Abrams

[Jεcka]

@Panther2995

-better Turret/Hull protection

Yet, their respective actual not-on-paper protection is pretty much the same as top tier shells are simply far too powerful for their hulls (from any angle) and turrets (from wider arcs). So, how is 2A6 having “more milimeters” on paper exactly relevant when in-match situation doesn’t reflect what you’re saying?

much less exposed turret ring/not having exposed pumps in hull

Right, so you’re not going to mention that 2A6s hull is also a lot more exposed than M1A2s and is what gets shot “99%” of the time, then?

Seems to me like you’re trying to peddle an idea that M1A2s turret ring is the only weakpoint/weak area that matters in this comparison, when it isn’t. If you want to be objective then look at the sizes of each tank’s weakpoints.

Spall Liners on Turret

For God’s sake, if you’re getting hit in the spall liners which are pretty much located only on the turret sides you’re already dead. It’s a non-argument pretty much.

better Shell penetration/Muzzle Velocity

It’s a difference of like, 25mm? You’re just grasping at straws now.

however bein able to target larger weakspot and sniping enemy tanks through longer distances is more important.

How did you qualify how large a tank’s weakpoints really are against DM53 and against M829A2?

Its niche positive side

My man, this is just cope. One whole second of reload is what has seperated NATO tanks from most RU/Chinese tanks for the longest time, and it’s a huge advantage to have since you fire more often. What strikes me the most is how faster reload is apparently “a niche” to you when it comes to the Abrams, but 2A6s better “on-paper protection” is something that just has to be mentioned because it matters so much more.

And if you equip TUSK1 kit you basically become less mobile than Leo2A6

4.54s to 31kph, 10.68s to 50kph, 21.8s to top speed; SEPv1 w/TUSK and without one hp engine mod and “only” an expert crew.
4.39s to 31kph, 9.91s to 50kph, 19.78s to top speed; 2A6 with all engine mods and an aced crew

The differences between their acceleration are at best negligible, at worst irrelevant, and they would be even more if I had all of the engine mods on my SEPv1.

If you want to talk all-around mobility though, M1s reverse is better, their turning on the move is also better.

[Panther2995]

@Jεcka

turrets (from wider arcs). So, how is 2A6 having “more milimeters” on paper exactly relevant when in-match situation doesn’t reflect what you’re saying?

Like how M1A2’s right turret cheek is actually penetrable by DM53 on certain angles? I’ve yet to see same thing on Leo2A6, as for hull armor i think i’ll agree with you.

@Jεcka

Right, so you’re not going to mention that 2A6s hull is also a lot more exposed than M1A2s and is what gets shot “99%” of the time, then?

Right so Abrams giant lower plate that is almost equal to entire Leopards upper+lower plate doesnt mean anything?

@Jεcka

Seems to me like you’re trying to peddle an idea that M1A2s turret ring is the only weakpoint/weak area that matters in this comparison, when it isn’t. If you want to be objective then look at the sizes of each tank’s weakpoints.

Sure lets look, which tank does have more exposed turret ring? Which does have Giant lower frontal plate that is almost equal to entire frontal hull, which tank does have exposed hydraulic pump that is placed in wrong place, which tank doesnt have any spall liner?

This is unneccesary hostile behaviour is pointless, we’re just sharing our personal opinions.

@Jεcka

For God’s sake, if you’re getting hit in the spall liners which are pretty much located only on the turret sides you’re already dead. It’s a non-argument pretty much.

I disagree, those Spall Liners saved me many times while i cant say the same thing when my M1A2’s turret armor penetrated, why do you act like Spall liners makes no difference?

@Jεcka

How did you qualify how large a tank’s weakpoints really are against DM53 and against M829A2?

M1’s right Turret cheeks, iirc T72’s/80’s upper frontal plate and Chally2’s ufp are more suspectible to DM53, correct me if im wrong.

@Jεcka

The differences between their acceleration are at best negligible, at worst irrelevant, and they would be even more if I had all of the engine mods on my SEPv1.

So its either Leopard significantly lacks its mobility or your claim lacks certain truth.

Not to mention TUSK kit makes you HE magnet due to additional protection on roof mg, and it makes you to spot easier.

I dont understand why you became hostile since we’re trading personal opinions and in game values, your attitude changes quite fast when someone doesnt agree with you on leopards or Abrams.

I guess thats what happens when you consistently deal with Russian and Us mains but this is not the way to act like this.

