Nothing is stopping them from saying “We don’t know how much the armor was improved exactly so SEP V3 would have same armor as SEP V2”
3 Likes
I think in this case, many might turn away from War Thunder. After all, SEPV3 is the last hope for US players. If they release a clone of SEPV2, we’ll have nothing more to expect from this game in terms of balance.
They could, which honestly, I see them pulling something like that, but I just want to see if they outright deny armor upgrades. And we do know the new Armor package was intended to protect against operational and emerging threats.
3 Likes
You say that as if abrams are bad?
1 Like
The Abrams is currently a very weak tank, and coupled with the US’s lack of adequate CAS and SPAA/SHORAD, this results in a terrible win rate and constant losses. If Gaijin keeps nerfing the US and buffing the USSR, no one will want to play as the US. Everyone will play as the Russians.
Sorry what ?
Abrams has
- great mobility
- great optics
- great ammunition
- great relaod rate
- middling armour
What exactly is weak about it ?
Also weak cas?
- AH64E
- F15E
- F18E
- F16, even the A is good CAS.
SPAA? Claws is definitely not bad spaa
So again where’s the issue.
4 Likes
I want the SEPv3 as much as anyone else, but this is a serious skill issue take.
The current SEPs are still among the better top tier MBTs, only truely behind the 2A7s/122s.
- Using the base 6.5 second reload of an Abrams with an absolute level 0 crew is dishonest. 5.3 second expert or 5.8 seconds non expert reload is much more realistic.
- The BVM only has a 6 second reload if it doesn’t use 3BM60, when firing 3BM60 it’s reload is 6.4 seconds.
So you are either not very smart or you are deliberately dishonest to make the Abrams seem worse than they are. Not sure when of these is worse though.
7 Likes
The M1A2SEP V2 is probably the most fragile tank in the top tier. Compared to the T-90M and T-80BVM, the Abrams is a light tank.
1 Like
You seem to be ignoring
- the leclercs.
- the Arietes.
- the challanger 2s.
- the Merkavas.
- the Leopard 2A5 (they’re protections about on par).
- the chinese MBTs which still have holes in their armour.
the abrams is more well armoured than all of them bar the CR2 which it’s about on par and the 2A5 which again about on par.
however it out does them in the otehr areas which matter.
3 Likes
M1A2 SEP V2 is quite good i’d say, i like it more than STRV 122s
A good light tank at that, if you and T80BVM both non pen each other and if u have that 5s reload u can just see T80BVM there reloading all helpless while u can just LFP him
1 Like
I agree with you, I don’t have STRV 122, but I do have Leo 2A7V and for some reason I like SEP more then 2A7V. Maybe due to M1A2 SEP’s mobility and more gun depression
2 Likes
This and M829A2 + 5 sec reload and it can actually take some hits too
1 Like
T-80BVM player must have massive skill issue to not hit any of Abrams weakspots (AKA everything but turret cheeks)
1 Like
Ill hold your hand when i tell you this
So must an abrams player to not hit a BVMs lol, you can pen the front of the turret as @Panther2995 Let me know, it’s asctually covered in weak points lol.
1 Like
U can pen his roof and disable breech and gunner/commander depends which side u shoot on and u do it again and hes dead, so funny to do that when they hiding
2 Likes
What on earth is this coal take?
1 Like
Hull does not have a LOS increase. Both measure 600mm from the front plate to the weld line, which there is then 101mm RHA back plate. So 701mm LOS total for every Abrams ever on the hull.
From M1A1 to SEPv2, the armor cavities are 711 mm thick (Source) plus the 101mm RHA turret structure back plate so 812 mm total. This is angled at 37 degrees from perpendicular on the loader’s side to give 1016mm LOS and at 27 degrees on the gunner’s side to give 911mm LOS
On SEPv3, turret armor cavity was increased to 830mm plus the same 101mm RHA turret structure back plate so 931 mm total. This is angled at 37 degrees from perpendicular on the loader’s side to give 1165mm LOS and at 27 degrees on the gunner’s side to give 1045mm LOS.
The SEPv3 (as others have already posted) is clearly mentioned to include upgraded armor developed under the NEA/NGAP program. This improved the armor composition in the hull, turret front, turret crew sides, and turret bustle sides.
Considering the current SEPv2 is already drastically underperforming when it comes to turret side armor by 250% (see spoiler), the SEPv3 if added should have a extremely strong turret from all angles.
Hull armor is a guess at best but even going with the minimum increase (by using proposed armor targets from the 90s that were likely already implemented in the budgeted armor upgrades that occurred with M1A1 SA/SEPv2 in the mid 2000s), looking at 25-35% improvement vs KE and 25-50% vs CE.
90s Armor Development
2000s Armor Budget Docs
6 Likes
Its so exposed its not even funny at top tier.
Don’t remember how many times i one shotted/crippled BVM’s through their turret weakspot.
2 Likes