FAQ - Why no Soviet T-72 division?

[[EUG] MadMat]

Because the game focuses on WW3 in Germany ... and there was no Soviet T-72 in Germany.
Soviet tank units in GSVG (Group of Soviet Forces in Germany, that facing NORTHAG and CENTAG) were "tip of the spear", and they were equipped with the finest tanks USSR had. CENTAG mostly saw T-80B/BV opposing them, while NORTHAG had a mix of T-64 variants and some T-80B/BV.

T-72 wasn't consider a good tank by USSR and was mostly made for export to other WP countries, or use by Soviet second lines troops. Only Soviet T-72-equipped units in Central Europe were in CGV (Czechoslovakia) or back home in USSR territory.

T-72 wasn't a main Soviet tank, it is a main post-Cold War Russian one. After the fall of the Soviet Union, T-80 production was discontinued (spread too much) in favor of the T-72 for economies of scale. The T-72 factory is absolutely gigantic, in prime years it could make 1200 tanks per year every year on 6 production lanes.

[Ahriman]

Автор сообщения: xenon

It's funny how you're asking me questions, yet every single time I asked a question... you just gish gallop somewhere else. Where did I claim that "ThErE WeRe SoViEt t-72 StAtIoNeD In GeRmAnY"? Can you answer that one first? And as a "follow up", can you maybe explain to me why "T-72 Is LeSsEr T-64"? Or maybe "SoViEts ThOuGhT iT wAs LesSeR"

Well, if you insist:

Автор сообщения: xenon

Sorry komrad, T-72 was an MBT and in many ways superior to T-64 simply on reliability alone. The fact that they've built more T-72s for their own army than T-64 and T-80 combined seals the deal, and they kept modernising T-72 until it turned into T-90.

So last I checked, not that I consider myself an expert on military strategy, but usually I tend to imagine that you want your best stuff at the heart of the most important battle so to say. You don't want to give your frontline US Armoured Unit M60s for example, you want to give them the tank you consider an upgrade such as the M1A1 Abrams. You also don't want to hand the limited supply of your top of the line equipment to a second rate unit that will only be called in should the front units fail. You also hardly want to hand over your best equipment to your allies primarily instead making them for your own use.

And yet... We look at the Soviet TO&E of 1989. T-64s were not being replaced with T-72s, the order was to replace them with T-80s in Germany, where the Soviets always expected the big clash will take place, and thus where the prime units were to be stationed. Meanwhile they had their allies replace their old T-55s with T-72s.

This makes me wonder. If T-80 is there to replace the T-64 while the T-64 is then consolidated to other units, it is exceptionally weird that they wouldn't be replacing the T-64s with the T-72s while they were at it. Why keep those around while you had all these thousands of T-72s they were handing out to their allies, but keep the 'inferior' T-64 for the units they consider high priority.

Because you are the one inhaling such high level of copium if you legit think people here are arguing about if the T-72 is worse or better than the T-64. No one is. Not even MadMat. We are all stating the simple fact that the SOVIETS didn't see the T-72 in such high regard, as if they did, they obviously wouldn't have been selling it to their allies over gearing up their own priority units.

Very cool that one dude went and said "I don't like the T-64" and halted production, doesn't change the simple fact that Soviet High Command still didn't start assigning it to their priority units, which signals that they see it as... wait for it... the inferior tank.

That is why you are being asked to provide the source that presents the opposite.

Автор сообщения: xenon

But I'm glad you brought up "eLiTe DiViSiOns". Eugen is adding Tamanskaya Division. Is it Elite enough for you? How about Kantemirovskaya, is that Elite or just a bunch of raw recruits? How about the 1st Tank Divison, part of 11th Guards Army... Guess which tanks they used. They weren't stationed in Germany, but maybe you can stop spewing incoherence for just 2 seconds, and start asking logical questions.

Tamanskaya is the garrison of Moscow. So yes, they would be, and you can see this in their equipment. They also have the latest versions of the T-80. Unlike the west, Soviets invested heavily into their Moscow defence. So why no T-64s you will cry out, because the T-72s were also used for homeland defence by second rate units as well, so the stockpiles would be primarily located there. Also the version they are getting is one of the very late models.

