What do you think of the armor performance of ZTZ99A?

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
63

I don’t believe Russia dominates. At least not any more than the US.
I would personally rather play the M1A2 SEP over the BVM, but they’re clearly very close in performance.
Additionally, the T-90M is worse and all the other tanks that Russia has are not top tier.

The US, on the other hand - gets 6 top-tier worthy Abrams variants. (M1A2 SEP V2, M1A2 SEP, M1A2, M1A1 HC, M1A1 AIM, M1A1 CB). And a pretty strong plane in the F-16C.

Realistically, the Abrams is the 2nd best tank in the game. Tied with the BVM, and only worse than the spall-lined Leopard 2s. The Strv 122B+ and the two Leopard 2A7s. Essentially the same vehicle in my eyes.

The Type 10 and Type 90 are also extremely strong in the hands of a skilled player, and I would easily take the Type 10 over the BVM or the T-90M, myself. But that’s a more controversial opinion.

China, Italy, Israel and Britain are the nations at the bottom of the ladder. And they all have massive issues.

And, keeping up with the topic, I personally believe that China is the nation whose tanks are missing the most features and are most wrongly modeled (not the worst - as the Ariete is clearly worse), as almost all of their vehicles are missing spall liners that we know exist and have been described in this thread: Gaijin need to add spall liners to Chinese vehicles

The Chinese ZTZ-99A, ZTZ-99II and ZTZ-99III (also possibly the WZ1001, forgot if it also has it installed) are missing their laser APS. (It’s actually fully visible and even modeled as “optics” on some of them, it’s not missing physically, just doesn’t do anything.)

Most of them have wrongly modeled breeches, the 99A has the breech and LFP, gun depression, autoloader, innumerable things wrong. As we’ve described multiple times.

The VT-4A1 has numerous armor errors, is lacking a dedicated drone even though it has a modeled drone box, spall liners, breech armor, gun depression, traverse rates (hull especially has a far worse traverse than the 99A even though it should be the same).

Honestly, I could go on with their issues all day - and they’re all integral, logical, and infallible, something that cannot be said for the Abrams in-game. And I’m honestly sick of Chinese armor threads being effectively raided by people talking about the Abrams.

7 Likes
64

you can’t claim the M1A1 HC is top tier worthy but the T-72B3 isn’t lol

2 Likes
65

Top tier balance has ping pong back and forth between Germany and Russia the most. Before the 2A7 and 122B+. BVMs are rolling. Currently leopards are in favor.

I think most people would take some of the most mobile tanks over BVM and especially T-90M.

1000% Agree.

1 Like
66

I can, because the B3 is a lot worse than the HC?
I don’t think anyone experienced would take the B3 with the same issues as the T-90M but far lower survivability over the T-90M, while the HC is effectively an M1A2 without the thermals.

67

how so? It’s barely worse than the T-90M, it has very similar armour against everything that isn’t DM53 from an L/55, it also has advantages over the HC like gen 3 thermals

68

Yes, but it has no spall liners and it has multiple areas with less armor.
Additionally, it has an advantage over the HC in the thermals… (and better hull armor)

But the HC obviously has the advantages all of the Abrams tanks have over the B3:

  • Far, far better firepower with a better shell and a 5 second reload, while the B3 doesn’t even get the 6.5 second reload of the BVM and is stuck at 7.1 seconds. Russian tanks in general have the worst firepower at top tier, with the longest reloads and worst shells. Only China is worse, since China doesn’t even get 6.5s reloads on some tanks.
  • Double the gun depression.
  • The reverse gear on the T-72B3 is still 3km/h-5km/h I believe. I think it’s fairly understood how much of a disadvantage that is. While the Abrams is coming up to nearly 40km/h?
  • I also believe the HC is faster than the B3 frontally, very slightly.

Hope this helps.

69

It’s just perhaps a bit disingenuous to claim that the Russian tech tree only has 2 usable vehicles at top tier when the T-72B3 and T-80Us/UK are certainly usable at top tier and not significantly worse than the BVM/90M, especially not completely unplayable

70

I’m not saying that they’re not usable. I personally almost exclusively use the Chinese 9.7 ZTL-11 and ZBD04A at top tier. So they’re clearly usable.

