No one has actually said that though. No one is even against “fixes” in principle, even though it all started with people listing their grievences with the M1 and how it sucks and is the worst top tier ever, the counter is other top tiers have similar or worse problems but do not perform as bad W/R wise as U.S, then the conversation pivots to “fixes” and everyone just hates U.S.
4 Likes
erm cro i have 1 decent top tier and it is around as good as your kd, you brag about kds in some of the best tanks at their br, why are you making a point of this? i use comparatively mid tanks and youre bragging about some good tank kds in decent tanks
At least try harder dude cause no one’s gonna believe this statement, especially after the shtshow that went down.
2 Likes
Again, you wouldn’t know its a decent tank because you don’t play them, not even prototypes of them, you have no idea.
he’s not being a piece of shit? you just started being hostile
In my observations, people are combative and hostile to those with differing opinions.
Someone says Abrams is the worst top tier MBT > someone with experience responds > “you just hate the USA” (despite them saying it is a great tank)
Winrates shouldn’t really be considered in vehicle balance, because they involve more than just the vehicles themselves.
3 Likes
the concept and specs of the abrams is enough to tell you that, is it not
No, they are not.
how could you tell… i said the abrams isnt bad and is very capable and mfs hopped on a hate train for no real reason lol
m1a2, has better pen than t80bvm, better speed, better gun depression, 50 cals, heat-mp/he-vt a lot more advantages
1 Like
And how do you know this, by just looking at stats? Cause its pretty obvious you dont make those claims with solid first hand experience.
In general, it’s quite the opposite: people with experience express legitimate concerns around Abrams-related issues, then someone with zero or next-to-zero experience with the Abrams bursts in claiming that it’s aktchually amazing and needs no changes, and that “everyone who claims otherwise just has a skill issue”, and it goes downhill from there.
I don’t know how many people consider first-hand experience with vehicles to be a fair metric to determine the validity of an user’s criteria, but…
I In that case, I have, when it comes to Rank VII-VIII MBTs:
4,387 matches on the Abrams family (U.S)
3,564 matches on the Leopard family (Germany)
3,495 matches on the T-72/80/90 MBTs (Russia)
1,861 on the Type 90/10s (Japan)
1,844 matches on the Challenger 2s (U.K)
1,655 matches on the Strv 122s (Sweden)
1,005 matches on the Leclercs (France)
575 matches on the Merkava Mk.4s (Israel)
Being these my current Top Tier and most played lineups:
So, uh… given my experience… would my opinion be considered valid, or I am “just another U.S main who wants the Abrams to be invincible”? xD
(Also I replied so fast with such a big response because I had been writing from earlier, I just chose to quote you when I saw your comment xd.)
4 Likes
Call it what you want, but i think the condescending tone and mockery is asshole behavior.
BVM has better thermals than the base M1A2, same max speed damn near, BVM has the NVT HMG, HEAT-MP does nothing to light-armored vehicles thanks to Gaijin’s modelling, also its only helpful if you know theres a heli lasing you (Abrams doesn’t have an LWS)
BVM has a better armor profile, and the discrepancy in penetration doesn’t really help the abrams much because anything too armored for the BVM to pen, the abrams probably also won’t pen.
Name the “more advantages” because you conveniently left out the LWS as well.
Doesnt change anything since you’re gonna aim at same weakspots.
Only in reverse.
It also doesnt matter too much since 80-90 percent of the maps are flat CQC type.
Both Tanks does have 50cal, seems like you dont even know your BVM’s abilities…
Doesnt have HE-VT but rather half baked HEAT-MP that doesnt work properly half of the time.
Its quite obvious you have no idea what you’re talking about and doin nothing but throwing empty claims.
7 Likes
lack of gun depression is a russian thing as a whole
better speed is arguable, in almost every aspect, and the 50 cal argument seems silly because the bvm also has… 50 cals
neither tanks are bad, but one is more beginner friendly than the other, that being the bvm
neither play the same role, but one can perform more roles than the other, that being the bvm
in general, it is easy to state that a tank is op/easy to play, but when it comes to proving it, then its not so easy unless your claim is actually 100% valid
6 Likes
^ HEAT-MP is only useful against helis, and thats only early match heli rushing that im referring to.
Since the Abrams lacks a LWS, or any tech that makes it stand out, it becomes more of a bare-bones mbt, making it more boring like the 2a5. As stated previously, the Abrams’ extra pen will not help it pen anything more than the lfp and drivers port (on the BVM), in which every other mbt can already pen
Therefore, the only arguable difference would be the Abram’s good turret armor and good reload
1 Like
When comparing it to other nations MBTs, it lands in the middle of the pack. Worse than the BVM/2A6/122s, but better than the Leclers and Merkavas.
I think a lot of it comes down to the disparity in performance between nations. It is less that the abrams is bad, but more that other nations tanks are undertiered.
However, when someone who has experience shows up and gives opinions, it becomes “he has X KD in X bad tank, that means that X bad tank is actually great.” People can’t discuss things civilly and in an unbiased manner.
I think it is good if they are experienced enough, and can compare their individual tanks stats, to their global vehicle stats.
I can’t give too much of an opinion on top tier, but I know when playing the Leo-2PL and other tanks, that armour must be good enough to stop the majority of rounds, or cause enemies to think twice for it to be considered positive. I would rather take an Xm-1 with dm43 than the Leo2pl at top tier because I know if I get shot, I’m already dead.
That’s how I normally put it, yep!
BVM is better and more forgiving to play more easily by a larger portion of the players with less effort, but its maximum potential is more limited;
The Abrams has more potential with players who are able to exploit its strengths while overcoming its weaknesses, but it’s far less forgiving and punishes the smallest mistakes.
Which means: BVM is better in the hands of the majority of the players, while the Abrams is better in the hands of good and very good players.
T-80BVM used to be fully and uncontestedly better than the Abrams, specially thanks to a former bug that made its ammo rack not detonate 50% of the times it was hit; but ever since that bug was fixed and also since its autoloader was modelled as a module, I would say T-80BVM and the Abrams are, in an asymmetrical way as explained, fair counterparts.
2 Likes
I’ve heard the BVM be described as low skill floor, low skill ceiling, meaning that it is easy to use, but hard to do very good in. While the Abrams is high skill floor, high skill ceiling, meaning that it is harder to use, but it is much better in the hands of an experienced player.