[J_ackal]

I guess you also never use night vision in night battles

[Nowel]

That seems to be the case

[Jεcka]

@Panther2995

Like how M1A2’s right turret cheek is actually penetrable by DM53 on certain angles? I’ve yet to see same thing on Leo2A6, as for hull armor i think i’ll agree with you.

And this isn’t DM53 even, I’m using M829A2 here.

Right so Abrams giant lower plate that is almost equal to entire Leopards upper+lower plate doesnt mean anything?

See, now that I’ve called you out on not mentioning things, you finally have started to mention them, now, refer to what I have already posted:

M1s turret ring is its weakspot. Leo 2s hull is its weakspot.

And no, Abrams’s lower isn’t “almost equal”;

It about 1.4 times smaller in terms of coverage.

Sure lets look, which tank does have more exposed turret ring?

Funny thing, they both are pretty exposed in absolute terms as the protection offered by either is non-existent, but the only reason why 2A6s turret ring hasn’t caught on is because it’s not as much visible as M1s.

Which does have Giant lower frontal plate that is almost equal to entire frontal hull

Which it isn’t, refer to the screenshots above.

which tank does have exposed hydraulic pump that is placed in wrong place

Conga line vs hydraulic pump.

which tank doesnt have any spall liner?

M1s, sure, but 2A6s turret side liners aren’t a whole lot relevant, at least not any more than M1s frontal fuel tanks are (but hey, I’m down for you insisting that those spall liners are somehow doing “God’s work”, because then it gives me justification to start mentioning how M1s fuel tanks have saved my ass on many occassions, whereas the same can’t be said about the Leo 2s ;^). )

M1’s right Turret cheeks,

Feel free to guess which is M829A2 and which is DM53.

T72’s/80’s upper frontal plate

Neither has any real chance against T-72s frontal, their chances against T-80(U’s, specifically) is about 50% at all times.

Chally2’s ufp are more suspectible to DM53

Challenged 2’s upper frontal plate is worthy only about ~530 to like ~540mm RHAe KE if we were to ignore volumetric on the edge of adjacent steel plates, neither round has any issue with it.

So its either Leopard significantly lacks its mobility or your claim lacks certain truth.

Or, hear me out, M1s RPMs allow it to keep up very well despite taking up on additional weight, crazy I know. A 66.5 ton 2A7V is only about a whole second slower than the 2A6 when both have their crews aced, why would the 65.4 ton SEPv1, which when spaded has actually slightly more hp, be somehow significantly slower? The M1s are also go-karts at lower speeds compared to pretty much everything that isn’t a Type 10.

Not to mention TUSK kit makes you HE magnet due to additional protection on roof mg, and it makes you to spot easier.

Yes, I’ve noticed, but it’s not like this is anything new or shocking. NATO tanks have always been HE magnets with their CITVs so it’s a moot point if nothing else.

your attitude changes quite fast when someone doesnt agree with you on leopards or Abrams.

Because it’s one thing when you state that M1s are worse than the 2A7V, and another when all of the sudden 2A6 becomes the second-best MBT model in the game right after the up-armored Leo 2s, cause it has been “dethroned” from that position by the SEPs long time ago.

[SpeclistMain1]

@TheArcticFoxxo

M829A2 doesn’t penetrate 100% of the time at 3x the range… That’s the explicit purpose of M829A3.

The point of M829A3 was to have something that could take out tanks at longer ranges without relying on pure brute force.

@TheArcticFoxxo

I didn’t know there was an ERA patent called “NATO ERA”

I’m not going to list all types of ERA that NATO has, my dude. I already just said Russian and Chinese ERA, idk how it’s hard to understand what I mean.

[БЕИ]

[Jεcka]

[Panther2995]

@Jεcka

Conga line vs hydraulic pump.

You do realize pump location is completely wrong on Abrams series right? it should be on engine deck not hull.

@Jεcka

I’m down for you insisting that those spall liners are somehow doing “God’s work”,

Dont put my words into my word, i’ve never said they are ‘‘Gods Work’’ i just said they work when they needed, which is much better than not having it.

@Jεcka

Feel free to guess which is M829A2 and which is DM53.

You know that i was talking about certain degrees, no need these kind of games.