I’m just saying that the American Abrams tanks at 11.3 and 11.7 are at a top tier level (mainly because the main difference between them is only the thermals, which isn’t even the case on the AIM, while the other Russian tanks besides the 90M and BVM have considerably worse armor, survivability, and gun handling in the case of some of them not having the 40deg/s turret rotation). The T-90M and BVM are at a top tier level, as well. But the T-72B3 realistically isn’t. And neither is the T-80UK.

71

I think they are

72

You are welcome to think whatever you want. I’m just laying out the factual basis for what I think. You haven’t done that yet.

74

The abrams, no matter how good it actually is, is in no way the second best tank in the game lmao. The russians are still very strong. the top 3 tanks being strv 122, leo 2a7, then bvm/90m.

1 Like
79

220mm/71.12°
A well-known instruction manual

81

Repairing the model is a very troublesome thing,
from Challenger2 ~ Leo2 are waiting for the model refurbishment, it is a long, long line.

1 Like
82

Oh, the challengers have already gotten it, could you not tell lol? I dont blame you, it was given to us half done, and then we were told it was all intentional and thats the last we heard of it since… were not seeing any more changes buddy and i doubt anyone else will unless gaijin see a money making opportunity.

83

Yes it is. It clearly ties that spot with the BVM. And then the best tank in the game is the spall lined Leopard 2. I personally count the 2A7 and Strv122 as the same tank as their performance is very similar.

I don’t understand why you don’t want to accept this. You can ask any more experienced player, I also very clearly outlined the advantages of the Abrams. And I would personally easily take the M1A2 SEP over the BVM - but they’re overall equals.

It seems as if you’re dictating your opinion based on feelings surrounding “russian bias” rather than objective fact. The Abrams reloads substantially faster, has a full 10 degrees of gun depression, has 50mm more penetration, triple the reverse speed compared to a BVM, and over ten times compared to the T-90M, and is realistically more survivable considering the carousel ammunition changes - while it has a turret rack with a blowout panel (the best ammo configuration possible).

It also has comparable frontal turret armor, an auto-ricochet UFP, and the turret ring weakspot is majorly overblown and is no larger than what the Chinese tanks get. Its main weakness - the LFP, is almost guaranteed to not one-shot the tank, while on a tank with a carousel - it’s a death sentence.

I would kindly ask that you stop bringing feelings into an argument.

All you’ve said is:

An absolutely empty sentence with no backing.
Additionally, I’ve noticed that you’ve barely played any relevant Russian or Chinese vehicles outside of 30 games in the premium ZTZ-96A (P). Yet you simply claim that they’re “strong”.

84

hmmmm, if you can check my game history but cant see that ive never siad they were strong? i said the abrams wasnt the best. And i actually agreed with you earlier about them suffering, they are just not the worst as they can still hold their own.

Im not gonna bother responding as you seem pretty set in your ways and i dont think anyone else really cares what you say tbh…

85

No it isn’t, we do know clearly that Chinese MBTs do not have 5 degree depression anyway, but due to GAIJING’s massive breech it currently only have 5 degrees of depression and 15 elevation. The model for the turret is leaning at 5 degrees, which seem to suggest that Chinese MBTs in fact have no depression at all if that has an effect on depression. So in reality I think the 99A should have around 10-15 degree depression and 15-20 degree elevation.

3 Likes
86

It’s pointless, because most players who say no need to buff this, no need to buff that, they don’t even play them so they don’t care, they hope gaijin don’t ever buff the vehicles they don’t play or fight against else how do they continue to be the bully? lol

1 Like
87

2- It has -6 degrees over the front, -5 over the side, and -4 over the rear. Its turret ring is angled down 1 degree both IRL and in-game.
4- M829A2 is the best shell fired out of the 2nd best cannon.
b- The classified docs poster that got banned proved its penetration to be correct.

88

It should not have -6 degrees over the front, it should have more. Because its turret ring is not angled down only 1 degree IRL nor in-game. It’s clearly more angled than the T-80 BVMs, for example - which is actually 1 degree. You can check this in the X-ray. The MBT-2000’s turret ring is in an even worse position, because it is clearly angled down even more, yet retains a measly gun depression.

As for M829A2 being the best shell fired out of the 2nd best cannon - I basically agree. I think the best cannon is on the Type 10 and A2 is effectively the best shell being fired out of a gun of L/44.

Again - the document states 680mm at 0 degrees, due to the length of the penetrator, it couldn’t possibly penetrate less than 600mm. Yet it is 577mm in-game which I believe might be the worst out of all top tier tanks. Couple that with the fixed extremely long 7.1 second reload…

2 Likes