This just proves that M774 is decent enough and M1 can deal with it’s common foes perfectly fine. You might need to aim more carefully than your contemporaries, but they’ll have to do others things more carefully than you so it all balances out, if you know what I mean.
My rig ?
Adding a better shell would make most tanks more fun to play, which is obvious. M1 is already fun enough to play and I would like to see other tanks in that BR bracket getting some love so they get fun to play as well.
The American 10.7 line-up relies on the M1 and M1 KVT.
10.3, the 120S packs a 5.3 second 120, but its hull is squishy. There’s nothing to be done there other than hide your hull and snipe.
The Wolfpack is a light tank, so easily HEed. But it packs a M900 4 second reload. That’s a 9.7.
The Bradley’s TOW2B problems of penning are known, but also known as being OP if their top down attacks are put at their accurate modeling. And of course, an IFV that can be HEed.
The others more readily are all light tanks (XM8 and CCVL). CCVL packs an M833, but is an event vehicle, thus requiring someone to buy it through Marketplace, and it isn’t even a premium to make up for the lack of armor.
In short, the M1s are the mainstays, and with their current foes, all need to be treated as light tanks themselves where it comes to taking hits.
This argument relies on you aiming carefully in a twitch game, which we already covered was questionable, plus using a subpar round, against enemies that DON’T need to aim carefully to plug you.
In higher tiers generally you’ll want to aim at the gun area in order to disable the enemy if you think you don’t have enough time to make a clean OHK shot. Your amazing gun handling helps with getting your gun on the target faster as well.
This argument was used in the topic about Object 292 being OP because it can penetrate everything everywhere. Even with that, you can still mess up your shot and kill only one crew (driver, loader), while getting killed in return. This is why I value stuff like reload and gun handling more than shell itself.
My opinion on them is in-line with the other players in this thread and the competitive war thunder scene in that they are good vehicles especially with the shell and reload combination of the M1A2s along with the mobility. Irrespective of whatever my opinion may be or anyones though gaijin apparently deem them as performing acceptably where they are just now. There will no doubt me a lot of changes for all trees in the future as decompression hopefully is implemented as they intend as 11.7/12.0 right now is extremely cluttered.
As for KVT/clickbait impacting vehicle performance statistics, obviously they do lower the performance statistics. It’s an undeniable fact that a lot of very new players simply buy these vehicles and perform poorly because they lack experience. The true extent of the impact of these players we don’t know though, only gaijin does since they don’t make their stats public.
So using the flattest map that I could think of with the longest uninterrupted sight lines the finds reflected surprisingly very accurately to what protection analysis said would happen.
The M1 with M774 had no issues penetrating the following areas of the 2A4:
The upper glacis plate of the 2A4 would auto-ricochet the round, the remainder of the right turret cheek could not be penetrated and the left turret cheek could not be penetrated. The roof was unable to be targetted. At this range fine adjustment of aim coupled with shell deviation made trying to hit the upper glacis difficult.
As for testing the 2A4 against the M1 with DM23 from the same range it was found that the following areas could be reliably penetrated:
Both the roof and the upper glacis were both auto-ricochet zones. The left cheek could not be penetrated as expected. Surprisingly the right cheek could not be penetrated even whilst trying to hit as close to the mantlet as possible even though protection analysis indicated it should be able to sometimes in this area. Appears to be a fairly low chance. The most surprising though was the LFP, where there was also approximately a 50/50 chance that the shell would even penetrate. Similar to as with the 2A4, at this range trying to intentionally hit the turret ring proved to be very difficult with shell deviation and even trying to fine aim onto it with max optics zoom.
Between both of the vehicles it was slightly easier for the M1 to penetrate and damage the 2A4, compared to the 2A4 against the M1 at a range of almost 1800m (maximum distance we could achieve on the map).
As a separate aside we also tested the 292 against the M1 roof and upper glacis and found the results perfectly matched necrons video he posted earlier in the thread. Every single shot auto-ricochet off the upper glacis and roof at a distance 15m.
