Good point. Was that ever a bug report? Submit that and the list of Abrams things as a bug report asking why theres a doubke standard.
cause that’s how they do it, just like the BN was a one time trial of the APS it has.
By the way, where did Gaijin get the data for Relikt ERA? The manufacturer’s website for this armor is closed, and there is no data available on the internet. So where exactly did Gaijin get these Relikt figures from?
1 Like
Probably state actor.
1 Like
Aaaah. Hidden sources of Gaijin.
1 Like
The reason for not adding the ballast is probably because they gave it they new battery which can hold the weight. The SEPV3 has a new battery i wouldn’t be surprised if they implemented that in to the SEPV2 as well.
These are your assumptions.
Well IRL they had to add new batteries to bear the load of the APS and LWS systems.
So im not guessing, its still very possible gaijin just added the one without ballast.
like this one ^
1 Like
Listen, i like the look of the ballast. Please let that stay y’all.
1 Like
wow Same Exact Protection Version 3 but for some reason weights several tons more than previous variants.
Thank you gaijin. For not following your word [[Development] Reports concerning the protection of post-war combat vehicles - News - War Thunder]
"In War Thunder, we try to recreate real equipment as accurately as possible. For this we use all the available information. You, our players, help us with this, and we are grateful to you for this help. Together we have corrected a huge number of various inaccuracies and made the game better. In order to make this work in a more fruitful and understandable way, reports for correcting errors and inaccuracies are accepted only if they meet a specific set of requirements.
Unfortunately, these requirements may conflict with the availability and even the openness of information. Primarily, we are talking about the parameters of armour-piercing projectiles and an even more closed topic - the protection of modern tanks.
We are unable to just rely on primary sources in the reports, since in most cases concerning modern MBT’s, such sources are likely to be classified."
Thank you for not keeping your word once more again and making the game worse. What is a game if the devs don’t follow what they say? A amazing game I wish it would be playable on post cold war era but it is simply a joke that vehicles aren’t realistically represented.
The US ARMY has the trend to follow what CIA reports says. The very first M1 Abrams could tank all current soviet union ammunitions at the time and that trend continued to today with the SEPv3 the kornet cant go through the fron’t armor of the Abrams on the turret but the hull somehow is still a 1980s hull that has less protection than a 1979 T72.
12 Likes
Need the content creators to talk about that post in 2021 vs. Now.
1 Like
Gaijin has convinced me at this point the Abrams is not real.
1 Like
Wow, does our LFP now withstand all shells?
being realistic idk if the hull can tank a kornet. due to space constrains the turret will always have more armor. But the hull has 100% been upgraded.
The M1A1 Abrams weighted 57.2 tons with the current Abrams turret armor but somehow the M1A2SepV3 weights 66.8 tons but the armor hasn’t changed in any possible way. thats almost a 10 tons increase without changes to the armor layout. so either the crew ate many burgers or there is a problem with modelling.
From the M1A1 to the M1A2 the change is already from 57.2 tons to 62 tons which can’t be anything else than a increase of composite materials on the hull or other part of the tank.
3 Likes
So the new Abrams is heavier, but has no armor improvments. It was given a new round with slightly more pen but Russian ERA was also buffed. It has new internal modules that once hit, kill the tank and no other MBT has been announced with these modules? Why is this being added again?
1 Like
The ERA which was buffed the M829A3 couldn’t pen anyway its meant for kontakt 5 not relikt.
Enough parroting nonsense.
Same as CR2 gets a turret basket but doesn’t have one irl
1 Like
Except thst it performs the exact same against kontact 5 as A2 did? It has worse angle performance and pen over range?
He isn’t parroting nonsense. People have covered this ad nauseum.
The only difference is it weighs a little bit more so MIGHT result in a more reliable amount of spall upon a successful pen. But also the amount of over pen is a factor in the amount of spall generated, correct me if I am wrong there.
So Idk dude, I like your comments but leave a guy alone. He isn’t actually wrong.
I think the Abrams need a BR change if these armor model changes happen, and I think they should allow for them to choose between A3 or A2 and make A3 mean a little more of a trade off than it does now. Could see a .3 BR increase - though I wish they’d just add 14.0 GBR, and then spread stuff out more for nations.
1 Like
To the point of ad nauseum.
Yet as far as I’ve seen and others have seen and showed videos on it more reliable goes through kontact 5 than the A2 does / did.
weight makes zero difference to spall you’ve been told that before.
The only thing which nakes a difference is the residual penetration, which A3 last it was looked at had more due to the Anti ERA.
He’s wrong claiming its worse when it’s not, it’s a side grade at worst and marginally better at best.
How do you mean? As it sits right now most abrams are under BRd.
The top tier for grb should move up irregardless, like without even talking about any nations vehicles grb should of been up to about 13.7 now.