Ive said many times before that i think the m829a2 is good but why not add the m829a3 that would have come from the beginning for the sep v2 (that they should add to sep v3 when it comes)
The turretbasket is a very bad nerf to the abrams snd leopards, if you shoot almost anywhere on the abrams it’s an instant turretbasket delete, walking weakspot and i still love the abrams to death lol.
I hope you someday learn that when a thing you like and that you want added to the game, you want it to have what it haves in real life. It’s like getting your favorite sports car added to your favorite game and it comes with fwd and another engine…
You acknowledge the fact that these M1’s have extremely potent firepower, but then you go on to say that it’s still not enough.
This is a game which has to stick to some form of balance, that’s why you don’t get to demand your favorite toy be superior to everyone else’s just because it’s your favorite.
I’ve recently been playing my M1A1 a lot again and I’ve barely even noticed a difference.
I never said it was not enough i said that it would be nice why not it would nit be game breaking.
And to be able to add better rounds to other tanks you need to be able to start somewhere…
Do you really want to be stuck in 1980s?
There have been many times the turret basket had f up some really good plays, the turret basket and horizontal drive are different components so it should be able to turn the turret anyway…
The tanks equipped with Kontakt-5 are the T-72B3, T-72B3A, T-80U and it’s derivatives, now what do all of these tanks have in common? They’re barely hanging on in a meta that favours the Strv 122’s and Leopard 2A7V’s.
Now you want to introduce a shell that completely ignores the single advantage they have left: Their frontal armour, and you don’t see a problem with that?
Because leaked documents are that. Leaked documents. What people fail to realize now is Gaijin now can’t do anything because it’s a grey area at best. Every time someone leaks something it hurts the game.
I thought the same thing until I found out Australia requested a different version of NGAP (sepv3s armor), which basically confirms that there is still DU within the armor composition since they did the same thing when we sold M1A1s to them because they didn’t want the DU package.
I know but they should at least buff the shells a bit. Chinese tanks already have very long reload times and bad armor so having a slightly better shell could help
There is absolutely no point in adding the M1A2 SEPv3 if it’s going to be just a heavier, bulkier, larger and even easier to kill (more sh*t on the turret, hell yeah) SEPv2, which in turn is just a heavier SEPv1 ingame ^_^
Unless Gaijin starts taking the Abrams’ for real
Also - in my opinion, the Silver Bullet A3 (M829A3, with Anti-ERA tip for breaching heavy ERA) getting added to the Abrams’ line from the M1A1HC and above, (or the M1A2 and above) would be better than adding the afforementioned even heavier SEPv1.
M1A2 SEP and above imo, and if the M1A1 AIMv2 gets a tech-tree derivative like the FEP then that would be a good starting point for modern M1A1s to receive it as well.
The M1A1 to M1A2 jump is already where M829A1 changes to M829A2 as the top cartridge, why lengthen the bridge to the point of M829A1 → M829A3?
For 4S22, yeah. As of now its unseen what effects it would have against 4S23 and 4S24[U], so that’s a little bit of a disappointment.
As of now M829A2 can already lolpen the T-80U and T-72B '89. Having M829A3 would simply make it more commonplace and far more reliable, which would be nice. Wouldn’t affect much for when we get more '00s designs like the stopgap T-80s and the T-72B2.
1- To assume the Australian request was motivated by not wanting DU is just an assumption.
2- If the problem is the DU, they are not requesting it to be removed from the front hull, which following the same logic as for the turret, indicates that the hull front wasn´t upgraded.
