This thread is an useful one for a decent amount of people, but you two need to cut this argument or at least take it to PMs. You’ve been arguing and bringing up skill issue since more than 100 messages ago. Please find a way to remain respectful to each other and keep on discussing the topic itself.
7 Likes
I really do not want my thread locked. My apologies, Bao. But thank you.
Returning to topic, as I said, every example Necrons has shown is old, as he himself has said he isn’t playing right now, and he consistently pulls up gameplay with M1A1, which has 600mm KE protection, not 370mm protection, and he himself rarely shows gameplay on long range maps.
As I said, M774 is too anemic in the tier and maps it is today. M883 will help be its M900.
4 Likes
Sure you can, but it’s not as easy as with something like the Leopards, or even Arietes.
At 300m, 120mm DM23:
At 300m, 105mm M774:
80% seems very generous, but I agree that the 2A4 has a larger breech; however, the Abrams’ turret cheeks are much more easily penetrated in return.
Sure, but they must be way out of cover to do that.
The turret ring is much easier to expose.
At far ranges, and for flicking shots, it’s easier to shoot centre mass of vehicles than not, which I assume you agree with. So I believe trying to go for one-shotting the Abrams is easier than trying to go for one-shotting the Leopard.
For example, if both vehicles were an array of pixels 7x wide, and 7x tall, we may get this:
I can’t speak for you, but I believe it’s easier to hit the one on the right than the one on the left, if you had only a couple seconds to do so.
If you do miss the Abrams’ 1-shot area, you’d either hit the UFP (nothing), or the breech.
If you do miss the Leopard 2A4’s 1-shot area, you’d either hit the UFP (usually nothing too), or the LFP (which you will get the driver, engine and maybe the gunner).
The 1-shot area of the Leopard 2A4 is larger. But in some situations, due to the way the crew is orientated, you can use this to your advantage. For example, side-scraping from your hull-ammunition side can effectively make you unable to get 1-shotted. This can be done to a somewhat worse extent with the Abrams.
The 1-shot area and viability also changes as you start angling the hull, so you must take that into account, whereas you should be able to simply shoot the centre of the turret ring, at almost any angle, every time, and still expect a 1-shot.
2 Likes
8 month old clip on targeting range, not on game servers against opponents.
Maps ?
If anything, maps are as small as ever, so using that as an argument isn’t realistic.
1 Like
8 month old clip on targeting range, not on game servers against opponents.
Absolutely irrelevant.
1 Like
You don’t play Red Desert, Tunisia, or Eastern Europe?
Imagine bringing up red desert.
Must’ve seen that map about once in the last 100+ games. Practically doesn’t exist along with pradesh and large (now smaller) tunisia. Also have all these maps liked, not that it does anything.
1 Like
I didn’t bring up if you saw it often. My point being that playing on any of those larger maps which suit high tier gameplay and gunnery results in a massive imbalance of the M1 versus its contemporaries. So that’s a nonstarter to me. M774 is not powerful enough to measure as adequate in the meta today, particularly in those long range maps.
Not really an argument. Certain vehicles are better suited to certain maps than other vehicles. This isn’t even unique to that BR range, this is the case through the entire game.
2 Likes
I think I saw Jesus more times than Red Desert. Saw big Tunisia probably once or twice since it was introduced and occasionally get big EE but most of the times it’s the small version.
Smaller, post stamp sized maps are still in a big majority.
That’s like complaining your Russian vehicles need changing because their bad gun depression sucks on hilly maps. Sometimes you have to deal with things that are thrown your way.
1 Like
That’s like complaining your Russian vehicles needs changing because their bad gun depressions sucks on hilly maps. Sometimes you have to deal with things that are thrown your way.
At least the abrams has versatility for those maps too. They have speed and one of the fastest reloads so can push up to ambush positions or flank.
Main battle tanks are meant to be generalists, this isn’t a specialized IFV or SPG. The M1 is a main battle tank. The 774 round isn’t powerful enough to keep up with the current BR, or even many 9.7 tanks’ penetration.
There’s 9.3 tanks players can bring as back-ups in their line-ups that can reliably penetrate Abrams at 1,500 meters.
This should be reason to give it better firepower.
3 Likes
There’s 9.3 tanks players can bring as back-ups in their line-ups that can reliably penetrate Abrams at 1,500 meters.
And? Exact same thing can be said in regards to the 2A4.
Main battle tanks are meant to be generalists, this isn’t a specialized IFV or SPG. The M1 is a main battle tank. The 774 round isn’t powerful enough to keep up with the current BR, or even many 9.7 tanks’ penetration.
Says who? War thunder has asymmetric balancing across the BRs. Just because your tank isn’t quite as strong in one area as others does not mean it isn’t balanced where it currently is and isn’t more capable in other areas to make up for it. This underpins the entire game.
This should be reason to give it better firepower.
It isn’t. By the same reasoning we can also argue that the 2A4 should get a 5s reload so that it can keep pace with an abrams in a duel since the 2A4 will likely lose should they both fail to kill with first shot. It is unfair that the 2A4 has a longer reload.
2 Likes
No, it means it should get dm33 to keep pace now that 9.3 can’t see it
No, it means it should get dm33 to keep pace now that 9.3 can’t see it
It really does not need DM33. It’s already arguably the best 10.7 in the game. And you are forgetting again that everything the same BR and above it also went up and a a lot below.
1 Like
That’s a moot point
The U.S. doesn’t need to be a tactical underdog in every BR because you claim there’s asymmetric balancing. And even with M833, it still would be a tactical underdog because it lacks the same penetration as a 120 or 125.
But at the least it wouldn’t be shoehorned into needing to somehow cross open fields to get inside 500 meters to reliably penetrate something that can kill it from three or four times that distance.
4 Likes
No it isn’t. Nothing has changed for it aside from the fact that it does not see 9.3 vehicles anymore. It does not need DM33. It’s still only facing the vehicles it already faced.
No it wouldn’t (and it isn’t at the moment) since it has many redeeming features over it’s contemporaries.