Stridzvagn

Leopard L44 and AMX Super Battle Rating

3 hours ago, Matt_82 said:

For goodness sake, stop using the word 'proof'.  You have flawed statistics and flawed assumptions ("because it was a 9.0 constantly being uptiered" -prove that.  And tell me why a tank being uptiered stops it being OP at its own tier while you're at it) but not proof.  Yes I had the tank back then so guess again, Columbo.  Yes it was OP then as well. 

 

Anyway please stop quoting Thunderskill.  At least at me.  It's so tiresome reading this nonsense.  I don't care that you think it's proof of stuff, I really don't.  It doesn't matter how much you tell me about win rates 6 months ago or whatever else you are on about.  I know that win rates are dependent on lots of other things.  So you won't be able to convince me that the XM-1, which had capabilities far superior to any other vehicle at its BR and above, wasn't OP because of your interpretation of incomplete statistics that you claim as proof.

 

 

And just like that, here is a good 180 reversal. prove your argument....... all you have is your 'single' experience that is it. whether you like thunderskill or not its the only 'proof' we have, so if you want to ignore it fine. but then please dont try to say the opposite when you have ZERO proof to prove your OWN claims. 

 

It works both ways, you have a claim (prove it) I have a claim (prove it) if you want to disprove the argument because of flawed stats thats 100% fine but seriously dont try to push your own argument across when you have YET to prove your own claim, Thank you and good day.

Edited by TheCloop123
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice dodge.  Unsurprising.

 

So prove the XM-1 was better than the other 9.0s in the game from a year ago? It's much faster, better reload, better optics, better crew layout, huge mobility superiority, better ammo storage, phenomenal gun handling, laser rangefinder.   It also had a much better stabiliser, before they gave everything the same type a couple of patches ago.  That allowed it to fire accurately at (its already much higher) top speed while opponents had to slow down a bit to get the same accuracy.  

 

It had weaker armour as a downside and a less powerful (but powerful enough) gun.

 

Those advantages over similarly rated vehicles were more than enough to justify a raise in BR. 

 

It's odd. I just read a post from you in another thread where you state that the L/44 should be moved up. You're stating the facts about its capabilities being better than the A1A1. How come you can objectively look at tank capabilities there and see that one is better than the others but not do that with the XM-1? 

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Matt_82 said:

Nice dodge.  Unsurprising.

 

So prove the XM-1 was better than the other 9.0s in the game from a year ago? It's much faster, better reload, better optics, better crew layout, huge mobility superiority, better ammo storage, phenomenal gun handling, laser rangefinder.   It also had a much better stabiliser, before they gave everything the same type a couple of patches ago.  That allowed it to fire accurately at (its already much higher) top speed while opponents had to slow down a bit to get the same accuracy.   

Not a dodge, you know how a debate works correct......... let me explain a few things because its clear you have zero intellect when it comes to a 'proper' debate so i will enlighten you.

 

When you discredit a source of 'proof' that has 'some accuracy' to the statistics (the only thing called into question) about thunderskill is the 'date pool size' they even state it themselves that the stats are taken from users that use the site (registered accounts) so now that we have this cleared up ill get to my second explanation.

Spoiler

ok.thumb.JPG.306dd9df575ef46dba72c4a05c3

 

Its 100% fine for you to discredit a source (I dont doubt that) but when you discredit the ONLY source, your claims become null and void as well because you have zero ability to prove them as well. Hope that explains everything, because its very clear you have little intellect in situations such as this. but its funny how you discredit thunderskill even though that data size that they 'use' is still going to be higher than your 'single experience' to gauge your opinions on said vehicle. meaning my 'claims' still have more credibility than your so called 'claims' funny how that works.

 

Your so called claims of XM1 being OP prior to Thermals being added have zero proof to back up, why? because your 1 experience is not the experience of the 'average' player it could be the minority or you simply could be an extremely good player while the majority who play it are not. you said it yourself "I know that win rates are dependent on lots of other things" 

6 hours ago, Matt_82 said:

It's odd. I just read a post from you in another thread where you state that the L/44 should be moved up. You're stating the facts about its capabilities being better than the A1A1. How come you can objectively look at tank capabilities there and see that one is better than the others but not do that with the XM-1?