@Jεcka

hen all of the sudden 2A6 becomes the second-best MBT model in the game right after the up-armored Leo 2s,

I’ve never said Leo2A6’s are the second best tanks right after armored Leo2’s, i just claimed its better than M1A2’s in my eyes(Except SEPV1), to me Second best tanks always changes to my current mood, sometimes Leclerc’s are better sometimes Leo2’s and sometimes even M1A2’s.

[БЕИ]

[Surbaissemaxxing]

Extremely rare image of soviet nuclear testing on tanks (colorized)

[Jεcka]

@Panther2995

You know that i was talking about certain degrees, no need these kind of games.

Those certain angles are the same for both. M1s turret either stops both, or not. The practical difference in the weakspot size in the M1s turret against either can only be differentiated by counting pixels, really.

Dont put my words into my word, i’ve never said they are ‘‘Gods Work’’ i just said they work when they needed, which is much better than not having it.

I’m not, it’s simply an expression which you are reading too much into.

You do realize pump location is completely wrong on Abrams series right? it should be on engine deck not hull.

That’s very cool, you missed the joke there.

I’ve never said Leo2A6’s are the second best tanks right after armored Leo2’s

I never said that you do so explicitly, but, the implication was there, regardless of whether you really meant it or nah (cause, y’know, you very clearly declared that 2A6 is better than the M1A2 series ‘overall’, if that is not an implication then I dunno what else could have been…).

[Panther2995]

@Jεcka

(cause, y’know, you very clearly declared that 2A6 is better than the M1A2 series ‘overall’, if that is not an implication then I dunno what else could have been…).

And that makes Leo2a6 second best tank? According to other people best tank list changes a lot, some people prefers reload and mobility over firepower and armor thus they value Type-10’s and Leclerc’s more than Leopards and some do opposite, that doesnt mean Leo2A6 becomes second best tank.

@Jεcka

That’s very cool, you missed the joke there.

Forgive me if i just simply missed your genius joke right after your hostile behaviour, maybe try more friendly apporach so people can utilize your jokes more?

Anyway it seems your hostility still on and as long as it stays that way this conversation will stay away from bein productive.

[Jεcka]

@Panther2995

And that what makes Leo2a6 second best tank?

Oh I dunno, maybe being declared to be superior to the M1A2s, which aside from up-armored Leo 2s, are the next on the list for being the most meta MBTs because of their combination of firepower, armor, mobility, gun-handling, and survivability?

Subjective preferences aside, of course, because I am not interested in whether some guy somewhere considers a one hit wonder MBT to be “better” because it suits his playstyle more.

Anyway it seems your hostility still on and as long as it stays that way this conversation will stay away from bein productive.

Alright, we’re done here then.

[Panther2995]

@Jεcka

Oh I dunno, maybe being declared to be superior to the M1A2s, which aside from up-armored Leo 2s, are the next on the list for being the most meta MBTs because of their combination of firepower, armor, mobility, gun-handling, and survivability?

According to your personal opinion, not everyone agrees with that claim.

@Jεcka

Alright, we’re done here then.

Sure,ıf you cant stop bein hostile we’re done then.

[BeautifulTai_wan]

@Jεcka

Those certain angles are the same for both. M1s turret either stops both, or not. The practical difference in the weakspot size in the M1s turret against either can only be differentiated by counting pixels, really.

If you bothered to use the bloody protection analysis tool correctly you’d not be peddling this load of dingo’s kidneys.

It’s really bloody simple to do, you don’t cherrypick a screenshot and zoom the camera all the way out, instead of having it right next to the tank.

[Jεcka]

Entertain me, lets see how you “utilize” the analysis tool correctly.

It’s really bloody simple to do, you don’t cherrypick a screenshot and zoom the camera all the way out, instead of having it right next to the tank.

Alright, I see you haven’t changed in the slightest and still continue to peddle nonsense.

[BeautifulTai_wan]

That’s a laugh, alright.

I’ll teach you how to use the tools in game correctly, with glee.

Give me 30 minutes to record and upload a motion picture, because it’s actually going to be representative of reality instead of whatever you see through your blinders.

[Just_Baron]

Bad.

[Jεcka]

Go on, I’m waiting.

Give me 30 minutes to record and upload a motion picture, because it’s actually going to be representative of reality instead of whatever you see through your blinders.

Bro is going to record a video of him checking every nook and cranny just so he can find the few pixels where DM53 can perforate M1A2s turret but M829A2 can’t, actually hysterical, anyways;

Spoiler

Lmao.