Not sure about surrounding it with weaker tanks making the side armour issue irrelevant. It's not very hard for me to ignore the tanks you have on its side and just simply target your side armor of t-64BV. If you charge a bunch of weak tanks at me, one thing's for sure: I'll take advantage of the fact that you have crap side armour by merely positioning my troops at a 20 degree angle to your front armor (if they weren't positioned already to begin with) to get easy hits on side. And since the BV is probably going to be the biggest threat, I'd target my atgm's at it rather than your meatshields/the tanks on its side. And i usually keep atgms safe from meatshields charging them with my own tanks and infantry in fast carriers to unload right in front of charging T-55s or zhalos.
Putting weaker tanks next to your side armor does not at all make the side armor any more inaccessible to my rounds/ATGMs, nor does one need to actually be on the flank of the tank to hit its side armor. For that reason, I have personally phased out the T_64BV in my arsenal (in fact i've deleted the entire line off my deck).
Also, 130 points is alot to be traded for a few measly VTS1's or a friggin' Tow jeep missile...

_________________
Definition of "balance" on ALB forums:

"WAH WAH NERF PACT TO OBLIVION I DONT WANT TO L2P!!"

Are you talking about 1v1 exclusely? Im not sure about that, it evolved a lot since i used BVs in 1vs1. But you never charge in with BVs anyway and 16+ IFVs or Tanks can make up a huge screen, not to mention recon on the flank. You will have trouble getting into 2,4k ish range unnoticed. Its a fundamental flaw to allow tank hunters on the flank without reacting to it and of course BVs will be toast (as will most other tanks). Beside the T-64 are normal size so they are harder to spot aswell. Im not calling them the new fotm, i leave that to others.
Plus you get the 2nd best gun in Pact arsenal coupled with a good amount of missiles, etc.

Well yes i didn't mean to say charge. But even if you're stationary how do you know if i have say a Milan F2 squad inside a bush or forest 20 degree angle away from the direct front of your tank? Whether or not your tank is stationary, I can still hit its side, and you can't always 100% detect ATGM threats like infantry ATGMs (milan F2, 12AP, 1 hit KO half the time to the side of 64BV). In fact, to detect infantry on the edge of the forest, you'd have to fly / drive the recon right up to it until it is like 100m away. And I'll just turn off the ATGM until the big bad 64BV's come so that they don't shoot meatshield screens, only at BV. The normal size harder to spot argument you made is trivial as once you're within shooting range of me, you have already been spotted for the last 2000m by my 2e rep famas and gazelle. Normal =/= very small, especially if your tank is in the open (why would you put it in the forest anyway..). Normally when i face T80 + T64BV formations I always discover them at the same time simultaneously with recon.
However, to be honest, between the T80A and T=64BV it is a toss-up, as the BV is slightly more accurate with better front armor while the 80A's only advantage is side armor and speed. But the T80BV i would always use over 64BV because 80BV has 1. much better atgm 2. much better side armor (2 points is a HUGE difference) and 3. better speed. All this for a measly loss of 1 pt in accuracy of main gun I say hells yah ( I know the 80BV is also slightly more expensive but when you're buying high end tanks up in the 100s, 10 points is a trivial difference)

_________________
Definition of "balance" on ALB forums:

"WAH WAH NERF PACT TO OBLIVION I DONT WANT TO L2P!!"

A quick note here.

atleast IRL, being on 20* to the tanks front and shooting the side would not work. Due to the angle of the tank to your weapon your giving it over 2.5x the armor LOS-wise. It is a pity that WG:EE does not simulate this with extreme angle side/rear shots.

Yeah, thats why the german Tiger I was so hard to penetrate, they would always slightly turn to one side to give the front armor an angle.

Edit: Using Tiger I as an exemple because historians often critizise its non sloped armor, while you can effectively make it "sloped" by slightly turning the tank.

