To all you guys who think the Abrams is super nerfed
Why do you think a fairly similar MBT, the Leclerc, has such better player stats?
1 Like
Lerlerc has actual mobility advantage, 5 sec reload is autoloaded, so no Ace crew or loader down debuff. And France has Ito 90M as SPAA is 2nd best SPAA in game that somewhat protects from Russian CAS spam.
But more importantly, it’s a minor nation not only played by a lot of veteran players but also get’s more favourable matchmaker being in bigger Russian and German player filled teams with best tanks and SPAAs, meanwhile US teams fill 90% of the team with average players, average tanks and below average SPAAs. It’s no surprise that they get stomped, no veteran plays USA top tier because even if you’re good, the Abrams can’t carry your average teammates like Leopards and T series can, there for they all die of and you’re left alone to fight against entire enemy team alone.
1 Like
I’m fairly certain they already come with backups.
Furthermore, it doesn’t do anything to solve the problem of Click-Bait and AIM players not knowing what they’re doing.
I’ve long said the SEP v3 should’ve been implemented instead of the SEP v2, but I’m still realistic about the fact that the hull armour is very likely still going to be penetrable to top-tier APFSDS, dispite the upgrades.
There’s also no spall liners present on the M1 series of tanks. At the very least Gaijin has nerfed their effectiveness a bit, which lessens the gap between tanks that have them and those that don’t.
SEPv3 with trophy to fuck with vikhrs and other AGMs would be funny. I agree though, it’s armour package won’t change how it plays; penned through the LFP by every modern 120MM+ round.
Premiums does come with them but they run out quick and allows only 2 spawns. My suggestion is 3 free spawns for premiums and 2 for Squadron vehicles.
Well, they will learn. One death leaving is just gonna further delay that process meanwhile leaving your team vulnurable. There’s no one fix solution, these changes could help at least.
What are you basing that on? I’ll sources I’ve seen proclaim 600 or more protection against kinetic rounds which can stop direct Russian 3BM60, Chinese, Sweden shells and Japan’s, Israel shells when angled and only Germany, Britain, Italy etc BM53 users can pen reliably. It’s still not bad.
There’s some sources that mention Abrams using kevlar lining to reduce spall.
How much protection do you think the hull has? All sources I have seen say around 600 KE. Only the DM53 and few others can reliably pen that.
Honestly, it doesn’t matter. Nobody has that information. I could pull a number out of my ass, but it would be just that; a guess. I haven’t seen a single reliable source stating the amount of KE protection of the hull. I’d ask for those sources tbh, because I’m genuinely curious as to where they got that information.
These are the all I have seen so far, not sure which one is reliably which is not, just sharing what I have found.
None of these are primary sources, and only one of them cite their sources. These are just bullshit claims that they got from ‘somewhere’ and said ‘sounds right’ before posting. None of these are credible.
Hell, one of these is literally Steel Beasts. Let me put this one in perspective, would you take War Thunder as a credible source?
I’m looking at the ogorkiewicz source soon. Give it a couple seconds for amazon to finish delivering it.
Edit: found the first source https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA567418.pdf. Just a thesis. Non-credible tbh.
1 Like
I didn’t claim any of them to be reliable primary sources, what is up with this aggressiveness? What I said is all sources I have seen proclaim the same ~600mm hull armor
There is no aggressiveness? I’m just evaluating the sources. The probable reason you’ve seen all sources proclaim the same 600mm KE is that they’re all citing each other, and there’s one false claim made years ago that started all this. Now I’m just digging to see what it is. Relax.
And what source is that?
That’s what I’m digging for.
How do you know it’s all coming from one source if you don’t know the source?
Because that’s usually how these things work. If these people won’t cite their sources, it usually means the source is bunk. The thesis is the ONLY one to cite its source, and that source is from a Jane’s book. Now, Jane’s is usually pretty hesitant to publish hard RHA equivalent numbers on armour, so it piqued my curiousity. Maybe it turns out to be credible. That would be neat.
Edit: Just realized I’m really dumb. Unless the hull front of the abrams has some kind of wundercomposite in it, there’s no way it can reach 600mm of RHA vs KE. Even assuming favourable scenario where the entire block is Aluminum Oxide, it’s mass efficiency is about 1.3 (According to that Ogorkiewicz source). Should it be higher vs APFSDS than the 400mm equivalent it currently is? Maybe. But not 600mm KE.
no, it has that because it is the equivalent of a reserve tank for Israel
I know, that’s what I suggested. If you don’t have any other similar BR’ed tank in your lineup, you should be able to spawn your premium/squadron vehicle multiple times to prevent one death leaving. I pointed M51 to show that it’s a feature already in game, just need to implement it.
Oh man… the weight.
M1A2 SEP v3 weighs 66.8 metric tons.
ARAT II & belly plate = 4.5t
Mine plow = 3.4t
Mine roller = 9.8t
Trophy APS = 2.3t
Obviously it doesn’t have to mount all of this at once, but we’re still likely to see an M1 that creeps up to, or exceeds 70 metric tons.
If they would learn, they’d have done it by now. It’s 9 months on.
Because as far as I’m aware, the LoS thickness of the array was not increased.
There are no primary sources available on M1A2 SEP v3 armour values, any of the ones out there are fabricated.
The only information available is that both the turret and hull were upgraded, no further details are given.
And those sources aren’t valid, or at the very least they’re less valid than the primary source documents which state the production M1’s do not feature spall liners.
I guess another way for me to make the point would be to say if Gaijin released a new Abrams that had DU armor, “fixed” turret ring, a new round, etc. what do people think would happen to US win rate…
My bet is it would still be abysmal. So blaming the poor win rate on the MBT isn’t exactly honest. It’s just a smoke screen to the real issues
1 Like
Majority of issues US top tier faces is because of low level premium players. No matter how much we fix the Abrams, if 1/2 or 3/4 of your team is inexperienced and has clickbait or the aim, you will still lose.
Have an option to only queue players that have reached end of line vehicles last vehicle) together. This won’t solve all the issues. There’s still gonna be one death leavers, no line up and etc. But what this will allow is for players with decent experience to play together.
Now onto your points:
The turret ring needs to be fixed, it’s such a glaring weak spot for auto cannons. I believe the Tusk’s CE protection is accurate but the KE protection is up for interpretation.
The M829a3 won’t affect top tier because it’s penetration is the same but it allows it to bypass kontact 5 era. This will pretty much make any 11.3 Russian tanks useless which is unfair.
the Sepv3 defenity should’ve been added instead of the V2 (should’ve been a mod to the v1). When Germany,Sweeden,Russia got actual improved tanks, the US just got a copy paste
The ADATS is pretty good at close ranges 3-6 km but any further is kinda difficult to use effectively. What makes it worse is that you can’t shoot projectiles down. Even against ground, it sucks because almost everyone has good CE protection. I agree with it being 11.3 just because it’ll counter 11.3 CAS.
But again, let me emphasize, that this is putting a bandage on a stab wound. It won’t help US’s general WR
1 Like