Its funny how you say that, but what do you compare an XM1 too? like the comparison I made about the L44 vs the A1A1 or the AMX30 Super vs Brennus (which all sit at the same BR) that was the comparison being made....... (I know what thread your on about but its clear you purposely missed the entire other section out to suit your 'claims') I would love for you to also quote me 'where' I have said the XM1 is not 9.3 worthy...... I have said in other threads it is 9.3 worthy. 

 

I was calling into question HOW people have said from day 1 this tank was 9.3 material when it never was back then (back when 10.0 was top tier) when my experience has proven the opposite. when grinding US Top Tier was a bloody nightmare because XM1 spam at top tier caused huge losses across the game for everyone. 

 

Edited by TheCloop123
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TheCloop123 said:

Its funny how you say that, but what do you compare an XM1 too?

 

Leopard 2K is the actual contemporary but I'll give U.S a handicap and say the MBT-70

 

 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, *RAazzy91 said:

 

Leopard 2K is the actual contemporary but I'll give U.S a handicap and say the MBT-70

 

 

I meant US v US comparison because thats what I made in another thread that Matt_82 forgot to mention, but yes 2K would be a comparable tank, however you still have a few differences that make a 2K better (hence higher BR) such as it uses a 120mm gun has a 20mm machine gun (very useful) has decently sloped armour and I want to say comparable mobility but I dont know if they ever fixed the mobility issues on the 2K.

Edited by TheCloop123
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/01/2020 at 15:25, TheCloop123 said:

Not really....... winrates are already at 56% after what? 2 weeks of a BR increase (steadily declining), KDR has also dropped by 0.5 KDR from its highest of 2.3/2.2 to 1.7/1.8 yes thats still high but if a 0.3 BR increase is dropping performance that much it clearly is not 9.7 capable when that would actually make it face 10.3 much more than it already does. sorry to burst your bubble but I called this before its BR went to 9.3

 

Oh look, what a surprise L44/Super/MTCA KDR's have all increased since XM1 is now being tiered up with AMX30 Super clocking 2.5/2.6 KDR........ (on the graph) way higher than what the XM1 ever achieved and people still think thats an 8.7 capable tank........

 

BR's for all premiums should have gone to 9.3. no premium should perform better than current tech tree equivalents. just hope Gaijin see that all these premiums are now not 8.7 and are easily 9.0 and AMX30 Super 9.3 capable with those KDR's

 

It's more than capable even if it was 9.7, I own the damn tank myself.

Unless.......Are you talking about AB instead of RB lol??

 

Because it sitting at a nice comfy 62% even after the BR increase.

 

959626317_godforbidwehavebalance.thumb.P

Statistics are gonna drop a bit, you don't have ppl just steamrolling 8.7 and below tanks as often anymore with the xm-1. It's what happens with anything when balance passes are made.

Out of all the premiums I will agree that the AMX-super is a possibly 9.0 viable tank....BUT only if Gajin decides to move top tier T80,leo2s,Abrams and similar vehicles WAY out of range from these vehicles would a 9.0- 9.3 BR be justifiable for the premiums.

 

As far as the L44 and japan premium goes they can stay at 8.7, neither one has the mobility to justify a increase in BR. They are literally the normal tech tree version of their respective vehicles with the thermals being the only real advantage. Guns don't matter at this tier because you are getting penned regardless of caliber if you are hit since everyone and their mom is passing around APFSDS rounds at this tier anyway.

 

Gajin should give us access to their internal statistics in a perfect world, but going by thunder-"BUT KDR"-skill pretty much all the premiums at 8.7 have about a 50% avg win rate, even the AMX-30 super. 

KDRs are meaningless if we're talking about balance this isn't a new concept, KDR is not the only statistic you should be looking at...

 

 

no.thumb.PNG.aff83c550f5421ffc92887592b6amx.thumb.PNG.0e823f2cc17de8261524ef5ea4sepuku.thumb.PNG.2faa3f1022affd3a998de28

 

Do you own any of the other premiums aside from the XM-1 ?

 

 

Edited by sugarstudd
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheCloop123 said:

When you discredit a source of 'proof' that has 'some accuracy' to the statistics (the only thing called into question) about thunderskill is the 'date pool size' they even state it themselves that the stats are taken from users that use the site (registered accounts) so now that we have this cleared up ill get to my second explanation.

