The SEPs initially had block 0, however starting in 2004 they started receiving Block 1s.
1 Like
My impression: You obviously didn’t understand the problem.
Please do your homework and if it is necessary to involve the players then do it first. There is no point in continuing like this, the dissatisfaction and frustration on both sides is only increasing.
4 Likes
I dont understand why you dont wany to put kevlar spall liners on abrams…
I guess 13.0 BR fighter aircraft toptier would be Sukhoi Su-27SM3, Sukhoi Su-34, F/A-18A+ Hornet (1995), F/A-18C Hornet (1993 ~ 2002), CF-18A Hornet (IMP) and F-15I Ra’am (1998)
2 Likes
This will not go unnoticed, Gaijin devs deserve to be exposed for blatant bias and favoritism.
2 Likes
@Stona_WT Since as you said on the previous post we should focus about abrams and this is the general one for MBT’s
It is possible to take a look at this report? What about this report?
Leclerc MBT ( All Variants ) incorrect rate of fire // Gaijin.net // Issues
The previous one got refused because of a single secondary source against 10+ secondary sources, i hope this one, with a Brochure from the manufacter, is enough.
4 Likes
I’m back to make fun of this some more…
Old Akers website confirming MEXAS was a development by IBD (i.e German):
IBD pamhplet confirming that TVMs were using 3rd generation MEXAS add-ons, production vehicles would’ve been instead using 4th - 5th generation (including Strv 122s, as seen in the pamphlet):
Quite the nonsense to be basing the protection of a vehicle that entered service in 2021, on a prototype that was using MEXAS add-on armour a whole generation (or two) older than the Leopard 2A5 & Strv 122s, don’t you think?
At the very least you should be making 2A7V completely equal to the Strv 122 in terms of protection (and that’s the BARE MINIMUM)… but better solution is to literally read the evidence provided, because it states 2A7Vs hull was required to provide equeal protection to the turret (and we’ve already established 122s and production Leopard 2 used 4th/5th generation MEXAS, so there is no reason for German vehicles to perform worse, so you’ve also got to bring up the turret to 122s level).
26 Likes
Maybe make a new bug report? With this “new” information?
Looks like there is no longer any reason to play any other nation besides Russia. Devs really just hate anything that isnt Russian and do not care about historical accuracy, all motivation to play knowing that whatever vehicle I use will be third-rate if it’s not russian is killing the drive to play this game.
8 Likes
This is so exhausting. The main info on the tank is classified, but plenty of sources say there is DU in the front hull and estimation of 600mm protection against KE rounds. You wont be able to get the accurate information as its highly classified and want get the wording your looking for. So you ether dont care about the american tech tree and just use to to throw out tanks like “click bait” because its just that for you to get $70. There is no reason to play American tech tree then at high br. You can give the abrams 5000mm heat protection and would still do nothing since everyone uses KE rounds.
Sep V3 on its way everyone! it weighs 120 tones 5000mm of heat protection 200mm of KE protection, with a top speed of 15mph get the click bait now for $70 so you can get a head start in getting this newest and great tank!!
10 Likes
Dear Gaijin
I like the unique meachnism of Warthunder and I am willing to pay for it
This proves I have spent a lot on Warthunder. However, the horribly weak VT4a-1 makes me unwilling to pay more on WTarthunder, I hope you may treat it equally, only that I will start buying Golden eagles again
3 Likes
I don’t know guys. I have a feeling that the Abrams is still getting stomped hard…
EDIT: don’t mind the Germany winrate bit. My friend wanted to grind his PSO and 2A7V.
3 Likes
Yes I know.
the sides might not have DU in them
You’re arguing that you think the sides [of the hull I assume, you’re also being vague just like the document now, lol] do though… if they did, then there would have to be lines in this license for both the storage of those side hull pieces AND for the contaminated stuff in working with the side hull pieces.
why would the sides ne storage for contaminants if they are not in contact with DU?
They wouldn’t, if the side hull has no DU. But then why did you give this as a possible source then for the hull having DU bruh? Or if that wasn’t the point, then I don’t know why you posted it.
it has DU on Sides, confirmed here
2 Likes
They made it clear they will not make any existing or future NATO vehicles better armoured because “they believe” or “this 30 years out of date document states something else”.
They also made it clear that they do not believe in Western APFSDS having been specifically designed to combat ERA.
All of this is basically them “believing” the West is incapable of technological progress to achieve their requirements.
Honestly? This is a losing battle unless something happens.
13 Likes
That quite clearly says “TURRET side armor” not “hull side armor”
The conversation with the other guy was about whether the “sides” in question were only the turret sides, or also the hull sides, so your source doesn’t help with that.
Ah, I see
Yeah I agree.
I was mostly just poking fun of their line that the faster reload would make the Abrams far more effective against all opponents (which is somewhat true, even if I don’t fully agree, it surely didn’t make the situation of playing top tier US any better), and that they would consider giving M829A3 if things didn’t get better.
So Gaijin are you going to do something to actually help make US top tier a bit better for the actually decent players or was that a lie to? are you just content with their super low winrate?
EDIT: Fun fact. I queued most of the launch week/weekend with Germany as the US, so my winrate was around 74% in the launch weekend after I got the SEPv2. Since then my winrate has dropped by nearly 15%.
My argument: side hull has no DU.
Front hull does.