Adding Round shattering physics and More armor to Abrams

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
1

  1. From what I have found online, the turret rind of the Abrams is designed specifically to shatter APFSDS rounds, their is ofcourse some weak spots but in game, instead of shtattering in the “Bullet catcher” It instead bounces off of the bottom of the turret armor, into the turret ring, subsequently killing the tank.

  2. When The Abrams was first added, it was OP because the armor stats where as they are IRL, they later debuffed it and never re-buffed it and now its suffering.

  3. As someone who knows people who have worked on the Abrams Armor, I can confidently say that the Armor on most, if not All NATO MBTs are Under Represented.

  4. This would All be fixed if they add the SEPv3 with DU Armor and APS system.

2 Likes
2

Shell shattering already exists, just use APDS for a while and you’ll see it.

I don’t know if it is a thing for APFSDS, but it would make sense if it was.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t it facing tanks that were mostly slower, and worse armoured?

2 Likes
3

It was, but now it isnt and other tanks are just as op as it was

1 Like
4

Currently, it does not exist for APFSDS.

1 Like
5

False.

On around the 16th of September 2020, the armour of the M1’s was buffed across the board, save for the base M1’s turret which was actually overperforming according to available documentation.

The changes were as follows:

  • M1 Abrams, IPM1, M1A1 and M1A2 lower glacis: 332mm > 375mm.
  • IPM1 and M1A1 right cheek: 400mm > 464mm.
  • IPM1 and M1A1 left cheek: 434mm > 539mm.
  • M1A2 left cheek: 667mm > 766mm.
  • M1A2 right cheek: 625mm > 685mm.
  • M1 Abrams left cheek: 486mm > 450mm.
  • M1 Abrams right cheek: 426mm > 403mm.

‘‘I know a guy that knows a guy who’s distant cousin works at GDLS and he says…’’

If you believe the armour is underperforming, feel free to share publicly available sources which support your position.

ATM machine.
ATGM missile.
PIN number.

2 Likes
6

As someone who knows people who knows people who knows people who knows people who have worked on the Abrams Armor, I can confidently say…

1 Like
7

I was not aware that the Armor was buffed again

8

Lol

9

when did they buff the armor on the abrams?

10

Read the qoute?

11

The only thing the Abrumz is suffering for is players lacking in any kind of skill.

1 Like
12

It’s mind boggling how some of you think this is valid argument.
If a person made a post in cyrillic that they think the T-90 needs buffs because they know someone that works in Uralvagonzavod you wouldn’t believe it, would you?
Get a clue.

1 Like
13

welcome to the club. challenger 2 is in the same position

14

As someone who doesn’t personally know someone who said the military said the Abrams can withstand sabots. Anyways rant over.

15

The winrates are suffering from skill, but the tank itself is just far worse than something like the unpennable Leo 2, or the T 80 U who has better armor than most MBTs whilst being faster than most light tanks.

16

M1A2 > T-80U

There’s a reason why one is 11.7 and the other is 11.3.

The Leopard 2A7V and Strv 122 are indeed the best top-tier tanks right now, but that doesn’t mean the M1’s are bad in the same way that the T-80BVM being worse than a 122B doesn’t mean the 80BVM is bad.

17

M1A2 has worse protection and mobility, and the slightly better sabot doesn’t matter as you can pen all the same stuff anyways.

18

Eh id disagree, i just get annoyed when a T80 pens my turret cheek

19

The armor is lacking, T80s have penned me in the turret cheek, that shoulnt be possible

20

Alright, when I go back to school in my engineering class Ill see if my teacher can bring in the Armor documents again. I understand your skepticism.

1 Like