You talking nonsense now, DU armor in the hull is present in the SEPV3 and gaijin believes that there was no improvements to the armor from the 80’s??? and expect us to believe that a tank from WW2 can kill a 2009 tank and that’s okay to you?
There is, sure some of the following impact other nations due to sharing equipment;
but it’s things like the gulf in performance between the XM975 and Pantsir /ITO / Flak Rad etc. as the top tier SAM since the ADATS is apparently a Missile TD, not a SPAA and so has its SP cost increased and pooled with other vehicles, which impacts the metagame and flow / flexibility of said lineup, the ability to second spawn / or have SP reserves to even after first spawning them is significantly reduced for auxiliary performance gains(improved AT performance doesn’t help against aircraft does it).
-
A lack of Laser guided PGMs below 12.0 (outside a $70USD premium) even though there are a number of existing recipients (e.g. F-4C/D & -E, F-16A etc.)
-
The TOW-2B is Missing its second EFP / tandem warhead penetration increase.
-
The Stinger’s Seeker & Maneuverability, is undermodeled / erroneously passed over for mechanics.
-
The MIM-72G is mysteriously AWOL from the US Chaparral
-
There is also things like the erroneous changes to M735 that are yet to either be clarified or reverted, the comparatively poor performance of the arbitrary selection of APFSDS shells the US vehicles have access to doesn’t help either, especially when matched up against opponents with stronger armor.
-
M1KVT has a 105mm instead of a 120mm like it should.
-
XM-1 missing composite arrays.
-
Pyrophoric properties of DU alloy penetrators aren’t modeled (impacts various APCR / APFSDS rounds).
-
Lack of R-60M(K) / R-73 counterpart(AIM-9P-4 / AIM-95) where possible (F-4, F-111A, F-5E, A-7, F-14, -15 , -16, A-6, F-8 etc.).
-
Missing AN/ASX-1 TISEO & erroneous modeling of AN/AXX-1 TCS that does less than nothing, in fact is a significant impediment to the proper functioning of the FCS on occasion.
-
The Multitude of issue with the modeling of the AIM-54s (Seeker, Drag, Motor, Maximum G loading etc.)
-
Teen Series radars underperforming pretty much across the board and / or missing features, due to being based off soviet estimates in place of actual primary sources.
-
General ordinance variants like the M117R, GBU-9/B, assorted HE / AP warheads for rockets & gunpods (GPU-2/A & -5/A), APAM APKWS-II and multitude of others.
-
Passing over relevant airframes like the B-57G Tropic Moon III, F-4D, OV-10D, F-16C-25 / -30, AH-1J / -1T, F4D / F7U, F-86D / -86H, F-89J, F-101B , F-102 /-106 etc. that would build half steps and assist with providing options for lineups at each BR bracket.
-
Erroneous modeling changes to the AGM-65’s Seeker, as a Correlation type instead of a Contrast seeker even though it was properly implemented in the first place, but changed soon after things went live.
-
Various test configuration HMS’s for the Teen series & A-7E
I could go on I’m sure but those are what I can recall off the top of my head.
8 Likes
If it is the players then by saying so you could upset a lot people and risk being kicked off the forum for xenophobic comments.
Have you seen Israel in the game at all? The Merkavs are disgusting, as is the whole of Israel’s TT in general.
Is anyone 11.7 there?
T-90a slow, with terrible aim, but there’s armor. He’s at 10.7.He’s no match for 11.7 tanks
T-80U(K) are strong representatives of 11.3. They are not equal to 11.7 tanks either. They have such a poor heat, the shell is already little suitable for 11.7, and aiming is just disgusting.
When you wrote object292, were you kidding me?
Yes. Because from the outside you don’t know the problems of engineering. Type90(10) have worse aiming than their BR neighbors, they have ABSOLUTELY NO armor (you can kill them head-on with a Bt-5 from 500m), they have unadjusted transmission which makes them drive worse than they could. They have no gun declination angles.
show me where SEPV3 is? Maybe I’m blind and I can’t see.
1 Like
Buddy created a thread about US and started talking about other nations, this forum is just sad.
Maybe name it How bad are every nation??
No need most of them got good enough shells to deal with TOP TIER MBTs.
Because thats how it is in real life? all Russian tanks are slow af?
3BM60 disagrees.
People still use them and get kills with them?
A good shell to penetrate the Abrams turret cheeks and 2A7 hull? maybe bad reload but that’s realistic.