Meanwhile you answered your own question with the 11th Guards Army comment. They weren't stationed in Germany. They weren't a high priority unit.

Because if you actually look into the TO&E of the Soviets, you will see them actively replacing outdated and inferior equipment wherever they can for the frontline units. Priority order is always Germany first, they haul the old stuff away, or usually just hand it to their allies. Not the case for the T-64 oddly enough. A real mystery, huh? The only piece of equipment the Soviets had they clearly saw as an inferior to the T-72, yet chose not to do the exact same thing to it than they did to literally everything else.

The pecking order for the Soviets was T-80, then T-64, then T-72.

[LastTurkInPontus]

Автор сообщения: DasaKamov

Автор сообщения: xenon

Cope more.

Wut

This guy just on some kind of drug , he is way too full of himself. I assume he is from Novosbirsk or something

[Amormaliar]

Автор сообщения: LastTurkInPontus

Автор сообщения: DasaKamov

Wut

This guy just on some kind of drug , he is way too full of himself. I assume he is from Novosbirsk or something

He’s just a super hardcore fan of T-72 and don’t want to accept the truth

[xenon]

Автор сообщения: Ahriman

Автор сообщения: xenon

It's funny how you're asking me questions, yet every single time I asked a question... you just gish gallop somewhere else. Where did I claim that "ThErE WeRe SoViEt t-72 StAtIoNeD In GeRmAnY"? Can you answer that one first? And as a "follow up", can you maybe explain to me why "T-72 Is LeSsEr T-64"? Or maybe "SoViEts ThOuGhT iT wAs LesSeR"

Well, if you insist:

Автор сообщения: xenon

Sorry komrad, T-72 was an MBT and in many ways superior to T-64 simply on reliability alone. The fact that they've built more T-72s for their own army than T-64 and T-80 combined seals the deal, and they kept modernising T-72 until it turned into T-90.

So last I checked, not that I consider myself an expert on military strategy, but usually I tend to imagine that you want your best stuff at the heart of the most important battle so to say. You don't want to give your frontline US Armoured Unit M60s for example, you want to give them the tank you consider an upgrade such as the M1A1 Abrams. You also don't want to hand the limited supply of your top of the line equipment to a second rate unit that will only be called in should the front units fail. You also hardly want to hand over your best equipment to your allies primarily instead making them for your own use.
Tamanskaya is the garrison of Moscow. So yes, they would be, and you can see this in their equipment. They also have the latest versions of the T-80. Unlike the west, Soviets invested heavily into their Moscow defence. So why no T-64s you will cry out, because the T-72s were also used for homeland defence by second

And yet... We look at the Soviet TO&E of 1989. T-64s were not being replaced with T-72s, the order was to replace them with T-80s in Germany, where the Soviets always expected the big clash will take place, and thus where the prime units were to be stationed. Meanwhile they had their allies replace their old T-55s with T-72s.

This makes me wonder. If T-80 is there to replace the T-64 while the T-64 is then consolidated to other units, it is exceptionally weird that they wouldn't be replacing the T-64s with the T-72s while they were at it. Why keep those around while you had all these thousands of T-72s they were handing out to their allies, but keep the 'inferior' T-64 for the units they consider high priority.

Because you are the one inhaling such high level of copium if you legit think people here are arguing about if the T-72 is worse or better than the T-64. No one is. Not even MadMat. We are all stating the simple fact that the SOVIETS didn't see the T-72 in such high regard, as if they did, they obviously wouldn't have been selling it to their allies over gearing up their own priority units.

Very cool that one dude went and said "I don't like the T-64" and halted production, doesn't change the simple fact that Soviet High Command still didn't start assigning it to their priority units, which signals that they see it as... wait for it... the inferior tank.

That is why you are being asked to provide the source that presents the opposite.

Автор сообщения: xenon

But I'm glad you brought up "eLiTe DiViSiOns". Eugen is adding Tamanskaya Division. Is it Elite enough for you? How about Kantemirovskaya, is that Elite or just a bunch of raw recruits? How about the 1st Tank Divison, part of 11th Guards Army... Guess which tanks they used. They weren't stationed in Germany, but maybe you can stop spewing incoherence for just 2 seconds, and start asking logical questions.

rate units as well, so the stockpiles would be primarily located there. Also the version they are getting is one of the very late models.

