But it is balanced, thus making it a non-issue.
It has better armor profile than 2A4. Also, you forgot about it’s reload speed.
When compared to most other tanks it has better mobility, gun handling and gun depression as well. It also has the best ammo compartmentalization.
@Columbia6448
I was just stating that my stance on this wouldn’t change regardless of what vehicle we’re talking about, M1 or not. Buffing already strong vehicles doesn’t feel good, regardless of BR and nation.
The
And yet despite those two things, the Leopard 2A4 is still better due it it’s better round.
But worse armor when compared to other nations.
It’s mostly average when compared to other nations and only better by a very small amount. (once again 5% to 10% increases)
It’s only good because it let’s you carry a lot of ammo safely when compared to other tanks, problem with that is you can lots of ammo and you need too while the 2A4 can cruse around with only 15 rounds and be fine because it’s ammo actually just works.
Personally I’d say it really isn’t even that powerful, I’d take the challenger 1 or Leopard 2A4 over them any day because those vehicles actually are powerful, why? because their ammo and armor actually just work.
The Challenger 1’s armor is thinner on the hull but very thick on the turret, the Leopard is mostly the same but a bit thinner and covering a larger area, leopards are easier to kill than the M1 but it can just as easily nuke everything else.
it had a sub 50 percent win rate BEFORE the CB and KVT according to some people
Another thing on this, the only tank I’d say is worse than the M1 at 10.7 is the Italian Ariete P, poor lil guy always getting bullied by Gaijin.
M1 has better reload to compensate so their firepower is pretty equal.
-10 degrees of gun depression surely isn’t average. There are tanks out there with like half of that available.
M1 has horizontal targeting speed of 40 degrees per second, T-80B has 24 and Challengers have 31. I think that’s more than just 5-10% increase.
15 rounds isn’t always enough, especially in longer games. M774 works as well for your information.
2A4 is pretty good but Challys are lacking.
Also, if you think 2A4’s armor works then same should apply to M1 because it has better armor profile.
If you like high powered shells so much to think that, you should try out 120S or Object 292.
5 seconds is now the standard reload for most tanks that aren’t Leopards or Soviet.
And honestly I’d take 1.5 more seconds on a reload for a gun that does more damage and pens more any day.
It is quite literally the average and standard for most MBTs, the only ones that don’t follow this rule are soviet tanks(which don’t follow the NATO standard for obvious reasons) and leopards which only have 1 less gun depression
Which is the NATO standard, even the Ariete P has this.
The challenger and soviets are the exception.
15 rounds is always enough for me as I’m not stupid and refill my ammo on cap points as most people do, 15 rounds of M774 would never be enough and that’s what I’m saying here.
The challengers aren’t lacking anything but top speed, they’re very good people just tend to not take advantage of just how thick the turret face is.
The M1 and Leopard 2A4 have about equal armor and mobility, the M1 is generally more evenly protected while the Leopard has more thick parts and more thin parts. they mostly have equivalent survivability.
I am, I’m getting the Object 292 as soon as I can get my hands on one.
In general the less powerful your shell is the worse the tank is, a great example are most of Britain’s tanks they would be some of the best in the game if their rounds didn’t do so little damage when compared to others.
Generally nothing effects how fun a tank is as much as the round does, a tank can have horrid mobility and no armor, but people will still like it because it’s gun is strong.
At 10.7 only Challengers have 5s reload, which is great until you find out you only have 3 rounds in your first stage stowage.
I’ve always said to myself that you can always aim better, but you cannot change how fast time goes. You almost always should aim at same places regardless of the round you have.
How can you be average when you’re the best ?
You forgot about Chinese, Japanese and Israelis.
Sometimes refilling isn’t an option and having more ammo that’s secured is always better.
You’re seriously underestimating the power of mobility in this game, and yes they are. If you find yourself in a situation where you need to shoot repeatedly you’ll quickly burn through that first ammo stowage. Also, Challengers are notorious for getting OHK through their breech area.
Considering you like Challengers this much, I think 120S would be a better choice for you. 5s reload with 600mm of pen at 10.3 with great thermals and turret armor is probably something that’s hand made for you lol.
Meanwhile RU top tier tanks are/were amazing while having pretty mediocre/bad shell for their BR.
It’s the standard for most MBTs… If America and Britain solely made a majority of MBTs.
Germany doesn’t have a standard of -10dg, nor does Japan, Italy, France, Sweden, South Korea, and… So on.
Is everything a “NATO standard” if you deem it good enough?
Now compare the following statistics between the M1 Abrams and T-80B:
@PT1GodHunter Now watch them bring up some completely irrelevant point like they always do, and how they continue to ignore the M774 round has no place at 10.7
Something I’ve noticed as well is that US players do not take advantage of the smoke shells. They are actually amazing.
omg, look at me playing bad with a vehicle with stock heat what a surprise;
i`m not crying in the forums because I have a stock heat
im not even post a SS of your profile because its horrid, i have better things to do m8
have fun, get good instead
The complete opposite of German WW2 players.
nah german tanks have launchers US players need to load a shell
Yet that’s the constant argument used is the reload rate as to why the M1 shouldn’t get the M833 when it would STILL be the worst round at 10.7… and cool, how does the Object 292 and M60 120S have anything to do with the M1 that has to snipe VERY specific spots (especially in an uptier. T90 is almost impossible to get frontally so God speed at range) while tanks even before it can one tap it through the front with very limited difficulty, even at its own BR. Not even joking, every other nations first APFSDS can go through the turret cheeks. That’s not including the fact the M1 is stuck with the M735 which has an anemic penetration capability at 292mm flat pen at 10 meters…
I mean with that argument; the Object 292 is a T-series on steroids :T What’s your argument toward why the Object 292 shouldn’t be raised in BR as it’s has competitive composite armor and a powerful gun in BRs above what it is currently yet is 10.7 when it’s resistant to 11.7 shells.
Wanna note that the Leopard 2A7V and the Challanger 3TD are limited to the DM53, a round from 2001, whereas they operate the newer DM rounds such as the DM73 in real life? Also, the T80U can pen the UFP just fine on the Leopard 2A7V with the SLIGHTEST of firing downward and the T80U can pen the Challanger 3TD through the entire front of the hull. Same thing occurs vice versa so it matches how tank combat is and where the first tank to get a shot on target will usually, not always, win the fight.
Though, I’ll add the T-80U is also running 1992 ammo so again, it gets FURTHER development of its munitions.
I ain’t surprised he’s saying it though… Motorola has a LOT more Russian gameplay at that BR than with the US
If we’re being realistic here, the M1 is gonna be uptiered because of the lack of a 10.7 BR across the nations. Not exaggerating but I’ve had like 2 battles that weren’t max uptier in the M1 in the last 2 months. With the exception of tanks with autoloaders, almost those 120mm guns have 6 second reload. I’d happily take a 6 second reload if I can actually penetrate tanks v a 5 second reload with a gun that mostly fails to pen unless from the side.
Never see them do it, even if they have a launcher to do sk.
1991 is the doi for 3BM46. And how does it matter if T-80U in game is T-80UM from 1992?
I would love to see what 11.7 shell 292 can take without being penetrated by it. Especially to the hull, since there it can be penned by some very weak ATGMs.
1992 is the DOI for the ATGM it has, the 9M119.
Ran it through the armor analysis and it stops a good amount of them