Thank you! Takes many years and edits, but you eventually get there when you hang around the internet for long enough, hahah.
1 Like
(EDIT: Stonewalling.)
1 Like
Yeah because we’re constantly dealing with people like Necrons and Pitzo and others talking down on people actively offering the constructive takes, and they drag down the conversation until it becomes a mudslinging fest that can get the thread locked or otherwise removed from the top of the message boards.
In short, a holding action.
3 Likes
What does the M1A1 at 11.0 being a Leclerc with a better round have to do with the M1A2s with better armor and the best round in the game?
You know, this is a topic about Abrams.
This isn’t about how all tanks equally had a chance of not having their ammo explode due to a bug that had a <10% chance of occurring.
Nor is it about Abrams having the most skilled players from 2019 to at least 2021 until they quit/went to grind other tech trees, Soviets included.
This should be exclusively discussing how to improve the topic’s vehicle.
Also a little funny…
4 Likes
Asking for the 2A4, 2A5 and 2A6 get hull armor improvement is in no way more justifiable than asking for the Abrams to have better hull armor lol.
1 Like
Is that really an achievement? I mean I just turned my brain off the last few days when I played my BVM and I think I’m running around 1.9-2.0 K/D.
And it was pretty easy to get there.
but theyre mocking me for my kd and ‘low playtime in top tier’ when they have objectively worse kds in all of the sepbrams, which i find interesting
do you lack eyes or a certain chunk of your brain? how am I a russian fanboy? I haven’t played russia in so long and I only have below 100 matches in my t34 and kv1 which are the highest tier russian vehicle i have (beside my obj292 with 2 matches)
1 Like
to revise on this, i never complained that the leo2 needed a hull armor upgrade, i just said it was justifiable. now i did say the abrams has decent playability and performance, but it definitely should have thicker armor, but avoiding that point, it would still make 0 difference ingame except generating MORE spall for you to die to, so i really dont see the point of adding this? please if youre gonna reply back to this, do it CONSTRUCTIVELY. dont act like an ass for no reason because i bring up my opinion.
I, too, have a better K/D on T-80BVM than I do on any Abrams…
And I know why that is, xD.
2 Likes
That is massive cope, it’s not justifiable and the 2A4 is already one of the best 10.3 MBTs, definitely top 2 together with the M1.
Indeed.
If 2A4 with C pack armor and DM33 were to come, it would be a 10.7, maybe even 11.0.
Compared to M1A1, it would have worse firepower, but better armor and same mobility.
1 Like
fair, maybe not on the 2a4, but definitely it could be improved on the 2a5 and 2a6 since its a large LARGE weakspot… and doesnt require much aiming. im not saying its a problem specifically for me, but it would just be beneficial to have, no?
it isnt as if im just shit at every tank, im not so bad that i dont know what to do and how to play and people have just looked at my older kds to ‘prove a point’ which was mostly just glaze themselves and their opinion instead of having a peaceful debate lmao
The 2A5 and 2A6 are also fine where they are and their armor is also enough.
The main problem is decompression which means that the 2A5/2A6 (and most 11.7 MBTs in general) have to share the same BR as absolutely busted tanks like the 2A7s and Strv 122s.
that is blatantly false and a quick look at your statcard debunks this claim
3 Likes
I’m a historical accuracy fan, so, to me, it depends on what’s historically accurate hahah.
I would never ask for a buff or a nerf that contradicts historical realities.
As of now, 2A5 and 2A6 have accurate C-tech hull armors. I don’t know if they are suppossed to be C, or D; all I know is that I would want them to have their historical armor, regardless of which it would be, hahah.
I have seen people claim that both options are historical depending on the batch, others claim that C, others claim that D, and, at this point, I don’t consider I have enough info to draw a full conclussion on the matter, hahah. It has become too confusing to me.
okay, fair point! but sharing that br means they are ‘equal’ and thus i base my opinions on that fact. it would not hurt to have a little bit of extra armor at the same br as the 2a7v would it? that is how my thought process worked, and can you fault me for that?
or at least, they should be around the same level of quality (sorry for the shitty wording there)
1 Like
Mainly because the BVM is far safer and easier to get in to, so below average, average and slightly above average players will do better in it.
However imo a good player can do equal or even more in the Abrams than in the BVM.
The main problem is the 2A7s and Strv 122s. I just think that Gaijin has raised the standard of new top tier MBTs with the 2A7s and Strv 122s, so other nations should get counterparts.
2 Likes