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
Dam, even M1A1HA protection value source wasn’t enough to backup M1 Abram Owner workshop manual.
We are so in shambles, no reason to grind Abrams at all now.
22 Likes
What this guy said,
“Where’s the sources for this information?”
6 Likes
Ok so if you guys ever decided to add SEPv3 which clearly states for devs it has HULL ARMOR UPGRADES, since we literally have no information whatsoever on the protection values would you end up leaving it with 1979 hull armor protection?
42 Likes
No reason to grind for any top tier MBT that isn’t in Germany Sweden (mixture of Russia and Germany) and Russian tech tree. They are all horribly underperforming with the way they are implemented. Poor merkavas can be frontally penetrated basically anywhere.
7 Likes
They won’t because it only mentions “hull armor upgrades” but doesn’t make mention of DU armor for the hull upgrades. I guarantee that’ll be their reasoning.
2 Likes
there is no way the driver in the M1A2SEPv2 would be sitting behind armor that was the height of the 1970s.
26 Likes
Most likely, Gaijin wouldn’t have the protection value on SEPv3 and decide to use M1A2 armor value LMAO.
Hell SEPv3 wouldn’t even be added until T-14 comes because Russia lul
8 Likes
Yeah, I’m done with top tier at this point and had actually just reached the M1A1. But Gaijin just made the case that finishing the grind is worthless. I was already on the fence with how badly the F-15A was added but I’ll just stick to WW2 now and go play like Squad or Arma if I want Abrams/modern MBT combat.
6 Likes
Funny enough in game the m1a2s armor values are not even based off the American DU package. It’s based off the crappy Swedish export package that is known to be worse in protection.
42 Likes
Nah uh
Ok, where does the M1A2, M1A2 SEP and M1A2 SEPv2 weight comes from without ERA???
20 Likes
Who stole the era?
27 Likes
Devs did
4 Likes