‘‘If the Leo 2A4, T-80B, Ariete (P), Vickers Mk7, T-72AV TURMS-T, T-80UD, Strv 121. etc can’t have 5s reload like the M1, then neither should the M1 have a 5s reload.’’
‘‘These bogus arguments about the Abrams having a better reload are utter trash. If those other MBT’s don’t need a 5s reload, then neither does the M1.’’
Trying to Uno Reverse me doesn’t work here because I never said they shouldn’t get the realistic reloads.
But hey, guess what - The T-series autoloaders are dogwater and don’t go lower than roughly 6.5 seconds, so they will always reload slower regardless. Maybe the Ivans should build better autoloaders.
Show me Italian win rates ever being low.
The tanks and lines are objectively worst then the US and yet it always has a better win rate.
Then give up the 5 second reload! It’s as simple as that!
Or give everyone else a better reload!
Show me 16 Italian players versus 16 USSR players or 16 German players.
Italy top tier gets sub-4,000 battles daily.
Germany, Sweden, USSR, and USA all heap out 10,000 battles MINIMUM.
And Italy is almost always one lone tanker or max 3 in a match beside Germany, US, or Britain.
You’re splitting hairs now.
It’s the players, if your gonna sit here and honestly say that the M1 is a bad tank in war thunder then I honestly don’t know what else to tell you.
The sad part is that SnailSoft will probably give into US demands(again) and give yet another unneeded buff.
It doesn’t need to be given up as other nations are also getting/have gotten their realistic reload rates.
Did you not read the last update notes or do you just have short term memory loss?
What are you talking about? What does that have to do with anything?
You either give up the reload buff(which btw, the leo2 could also get to a 5 second reload) or you get the better round.
Nah. How bout the other 10.7 MBTs get the better reloads AND lose their 400mm+ pen shells instead? Then they’re closer in parity to the Abrams at least in firepower.
What, that’s no good? Aight then, Abrams gets M833 and the other tanks get better reloads and keep their current shells.
Ivans and West Tais lose out only because their autoloaders are garbage, but that’s a them problem since they skimped on engineering, but at least they keep their shells.
So I have everything set up.
Here is my current stats.
Now, I will fight 15 battles in each nation, and start with the following 10.7 tanks.
Leopard 2 Pzbtl 123
Object 292
M1 KVT
My goal will be to score as many kills as possible in those 15 matches. I’m also limiting myself to 5 vehicles overall, to represent other players who play for free without spending GE.
However, the ultimate goal is to achieve as many kills as possible - without back-ups - from the start of match. Whether I win or lose is secondary to this overall goal. The ultimate goal is to see whether M1 KVT and its M774 round is adequate against 10.7 tanks of its own variety.
I’m inviting others to also choose to take this challenge up if you have available 10.7 tanks as such. Just be sure you copy your current stats in a screenshot here before you start.
To wit, my current kill scores are as follows:
Object 292: 633
Leopard 2 Pzbtl 123: 242
M1 KVT: 209
Oh man, I’d take that deal. A equal pen shell to the US and a faster reload? Deal!
Can we get some of that amazing CAS also?
The CAS aspect is a trickier sell as many nations had much more limited options over time compared to the US. That said, much of what is in-game is missing their IRL A2G loadouts across the board, so I’m all for taking those missing items into consideration.
You know what would be amazing? If SPAAs learned how to be anti-CAS and didn’t grind their way up main battle tanks only and then 1 death Andy. But you know, we can’t all be snarky and perfect, can we?
To be fair, many nations DO need better SPAA.
But we’re getting off the track here so let’s refocus.
In the amount of games I’ve played of late, I’ve watched players literally might as well get up and go have a cup of coffee after spawning SPAA. They’re just sitting range targets.
I won’t bother counting the number of missile SPAAs I see sitting in spawn without even twisting their turrets or maneuvering their vehicle to a more secure location.
So if USSR players or German players are upset about US air, or if US players are upset about Ka-50s, I’m sorry to say that’s on their side of the aisle for not learning how to effectively take down planes and for moreorless not learning to utilize multiple skill sets in their line-ups. It isn’t an argument for their cause in this case.
I’ve got a few more rounds to do to finish USSR.
It might be just me, but I’ve noticed that Germany 10.7 is almost always costing 120SP and split evenly between 9.7 and 11.7, rarely seeing 11.7.