Meanwhile you answered your own question with the 11th Guards Army comment. They weren't stationed in Germany. They weren't a high priority unit.

Because if you actually look into the TO&E of the Soviets, you will see them actively replacing outdated and inferior equipment wherever they can for the frontline units. Priority order is always Germany first, they haul the old stuff away, or usually just hand it to their allies. Not the case for the T-64 oddly enough. A real mystery, huh? The only piece of equipment the Soviets had they clearly saw as an inferior to the T-72, yet chose not to do the exact same thing to it than they did to literally everything else.

The pecking order for the Soviets was T-80, then T-64, then T-72.

I've just explained it to you. Just to reiterate for the 100th time:
1) T-64 started production about 10 years earlier (more if you count T-72A)
2) Lots of politics was involved. Seriously, even dump like Wikipedia has the following:

"Problems with the early production run were evident from the start, but a strong lobby formed around Morozov who advocated for Ob. 434 in Moscow, preventing rival developments and ideas from being discussed.[18] Ob. 434 was accepted into Soviet Army service in May 1968 as the T-64A.[19]"

"Kartsev was unsatisfied with the innovations of the T-64, and began instead a more comprehensive project to redesign the tank. Kartsev melded what he believed were the best aspects of the T-64A, Object 167, and an upgunned T-62.[26]

During development the tank was code-named "Ural" after the Ural mountain region.[15] Uralvagonzavod produced the first prototype with a T-62 turret, D-81 125-mm gun and V-45 engine in January 1968. Ob. 439 differed so greatly from the T-64 that it was redesignated as "Object 172".[25]

Kartsev's defiance angered GABTU, which initially reprimanded him for his insubordination. However, after the tank proved indeed to possess potential as a less costly alternative to the T-64, Kartsev was allowed to continue work on his design. Politically motivated opposition continued to beset the tank throughout its development. Vagonka tank plant manager I.F. Krutyakov sought to subordinate Uralvagonzavod under Josef Kotin. Kartsev skillfully beat back this play for power, embarrassing Krutyakov in the process. Kartsev retired in August 1969, and was succeeded by Venediktov.[26]"

3) The simple LOGISTICAL fact of Kharkov being much closer to Berlin than Nizhny Tagil is. You're not beating geography by day dreaming, komrad.

According to your little T-64 fanclub over here, the Soviets were basically a bunch of imbeciles. They were wrong for seeing T-64 as what it was... In the 60s it made a breakthrough, but never got past its whole set of problems. That's why T-80 and then T-72 were made in the first place.

Have you watched Zapad-81? Yeah, lots of T-72s in there...almost like...exclusively... Paired with Buks, Krugs, MiG-31s, Yaks, ...

You still haven't answered a single question of mine and just gish gallop once again. As for the other two fanboys... the only people on drugs are the T-64 fanboys that use nothing but memes. T-72 is also the best PACT tank in game, especially in modes like 10v10, it's just a simple fact. And the fact that this post aged like milk with Eugen adding ElItE T-72s is just icing on the cake.

[LastTurkInPontus]

Автор сообщения: Amormaliar

Автор сообщения: LastTurkInPontus

This guy just on some kind of drug , he is way too full of himself. I assume he is from Novosbirsk or something

He’s just a super hardcore fan of T-72 and don’t want to accept the truth

This isn't his first rodeo. He claimed milan 2 can one shot both T-80U and UD frontely. Than he claimed 119th is bad at everything and compared it to 3rd armored while 119th was similar to 11th ACR in terms of slots and way of playing. Than also claimed if it was 1v1 119th losing to 3rd armored proves him right not getting what a support deck is. He also has no idea U and UD has 2800m ranged missiles with 21 pen and can cause M1A1HA cohhesion to dip and one just by firing more shot.

[xenon]

^ Find me my post where I stated "Milan 2 can "ONE SHOT" T-80U and UD "frontely". Go ahead.

Btw I'm pretty sure I saw you play, you're terrible at this game.

[Ahriman]

Автор сообщения: xenon

According to your little T-64 fanclub over here, the Soviets were basically a bunch of imbeciles. They were wrong for seeing T-64 as what it was... In the 60s it made a breakthrough, but never got past its whole set of problems. That's why T-80 and then T-72 were made in the first place.