I know all of this, but the Type 90s are good when it comes to mobility and reload, plastic armor but yeah still enough.
Yeah no shit, the SEPV2 was a really bad addition, no removable TUSK, GEN2 thermals, no TROPHY, and still a super bad armor, fat and big.
While the SEPV3 has new kind of armor, spall liners, TROPHY, and DU in the cheeks and hull.
2 Likes
I think in the game (at least with the current DM) it’s inconsequential.
AIM95 has been abandoned. It hasn’t entered service, so no one should have it.
AIM9L is the perfect answer to the R-60M. It is better than this missile in all respects. Except for one thing, the fuse activation time, but that’s not that important
Those airplanes that wore 9L have them.
9M has been in the game for a long time and has many carriers
I agree that the M735 clearly has some implementation errors. For some reason it doesn’t do any damage at all, although it should. Its penetration doesn’t cause any problems, but the damage…
Phoenixes are already an ultimatum weapon that works even better in the game than in reality. The only problem is the radar, but that’s to the F-14 questions
- They don’t need it.
- It’ll cost them an increase in BR.
How will this affect the game?
In addition to shells, you also need mobility. pointing, survivability, armor.
Maybe that’s why he’s on 10.7?
And Soviet tanks aren’t as slow as you think. They move better in rough terrain than western tanks because of their lighter weight, wider tracks and less ground pressure
Only one tank out of all the tanks listed has this shell. By the way, Abrams has a shell 11.0 better than the best shell of the USSR
People make kills at the top on both the M22 and the Bt-5.
Okay. I guess there’s no point in arguing with you. After all, this chariot of the gods has no smoke, no thermal imaging, no armor, not even K1.
Only on reloading. That’s it. I’ve already written to you that they drive badly because of the implementation of the transmission
I very much doubt it, as far as I know Abrams front rollers have been barely getting the job done for a long time now and weighting the hull is not an option
2 Likes
Lmao you you think the turret ring in reality is the exact same as in the game? My guy you are clueless if that’s what you’re really saying.
it was at least type classified, and we probably have sufficient data to implement it.
Its not present on a number of airframes that could receive it; the -9P-4 serves a a lower performance alternate since its still limited to the 18G overload of the -9J so could serve as a counterpart for appropriate airframes without a BR increase, since its not too dissimilar to the change from the R-60 to the R-60M.
No they don’t, otherwise the F-4E / F-4J, F-14A, F-5E, F-111A and A-7E would have the AIM-9L / -9M.
The AIM-95 would be similar in terms of close in performance since the -9M marginally improves on the dogfight performance of the -9L, or have it’s improved seeker either.
The F-14A & -15A probably could if they were to move up .3 respectively since they will have their own issues in full uptiers considering their current armament.
Effectively, most variants(AGM-65F & -G excepted, and even then Correlation type tracks can only be used against ships and large facilities) should only be able to lock onto point targets (e.g. Vehicles / bunker etc.), not areas on zero contrast, this would also be coupled with a reduction of performance for the -65A & -B to 2~6km, and otherwise to ~75% of the current limits since they used improved target discrimination methods or so to bring them into line with known performance.
2 Likes
Now that shell is at 10.0, sure on a slow chasis, yet still there.
Insane how people think its Abrams underperforming but not the teams.
3 Likes
Sorry, but after saying that, I decided to check your stats.
Now I can see why you have 9M “marginally” increases capabilities. For the record, the 9M is better than the R-73 in more situations. It’s more stable. And in the A.S.B., it destroys all living things.
I don’t understand you
I like to know why all 3 big nations have 11.3 premiums, all 3 have more or less the same number the battles and still the gap in WR is so bad.
I have ~1.6 KD on 11.3 Abrams (AIM, HC, Click Bait) and manage to get some nukes, still, it feels way more hard and punishing to play then GER (I only play US and GER, so ill stick with those 2), Its like play on hard or easy mode.
The problem of abrams is the turret ring, not exactly the turret ring it self, but how easy is to disable it. Any shot, anywhere, basically destroy the ring or the hydraulic pump (in which disables the ring) and you lost any chance to fire back or punish who didnt one shot you. It is like a stun mechanic which occur way to much on abrams. I just J out when i get shot and cant do anything anymore, 30 sec to repair the ring (or pump) the enemy can make a coffee and back that ill still repairing (and when i fix it 5 sec later another shot disables AGAIN the ring).
