It’s not the same pen? Puma has 121mm pen to the 114 of the standard bushmasters, not to mention it also has anti air ammo and air tracking while having full 360 coverage of its hull unlike the 9030. The PUMA should stay where it’s at until the 9030 goes down because the difference between the two is quite large.
The fact you didn’t list actual differences tells me you have no idea what you’re talking about. Additionally in a fight the PUMA has the smaller turret profile and is more likely to knock the turret and kill the 9030 which also has worse all around armor.
When it comes to the ability to take hits to the turret the PUMA is second to none. Any penetrating shots would often result in ammo cook off, if not module damage or FCS out of service, and it takes no critical damage like crew damage.
PUMA’s ability to take all types of apfsds to the turret, crews take zero damage = ∞
VS
Other light tanks = darts kill them through the turret in one hit, or it lose 1 crew when lucky
HEATFS lol you will go 30 matches without ever getting hit by HEATFS once, even if it does get hit to the turret the chance of overpressure is slim to none.
Similar IFVs with crewless turret and the behavior of their damage model base on my observation:
BMPT, hitting one of the two belts will have 50% chance to trigger the blowout panels, temporary disables the FCS, sometimes can even kill the BMPT but the chance is extremely slim like I would say somewhere around random % 20 == 0
PUMAs, darts has practically no chance to kill the PUMA through the turret, only trigger blowout panels, each fireworks spend 1 belt and PUMA has 3. Can be overpressure by ATGM or HE but extremely rare occurence base on my playstyle.
Namer, has a turret hitbox very similar to BMPT, can take darts to the turret like PUMA without critical damage, except for one ammo cookoff burn through all the ammo reserves.
Not to mention when it comes to mobility department, the PUMA is extremely mobile on all types of terrains thanks to the engine power and having tracks. Wheels sucks
Also, the difference in pin is infinitely small. The Anti Air ammo i.e AHEAD absolutely sucks. And if you mention the “smaller turret profile”, why not mention HOW INSANELY HUGE the PUMA is, making that a moot point? The thing is slow, big, and cumbersome.
Yeah, that’s bullshit. It has roughly the same survivability as other unmanned turrets such as the 2S38. While being much more easy to disable. Remind me again where the 2S38 is at? Right, 10.7. While being superior in virtually every damn way. It should not be that close.
And no, the only light tanks who lose crew/get killed are those with manned turrets. The unmanned turret ones are virtually all at 10.7. And that’s the one with SPIKES. The PUMA VJTF sits at 11.0.
That you dare to compare the PUMA to the BMPT and pretend the PUMA not only stacks up but wins, at least in it’s War Thunder configuration shows that you’re just being incredibly dishonest to an absolute absurd degree.
360° coverage is in regards to turret viewing angles, you suggested the puma should be 9.7, I’m mentioning that an infinitely worse 30mm tank sits at 9.3 and can’t look full 360° as the gun has to raise over a view port on the rear while having worse armor. Also you say mobility but do you even know what you’re talking about? Your armored IFV has 25.3 HP/t
The CV9030 with worse armor, worse ammo, worse survivability, no air tracking, no anti air ammo, and no 360° gun coverage, only has 22.7 HP/t
Seriously why would anyone take your opinion seriously when you want a vehicle like that to be only a .4 difference in BR?
I’d be willing to take your argument seriously if you hadn’t suggested such a ridiculous change.
Again your comment where you cry about the PUMA claiming “realistically it should be 9.7” because hur dur the CV9030 is 9.3 it’s a joke, you have no idea what you’re talking about. You didn’t even know anything about the CV9030 you just spouted random nonsense like a child
@_Renzo is this guy for real? It’s gotta be bait right? This is Tiger tank on an alt account right? No way someone could literally be that ignorant of another vehicle and trying to use it to justify their own argument while not knowing a single thing lmao
Also the profile is definitely different but the difference is armor on top of the Puma and the turret needing to be remote controlled.
Regardless it’s not the biggest difference outside of maybe HE shot traps, though the CV90 will always die compared to the Puma. Puma just has to sit until it’s finished off.
I love how you guys genuinely pretend one of the singularly worst performing vehicles in the game by every metric is somehow in a good place and fine where it is. Even comparing it to the BMPT which has is currently at 11.3 but people bring it all the way to 12.7 and it still works. You’re a genuine riot.
No, I never actually wanted to compare them, since one is a light tank and another is a tank destroyer. But anytime PUMA gets brought up people would put bmpt in same sentence to compare their ability like its a one vs one scenario or 16 puma vs 16 bmpts we can see clearly which one would lose. Even before the bmpts is here PUMA has been performing exactly the same vs its natural enemies, to solve the problem with the new guy we don’t simply move every ifvs down (which you may solve one problem and introduce another for lower br) but to move the problematic guy up which they already continue to do so, nerf the hitbox or remove it like Maus to cull its population for years to come. PUMA were never as weak as everybody and their mother claims, just extremely weak in cqc maps and super annoying to fight on large maps that allowing it to hull down, 1 life to kill assist ratio is extremely high for the PUMA.
