So be it then; those weapons can destroy any tank and no one claimed the Abrams to be an exception.
So what exactly made SEPv3 be 4 tons heavier than SEPv2, if not armor?
And none of which is in service with any MBT.
no one claimed the Abrams to be an exception.
Other than general dynamics which you directly quoted via your document about the SEPV3.
So what exactly made SEPv3 be 4 tons heavier than SEPv2, if not armor?
Addition and upgrades of internal systems. The new APU alone was 420 lbs. It’s not like this information isn’t readily available. A handful of new packages from countering IEDs, new APS and ERA mountings.
3 Likes
Context- the statement is OBVIOUSLY referencing the improved frontal composite modules.
Not the turret roof
Not the side plates
Not the back
And not the engine bay:
THE FRONTAL COMPOSITE MODULES.
Which ones?
190 kg. Good, only 3,810 kg to go. And not even that; SEPv2 already had an APU. This one replaces the old one; so the weight is not fully added; you gotta substract the old APU’s first- and the new one is probably lighter.
Nothing SEPv2 didn’t have already.
1 Like
Anyway, I give up for now, I am embarrased by the amount of time of my life I’ve just wasted, I’m going to bed, goodnight xD
1 Like
5 Likes
Lmaooo
I’ll drop one too, before going to bed for real xD
12 Likes
I don’t understand how any problem with any other MBT, people will happily discuss and be civil about it.
God forbid you try that with the Abrams and suddenly every troll in existence/ USA Racists/ or what ever will suddenly come out of the woodwork like roaches and brigade any all US/Abrams threads.
4 Likes
Yep. As the MBT fetishist that I am (and NOT any nation’s “main” or “hater”), I have made and participated in threads about every MBT: Merkava, Leclerc, Ariete, ZTZ/VT, Leopard 2, Challenger 2/3, Type 90/10, etc… and it’s always been civil and welcome.
However, as soon as the Abrams is even remotely mentioned- this happens, each and every single time. It’s so tiring.
Anyway, now for real, hahah- goodnighty! o7
4 Likes
True, tbh I wish the forums were more civil as a whole though. Clearly instead we should discuss the least controversial MBT, the T-14-
/s
To be fair, the Pro abrams players aren’t exactly blame free. They act like they are 1000% in the right, and anyone who disagrees wants the tank to be bad. (See: how people have reacted to Necrons, someone who is knowledgable on the Abrams) Basically, they have a victim complex.
It also doesn’t help that USA mains go into any thread about Russian equipment and say “no its fine, Russian bias blah blah,” which can be annoying when you want to genuinely discuss stuff.
5 Likes
oh 100%.
4 Likes
In perspective, you’re right. I might take some side notes on both points you did:
There’s a lot of people that genuinely does not want the US to be somewhere near the meta, with no real technical approach at all, and that’s hardly deniable up to this point in the forums history. Out of all people doing criticism, 70% of them pull out regular fallacies that got portrait throughout this entire thread, that is not a healthy way to talk about balance.
At this point, the spiral of mistrust is just unfixable, and it’s not only a thing of US players going against Russians, it’s Germans going against Swedish, Italians against everyone, Brits against the US, i can keep naming eroded relations all day long.
It may be a valid argument as long as the meta shifts from nation to nation every once in a while, but the GRB meta specially has just stagnated around having a decent CAS and vehicle’s depth.
5 Likes
The issue is not on the MBT, but CAS and LT, considering the cost of F16C and the AGM65 long-range performance( if they have like KH38MT such kind of weapon), If gaijin added AGM114L and improve the HSTV’s performance, it would very helpful
2 Likes
That’s completely dependent on what you want. Accurate long range target detection and high pen dart? Germany.
Want more forgiving and better armor to brawl with? Sweden.
Source: “trust me bro, I’m an expert.”
Everyone with any sense is asking for one dang fix, the turret ring. Quit strawmanning him to argue with him.
