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.
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.
the t90A sit on 11.0 with laser warning system and 3bm60. russian bias
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.
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.
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.
You say that as if mobility isn’t the #1 most important aspect to tanks in War Thunder’s meta.
Light tanks generally aren’t (much) more mobile than an MBT, that’s why they don’t reach the highest BR’s.
Give what the correct BR?
Are you implying the M10 Booker should be 12.7 because it’s a 2024/'25 vehicle?
The Abrams wins in the areas where it does not, by a large margin, while the armor and penetration of the T-90A are far superior to the M1.
Yes, it’s very important, especially if your tank is going 35km/h and the enemy is going 60km/h. With a difference of 12km/h, it’s clear that the Abrams will reach points on the map sooner, but the T-90 would still have time to reach the closest points.
12.7 no, but upgrading some of the highest and best armed IFVs to Br 11.0 might be possible, especially if they correct the damage models.
In what universe is a difference between a 7.0 reload and a 5.3 reload not a ‘‘large margin’’?
3.5°/sec vertical traverse against 24°/sec vertical traverse?
-4 km/h reverse against a -38 km/h reverse?
-4° of depression against -10°?
24°/sec traverse against 40°/sec traverse for the turret?
16 seconds to reach 55 km/h vs 10 seconds to reach 55 km/h?
I’m sorry, but you give me the awfully strong impression you’ve never played these tanks and you have no idea what their performance is like.
Plenty of vehicles (including MBT’s) are not performing correctly based on available source material.
A corrected Leopard 2A7V/HU would utterly dominate everything and I can’t think of a single light tank that would come remotely close to it’s level of performance.
i see enough Put the Leo2a4 with 140mm cannon
No, I haven’t actually played with those two tanks, but from what you’ve said, it’s a situation similar to using a Panther D against an M18 Hellcat, an M4A3E8 or a T-34 85.
I’m referring specifically to when you penetrate and your bullet does very little or no damage, or ricochets meaninglessly. That’s what needs to be corrected.
Panther D and hellcat actually are quite a good comparison. T90 behaves like a heavy tank frontally, though its turret traverse is not as abysmal as the panther D but as a comparison it works. While the abrams/hellcat is constantly moving, trying to find an angle to its sides or flanks, the t90a will have a lot of trouble as soon as hes got to cover multiple angles and cant show his front anymore (though you can still easily onetap it from the front, those shots just take way more precise aim than vice versa) due to long reload and quite bad turret traverse/gun elevation speed
It is a good comparison and highly map and game mode dependent.
The agility of the abrams family requires broken sightlines and map design that allows for flanking. Put it on a map that is close quarters and it suddenly those advantages of being slightly faster and able to swing the turret disappear.
Need to contest a point in on a knifefight in a phonebooth map? Well that’s not for you buddy, enjoy that repair time to think about your mistake.
Fair, but it’s not like the Leopard 1, which can be autocannoned to death in 0.5 seconds.
they also have 105mm guns with a lower velocity and lighter round (105mm DM33 is 0.5 kg lighter and 185m/s slower than 120mm DM33, which doesn’t sound like much, but that’s 44% difference in K/E if my math is right).
It’s nice not to die to APDS from auto cannons but the ones at the 2A4s BR usually have enough pen and dmg they can knock out the gun or other key systems.
MBTs are honestly a bigger worry.