What is the justifiable reason for the Namer to be a higher BR then the Terminator

Fire them with the laser off from behind cover, which you can do, then engage the laser about 10 seconds before impact. It’s perfectly doable and very deadly.

It has IOG, regardless of what the Statcard says.

The Ammo Box is useful for the extra belts of ammunition, not just the Spikes. The turret is extremely fragile despite the hull’s durability, which means if it’s ammoracked without a point to rearm on, it becomes useless for its team.

You take issue with the 1A4 being labeled as an SPAA when the Terminator isn’t a Tank Destroyer?

The only other tank in-game with the same role IRL as the Terminator is the Begleit, a light tank.

its not russian, and premium, that’s it

I rather keep terminator as TD instead light tank.
That thing having scouting would be broken as H***

Well it actually doesnt. It just doesnt “register” that smoke everytime like it should , or there is a delay on that. You can go and test it with your friend. Popping it while it has enough fly time it goes “rogue” it doesnt land where you were.

You do realize that this is a Heavy Armoured fighting Vehicle, using a tank chassis as the main body

the fact it’s armor is only limited to “autocannon fire” is ridicolous. If we’re going by that logic, why is the Terminators tank chassis so strong and the Namers isnt.

It’s due to the Merkavas as is not having good protection while the T-series tanks have weakspots and magic protection sometimes. Hell, you ain’t finding a weakspot on the Merkavas, there’s less hard spots than weakspots on that tank, and so it is reflected on the Namers but with less armor, so if the Merkavas are already buns, the Namers are worse. Still weighing 64 tons though, so basically a struggle bus.

Honestly, Mk.3s can ONLY be one shotted if you hit the ammo in the far back, which requires a very lucky flank.

Hmmm, most Merkava hulled tanks are tanky enough to not get one shot if the shot isn’t precise enough (not pixel-hunting level) due to the engine being in the front, the problem is that it gets disabled quite easily and armor is uhhh a bit untrustworthy, if you get shot and tank it, you’re asking yourself how you did that. Regarding one shotting merkava 3s, wouldn’t the LFP also work?

1 Like

The Namer’s armor is pathetic because the Merkava Mk.4’s armor is pathetic. They have the armor modifiers of rubber. I’m not joking.

2 Likes

And when the Merkava 4 was first added, the hull had 0 armor, bur because players couldnt 1 shot it. They added that stupid ammo in the front to make it implode.

All because the crew was spaced out and didnt give an oppurtunity to smite them all in one hit, EVEN though the hull could be penetrated by literally anything.

Horrendous logic.

Issue with the Merks is that - yes, you can often tank a shot with your engine. But then you’ve just lost your engine. You survived, but now you’re immobile, vulnerable, and probably about to be nuked. I like my engines hidden in the back.

1 Like

Wait till they add a Russian spike missile
1500 mm pen javelin capabilities meaning always hits the top of the tank vertically 20 kg of tnt and 100 g overload also can’t forget it gets two version one with trigger radius of 25 mm because it’s Russian and other for ground with mach fucking 5 speed

Gaijin magic. And also a lil bit of the good ol Russian bias mixed in with the fact that gaijin is money grubbing by making an insanely overpowered premium.

*Overpowered because its an HAFV with good armour at a BR thats hard to deal with

Right? I just want to make sure thats the general concencous and not just “its op no matter where you put it”.

If namer is over powered then bmpt is just power itself either delete the game or play a few more months before coming to the forums

I’m not saying the Namer is overpowered, did you not see the title of this post?

I was asking for clarification if the BMPTs br is whats making it “op” and not them saying “its op in general”

At its br it has incredibly good armour and a decent armament. Also the crew less turret makes it hard to kill, even shooting it from side on isn’t a guaranteed kill

Plus some weirdly modelled protection making it harder to kill than in this case a Namer, whilst having decent armament. I dare not say it’s better than the Namers but I can say it’s not THAT worse to be at the BR it is right now.
We’d need Gaijing to actually clarify why and which procedures they went through to model the BMPTs, how the protection is gimmicky and why it’s been placed at said BR range.

It’s protection is the same as the T-90ms hull wise, there’s nothing notable different about it.

The turret on the T-90M is existent and shootable. The BMPTs turret is ass-modelled and if you shoot you have a lot of chances of it not damaging anything.

It’s modeled just fine, it’s literally a low profile turret. No shit the T-90s turret is “existent” it’s huge.

The turret is modeled exactly how it’s supposed to be model, there isn’t supposed to be some artifical gap made for it.

AGS is a great example of low profile. The only difference is that it’s hull isn’t based of a tank chassis so it doesn’t have the equivalent armor protection.