Oh nice i wonder why it create more spall and cripple the entire tank in dev server then
god damn it gaijin
2 Likes
You continue to act as though these M1’s are in an unplayable state.
Meanwhile, the most knowledgable and skilled players this game has to offer continue to explain how the vehicles are fine, and that the issue lies squarely with the players.
''Idk, after bullying 11.3 US for a while I decided to check out how bad it really was. And honestly it is just like every other time people say the issue is the tank. It just is not the Abrams. It is just a player issue. […] But I really do not understand people who shit on any of the Abrams. ‘’
''Great Premium, No the shells are fine. It doesn’t need M833 because it will only go up in BR. ‘’
I’m sure there couldn’t possibly have been any issues with subsonics consistently forced to fight a F-104 they can’t touch.
This was a pretty infamous debacle at the time, any chance you weren’t active back then? It was hard to miss.
You did say: ‘‘Not a single Abrams performing near as well as the T-80BVM or T-90M’’
This M1A2 SEP is already performing virtually identically, and that’s me being generous by placing a lot of value on that 3% winrate difference which can easily be attributed by Click-Bait newbies dragging it down.
On this point we’re basically wasting eachother’s time, because we agree the SEP v2 could easily receive armour upgrades.
Anyways, I’ve already been spending too much time on this and quite frankly I’ve got more important stuff to spend time on these days, I’ll leave it here for now.
You do realize there are two 9.3 F104s and the Lightning is 9.3 as well, right? The T-2 is 9.7.
Well then only the Sep v2 then.
I also like how you’re leaving out the AIM and HC.
Regardless K/D is a stupid stat. It’s easy to pad K/D. If you don’t play to win and just hide in sniper spots you can drive K/D up. SOmething that is more likely for a player who is already losing all the time and just starts worrying about getting theirs.
3% for a win rate over thousands of games is not a meaningless difference.
I know I’m not going to convince you at this point. I’m just telling you that your argument is not coming from a place of fairness.
I don’t even play USA top tier. Why would I play fake facsimiles of what I used in real life? I play France and Italy mostly. And TTT vs. an Abrams is .2-.5 seconds quicker and I am more likely to cripple or kill an abrams from the front. The stats suggest that this is not a anecdotal experience.
I know for a fact that the Abrams reload rate is significantly longer than it would be in real life. I know for a fact Gaijin doesn’t model the armor accurately. I also know for a fact that the turret ring is not that easy to hit IRL.
I’m just asking for the most glaring issue to be addressed and that is the bilboard sized LFP that can be penned by everything from every range and will usually lead to significant damage if not an outright kill.
You are obviously somebody who thinks that it would be unfair. I think you are too heavily biased to be objective. However, I also know I don’t have Gaijin’s stats. There could be plenty of gameplay reasons they don’t change it. The issue is, and ever will be, that Gaijin argues it wouldn’t be realistic to give the Abrams DU hull armor. And that is categorically untrue. Most of what I am doing here is getting everyone else to understand what a stupid statement it is to say the Abrams getting DU hull armor is not possible. That is ignorance and hubris talking.
1 Like
The Abrams turret basket is missing the screens and the driver’s access door. They should provide additional protection for the crew catching spall, and like thin sheet metal in game, should produce zero spall.
1 Like
The bottom is actually to protect the driver from getting burned if you spring a hydraulic leak.
those screns are NOT spall liners. They are thin and week steel. Their only purpose is to keep you from getting snagged by things in the hull as the turret traverses.
As the Chieftain would say, shields to protect your limbs from being eaten by the turret monster.
1 Like
I never said they were spall liners. In the game, thin metal sheets can catch spall, so why shouldn’t this one?
1 Like
The 120mm gun cradle/rotor is incorrect, it’s the same as the 105mm gun cradle/rotor, which makes the area weaker than it should be. Every Abrams starting with the IPM1 is also missing some gun mantlet armor.
30mm with AHEAD equivalent go ball bearing ball bearing
you ar wastin your time talking to necrons, or the rest of the eastern block heads. show them videos of abrams loaders loading in 2.8 - 4.4 seconds and they ignore it
2 Likes
hey, necrons was pissed about the turret basket change as well.
what did gaijin do this time
weight is not stopping d.u from being added
They did a thing to the M1 and Leopards
1 Like
That “Russian TAnk” didn’t have ammo left.
Like seriously. Its like second time i have see people cry for the same thing… Not matter how many time you shoot the ammo rack if it don’t have ammo.
hey im all for better hull armor and all but weight is super problematic in the US so
Yes, it did. The fact that you just said that is laughable as i witnessed him firing his gun 10 seconds before i shot at him and h literally just fired his gun.
no weight is not a factor as there are already tanks heavier than the M1A1 SA was if it had D.U armor in the game.
I’m quite familiar with Necrons. Someday maybe it will sink in. But more importantly, it’s for everyone else who DOESN’T know. I feel like I provide a credible source for players here.
1 Like
Consider the Track-Width Mine Plow weighs 4.5 tons and has a center of gravity well out from the LFP.
Weight isn’t the problem.
1 Like