Meanwhile 2A7V…
(Akers Website)
Totally independent Swedish armor, much stronger than German one 25 years newer.
31 Likes
Since you are not going to fix the armor can you at least make the TUSK II a modification. It is an optional kit in real life not a part of the SEPv2. It is pointless weight and add height.
24 Likes
So it is Gaijin’s official stance that the Abrams series MBTs received zero armor improvements since its introduction. And the added weight given to them was for, what reason?
To say this was a lackluster explanation is an understatement. And given the backlash, what is the point of these forums and bug reports? Clearly players aren’t happy with this. And that’s evident in more places than just here. Why do we even have community managers? What is the point of this forum? Clearly player wishes and concerns be damned I guess.
The traditional Gaijin response makes another appearance. “We have heard your comments and concerns and have decided to do nothing”.
56 Likes
That’s the problem, can’t provide exact values.
Why those are necessary I have absolutely no idea since we definitely CAN make up armor values on stuff like the Chinese tanks or the Chally.
9 Likes
German and Swedish leopards
“Additionally, a significant weight increase from such an armor package would lead to overloading the first pair of torsion bars, which already are under an increased load on the M1 series due to the placement of the frontal armor being positioned significantly far towards the front of the hull, as well as the large armored fuel tanks either side of the driver.”
Source?
36 Likes
I mean, it is rather clear a lot of the outcry regarding the state of the Abrams in-game has been over the neglect of American ground and the constant releases of sidegrade models of the Abrams over anything with actual improvement. I don’t understand why Gaijin went with the base SEPV2 over anything that offered some improvement over the M1A2 SEP. I believe we wouldn’t be having this outcry if Gaijin went with either the M1A2SEPV3, made a Frankenstein SEP with the test DU hulls or just gave the SEPV2 trophy. Considering the existence of the M1 KVT I don’t really see the reason to not just go with a theoretical Frankenstein abrams that’s on par with the T-90M or T-80BVM.
4 Likes
“Reload it’s balance value” - Trikzzter
4 Likes
This is an easy fix;
They calculated M1A1 AIM’s armor based on M1A2’s, right?
The issue is: since A2 is based off the export one, AIM is actually even weaker than the export one.
The fix is easy; give AIM the current A2 values, which are the export ones, THEN increase A2’s by the same factor they degraded AIM’s ones compared to the former A2’s.
10 Likes
I think you guys need to hurry 😅
Pretty sure it’s identical
What about other things like Upper Front Plate? There’s photos that shows that under main plate, there is another one 1 inch (25.4mm) thick plate, for a combined 2.5 inches (63.5mm).
3 Likes
What about the estimated value given by BRL test and protection value on M1A1HA?
5 Likes
Aight bet, source showing the exact armor of the t90m please, Since we Need EXACT numbers on classified tanks now.
Next leak is on yourself, you’re literally baiting it
42 Likes
Nope, it’s 20mmish worse.
So the fix would be:
M1A1 AIM: get current M1A2 values
M1A2: increase by 20mm
Basically, both are underperforming by 20mm each, since A2 has export values and AIM has worse-than-export values.
By increasing both each by 20mm, AIM would get current A2 values (export) and A2 would get its proper values.
4 Likes
Unfortunately, those leopards are not even up to the level of a regular t-72b3 in armor in my opinion! t-72b3,t-90a, t-80u,t-90m,t-80BVM! all with incredible armour!
Remember guys Gaijin knows better than the US government regarding their tank upgrades.
37 Likes
I guess this is the biggest advertisement push and case they could’ve ever made to just not play top tier. They won’t balance it so why play it? Why buy any post-WW2 packs? No need to get excited for future updates that aren’t Cold War or earlier. I guess this is a sort of blessing in disguise.
4 Likes
Several of the sources state it is more than “muh 5 hulls”, which is just a complete nonsense source that has no real basis besides stating that 5 DU Abrams hulls existed at that specific point in time.
And even if only 5 hulls ever had DU inserts (again, wrong), they gave the T-80B Agava-2 despite only a select few tanks getting it. The T-80U gets Agava despite only some being T-80UM standard. Surely, by this standard you’ll be removing such capabilities from these tanks as there is no evidence that production models received such capabilities? Or maybe you’ll finally release the sources you’re using for modeling Russian/Soviet tanks? Considering no one can find the specifications for things like the 2S38, the T-90M, or the T-80BVM; all of which are clearly overperforming their real life capabilities.
25 Likes
what is the point of bug reports then if you believe only in “your” sources?
You are just trying to excuse it and do nothing about it by making this post…
22 Likes