New BMPT

[kachow 0]

SS posted this earlier, seems like BMPT prototype with single 30mm autocannon and quad pack of kornets

missing side ERA however

Edited May 4, 2020 by kachow (see edit history)

[Katsumoto 11]

Please no.  We don't need more of these.

[kachow 0]

If the armament is what I think it is (30mm AC and 4 Kornet), its probably gonna end up as a downtiered T-15 with weaker armor and weaker ammo due to it being much older than the latter

[di_duncan 24]

What's going to happen with the current BMPT "Proto" then?

feelsweirdman

[Haswell 294]

If it will truly have Kornet missiles, then it will probably be a tier 9.

But why do we need yet another Termi variant? We already have the Termi proto, the Ramka, the 2017 and the Termi 2. What's the point of this one?

[kachow 0]

dunno if i am stupid or not, keep finding contradictory sources that i dont know the credibility of

according to this http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product2083.html the missiles are not kornet, but are konkurs instead

according to this https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/modern/Russia/BMPT-terminator.php they are kornet

most credible source i know is andrei bt http://btvt.narod.ru/3/bmpt.htm says they are kornet

still think they are kornet due to the end of the missile tube being different from that of the konkurs

Edited May 5, 2020 by kachow (see edit history)

[Katsumoto 11]

9 hours ago, kachow said:

dunno if i am stupid or not, keep finding contradictory sources that i dont know the credibility of

according to this http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product2083.html the missiles are not kornet, but are konkurs instead

according to this https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/modern/Russia/BMPT-terminator.php they are kornet

most credible source i know is andrei bt http://btvt.narod.ru/3/bmpt.htm says they are kornet

still think they are kornet due to the end of the missile tube being different from that of the konkurs

Add this one as well:
http://otvaga2004.ru/kaleydoskop/kaleydoskop-track/k-istorii-bmpt/

So it appears that this could be with a 90% certainty the UKBTM.  This program started in the early 2000's so it would predate the current variations of the BMPT.

Quote

 

"Although the initiator of these works is I. Rodionov soon (May 1997) he was dismissed from the ranks of the Armed Forces, work on the creation of BMPT was continued from 1998 by the established procedure in the Ural Design Bureau of Transport Engineering, where V.I. Potkin was the chief designer, and V. Domnin since 2002. B. Thus, Rodionov I.N. may well be considered the "father" of modern BMPT.

Initially, in the UKBTM, the chassis of the T-72 tank was used, and subsequently the T-90A tank. The running model of the BMPT "Frame-99" ("Object 199") was demonstrated for the first time in the summer of 2000 at the Nizhny Tagil arms exhibition. BMPT has already been decoded as a tank support combat vehicle.

Of the five crew members, four could participate in fire control. On a low-profile tower of an original design with external armament, a 30 mm 2A42 automatic gun and a 30 mm AG-30 (AGS-17A) automatic grenade launcher paired with it were installed in a single stable cradle, four Kornet ATGMs with their own independent stabilized drives (in armored container on the left side of the tower).

This design made it possible to fire immediately from the entire weapons complex. The commander’s hatch housed a 7.62 mm remote-controlled PKTM machine gun.

Additional weapons were two automatic grenade launchers in the fenders in the front of the machine. The modern SUA BMPT "Frame" made it possible to conduct effective firing in any conditions and over a long range."

 

 

 

Yeah, we don't need another BMPT varient.

[Silentstalker 54]

Western sources usually mix these vehicles up so I wouldn't put much stock into anything in English. It's basically the earliest proto-Terminator from 2000. Was shown around a bit, didn't get much attention and in 2002, it was reworked to what is basically Ramka-99 in the game. The designations are a complete mess, multiple configurations can be referred to as "Ramka-99" and such. That's why we'll likely be calling this vehicle BMPT Mod.2000 in English. As for the Kornet missiles, I'd like to bring your attention to the fact that it's an older Kornet-E model, not Kornet-EM.

