Why is the bmp3 9.0

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
29

So because Soviet vehicles are correctly BR’d and a tiny amount are over-BR’d that means Russian favoritism about a Soviet tech tree? lol

The BMP-3 is 9.0 because its equal [Type 89] is 9.0, it’s really that simple and if you look at all their tanks it’ll be the equals are at an equal or lower BR if equals exist at or near its BR.
Some vehicles have no equals at its BR due to rarity of the vehicle type [HSTVL, Sea Vixen, etc.]

@WARTURTLE09
T-55AM-1 moving up would make sense if its equals weren’t all 8.7 still. Every 9.0 in the game are better than the T-55AM-1. XD
Strv 103C is not an IFV and can’t be compared to BMP3.

3 Likes
30

And its still incredible fun and very good

1 Like
31

That’s why you should exclusively use the 100 mm gun, as I do, the 30 mm autocannon is just a secondary weapon, accurately speaking the autocannon is a coaxial gun, I prefer use the BMP-3 as a tank destroyer,

As you mentioned the positive point about the hydropneumatic suspension control, it offers unmatched capabilities to counter the terrible firepower it has.

Get behind a soft hill where you tank is completely covered by the terrain, take a good distance, set to select secondary weapons, rangefinder using the binoculars, and toss a HE into the enemy.

If the map is favourable, keep the distance using the BMP-3, if not, get behind or ambush, the missile amount is decent but the reload time is terrible for quickly engagements.

That’s why I like the BMP-3, it’s not the best but it certainly offer a fun gameplay in some sort of way.

1 Like
32

As I mentioned earlier, the BMP-3 is weak armor speaking, the only thing it has in comparison to the Type 89 IFV is the mobility which both shares decent values, but the Type 89 IFV carries a punchier 35 mm autocannon with far better values where the ATGMs doesn’t even matter.

In one hand one is better at long distances the other performs better in the complete opposite position. They have two contraditory application yet the same roles, one causes better damage closer it can get and the other reserving itself from damage at distance.

33

I am grateful to the devs for not listening you

6 Likes
34

because its a high skill floor vehicle, it requires a brain to be really effective in. noobs are tanking its stats hard.
people its not a mbt.

3 Likes
36

seems common

37

Typical ignorant and biased US main. Go look at the US tech tree objectively, and you will realize many tanks are OP, just like USSR tree.

2 Likes
39

Buddy, if you are struggling against American tanks then you have an extreme case of skill issue.

3 Likes
40

-M22?
-M3 Lee
-M4?
-M44
-M4A1 76 W?
-5.7 Jumbo
-T34
-M56?
-120S???

And that’s quite about it. Not many in my books, in fact less than 10, and there’s arguably some of them not that OP.

41

name one

42

Jumbo, M4, and M4A1 (after the BR change) honestly don’t even come close to being overpowered

2 Likes
43

Jumbos are fine.

I’m just being generous, in the end the point is made regardless.

1 Like
44

Yeah , ok and before that was MiG 23ML/MLA/MLD with fake FM (not to mention ) and people still cry because it got fixed -not nerfed, it became according to data after how many years.
Yes people defended F-14 because they refuse to do anything to evade AIM-54s and F90s, which in my MF.1 i didn’t got hit once by either (and people say it has crap RWR) … Which AIM-54 was also carpily nerfed -or be correct , incomplete and never got completed- from day one.

About this, everyone said if you give R73 , you should give M2 and 9M. GJ said it was a test and those missiles are too OP, yet (yes they would because most of planes in the tier below didn’t even have all aspect or had R-60M).
Let’s not talk that GJ brought R-27ER , instead of fixing R-27R back there. They fixed them one year after…

And i’m not any main. But when you talk be objective, it’s annoying to blame players and their whining like if GJ takes it seriously anyway. And many times they artificially nerfed/buffed things or gave things that they shouldn’t to create balance but failed. It’s not only in US/USSR…
Ex. they gave M2 missiles, but they were R-60M quality for much time… They could have done the same for R-73.

It’s not about USSR/US whatever nation, the ^mains^ ,which is a stupid term since today we play this and tomorrow we play something else. It’s more of meta-slaves refusing let go their favorite points machine. Those ^mains^ main a nation that nets them “flex” points… when the meta shifts, their are bothered to grind something they didn’t …because it wasn’t meta.
GJ exploits this and shifts the meta patch after patch and there you see US ^mains^ crying, USSR ^mains^ crying , Germany Superior technology ^mains^ crying etc. That happens since forever!

1 Like
45

And M4A3 (105), T26E5 and E1-1, T29, T30, M46, T32 and E1, M60 (base variant), M247, M1, IPM1, M1A1.

These are all OP, if you apply the same standards US mains use when declaring Soviet tree vehicles OP. If T-80BVM is OP, so is M1A2, both are similarly powerful within their BR, compared to the vehicles of other nations.

Edit: M4A3 105 specified

2 Likes
46

5.7, face tiger and king tiger, also is-2
in a down tier its killable, front armor sometimes bounce otherwise dead

i mean this thing is good so

mid

premium, OP? not really, has weakspot but the only good is gun

hell no, how did u even came to this conclusion

its a m26 with better engine and heatfs, thats it, it face 8.0, downtier is ofc sometimes shred but the t26e5 is better

they face apfsds and heatfs, armor is good again convetional rounds but the T32 has weakspot, T32E1 is better tho, but nowhere OP

its slow, doesnt have stabilizer, armor is quite decent, traverse rate is mid, apds is ok

yes but not really

M1 is ass, Leopard 2A4 is better, hell even 2AV is better, mobility is good, m774 is mid, armor get penned easily, constant up tier
IMP1 and M1A1 is decent, but armor again isnt very good especially hull armor, ofc its abrams anyways but uptier constantly
speaking from experience^

47

I assume you’re referring the rank II, not the 76, because if it’s the case this holds no sense whatsoever.

a 90mm at 6.7 is OP? lmao

7.0 armor but same problem as the previous vehicle.

Premium that barely anyone plays nowadays other than collectionists and content creators to do milking campaigns over forgotten vehicles

same as before + event vehicle that gets even less seen.

same argument as the T26 yet worst bc it gets 7.0 due to APCR.

Only worthy vehicle so far that you’ve mentioned that deserves to be called OP without any tag.

Outclassed by armor and penetration, and marginal mobility advantage against light tanks that do hold better pen.

Both are mid of the pack: Either bully early rank VII or gets bullied by late rank VII, that doesn’t make them OP by definition.

Out of your ‘objective’ list, i only found 2 more vehicles at most.

I’m not using any standards if its with absurd and childish strawmans.

absurd simplification. The T-80BVM has arguably the same speed, has better armor and enough pen to punch through anything, a combo any M1A2 does NOT have.

nope.
bud is definitely NOT beating the allegations.

1 Like
48

Out of all of those only 120S might be OP.
However, what’s really OP is F-15C, P51H5NA, now M4A2 due to other movements in other tech trees.
While I don’t consider M60 TTS OP, it’s currently the same BR as the inferior T55AM1.

1 Like
49

LMAO the only one in that list that’s OP is the M4A3 (105), and in all honesty, rank 1/2s don’t even count. All three big nations have rank 1/2s vastly superior to every other nation (except maybe Britain).

Honestly, the M4A2 is kinda meh. Against new players it’s pretty good, but anyone who knows about the turret weakspot will have a very easy time nuking the M4A2. I speak this mostly from my experience fighting it, I haven’t played it a whole lot.

50

US tanks? OP?

Lol. Lmao even. If only.

1 Like