t90 vs Abrams(test1: open field,armour)

[Lacroix]

after testing in multiplayer, it is clear that t90 is sherman 75 and that abrams is panther (ww2 analogy)

 

on long distances , abrams literally obliterated T90s, out of 20 abrams, 2 are destroyed, out of 20 t90s, 20 are destroyed. not because of spoting but because of Tank Resilience

 

close distance(10-100m): almost same result,abrams on average survives 3-5 shots from the front

 

 

 

Shooting abrams from the rear/sides,close distance (10-100m)  is different story,it is very likely to be destroyed by 1 hit from t90

 

 

conclusion: all putin can do is ride bears naked and play violonchelo

 

 

 

 

 

(this information is regarding CM:BS, not actual real lfie , but i am sure it wouldnt be very different there too,provided same terain and vehicles are there)

[Aurelius]

One Abrams actually took 4 hits on front armor from ~20 meters and then managed to destroy 4 T90 in quick succession.

[AttorneyAtWar]

One Abrams actually took 4 hits on front armor from ~20 meters and then managed to destroy 4 T90 in quick succession.

 

Yeah unfortunately crews do not experience "stun" effects when there vehicles are hit, vehicles only suffer performance issues if crew are killed or modules are damaged. I would really like it if vehicles took a huge penalty after being hit, especially by a 125mm tank shell.

[Thewood1]

Was this also posted in the Mod section as well?

[Aurelius]

By mistake

[Lacroix]

Was this also posted in the Mod section as well?

yes, i edited /deleted text when i realised

[Nerdwing]

conclusion: all putin can do is ride bears naked and play violonchelo

 

Same.

Edited April 8, 2015 by Nerdwing

[stikkypixie]

Out of curiosity, what is the exact version of the T-90?

[Lacroix]

Out of curiosity, what is the exact version of the T-90?

t90a and t90am,both did same in the test

[snarre]

äh , not again this M1 and T90 testings. Both tanks can destroy each other long and short distance. M1 has biger advance on longer distance.

[Aurelius]

Abrams has the advantage both in long range and in short range.

[snarre]

yes in raw testing on opend field and t90 am can take hit ewen on sort distance if M1 hit era tiles. that time is enough to t90 am destroy M1.

[Lacroix]

yes in raw testing on opend field and t90 am can take hit ewen on sort distance if M1 hit era tiles. that time is enough to t90 am destroy M1.

 

i played multiplayer qbs, tested this and in every case,except some rare cases, t90 sucks, in comparison to abrams at least. i compare it with sherman and panther,sometimes sherman will get lucky hit, and sometimes sherman will survive panther, but in general, abrams(or panther) is far superior to sherman (t90)

 

you are talking about lucky/unlucky shots, we were testing raw power of the tanks.sure skill matters,but skilled abrams will kill skilled t90 many times more than skilled t90 will kill skilled abrams

Edited April 9, 2015 by Lacroix

[Sublime]

And so... you've come to the conclusion everyone here already knew?  The patch will improve some aspects of Soviet armor but dont expect it to be that greatly changed, and rightfully so.  As Capt Miller has stated anyone who wants Abrams to be nerfed just so the game is balanced should go play Command and Conquer or something, the game is trying to be a simulation of real life combat, not a balanced RTS game.  I think its funny that noone demands German tanks should be nerfed but somehow the Abrams should?

[Aurelius]

And so... you've come to the conclusion everyone here already knew?  The patch will improve some aspects of Soviet armor but dont expect it to be that greatly changed, and rightfully so.  As Capt Miller has stated anyone who wants Abrams to be nerfed just so the game is balanced should go play Command and Conquer or something, the game is trying to be a simulation of real life combat, not a balanced RTS game.  I think its funny that noone demands German tanks should be nerfed but somehow the Abrams should?

Who said anything about nerfing Abrams?

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

It comes up in other treads, mostly about how unfair it is, and makes QB impossible or something.