When it came to Tank Design? Absolutely. Personally you won't much find me enjoying sitting in a tank that has a very large tendency of having the turret join Sputnik at the first penetration. I prefer my Crew Ergonomics far too much for that.

Автор сообщения: xenon

You still haven't answered a single question of mine and just gish gallop once again. As for the other two fanboys... the only people on drugs are the T-64 fanboys that use nothing but memes. T-72 is also the best PACT tank in game, especially in modes like 10v10, it's just a simple fact. And the fact that this post aged like milk with Eugen adding ElItE T-72s is just icing on the cake.

I did. I answered your question about both the reason why the T-72 is in the Moscow Garrison, and why there were T-72s in a Tank Division attached to a Guards Army, which was its lack of being in the high priority sector.

Again, this entire argument was started because for some reason you can't acknowledge the fact that the Soviet High Command considered the Tank a lesser of the two alternatives, and because of that it didn't replace the T-64s in Germany. They replaced literally everything else where they could, from BMP-1s to BMP-2s, from BTR-60s to 80s, and so on.

And if the Tank was seen in such high prestige, it would have been exported as widely as it did. Soviets were very, very much against the notion of giving their allies their 'best' stuff and have always operated on the hand-me-down basis. The models they consider inferior go to their allies, the best remain in their use. They could have just as easily given the T-64s to the Germans and replaced theirs with T-72s, but instead they just gave the Germans the T-72.

As for the Zapad-81. Took a peek at it, took a moment to find a proper one that didn't just have music blaring over it as opposed to the actual exercise. When it came to the parades part towards the end though, I couldn't help but be reminded of 1941 October Revolution Parade. Rows upon rows of Tanks driving in columns, truly awe-inspiring. Just a tiny problem though that then it was 90% T-60s/T-70s and BT-5s/7s driving with a mere handful of T-34s and KV-1s.

Makes one wonder.

[Ahriman]

Автор сообщения: xenon

^ Find me my post where I stated "Milan 2 can "ONE SHOT" T-80U and UD "frontely". Go ahead.

Btw I'm pretty sure I saw you play, you're terrible at this game.

I'll help a brother out

Автор сообщения: xenon

Well done, you can count and proved me right?

Milan 2 can destroy UD frontally. Check.
U has barely more armor than a T-72M1. Check.

Oh yeah plane missiles can kill it in one shot. Just about any missile can.

I'm sure the next time you'll be useless in a 10v10, you'll just blame your teammates not doing maffs instead of playing a better battlegroup. Up to you BROOOO.

So either you are making a non-statement, aka an ATGM can kill any tank frontally given enough time, or you are somehow trying to imply that the Milan-2 can kill the T-80U/UD with ease before it can casually smoke and reverse, even after being struck.

[xenon]

"Again, this entire argument was started because for some reason you can't acknowledge the fact that the Soviet High Command considered the Tank a lesser of the two alternatives, and because of that it didn't replace the T-64s in Germany. They replaced literally everything else where they could, from BMP-1s to BMP-2s, from BTR-60s to 80s, and so on."

They didn't. Even the bloody Ministry of Defense himself disagrees with you. You can daydream all you want, simple history disagrees. All my posts were basically straight copies from books or articles. I gave you videos, meanwhile you use...what exactly?

Funnily enough you bring up the turrets in space meme again.... Go take a look at T-64 and T-80 autoloaders, and pay close attention to the way the shells are placed. I wonder why T-72 placed shells horizontally? Did you know that T-64 couldn't even switch between compartments unless they turned the turret and physically removed a few shells? Here, have a look:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDDs6vbU2-M&t=2160s

Again completely demolishing your "lesser tenk" meme, which is supported by absolutely...nothing.

Автор сообщения: Ahriman

Автор сообщения: xenon

^ Find me my post where I stated "Milan 2 can "ONE SHOT" T-80U and UD "frontely". Go ahead.

Btw I'm pretty sure I saw you play, you're terrible at this game.

I'll help a brother out

Автор сообщения: xenon

Well done, you can count and proved me right?

Milan 2 can destroy UD frontally. Check.
U has barely more armor than a T-72M1. Check.

