welp, my favourite BR range. Since most 10.0s moved to 10.3, the 9.0 lineups are fun as heck.
2 Likes
no love whatsoever for anything below 10.X? the early cold war is in dire need of decompression, its so bad that 1998 tanks are in the same BR as 1940 ones
WW2 era is worse, where you get modern IFVs from sweden fighting Pz.4s and T-34s
man the T69 G II sits at a different level man, it’s bloody fun at 9.0.
hell even 9.3 for me is going down more than up
1 Like
Look behind the breech, theres nothing there, its the composite but then theres dead space, the actual physical cannon breech can eat spall on other tanks
shoot the LFP on a T90 it has a CHANCE of dying
Shoot literally anywhere on the abrams hull and it WILL die, i dont see how the abrams is better off
Its not, autoloaders literally dont spall for some reason, while the abrams basket, meant to be an equivalent, does spall, and is much more crippling to the tank
Your counterpoint refers to a slightly slower abrams, a 5 second reloded DM53 carrier, an extremely fast 5s autoloaded mbt, the fastest reload in top tier with a deadly shell, and possible the omly tank that can survive the fnf heli hell of top tier
Which I just showed you is the exact same on the leopard mate.
The actual physical cannon breach on abrams eats spall as well. wtf are you even talking about mate.
It’s almost always a certified kill.
Your obsession with T series tanks is a bit mistifying when Abrams are widely considered better by most the active playerbase. Bar the T80BVM which most now consider to be about equal in terms of capabilities.
That isn’t true at all mate.
They “literally” do spall, as I’ve said numerous times it is RNG based.
Same as all modules
No it’s not meant to be an equivelant, and if you wait just a patch or two more almost every MBT in game will have the turret basket, then the T series will get yet another nerf, you can also disable said auto loader firing clean through the front of the turret.
You cannot be serious right now?
Challanger 2
-
worse mobility.
-
worse round by a huge margin arguably the worst top tier round numerically.
-
worse reload as it is only 5 seconds aced, for four rounds not the entire 30 odd ready rack abrams has.
-
mobility, CR2 even the 2E are extremely lacking in mobility, 2E has too much weight and becomes extremely cumbersome to use.
-
Armour CR2 armour is arguably worse due to the huge gaps in it.
-
profile CR2 is substantially taller as well allowing easier breach shots.
-
survivability. CR2 once penetrated will detonate due to the ammo layout.
-
Merkava.
-
worse mobility.
-
worse armour entirely
-
worse round.
-
same reload.
-
substantially larger than abrams as well as being largest MBT in game rn.
strong text0.7 BR higher.
Ariete
- worst armour at top tier.
- arguably worst survivability.
- worse mobility than abrams.
- no hull composites.
- worse round than abrams
VT4A1
- gaping holes in its armour which have been there from the get go.
- worse round by a very large margin.
- substantially worse reload.
- worse optics.
- worse mobility
- half functional APS, 2nd best in game to BN but it isn’t great
- worse gun handling.
0.7 BR higher
advantage all have is gen 2 thermals. that is it.
Leclerc
- worse armour
- substantially worse round.
- worse survivability
- bigger breach weak point which rank 2 can penetrate and destroy the tank.
type 10
- worse armour.
- worse round
- worse survivability as all 3 crew tanks have.
- worse gun laying speed by a huge margin.
- arguably worse optics as it’s 4x - 13.3x rather than the 3x - 12x
0.7 BR higher than the M1A2
as I stated all have better thermals.
However the abrams is still overall more applicable in every situation than all of the aformentioned tanks.
You are running out of arguments to make mate, you’ve now resorted to saying stuff like this “and possible the omly tank that can survive the fnf heli hell of top tier” refering to VT4A1 to make it out as if it’s worth being nearly a whole BR above the M1A2.
-
this “a 5 second reloded DM53 carrier” to refer to what is widely considered the worst top tier MBT in game in the Ariete, which BTW DM53 is worse than M829A2 as @AlvisWisla will tell you.
The L/44 DM53, and L/44 M829A2 have different pen, and DM53 falls shorter. -
CR2 is just slower abrams? it’s not at all as @Morvran can direct you to the page he has dedicated to what is wrong with it.
Finally sorry for pinging folks but this has gone on far too long.
M1A2 should not sit below so many vehicles it is either A on par with or B better than.
it should sit with the 2a5 at the very least.
4 Likes
Is someone really claiming the Abrams is slow?
