I’m going to have to ask: How old are you? And this is a genuine question, I’m not being demeaning or intending to offend, because I’m getting a strong feeling you might be very young.
You seem to take offense to anything that doesn’t align with your point of view.
You don’t seem to want to understand the arguments you’re presented with.
You constantly repeat arguments that have already been addressed.
You constantly move the goalpost when presented with evidence that contradicts your position.
‘‘Tell me how US MBT’s are any good!’’
‘‘Sure, here’s how they’re better than the majority of other MBT’s…’’
‘‘Who cares?! Go away and make other posts about those other MBT’s then! But don’t bring them up here!’’
You specifically asked me to elaborate on this topic. Don’t tell me to go take a hike when I actually answer your question.
Furthermore, you saying you can’t play the M1 aggressively implies that other MBT’s can do so without issue. Countless MBT’s are far less capable offensive machines than the M1 is, and you’d realize that if you actually bothered playing anything aside from the M1.
If we’re going to discuss vulnerability to autocannon fire, I’d once again like to bring up a handy chart:
And lastly, the Abrams is a personal interest of mine, don’t tell me what I can and cannot say. We both have equal rights to express our opinions here.
Wow aren’t you the egotist. Now you want to ask about my age and make shots at my psyche. Um no buddy, that’s not how the internet works.
I must have hit a nerve.
You still didn’t answer the question, instead you deflected AGAIN (which is what you always do) and specifically spoke more of the Abrams. That was NOT the question. I said what does that leave. I’ve already acknowledged that the armor of the Abrams is broken. You choose to ignore that fact and go on to say that it’s better than a, b and c.
I never said it was the worst MBT, far from it.
You had a bad experience, why don’t you make a post about it and explain what should be changed? Wouldn’t that be beneficial to the challenger?
Completely ignores the point I already made and deflected again.
As it stands with the exploit, I am not wrong. Do you choose to ignore the fact that the Abrams is bugged or are you just incompetent?
Explain to us how US ground IS good without mentioning CAS and the currently broken Abrams. What does that leave? ADATS? LOL… HSTVL has the wrong ammo/pen, Bradleys are just terrible because of how bad AGMs are in game, M1128 is a VERY niche map unit, and the LAVAD’s missiles range sucks
Convince me that what? The Abrams isn’t broken? The Challenger is worse off than the Abrams? I’m trying to get the Abrams fixed, that’s on you guys to get the challenger fixed.
the Abrams is probably above average in how good they are, they are defiantly better then the challengers, Merkavas, Arietes, ztz99s and Leclercs
M829A2 is better round then all of those tanks have.
the turret ring is an issue and needs fixed but compared to those other tanks you have pretty effective armour
if you really wanna compare tanks, and since your complaining about the tusk package
challenger 2TES
slower
worse armour layout
worse round
far heavier
the same reload
worse thermals
a far smaller ready rack
and similar if not worse preforming addon armour
That’s the thing, I don’t want to compare tanks at all. I just want the lower mantlet fixed. I don’t understand why everyone and their mother is bringing up other tanks in this post. I’m sure other tanks have their problems. The title says US ground top tier, not ground top tier.
Making the lower mantlet a non-pen area would fix that
You asked what was good about US top tier, I responded that the Abrams is a good tank.
Then you moved the goalpost saying that the Abrams was broken. A tank being broken doesn’t mean it can’t be good. Whether or not you can use it well is a different story.
No matter what we say, you’ll just move the goalpost.
I did not move the goal post, you guys took it upon yourselves to change the context of the question. The question already addresses the current state of the Abrams. This question was to address the other vehicles in the US lineup
Yes, because like I said 10x now, something being broken does not prevent it from being good.
You asked for reasons why US top tier is good. If you wanted your second sentence to hold any weight you should have asked for any things that aren’t broken in the top tier US lineup.
You can say the abrams is good 100000 times. It’s still not what I asked. I’m sorry you are having difficulty understanding the nature of the question.