Oh yeah plane missiles can kill it in one shot. Just about any missile can.

I'm sure the next time you'll be useless in a 10v10, you'll just blame your teammates not doing maffs instead of playing a better battlegroup. Up to you BROOOO.

So either you are making a non-statement, aka an ATGM can kill any tank frontally given enough time, or you are somehow trying to imply that the Milan-2 can kill the T-80U/UD with ease before it can casually smoke and reverse, even after being struck.

And you say I'm the one with bad reading comprehension? Milan 2 CAN kill T-80s frontally. The other part is just about any missile also can one shot it (do side, top and rear shots just magically disappear in your fantasy?)

[Ahriman]

Автор сообщения: xenon

Again completely demolishing your "lesser tenk" meme, which is supported by absolutely...nothing.

Except the Soviet TO&E of 1989, but hey, you do you, bud.

Автор сообщения: xenon

And you say I'm the one with bad reading comprehension? Milan 2 CAN kill T-80s frontally. The other part is just about any missile also can one shot it (do side, top and rear shots just magically disappear in your fantasy?)

So you are making a non-argument then, as it adds absolutely nothing to your argument about the T-80U vs the T-72M1. The T-80U is superior in every metric otherwise in-game. Better range, better armour, higher health, ATGM, higher rate of fire, it's faster, and has greater autonomy.

[LastTurkInPontus]

Автор сообщения: xenon

^ Find me my post where I stated "Milan 2 can "ONE SHOT" T-80U and UD "frontely". Go ahead.

Btw I'm pretty sure I saw you play, you're terrible at this game.

I don't use same nickname , tell me my nick in game. Also https://steamcommunity.com/app/1611600/discussions/0/592888463635889755/?ctp=3 , should be 32nd anwser

[xenon]

Автор сообщения: Ahriman

Автор сообщения: xenon

Again completely demolishing your "lesser tenk" meme, which is supported by absolutely...nothing.

Except the Soviet TO&E of 1989, but hey, you do you, bud.

Автор сообщения: xenon

And you say I'm the one with bad reading comprehension? Milan 2 CAN kill T-80s frontally. The other part is just about any missile also can one shot it (do side, top and rear shots just magically disappear in your fantasy?)

So you are making a non-argument then, as it adds absolutely nothing to your argument about the T-80U vs the T-72M1. The T-80U is superior in every metric otherwise in-game. Better range, better armour, higher health, ATGM, higher rate of fire, it's faster, and has greater autonomy.

Nah, I'll just use history with evidence instead of make belief and pure memes.

T-72M1 is better than T-80U in game. I explained why as well. But way to backpedal on your ridiculous claims. Perhaps one day you'll understand why, but considering you took such a hard time understanding basic history....

As for the other salty 119 fanboiii..... here:
https://i.ibb.co/21Mk8gKj/image.png

[LastTurkInPontus]

Автор сообщения: xenon

Автор сообщения: Ahriman

Except the Soviet TO&E of 1989, but hey, you do you, bud.



So you are making a non-argument then, as it adds absolutely nothing to your argument about the T-80U vs the T-72M1. The T-80U is superior in every metric otherwise in-game. Better range, better armour, higher health, ATGM, higher rate of fire, it's faster, and has greater autonomy.

Nah, I'll just use history with evidence instead of make belief and pure memes.

T-72M1 is better than T-80U in game. I explained why as well. But way to backpedal on your ridiculous claims. Perhaps one day you'll understand why, but considering you took such a hard time understanding basic history....

As for the other salty 119 fanboiii..... here:
https://i.ibb.co/21Mk8gKj/image.png

Same pp but not same guy. This pp is from ck3 so anyone can use it easily for 400 steam points or something. Hell even someone from my steam friendlist has same pp. So cope boi. If you fail to find me for 10 more times I will give you the anwser

[Ahriman]

Автор сообщения: xenon

Nah, I'll just use history with evidence instead of make belief and pure memes.

You think the Soviet High Command was just memes and make-belief? Odd take after defending them so fervently.

[xenon]

Hahah yeah okay. SoViEt HiGh CoMmAnd, absolutely delusional.

As I typed a page ago, can't wait until another T-72 battlegroup. PACT needs it.