Meanwhile USSR is almost consistently uptiered with the Object 292 costing 100SP except in two out of seven matches.
Team quality is of course dependent on whether US is there or not, but even some USA players are actually not complete “shitters”, they are trying.
Player skill and attention levels aside, there’s a massive gap in SPAA capabilities amongst many BR levels, and no amount of skill will make up for discrepancies as large as a what a Pantsir can do vs an ADATs or Otomatic, for example.
But I digress to return to topic, as spaa isn’t the Abrams.
For me, just give M833 as T4 modification. with 395mm point blank it still worse then 105 DM33 or 120 DM23. Giving it that round wouldn’t turn it into a killer machine, as stated before it will most likely face equal or higher tiered enemies due to the recent BR changes.
It used it in real life and as apposed to giving leo2 120mm DM33 which would jump the pen from 410 to 481, which is a significant increase, 20mm isn’t.
Same goes for the type 16 P & FPS, receiving DM23 to replace M735. which was a pathetic round at that BR.
On release TURMS was gifted with 3BM42 without increase in BR, 2S25(M) have very powerful rounds for their BR, M variant received 3BM60, without BR increase, peer vehicle would be the TAM2C which is at the same BR with 430mm pen compared to 580 on M.
Final update.
15 matches in each tank at first spawn.
M1 KVT - 15 kills
Leopard 2 (Premium) - 23 kills
Object 292 - 33 kills
The reload rate on the M1 KVT and M1 is not enough to make up for the lack of punch the M774 round offers at its own BR or when it uptiered against 11.0s, 11.3s, or 11.7s. It loses loaders fast and the reload rate then is reset, making it much more difficult to make it an OP vehicle.
The Leopard 2 has plenty enough punch to do so, and unless outmaneuvered, tanks more hits.
The Object 292 with a loadout that keeps most of its ammunition bays in the rear empty will tank more shots than expected, and unless faced with M829A2, it will pawn most anyone who doesn’t see it coming or underestimates it. Its only drawback is the 10 second reload rate and lack of ERA and thermals, which on long range maps makes it suffer when trying to spot distant enemies using thermals of any generation.
After having played, I’m deadset on advising and suggesting that M883 be added to the M1 and M1 KVT.
Edit:
Another point… on top tier maps and larger maps that I personally want to see more of, the 774 is stupidly anemic on punching power, eliminating entirely the advantage of having a rangefinder or even thermals, which was one of its greatest strengths.
One can shoot even British or Indian tanks side on, take two crew, and still get killed as a result of taking too long to destroy an unaware enemy.
About the results I expected, frankly. As tempting as it is to have my own go at it, I frankly just cannot be arsed to waste my time on 45 matches for an outcome I already know will happen. Could instead spend that time playing games I actually enjoy instead of WT.
So you don’t enjoy playing the game, but still feel the need to tell others playing the game its a skill issue. What’s the point of your opinion then? Its not like adding the round, or even making the Abrams fire the Deathstar’s laser will change if you play the game or not.
That being said if adding the M833 is a placebo round, then why not add it? At that point all it does is makes modules in the M1 cheaper to get. KVT just will have another round, but nothing changes.
Or if it is the ultimate penning round as some claim I’d compromise and adjust the reload rate to match the penetration increase. From 372 to 395 or a 7% increase in penetration. Which would mean 5.3 second reload with ace crew. Matching the Leo 2’s reload rate of 6 seconds is a 20% increase in time, which is if reload rate is balance, require a shell that pens near 450mm. The logic this follows is the Abrams should be penning 20% less than the Leo 2, cause it can fire 20% faster. That’s a 328mm of pen, does that balance out the M1 in your opinion? There’s more to balance than just the reload rate, the armor, and mobility come into play. Leo 2 is more likely to tank a hit than an Abrams. So it doesn’t matter if the Abrams can fire a second faster, if its more likely to be crippled the first shot vs the other. Skill helps, but you can’t be perfect every time.
If thunderskill ever comes back on online, I’d love to see how many Ariete AMV are being used vs the Leo 2A7HU for Italy. I’m sure pretty sure it will be the Leo 2. They both fire DM53 but I’m sure the Ariete’s one second faster reload rate doesn’t matter as much vs it’s lack of armor.
