Its certainly not meaningfully different, both are glass cannons.
Armor is uptier/downtier dependant bro, while uptier or downtier doesn’t make much difference for the booker it certainly does for the M1, the turret cheeks of M1 can take things the booker couldn’t.
1 Like
Ok? The Turret ring is right there. And can’t even defend from 23 / 25mm AP, let alone 30mm APDS(FS) which are common to Autocannons at the BR .
Turret bascet?
That only happen in cqc, what other mbts cannot be disabled quickly by autocannons given the same situation? Your barrel turns into banana peel in split seconds, disabled is disabled, what difference does it make?
It’s hardly uncommon or difficult to achieve, and its still fairly vulnerable out to a fair distance, especially against APFSDS.
What other is killed by them frontally by shots to the center of mass?
One gives you a chance to repair; the other forces you to either respawn or go back to the hanger in short order.
It could be argued that the M10 doesn’t belong at 10.7.
It is in no way that much worse than the VT-5 to justify a full BR difference. The M10 could be 11.0 and still be more than fine.
1 Like
I have not played it but I think Booker is fine at 10.7. It trades mobility and armor for a good round.
Good addition to the 10.7 lineup, albeit “lineup balancing” is usually bad.
VT5 should be 10.7, 11.0 at most.
1 Like
You mean like the M1 IP?
I’d like it to be 11.0. It’s not bad at 11.3- it would just be more fun at a lower BR and I am being selfish.
That said, the speed and reload are really nice. The gun is pretty powerful and the armor isn’t great but it can work. It’s really nice to be able to slap one guy, and then the next, within 5 seconds, with a very good round.
Which should be 11.7.
I disagree. The M1 IP is fine at 11.3, and only seems insane because nowadays only diehard pros use it thanks to it being foldered near the top of the tech tree.
11.7 is simply too high for a vehicle with a 105mm gun, 10.3-10.7 armor, and crappy Gen 1 Thermals (Not that I rely on thermals anymore- but they are certainly not as good as the Gen2+ common at 11.7 and up). It has good speed and a good reload, yes, but it’s contemporaries all sit at 11.0 or 11.3 (T-72B3A arena, T-72B3A).
The T-80U, which is objectively better (better top speed, better P2W ratio, better round, better armor, smaller profile) sits at 11.7. So currently where it sits is fine, and any higher is too high unless you move the T-80U and other like vehicles up in BR.
just like every other russian tank, i dont get why its suddenly so hard for everyone
It has an upgraded turret over M1. Its contemporaries aren’t the 11.0-11.3 Russian vehicles, it rinses them in gun handling, reload, mobility, gun angles, reverse, etc.
T-80U is a more balanced opponent for it as it can actually move, unlike the T-72/90s, yet the IPM1 is still better due to my mentioned reasons. Armor isn’t everything.
Which is still dominated by a 105mm gun and a buggy turret ring.
The Russian vehicles have a better round, an autoloader, smaller profile, better armor, better thermals. Those add up.
And again. Objectively better in every way. So not a fair opponent at the same BR.
A 105mm gun is not a disadvantage. Caliber does not determine spall for APFSDS above 76mm, only residual penetration. Turret ring is only really a problem against autocannons at times.
A better round is cancelled out by the reload on Abrams, and a low profile/autoloader are not pros. Thermal generation is largely QoL, Gen 1 is perfectly adequate.
T-80U is not objectively better.
It has:
Worse mobility
Worse gun handling
Worse reload
Worse depression
Worse shell stowage
Worse reverse
Among other disadvantages.
3 Likes
Lmao.
IPM1 beats the T-80U in mobility, firepower, gun handling and gun depression.
I think you are misusing the word “objectively” here.
5 Likes
How so? I thought the T-80U had a better P2W ratio and higher top speed, only struggling in reverse which is NOT a majority of mobility if you position yourself right.
Firepower, again, better round, although I apologize as I thought it had 3BM60 and not 3BM46 so not really a better round. I will say it’s new 6 second reload is nice and will beat out a stock crewed M1 IP, and because it’s an autoloader, if you’re down to 2 crew it also still out reloads you. And also higher gen thermals makes it easier to spot things
The depression is worse, as is ammo stowage, although again a smaller profile and ammo stowage not in the turret is quite nice. Also no turret basket because for whatever reason the Abrams has one that affects traverse (a majority of the basket, upwards of 95%, should NOT affect traverse- just hydraulic lines).
BUT I’m looking at pure stats. Unfortunately I don’t have the T-80U and my only experiences with it were about 2 years ago so I can’t say much on that front. I can say the M1 IP is fine where it is IMO because unfortunately (as is with every vehicle around this area) at 11.7 the 12.7s it would face would just completely dominate it and it would stand no chance.
The Base M1 should get M833 (which only adds like 20mm of pen at 10m) to be a little more on par with contemporary ammunition. Aside from that it’s fine where it is.
2 Likes
Base T-80U doesn’t have better thermals than IPM1.
2 Likes
Debatable.
Its a ~68mm weakspot (thus most MBT caliber APFSDS especially at top tier creates maximum residual penetration of 400mm for spalling) that cannot be altered, unlike turning your hull or turret.
Lower profile / autoloader can be pros, but not in all cases.
1 Like