I think it will be worse than 3bm60 after gaijin penetration convertation from realism to gaijinism
1 Like
Weird of you to call realism “Gaijinism”.
Of course 3BM44M would be worse than 3BM60, that’s realistic. 3BM60 already pens more in-game.
And Gaijin uses a known good formula for all APFSDS in War Thunder, which is why APFSDS is pretty much identical to IRL tests when available.
Personally I don’t even think they’re mid but down in the worst. No reverse speed, capped 6 sec reload, poor tank design makes it an easy one shot. I play them so cautiously cause I’ll get popped like a soda can. As far as CAS goes it is “OP” in all nations if I see a Grippen or F15E I always know we’re going to get rocked if they have a good pilot.
I can’t justify Russian MBTs being top tier without their ERA. Even if the T-14 Armata was in game I feel it’ll be just another AGS like tank.
2 Likes
They are using most modern shell on their top tier Mbts.
The only thing France can get is the SHARD which is not in service yet.
Sweden already using their most modern round for their Strv-122 unless they suddenly decided to buy M338 from Israel or DM53 from Germany.
They are also using one of the most modern rounds on their inventory.
Only US and Germany using much older munitions compare to rest of them.
Still they don’t need any buffs.
2 Likes
You do realize Lekalo is literally worse than Svinet-2 right?
No, 3BM60 is using 1970s technology. Just because it was produced later doesn’t make the technology newer.
M829A2 easily is more modern than 3BM60 because it uses newer material practices.
If you use that logic every round development history based on 1960’s 1970’s Alwis.
Also even if we take your logic into account it will not change the outcome, Svinet-2 is the most modern round in Russian Armed Forces inventory and Russia hasn’t developed any more modern round for their 125mm cannons apart from some prototype shells that has little to no information.
Once larger maps becomes more common I can see these changes being implemented however with CQC maps still being dominant, the T-90M still does quite fine and arguably better than the Seps.
Won’t reach the level of pen like DM53 but if you feel like T90M needs a better APFSDS you’re doing something wrong. NATO MBTs are so squishy and have a turret basket nerf. What part of the tank do you have trouble penning that you’re asking for more?
It better get the same angle of attack and not be true top down. Oh wait russian missiles have a higher AoA so I guess this will be better in every way. No, let’s not bring this in.
It’s as competitive as Leopard 2A7V. NATO MBT should have access to rounds like DM73 which this round was specifically designed for the 2A7V if T-90M was to get the 3BM44N. I don’t think russian players will be happy when their ERA is ineffective.
??? This is just clear ragebait bro. Are you not reading anything???
3BM44M is the predecessor for 3BM60, which means it is worse. Nowhere NEAR DM83. 3BM44M is just a upgraded 3BM42, it’s pen ingame would likely be worse than the 3BM46.
3BM59 is the only better round the T-90 could get, and it is barely better. Please just learn how to shoot a weak spots, I can do fine with L27A1 which is far worse
1 Like