I lost my faith that we will ever get, even when SepV3 will come into the game, improved hull from fucking 370KE protection. What a shame actually. Stick to your 10.3 Abrams guys because it’s the best option to pay right now. With possibility to actually take some shots but with 3BM-42 flying around from every tank…
1 Like
The era is accurate, their hull composite isnt
@Thug Shaker Actual @Count_Trackula @WaretaGarasu @Kenny110 What now guys, are we gonna give up?
1 Like
Era is wrong too. Its fixed value, real life heavy era doesnt work like that at all… its WAAAAAY less effective against 829A3 than against 829A2 and its less effective against faster A2 than against A1.
Its just wrong implementation to artificially buff russian vehicles ON top of that armor layout.
At this point I’m just tired of it. I hate to cry Russian bias but what else can it be at this point? Why is every other nations equipment at top tier implemented with the worse possible interpretation of its capabilities while Russian equipment is always best case scenario? What other explanation is there? Incompetence?
7 Likes
I’ve asked Stona in the Abrams devblog thread. I highly doubt another bug report will work, as the devs have kicked it back and invented new (even if debunked) excuses. You can try again. I would use the highlighted documents I posted in this thread along with the Haynes manual and any other book that supports it.
But I’m not going to add anything to a bug report, since last time people got upset when I had to correct the people who were undermining and confused about the presence of DU. If you aren’t sure, just shut up and let the sources and documentation speak for itself.
2 Likes
It’s also doesn’t work when struck at 90 degress, in game it’s still gives protection
2 Likes
wrong thread i believe?
Indeed. No idea how that ended up here
It technically provides the correct protection of 20% of an apfsds penetrator within the correct time period. It provides 140mm los protection or 20%, of m829a1s los pen at 68 degrees.
I understand what u mean about them not working as an los bonus irl, but technically they arent completely wrong.
Also. Id wager a1 can pen any k5 tank under 1200. (This isnt an acceptable range for combat) Which is why a2 was just velocity boosted to push out the combat distance.
This of course could be true with the corrected ufp composite of a t series tank with k5 added. Its not in game rn
This makes me sad. They don’t believe in America like they should. God damn it do you know the country that visited the moon?
Hope Abrams gets better one day but its too difficult to sort all 12gen du insert in lower part of left third of upper side hull and choose the one that’s right
Off topic question, do you have anything on how much the TUSK package is suppose to weigh?
I found some info on how much each tile for ARAT and ARAT 2 weighs, but the current implementation of TUSK weighs like 1.2 tonnes more then the ARAT tiles do.
I’ll go through what I have, but I don’t think any book I have gives a hard weight for TUSK. Might be a source online, though.
“DU” armor from swedish trials
1 Like
As I said, we need a new bug report with every new source posted in the current “Hull Armor of the M1 Abrams”-Thread so we can get this ball rolling!
Oh how wrong your anti-NATO take is.
Sweden isn’t Russia, nor is Germany & China. 3 tech trees whose armor matches that of T-90M while having identical or superior ammo.
With people like yourself to praise Russian vehicles, who needs actual Russian mains?
Your post defends Russian vehicles more than any Russian main in existence, quite the accomplishment.
And I’ll be labeled something nasty for my defense of Abrams & NATO vehicles once more.
Tantrums fix nothing.
Gaijin ain’t an enemy, and Abrams is tied for 2nd in fastest reload… while having the 2nd best penning round in the game.
Ya’ll are mad at Gaijin cause the US government is hush hush about Abrams.
& instead of thinking of solutions like I and many other well headed people have done, you yell.
1- More digging for information on specific Abrams, like what @Daniel8599 has done and may continue doing.
2- Suggest rule changes on the forum suggestions.
3- Provide feedback for 2024 roadmap that includes your respectfully written assertive dissatisfaction with the current rules on armor for top MBTs.
People forget that Gaijin explicitly states they’re open to new sources of information.
@Dancing_Frog
Tons? Sir, M1A2 SEP2 has only half a ton on SEP1, which TUSK2 is clearly part of.
SEP1 has half a ton on M1A2, tho not entirely sure where that is.
And M1A2 has more armor & tons than M1A1.
@_Renzo
Negative reviews won’t change anything, they don’t respond to those and never will.
Pens every time, less than 600mm of protection.
My negative review wasn’t made to get things to change though. I just made it so that new players can know that the “authentic and realistic vehicles” is only true when Gaijin wants it to be, and not overall true.
3 Likes
Except your statement is false.
All vehicles are authentic to known information at their disposal.*
It would only be unauthentic if they scrapped the armor source rules in favor of parity at top MBTs for example.
We’re stuck cause there’s nothing conclusive before SEP3, and M1A2 - M1A2 SEP2 weight gain isn’t more than a ton.
Now, 1 ton is something. Computer equipment, guns, armor, etc as potential options.
SEP3 is the thing that REALLY gains weight cause its armor is 100% confirmed in the sources I’ve seen.
Except that we have things like a production T-80B in game with thermals that were mounted on 1-2 test vehicles. Or A T-80U with features of a T-80UM.
13 Likes