You’re just a Gaijin defender trying to convince players that there’s no bias. You’re here 24/7 without a day off. I’d even bet you’re a Gaijin Entertainment employee.
How can U.S. players be considered worse when they’re fighting with objectively weaker vehicles against the USSR, whose top-tier vehicles have been consistently buffed and are equipped with superior weaponry?
The T-90M has the best protection and survivability in the game, largely thanks to its heavily buffed fuel tanks that can absorb APFSDS rounds, as well as spall liners that seem to absorb nearly all spall—and sometimes even the projectile itself. It also has some of the smallest weak spots among top-tier MBTs.
Its main drawbacks are reverse speed and gun depression. But T-90M players rarely need to reverse. They simply hold W and drive straight toward the enemy, often exposing their side, because they know the fuel tanks, spall liners, or even the autoloader will absorb the damage, giving them enough time to fire back. On top of that, they still don’t have to worry about turret drive damage in the same way other tanks do.
If the Abrams had that level of protection, U.S. players at top tier would probably have a K/D ratio of at least 2.
If War Thunder’s meta were primarily about armour, you’d have a point, but it isn’t.
War Thunder’s meta = Mobility + First hit cripple/kill.
T-90M has the literal worst firepower of any 12.7 and literal worst mobility of any 12.7. One of those would be really detrimental, but both of them is just completely crippling in War Thunder’s meta.
It’s also extremely obvious you’ve never played the T-90M given all of your misconceptions stem from only facing it and not having experienced it’s crappiness yourself. It’s the typical US main that thinks ‘‘Grass is always greener on the other side’’.
- And the atrocious reload.
- And complete lack of acceleration or top speed.
- And lack of neutral steering and the atrocious reverse steering.
- And it’s extremely wide profile in combination with the wide hull ammunition storage which makes city fights/corner peeking impossible without being one-shot.
See? If you’d actually played it yourself you would’ve known about all of it’s drawbacks, instead of just a minority of it’s issues.
1 Like
Ok, let’s imagine that US players are better than Russia.
What about Germany, UK, Japan, China, france, sweden, Israel or Italy ?
You are the most american main of all american mains.
You are the cliché of the US main.
Says all the time that US ground and air needs to be ‘saved’, everything is bad because Russia has everything better, and want a LFP on abrams that can stop a DM-73.
I wonder about the turret of sepv3/m1a2c what distinction can be made between earlier models and current ones
Note that the first picture lacks the “chiseled” flat spots next to the gun
And I more specifically mean what should we call them to distinct the two from each other
1 Like
Armor absolutely does matter. Trust me—when you fire at a T-90M or T-80BVM that drives out exposing its side, and your APFSDS round simply disappears into the fuel tank, or the spall liner absorbs all the fragments and the only thing you manage to damage is the autoloader, armor definitely matters.
Or when a T-90M is constantly pivoting in place, making its weak spots extremely difficult to hit. Trust me, armor makes a huge difference.
Its firepower may be worse, but the T-90M is fighting Abrams and Leopard tanks, which have very little armor in comparison. It doesn’t really matter whether the T-90M’s shell penetrates 450 mm or 600 mm the lower front plate and the turret ring of NATO tanks can be penetrated by almost anything.
NATO tanks are essentially cardboard in terms of armor. Gaijin deliberately modeled their armor so that 3BM60 rounds would have no trouble penetrating them.
You have a 7-second reload without needing to level your crew, and your reload speed doesn’t depend on crew members surviving.
As for the turret drive, it technically exists, but it’s represented by a tiny gear in the turret ring. The only way to disable it is to hit that tiny component with a very precise shot.
What? A wide tank profile? What are you talking about? Stop making things up.
I’m just here to challenge your delusions or borderline lies. Making sure you know that you are a mediocre player is part of that.
I wish, at least that would mean I’d get paid for dealing with people like you.
2 Likes
You’re the most Russian main of all the Russian mains. Can you tell me how much you pay to rent your apartment in Moscow?
With your level of skill (or lack thereof) and the things you posted earlier, it’s hard to trust anything you say regarding the game.
1 Like
If you’re not even getting paid and you’re doing this for free, then I honestly feel sorry for you. You’re basically a volunteer being exploited by a company.
This is needless in here
Who tf are you hahahahaha
Go check my stats first.
I didn’t knew some people were saying Abrams such as the M1A2C and Trophy are the ‘worst in-game’. As I can see by the k/d, they are actually the best.
OMG, here we go again with the statistics. I never said that I’m an esports player. I don’t participate in competitions or tournaments. I’m just an average player.
Most of the time, I finish around 3rd–5th place in battles. After all, I don’t work for Gaijin Entertainment like you do.
You getting a whole ass A4 print on my wall
Abrams are considered the best because they are played by skilled players. This is the reason why Gaijin keeps nerfing the U.S. tech tree and buffing the USSR.
I don’t think you can argue with that fact, can you?
Comrade, so how much do you pay to rent an apartment in Moscow?
No. Why would I trust someone’s opinions on vehicles they’ve never played?
In case of a T-80BVM that’s just a Skill Issue™ 95% of the time. It doesn’t feature spall liners, doesn’t have the armoured carousel and has the larger vertical ammo stowage. T-80BVM’s are among the easiest tanks to consistent one-hit-kill at top-tier.
T-90M’s can be more trolly, but usually not a problem with basic weakspot knowledge and basic aiming skills.
Firstly, please use the Armor Analysis tool correctly:
Otherwise you get completely false results like you’ve shown in the screenshot, and as I can demonstrate with this screenshot:
With that camera angle a T-72B3 has 520mm UFP, using your exact example, are you saying M900 can lolpen a T-72B3’s UFP then?
The Upper glacis of every single M1 Abrams variant is immune to any and all APFSDS in the entire game as it’s constructional slope is greater than the critical ricochet angle of any APFSDS in War Thunder.
The correct armour vulnerability zones are as follows:
As you can clearly see, the M1A2 SEP v3 has above average armour protection as far as 12.7 MBT’s go, and it’s even quite similar to T-80U-E1’s, T-80BVM’s or T-72B3A’s.
Yes?
That’s my point? 7 seconds is the literal worst of any top-tier tank?
I’m getting a bit tired of people making this nonsensical argument.
A NATO tank only suffers a greatly reduced reload when 2 crew members are knocked out. If a Soviet/Russian tank suffers 2 crew losses you’ll be looking at the respawn screen. I’d much rather have a reduced reload than being dead.
Colour me surprised, a player that has never played these Russian MBT’s fundamentally doesn’t understand it’s drawbacks.
The gray area represents a building and covers that side of the vehicle:
No matter how you approach the angle (sidescraping or angled), you’ll always have the wide ammo stowage frontally vulnerable BEFORE you can even fire.
3 Likes
