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
can we perhaps see this 70+% frontally pennable surface area?
watch vro use protection analysis
so let me get this straight
You claim that the BVM is better than the Abrams based off your K/D in both tanks
You later admit that you do not in fact play the abrams to its strengths and instead play both tanks in the same exact way (i.e brawling), a data gathering method that clearly benefits one side of the equation
This is what you call bad data, your own stats are meaningless in this conversation because they are blatantly skewed in favor of tanks that can brawl
3 Likes
There is a reason why the 2A7s and Strv 122s, and BVM/90M to a lesser extend, have such high winrates. They can just take map and objective control and hold it while every other nation just has to “play hull down”. Sure sit and wait in your cozy hull down spot when I’ll just win my games.
However this isn’t an Abrams exclusive problem, this is just a massive map and gamemode design issue. And a balance issue with the 2A7s and Strv 122s being so strong.
4 Likes
Now that my T-80BVM is nearly spaded, I can definitely say I’d take a M1A1 (11.0) over the T-80BVM.
The mobility isn’t as good as people kept telling me it is:
The reload disadvantage has gotten me killed a couple of times already, you just can’t play as aggressively as with the M1A1 because you know your opponents are aware of the gap between shots and you don’t have the reverse speed to back off in time.
The breech weakspot being so massive thanks to that crappy T-80B turret means you constantly get killed through the turret front, it also has the issue of a very poor turret roof (that the M1A1 doesn’t have) that often means enemies can shoot your breech whilst you can’t shoot theirs.
The gun depression limits me from utilizing my favourite positions.
The survivability isn’t nearly as good as people make it out to be, LFP shots are virtually guaranteed to OHK you and as I said, the turret front is surprisingly weak.
And I get this is 3BM-42 I’m using, and the side shot could’ve been aimed further to the front, but the people saying a T-80BVM’s survivability is equal to a Strv 122 are losing their minds:
The T-80BVM obviously isn’t bad, but I don’t understand people claiming it’s equal to a Strv 122 or Leopard 2A7V.
5 Likes
In the case of the Top Abrams, the only area capable of withstanding fire are the turret cheeks, nothing special at this point; and, in the very best case scenarios, the UFP, that makes up for a very small percentage of front surface area from LOS.
Meanwhile, tanks like the Russian ones or the uparmored Leopards only have very specific weakspots where shooting is viable.
I don’t play both tanks in the exact same way; with the Abrams, while I don’t camp, I don’t rush mindlessly either, as I do with T-80BVM. I try to use terrain to my advantage; just while advancing, rather than spending the whole match hidden behind a hill near my spawn, as apparently is the only viable way to play it, which is the issue.
In any case, I will repeat: I think current Russian and American tanks are 1:1 counterparts in an asymmetrical way; Russian tanks are NOT a balance issue anymore.
4 Likes
anddddddddd if its a bad map for brawling you can top it off with the 2a7 and strv being 10x better in hull down than most else tanks
1 Like
So, explain to us how you dont do that, in warthunder, while doing objectives or in city maps (or both at same time).
Or your opinion is actually stay camping hull down 100% of the time?
That’s basically my issue.
Ever since the 122s and 2A7s started coming into the game, they should only have done so with proper counterparts on every other nation;
Be it by fixing currently underperforming vehicles (Leclercs UFPs, Type 10 mobility, etc, etc), or by implementing new more powerful vehicles (SEPv3, Leclerc XLR, etc).
The 122s and 2A7s were needed to counter the (back then) stomping Russian tanks, yes; but so were proper counterparts for everyone else as well.
Alt+F4 when you see a city map its not that hard to avoid them
good solution dude, uninstalling the game next city map
me personally i just use superf4 to quit out of maps i don’t like while they are in the loading screen, curiously all city maps happen to be on that list
as long as you quit while the map is loading it won’t give you a crewlock so you can just reboot the game and search for another game in like 15 seconds
I assume that part prevents crewlock from triggering in…?
It it works, it may be an… interesting solution…
You blind? or you didn’t check this whole thread full of people against fixes to the turret ring and the Abrams in general, i’ve seen people say the turret ring issue shouldn’t get fixed, why? because it would make the Abrams invincible, there should be a spot where people should shoot at, crazy stuff.
yes, as long as the map is in the loading screen you can bruteforce kill the process and not get a crewlock when you reboot the game
1 Like