dude no ones right on the turret throat. it could be anything, stop bringing bias into this it only infuriates the other person. we simply just dont know, just go off of what we do know with sources.
go and read what he told me before dribbling like that, this CTP player has now been arguing on 2 consecutive posts with only 4000 games and all exclusively in America, he tried telling me that ERs were useless and I went and checked, well well well, his highest chinese, german and russian vehicles are props, and yet he still pretends as if he is an experienced player on such a matter, furthermore he has pointed his smelly finger of shame at poor @T3ddy4 and in a similar manner to mine would rather call us insane and biased that actually read what we said, leading to a pointless argument and bloating out threads
again just go off of the documents we can LEGALLY have. not whos bias and whos plays what nation. as long as you have top tier idc, the main requirement is top tier then you have a say.
And I’m sure the turret ring is armoured IRL, however unless it’s comp or very high thickness (it isn’t) then you will never see it fixed in game, because it’s a doctrinal issue over a poor modelling one, the fact that the turret ring is so exposed is the issue, not the amount of armour
in real world scenario im pretty sure the united states isnt that stupid to just leave a gap there. but thats besides the point.
This is presented by the VA (veteran affairs) showing the M1a1HA and m1a2s and onward should have DU in the turret.
If you place said photo’s next to the in-game model, you’ll see there’s virtually no discrepancy.
It does and has been doing so for ages now:
Because there’s none on the real M1 either. Even the very source you included shows the composite material is only placed behind the front plate, and not the glacis plate.
It’s a simple 38mm plate, even on the later SEP models:
And they have it in-game as well.
Where do you think the jump from 400mm @ 60° frontal arc on the M1A1, to 600mm @ 60° frontal arc on the M1A2 and M1A1 HC comes from?
And why are you showing multiple sources that have all been implemented in-game already, yet you’re pretending that they have not been?
Special armor skirts? Implemented.
Special armor mantlet? Implemented.
Special armor turret side? Implemented.
Special armor front plate? Implemented.
7 Likes
the front composite plate is not implemented and also all round on the upper plate should richochet no just off the left, if that round was dead center on the front plate it would pen in game which is inaccurate.
this is angled up towards the driver
the skirts aren’t implemented at all either,
???
So firstly, that claim is extremely dubious.
It’s only a 38mm plate and simulations show that later (monobloc) long rod APFSDS such as 3BM-42, DM33 and L26 should be able to partially penetrate it.
But even if we set that aside, it already is capable of defeating 804(!!!) millimetres penetration APFSDS at point blank range in-game.
3 Likes
I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to ask you how old you are.
Are you around 11 years of age? Because I don’t understand how you’re able to directly look at something which proves you’re wrong, and then conclude you’re correct.
5 Likes
thats no the same plate,
a rough image but it should be angled up towards the driver
front on theres no composite facing up as seen here
age??!?!?!?! cause that has something to do with it. how about how you have a total of 6 games in the m1a2s and you’re commenting on there armor in game???
Because your arguments are the equivalent of you saying 1+1=3.
I’m genuinely confused by your arguments and how you interpret sources so strangely. My assumption is that you’re very young and have some difficulties with understanding sources and the in-game implementation of them.
And around 2800 kills in other M1’s.
I fail to see what my number of battles in an M1A2 has to do with you claiming the composite skirts aren’t modelled when they clearly are.
4 Likes
Should’ve checked yourself before you shrek’d yourself.
2 Likes
on these other top tier mbts they meticulously model the composite, for the abrams the just put a number in there and call it a day while other nations have better modeling. its just lazy.
Tanks designed with different requirements and by different countries end up with different armour designs.
Shocking.
If you believe the M1 Abrams has composite armour on the internal structure of the hull flanks, feel free to present sources which prove that to be the case.
Because right now what you’re doing is the equivalent of:
‘‘Leopard 2 A7V is poorly modelled and worse than M1 because it has no composite armour’’
3 Likes
