The AIM is easily a 12.3 material, having 12.7 Abram’s FCS at 12.0 while having a round more or less equal to its counterpart.
And yes, the vehicles are good, and you are just bad bro
1.1KD is respectable? I thought anyone could achieve this by holding w to the objective point like a headless chicken lol
I swear the moment people start pulling stats to “win” arguments these threads just devolve into a hellscape. Just accept the fact that people will have different views on stuff because of their different experiences.
Leo 2? Which one? If this is the 12.0 2A4M, the Abrams has better mobility, reverse, reload, shell selection, ammo stowage, armor, and more.
T-80? If this is comparing it to the 12.0 UE1, the Abrams has better shell selection, reload, gun handling, reverse, reaction times, depression, among other pros.
Type 10 and TKX are jokes of a tank and you would know if you had played them. Atrocious gun angles, gun handling, mobility, etc.
No. Abrams is better in RB as well. The better reload, mobility, reverse, depression, etc. allows you to use more positions, knock out more targets, and get out of there when you need to.
Then how do some players perform incredibly well against them? Are they cheating?
And the Leo 2 (Germany Leo 2, Swedish Leo 2, French Leo 2, and Italy Leo 2), heck, even the 10.7 Obj 292 if we wanna go there.
The only MBTs with worse firepower are the T-series and the Chally/Ariete/Merk. Again, Abrams being compared to the three worst MBTs in the game.
You mean the Chinese Abrams that’s for some reason better than all the U.S. Abrams?
lol, no.
What you meant to say was 12.7 Abrams are 12.3 material.
If QoL advantages are all you can say good about the Abrams, then it’s probably bad.
T-80 has better armor, better survivability, and better shells to use, all with equal mobility. Y’know, advantages that actually matter ingame.
Yes. The fact that Abrams manages to be worse is some good food for thought.
‘‘For some reason’’
Lol.
I sure do wonder what sets the CHINESE TECH TREE Abrams apart from the AMERICAN TECH TREE Abrams… Unfortunately this will forever remain a mystery to us all.
lmao.
Worse firepower than the Abrams due to the full 1 second longer reload.
Good luck with that 10 second reload.
Pulling stuff out of your ass already?
The SEPv2 is arguably better than the M1A2T in the current meta, maybe actually get some top tier vehicles and get good at the game before making these claims.
That is clearly why most people in top tier tournaments use the Abrams instead of T-80s.
Instantly falls flat when the enemy tank has 2 braincells.
Lmao.
Better shell.
Wasn’t really an issue tbh. Near all engagements ended in the first shot.
And the Merkava is arguably the best toptier MBT.
You mean ultra tryhards playing (basically) a completely different game?
Or, y’know, the T-80 is moving, or is hulldown, or . . . is in pretty much any situation that isn’t just sitting stationary point blank.
Bear in mind, someone fighting a T-80 needs to shoot a very small area to maybe deal damage. Someone fighting an Abrams can literally shoot the tracks and end up destroying the horizontal drive and engine (I did that before the turret basket btw).
Same goes for the Abrams if the Abrams player has 1-2 braincells.
You have yet to actually give a reason that the M1A2T is better than the US SEPs. Show me what you pulled out of your ass.
The extra smoke grenades that the SEPv2 gets are great in this meta with a lot of IR guided weapons.
Still easily penetrated and one shot in all of these scenarios for any self respecting player.
You consider yourself a decent player, but you seem to struggle so much against T-80s. So maybe you are overestimating yourself?
I’m glad we agree the reload time isn’t the end all be all that some seem to think it is.
Unless you die first, which you probably will since larger weakspots.
Idk who’s struggling against T-80s, aside from maybe you. Everything I have to say about T-80 is from playing it.
You are calling the Abrams bad and worse than the T-80s.
I’m not the one with the negative stats in the Abrams and that thinks that their 1.1 K/D in the T 80 U is “respectable” lol. So clearly you are struggling with or against something.
Yes, because it is. I’ve played and fought both. T-80 is both better when playing, and better when fighting,
And that pretty much proves the point that I have made for a while now. T-80s are low skill floor low skill ceiling tanks while the Abrams is a high skill floor high skill ceiling MBT.
You are a mid player, so you prefer and perform better in the T-80s because it having a lower skill floor and because you lacking the skill to actually abuse the high skill ceiling of the Abrams.
You’re conflicting “high skill ceiling” with “requires more skill to do the same.”
Nope, because the Abrams can far surpass what the T-80s are capable off.
You are the only one conflicting stuff. Idk if it’s just a misplaced ego, but you seem to think that you are a good player and that your perspective is absolute. You can’t get more out of the Abrams so nobody can.
No, not really. T-80s have near identical mobility whilst having better armor, better survivability, better armor, and better ammo types. Abrams doesn’t have higher skill ceiling, it just requires more skill to do the same as other tanks.
I never said that, infact I said the exact opposite. You’re the one with ego issues.
We can go around in circles like this forever, but neither is going to convince eachother.
All the things you wave away as merely quality of life improvements like reload, gun handling, gun depression and reverse speed are much more valuable to good players than armor will ever be (which is realistically the only strong point of the T-80Us/BVM.
That is exactly why the good multi nation players on this forum will almost always gravitate towards the Abrams over the T-80s if they have to choose.
I’m not even that good of a player, I have no problem admitting that. However I’m not the one calling a perfectly good tank bad because I personally struggle in it, that is you again.