1 Like
I wish armor mattered more at the top end, but until mobility differences between tanks IRL get featured in War Thunder, I feel armor won’t matter until that point.
T-80U and Type 90 being notably faster in-game than IRL, while Leclerc is either correct speed in-game or slower, and Type 10 is correct speed in-game or slower is causing issues for the meta.
Ariete should be more mobile than T-90M but their mobility, despite the T-90Ms trash reverse speed, is closer than it should be.
Ariete’s mobility should be unique to the fact it’s not as armored, but it isn’t because mobility is normalized among MBTs.
Centurion is the most egregious example of over-performing mobility in War Thunder according to Swedish trials data.
1 Like
Hes claiming for CR2, and I quote “Your counterpoint refers to a slightly slower abrams,” on talking about CR2.
I listed the CR2, Ariete, Leclerc, type 10s, VT4A1 and merkavas as all worse than the M1A2, and his rebuttle has to be bait.
Ariete is a 5 second reloaded DM53 carrier, was his retort to my saying it was worse than abrams.
Like ariete is beyond bad for a top tier, why it sits 12.7 while M1A2 sits at 12.0 is ridiculous.
this is how far it’s descended
Im fairly certain you could stick an F-22 with Aim-260s and Aim-9X Blk3s at 11.0 and american mains would still find a way to complain it wasnt competitive
2 Likes
I think they try keep mobilities roughly around the same area to keep some form of balance, like CR2 off road due to its suspension is surprisingly fast compared to some other western MBTs as they lose a lot of speed on the worse terrain.
I know very little of the Ariete, I do know the T90M still essentially mobility wise is just a T72, if not worse due to actually being heavier.
Maybe make the mobile tanks mobile, and the armoured ones armoured and we could have some A-symetrical warfare.
Also thanks for the rapid response btw!
1 Like
I am at the point again I think im going to abandon the forums man, I feel like im wasting so much time here explaining stuff to folks who will just flat out refuse it as they don’t agree xD.
Dude claimed 3BM46 can go through the turret cheek of an m1A2 not the A1, I think this whole mess is cause he hasn’t used the A2 variant so is framing his experience with teh M1A1 to be the same.
Also thanks for the rapid response man.
I don’t like pinging folks but this guys spouting some madness xD
3 Likes
Those are some interesting delusions.
1 Like
VT-4 didn’t receive spall liner nor the reload buff, how is the Abrams 12.0 and VT-4 12.3?
3 Likes
I mean, dudes catagorically wrong on more than one thing, just read the lists of stuff I’ve had to make.
Cause Abrams are mega handheld? the M1A1 being 11.3 is quite funny as well, it sits a full BR lower than the likes of the VT4
1 Like
Thankfully, I think that is being corrected this major
Youve tet to prve that theres is anything good about the abrams hull armor, a BT-5 can frontally KILL and abrams, not just pen, KILL IT. The oplot had this issue for what. A week? And everyone was furious about it, abrams has been like this for years now.
No, if the autoloader doesnt spall the tank is fine, even if you knock out the autoloader is still has a round
The breech doesnt cover the entire mantlet, opposed to other tanks where it does
Thats what theyve been saying since they added turret baskets, not to mention the devs have alos said the T series wont get turret baskets since the autoloaders are considered equivalents to them, which they arent in any wya similar, as t series can still return fire, while disabling a turret basket is basically a free kil
Thats… the same?
Abrams Turret ring exists, turret roof exists, the entire hull, both of them have cheek armor snd thats about it
I wonder what the abrams has…
All that matters at top tier anymore is who has an fnf heli, being able to be the only fee tanks that can survive in the hell that is mi28 spam is pretty good imo
Im not, im saying the challenger is just a slower abrams, the only abrams that are slow are the HC and the SEP V2
How os that relevant? A modern 21st century jet against mid cold war gen 3 aircraft isnt the same as comparing a poorly represented tank to modern ones with their proper equipment, to use your example its like if that said F-22 got AIM-9Bs, AIM7Cs, and the engines from a sabre and then people were complaining it be moved to 14.3
It quite literally can, go run an armor protection analysis, and the right cheek can be pretty easily penned, both can be if not angled properly
The only thing I know of that kinda does this, is if you penetrate the ammo rack’s bulkhead and the ammo explodes. Which is super rare from a turret ring / breech shot. Like 1 in 100,000
1 Like
you cannot tell the difference between the M1A2 and M1A1.
- I have stated, and shown you in the photos above that the 3BM46 can’t pen the damn M1A2.
