Shooting at enemies while having your back exposed is niche unless you’re an IS-2 or a TOG.
M1s losing only their loader is a rare sight, they’ll either lose two or more crew at a time. Guess what happens to T-tanks when they lose 2 crew ? Their reload speed goes to infinity because they’re back in the hangar.
They also explode, which can’t be said for external ones found in M1s.
Abrams has 40kph reverse for mobility category. That’s worth like 6 points out of 10 alone in favor of Abrams.
BVM has an huge roof weakspot section, making hulldown horribad.
Survivability cannot be the case outside of RNG autoloader rack shell absorb 1/40 battles. Abrams has indestructible ammo, 4 crew and better internal spacing.
HE is nothing compared to Abrams Proxy HEATFS and their new HE.
ATGM is completely useless. Turret MG is both better and worse.
Than again, you wouldn’t know this, considering you have never played top tier.
Amazing how very often on leddit and the forums players constantly talking about things they have never experienced. Wonder why that is.
While I agree with him on the fact that the BVM is better for a majority of the maps and current gamestate. The abrams certianly has its advantages as well.
Turret ring bug and lower mantlet modeling. It’s well known and spoken of until US mains are blue in the face. You can hit anywhere on the UFP remotely close to the turret and shells will ricochet through the lower mantlet into the turret ring.
How desperate a man can be to bring up a SINGLE tank and judge the entire nation. While forgetting that even before the introduction of such thing Italy already had that winrate.