I’m struggling to understand the balance logic where multiple 9.3 MBTs such as the Leopard 1A5 or OF-40 (MTCA) are equipped with DM33 (~420 mm penetration), while the Leopard 2A4 at 10.7 is restricted to DM23 with noticeably lower penetration. At this BR, the Leopard 2A4 frequently faces vehicles with stronger composite armor and access to significantly higher-penetration ammunition, particularly among Soviet/Russian and Chinese MBTs. This issue becomes even more apparent during regular uptiers to 11.7, where the Leopard 2A4 is placed in one of its weakest positions, expected to fight top-tier vehicles with only ~400 mm of penetration, making the ammunition choice feel inconsistent and underpowered for its matchmaking environment.
5 Likes
Leopard 1A5, M60TTS, etc, have no armour - so they get a good round. How hard is this to understand?
ive long been a supporter of adding the tranche 8 of the Leopard 2A4 with the better armour and the DM33 at 11.0.
its time germany started getting a legit 11.0 lineup
12 Likes
The 2a4 armour doesn’t really standup too well at its BR.
7 Likes
Meanwhile M1 at the same BR with M774:
2 Likes
I will never understand why people keep asking for better ammo, as if it wouldnt come with a BR increase. Tanks with “bad” rounds for their BR are usually better than tanks with “good” rounds anyway.
@Sp0w0ky-w-天使 should be glad that the Leopard 2A4 doesnt have the DM33.
3 Likes
The M1 is the better of the 2 however.
1 Like
I just checked, and it’s curious. Based on production dates, the M1 Abrams should be using the M833 as its best ammunition. Another curious thing is that it ceased production in the same year (1985) that the T-72B began production.
Actually, if you look at it, practically all NATO tanks from the 80s and 90s don’t use the ammunition of their era: the Leopard 1A5 with the DM63, the M60A1 RISE and 3TTS with the M833 and M900, the AMX-30B2 Brenus with the OFL105G2, the STRV103C with the SLPPrJ M/90S, etc.
The TT gap is like 10.7 to 12.7 for lineups. Really dumb.
2 Likes
Same for the 2010s and 2020s. M1A2 SEP and SEPv2 should be using M829A3, which, even according to Gaijin, wouldn’t change much gameplay wise… but at least it would be historically accurate.
That’s fine though; Leopard 1A5s have been in service well into the 2000s, and even nowadays, in which cases it has used DM63.
Same goes for A1 RISE P and A3TTS with M833 and M900; A1 rise fought in Iraq in 1991 with M833 and A3TTs remains in service even today with M900.
I don’t think M1 having its historical M833 shell choice would harm anyone, though. It’s not all that much better than M774, it’s just more historical. Same situation as SEP/v2 and M829A3 over A2.
A 20mm difference in penetration, a whole world difference in accuracy.
Because that’s what’s balanced.
Point being?
It’s all about pros and cons that keep things balanced.
You wouldn’t expect those Russian/Soviet MBTs to have equal acceleration, reverse speed, turret traverse, gun depression, neutral steering, etc. to the Leopard 2A4 either, right?
Virtually everything struggles more in full up-tiers, I’m not certain what your point is here.
M774*
M833 entered service 3 years after the M1 did.
2 Likes
You’re absolutely right. It’s also important to remember that the M833 entered service while the M1 was already in service, so even though the M1 initially used the M774, it eventually came to use the M833.
The M1 with the M774 would be the natural enemy of the T-72A (1982), T-80B, and T-64B. The M1 with the M833 would be the natural enemy of the T-72B, T-80BV, and T-64BV.
P.S. The T-64B in the game is actually the 1985 T-64BV.
1 Like
the t90A sit on 11.0 with laser warning system and 3bm60. russian bias
1 Like
M1 Abrams(1979)+M774(1980)=Br 10.7
T-90A(2004)+3BM60(2016)=Br 11.0
Ugh, I think I’m going to throw up.
Wait until this guy finds out about the recently added M10 Booker.
4 Likes
I know of its existence, and I think it should be at the BR it belongs to (like almost all tanks). Another thing is that, although I don’t own it, just by looking at it, its armor, mobility, and gun, it seems like it will be a mediocre vehicle, only destined to be easy targets for other light tanks with automatic cannons; I imagine that’s why it’s BR 10.7.
By the way, the 2S25M is Br 10.0, and the BMD-4M 9.7, and let’s not even talk about the BMPTs,besides, there are tanks from all countries in the same situation.
Meanwhile, M1 Abrams crying in a corner (still stuck with throwing suggestions for penetration)
Oh so now vehicle performance suddenly matters…
When it was the Abrams vs T-90A you were only looking at DOI (Date of Introduction), but when it doesn’t suit the narrative as with the M10 Booker, suddenly performance characteristics are relevant again.
The T-90A is a mid tank which has a long list of downsides that make it a 11.0-worthy tank, the sooner you throw DOI out of the window when it comes to perceived vehicle balance, the better, because DOI is in no way an indication of how effective the vehicle is in War Thunder.
8 Likes
Dm33 from the 105 mm gun and Dm23 from the 120 are something entirely different. Weight of the dart also plays a huge role and thats also why the 120 mm dm23 has basically the same angled pen values as the 105 mm dm33. If its the numbers, which admittedly are a bit confusing, then check what the tam2c is shooting.
Could it get a better round? Maybe, idk, we all know gaijin balans does what gaijin balans does so the T90a and Sprut fire 3bm62 the russian top tier round at 10.0/11.0 but those have other massive downsides.
It’s strange, it seems that for an IFV or light vehicle to reach BR 12.7 it has to be equipped with a laser cannon. I really think IFVs can’t reach higher due to the very small maps, aside from their terrible penetration and damage models.
That’s curious, I seem to recall that the first thing I said was that they should give it the correct BR. The fact that it’s a low-performing tank in the game has nothing to do with it. If the M10 doesn’t perform very well at BR 12.7, then it will have to be played more carefully and strategically.Also, keep in mind what I said: to make these vehicles playable, larger and better-designed maps are needed.
I don’t know, but comparing those two tanks, the only advantage of the Abrams is its speed and gun depression; in everything else, the T-90A I don’t know, but comparing those two tanks, the only advantage of the Abrams is its speed and gun depression; in everything else, the T-90A is much better.