 

Is English your first language?  Some of your points are difficult to address because they don't make a lick of sense.

 

Quote

Its 100% fine for you to discredit a source (I dont doubt that) but when you discredit the ONLY source, your claims become null and void as well because you have zero ability to prove them as well. Hope that explains everything,

 

Like this one. I'll try to interpret what you mean, though.  I don't quote Thunderskill when discussing the capabilities of a tank so Thunderskill being discredited means nothing to my claims.  You are basing all of your claims around Thunderskill.  It's your claims that fall when Thunderskill is removed from the conversation.  When talking about speed/mobility/reload/gun handling/survivability/armour/etc, Thunderskill is irrelevant.  Those facts/abilities are there in front of you and can't be denied or twisted.  You can debate whether or not those advantages warrant a BR increase but when the vehicle in question has a significant advantage over other vehicles at its own BR and above, then it won't be a particularly interesting debate.

 

Quote

Because its very clear you have little intellect in situations such as this

 

Aww shucks. This means a lot, coming from you. :blush:

 

Still waiting on the answer to these that you definitely didn't dodge but haven't attempted to address in two replies:

 

  • "Because it was a 9.0 constantly being uptiered" -prove that
  •  Tell me why a tank being uptiered stops it being OP at its own tier

 

Anyhoo. 

 

Quote

The only thing called into question) about thunderskill is the date pool size

 

No it isn't the only thing.  Thunderskill leaves out lots of useful data.  Such as the level of the players using the vehicle.  A player, brand new to the game buying their way to top tier and only having one vehicle in their lineup is going to be detrimental to the team (as you acknowledge further on).  But that's a player issue (or actually, a "poor decision by Gainjin issue"), not a tank BR issue.  I mean, if for some reason, Gaijin decided to open up the Leo 2A5 (for example) to everyone, regardless of level, so that every single player could have immediate access to the Leo 2A5, the K/D and win rate would almost certainly plummet.  Simply because all of a sudden, top tier would be flooded with new and inexperienced players and they'd be up against the hardened veterans of top tier who'd likely kick their ****, even when they were using the excellent Leo 2A5.  Now, if the winrate and K/D plummeted on Thunderskill, would you be advocating for the Leo2A5 to get moved down to 10.0 or even 9.7?  The tank wouldn't have changed.  The tanks around it wouldn't have changed. Just the players using it.  Would the abilities of these poor players trump the abilities of the vehicle they were using so poorly?

 

The converse can be seen when they increase the repair costs for vehicles to levels that most players find prohibitive. Once you sieve out the players that expect to be killed often or don't have lots of SL, you are left with better players that do well with the vehicles.  So the next time it comes to repair cost changes.  It goes up again because high quality players are killing so much.  The tank and the BR has stayed the same, the quality of players has changed.  If they raised the repair costs of the XM-1 to 20,000, you'd likely soon see a massive spike in K/D ratio because the crap players like me wouldn't go near it.  But again, we are left to speculate because Thunderskill doesn't give us that info.

 

Players leaving after one death in an XM-1 definitely does make things harder for the rest of the team, though.

 

PLdPFCq.jpg

:crying:

 

Thunderskill WR stats don't take line ups into account.  If your XM-1 gets 3-5 kills early in the match before getting killed, it's probably safe to say that it's doing better than ok.  Problem with USA at that point was that there wasn't a lot of back up for a long time.  Once it was gone, assuming you even had a full line up, you'd be in a RISE, Bradley, M551 or Starship and they really couldn't cut it.  Germany has strength in depth at 8.7.  Until the 8.7 premiums were added and dominated everything, so did the Russians (my 8.3 vehicles all have win rates between 60-70% because of this, despite fairly average K/D).  So the vehicle itself can be doing very well without getting huge WR as a result.  Again, if more people are bailing after one death, these stats will be skewed further. 

 

Thunderskill misses out what BR people are using vehicles at.  Lots of people brought the XM-1 into 10.0 matches as cheap back up for the Abrams.  So that will skew results because the matches counted aren't all at their own BR (which is what matters) or even their own spread.  What percentage of matches counted were at 9.0, 9.3, 9.7 and what were at 10.0?  We don't know.  And that's the problem.