Did I say the Puma was good? No it’s called COMPRESSION yeah the Puma isn’t good specifically the VTFJ but just because one vehicle is bad doesn’t mean I want it to move down so much that it becomes lower than vehicles it is superior too that’s called being biased.
I’ll never accept the Puma and the BMPT being near each other but I’ll never accept that the Puma isn’t a good unmanned IFV when it is, unfortunately due to compression it has to be much higher because of how much better it is next to its contemporaries.
You’re the only one actually being a problem here because no matter how many logical points we make you brush them off and just say we’re being irrational.
Technically if we get into semantics they are the same class of vehicle, but BVVD stated it would be a TD because they wanted it to replenish ammo for gameplay.
Who said the PUMA needs to go to 9.3? Basically nobody. But it does not belong at 10.3, nor does the SPIKE variant belong at 11.0. SPIKE might work at 10.7 though. Where it has the semblance of a line up.
There was a thread asking for the Puma to be moved to 9.7 recently, with the guy saying that it would be fine since the M1296 and CV9030 are both at that BR too.
Ignoring that both of these are considerably worse than the Puma.
EDIT: I’m still waiting for you to link the post where I supposedly say that the Puma has better survivability than the BMPT. If you are going to accuse me of saying something you better show the evidence.
“Some guy said”, how is that my problem? Im not responsible for that. Also the CV9030 is at 9.3 not 9.7. You can argue it should go down to 9.0 and I wouldn’t necessarily disagree as most 30mm NATO tanks are overtiered.
Was actually [БЕИ], NGL you two blend together for me on most threads as you basically argue the same points and agree on virtually everything. I would like to say it won’t happen again, but it absolutely will.
@_Renzo did he seriously just forget he said that above or what?
Like brother you could’ve checked my reply but you’re so lazy and cope filled you had to reply to me again without checking where I was pulling my argument from your own words.
SPIKES are terrible and the PUMA is a shitbox. It’s worse than the NAMER albeit not by much and both are overtiered as hell. As are MOST NATO auto cannon tanks.
@Pheonix_RX01 The CV9030 is 9.3 not 9.7 and arguably should be 9.0 too rather than 9.3. So what exactly is your point?
That’s not the discussion, the discussion was your comment that the Puma is just a CV9030 which I stated it wasn’t. It’s arguably a better CV90 in every way which means it should be 1.0 BR different. You didn’t say the CV90 should go down you just stated the puma was just a bigger CV9030 and should be lower in BR.
It shouldn’t be lower in BR because it’s not a 9030 it’s again a better vehicle than the 9030 in so many vital aspects. Sure we could talk BR’s but if we are going to move one down we need to look at all of the bushmaster tanks without launchers and balance them.
I have no interest in only moving the Puma down when it would be infinitely better than the other bushmasters at 9.7 but that’s a discussion for a thread on bushmasters and not just the Puma.
Also where is this I said the CV9030 was 9.7 coming from? You’re the one who suggested the Puma should be 9.7 when it’s literally an entire BRs difference in performance which is why I said it should be 9.7 because the 9030 sits at 9.3
My comment was that the PUMA is just a CV9030 with an unmanned turret. It’s literally not an improvement above it beyond that for the most part. “But it gets AHEAD”, yes which is an absolutely horrible round that performs worse than any proxy in War Thunder. Nobody brings the PUMA out for anti CAS duty for good reason.
And I never said the PUMA should be lower in BR than the CV9030. I said it should be significantly lower in BR than it currently is. Either you are misreading what I’m saying on purpose or misunderstood my point.
And there aren’t many 30mm at 9.7 anyway. Most sit lower at 9.3 or even 9.0. With those at higher BRs having crewless turrets, ATGMs, or something else to help them out.
And no, the PUMA performance is not worthy of “an entire BR difference of performance”, in fact it performs absolutely atrociously. Both the PUMA and PUMA VJTF are among the worst performing vehicles in War Thunder.
PUMA: Has anti air tracking ✓
Has literally any form of anti air ammo✓
25.3HP/T so better mobility than the CV✓
Has better armor than the CV90✓
Has a APS(that is really finicky but still has)✓ Better penetration at 121mm vs 114mm✓
Is a unmanned turret✓ Can look and cover the vehicle 360°✓ Suggested BR 9.7
CV9030 Worse armor than the Puma✓ Slower than the Puma, only 22.7HP/T Less armored than the Puma Crewed Turret, making it less survivable Can’t look 360 down, specifically on the rear No anti air abilities
Suggested BR 9.0
In what world are they only .7 apart?
Your form of balance is just illogical, honestly the same type of balance gaijin though when putting the BMPT at the same BR as the 10.3 Puma, again how you don’t see the irony is beyond me