Personally I use:

FlammPz TO-55:

Same as the Soviet flame tank, but available in greater numbers. (Not that I ever ran out of the Soviet version, but why limit yourself for no advantage!)

T-55:

Great cheap spam tanks, and the later variant T-55's are better value than the cheap T-62's imo.

T-64:

The later variants are good, but I don't use them often. I have them as insurance due to the low numbers of T-80's.

T-80:

Great tanks - these are what I use every game. The base variant is great value and the later two variants are very powerful but only available in low numbers, and expensive.



I think that the tanks are pretty balanced on both sides. For Pact I always have some BMP's in support (various versions depending on what I can afford!), and usually a Burratino or Danas covering the area.

If you and your opponent are both competent players, then you need the right support to tip the balance. I use various tactics to tip the balance for Pact - if they don't have much AA, then I try my best to take it out and then send a havok round the side to take advantage of NATO's AA limitations. Sometimes during a tank battle I use a fake rush of empty Skots (Cost 5 points), followed by Skots filled with Motostrelci - this usually gets the Inf right next to the NATO tanks and is devastating to them, with me often losing just a few empty Skots. I rarely have 1v1 head on tank battles which ever team I'm on - I'm always throwing something else at them.

T-62's
My note for that tank is only use the last variants but they are beast due to its superb ATGM and its main gun can out class most Leo1 series Chieftain series M60 series and others that are weaker than the KPZ-70, M1 series, Leo2 and Challengers. Very good at defence. (I defeated easily a batch of M1 tanks and Leo2 with 4 of the last version of the T-62)

T-72's
The T-72A is very good for its price and a gun with 8 AP damage, Good armor, and to some extent a stabilizer and good economy is very good. Any heavy tank stupid to get close to it will get toast. I also use them for flanking the enemy since I can take down Heavy tanks (I have did this with so much success that I'm called a hacker sometimes since I use these to take down their high class tanks) The T-72B is very good since it has a really good main gun, epic ATGM (not that accurate but more accurate than the PACT atgms) and you can carry 4, 11 AP Atgms with 8 Acc is really good for crippling enemy heavy tanks. It's main gun has high range, ROF and good AP damage. Only problem with it is its frontal armor kills it. (Try to use them at the back of your ranks, I made a seige match and I deterred a whole tank assault with a lot of Leo2 series and M1 series with 6 T-72B's and I didn't lose any of them. Also good for crippling tanks that are on defense.)

T-64's
Well the series is a really potent series. With good ROF, range and damage this series owns. Not to mention you get kobra ATGMs that is crippling to enemy armor also. They can carry alot of Kobras for a time too. Kobras always gets me to destroy enemy M1 tanks and Leo2s even with the buff in range. Problem is its SUPER WEAK AND PUNY side armor. I suggest keep them at the back of your ranks or show it's front side always.

T-80's
Base T-80 can kill M1 Abrams. T-80B can kill M11P Abrams and kill Leopard 2's 60% of the time due to the ATGM. T-80A is a very good tank as it out classes all tanks except the Leo 2a4 and Challengers. And T-80BV and T-80U can destroy any NATO tank has to offer. (BV can be challenged by the Leo 2a4 but will mostly win since it has the ATGM advantage.)

These are only my opinion and can be proved wrong at anytime

Yeah I think T-64BV side armour is too weak. It's not worth using simply because anything can flank it and get a free 130 points. Heck, even arty can kill it if you don't micro it well with that 1 rear armor..

_________________
Definition of "balance" on ALB forums:

"WAH WAH NERF PACT TO OBLIVION I DONT WANT TO L2P!!"

I think that it would be reasonnable to give the T-64BM a side armor of 3 and a side armor of 4 to the BV. It would still be inferior, but not horribly so. The problem is that side shot are so easy to do in this game that side armor is almost as important than frontal armor. It's not to problematic to the A, B and BM variants because they don't cost to much, but the BV one suffer heavily from that because of his cost. I don't know if such a buff deserve a rise in cost. More than 140 for the T64BV would be too much however.