Edited May 5, 2020 by Silentstalker (see edit history)

[Qbicle 98]

New article is out

https://aw.my.games/en/news/general/development-bmpt-mod2000

Quote

As its armament suggests, this BMPT model will focus on ATGMs rather than autocannons. It will lose one autocannon but gain the ability to fire four Kornet-E missiles in relatively fast succession (roughly 4 seconds between shots). These missiles will boast 1000mm penetration and 760 damage, which is quite a lot for Tier 8. Other than that, its characteristics will become similar to the Tier 8 progression BMPT.

We won't get to see it being used by bots in PVE.

Quote

One last thing – if you’re worried about the performance of this vehicle in the hands of AI opponents (specifically, its powerful missiles), don’t be. The bots will not see this TD added to their vehicle pool.

 And it's time to wave goodbye to the old Terminator as it gets replaced by the proto-prototype.

Quote

...it’ll become available for sale at some point, but the players who already own the Tier 8 Premium BMPT will see their older vehicle automatically replaced by this one, free of charge. It’ll be quite an upgrade thanks to its powerful ATGMs and other tweaks bringing it on par with the progression version. Everything else (your crews or Experience accumulated) will remain the same.

P.S. If you have Reaper and/or Sapphire versions, you'll get their Mod.2000 reskinned counterpart(s) instead.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Qbicle
Mentioned Reaper & Sapphire versions (see edit history)

[Austin5125 2]

Yeah.. Its like Ataka was not good enough already, so why not give it more powerful Kornet?

I mean I don't mind improvement of old, obsolete premium vehicles, but we need more of this to other vehicles such as M1A1 AIM, M1134 such like that.

[di_duncan 24]

On 5/4/2020 at 6:10 PM, di_duncan said:

What's going to happen with the current BMPT "Proto" then?

feelsweirdman

I guess my question was answered then ;)

I actually appreciate this move by the devs. If there is too much repetition and overlap, it is best to change/replace some stuff so the entire line can feel "distinct" and "unique". 

[knutliott 41]

I'm annoyed that the Termi is being replaced.  There's no need to replace it - just add the new vehicle.  It's not like we have a limited number of garage slots or something.

The Termi is at least as distinct from the Ramka as the gazillions of various MBTs are from each other.

[dfnce 28]

This replacement seem to be a waste of time from dev side.

The tank looks different enough from Ramka-99 and Termi 2017, in no lesser degree than T-series, Leo or Abrams series between clones placed on different tiers.

I prefer to keep Termi Prototype as it is. Purely for sentimental value.

The original Termi P was placed to underdog position by devs compared to better powerful Termi 2017. Everyone who got 2017 in hands, forgot about original Termi because there was no point to play less powerful Terminator, at least until recently when Prototype got slighly better AC compared Terminator 2017.

Edited May 6, 2020 by dfnce (see edit history)

[knutliott 41]

The 2017 should not be at Tier 8.  That's the biggest problem - it should be Tier 9.  It's basically a Terminator 2 turret on the better T-90 (vs T-72) hull of the Ramka.  PLUS it has the soft ERA bags.

The Terminator and Ramka-99 are both valid at Tier 8 as they currently exist.  The Termi has better DPM, but the Ramka has better defense.  It may not look that different on paper, but in actual play the "troll" armor of the Ramka makes it significantly more survivable than the Termi.

There's no reason to remove the Terminator.  Just add the 2000!  Bonus: devs don't have to make the Reaper and Sapphire skins work on the 2000.

[Beady_Eyed_Bob 0]

I'm confused (but I'm used to it),

I have a BMPT 2017.

Stats on Ataka "M" are pen = 950, avg damg = 775, 3 second firing delay between missles.

Stats on Kornet-E are pen = 1000, avg damg = 760, 4 second firing delay between missles.(edit: may drop to 3 with Commander).

I have to wonder if this "improvement" is worth losing an autocannon over.

 

Edited May 6, 2020 by Beady_Eyed_Bob (see edit history)

[Spyshadow01 2]

2 hours ago, Beady_Eyed_Bob said:

I'm confused (but I'm used to it),

I have a BMPT 2017.

Stats on Ataka "M" are pen = 950, avg damg = 775, 3 second firing delay between missles.

