I hear there is a ridiculous and in reality unlikely Turret ring shot available. We used to have that for the T34 but it seems to have gone of late so maybe Gaijin should do the honours and lose it for the M1.
Gaijn should also bear in mind the huge amount of crew survivable damage the M1 took from friendly M1s firing DU at it in reality when it comes to one shot kills in the game.
Quoted from a real post - I cannot make this shit up
“United States tech tree is missing different variants of its LAV’s and striker vehicles Also, US helicopters has The ability to carry AGM-65 Vehicles like HVT-L Doesn’t even exist in any American units the fact that it’s 11.3 Is delusion
The 2S38 is 10.3 The turret ring on the Abrams makes the game completely unplayable depleted wholes were added on all M1A1 After the second invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan the sep 2 Fires actively the fourth generation round choppem armor What the Abrams is made out of consist of composites and Kevlar meaning the tank has a liner to protect from spiling every Abrams have Kevlar lining”
How many bingo points does that get me? Pretty good shot, right?
You’re going off topic for no other reason than to win a “debate”. This topic is talking about the state of the Abrams, and the issues that it currently has.
There are historical inaccuracies in which it needs to be corrected. These issues has been submitted and been acknowledged by the devs. People who argue anything other than the validity of the sources and have liked the “bingo” card are hypocrites.
You can argue about the current state of the Abrams however you either need to play or have played against it to make an argument. It would be even better to have done both to get a full picture. The issue is you done nothing of this yet act like you have.
You are contributing nothing to the conversation (so has the majority of people here) and only want to cause drama
I don’t believe you’ve actually read my othrr posts here, only the most latest one.
The Abrams, like any other tank, deserves to have its fully realistic capabilities to the extent of full balance. This would be significantly easier if people tried advocating for improvement, rather than immediately jumping to “Garbage it’s not real Abrams”.
It’s fair to question the validity and sincerity of his opinions by considering other things he has said.
If I for example said I hate America and Russia is the best country in the world, you would be fair to consider me biased towards Russia and thus question my opinions about other things in the game.
Both of which are excessively dense materials that were chosen specifically due to their propensity against KE penetrators.
Woah, effective armor is effective???
The issue is that this should’ve been stated in the very beginning of the thread instead of mocking and lumping in people who have genuine suggestions for the Abrams:
And because of this, it’s very hard to see any genuine statements as genuine. That is my issue here and with the majority of people on this thread.
@MrBaleadas099 asked a question. He didn’t say Abram sucks, give abrams M829A3^3, he simply asked a question. I have my doubts of the intent of asking that question but I’ll answer it regardless. Neither you or many people in the beginning of this thread didn’t do that. It was unproductive and waste of time.
See, you could start mocking people once they make these outlandish claims but you didn’t. Instead, you anticipated what people were going to say and said it ahead of time.
There should be a separate channel discussing the Abram’s technical data though. It’s quite annoying to see the same type of thread pop up here and there.
Nothing wrong with that and didn’t say I supported everything @sartt said however it doesn’t help your case when you were made a bingo card mocking everyone (including the people with genuine suggestions).
That’s a good point, I probably could have started more constructive, it was just seeing other players having experienced the same thing I have made me more inclined to say things I shouldn’t have.
Thank you for pointing that out, I will keep it in mind next time.
Bvm isn’t worse at all, it’s exactly on par, the deciding factor is what map. That is it, nvm will be better on some maps, Abrams on the others. Type 10 is in the same position. What situation you’re in and gameplay dictates which of the 2 would be better. Those 3 tanks are basically equal to each other and quite well balanced.
You mean like
checks notes
The Abrams thread you’re all in?
See above, take notice of what thread you’re in and who’s talking. Don’t be purposefully obtuse, those people exist in all groups here. It’s called a confirmation bias, you’re experiencing it right now.
What a tone def comment. Complaining about not being able to have a discussion and then joining a thread not about your stuff and derailing it and dismissing things.
The hypocrisy of this forums users is at times incredibly hard to stomach because it’s hard to believe someone writes these things with a straight face. You mean to complain about something affecting your nation, while literally being here doing what you’re complaining about US mains doing?
I strongly disagree. After playing a few matches of 7.7 Britain I refuse to play anything that requires my team to be competent. If I cannot carry or hold down half the map by myself, I do not want it.
so i just linked you to the U.S Government congressional hearing where members of the military were testifying under oath, and your response is go back to 4chan?? Go back to leveling up and you might make it into tier 6 ground kiddo.
