That goes for every tank. Going by that logic, the Arietes are as good, if not better, than the Leopard 2A7s.
The point of armor is not to YOLO and expect to be immortal- it’s to have more chances to survive when you are inevitabily eventually shot at.
It’s like , armor protection always represents the lower limit level of a vehicle, but its upper limit level is still determined by firepower and maneuverability
In addition, the turret armor of Arietes is not as reliable as that of L2A7V. For me, as long as the basic armor of a certain tank’s vehicle can force it to attack its weak points instead of just firing a shot to anywhere he want, then the role of armor has been achieved
So when you have two tanks with equal mobility and firepower, what breaks the tie is… armor.
So, naturally, the tank with near invincible armor is better than the one with glass armor.
Specially in a game like War Thunder, where game modes and maps lead to direct exposed point blank engagements.
True thing bro. After all, vehicles with better armor do not need to spend more time targeting weak points when facing low-level armored vehicles, or less likely to hit strong armored areas
Now actually, I am more concerned about how long it will take for Gaijin to select the next detailed model’s vehicle
I mean I do think it’s up there right behind the 2A7s/Strv 122s. I started playing my 11.7 US lineup again during the T86 event and the M1A1 and M1A2 (by extension the SEPv1) are still awesome.
Sure it’s not a 2A7 or 122, but it’s still a really good tank that is relatively easy to do well in. Just because it’s easy to kill doesn’t mean it’s a bad tank.
Yeah the mindset of “it’s not the worst so it doesn’t need fixes” needs to go.
It’s certainly not, Russian tanks are still the second best tanks.
It is a bad tank and it can be easily disabled thanks to the hydraulic pump, so i don’t know how do you define “Good tank” but in Top Tier what matters is Armor and how your tank can do after being shot at.
The Abrams turret should just move slower when the reservoir is destroyed. (improperly shown as the pump in game) When the engine is destroyed, the oil pump for the turret drive is located on there but crew should be able to manually rotate the turret at a reduced rate (WWII traverse speed)… When the turret ring is destroyed, that should be the only time the Abrams can’t turn the turret. The turret basket should be modeled to just be a spall liner since that’s what it actually does. It has 3 screens there to protect the crew.
I mean talk about balance, knocking out the T-series autoloader, actually anything with an autoloader should completely prevent them from firing if they don’t have a shell loaded. (unless specifically mentioned they could manually load a shell if the autoloader is inoperable) The Abrams can’t rotate the turret at all when the turret ring is destroyed… That’s a really unfair advantage
Nah. Most of the Russian tanks are just driving skillchecks. There is a reason why the majority of the good players pick it as their top 3 MBT (assuming you group all the Strv 122s and 2A7 as one tank).
I have 8 of the 10 nations in game and the reason why I think the Abrams is a great tank is because there is no tank that is/feels as responsive to play (due to a combination of mobility, gun handling and reload).
The Abrams has always been a vehicle with a high skill floor and a high skill ceiling, the turret basket made the skill floor higher but it didn’t lower the skill ceiling.
I mean- if it’s about responsiveness, Leclerc beats Abrams; with the same gun handling, except even better mobility. The reason why the Abrams is generally considered to be better than Leclerc is that because it has SOMEWHAT better armor and survivability.
Yep! The polar opposite to Russian tanks. But, asymmetrically, they are kinda on par, in different ways.
By the way, I don’t remember if I asked this already, but- do we know whether KF-51 will be for Italy (Hungary), Germany, or both?
Unless Leonardo and Rheinmetall agree to just plaster the LRMV sign on a KF-51 demonstrator, I don’t see how Italy could get one.
Hungary never got one either, Rheinmetall just brought the demonstrator once at hungarian plant but that would be quite the stretch.
It’s moreso the better pen and slightly better armor I think, at least that is why I prefer the Abrams over the Leclerc.