 

Thunderskill also misses out if it's the first spawn or second/third/fourth spawn vehicle.  Secondary spawn vehicles often meet other secondary spawn vehicles as people all tend to kill each other at the first big contact of the match.  If you're at 10.0, those secondary vehicles might be another T-80, Leo 2A4, Leo 2K etc.  If it's at 9.0, those secondary vehicles might be a T-55A, or  RakJPz 2 with its WASD controlled missiles.  We don't know, yet these thing skew results.  And that's the problem.  

 

Thunderskill doesn't give you match making info (MBT-70 a month ago: 67% WR.  KPZ-70 a month ago 42% WR.  It's the same tank!).  Thunderskill doesn't tell you how quickly in the match the kills are happening (5 quick kills at the start of the match tends to be a sign that a vehicle is powerful. 5 kills at the end once your team has been beaten and enemies start to over extend in their second choice vehicles is a sign your vehicle can't influence matches).  Thunderskill doesn't tell you how many of the players are in a squad, talking to each other and covering blind spots.  Thunderskill doesn't tell you anything that you'd need to make a judgement based on the numbers.  And that's the problem.

 

So data pool size isn't the only thing called in to question.  Not even close.  Even if every War Thunder player was tracked by Thunderskill, it'd still lack the relevant information to make claims like you do.

 

Quote

Your so called claims of XM1 being OP prior to Thermals being added have zero proof to back up...Its funny how you say that, but what do you compare an XM1 too?

 

I literally listed all the ways the XM-1 was better than the other vehicles at and around its BR.  I've mentioned this in a few posts, now.  Vehicles that shared the same BR were the T-62M-1 (which is rarer than hen's teeth) and for a short while, the Leo L/44.  The XM-1 is better than both of them.  Above it were T-64A, T-72, MBT-70 and Chieftain Mk 10.  The XM-1 is better than them too. Comparative at a push (and that's being generous).

 

Quote

 like the comparison I made about the L44 vs the A1A1 or the AMX30 Super vs Brennus

 

Surely you don't need tanks to be more or less identical with only a few differences for you to determine which has the advantage?  You can compare the T-62M-1 to the XM-1 and see that the XM-1 is better.

 

Quote

I would love for you to also quote me 'where' I have said the XM1 is not 9.3 worthy

 

Quote where I said you did?  You do seem to have maintained that it only deserved its BR of 9.3 in the last month or so, however.  I'm pointing out that it's always been significantly better than other vehicles at the same BR.  You haven't addressed why you think it it wasn't better than T-62M-1, L/44, Chieftain Mk 10 etc.  You're saying it wasn't better than them, yes?  That the same BR was fair?

 

Quote

Your 1 experience is not the experience of the 'average' player

Quote

When my experience has proven the opposite

 

"Proven" alarm! 

 

So your experience of 59 games with it is valid, my experience of 306 games isn't?

 

Quote

when grinding US Top Tier was a bloody nightmare because XM1 spam at top tier caused huge losses across the game for everyone

 

PLdPFCq.jpg

:crying:

 

Again, a player issue, not a tank BR issue, no matter what Gaijin tells you.  When you bailed on that match after one death, was it the fault of the tank or the fault of you? (I'm not having a go, btw, I bail on plenty matches).  If you (and other players) do that enough times, should the BR be lowered again? (I haven't stumbled upon your evil master plan, have I?).  

 

Undertiered premium vehicles are good for sales, obviously.  The XM-1 has been spammed since it was released and it wasn't because it was just so balanced that people couldn't get enough of the balance.  They've had a year and a half out of the XM-1.  Moving it up stopped some moaning.  Now the thing is to see how long they can hold out with the other over powered premiums.

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ANDROMADA said:

Give me a break...

 

 

ikr the XM-1 gets thermals and more mobility for a lower BR, I mean thermals must be a huge deal with all the people complaining about the A1A1 L/44

 

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, sugarstudd said:

As far as the L44 and japan premium goes they can stay at 8.7, neither one has the mobility to justify a increase in BR.

Laughs in Merkava Mk. 2b at 9.0 and M60A3 TTS at 9.3 with less mobility than the L/44.

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dutchrenzo62 said:

Laughs in Merkava Mk. 2b at 9.0 and M60A3 TTS at 9.3 with less mobility than the L/44.

