How is Russia’s Top tier tank armor penetration even fair for the Abrams? Like seriously example T-90M’s armor penetration stats is 550 / 550 / 550 mm, and the M1A2s is only 480 / 480 / 480, it should be like 630 / 630 / 630 mm bruh!
A lot of other countries have to deal with inadequate armor, Russians shouldn’t be immune to this just because they overly rely on ERA to make up for it
Well, not really, it depends. US air definetly is but for ground Leopards are better from what we know so far. There isn’t much info on Abrams protection to be sure.
So you keep going back and forth between the MBT being the problem and the players being the problem. Which is it? I don’t think you can objectively say the Abrams is the worse MBT in the game and yet US TT has the worst win rate.
I main a paper tank, the Leclerc, that can be frontally penned by auto cannon through the LFP… Literally got 1 shot by 1 30mm round in a game yesterday.
I’m an average player and I do fine in French TT.
90% of the US TT win rate problem is premium spammers and CAS mains leaving ground to fly immediately and abandoning obj. Really has very little to do with MBTs
(Is is very evident when you look at plenty of the other nations tanks compared to Abrams)
You and others(there are a lot of “OMG Abrams is nerfed” threads) seem to make the argument that the main reason US suffers is because nerfed Abrams. But other nations with worse MBT… oh well it must be they have skilled players.
Abrams is the worst MBT in game among major nations (Germany, Russia and USA)
And problems aren’t just white and black, there are multiple layers of things that make US winrates suffer. One of them is MBT being average or less than average compared to Leopards and T-series, Abrams dont get any armor upgrades from 11.0 onwards unlike the competiton that gets Spall Liners, ERAs and general armor upgrades. Which makes average players of other major nations take down Abrams very easily meanwhile US players have to wait and aim for weakspots.
EDIT: and up above I explicitly said “one of the problems” not THE problem
Can you see the gunner in a Leclerc? No, mon ami.
So how is it that these stats look the way they do?
If the Abrams is such a skill issue tank, why is it I’ve equal amounts of skill in it as well as the Japanese and French line, and yet my win rates and kill counts are completely different.
The Abrams is big (detriment in urban combat where enemies can pop its hydraulics and turret ring)
It’s loud (louder than the gas turbine should be in many cases)
It’s turret ring and turret height has been mismodeled for years and everyone knows
It lacks its best rounds, nor reinforcement of the armor to multiple hits and 20 years of new armor tech
Its thermals are often a generation behind the other nations
The French Leclerc is fast, 5 second autoloader, doesn’t need to stop a reload to turn out a fire (which realistically is true of EVERY modern main battle tank including the Abrams, since its the driver who controls putting out the fire, not the loader!!!), and has a decent enough round to overpen most any hull.
Does the Leclerc’s transmission need fixing? Yes.
But don’t confuse skill issue with obvious differences that have made the Abrams a strugglebus for years.
3 Likes
If you perform the same in 3 tanks that are pretty different, but lose much more in 1 nation, would that not indicate that it isn’t the tank that is the problem?
If in France and Japan tanks you had 2.0 KDA and in Abrams you had 1.0 it might indicate the tank being a problem… but I don’t see that from your stats?
1 Like
Uhmm… ermmm… Obviosly it’s the skill issue. It’s US players that dragged you down, unlike the obvious supreme minor nation players boost your KD.
EDIT: Thanks for your honesty btw, there’s way too many clowns here with alterior motives
2 Likes
I just laid out the obvious issues for you.
And why are they dragged down? As the other guy said, it’s been 9 months, how have they not learned the tank yet or grinded up to the top tier?
Edit: Thanks for being gracious.
I honestly don’t get the point you’re trying to make
So the Type 10 and the Leclerc are better than the Abrams but you perform equally well in all 3 tanks.
I guess you just play better in the Abrams, your skill level goes up, when playing a tank that has more inadequacies than other TT tanks???
Or could the answer be that all 3 tanks are roughly equal and it’s not the MBT causing the W/R drop it’s your team
Was it though?
I don’t think the dates line up for that to be true. Both the SEP v3 and T-14 were revealed in 2015 if memory serves me right.
I’m extremely skeptical because that entails the armour equivalency to have nearly doubled without any change in the LoS thickness of the array.
As far as I’m aware, the hull array also doesn’t have a particularly impressive LoS thickness, give or take 700mm.
600mm RHAe vs KE would mean a 0.85 ME value from a previous 0.5 ME value, which seems excessively high unless this new armour package is extremely dense.
To put this into perspective, the Leopard 2 series only achieved in excess of 600mm RHAe by improving base armour as well as implementing applique armour which increased the LoS thickness to somewhere around 900mm IIRC.
Mate… you’re looking at stock HEAT-FS penetration values…
Even a 11.0 M1A1 has better penetration than the 11.7 T-90M, alongside a massively superior reload rate.
Tell me you don’t play Russian top-tier MBT’s without telling me you don’t play top-tier Russian MBT’s.
The T-90M and T-80BVM already get consistently roflpenned on the first shot more often than not, it doesn’t make a huge difference because the majority of shots are to the side armour, and even if they aren’t, the front has enough weakspots that enemies generally take advantage of and one-hit-kill you.
Furthermore, I’ve had plenty of cases where even poorly aimed shots to the UFP go right through regardless.
The T-90M is garbage at pretty much everything else, if you take away what little relevant armour it has left, it goes straight down to BR 11.0 and the T-80BVM goes down to 11.3.
Leopard 2A7V > M1A2 SEP > T-80BVM > T-90M
Development of the armor was still on going during 2015 they actually changed the name of the armor to NGAP from something else a few years later which I have the doc but I’m not home. Remember sepv3 didn’t enter service until 2020 a lot of development and testing was still going on between those times. Also army leaders stated sepv3 was a response to the t14.
1 Like
🤡
1 Like
You can literally pen the Abrams from any direction with how large the gap is between the turret and hull. Sounds like you non US mains like your easy kills so you can flaunt your “win rates”. Lets face it, if you’re not playing US, you’re most likely playing against them. Exploiting a bug does not make you good.
3 Likes
They like to give the US 80s and 90s technology a little bit of early 2000s and say this is America’s best and greatest not one vehicle in the US tech tree was made past 2008 not one But we face other nations Newer technology you Literally have the IMP1 at 11.0 That’s late 70s early 80s technology facing mid to late 2000
1 Like
Yeah and this is why I take Necrons’ stuff with heavy grains of salt.
The T90M is one of the tankiest high tier tanks there are except for ‘leet’ twitch shooters aiming for LFP or driver’s hatch.
The reality is most players are not on that level of skill or even have the rig to run that. They do however have a rig that can see the turret ring on an Abrams with a snap.
1 Like
Also, the same armor package that’s on the Challenger chomb armor is the same armor On the Abrams meaning we have lining to protect from spalling
I don’t care, Russians get to have the Pantsir because that’s the doctrine they focused on while other nations have to deal with inadequate AA or flying fighters, it’s only fair the US also gets to have advantages specific to them
1 Like