- screenshot 1 is the 3BM46 VS the M1A2
- screenshot 2 is the 3BM60 VS the M1A2
shock horror, neither round can penetrate that nor can they pen the HC, which is due to the upgrade in armour. the HC has the same turret armour as the M1A2 more or less.
- 3bm46 VS M1A1 which it can penetrate.
so again, you are wrong in stating the 3BM46 can penetrate the damn M1A2 turret frontally.
- you’ve no idea what you’re talking about.
Just gonna leave this here.
- 3BM60 VS the Abrams frontally M1A2 Sep. same hull armour as the M1A2. There is the entire UFP that can bounce or stop 3BM60.
You should not be exposing the LFP. In which case, even when / if it is penetrated there is an entire RNG based system around the turret ring, as well as other modules on how much they soak / spall
Got a source for that other thant trust me bro?
- leclerc can also be penned and killed by rank 1s.
- CR2 the same LFP can be penetrated by the short 75mms.
- ariete the same.
It quite certainly isn’t fine.
Your arguments seem based around your experience of not being able to take out specifically russian vehicles?
if you aim for the turret ring, drivers view port, LFP if visible then you will almost always one tap it.
Again unless RNG dictates that spall isn’t generated, but the abrams turret, leopard turret as well as other modules like FCS also do this.
So again what is your point?
You’ve moved the goalpost yet again here mate
It has the exact same as any other MBT , the mantlet if you penetrate it will hit the breach, that isn’t even a debate worth having man, you’re constantly changing what you are saying to try make it seem the abrams breach weakpoint is somehow magically worse than anyone else.
- T90M the breach is narrower on both sides leaving room for “empty space” as you say.
-CR2 doesn’t even get composites on the breach as well as the same “empty space” issue that you brought up.
I’m not even gonna keep rattling through tanks like this as it is a genuine waste of a saturday evening.
You are now clutching at so many straws that you want to claim the abrams breach is somehow worse than the rest , even when it has Composites and B the breach fills the gap.
Unless someone can fire clean past it, same as the T90, T80, Ariete, leclerc, Challanger, etc etc which means its the same as every other top tier the breach is purposefully left that way for a weak point.
I mean they were about to roll them out for china and russia and realised it would be a huge nerf for them-
Which has already been rectified and they were confirmed not very long ago to be getting them.
You have an obsession with the T series as if they are somehow good. No one complained about modules being added when the auto loaders were added specifically to russian tanks.
as @Razielkaine accurately has said many times.
T series can lose their ability to reload even if the very top of the turret is shot, you can break their auto loader.
They are fairly balanced that way.
- Again you actively ignored the rest of that line.
The CR2 only has a 5 second reload aced, for four shells then it’s up to over 6 seconds Aced that means if you aren’t running an aced crew, your reload sits back at over 7 seconds. The CR2 should have 20 ish rounds in the ready rack.
CR2 also has a turret ring weak point under the breach which nukes the crew.
Can also be penetrated anywhere bar the two small sections of turret cheeks. Which are still modelled wrongly.
It’s armour doesn’t have massive holes in the middle of it at all. The abrams armour isn’t too far off being accurate, all that’s really missing is the volumetric turret ring, which wont make much of a difference, and some DU in the LFP composites, which again has already been proven that in game wont make much of a difference.
CR2 is one of the most well armoured MBT’s in the world, (BTW the abrams uses a variation of dorchester armour from the british) yet in game it has less than half of what it has IRL, which was proven by some maniac leaking the documents about it.
Not at all, have you even been playing top tier ?
The Mi28 spam? the same spam of helis which is seeing countless Z10ME’s , and apaches also slinging extremely long rang FnF missiles?
once again moving the goalposts to try make abrams seem worse than it is. The VT4A1 is substantially worse overall compared to abrams in every field bar having Gen 2 thermals and an APS:
that is it.
The Abrams isn’t that far off being correct at all mate.
You act as if it’s some super wonder weapon tank, the damn design is from the 1970s mate.
2 Likes
Incorrect as hell. I load 4 heat rounds always, I took a hit last night in the ammo rack. It cooked off just fine, I lived and went to a cap to replenish
Unlike in areite, leclerc, merkava, CR2, VT4 etc etc that all pretty much pop once penned? xD
The dude thinks 3BM46 can penetrate teh M1A2 turret, which I’ve already showed., now twice 3BM60, and 3BM46 VS the M1A2 turret. neither can penetrate its turret cheeks.
1 Like