That's Gaijin just being Gaijin,almost every new vehicle has suffered from this.

I hope i'm not wrong but you can expect both of those to drop down to 8.7 eventually .

 

Unless the logical happens, top tier is moved out of range, we get new normal tech tree variants of vehicles with thermals for all nations like for example the leopard 1a5,1a3 Italian variant etc and 9.0-9.3 is used for all the Cold War tanks with thermal capabilities and whatever new ammo they could field.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/01/2020 at 19:46, *RAazzy91 said:

 

ikr the XM-1 gets thermals and more mobility for a lower BR

It also gets far worse firepower, lacks a 20 mm autocannon (which works on 2 crew), and arguably worse armor.

 

On 15/01/2020 at 19:46, *RAazzy91 said:

I mean thermals must be a huge deal with all the people complaining about the A1A1 L/44

I love the forced false equivalency.

The A1A1 L/44 has the same firepower of the 2K while also having thermals and being 3 BR spaces lower.

 

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/01/2020 at 23:06, ANDROMADA said:

It also gets far worse firepower, lacks a 20 mm autocannon (which works on 2 crew), and arguably worse armor.

 

I love the forced false equivalency.

The A1A1 L/44 has the same firepower of the 2K while also having thermals and being 3 BR spaces lower.

 

it also has under performing armor 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/01/2020 at 04:06, ANDROMADA said:

It also gets far worse firepower, lacks a 20 mm autocannon (which works on 2 crew), and arguably worse armor.

 

The 2Ks firepower isn't much of an advantage vs 10.3s which is when everyone cries about the XM-1 being inadequate 

20mm is situationally useful, not something I would say is viable reason for a higher BR

 

On 23/01/2020 at 04:06, ANDROMADA said:

I love the forced false equivalency.

The A1A1 L/44 has the same firepower of the 2K while also having thermals and being 3 BR spaces lower.

 

the A1A1 L/44 and 2K are about as much alike as the M60 RISE and XM-1

It's not a forced comparison, nor is it a false one but keep telling yourself that

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/01/2020 at 20:06, ANDROMADA said:

It also gets far worse firepower, lacks a 20 mm autocannon (which works on 2 crew), and arguably worse armor.

 

I love the forced false equivalency.

The A1A1 L/44 has the same firepower of the 2K while also having thermals and being 3 BR spaces lower.

 

Yeah, that 20mm gun really makes a difference at 9.7...lots of pasta bois to shoot.

 

the firepower doesn’t mean anything when you only fight 10.3s.

  • Haha 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That 20mm, and the continued troll armor of the Leo 2K, are its greatest assests, IMO. If by some miracle you don't get breached immediately (this is Breach Thunder, after all), the 2K just peppers your barrel with 20mm and makes it red or black. Not to mention how it is amazing against planes and choppers (assuming you see them) and SPAA. 

 

It's extremely useful...not so much so to change the vehicle's BR, but it's not a small thing either. 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, *CodyBlues said:

Are we still pretending that the XM-1 is ok at 9.3? 

Are we still complaining about the XM1 after it has been uptiered twice already to divert from the real problem?

Alright, I'll bite.

 

15 hours ago, *CodyBlues said:

Yeah, that 20mm gun really makes a difference at 9.7...lots of pasta bois to shoot.

21 hours ago, *RAazzy91 said:

20mm is situationally useful, not something I would say is viable reason for a higher BR

It breaks gun barrels, is great for obscuring enemy vision, will penetrate the sides of some MBT's, it can act as AA, and works wonders against those cheeky SPAA that shoot your gun out. Gaijin even went as far as to give this gun a HVAP shell with 57 mm of penetration.

I really hope you took all of this into consideration, then compared it to what the XM1 has to offer in return - a single .50cal and a couple .30cals.

 

21 hours ago, *RAazzy91 said:

the A1A1 L/44 and 2K are about as much alike as the M60 RISE and XM-1

It's not a forced comparison, nor is it a false one but keep telling yourself that

Some nice circular reasoning there.

First, state that the tanks are nothing alike.

Next, draw comparisons between these tanks to further your narrative.

Then, get called out for it.

Finally, go back to step one.

