Abrams

Machinery of War Discussion
32

image

The jokes write themselves don’t they

What’s even crazier is I wasn’t even talking about the Abrams, only the bingo card.

8 Likes
33

In fact, I do not consider the M1A2 to be a weak tank. Maybe you should explore the strengths of this tank and have fun playing with it…

3 Likes
34

Just do BR, its easy, Pantsir and Leo2s all need to go up.

35

The chinese VT4 might, in the manual leaked (thai) it said 6.7, but after all, not a big deal unless you Leopards.

36

This is what mine looks like
IMG_4557

7 Likes
37

you have to love when people come to the forum to discuss a specific vehicle ( especially any US vehicle ) there are immediate attacks on the player base who plays them and none of the comments get removed or hidden. Talk about the crying of another specific nation and the thread gets locked/comments removed/hidden.

Why do people feel the need to make fun of a player base to make themselves feel better about what nation they play? why cant you have a discussion with out attacking other people?

6 Likes
38

well said

39

Engine sound was up there too!

1 Like
40

By far one of the worst toptier MBTs. Only nations that get worse are Israel and Britain.

To fix it, buff its turret ring’s thickness and move the ring itself down to where it is IRL. Warthunder’s sabot simulation in general needs a rework. The UFP was specifically designed to turn long rod sabots into boomerangs, but in Warthunder it’s just one of many weakspots to shoot.

Lastly, put all lvl <100 toptier premium pack players in a separate queue from TT players.

41

I truly do enjoy these threads listening to mutt mains whine about the abrams not having the MA29938283382828 shell with 10km of pen that it needs to make it playable because second best isnt good enough and fantasy dwarven made mithril plating that should reduce the effectiveness of spall by 10¹⁸%

4 Likes
42

Worse MBTs than M1A2: Ariete, Leclerc, Challenger 2, BVM [only slightly worse], 2A5 PSO, Merkava Mk4, ZTZ-99A [only slightly worse], and Type 10’s slightly worse similar to BVM.
So no, it’s not “one of the worst” it’s a top 10 MBT.

War Thunder’s APFSDS simulation is among the best in the industry as well as it uses Lanz Odermatt’s.
Abrams just needs its turret ring fixed and it’s on-par with 2A6 fully.

3 Likes
43

yay! the clown disagrees with me : D

1 Like
44

@Pangolin_Fan accuses anyone wanting Abrams’ turret ring fixed of bad things as usual.

2 Likes
45

Main issues with the Abrams is a couple things:

A: People, for some reason, expect it and want it to be literally invincible because “During the Battle of 73 Eastings…” yeah no, it’s not that amazing, it is quite literally the modern equivalent of the M4 Sherman, built to be “good enough.”

B: Maps. A large majority of maps in this game are either too city orientated (not ideal for sniping tanks like the Abrams) or they’re just simply too small (also not good for sniping tanks).

I read a comment earlier about map assets, I forget who commented this apologies, and while that’s true I believe maps overall at 9.3+ need a huge rework in assets AND playable areas, especially with the whole “red zone taking up 75% of the map” stuff we’ve been seeing this last ~6 months.

1 Like
46

You tagged the wrong guy. you mean to tag @AlvisWisla

1 Like
47

City maps hurt Soviet tanks and benefit less armored tanks.
Large maps benefit Soviet tanks and armored NATO tanks.
Largely caused due to gunner sight through gun rather than the actual gunner sight.

2 Likes
48

I wouldn’t say the BVM is slightly worse

49

Stop saying stuff like that.

Don’t hide behind popular opinions to avoid criticism, and don’t put words in people’s mouths like that.

1 Like
50

“3rd worse” round, 10.3 turret armor barely covered in the front aspect with single-use ERA, and while fast in a straight line still lacks the general mobility of NATO tanks.
T-90M fixes lack of mobility with significantly more armor.

Also @Ion_Protogen blatant character attacks aren’t criticism.

51

Check the bajillion other threads, this sort of thing gives people advocating for the US a bad rap.

But, off the top of my head:
  • No Abrams in game has actual DU armor (Swedish Trials were export versions explicitly stated to be worse than domestic packages)
  • The hull armor of the heavy-package Abrams in game doesn’t feature improved hull armor, even though budget justifications, NRC licenses, and multiple secondary sources state there were hull armor improvements (both DU and non-DU)
  • All of the Abrams should have spall liners as it’s integrated into the armor package
  • The turret ring is 50mm and non-volumetric, and it should be 250mm+ and highly angled
  • The turret ring is overly exposed and should be nigh-impossible to hit even with War Thunder’s mouse aim
  • The fuel bulkheads are modeled incorrectly (this also makes the UFP weaker than it’s supposed to be, due to not having the fuel bulkheads as extra armor)
  • The Improved Turret Side Armor package hasn’t been added
  • There’s no real reason to play the SEPv2 since it’s just a heavier SEPv1, even though they could’ve just made TUSK II removable and add the SEPv2’s APS
  • M829A2 should punch through Kontact-5 under 1.5km

Some issues that apply to the Abrams and nearly all NATO nations are:

  • NATO armor modifiers are on average defined to be worse than Russian tanks
  • NATO ERA massively under-performs in comparison to Russian ERA (even when NATO sources outright say what the ERA performance is)
1 Like