The chinese VT4 might, in the manual leaked (thai) it said 6.7, but after all, not a big deal unless you Leopards.
This is what mine looks like
7 Likes
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
well said
Engine sound was up there too!
1 Like
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.
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
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
yay! the clown disagrees with me : D
1 Like
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
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
I wouldn’t say the BVM is slightly worse
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
“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.
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
The US mains tend to bring it on themselves.
You can’t have a civilized discussion with them most of the time, and it’s hard to talk to someone who claims Snailsoft hates US players while they are getting amazing vehicles nearly every patch.
They tend to dogpile on any Russias or German players who ever ask for anything to be added as well.
Just mention a SPAA being added for any nation that isn’t the US, or that maybe the US doesn’t need yet another top tier jet to be added for a patch or too and they tend to go nuts. There was a guy actually saying to remove the 2A7 because the Sepv2 isn’t equal to the 2a6.
I also saw one guy angry about the BR changes and that the M1s were going up, when I pointed out that others were going up as well without buffs(leopards in this case) the guy started spouting all kinds of wrong info.
8 Likes
This mainly stems from clickbait players, inexperienced players and rage bait posters. I absolutely despise these type of people because instead of watching videos, learning how to play the game and coming to a conclusion, they just ask dumb questions or make dumb statements with no thought into it. It ruins people who want to have a genuine conversation about a state of the vehicle because they get lumped into them.
Then there are people who fall for rage bait posts. Majority of people here have little to no experience playing the Abrams and pretend that they do. they offer no valuable discussion but causing drama. There are people where their only experience is just America which keeps them blinded from seeing the other side.
Then there are people who want to have a discussion about this but no one wants to do so because it will either put to their beliefs to the test or it will end up talking to a brick wall.
These type of posts are just a waste of time
1 Like
“Russia has modern stuff but NATO only has old stuff”
This isn’t the win you think it is
1 Like