As if someone who can have objective opinions when they lack solid experience on those vehicles, not to mention it s a common knowledge that protection analysis isnt hundred percent accurate.
You proved nothing but only how clueless and unexperienced you are when it comes to other Nations vehicles.
Coming back to this bit, this is a pretty easy shot to make when an Abrams is hull down and you can only see the turret (so not the turret ring). pretty much every time I hit it in the test drive the ammo cooked off.
I know this is in the test drive, but I couldn’t quickly find a friend that has the abrams online to do a bit more of a real test.
EDIT: Ah shit, seems like medal doesn’t like cooperating today.
Call me when you need to do those kind of tests.
Always happy to help.
A test drive is completely pointless. I one-shot the M1 Abrams every single time with the ZBD04A’s APS03 in the test drive, but it doesn’t happen in a real match because (hopefully) the enemies that you’re facing are actual living humans with thoughts in their head and proper positioning.
You keep talking about “experience” even when facing objective facts. It really doesn’t matter what you seem to think. I’m not even stating opinions. I literally edited that post with a very simple comparison in the hangar. Immutable.
As a wise man said: Never argue with the ignorant, because he will always prove you wrong with his ignorance.
Exactly.
Thanks for agreeing that how ignorant you are.
At least you show some experience in that case.
Since you like using K/Ds as an argument, let’s try taking myself, an all-nation player, as an example to illustrate my point:
Germany:
Leopard 2A7V: 1.97 (+)
Leopard 2A6: 1.38 (+)
Leopard 2 PSO: 1.30 (+)
Leopard 2A5: 1.25 (+)
Leopard 2 PL: 1.14 (+)
Sweden:
Strv 122B PLSS: 1.40 (+)
Strv 122A: 1.32 (+)
Strv 122B+: 1.30 (+)
Japan:
Type 10: 1.58 (+)
TKX: 1.53 (+)
Type 90: 1.40 (+)
Type 90 (B): 1.37 (+)
Russia:
T-80BVM: 1.24 (+)
T-72B3: 1.16 (+)
T-90M: 1.11 (+)
T-80U: 1.01 (+)
U.K:
Challenger 3 (TD): 1.26 (+)
Black Night: 1.15 (+)
Challenger 2E: 1.12 (+)
Challenger 2 (2F): 1.08 (+)
Challenger 2: 0.98 (-)
Challenger 2 TES: 0.97 (-)
France:
Leclerc S.1: 1.20 (+)
Leclerc S.2: 1.14 (+)
Israel:
Merkava Mk.4M: 1.15 (+)
Merkava Mk.4B: 1.13 (+)
Merkava Mk.4LIC: 1.08 (+)
America:
M1A2 SEPv2: 1.41 (+)
M1A1 HC: 1.17 (+)
M1A2: 0.97 (-)
M1A2 SEP: 0.96 (-)
M1A1 AIM: 0.90 (-)
Now… why may that be?
And before you jump in to stat-shame or say “skill issue”, I know I am far from being a good player, as I am merely average and I don’t care to do any better. I play War Thunder extremely casual while browsing the Forums, watching shorts, playing music, eating ice cream and generally not caring a single bit about K/Ds.
But if the Abrams tanks are so OP and so good… why could I possibly perform worse on them than on many other MBTs I have? If they are so OP and so good, shouldn’t it carry this noob’s matches? Isn’t that what OP vehicles do?
Wouldn’t you agree that, when the same player plays many vehicles the exact same way… the performance is decided at least mostly by the vehicle’s capabilities?
Objective means it can be proven with facts and numbers, but you have yet to prove anything you said.
ZTZ-96A (P):
M1 Abrams:
It’s very hard when you make such extremely outlandish statements.
The things I’ve said? Almost all of which were numbers taken directly from the game?
How do you intend to disprove this:
I’m using a hacked client, perhaps? Do you want me to send you a DxDiag like when making a bug report?
I’m perfectly fine with arguing with 4 people at the same time by myself.
Thought you were talking about the Abrams being hard to one shot or hard to deal with when hull down, I can see this point about the T-80B vs BVM armor at their respective BRs.
However you have yet to say anything objective about the Abrams survivability, because someone with 2-3 braincells should be able to easily dispatch of a hull down Abrams.
Player experience at the time of playing is an excuse as far as I’m concerned. From your post history you dismiss excuses quickly so I’ll do the same. Instead of making excuses why don’t you play the Abrams again and prove me wrong. The numbers don’t lie sneedle deedle if you don’t like them play and change them. Statistical significance of the difference was never a part of the argument, so I’ll say it again play the game and change your stats if you’re such a better player now.
Try to shot T-80B’s hull and Turret armor with 120mm DM33/M829/A1, K-EW and M900 since those shells can be find at that Br.
Now try to shoot BVM’s hull and Turret armor with DM53,Type-10,OFL F1,M829A2,L27A1 and lets see what happens.
Results are clear, BVM has significant less weakspots then T-80B when it faces the vehicles that sits at similiar Br’s.
The point isn’t about the T-80B and BVM. The point is that tanks at ~10.0/10.3 and tanks at 11.7 play almost exactly the same. That was a different argument with another one of you. And I sourced my proof for it just like with everything else - from the game itself.
All you’ve done so far is post a TEST DRIVE VIDEO of you killing an Abrams that wasn’t hull down with his turret ring exposed. A test drive Abrams. That sits there in the open. That was your proof.
If you think this hull-down profile, while utilizing all 10 degrees of gun depression in a proper position, and utilizing the high hp/t and 34km/h reverse is “easy to one-shot” (you’re certainly not hitting it in the turret ring if you’re actually facing someone intelligent) - you’re simply crazy.
(Especially bushed up, like mine is, and from a far greater distance than the one in the test drive)
Or rather, no, what you are is someone who wants to make people believe that the Abrams is worse than it actually is. Like someone else here…
Disccussion was about comparing T-80B and BVM’s armor, wasnt about using Abrams against them.
Not only you lack knowledge you also lack comprehending skills it seems.
120mm Dm33,M829/A1,KE-W and M900 can be found at 10.3, seems you also lack knowledge in this case.
Or, and this might be crazy, I can actually aim against top tier tanks. They will need to stand still for a second or 2 to aim for a good shot. that second or 2 is more than enough to OHK him. Worst case scenario you destroy it’s breech and engine, leaving it dead in the water for a followup shot.
Yet all I see in you is someone with barely any experience at top tier making tanks out better than they really are, possibly that little experience at top tier has resulted in issues with aiming at that BR?
I’m actually sick and tired of talking to someone like this.
I’m not going to pick apart your worthless slop. Your entire post here reeks of a complete lack of self awareness which will no doubt be further exacerbated in any continued responses.
Blocked.
Oh wow! Just like you could with the BVM? Or basically every other top tier MBT?
Except the Abrams has a better shell, more gun depression, a higher reverse speed and a 5 second reload!
How do you sleep at night?
Oh look Mr “i have no pointless arguments left so im going to block you”.
How original…
Exactly. Do I need to remind you that my point from the start has been that the Abrams survivability is nothing special. I have never said that it’s survivability was worse than others.
Although it’s survivability is definitely worse than the likes of the Strv 122s and 2A7s.
You were the one making the Abrams put to be some highly survivable tank.
