have u ever play ztz99A？your analysis is incorrect,u compare the area of weakness and ignore that which parts when a enemy will try to aim at,enemy wasnt the robot, they will try to aim at the weak point right?and the weak point of ztz99a is big enough that its hard for enemy to avoid it,or in other words,if u dont aim patiently,its hard for u to hit the armor that is strong enough in ztz99a!
13 Likes
if u have ever play it,u will find it is in a embarrased situation:run faster than t90m and so?if u see 3 enemy in front of u ,u need at least 14 second to kill them all,while 5s reload can kill them in 10 second,the extra 4 second is essential,ztz99a will be choked by enemy when u dash to the kicten of KFC!and what is the advantage of ztz99a?it run very fast!thats all!(in fact,in short distance ztz99a might be slower than t90m cause the speed of uptier tank are so close)so its very contradictory!why a tank with high speed and poor armor and long reload?l
11 Likes
by the way,in the real game,if u have ever play the ztz99a,u will find it armor wasnt as effective as u think,play it in real game and u will find it than u are like a clown tied up with ropes(the reload time)
9 Likes
I disagree with that point. Armor is only truly effective when it is substantial and large enough to cover the weak areas of a tank. However, the “effective” armor on the 99A and VT-4 is far from sufficient to ensure the safety of these tanks. In fact, the average performance of the 99A’s armor is comparable to that of the Leclerc or Ariete. This is because the weak areas on these tanks are large too, and skilled adversaries are unlikely to waste their efforts targeting the traditionally protected areas.
Meanwhile, reload time is a critical factor when operating these tanks. Despite the existing issues with the 99A’s older design, if GAIJIN choose not to address these flaws, then a 6.5-second reload would time be a more practical choice for Chinese MBTs.
9 Likes
99A家族应该发6.5秒装填弥补火力的缺陷，本身99A，VT4的击穿后生存率就极低，百分之99被穿裤裆会当场暴毙，当然，这是锅盖头的通病，但90M拥有更好的防护以及内衬，bvm拥有6.5秒装填，99A以及VT4拿着低穿深长装填，也许有人想拿勒克莱尔和公羊对比，但公羊拥有5秒dm53，勒克莱尔也有五秒的装填，他们的确都是弱的坦克，我们应该呼吁官方一起加强他们而不是因为有更弱的所以不去加强第二弱的
15 Likes
When you assessed the survivability of the Type 99A tank using protection analysis, I immediately knew you’d never laid hands on a real 99A.
Realistically, the Type 99A shares the same critical flaw as the Ariete and Leclerc: no second-shot opportunity. Its 7.1-second reload cripples combat effectiveness just as severely as the Ariete/Leclerc’s poor armor. Post-penetration survivability on the 99A ranks among the worst at BR 12.0. What other top-tier tank suffers a 7.1s reload? The T-90M—but unlike the 99A, it can actually absorb a DM53 hit and keep fighting.
Admittedly, the performance of the Ram tank and Leclerc is poor, but I hope that when we discuss vehicles, we should strive to strengthen the Ariete, Leclerc, and 99a together, instead of saying, ”Why should you strengthen the 99a when the Ariete and Leclerc are so poor?“
15 Likes
99A only seems like to have better defense than the Leclerc but actually not. Its large weak spots are easy to hit and often result in one-shot kills. Additionally, its fuel tank explosions are frequently cause tanks explode, and its flank protection is virtually non-existent. Therefore, the 99A overall protection level is not superior. Compounding this, its extremely long 7.1second reload time and its APFSDS lack of penetration mean it would be reasonable to give it a reload time of 6.5 seconds or even faster.
7 Likes
99a的装甲问题也很多，缺乏内衬，爆反连块、油箱爆炸，这么多不够还原。虽然乐扣的装甲也有问题，但99a的问题这也是事实。那么为什么非要99a不改进，等乐扣改？到时候乐扣说要改的时候别人来喊为什么老中不改？那么这是应该改还是不改？
硬要对比的话99a应该和苏系的80和90系列相比，因为这两者更为接近。相对来说BVM拥有更低的马力的同时，加速性能也不弱，在地图日益修改变小的当下，其实速度没有什么差距。其二，BVM在装甲更好的情况下，还拥有更好的装填（虽然是还原射速）。但是这是否就很不公平？这么看99a确实就是弱了，即使更新了装填也没有改变BVM强度大于99a的状况，但是至少还原了一部分，这样的诉求其实还是很朴素的吧。
16 Likes
I can dig up footage of my Ariete tank taking a 3BM60 hit to the frontal armor and surviving, but I’ve never found any video showing a 99A tank absorbing any TOP APFSDS round frontally—unless it hits the main composite array, which basically never happens in actual combat.ㄟ( ▔, ▔ )ㄏ
7 Likes
First, use the three tanks 99A, WZ1001, and VT4A1 one thousand times each in the battle situation, and then evaluate whether they are good or not
5 Likes
最好的方向是冲内衬和激光压制，装填时间和钢针穿深资料都较少而且提供的资料全被nab
8 Likes
7.1秒装填时间已经无法适应现在的顶级房环境，加之之前有人提交过材料，无论是出于平衡性还是现实都需要重新考虑一下中系的装填时间了
7 Likes
如果大家决定先就99a的装填进行讨论的话，其他可以先放一放。不要分流了
5 Likes
99A装填早该“平衡性加强”了，现在顶级房都是些什么三体人，高坚果122a7V90m，还有动辄5秒的600穿，你99A577+7.1加一碰就碎的生存性拿头玩？内衬也不发，美其名曰产能不足，我看给各系下毒，或者是改弹药面包这些无足轻重却又膈应玩家的“好事”上但是满满都是产能
10 Likes
The frontal protection of Lec is indeed not as good as 99a, but Lec players are not always facing you directly. When Lec’s body has a certain angle, the corner fuel tank and the wide body often bring good survivability. However, 99a does not have this experience at all. As long as the body has a slight angle, it is easy to be penetrated and catch fire or explode
8 Likes
Moreover, France’s advantage lies in having a very comprehensive combat system. The four Lec on the ground are not the main force, and there is also the strongest version of the “Rafale” fighter jet in the sky. Moreover, France’s helicopter is also the strongest version of the current version, and the VT1 is the second strongest AA. On the other hand, China’s modern vehicles only have three 99A, which means there are no useful CAS, helicopters, or AA. Therefore, France has no right to cry over the performance of Lec
4 Likes
英文字母全大写了，随便打个小写字母就行
2 Likes
The protection of the 99a is even inferior to that of the T72b3, because the ERA on the side of the T72b3 is very powerful. When the car body presents a certain angle, it can unexpectedly withstand many attacks, especially various small caliber weapons, which the 99a obviously does not have
4 Likes
Your use of the perspective of “protection analysis” is incorrect, which exposes your lack of professionalism. I can even assume that you are not a seasoned player of WT, because veteran players know that your “protection analysis” is only correct when the shooting angle equals the vertical inclination angle of the armor. Therefore, in reality, the protection area of VT4 is smaller and its weaknesses are greater
6 Likes
确实应该平衡
3 Likes