It cannot be Chinese main due to them also having an abram. It is most likely other few nation mains who don’t want other nation to have better equipment then theirs
They never play it.
You know what I mean. Mains.
What? did I miss a bunch of sarcasm or somthing?
1 Like
Gaijin nerfs NATO vehicles, and they love, love, LOVE!
Doing whatever ahistorical mess they can with the Abrams, whilst in the same breath, add in a missile that’s basically a propaganda piece that isn’t even real.
2 Likes
In fact, all the interpretations of armor protection regarding the US Army-operated Abrams are sort of a “guess,” as the US government never revealed any numerical data of any fielded Abrams variants, including the very initial one.
The only Abrams we have any actual values for if I recall is the XM-1 GM and maybe the Chrysler.
Exactly, plus I am not 100% sure if it is unclassified or not
1 Like
To be frank, there has been so much constant back and fourth when it comes to it’s hull armor where anything related it, I try not to talk about it because I haven’t done no where near as much research as I should. Both Tripod and Necron are pretty knowledgeable but disagree on many things when it comes to the Abrams so I’ll wait to see what they’ll say regarding this (if they even want to that is).
That being said, I would advocate the devs implementing all the “accepted” bug reports regarding the abram’s protection first, then see how it would perform. There’s quite a few reports made but I’m not sure what exactly each one is.
The issue is that something is wrong with all of the M1’s. And that to a degree Gaijin both isn’t specific enough about configurations, and isn’t at all responsive to reports with many relevant reports with no apparent activity after multiple years of being accepted.
Take for example
M1A1 / IPM1 - Turret Frontal Armour Incorrect
The M1A1 turret front currently has approximately 410-420 mm of KE protection at an azimuth angle of 20°, and 900-915 mm of CE protection at an azimuth angle of 27°. As part of the UK’s Chieftain replacement Programme General Dynamics Land Systems offered both the M1A1 and M1A2 as options. It can be seen from two different declassified reports on the chieftain replacement programme that the M1A1 frontal turret armour should be:
- 460 mm KE at ±20°
- 750 mm CE at ±27°
As the IPM1 has the same turret armour as the M1A1
The special Side skirts are also currently erroneously modeled as a monolithic block of “composite screen” instead of a RHA strike face with a Tri-plate assembly behind it. Which should at at a minimum confer an additional 30mm of protection
We know what the XM-1 / baseline M1 should be
And lacking providence (so can’t be used in reports (as it is technically secondary at best as it comes from a presentation so needs a corroborating sorce))
2 Likes
m1a2, m1a1 | (all variants) turrent cheek armour gap // Gaijin.net // Issues
Here is another report they haven’t touched in months
It really goes to show when you see all the otger reports being taken care of then they just ignore the abrams LONGSTANDING issue lol
China has an Abrams, & armor corrections wouldn’t impact USSR players at all. They already aim for spots that wouldn’t be up-armored.
Nah they defintely do, it a great tank in that TT.
Turret neck definitely needs some redoing.