(Bonus point that is unrelated, we managed to get vehicle pop-in occurring reliably. When we got into position if the other person was static and had not moved they were invisible to the other person until they moved or fired a weapon despite sitting in clear open view on a flat road. This is still insanely silly and needs to be removed, tanks sitting in open view on a road should not be made invisible until performing an action.)
the abrams is better then all of those vehicles tho, the rooikat, VFM5, Radkamp, Leo2k, leo1a5, type16 are all lightly armoured vehicles that can easily be 1 shot as they have basically no protection, the olifant and chieftan mk10 are literally so slow and poorely armoured they are already too high br wise, like the olifant is literally a centurion can can easily be penned by everything at its br and even in a downtier while being slow, and the chieftan is even slower, doesnt get thermals and only good thing about it is the turret armour
cope
Eh i would say that if it wasnt for cas us vehicles are fairly eh. 6.7 is the best lineupp in the tree and it isnt even close.
T80B. T72AV. T72B. I’ll wait.
1,800 meter on flat ground, I wonder what would happen when you make it perfect conditions.
And again, you’ll deny that you’re testing on a custom server.
One more note, how many shots did it take for you to kill the Leopard?
Edit: Actually, it really doesn’t matter. You’ll make it perfect setup and pretend it’s the same as in gameplay.
T80B. T72AV. T72B. I’ll wait.
These vehicles all are very different in characteristics from the M1 and the 2A4 and have significant differences in strengths and weaknesses. Although they may have higher penetration shells and more effective frontal armour they also have all the drawbacks associated with them such as poor to very poor reverse gears, lack of neutral steer, lack of thermal imaging, much longer reloads, ammo carousels, lack of depression, worse gun handling to name a few.
This is no different to how earlier in trees tank destroyers will often have much better shells than other vehicles at the same BR but will also have limiting factors applied to them in return.
1,800 meter on flat ground, I wonder what would happen when you make it perfect conditions.
This doesn’t say anything, this sentence is incomplete.
And again, you’ll deny that you’re testing on a custom server.
You have not yet evidenced a single credible reason as to why testing this on a custom server and on a live server makes any difference to the variables at play within the test that was carried out.
One more note, how many shots did it take for you to kill the Leopard?
Multiple of each vehicle were destroyed during testing. The number of shots it took to kill each vehicle varied depending upon location of the shot, and even then varied depending upon spalling pattern.
Edit: Actually, it really doesn’t matter. You’ll make it perfect setup and pretend it’s the same as in gameplay.
Penetration performance against armour of vehicles at set distances does not have any variables that are effected by playing on live servers versus playing in a custom lobby. You still have not cited any credible reason in this regards.
I knew you had no interest in actual testing and only cared about what your feelings were, but thank you for confirming. The people in this thread who are interested in the reality of the situation however can make use of it and can recreate the testing conditions easily themselves to verify the results.
M48A2 G A2 has DM23 at 8.3 🤣🤣🤣
Hello All,
Just a friendly reminder, Do not put down / insult other members, keep the discussion civil and take all personal quarrels to PMs please.
Thank you.
I seriously doubt he cares about any of that.
What probably happens is him getting into the modification panel, check the shell penetration number and immediately say: “wow, this tank good/bad”.
This happens a lot on this forum, people keep getting overly fixated on a single performance metric and ignore the whole package, which in return makes them believe something is OP or absolute trash.
This, the guy literally cant fathom that anything other than shell pen matters it just seems like an incredibly common thing with US mains
Nothing changes between custom and live matches asides from hidden modifiers like shell shatter
M60 120S has better firepower than a Strv 122B PLSS, clearly the Strv 122’s are underperforming and need major firepower buffs /s
Would absolutely love to, but considering the amount of insults sent in my direction, I’ll just go ahead and close out with thank you for trying, Test et al.
As I stated elsewhere, this isn’t what I brought up. The sum of its parts are not in the same league as its contemporaries. Is the M833 too good of a round for 10.7? Yes or no?
It’s not just about the round so sooner you realize this, the better.
Is the M1 with M833 too good for 10.7 ? Yes.
Let’s compare the pen of M1 with other 10.7s:
T-72M2: 509
Bhisma: 457
T-80B: 457
Leopard 2A4: 410
Strv 121: 410
.
.
.
M1: 372. Proposal: 395.
And somehow M1 getting 395mm, which would STILL be lower than any other 10.7’s and even many 9.7 and 9.3s… is an issue?
It’s not like they are asking for M900. They are asking for M833. This is a more than reasonable request.
Sure, mobility- Leopard 2A4, Strv 121 and T-80B have similar mobility, while having better firepower that would still be better even if M1 got M833. Sure, M1 has faster reload, but many of these have better armor. It’s simply asymmetrical pros and cons.
