Consider this, armour wise the T72B is vastly superior to other 10.3 tanks like the Challengers, the Abrams, the Leopard 2a4, and even some 11.7 tanks. For that, you trade off thermals. You have good enough optics (if it works for the TTD it works for the T72B). And every other problem you list is a doctrine issue. And any case of bad gun depression, or poor reverse speed is an issue with the player not the vehicle. The T72B is not at fault if you peek a ridge you shouldn’t.
Let me be clear, if the doctrine of the tank makes it bad in WT, it should not be at a br where it is not competitive. However, the T72B is plenty competitive when you consider that the trade off you give away for an amazing platform is only matched by a premium (which you should expect to be undertiered) you are simply stating something that is false.
The T72B is a viable platform. Good armour (L27A1, M829A1, DM33, and even DM53 can struggle to pen), okay mobility (except in reverse), good firepower, and a slow but competitive reload. The T72B should not go down, further compressing the game. Rather, other tanks that vastly outperform it that consistently face it should go up.
T-72B 1989 does… T-72B is easily pennable.
This makes exactly zero sense.
You do realize that what makes NATO tanks better is their ability to do this in the first place, right?
The T-72B is good at 2 things. UFP armor, and a good round. Not amazing, like M900, DM33 or 3BM60 which are at this BR, but still good.
Every other quality about this vehicle is either mediocre or bad. Terrible gun handling, bad optics, no thermals, terrible reverse, bad forward speed, long reload, and bad survivability.
The only thing keeping it at 10.3 is 3BM42, otherwise it would be 10.0 or even 9.7.
bruh what are u talking man
TTD has a thermal sight
even DM33 can pen it from front
I can understand why this is an issue that would hinder a vehicle performance that you wouldn’t understand, due to the vehicle limitations there ain’t many ways to play them, seeing how British vehicles filled all three pages in your record.
Its simply a mediocre tank. Like most of the T-64/72/80/90 series, it shares the same obvious weakspots (breach, drivers port, and LFP) from 9.3. The armor it does have is only useful against unfamiliar players or panic shots, otherwise it usually dies or is heavily crippled in one well-placed shot.
In a bracket where speed is king, the T-72B’s are probably some of the slowest, and its not just in mobility. Gun handling is also atrocious, especially with the vertical drive speeds, and mediocre gun depression.
3BM42 is quite a good round at this BR. Though, why wouldn’t I just use a 2S25M? It’s a lower BR (granted without much armor) but has 3BM60, 3rd generation CITV, a very fast reverse and good power to weight ratio, and in some cases superior gun handling.
T-90A also shares the same issues as the T-72B, id argue its even worse given that its 11.0 with such awful mobility and gun handling.
PS: the best way to get someone to ignore your point is by being snippy in the response.
You can disagree all you want. But when you make fun of someone they will always ignore what they say. Which is what I’m doing now.
The T72B is perfectly fine at its br, it has good qualities that balance out the bad, and bad performance with it is a skill issue.
:3
No bro because you give one of the worst takes ever and to make the matters worse, it turns out that you didn’t even play them, so people who actually played them and have experience in it are treating your post as gaslighting lol. I do agree with you that a good player will still perform well in a shit vehicle.
Yeah nah you’re just not a great player.
lol calm down lil bro
You forgot to mention what for me is the main problem: it doesn’t even have commander FCS. gunner dies, you’re cooked.
Because it’s fits there
BRs have probably changed in the ~year since, but the T-64B has 3BM42 and is at 9.7.
T-64B also has worse mobility and armor.
T-72B may lack thermals and mobility may not be outstanding; but it’s still highly mobile, with great firepower and REALLY good armor for its BR.
And it’s facing 9.3s at 10.3. Suggesting that it should be 10.0 implies that it should face 9.0s… and I just can’t see that being fair.
T-72B is perhaps one of the worst T-72 variants I’ve ever played, followed by the T-72B3 and the recently added 12.0 with APS, they are so dogwater that my M1A2 and Leopard 2 with stock rounds M829 perform better than them with top ammunition unlocked. The only T-72s style mbt that I had a good time with is T-64B, and another one that remotely comes close is the T-90A because of good thermals and optical zoom, the rest are downright mediocre and rage-inducing lol
Remember, 0.3 BR doesn’t make any difference.
Nah, just nah. It has mediocre mobility at best and it’s firepower is just mid.
Armor is the only good thing about it and doesn’t make up for the whole list of bad things.
That thing has 18.9 HP/t in the tier where it’s common to find MBTs with more than 24 HP/t. Pair that with atrocious reverse speed and you get a tank with pretty much one of the worst mobility for it’s BR.
So yeah, thinking 72B at 10.3 is still a highly mobile tank is just laughable.
Can we disqualify a tank from being called highly mobile if it only has -4 km/h reverse speed, thanks