Gaijin why add Bmpt which is a very overpowered vehicle that is pretty hard to disable and take out and also buff the reloading speed of every T series tank along with adding a new aa system for Russia that can carry 48 missiles with anti ground abilities but still not add M829a3 for the M1a2 sep and sep v2 is just adding a new shell that can help U.S. Pen armor better too op apparently?
12 Likes
23 Likes
Because Russia is the greatest country in the world!
11 Likes
M829A3 is not needed
4 Likes
I mean, not being able to pen the terminator front on if you shoot at the center mass (the excuse which was used for the turret baskets) and disable it, using the Abrams, is pretty lame, but i guess
2 Likes
IIRC gaijin said it won’t be a very huge Improvement over M829A2. Though it should get it, but even with M829A2 it is very easy to to one shot BMP-T if hull is visible
1 Like
Oh no, 0.1s reload increase for rank 8 vehicles, must gib buffs to US.
9 Likes
Why should the US and US alone get a better shell? Especially when they already have the second best in-game with a faster reload than the best, which imo, gives US tanks the best firepower in-game at top tier. And that isnt even factoring the fact that said firepower can be found as low as 12.0, where instead it shouldnt be until 12.7 that firepower is available
4 Likes
The Gaijin paradox.
Gaijin: M829A3 wouldn’t be a noticeable improvement(not even correct but whatever. Relikt tanks would be vulnerable but Gaijin thinks whatever they want to think)
Players: Then it’s no problem if we get M829A3?
Gaijin: No. It’s unbalanced😠
21 Likes
wouldn’t … Fix it for you!
1 Like
The vehicle’s armor isn’t new. It’s worse than T-90M’s armor protection.
I deal with BMPTs using DM33 equivalent rounds. I think the 80% - 3BM60 equivalent rounds many 10.3 - 11.7 tanks get is enough based on a cross analysis.
Especially since the BMPT relies on HEAT penetration.
Also, M829A3 being able to pen Relikt + Armor… I think I’d need to see evidence for that one.
1 Like
So what’d I do wrong then?
M774 to the return sprocket got eaten at 288 meters.
ussr_bmpt_105mm_m774_274.65.blk (5.6 KB)
Volumetrics… I’ve done the same shot (roughly at the same spot) with M1 and did manage to one-shoot the BMPT. It’s a coin toss… I don’t say its right.
You replied to the wrong post, as your post has nothing to do with mine.
I however, will supply what limited input I can offer.
Your round didn’t actually hit on the sprocket, but instead above; and I’m unaware of what happens when you shoot above an idler wheel except a higher chance to unintentionally hit the UFP composite.
I usually aim too low or higher than you did when I make my own aiming errors, and it’s usually not with M774, a round I’d only use for side shots against T-90A for that matter.
@V_Rohnin_V
Wrong.
If he shot volumetric armor, it would have a higher chance of penning, not less.
Isn’t the same as hitting the upper most part on the side of a leopard 2 and your dart getts “eaten” in the voide…? i think @IHаteCAS has a video on it…
That would be over-lapping plates causing an issue in that case, something that happened prior to volumetric rounds as well.
Volumetric armor entirely prevents the overlapping plates issue, but can’t always be the solution.
Some of the others will have similar ammunition and some will not.
why?
Giving other nations high-penetration rounds won’t fix the BMPT’s problem. This tank is just broken.
Relikt is not some invincible “magic” armor the US had no answer to until 2014.
Do you really think the US would introduce a new APFSDS round in 2003 if they knew it would be made obsolete just a few years later by Relikt?
An ERA they already understood how to defeat? An ERA they knew was close to entering production?
That would mean M829A3 was effectively outdated before it even finished replacing older stock.
Make that make sense please.
Sure @AlvisWisla .
1992 DoD patent for double flyer ERA(Relikt design):
2000 DoD patent on countermeasure to double flyer ERA with APFSDS. Patent APFSDS is similar to M829A3:
1999 Open publication from the army mentioning how Russia is heavily working on novel protection/new ERA like Kaktus. If they release that to the public, what do you think they keep for themselves?
Spoiler
https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/1999/JUL_AUG/ArmorJulyAugust1999web.pdf
2002 Army fiscal year report:
LFT&E for this program(M289A3) includes both lethality and vulnerability evaluations. System lethality will be assessed with respect to expected threat tanks.
2 Likes