I’m glad gaijin doesn’t listen to all the hearsay and unverified claims and makes changes based only on reliable and accredited information otherwise the abrams would be capable of interstellar flight and immune to all threats both physical and magical at this point.
I look forward to the next thread where this can all repeat without a single shred of tangible evidence.
Funny, someone asks you your unit, and you don’t answer. So much for a security clearance when Conte can hint at his and even back it up, right?
Insofar as review bombing, I have no intention of starting that up again.
I will ask them again and again to get their stuff fixed, especially where it comes to NATO nations, as is appropriate. Add more modern ammunition to NATO tanks, as is appropriate.
The fact that certain nations lag behind on ammunition is of course unfortunate, but we’re talking about presenting things as they are, not as someone wishes them to be. And let’s be real, we all understand it’s an arcade game.
If they were so kind as to introduce true long distance maps like Poland, Flanders on a larger scale, et al, players would be forced to use their brains more often.
The downside would be that their matches would take longer. But you can alleviate that by making the games in Realistic similar to Arcade, with no ‘historical’ enemies, and simply drop 16 v 16.
I don’t remember when I was obligated to answer you. Ah right, because I’m not.
If you have any actual, tangible evidence for your incorrect and spurious claims though you should submit a bug report and if it is found to not be napkin math then it will be implemented.
I don’t recall asking you the question. That was someone else. You’re not obligated, but it proves you’re not to be trusted. So long.
Ah, yes- dismissing and mocking perfectly legitimate concerns by using hyperbole. I know this one.
I guess we will have to wait until General Dynamics releases all specific classified information regarding the U.S’ main workhorse MBT in 2024 signed by all of the Founding Fathers themselves for you to (hopefully) deem it to be “reliable” enough for a change.
General Dynamics, when will you please release all this classified present day information so that some people finally believe that you did, in fact, make some upgrades in 29 years between 1979 and 2008?
ive seen contes post before, hes shown pics in stuff to prove it
Conte’s the officer material that would have been giving me orders. He and I shared the same dirt in the Triangle of Death in Iraq. Some of my boys rolled out to Fallujah the second fight, while we got stuck on static OP and outer cordons in Ramadi.
I wish to God they’d given us leave to go put some bad guys down, but he might recall the 1-9 Manchus that were stuck in with his boys out west.
Side plate armour:
I assume you mean the plate over the driver, the document you provide doesn’t even mark that as “conventional Armour” so since everyone wants Abrams “real armour” based on this pehaps the top RHA should be replaced with “structural steel” (joking… put down the pitchforks USA mains):
Or did you mean the cap over front plate composite array? Because that is clearly marked as “conventional Armour”:
Where dose the magic 260mm of extra protection from the same armour thickness come from if there is no DU?
Which is why:
Here’s a top 0.01% player saying the Abrams are well performing vehicles, and the issue lies with the playerbase.
And just to clarify, here’s his stats on the M1’s:
If you still want to call these players '‘Idiots’’ you’re welcome to, but you better not mind looking a bit silly in the process.
Like this?
Or this?
Or this?
Or this?
I literally said they should’ve introduced the M1A2 SEP v3 alongside the T-90M, Leopard 2A7V and Strv 122B+.
The US (and Israel, France, China, Britain and Japan) all deserve an MBT that is as close in performance to the Strv 122 as possible.
But there’s extremes to both sides, I think that the US should’ve gotten a new improved MBT, but that doesn’t automatically mean I think the current M1’s are the worst things to ever see the light of day.
Bro, we have literal veterans and ppl with legit experience and a inside view on how the Abrams preforms (pun intended) and you still deny it. I myself do good with the vehicle, doesn’t mean that its perfect. when i play Russia or Germany or Sweden what ever it may be, i can mostly turn my brain off and just get 6-8 kills with out thinking. The model is older, the tech is much older fighting vehicles 10-20 years newer and with more advanced modeling in game. sure, maybe 2 years ago the modeling was good but when you look at the level of detail on these new mbts like the strv122’s and the leopard 2a7s, and Merkava’s and we see amazing detail. which is good, but for most of us we just want a remodel and more balancing changes. maybe a better round, or br decompression. either way this painting of American mains being brain dead retard players who crab their pitch forks, mindlessly following a fantasy of an OP Abrams is just a myth to infuriate each other.
The “tangible evidence” you are looking for is all classified.
You are asking for something that doesn’t exist for a game or a community.
This is a lazy, close minded, argument.
Fact 1: From M1A1 onwards all Abrams hulls are all the same, and in fact are literally the same.
Fact 2: The suspension has been improved to better accommodate the weight growth of the tank.
Fact 3: DU armor was put into the hull off 5 Abrams.
If you need more than that, I’m not sure what to tell you. It’s more than enough to request DU Armor in the hulls of M1A1 and beyond variants. The only reason NOT to do so is “balance” reasons.
If you need documentations specifying the exact armor composition of M1A1 HC and beyond tanks you will never get it as it is all classified.
Furthermore, the protection values are all based on information obtained from production documents and the declassified Challenger 1 doc (according to gaijin it’s how they estimate protection values for non specified places). Production documents are the BASELINE requirements. Nobody here as any idea how accurate they are. The actual effectiveness is classified. The composition of the “special armor” is sensitive and not publicly known. Nobody at Gaijin, or in this forum (without access to the sensitive/classified documents) has any idea how good the Abrams armor actually works or how effective it is.
This thread is about BALANCING the tank. It’s about making the tank more, or less, effective in game. Given that nobody actually knows anything to precisely assess the protection of the tank, any reasonable request within the KNOWN parameters is perfectly valid. Asking for documentation is a cop out as those are all sensitive/classified.
This game is fake AF. The bullets are fake, the guns are hyperaccurate compared to the real world, targeting systems aren’t modelled, loading times for 4 man crews are adjusted for “balance,” and armor is all just guesswork. Therefore, arguing about accuracy is silly. None of it is accurate.
Did they make it more reliable too or just beef it up.
Beefing it up naturally improves reliability. However, the stresses put on the suspension of heavy MBT’s like the leopard 2 and the Abrams pushes the limits of our technology. So suspension items are still the most common “breakdown” on a tank. So yes, improved but not perfect reliability.
You are welcome to submit a bug report.
Yeah, sure, let balance the game over 0.01% of the playerbase, seems very good plan, maybe lets reduce the playerbase to 0.01% too
Skill issue.
I’m sure that someone who’s got thousands of hours in the game, plays every single tech tree, all BR’s, consistently gets 75% winrates and plays together with extremely knowledgable players, somehow doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
Here’s a question for you: Would you rather pick DEFYN or 5 random players to balance Air RB.
I certainly know what my choice would be.
If you want a game that only 0.01% can play correctly, why we are here? none of us are 0.01%. Yeah, most skilled players must have more relevant opinions, but it is only part of it, not something writing in stone and it dont automatically remove/deny others opinions. Thats is also why some times we remove the tops and bottoms to have a more realistic view of the problem.
Balance over 0.01% is like saying to a poor ppl that he can be a millionaire bc 0.01% became millionaire. He will? 99.9% that dont.
Hey, that 0.01% of the players have a 70% WR and 4.0 K/D on Ariete PSO.
Obviously that means Ariete PSO is OP and if we peasants can’t do well on it it’s a skill issue on our end.
