Abrams

Machinery of War Discussion
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
52

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.

7 Likes
53

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
54

“Russia has modern stuff but NATO only has old stuff”

This isn’t the win you think it is

1 Like
55

Does it have issues? Yes. Is it still good and fun to play? Well for the 11.3 ones yes. I don’t have the 11.7 ones so I can’t speak on them as much. But from playing the 11.3 ones in any uptier shows me anything then the 11.7 ones are probably good as well. Especially since now the HCs are getting the top round at 11.3 soon.

56

If they decide not to play the stupid Russian way which is to run into the points they won’t die as easily, use the depression over hills or just try and support USSR/Swedish/German team mates, as easy as that lol.

57

It already does.

LOL! Soviets use RHA as well. RHA isn’t “NATO armor” as your post falsely implies.

Once again false. Kontakt 1 performs worse than NATO HEAT-defeating ERA.
Kontakt 1 is ~185mm of protection from HEAT projectiles.
M60 TTS ERA has ~400mm of protection.
SEP2’s ERA ARAT2 has ~720mm of protection.
AMX-30B2 BRENUS ERA has ~430mm of proection.

1 Like
58

My point is that idea is false, NATO countries use very modern vehicles in most cases for top tier. The biggest outliers being France (2003) and USA (2005)

59

That doesnt mean people have to continue the cycle of toxicity. Just because someone jumps off a bridge doesn’t mean everyone else has to do it

1 Like
60

AbsoluteCinema

2 Likes
61

Well for M1A2 series only i can say that
“It not good enough”
it not bad but it also not good to keep up in top tier

2 Likes