The first rule of an anti-aircraft gunner is to never stand still and use cover. Once you accept this rule, all attacks over 10 km are negated. The homing head locks on to a target from 6-8 km before it flies to the target. All targets must be stationary or move minimally so they don’t fall out of the camera’s field of view.
said blowout panels dont work if
1- they have HEAT loaded inside, which most people do
2- theyre shot from anywhere that breaks the blowout door (ie, anything that isnt the side)
you can pretty clearly see, ammo remains unaffected in this shot, do the same thing to an abrams and, oh
isnt that cool
i moreso meant the side, as having any level of survivability from the side is a HUGE advantage
i also want you to realize that while most tanks haev the cannon breech actually protect the turret, the abrams has dead space, allowing shells to go straight through instead of being eaten by the breech itself
not to mention the void of zero armor between the mantlet and UFP, which can oneshot the tank with a gepard, by the way.
youre calculating all time kills across every tech tree and every nation and every vehicle type, im counting kd on the vehicles were talking about.
not to mention how refering to k/d as an excuse to say “im better so youre wrong im right” is kind of childish
Correct but again, do you really think GRB SPAA players do this? Of course not.
Especially if they don’t notice that it (or the plane) is coming
-
you should only take 2 heat rounds.
-
not at all how it is modelled, blow out panels only nuked the tank if the doors open aka reloading.
The ammo in the carousel does detonate.
You have to actually hit it.
No one should be firing at the LFP on your abrams.
Depending if you know how to aim, you specifically again are using the T90, but 2a7 spall liner is far more effective.
The T90, or any T series from 9.3 onwards all have the exact same weak point in which to shoot.
Spall liner will not matter.
I want you to realise I’ve nearly 4 thousand hours on the game and know exactly how jt works.
The breaches in abrams are the same as say CR2, or leopard 2.
They do also have empty space.
Turret ring weakness is about the biggest and most profound, which is slowly being rectified as well by volumetric.
Alright in which i still sit substantially higher.
I will refer to all time as it shows your general skills over all the vehicles, in which you claim are better than abrams.
Oh wait, you’ve used literally no other vehicle’s bar USA past rank 5.
Not childish at all to signify ones experience as well as understanding of the vehicles.
You’re making outlandish claims with absolutely no backing.
Every time having to change your argument as it goes.
You stated abrams is one of the worst top tier mbts.
It is in fact not, especially considering M1A2 sits nearly a full BR lower than tanks it is substantially better than.
1 Like
yet its still a one shot, interesting, isnt it?
when the autoloader its carried in doesnt spall shells thats rather tricky, you are literally trying to hit the ammo perfectly with the shell, not spall into the shell, you have to hit the ammo with the shell itself
it is, have you not seen the tusk force update log? or any videos on how the blowout panels arent accurate now? or how having the blowout door knocked out disables blowout panels function, which ive experienced and has been proven multiple times?
It does, spall liner greatly reduces shells effectiveness, add onto how weird autoloaders are with spall, and you effectively are nearly immune to ammo detonation
and were back to lying, i dont know why, but ok
as for the chally, i dont know why youre repeatedly referring to a tank the entire community agree, is bad
only on the abrams, and no, it isnt, gaijin has absolutely zero intent to fix the abrams turret ring and theyve made that clear with the bug report from over two years ago still not being added, despite being accepted
im providing you evidence as i have through this entire argument, while your rebuttles have been nothing but your own words, not one piece of solid evidence
again, prove it. Prove theres any reason to take an abrams over a T80, leo 2, etc etc. Its not in a good state, at all. The SEP V2 and M1A2 should both be 12.0 with the SEP V1 maybe being 12.3
13km for the D version*
1 Like
The lists ive provided.
The comparison of optics.
The photos showing how you were completely incorrect stating the 3bm46 can penetrate the M1A2.
the claim to spall liners in leopards.
The breaches which are clearly visible in game
Etc are all proven points buddy.
Evem the god damn blow out panel doors have been fixed for a long time, you being willfully ignorant of things within the game is not my issue.
Abrams provides a stable platform, with a good combination of reliable turret armour, smashing reload, great mobility as well as a fantastic round.
The very same round you also incorrectly claimed wasn’t that good…when it’s the best L/44 caliber in game round.
As @_Renzo will tell you, while Abrams has some issues, it’s in one of the best places it’s been since addition.
Between adding M829A2 and rhe reload, as well as all the small corrections over the last 2 years or more it has greatly improved how it plays.
US win rates are rofl stomped by the sheer volume of premium players.
That doesn’t make their vehicles bad.
Now I’ll continue this tomorrow when I am on my computer not over rhe mobile.
2 Likes
So I’m back on the PC.
No that isn’t how it worked, you’ve taken one specific cherry picked example of it not detonating the T90Ms’ ammo.
You also conviently forgot to take into account and show that if you fire even 3BM60 through the 90M’s LFP itll take out more of the tank than abrams.
see, ammo detonated. You can’t blow up ammo if you don’t hit it.
This as well shows you being dishonest with the shot caclulators. (BTW this is with 3BM60) one of the worst rounds for top tier.
as well as all that the T90 M ammo can be detonated by firing through the breach.
It has a higher chance as well there’s literally nothing between the right hand side of the breach and the ammo.
You state the Abrams has nothing behind it to soak the shot
The leopard 2a5, a6, A7 etc all have only one line of protection which is this.
To defend the breach, same as abrams, after that the shot goes through, hits turret rings, fire control systems, crew etc.
The abrams is the same thing! it has a more effective composite brick as well due to how it is modelled as multi layer.
So again, you keep talking about dead space in the Abrams.
which is false you’ve got all the modules the exact same as the Abrams.
so again, you are in fact
- wrong
- lying about tanks you nothing about.
So yeah, this “argument” will bare no fruit.
M1A2 at 12.0 is ridiculous considering that the CR2, Ariete, Leclerc, Type 10s, VT4A1, and Merkavas all sit at 12.7 xD
2 Likes
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