Or maybe British designers wasnt so smart to think that blowout panel would actually do good for tank, blame the designer not messenger.
You really dont.
Chally DS also sees high penetration rounds, its only 0.3 br below than my Al-Khalid which is a tank that has APFSDS shell that can penetrate 580mm armor, basically top tier Chinese Round at 11.0.
Type-90 also sits at 0.6 br above than Chally DS which reloads much faster,has much better mobility,armor and penetration.
Both Challenger 2 and DS has same engine and weight which means both tank has same mobility.
Seems like you’re the one who has no idea what he’s talking about.
I used your service record to calculate your results, feel free to check yourself.
no you just cant understand what i said.
The challanger 2 is slower at top tier compared to the counterparts.
oppose to the challanger 1 which last i used it before the BR changes, was keeping better with the tanks at its BR.
The challanger 2 also loses so much speed in its turns.
i have hundreds of games in teh challanger 2s mate.
there are many who believe the Type 90s are under BRd/ over performing incredibly in a downtier. the L26 is also near on par with JM33 btw with 10 less flat pen and 6 less angle pen at 60 degrees.
arguably one of the worst top tier rounds. meanwhile the challanger 2 is up against the likes of DM53, m338, m829a2 (more regularly).
coming from the one who
A. compared said the challanger 2 was in desert storm
B. Claims that what i said about the challangers armour is i quote “That is straight up bullshit” when all i said was that it allowed the full crew to survive a direct hit from a kornet missile. non of which is bullshit.
and no, its not just wet stoage at all, the charges themselves are in fire resistant sleeves, while also within a wet stoage, that has also a fire proof lining. to prevent ammo detonation, its not just a wet stoage at all, to boot its also on what documents that can be found a well armoured stoage.
again thats why the kornet missile didnt blow the tank to pieces and how the crew survived.
@Panther2995 this is also incredibly off topic for the thread as its about the Abrams and its buff, not a debate on what one is better armoured IRL. both in game are missing a lot of features. period. id just rather see the minor nations get brought up to the state of the major nations.
Not true at all, no one knows the exact thiccness of an non-export Abrams. Because the home grown/used Abrams dont use the export armor packages. Realistically the only Abrams with known hull/turret armor thiccness would be the M1A1 AIM and even that probably isnt right since I do believe the Aussies’ changed the armor.