[Lacroix]

And so... you've come to the conclusion everyone here already knew?  The patch will improve some aspects of Soviet armor but dont expect it to be that greatly changed, and rightfully so.  As Capt Miller has stated anyone who wants Abrams to be nerfed just so the game is balanced should go play Command and Conquer or something, the game is trying to be a simulation of real life combat, not a balanced RTS game.  I think its funny that noone demands German tanks should be nerfed but somehow the Abrams should?

everyone? i guess most of the people know that abrams > t90, but the point is:  is it '  sherman vs tiger ' or ' t34 76  vs t34 85'. also more people playing with this could result in unexpected results in certain areas of the story, perhaps even bugs could be found

 

also i think nobody mentioned nerfing abrams, i love realism aswell

Edited April 11, 2015 by Lacroix

[snarre]

then people should stop complaining how unfair it is and btw personaly i dont have difficulti destroy M1 whit t90 or ewen whit t72 . it is challenging but there is many ways to knock out them. 

[VladimirTarasov]

No one knows the layout of the T-90A yet assumes that it is weaker then Abrams, T-90As were made in 2000s from scratch not from "soviet armor" and T-90AMs would be made even later with better materials and with the Relikt ERA. I haven't been able to get this game yet but will very soon hopefully, And I want to see if it really is as how people say it is. Sucks how Armata cant be modeled in game... But would be cool if to make up for it the T-90AMs were gaven the Grifel Apfsds, Plus advantages of 2A82 cannon.

Edited April 11, 2015 by VladimirTarasov

[Vanir Ausf B]

No one knows the layout of the T-90A yet assumes that it is weaker then Abrams, T-90As were made in 2000s from scratch not from "soviet armor

http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/MBT/t-90_armor.html

But would be cool if to make up for it the T-90AMs were gaven the Grifel Apfsds, Plus advantages of 2A82 cannon.

This would be a good candidate for the first module. Edited April 11, 2015 by Vanir Ausf B

[akd]

But would be cool if to make up for it the T-90AMs were gaven the Grifel Apfsds, Plus advantages of 2A82 cannon.

 

They would have to be given 2A82 before they could have Grifel.

[L0ckAndL0ad]

"They" would have to be given T-90AM before they can upgrade its gun to 2A82

[John Kettler]

VladimirTarasov and Vanir Ausf B,

 

While it seems cool and edgy in game terms to give the T-90AM the 2A82 cannon and the associated Grifel round, my understanding, gun retrofit issues aside, is that the T-90 ammo carousel, regardless of T-90 model, simply is too small to accommodate Grifel, which, even in the usual two parts, is considerably longer than the current DU round. Given what I know of Russian tank design practices, I have serious-acute doubts a much wider carousel will fit the T-90 hull. If I'm missing something here, by all means clue me in. From a game standpoint, an upgunned T-90AM firing Grifel would, I feel, help considerably on the hitting end of things, but you would now have an even more expensive victim of the got Spotted First and Killed Award because of the continued sensor deficiency vs the M1A2 SEP V3

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

[db_zero]

I'm no expert on armor. What i would like to know is how advanced is the sighting and targeting system on the T90 as compared to current western tanks like the M1/Challenger or Leopard. Is it up to par with whats used in the West?

 

The only thing I have to even begin to remotely understand it all is putzing around in Steel Beasts and if that is even remotely accurate then the T90 has a long ways to go to catch up to current western tanks.

 

The T-62 is just outright strange. You fire a round and the gun and sight elevate-I assume to accomodate loading.

 

The T-72 is somewhat better. At least the gun doesn't evelvate when you fire a round, but I find the laser and sighting system is far behind Western tanks. I'm sure plenty of good training and lots of practice with live ammo can turn out skilled ginners, but the impression I get is you don't get that in the Russian army and anything on par with the NTC is non-existant. Also the autoloading system the requires the ammo to be stored a certain way makes it a deathtrap if it gets hit.

 

Perhaps the T80 and T-90 makes up for all the deficiencies of past designs. IDK, but I'm really interested if the protection features and other things like gun computing systems and ammo storage is improved. Is it still using an autoloader?

[Nerdwing]

They're better than what the US had in GW1 definitely.  They're good enough for most things I'd say.

 

The T90 in SB sadly is the S variant too, and unplayable at that