But whenever the Abrams comes up a lot of people just instantly go to 2 extreme opinions. People either go “The Abrams is the worst top tier tank because it’s not survivable”, or they go “Abrams is the second best MBT so it shouldn’t get fixes”.
And both opinions are either completely stupid or partially stupid.
Unlikely it would go to Italy or Hungary since we know the variants planned for them are different to the current demonstrators.
The concept vehicle KF-51 should be German. Hungary financed the development of the hull for it, so its no longer a 2A4 and neither is it the base KF-51.
Italy is financing and jointly developing the turret.
Frankly, I hope this leak was fake, or it will be for an April Fool’s event.
@Zyranovos @WalletWorrier @O_Warrior0 @NOR_Tissetassen
I never said there should by any sort of basket on the T-series tanks…
However, it is obvious that GJ tries to mitigate obvious shortcomings of the T-series tanks a bit unfair way…
IRL any penetrating hit would knockout any tank western or eastern. With exception that western tank crew would likely walk away, while eastern tank crew is usually done with noticeable pyro effect and flying turrets due to crampet interior design and ammo in crew compartment. Which was soviet design choice due to simple fact that soviet army was conscript army and crews were (and still are) expendable.
Since in WT everything can be repaired, more survivable crew is clearly an advantage. Therefore, GJ started to make Soviet ammunition less prone to detonation, less spalling for T-series tanks etc. to compensate less survivable crew
Apparently, it is still not enough, so they started to model other systems on western tanks to make them more vulnerable and more on pair with T-series.
However, T-series has less survivable crews, but they are also noticeably smaller( front area of M1 is about 5m2 while T-80 is only 4m2), therefore harder to spot & hit then their western counterparts. Thie is IMO big enough advantage, so T-series does not need so big hand holding as they have now.
I indeed see that the T-series tank have higher survival rate i am very sure it because it has ammo wetting which reduce the ammoracking chance and Western tank does take some time to kill in WT normally it take me 1-3shot to kill an abrams.
A missing hydraulic generator and a battery pack on these tanks aren’t really shortcomings considering how small and compact they are. Like really, like I’ve said before, if you aren’t one-shot-one-killing these tanks, that’s a big skill issue, and same in the likewise respective nations and specifically NATO tanks.
That’s what top tier is, find a target before they find you, engage, kill them, find another target before they find you. That’s literally the name of the game, that’s why I’ve gotten 3/5 of my nukes with the Patria CT-CV 105 HP, which btw, has a turret basket.
NO FREAKING SHIT, it’s almost the same as if someone comes on the forum and cries when a Strv 103 player is sitting on a hill using their tiny profile to their advantage, because that’s what it’s DESIGNED TO DO, the tank isn’t the issue man.
Do you see any hand holding with the Strv 103, most likely no, but, it has no internal modules like an auto loader, its hydraulic suspension reservoir is a part of the transmission system, the armor is 40mm thick, and can be crewed by a single person.
Yet you see no one complain about it on the forums like Russian tanks, but I can make a list of inaccurate things to the tank that would make it even stronger, but gaijin probably won’t add them, for gods sake, it moved from 8.7 to 9.0 to stop bullying the living shit out of 7.7 and it still didn’t really help.
If you don’t believe the Strv 103 is a absolute beast, I’m not the best player in the world at all, and have a 530~ kill to 350~ death ratio.
Considering mango can pen your Abrams’ LFP (Lower front plate, because you probably don’t know the acronyms) I wouldn’t be too worried about your turret ring, that has been repeatedly proven that it can be penned by any modern tank round, no matter how ‘deep’ or ‘thick’ the amount of material between the inside and outside.
Also, IRL the early T-80’s hydraulic systems were constantly trying to implode and catch themselves on fire because of the high BAR pressure and hot it ran.
If dart flies trough carousel/crew compartment and do no significant damage it is not a skill issue it is over-buffed survivalability.
Do I complain about T-series size ? Your text understanding skills needs some work…