I dont think there is any other tank (11.3+) that can be disable this easy in this manner.
1 Like
Have you considered that I might not play ARB? check my Arcade stats for a more complete picture. Also I’m working on getting various vehicles to a point where a lineup can be properly built at various BRs.
Also I don’t see how my stats are not relevant to if things are accurately modeled or not.
Its literally slightly heavier and so has worse acceleration, thus a slightly tighter radius of turn.
If the target doesn’t see the missile launch it makes no difference if a -9L or -9M was launched regardless of where they are since at least for now the seekers remain erroneously similar.
The -9M’s IRCCM has issues of its own since you can with effort learn to reliably defeat it consistently at basically any range assuming you have sufficient time to employ the defeat maneuvers yes it may take a number of flares to do so, but at this point is less of an issue considering the quantities that most airframes have access to at this point.
The R-73 is a Dogfighting specialist and is much more capable of striking across the circle which limits the options available since you need to keep jamming the WEZ to stay safe, and if more range is required there is always the R-27(E)T (AIM-7R or -Q not implemented for various reasons), on top of that if employed appropriately it becomes near impossible to flare due to the FoR reduction and Engine / flare ejection geometry, so the lack of range for the most part is not an issue, and the comparatively improved short range kinematics proves decisive in the R-73s favor.
1 Like
second screenshot is Arcade mode
The whole debate about the Abrams suspension was already debunked as it was proven to have been upgraded many times over the years so it can handle the weight. also, we already have hard confirmation regarding sepv3 hull and turret upgrades.
8 Likes
Hasn’t yet loaded for me.
Abrams is better than France’s, Italy’s, and Britain’s etc MBTs, but far worse than Sweden, Germany, Russia, or Japan.
5 Likes
blame gaijin for it not the players.
Its impossible to reach top tier without premium tank, and even the 70 dollar premiums gives you shit low RP…
1 Like
Do you really want to lose a good 9.3 spaa to get 3rd spaa in 10.3 line-up where it’s not really needed?
1 Like
There is no need to achieve toptier tanks in the first few weeks of the game. This does not help anyone. You learn nothing. Can’t contribute anything to the battle. Time in rank 3 and 4 are very important. But that’s where most people rush through. Then they realise that they achieve even less at rank 5 and firmly believe that they can dominate everything as soon as they have the top tier tank. But they can’t.
Even a paid tank won’t change that. It’s the lack of skills that prevents people from being successful there or gaining the necessary points for the top tier tanks.
Everything always has to happen quickly. Hardly anyone seems to play just for the sake of playing.
1 Like
The Type 90 and 10 are just a more meta version of what Gaijin wants the Abrams to be: a fast tank with no armor that fires fast (of which the no armor part is unrealistic, at the very least).
- Penetration - It needs it when it goes up against 2A7V/122B+/T-80BVM/T-90M
- Reloading - Big whoop, the reload change does little to make it more viable
- Speed - Not as fast as the Chinese or Japanese top tiers, yet the Abrams is also very poorly armored
- Strong Turret - People just need to aim center mass to kill the Abrams, the weakspots are much larger than the strongspots (if that’s a term lol)
- Gun Angles - Bruh, like Gaijin isn’t making every top tier map CQC or flat
- HE with radio fuse - This literally does not matter whatsoever, the lack of top tier SPAA or light tank with tracking is an actual issue
Two strong tanks. Israel, the US, Italy, and China (maybe) don’t have two strong 11.7 tanks.
Also the fuel tanks, spall liner, side turret armor, and increased hull armor protection (without DU).
There were at minimum 5 Abrams made with them, which is more than the Yak-141 and T-80B thermals, and the restriction to only 5 hulls was removed half a year later.
Crew and modules burning is already implemented into the game, it is most definitely consequential.
Lol what, things that have been tested and were functional are allowed to be in game.
The R-73 is a dogfighting missile, whereas the AIM-9M is a medium range missile that cannot turn.
It was erroneously nerfed, and I’m pretty sure Gaijin has acknowledged this, but they haven’t fixed it yet.
Uh, where’s its Mach 5 top speed and 25G overload?
And Abrams at 11.0 have to face tanks that have more armor than the tanks the USSR has to go against at the BR.
The thermals and smoke, big whoop. The armor is very good for 10.3. It’s supposed to be a glass cannon, yet it is 0.7+ BR lower than it needs to be in order to be a glass cannon.
Just this:
4 Likes