Ataka M's average damage is 665.  This vehicle is also replacing the Terminator Proto and not the BMPT 2017.  Proto uses baseline Ataka which 850 pen and the same 665 average damage.  The Mod.2000's missiles will do significantly more damage and have a 150mm penetration advantage over the ones on the vehicle it is replacing.  The only downside in comparison to the other termi's missiles is the fixed launcher.

[Beady_Eyed_Bob 0]

My BMPT 2017 (tier 8 Premium) Ataka "M" damage range is 599-951, hence my claim of 775 average.

Now that I know specifically which "tier 8 Premium", the article makes perfect sense.  Consistant use of the more explicit "BMPT Terminator Prototype" or just "Prototype" in place of the generic "tier 8 Premium" would have been my choice for the article.

So thank you Spyshadow01.  Now I'll just wander off and find something else to be confused about.

[Spyshadow01 2]

1 hour ago, Beady_Eyed_Bob said:

My BMPT 2017 (tier 8 Premium) Ataka "M" damage range is 599-951, hence my claim of 775 average.

Yes, but that range takes into account the bonus damage that HEAT receives against thin armor.  You can see this yourself by taking the Ataka's average damage of 665 and multiplying it by 1.1 (10% RNG) and then multiplying it again by 1.30 (30% bonus damage against thin armor) and you will get 950.95.  When the game gives an "average damage" for things like HEAT shells, it does not take into account the bonus damage against thin armor.

[Beady_Eyed_Bob 0]

If you say so Spyshadow01.  I don't know what your stated 665 average is based upon, other than possibly starting at the maximum and recipacating the variables to a base value .  The range of values I've given are based on the in game text of the missle description, a simple mean based on those two numbers alone.

Why would you exclude the variables from your "average"?  It's not like shooting a thin skinned enemy is a rarity.  I shoot a shi-metric load of them.  It definitely influences the average.

[Haswell 294]

This is where he got 665 from, and he's not wrong.

Take the listed average damage of 665, multiply that by 1.1 (because +/- 10% RNG), the base damage can only roll up to 731.5 at most.

The damage bonus from hitting thin armor however, is applied AFTER the base damage roll. Take 731.5 and multiply that by 1.3, you get 950.95 (rounds up to 951). This is why the damage bonus is listed only as +30%, not +40%.

But yes, your practical average damage for most things HEAT will tend to be higher than the listed average damage, because you'll usually be benefiting from the thin armor damage bonus.

 

The 760 average damage for the new missiles is most likely the listed value, before the +30% damage bonus.

[Beady_Eyed_Bob 0]

So really 665 is not an AVERAGE at all.  If penetration is successful(yippie!), the 665 value is the BASE damage value from which subsequent modifiers are calculated.

A true average would take into consideration all possible variables.  I think it  is wrong to claim 665 is an average value.  It is not.

I stand corrected!

[Haswell 294]

It's honestly very poorly explained in the game, if anything I would prefer the listed damage range to exclude the damage bonus to make the numbers more consistent.

I think the new missiles will perform similarly to the HOT-3 on the Mephisto, since the numbers match up so far. If that is indeed the case the new missiles will be a straight up buff from the old ones, at the expense of no launcher elevation/depression. I hope they will get autohoming too, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Spyshadow01 2]

9 hours ago, Beady_Eyed_Bob said:

Why would you exclude the variables from your "average"?

Because that's how the game denotes average damage.  I got my 665 figure from the game itself.

[Komitadjie 13]

Still rather weak, damage-wise, by comparison to a lot of other available rounds at 8 that will regularly break 900+.  Compensating is really good speed and pen, of course.  The four-second swap time is pretty long as well for something that's supposed to use missiles as its main armament.  We'll have to see.  I'm not *all* that hopeful, given that we know how useful fixed launchers are on most other platforms that have them.

[Spyshadow01 2]

9 minutes ago, Komitadjie said:

Still rather weak, damage-wise, by comparison to a lot of other available rounds at 8 that will regularly break 900+.  Compensating is really good speed and pen, of course.  The four-second swap time is pretty long as well for something that's supposed to use missiles as its main armament.  We'll have to see.  I'm not *all* that hopeful, given that we know how useful fixed launchers are on most other platforms that have them.

Yeah, trying to emphasize the missile armament and then saddling the vehicle with a fixed launcher is a questionable design choice, to be sure.