Yes the T80 with the “hard to kill” DROZD APS did in fact not have any thermals whatsoever however this is the point that makes it also outragous for me that in fact almost every T72 T80 T90 has thermals… except the T80 with Drozd aps which is honestly confusing… gaijin if you move up the tank by 1 BR at least give it thermals, and no you dont fix the problem by giving the t80 with drozd a new nation
ofc the older t72s and t80s didnt had thermals except the t80uk however for the sake that this is a game and games do not always tent to be realistic just give it goddamn thermals so the tank is nt just a waste of money like cmon over 60 gc for a tank that doesnt even have thermals??
Let me build a web site that says the T80UM2 didn’t have thermals. Would you believe it then? Because it would say it in that “document” it didn’t have thermals.
The proof of it is in its name that I stated was the T80UM2.
IT MUST BE CORRECT, right?! RIGHT?!
Stop believing everything that’s on the internet.-
Abraham Lincoln
Tbh EVERY OTHER TANK at that br has thermals so if they arent gonna give it thermals it needs to come down to a br where either A the aps is usefull or B where thermals arent NEARLY as prevalent or needed
skill issue
not really. it still is a T80U but with hard kill APS. sure its not that usefull but still. and since we dont have night battles every 3 matches played… it just doesnt matter that much. i do really fine with it. i rarely use thermals anyway. exept on big maps. but its still no much use time even on those maps. i dont get it why you are so butt hurt about this?! its just so irrelevant.
Every MBT at 11.0, except for the TKX (P), gets Gen 1 thermals. The T80UM2 has the best armor at its BR, along with an good shell (3BM46), the T80U’s 6.5s reload, and good min/max zoom. Why, is there a complaint that the T80U, lacking Gen 1 thermals, should be below 11.0?
1 Like
Nevertheless it is a game that tries to stay true to history.
Most likely he has the completely wrong playstyle for Soviet/PLA MBTs and bought UM2 without thinking.
Would not be supprised, everything in the game is a trade (in most cases) between armour, mobility or ammo / gun.
Any source or evidence to support that? Just curious.
To support that it doesn’t have thermals?
It doesn’t have the correct gunner’s sight head cover for Agava-2 (T-80UK) or PLISSA (T-80UE-1).
It only has the usual T-80B/T-80U image intensifier TPN-3 sight head, which has a cover that’s removed by unbolting it at night and rotating it out of the way.
The thermal sight housings on T-80UK and T-80UE-1 have a hinged shutter that can be opened and closed day and night, as did the T-80Bs that tested Agava-1 and the T-80U with Agava-2 that took part in trials in Sweden.
Ed:- embedded some links to ref images for the various T-80U sight heads for comparison.
Yeah you are right. I have investigated this topic myself and found out that T-80U-M2 only had NVD for gunner. But are you sure its TPN-3 and not TPN-4?
ur mad if you think a T-80 facing 9.3 tanks is balanced. T-80s stomp Leopard 2A4s, and even those are 10.7
I’d only heard of the designation TPN-4 on the Ukrainian/Kharkiv side of T-80->T-84 development, so I figured not since T-80UM2 was on the Russian side of development.
But looking at the current TPN-4MBT, it appears to be virtually the same sight as Buran-PA night sights that were in some late T-80Us and early T-90s. So yes it probably had Buran/TPN-4 rather than TPN-3
Hahaha, funny joke