When I say flanking tank, it doesn't mean it has to maneuver a lot ; let's say you play with RISE Pattons or AMX-30B Valorisés as the most outward units. Then you use your M1A1s more or less in the middle but with a very good lateral separation, so that if the enemy dares to fight you, you'll have a very fair chance to get side shots with the M1A1s, even more if the enemy engages your flanking tanks. The only units that can shoot from the center and hit the front armor shall be the ATGMs, and if it's possible, you shall even move them to get side shots.

Even though the M1A1 is slow with 50 km/h, the enemy can't move very fast either ; only the T-80s are really fast, while the other PACT tanks are either ineffective while shooting on the move to stay far enough from the M1A1s, or if they want to stand still to fight your RISE Pattons or AMX-30B Valorisés, they'll expose themselves to your 120mm DU shells of justice !

The M1A1 is worthless if you fight the T-80s head-on without moving ; if you force the T-80s to move, they already lose a lot of their effectiveness. Your job is to manage to get the most of your force to engage the T-80s without losing too much to their flank guards.

Nice theorycrafting. In practice T-80Us kill your outward units or force them to retreat, you try to back them up with abrams and T-80U runs away. That's not even considering all the support units that come with it like those fine T62M series with their ATGM just waiting to get a juicy hit on your abrams.

So yeah, in practice Leo2A4 is better in every single way so long as the current range buffs apply.

Allied with the terrible side armour the T64BV commits the cardinal sin of having only 1 point top and rear armour. 1 point armour is a sweet spot for dieing to artillery and having a 130 point unit that is damaged and killed by various forums of artillery is a reason to never buy the thing. You have 40 - 60 point versions of the T72s that will not disappear under a cloud of arty. What's the point of a heavy tank that will be hard countered by arty? None when one considers the T72 and T80 "heavy" line.

Gotta agree, the top and rear armor from T-64BV bugs me more than the side armor does. Its still a good tank but you have to be really carefull with it.

Why are we comparing T-64BV's to T-80U's when the T-80BV is mostly better than the T-64BV for a mere 10 points. Add to that the fact that you get the entire T-80 family anyway its pretty much a sure thing.

_________________

• Read my video game blog
• Follow me on Twitter

Formerly shugyosha on these forums and still shugyosha ingame

Availability

Availability is the same with T-80BV and U. Read the OP, availability was only a side issue in a straight up comparison.

If you want 8 heavy tanks you can get 4 T-80A, 2 BV and 2 U for 60pts more than 8 T-64BV. If you don't need 8 heavy tanks you can still deploy 2 T-80U. The point is moot anyway as there shouldn't be too pressing slot issues. The early T-64 models make for good medium tanks so both tank families have their use.

_________________

• Read my video game blog
• Follow me on Twitter

Formerly shugyosha on these forums and still shugyosha ingame

@availability: do you really need more then 4 heavy tanks on the field?

I saw one opponent roll 8 today. 4 leo2a2 and 4 abm1a1. In a 1500 pts/player game. And I often roll with 6 myself. So yes, some players do.

_________________

Want to play 10v10 in an organized team? - join PLF - viewtopic.php?f=102&t=2525

Not unlikely in team games. Playing the heavies for two players while the other player concentrates on other troops or for games that are going on for some time. Heavy tanks are also the most versatile counter to heavy tanks. I usually start with 2, sometimes 4 but up it if I see too many heavies with the enemy (which is nearly every game nowadays).

_________________

• Read my video game blog
• Follow me on Twitter

Formerly shugyosha on these forums and still shugyosha ingame