I just don’t think the T-72B3 Arena is that vehicle.
I don’t know, I guess time will tell.
Yeah
“Other nations win rates keep tanking not because we’re handheld and get unrealistic stuff while they get nerfs, but because their players are all bad!”. But yes, this fighting 10.0 and 10.7 in downtiers is fair. The Leo 2A4 gets DM23 and can’t have better ammo because “muh unfairness” but this thing can dunk on 10.0.
4 Likes
I love how Russian vehicles being criminally undertiered always brings out the Russia mains en masse. The same folks who claim The Leo 2A4 can’t get DM33 for balance reasons will defend this thing wrecking 10.0.
@AlvisWisla Do you even know what “shilling” means? Nobody is glazing Russian stuff, at all. People are pointing out unrealistic performance, withholding ammunition from NATO tanks for “balance reasons”, and absurdly low BR for Russian vehicles. That isn’t shilling, at all.
4 Likes
@Perinvisus
Soviet vehicles aren’t at lower BRs compared to other tech trees.
Ammunition has not been withheld in the slightest. In-fact, USA and Germany have ammo vastly superior to Soviet tanks at this time, and they were added to the game over 3 years ago.
All MBTs in War Thunder [except maybe Type 10] are over-performing in mobility.
Outside that fact, no tanks in War Thunder are over-performing over others in any notable capacity.
Shilling is a type of hardcore defense.
Just as I can be accused of shilling for NATO vehicles as I constantly defend NATO vehicles.
I can see very clearly that Demokrat’s primary post defended Russian vehicles.
And while T-72B3 Arena should be 11.3, 120S is at least equally under-BR’d alongside a few more tanks around these BRs.
M1A1 is 1.0 BR below its equivalent in France.
like my comment if this post is stupid
4 Likes
Regular M1A1 is not equivalent to Leclercs.
2 Likes
Armor is extremely similar.
Mobility is extremely similar.
M1A1 fires a bit better round.
Leclerc has gen 2 thermals instead of 1, though not relevant for general capability.
M1A1 has 2 degrees more gun depression.
Leclerc has less protected ammo, but isn’t relevant for most matches.
M1A1 is so egregiously OP that it was moved up instantly when decompression occurred after it dodged the decompression.
On average, OP American stuff is only moved up once every few years, and it happened instantly for once.
Soviet, French, and German OP vehicles don’t have to be OP [or powerful in some cases] nearly as long for them to be moved up.
Turret cheek armour of Leclerc is ~580mm, which can completely stop 3BM60 or even KE-W, let alone weaker rounds like 3BM46 and 120mm DM33.
The only round that is consistently capable of ammo racking it through the turret cheeks is the long-barrel DM53.
M829A1 / M829A2 / short-barrel DM53 / Type 10 / M338 can pen and kill one crew member, but Commander / Gunner can then immediately retaliate.
M1A1’s turret cheek armour is ~445mm for the gunner + commander side and ~500mm for loader side, meaning that anything beyond 3BM42 / L26 can lol-pen it, which is very common at 11.7 other than in a full downtier. If you bother taking more than 19 rounds you also suffer from ammo rack shots from the gunner side, and possibly even the loader side, though the Leclerc has issues with that when shot in the breech:
Abrams has UFP that can ricochet shots fairly reliably but Leclerc doesn’t have the pronounced turret ring.
Though both have autocannon prone weakspots (turret ring for Abrams, Breech / LFP for Leclerc)
The mobility is similar, I agree, but the Leclerc does not have to worry about NATO Hump.
M1A1 has 2 degrees more gun depression, which is very nice, though Leclerc doesn’t have to worry about both Commander and Gunner dying in one shot when hull-down.
The M1A1 could probably go to 12.0, and the Leclerc to 12.3, but I don’t think they are equal.
M1A2 / M1A1 HC / AIM solves the crappy turret armour issue by giving it roughly ~650mm for gunner side and ~730mm for loader side, making it impossible to ammo rack it with ~570mm+ rounds, let alone kill the crew.
That’s why I think the M1A2 / M1A1 HC / AIM should be 12.3, and are equivalent to (or maybe even better than) the Leclercs.
5 Likes
my brother in christ leo2a4 with dm23 is better than this lmfao. is the t90a “wrecking 10.0 downtiers”? No it isn’t and nor will this. cope more
2 Likes
Most of people here knows I’m not the most condescending towards Russia, but I’m here to tell you that, besides 3BM60 and its APS, it’s hot 10.7 material or the current 11.0 at best.
The turret vertical and horizonal rotation is mediocre, its mobility overall is bad and its reload time is not really something to brag about.
If they released it with the extra ERA package, there could potentially be an argument, but it’s not the case.
2 Likes
Holy skill issue
2 Likes
No, that’s not what shilling means and even by your own definition people are doing the opposite. Because they’re pointing out they should be way worse and way higher BR. And no, you’re not shilling for NATO tanks. You’re defending them underperforming and being overtiered.
1 Like
Sure, it can be 10.7 when the NATO tanks get stuff better than DM23 at that BR. While also having underperforming armor.
They already do.
1 Like
Well the 2A4 sure as hell doesn’t.
I don’t understand why the T-72B3 “Arena” (new vehicle) is at 11.0, while the base T-72B3 is at 11.7.
How is an upgraded version of said vehicle LOWER than the base version?
I do agree that the T-72B3 should be lower, but that’s not how you do it.
1 Like
I don’t think NATO is only 2A4.
It’s so upgraded that it’s missing a large chunk of it’s mobility and has less armor.
5 Likes