if it had m900 you would have no defense for it being uptiered to 11.0-11.3
Please explain how the firepower differs for me without referencing the pointless caliber which has no bearing on performance in game
It could even be said that M1 has better firepower due to it’s much better reload speed.
Better armour, better survability, commander view, Dm23, 120mm gun, almost same mobility, just worst speed
As i said in the first comment, great speed, yes, it does have excellent mobility, but u doesnt have anymore than just that
Yep, and thats why i said m833 is the real option to make it balanced
This has to be ragebait.
Explain both of these, where is the armor better, where is the survivability better, both have turret rings and 4 crew in same placements
It has a 5s reload and its the fastest MBT at the BR, that is not enough with M833?
Not gonna say that it needs the round to be good at 10.7, Its definitely on the better end of tanks for that br.
BUTT, I do feel that it should be given its irl rounds as well as a remodel to its turret basket mainly because we do have a BR system to balance these things and these 2 changes would give it some form of better consistency that isn’t “Oh, i’m utterly f**ked cause i wasn’t lucky”
120mm Dm23: 4.3kg mass of the projectile, 408mm pen
105mm m774 3.4kg mass of the projectile (less post pen damage), 372mm pen (36mm less of pen)
.50cal vs 20mm coaxial gun
So, 11.3 M1 Abrams? Minimum?
of course, decompression if the snail gets off their ass. But yea, if the abrams is just that good, Why not?
Mass doesn’t mean anything for long rod darts found on MBTs.
Mass in projectiles does not determine anything in this game for long dart APFSDS. Nothing. Zilch. Nada. ничего
You just listed they have similar pen, which is the only other difference, and the M1 reloads much faster at 5s aced or 5.3s expert
No, you don’t understand. 11.0-11.3 the moment it gets M900, not after decompression. After decompresion it would easily be 12.0+
With this logic the 2A4 gets DM53, does that make sense to you?
Same shot with the same ammo ath the exact same place, even if i shoot to the ammo the leo wont blow, the shot in the abrams killed driver, and gunner, also the turret basket, the one to the leopard 2 just killed driver and gunner, commander can shoot back, turret ring is fine
“same exact place” you got eyes right?
Almost the same spot, u want me to shoot the ammo? The crew survives that, u want me to shoot right in the center? Well, that kills both the abrams and the leopard 2
If you mean T-72A is at lower battle rating than the M1 Abrams is a good thing, yes I’ll agree with you, usually lower battle rating is good, on paper. M1 Abrams can be one of the only main battle tanks at battle rating 10.7 with a 105 mm cannon, it also can be a M1 Abrams at battle rating 11.0 or battle rating 11.3 with a 105 mm cannon with the addition of the M900 penetrator as required buff some people in the community been asking for which really defeats the argument that T-72A at battle rating 9.3 is good, M1 Abrams at battle rating 10.7 is bad but M1 Abrams at battle rating 11.0 or above is accepteable with M900 penetrator.
The turret ring of the M1 Abrams is a issue to be fixed. I was surprised that even World of Tanks: HEAT—A tank-hero shooter game had a modification for the Chopper (M1A2 SepV2 Abrams) that added up to 240 mm of armor to the turret ring, which says a lot about War Thunder vehicle characteristics accuracy but it doesn’t make the M1 Abrams weaker and deserving to face up to battle rating 9.3 if a battle rating reduction from 10.7 to battle rating 10.3 is considered, passed and implemented, it’s a reliable weakspot in War Thunder for a formidable vehicle. Also, talking about that, at this point I don’t believe that Gaijin has the intent to make War Thunder accurate, at most playable, going back and forth with realistic models and playable area, which creates this grey zone of pseudo-realistic vehicular combat game.
Commander view and 1st-generation thermal imaging devices are not a excuse for battle rating reduction, matter afact, it’s probably reason for battle rating increase (specifically the latter) as seen with the T-80UD (base version in the Soviet Union tech tree at battle rating 10.7) compared to the T-80UD/BE which adds a Buran-Catherine-E gunner thermal (which to add, in-game the T-80UD/BE is lacking a lot of other things.
The M1 Abrams is only equipped with lower quality, 1st-generation thermal imaging devices due to a lot of factors during its production, mainly budget constraints:
The main reason for the initial version of the M1 Abrams to have only one thermal sight, with only an extension for the tank commander, was cost. The original M1 Abrams was designed on a budget. The cost per unit was supposed to stay below $780,000 relative to the program’s start in 1972. This was significantly less than the estimated cost per unit of the failed MBT-70 program that preceded it and presented a major challenge to the design team.
And no, you’re just saying that you would play T-55AM at battle rating 10.7 to say, it will never be better than the M1 Abrams at the same battle rating if you tried to apply the same play-style: M1 Abrams is fast, you can easily flank and reply to threats easily with a more verstile fire control system compared to the T-55AM which is at most a support vehicle because it’s slower but the modernisations (T-55AM-1 and T-55AMD-1 with additional armor) would give you better chances if you tried.
Ill try with a t55 so u see the difference in armour better
You see how the abrams does not ever have 3 crew lined up frontally but the leopard does? And how both have turret rings? And how the abrams has a stronger UFP?
