Good combination of mobility (excluding the SEPv2), firepower, gun handling and gun depression.
The Merkava has similar firepower but with worse gun handling, gun depression and even worse armor.
The Ariete has similar firepower but with worse gun handling, armor and survivability (I already rate the Abrams survivability low, so this says enough about the Ariete.
CR2/3 have worse firepower, worse mobility, worse gun handling and arguably worse armor even.
These are just some of the bottom of the ranking list MBTs.
Could def use a buff too but this isn’t the place for it
Italy was never known for having good tanks. There’s a reason why Italy is trying to buy Leopards
CR2/3 is much better at hull down than the Abrams. Just looking on protection analysis, there is way less turret/hull gaps than the Abrams. Yes the breach is huge on the CR but if you’re in a situation where you’re hull down, you could always turn your turret between reloads to make the breach a smaller target
Fine, they’ve got the strongest MBT’s aside from the obvious flavour of the month Leo 2A7/Strv 122 clubbers.
M1A2’s got the shared second best firepower of any MBT in the game after the Type 10.
They’ve got competitive mobility at 11.7.
Shared best gun handling (together with the Leo 2’s) of any MBT in the game.
Above average armour protection.
Best survivability of any MBT that does not feature spall liners.
These types of out-of-touch comments are generally why people make fun of US mains.
I’ve been killed by Bradley 25mm APFSDS through my Challenger’s turret roof before, and here you are claiming it’s the better hull-down tank…
I can’t take anything you say seriously when you’re trapped in your US bubble and believe grass is always greener on the other side.
Seriously, broaden your horizons a bit and start playing other nations, you’ll suddenly find that the other nations have countless problems of their own to deal with.
This is where you have no idea what you’re talking about. You can’t even play an Abrams aggressively because any shot 360 degrees around the lower mantlet by lower caliber tanks such as the vilkas, bmp, wiesel, puma etc will BREAK the turret ring. It’s been said numerous times and you completely ignore it EVERY SINGLE TIME. It’s a joke. You come here to talk down on the Abrams because why? Your beloved challenger isn’t perfect? Make your own post.
I was going to say something, but Necrons already replied with a screenshot that would have proven me wrong.
Honestly comparing the Abrams (1) to the Challenger 2 is identical to comparing the 2A7 to the Abrams (2). The underdog (CR2/Abrams 2) has like 1 strength compared to the other tank (Abrams 1/2A7).
The T-72B3 wasn’t even a thing at the time Battle of 73 Easting took place. Iraq was armed with T-72M and T-72M1 or their domestic equivalents in the form of the Lion of Babylon MBT.
You actually can play the Abrams aggresively decently fine, just not to the same extend as you can with the 2A7s/122s, which everyone agrees are by far the strongest tanks at top tier right now.
The Abrams is a tank that below average/bad players will do bad in, but above average/good players can do really well in it because it offers the right tools/characteristics.
You really can’t. The lower Mantlet is just that badly exploited. You try going completely hull down and you’ll get overpressured by a T-series using 3OF26. You leave too much of the turret out? Great, you’ll get penetrated through the upper turret armor, it’ll pass through the length of the turret and into the ammo storage. The only way I do well with the Abrams is to try and camp. You move 5 feet and half the fucking map hears where you are which is another glaring problem since the audio is 10x of what a real Abrams puts out.
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.
