In my case, when it comes specifically to vehicles, I am only interested in;
-Top Tier MBTs (the most)
-Top Tier SAMs
-Top Tier Jet Fighters (lesser degree)
-Top Tier Battleships (even smaller degree)
-Maybe good, solid mid/late-WW2 Medium/Heavy tank
isnt glavie event already started?
I never said that the T-series are bad, just that the M1A2s are considerably better.
In fact the T-series are still alright.
Top tier US ground teams mostly lose due to Russian CAS being oppressive.
Alright then, I will now proceed to blame everything on you >:)
With all due respect, I’ve seen way more people with double KDs on T-80BVMs and T-90Ms than people doubling their KDs in M1A2s.
US teams have been losing nearly the same way since 2021 without the Kh-38 (or even Kh-29s) even in the game.
Because the average Abrams player is just diabolically bad and are using a tank with a high skill floor?
I mentioned this, but basically:
Abrams; high ceiling, BUT high floor
Russia: low ceiling, BUT low floor too
This means that, while the best players may achieve better results with the Abrams by overcoming its weaknesses and exploiting its advantages, the vast majority of players will have an easier time doing generally better with Russian tanks instead.
In technical terms, I believe they are pretty much perfectly balanced in an asymmetrical way. But in practical terms, the ceiling/floor matter makes the Russian tanks just be more effective.
Basically; the Abrams is better under 30% of the playerbase, while the Russian tanks are better under 70% of the playerbase, give or take. This makes Russian tanks statistically more effective despite technically not having as much potential.
A tank with a high skill floor is an overall mediocre tank for all intents and purposes.
the Ariete is a mediocre tank series with an even higher skill floor than Abrams, and it still has nearly the same WR.
Just because twenty counted dudes on this forum manage to make the Abrams work doesn’t mean that the only answer is skill issue. That is just neglecting the whole picture.
Except the Ariete doesn’t have that high of a skill ceiling.
The Abrams is a tank that can absolutely change games in the correct hands. Meanwhile the T-90M is only good for sniping (if you get in close with a T-90M it’s generally a free kill unless you skill issue) and the BVM relies on yolo rushing and hoping the enemy is bad.
EDIT: meant skill ceiling in the first sentence, idk why I typed floor.
Precisely. The Ariete maintains the point except also taken to the extreme;
Sure, a skilled player WILL manage to outperform any Russian tank on an Ariete thanks to the higher ceiling; but the vast majority of the players will just do much better much more easily on a T-80BVM instead.
Therefore… would people claim that Ariete is better than T-80BVM just because the very best players can do better on it? Or would it make more sense to state that T/80BVM is better given the fact that the majority of players just can do much better much more easily?
Correct, it has just 1 Issue thats the 1 Weakspot it has, the entire Tank
It has the same reload and basically the same pen as an Abrams, only lacking armor and chunks of mobility. By your definitions, that’s more than enough to blame skill issue on them if they don’t manage to overcome Russian MBTs and CAS, while having SAMP/Ts and EFs (and I’m not even accounting the 2A7HU).
These four words are what destroys any argument in my opinion.
Vehicle capabilities should be judged strictly and explicitly independently from the players that may operate them; and if you still want to bring players into the equation, then it should be the average player as a unified baseline standard, not “the correct hands” of a theorically top performing player.
Otherwise we can extend the argument to;
Abrams is the best in the correct hands.
Ariete AMV is the best in the correct hands.
Ariete PSO is the best in the correct hands.
Actually, an M22 played by the Top player in history can be the best in the correct hands.
Etc.
Of course an Ariete PSO played by a Top player will do better than the average Joe in a T-80BVM; that doesn’t make Ariete PSO better than T-80BVM.
I could be wrong but the Abrams has slightly less pen than the Ariete.
In that case the Abrams still wins, because the BVM only has 1 or 2 effective advantages over the M1A2 at most, maybe 3 if you are generous.
I do better statistically in my 11.7 Ariete premium used at 12.7 than both of you in a lot of your top tier MBTs, so I agree with this point though.
Precisely.
I remember someone’s argument to claim that the Abrams was OP was that some YouTuber uploaded a 10 kill match with it.
That same YouTuber also uploaded a 10 kill match with Ariete PSO, but funnily enough, I never saw anyone use that video to claim that Ariete PSO was OP.
Almost like those results were player-determined and not necessarily vehicle-defined.
So… applying the same logic to both instances, according to them, this would make Ariete PSO OP, unless using double standards.
It’s basically the same pen all around, which doesn’t change the point in question: if your only argument to judge a tank is based on the player’s potential to not whiff shots WHILE not getting RNG’d in the proccess, I have a case to sell you:
Guess which is practically the only nation with a positive win ratio at top tier. And this trend ratios have been more less the same since the times of the first batch of multi-vehicle SPAAs, or improved mavericks, or Air Superiority, or even the first SEP being introduced.
I refuse to believe you think Russian players are a super breed.
Their balance is perfectly asymmetrical;
T-80BVM over Abrams:
-Frontal armor protection
-Side armor protection
-No turret basket module.
-No Hydraulic Pump nodule.
Abrams over T-80BVM:
-Gun elevation and depression angles.
-Penetration.
-Rate of fire.
-Reverse speed.
Each basically has 4 pros and 4 cons against each other; T-80BVM’s emphasis being on being stronger and more survivable, and Abrams’ emphasis on being more flexible.
I didn’t mention one-hit killability because it’s just equally inconsistent in both cases xD
In an asymmetrical way, they are quite balanced; except the majority of players will have a much easier time achieving good results by casually playing T-80BVM, while Abrams’ potential can generally be exploited only by the best and/or most patient players willing to put on great effort to overcome its weaknesses.
Only on the hull, the BVM turret is laughably easy to pen.
However this discussion got shut down here earlier today, not sure if we want to get another warning here.
The turret pennable surface area of BVM is MUCH smaller than the Abrams mantlet, let alone whole center of mass turret neck, though.
Oh, I missed that! Then time to abandon ship xD
