Is US top tier too weak

100 percent agree.

Like i said , even though the minor nations tanks, france, china, britain, isreal and italy (not the 2a7hu)
Are all statistically worse than the abrams how did / do people get the winrate up even to 50 percent.

Its not the contrary it statistically proves that the US Win rates are effected by the players more than the vehicle due to the fact far worse vehicles and lineups are out performing the US.
The abrams is above the average in wt in my opinion, but lets say it is average, due to the amount of leo2a5s and 6s now in various trees.

The US overall lineup is far better than most other trees due to the versatility and cas options.
Why is the winrate so low?

All these debates are of minute differences in stats.
E.g the speed/ acceleration some one was doing on the mobility of leo and abrams comparison.

Say compare rhe abrams to the leclerc, type 10, ztzs, cr2s arietes etc.
It is the better tank overall by a margin.

Genuinely if it isnt the players why is the us win rate so low.

Just a little caveat.
This is not an argument against fixing the abrams.
As i will repeat, the abrams ans all mbts should get the relevant fixes as per bug reports etc, then a br shift to reflect that.

1 Like

Yeah agreed, look at the ztz, cr2, Leclerc hell even the type 10

Also because Russia’s tech tree lineup at that BR is pretty mediocre. All the good vehicles are premium/squadron/event.

Tbh just fix the issues of Abrams Spanish Avenger listed and be done with it, it’ll be pretty competitive then

1 Like

Itll be tied for the best tank in game then.

Then fix all the other bloody tanks as well and well all he happy

2 Likes

because by Gaijin logic so called strongest ground line up in entire WT history (according by some) need to babies sitting deadweight US Clickbait horde that don’t even know how to play Abrams and I’m kinda sick babysitting them while playing Sweden

Well, it typical for minor nation because the players are so few and most of them are experience players
Sweden luckiest of them all that they have both experience players and Beast like Strv122.

1 Like

I do better in the ztz 99 II and III than i do with other trees and they are statistically pretty poor compared to thr 12.0s they face.

Yet i sat with 2 m1a1 HCs firing st me unable to kill me while i killed them both…
How does that work they have the 2nd best top tier round and should be able to have shrecked me.

Us teams are something else, hell even when i take out the m1a2 its the same, they just fold like hot butter.

Strv 122s have slightly worse mobility, same lineup as Germany worse than USA, and matchmaker is identical.

It’s currently competitive, what you mean is it’ll be meta.

1 Like

As I said; U.S is generally played by average players, LOTS of them, who just want to have fun playing casually.

Meanwhile, Italy, France, etc, is mostly played by S-Tier players in significantly smaller numbers who flock to weaker niche nations to find a challenge for themselves.

And, as I also stated earlier, matchmaking, etc. Italy will always have a higher WR than U.S for as long as they are matched up with Sweden + Germany + Russia every time.

I don’t think the Abrams is terrible (although it would be much better if it were fixed), but I don’t think it’s great either. Not great, not terrible.

1 Like

Soviets having lost their S-tier players recently: “We miss our alleged win rates.”

1 Like

So do you think it should or shouldn’t get its various issues fixed? I support everyone else getting their stuff fixed too if you are wondering

1 Like

But where is the statistic to show thats who italy is matched with?
I genuinely want to know as i mentioned it earlier, as when i use italy at 9.7 im usually in random af lobbies

Edit as well as this, not everyone can be matched with sweden or germany as well so why are their winrates still higher than the US overall.

There cannot be that many sweat lords

I don’t know if there’s any available statistic, but, based on the several thousand matches I’ve got in Top Tier across 9 nations, I would dare say this to be the case, hahahah.

Matchmaker may be different in lower BRs though, I only know and am talking about Ranks VII and VIII.

1 Like

Yeah im at 5 or 6 at top tier now and must say italy i dont reallt see much

1 Like

yeah, well that exactly why they become the problem and deadweight, and you can find lot of them complain about how weak Abrams are in the forum
They can casually enjoy the losing all the match all they like i don’t care but they do drag other nation that team up with them down with them that is the big problem.
but for all it worth
Gaijin shouldn’t even sell high tier premium at the begin with.

1 Like

Sweden, Russia and Germany can have average players and they will stomp on everything anyway.

But U.S can’t have average players because its vehicles are significantly worse- and, somehow, that’s a player issue instead of a vehicle and balance one…?

1 Like

But they arent significantly worse. They are better than russian tanks, on par with tbe 2a5 and maybe 6 due to the reload differences. as well as this the full US lineup is something else.
Issue is no one seems to bother using it, seen a guy earlier with over 2000 games in bis sep v2 alone and left after one death.
He has the full lineup and had a 1.5 roughly KD yet chose to just leave, thst is not the tanks fault at all.

And not every minor nation is full of try hard sweatlords either so its unfair to assume they’re only the pro players.
As most pro players go where the “meta” is, which is why sweden has had very stable win rates at top tier.

I would like to see every nation get its fixes rather than new stuff crammed in every update then move on.

Like the chinese mbts as well have a plethora of issues too

1 Like

I don’t think so…

The way I see it, American and Russian MBTs are more or less equivalent in an asymmetrical way.

American tanks are worse in general but have higher potential, while Russian tanks are better in general but have lower potential.

-Abrams: high floor (bad), but high ceiling (good).

In short: harder to do well with for the average player, but easier to do extraordinarily well with for the better player.

-Russia: low floor (good), but low ceiling (bad).

In short: more easy to do well with for the average player, but harder to do extraordinarily well with for the better player.

Basically, Abrams can do great if you spend the entire match hidding behind a hill and only popping 0.17 pixels of your turret to shoot for 0.2 seconds. Dare to play a bit more aggressively and you are dead; on the other hand, Russian tanks can do great if you just kinda rush and brawl, but their weaknesses are more limiting for a more agile player who wants to do even better.


I would like to remind that all of this is not coming from a “U.S main”, an “American fanboy”, or whatever pejoratives may be used to undermine points in favour of the Abrams;

This is coming from someone who has played thousands of matches across the Top Tiers of 8 nations and who is currently grinding her 9th Top Tier nation… someone who has no biases towards nor against any nation and who simply wants the game to be as balanced as possible and for vehicles to be depicted as accurately and fairly as possible, specially since those more often than not come in together.

Yeah, and it’s a shame how Gaijin can’t be bothered to fix them even with the outstanding bug reports there are out there… specially the spall liner related ones.

4 Likes

Oh im a multi nation player as well i understand you are too.

Generally i agree the sentiment with tbe russian tanks and american.

Regardless of what people will claim i want to see the game historical and balanced.

Not one nation stomping in a rotation like we get currently.

I recenrtly looked into them and theres sooo many reports

1 Like

I think I can’t agree with this one.
M1s simply don’t have crippling cons that will greatly affect new players and how they go around a match.