I dont mind them giving the Americans better frontal hull armor protection, increase it to 600mm thats ok. They just have to make sure the “storm arrives” (152mm) and some will find themselves in a vaccum of hot air.
who cares
you can shove this “better” tank up ur ass. let’s make all M1s have 4km reverse and 7 sec reload and see what happens
4 Likes
Because Gajin at minimum wants a partial prototype.
Otherwise the PL-01 would be a valid addition and the removed German tanks/Japanese Planes would still be researchable.
abrams no have t 90 frontal armor lets make t 90 front armor same and wach what hapens
1 Like
https://youtu.be/7sPNyaMqyGs?si=xiO2E1Dond08i5DD muh frontal armor lol. so you can’t aim at it’s mantlet or driver port, which is classic weakspot for mbt. noted
1 Like
If they model M829A3 to pen the BVM and not the 90M that’ll be a reason to play the 90M over the BVM. Furthermore, we NEEED proof of improved reverse speed, we NEEED an example of the ‘M2 actually existing for that to be reasonably implemented. The Russian MIC has claimed improved reverse speed on the BVM and 90M numerous times in the past just for it to be debunked, and then for the government to say itself “it didn’t happen yet” basically. Which is really frustrating when you’re trying to add a vehicle with improvements like that.
I imagine Gaijin doesn’t want to add a fictional M2 just to have to nerf it down from the manufacture advertising… Uts a waste of time and money to do that. So businesses wise I see why they also want hard proof. Just like how they treated the Abrams DU hull situation, they should treat the T-90M2 the same EXACT way. For fairness sake, and to not waste money & time.
What they could do is give the 90Ms a reload buff to 6.67 secs instead of 7. May not be realistic but still better than nothing.
again come with weak spots:D and on abrams and leopards where is the weakspots?:D all frontal armor?:D lower br mbts penetrate it witout need to aim to much … 0:53 perfect sideshot example…
sure. Abrams totally doesn’t have armored cheeks and UFP overperforming against APFSDS, also it totally cannot eat shells with very funny damage. and T series are so armored you can wipe out crew in turret even doing stupidest shots possible. so you are one to cope
1 Like
there’s hole right above gun that leads to disabling breeching and often one of crewmems. small tricky zone near the gun doesn’t change whole picture of armor where only cheeks and part of UFP beat shells (soon will not be an option lmao). and in meanwhile it’s about one of worst reloads, gun depression and reverse speeds. ofc 80UK/UE/NVM can slightly compensate for it, but rest has nothing special against half-brained player with 1.5-2 k/d
They are refusing to give the sepv3 hull buffs lmao
1 Like
Those vids ain’t playin.
People don’t like T90M gameplay style, T80BVM is more agile, versatile, good for attacks, hold positions, better reload reverse, and they say “T90M is bad lmao” massive skill issue.
T90M is my favorite tank
1 Like
I mean I like the 90M my first match today was a 10 kill pumpkin smash, and maybe I wouldn’t have tanked certain shots but I won’t say it’s anything special or particularly “good”. You kinda have to rely on luck/chance far more than other MBTs.
I’d rather them accurately buff the Abrams, give the 90Ms reload buffs, and 3bm59 as compensation (not that those things will improve things too much without that reverse speed, but again the M2 we have no confirmation even exists in the form promised).
80NVM is straight up better in bruh thunder meta despite being less protected in turret department by WT’s Russia standards.
3 Likes
no freakin way. what does it say to you when you try play them?
Mean either dont understand why can the Trophy Spev2 get the additional tusk armor but the T90M cant get the metal ERA package on the side . It should be long implemented
1 Like