T-80BVM is pretty bad and in general I perform terrible in any T-80, honestly, the armor is ok but just because I said something is better than T-80BVM doesn’t mean I don’t want the specified object to be better, I’m just using it as reference to determinate something is well armored or not because for months T-80BVM been main topic regarding overperformance of kinetic energy explosive reactive armor. That said, I prefer the Type 10s composition of armor, yet doesn’t cover much but a thin portion of the upper half of the front of the chassis and the front of the turret but still hold a lot of shots if it’s badly placed.
1 Like
It pretty much only few tanks that can go toe to toe with Uparmored Leopard
same go as BVM the only few tanks that able to go toe to toe with them are uparmored Leopard
and the nature of average WT maps you know how it’s going.
Yes you mentioned the map, regarding this, that’s why I prefer T-90M, it’s not mobile as the T-80BVM or any other Western MBT like the AMX 56 Leclerc, when I’m fighting for a street corner I would prefer to go for it at solid 30 km/h with good armor to have time to think rather than 70 km/h and dying in the proccess. Friend of mine have the opposite opinion and states the T-80BVM is better, I say don’t,
If we’re getting at a point of 200 m/square maps, at some point T-80BVM may become obsolete when uparmored vehicles like the Leopard 2 HU and maybe at some future the Leopard 2E that, if I’m not mistaken uses the same Chempro as the Strv 122 does, then yes, it will be very useless, because I think it’s just me playing it wrong at the moment.
1 Like
Yeah, that why i always anti small maps in high tier it made no armor tanks next to useless
light tanks can’t work fast moving light armor MBT can’t work the only armor vs armor is work
Yeah, I know it fair that Russian tanks vs Uparmored Leoapard fighting in street but the other they almost have no chance against both Challenger best example they not gonna be able to fight both in street because soon as they pop out it die.
Greece uses the 2A6HEL, as far as I know.
No? Leopard 2E is just a descendant of the Leopard 2A6EX (created shortly after the Swedish Trials, went on to square off against M1A2 SEP in Turkey where it won), same with 2A6HEL.
In fact… 2A6EXs hull was used for the PSO demonstrator:
2 Likes
Sweden is allowed to have stronger leopards because it’s a minor nation. There are a lot more german players so even one 2a7 is already a lot to deal with for Russian mains, after all they never needed to learn weak spots in cope thunder before
No, because they bought stronger.
The STRV 122s are uparmored because sweden ordered them to be so, germany didn’t.
2 Likes
This is dumb that Germany the nation famous for there great leopard tanks in game got the worst versions all gaijin fault adding wrong variants
2 Likes
Leopard 2ex/tvm have similar armor
Devs don’t care what armies actually bought.all that matters to them is to bait people into grinding more trees and making Russia look good
And they did get ordered when again?
1 Like
I mean… Gaijin has proven time and time again that they can and will add vehicles that nations haven’t even ordered, were never in service, and their only purpose was to demonstrate a certain technology/capability (CR 3 TD and Strv 122B+ come to mind).
As such, I do believe Leopard 2A6EX could genuinely be added, then there’s also the Leopard 2A7+ that has actually been trialed by the Bundeswehr and certified by them as well.
3 Likes
was there a suggestion made for it? NVM found it
1 Like
1 Like
What is with the Russophobia in this forum? What a baseless, stupid thing to post…
1 Like
Guy with 1k battle talking about baseless
No offense but come back when you’ve got the slightest idea about how the game works or its history
1 Like
I do have a pretty good idea of how this game works. This isn’t my first account.
Using your logic, you think War Thunder is a Russian Propaganda outlet or something like that yeah?
Hate to break it to you, but your subjective and ill-informed opinions about Russian military equipment are not truthful at all.
What proof do you have behind any of your statements?
2 Likes
Yeah sure. El famoso ‘i have multiple accounts’.
- NATO equipment almost always comes undertuned (Abrams Leclerc Chally armor, anti-ERA properties on NATO darts, Hellfire and Maverick damage, Magic 2, TOW-2B modeled as HEAT, Hellfire guidance…)
- Russian equipment almost always overtuned or underBRd (old 3OF26, ERA, Pantsir, Vikhr, DIRCM, Kamov damage model, 2S38…)
- Devs requiring very high quality sources to buff NATO but then nitpicking or debunking said sources with sophism or calling them “marketing lies” when they don’t like them or if it makes Russia look bad ("nooooo! Stinger and Mistral can’t pull harder than Igla because muh fins are the same size!!!)
- Devs not caring about source quality or even just accepting hearsay to nerf NATO (like when they said no russian sources in response to a NATO buff, then used one to nerf NATO)
- US GRB win rate below 30% for years? Quick buff Russia! (Kh38, Pantsir, autoloader can eat rounds…)
- USSR ARB slightly underperforming? Quick buff Russia! (R27ER, Su27 SM +2 missiles +30% thrust…)
It goes on forever. The only people who claim bias doesn’t exist are those who depend on it. It’s pathetic.
3 Likes
That’s hardly what they are doing.
They denied better R-77s despite Russia having one of the worst 13.0+ aircraft.
And buff the US by giving them a 5 sec reload.
Anyone who believes that Russian bias is real is just experiencing confirmation bias.
1 Like