And for extra brownie points, reiterate that your comparison is indeed genuine.

 

15 hours ago, *CodyBlues said:

the firepower doesn’t mean anything when you only fight 10.3s.

21 hours ago, *RAazzy91 said:

The 2Ks firepower isn't much of an advantage vs 10.3s which is when everyone cries about the XM-1 being inadequate 

That's such a daft statement. The difference between 2K's firepower and XM1's firepower is:

- Reliably penetrating the hull of the Abrams at range

- Reliably penetrating the hull of the 2A4 at range

Frontally penetrating the T-64B at all

- Reliably penetrating the upper hull of the Leclerc at range

- Penetrating the turret of the Ariete

- Frontally penetrating the Type 96 at all

- Frontally penetrating the turret of the M1 at all

- ...

The list goes on. 120 mm DM13 offers much more flexibility when choosing targets. 

"dOeSn'T mEaN AnYtHiNg aT 10.3"

 

8 hours ago, Matt_82 said:

Seems they are both going to 9.0 soon, which is good.

It seems even Gaijin can show better reasoning.

 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Thodin said:

Slow Leopard 1 chassis' vs. M1 Abrams, no thanks.


But the even slower M60 chassis against Leopard 2s is ok?

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, *CodyBlues said:

Are we still pretending that the XM-1 is ok at 9.3? 

You're right, it should be 9.7 :)))

ok but seriously 9.3 is perfectly fine for anything with a stabilizer, darts, and thermals, we don't need to bring back the days of it ruining 8.0 games

 

Edited by watch_your_fire
clarification
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ANDROMADA said:

Are we still complaining about the XM1 after it has been uptiered twice already to divert from the real problem?

Alright, I'll bite.

 

The real problem Gaijin made by selling something like this in the first place and baddies needing BR handouts

 

6 hours ago, ANDROMADA said:

It breaks gun barrels, is great for obscuring enemy vision, will penetrate the sides of some MBT's, it can act as AA, and works wonders against those cheeky SPAA that shoot your gun out. Gaijin even went as far as to give this gun a HVAP shell with 57 mm of penetration.

I really hope you took all of this into consideration, then compared it to what the XM1 has to offer in return - a single .50cal and a couple .30cals.

 

Situational

You aren't always going to be in a position to shoot out someones barrel

If you're zeroed in obscuring isn't going to do much 

 

get a dictionary and look up situational

also a .50 cal can kill/disable most if not all SPAAs that the Rh202 can

6 hours ago, ANDROMADA said:

 

Some nice circular reasoning there.

First, state that the tanks are nothing alike.

Next, draw comparisons between these tanks to further your narrative.

Then, get called out for it.

Finally, go back to step one.

And for extra brownie points, reiterate that your comparison is indeed genuine.

 

You haven't pointed out anything that implies it's disingenious

just a inconsequential increase in what you can pen and a 20mm roof turret

all the while completely overlooking the XM-1 has better mobility and has Thermal while the 2K does not

wow

what's next: the XM-1 is actually equal to the T-64A? Do you even know how the top tier meta functions-

 

6 hours ago, ANDROMADA said:

That's such a daft statement. The difference between 2K's firepower and XM1's firepower is:

- Reliably penetrating the hull of the Abrams at range

- Reliably penetrating the hull of the 2A4 at range

Frontally penetrating the T-64B at all

- Reliably penetrating the upper hull of the Leclerc at range

- Penetrating the turret of the Ariete

- Frontally penetrating the Type 96 at all

- Frontally penetrating the turret of the M1 at all

- ...

The list goes on. 120 mm DM13 offers much more flexibility when choosing targets. 

"dOeSn'T mEaN AnYtHiNg aT 10.3"

 

 

 

 

I'll take that as a no, then again that was already painfully apparent before I asked

you would suck just as hard (probably harder) in a 2K as you would an XM-1

Not only do you pull 9.7/10.0s to further you're crap position into this and gloss over the huge mantlets and lower glacis of the 2A4 and Leclerc which you should instinctively be aiming for in the first place, the Turret Ring of the M1 which is easier to hit than it's LFP, and yes the T-64B is pennable frontally by M735

 

The XM-1 is a 9.7 tank

It always has been comparable to the 2K but's it's been coddled for sales and n00bs

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.