1 Like
looks like the forum is in an endless circle of US mains going to RU threads and RU mains to US threads do the same kind of trololololoo posts, i havent been here long enough to say who started the fire…
5 Likes
I’ve lost about 20 iq points just from reading this thread. The bad faith arguments, the lying, the strawmanning, the gaslighting, the “if ABraMs sO BAd whY OThEr tAnK WoRSe!!!”
1 Like
20 iq points is a small price to pay for some entertainment and popcorn eating.
Sorry for the late reply, i was paying for my sins
While i agree if you that looking at the WR of a individual tank and comparing with other tanks at same BR and nation should mean nothing, i think that in the US situation is a little different, is not like i have 30% WR only on Click-Bait or HC, its on Click-Bait, HC, M1A2, M1A2 SEP, M1A2 SEP and ADATS, its a whole line-up/BR group and i dont think this is normal, both are different problems. What i understood what you are saing is if i had 30% WR on M1A2 but 50-60% on the other tanks, already mentioned, and, bc of that, im asking for buffs on M1A2, and its not.
Another example is Italy that go up 10% overall in WR, since 19/06, just bc one new tank.
Maybe WR is not the best metric bc it dont give us the whole scenario, but i strong believe is a good thermometer.
On the low level premium noob problem i totally agree with you that it shouldnt be a problem on first place, but we know that it will not change and its futile to try to change, gaijin will continue do sell top-tier premiums and we need to acknowledge that kind of noobs in top tier exits (but if it change one day it will be inanely good for the health of the game in general, not only US top tier).
Also, not every noob is the level 1 click-bait player, there is also a bunch of noobs with experience in the game which i agree with you that if you are lvl 100 and dont know how to play… But they exists and its part of the game too.
About buffs and nerfs is where i cant agree with you, that is a mean to balance the game (balance is part of any game and that gaijin already use in warthunder multiple times) and i dont get why we should dispose buffs/nerfs just bc noobs exists (?), even worse if we are talking about to change to be the same as its irl part, thats why i say fix and not buff, even tho 90% of the time fix mean buff (there are fixed that are nerfs), a real buff would be if i ask for 600mm on turret ring, which would the double as its irl part (and for the ring fix even gaijin already acknowledged it Community Bug Reporting System).
Also, the 10.3 M1 already have a different model than others M1s and its ring is somewhat already fixed (if im not mistaken, its is 100mm instead of only 50mm), tested: https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/1e5wr2f/why_did_the_first_m1_have_better_turret_ring_than/
Maybe WR is not the best metric bc it dont give us the whole scenario, but i strong believe is a good thermometer.
The winrate of the Type 60 ATM is 60%. What does that tell you? Does it mean the tank is good and should receive some sort of nerf, maybe an increase in BR? Ultimately it tells us nothing because the vehicle in question is arguably one of the worst in the entire game yet it maintains an excellent winrate. A thermometer cannot measure air pressure. Winrate cannot accurately measure the health of a vehicle. The problem lies within the fact that we cannot see the inner workings of the game’s statistics so we’re forced to rely on Gaijin’s hodgepodge “efficiency”.
These same efficiencies would have you believe the Tiger 1 needed to be 5.3 or the T-44 needs to be 6.7 now. It’s not so much that the vehicles are bad or good, the players are just straight up poor.
Also, not every noob is the level 1 click-bait player
Yeah absolutely, but when I hear noob I think someone who doesn’t have any weakspots, map positions or even vehicle names memorized. A noob (newbie) is someone who doesn’t have hours under their belt.
About buffs and nerfs is where i cant agree with you
Nothing wrong with that, it’s a public forum where discussion should be held with levelheadedness and the ability to agree and disagree. But I find myself seeing more so that the problem with certain vehicles lies within the player’s inability to utilize them properly more so than the vehicle performing poorly. However, we’ve already firmly acknowledged the fact that the game suffers from mechanics issues such as physics, transmissions, improper values across the board etc.
At the end of the day this isn’t a simulator and accurate real world values is something that we cannot use due to the classification nature of such values. It is after all, just a video game.