“Abrams, besides nearly half of the top tanks, has probably the best armor profile”.
No shit, if you remove all 122s, all 2A7s, all 80s, all 90s, then sure, yeah.
Arietes are 11.7, except for an overtiered one that is 12.3.
Challengers have 550+ mm KE hulls (compared to Abrams’ 355mm KE one).
Chinese tanks have 700+mm KE glacises.
Leclerc’s UFP is underperforming by pretty much 50% and has a whole hole between the mid glacis and UFP, and that should be corrected (along with its mobility)
Abrams can actually eat bm60 with no damage to basket already if it hits fuel tanks. I got such shot on my m1 aim on dev
80s and 90s do not have as much armor in their turrets. They are literally bald pigeons
Without any hull improvements adding the A4 is a good idea tbh, since Relikt got buffed with zero sources.
They are when you consider;
1- that this T-80 is extremely oversized because it’s more zoomed in, making the weakspots appear larger.
2- that the Abrams UFP is only resistant as long as it’s on a perfectly flat ground.
3- that with the upcoming hull and ring report, although the ring stops being a weakspot against autocanons, it DOES become a bigger weakspot against tank shells, as the driver hatch stops being flat and becomes volumetric instead.
got buffed
performs almost same as on live
Doesn’t protect already big weakspots
But muh Russian buas
3BM46 would be really nice for the BVM, since you would trade lower pen for a faster reload.
flat ground
When it’s not flat, Abrams can hull down. T-series can’t because of mentioned bald turret and gun depression
T-80s are arguable. BVM and M1A2 are actually not very far off in terms of frontal armor.
AMV, overtiered or not (it is), is still at 12.3. It constitutes to being a top tier tank.
Go hit protection analysis and look at which tank has a more green hull. Not to mention Chally breach is like 75% bigger than Abrams.
With massive foreheads and just as big, or bigger, LFPs.
Yeah, for sure, but in its current state? Literally 85% green.
You know what? This is a solid statement and I agree with that.
Personally I have no issues using A2 against any tank but if Gaijin refuses to gives better hull armor then A3 is justified in this case considering they increased the weight on Abrams a lot.
Bbbbut reload doesn’t matter with such amor
I would like to push with Abrams brainlessly and ricochet almost every round like them t80s.
These people really talk about T series and Chinese having MUH ARMOR when their turrets are just a pinatas. Natoid bias doesn’t exist, it can’t hurt brains
Anyway. As to the actual question of this thread;
Gaijin wanted the K-5 tanks to be frontally immune WHEN they were the Top Dogs.
Now, Russia has 3x Relikt tanks; so the K-5 tanks, which are now lower BRs, are no longer the workhorse of the Russian tree at Top Tier, so they can (and should) be made more vulnerable to 12.7 tanks.
Man penetration difference isn’t even noticeable most of the time.
I regularly get uptiered in my T-80U-E1 and 3BM46 gets the job done very well hence why I maintain solid 2+ K/D against those top tier monsters.
As a USSR main, this update doesn’t make me happy haha let’s make the Slavic Devs and the employees in the Rus side offices even more biased so we can get more USSR buffs lol.
Try this yourself with T-80 and you will see how that turns out.
You won’t because russia players seem at least trying to aim something besides ufp
I do that all the time in my Abrams and still do well in it.
Gotta do what’s needed to get into the brawl with my Abrams.
Why take my quote out of context?