eh but sweden and germany’s top tier already is just ‘leo is better than most/any other nation’s capability rn’
i think youre overthinking how much some slight armor buff will do for the 2a5/2a6
You can rush like a headless chicken and know that many of the shots you take will be stopped by the extremely extensive and thick armor; while, on the Abrams, the moment you expose your hull, you are dead.
That’s why it’s easier to do better on it as an average player; even if I agree that the Abrams has more exploitable potential on the hands of a very good player.
- why would you do that
- dont do that
3.this applies to literally any tank
erm do you try aiming at the lfp of the bvm when you play against it, it tends to work
Because not everyone enjoys the passive Elite Sniper-camping simulator gameplay of spending the whole match hidden behind a hill near your spawn popping 0.2 pixels of your tank every 0.33 seconds in order not to die XD, even less so when this does not contribute to the team, the match or the objective and is done only to achieve high K/Ds and relative personal performance.
Not really. With Russian tanks, Strv 122s, 2A7s and basically any tank with functional armor, you can successfully push towards the objectives and enemies; be it because the enemy needs more time to aim to shoot at your weakspots, which gives you an advantage to shoot first compared to them just shooting in your general direction for you to blow up, or because they misplace their shots and hit your unpennable armor instead of the intended weakspots.
1 Like
That’s the point.
Abrams needs to pixelhunt-aim at the lfp of the BVM in hopes that it will die or be disabled after said first shot; T-80BVM needs only shoot in the Abrams’ general direction for it to die, unless it somehow manages to hit the cheeks or the small surface of the UFP in the worst possible angle (after which it may just bounce into the ring anyway).
Anyway, I consider current Russian tanks and American ones to be fair counterparts to each other, in an asymmetrical way. Russian tanks are no longer a balance issue, ever since the ammo detonation bug was fixed and even more since autoloaders were modelled as modules.
2 Likes
Not every map you can hull down (cities/cqb) and you dont want to stay hull down in sniper position all match doing nothing for the team.
Agree, but this is a game with objectives not irl.
Agree, but some tanks have better hull protections than other and are less punitive if you leave hull exposed.
1 Like
you’re not playing a tank to it’s strength and are complaining about it being worse than tanks that have what you are trying to do as a strength
this is quite literally 2015 german tiger main levels of thinking
2 Likes
you can rush into battle sure and maybe its hard to hit your weakspots but its no trouble to just… slam a round straight into your track and let someone else do the job for you. any competent player seeing someone rush will either take the kill and trust in their aim or they will just track you
well, than tell gaijin to make maps that you can play hull down 100% of the match while doing objective. Or you will be behind an rock all match while your team are losing bc you didnt go help cap A/B/C?
they arent even talking about hull down theyre just saying that you cant slam w key in the abrams… you have to take your time with it…
1 Like
dude, i know you are dumb, but pls, dont reply me if you are gonna type bullshit, thanks
1 Like
The point here is:
Tank (X) has only ONE way of exploiting its ONLY strength and overcome its crippling weaknesses.
Tanks (Y) have MULTIPLE ways of exploiting MULTIPLE strengths and have no weaknesses to care about.
And that’s where the balance issue lies.
2 Likes
map design is an entirely seperate issue that i have stated my dislike for several times already, if you wish to discuss the layout of war thunder maps I’d advise you take it to the thread made for that very topic
it isnt bullshit bro leverage your opinion with kd but at least dont make it obvious that you have 0 other ways to defend your point
this is direct related when comes to “play this specific way in this tank”, so, if you gonna talk to play without exposing the hull, yes, maps are the problem.
you fail to mention that everyone has a breech and a barrel
Either way, the topic was derailed again under the false premise that people want the Abrams to be invincible/overpowered/whatever.
All we want is literally for its turret ring and fuel tank bulkheads to be fixed xD.
And, ideally, study better the possibility of AIM and SEPv2 to have improved hull armor (which would still not likely be as good as Leopard 2A7V’s) or, otherwise, implement SEPv3 in order to have, at last, a tank with improved hull armor for the first time since 2018 like everyone else.
3 Likes
Main thing is, just because something is already a big problem doesn’t mean it should be made even worse.
If you shoot yourself in the foot, you shouldn’t shoot yourself in the other foot as well going “oh well I couldn’t really walk well anyway after shooting myself in the first foot, so it doesn’t make a difference”.
Everyone has a breech and a barrel
Not everyone has a 66% frontally pennable surface area
1 Like