And lo when someone like necrons tells you the vehicle is very good and points to his very high stats in it you just dismiss it anyway.
Almost as if you intend to dismiss anyone pointing out how wrong you are from the offset and you’ll just use any excuse you can conjure regardless of how poor it is.
A common trait of the disingenuous US mains.
Actually for that matter MotorolaCRO has very good stats in the M1 too at around 4K/D. Guess he doesn’t know what he’s talking about either.
This is made even better by the fact that Motorola mains USSR and does notably better in US vehicles at the same tier.
Must just be because the US vehicles are so bad and he’s got russian bias.
And in that sentence I can deduct that you didn’t read my little rant, I ground the entire Japan ground tree using the buggy mess that is M735, there is nothing I wanted more during that grind than DM23/33.
Which makes up for it with mobility similar to that of a wheeled vehicle over most terrains in game; While playing the Type 16, i was consistenly running into XM-1s that had progressed far across the map than their teammates, however since I cannot stand M735 in it’s current state I agree that the devs should give the XM-1s an M774 round or another 105mm dart that fills the gap
9.3 before the BR update was consistently uptiered to 10.3, that is where M735 becomes unbearable, it lacks the raw penetration to consistently kill Leopards, Abrams, T-series and other MBTs at the BR within their frontal arcs, then furthermore lack the post-penetration effect to ‘1 shot’ them
I don’t think much has changed since the time I played US at 10.3 (at that time). I also had to face flocks of 2A4s and T-series tanks just like you have to now, and from my experience I didn’t have problems dealing with any enemy from any angle, hence I don’t see an issue with M1 keeping M774.
You are preaching to the choir when it comes to the US tech tree as well, nobody likes M735 after it’s ahistorical nerf, once again, you still seem to be trying to spin this as I dislike or do not want this change in the case of Japan, no, Japan should be the standard everyone else should be held to.
Yet at the same time, the Type 16s sport CITVs, gen three thermals, a lower top speed, and better gunner sight magnification. However, we can go on and on and on trying to compare the minutiae of each vehicle, and such applies to every single tank in the game, yet, at the end of the day, you can have the fastest brick of armor on the planet, but if you cant kill anything that speed is worthless.
I would be more than fine with M774 on the XM-1 GM, but as we have already well established, M774 is incidentally one of the middle to low end rounds at 9.3. If anything I would rather the Type 16s to get Type 93 and the XM-1 GM to get M833 as such are the high end rounds at 9.3, with the likes of DM33 and M426 existing at 9.3 already. Reminder as well that M833 has inferior performance to DM33, M426 and Type 93.
Yet, that is still in the past, historical BRs have no bearing on the current game balance. The Stryker is 10.3 now and that is a fact, comparing it to the early Type 16s is a moot point as it is not the reality that is WT now.
It is not.
People often make this claim but I’ve never seen any compelling evidence to support it.
As far as I’m aware, spalling is determined by what modifier it is given in the game’s code.
I said add M833 to it? 774 can be pushed to a third tier round or second tier round, no problem.
Just as T-series tanks had thermals added to them, ERA to various base tanks that were actually separate lines entirely.
Also, that win rate with that k/d spread speaks volumes to how rough top tier US is if you’re a claimed USSR main and do so well with US tanks.
Stryker at 10.3 with M900 which is the 11.0 (now 11.3) IPM1’s fourth-tier round…
M1 sits nicely between the two.
Some tanks receive buffs in order to not drop in BR.
Giving M833 to M1 would surely push it to 11.0 which is something I don’t like personally, I think it’s better for it to stay where it is at currently with M774.
I don’t feel like I’m a main of any country, at least when talking about Ground. In Air I’ve only researched USSR tree so yeah.
In my opinion, problem with US at top tier comes from experienced players moving away to other nations that had something new and exciting added to them (T-90M, 2A7, 122B+). People quickly get sick of yet another M1A2 copy that has no new, usable features.
Firstly, I can respect that you don’t think you main USSR in any Ground tree.
Same here.
But you can see how readily USSR vehicles complement my playstyle versus your own.
That and Japanese and French tanks, which of course need their own massaging in model wise and in engine torque.
I grasp you think it should go up in BR if it is given M833, but I disagree based on the fact that the M1 as it is (and its premium KVT) are barely armored enough to stop even rounds that are at its newly-given tier, and most times it still won’t hold up against most of them.
I could begrudge the USSR tree for having perfect ERA, but it’s a parity I accept.
That’s my argument to add the M833 for the M1 and M1 KVT and keep them at the new 10.7 line.
Parity.
Others here have sh*t on that idea because whatever reasons they come up with, but for the average player who wants to enjoy the game, I feel it’s only right to give them the tools available to enjoy the game. Top it off with the fact that the M1 did historically carry the 833 round, and it feels like a obvious yes.
This won’t be fighting its T64A or T72 counterparts because those are down at 9.3. Its fighting contemporaries that are built in the 90s.
Thus, parity, to me.
The difficulty that some individuals have in understanding that if everything moved up by 0.3 relative to each other, nothing moved at all relative to each other is wild.
Frightening almost.
Top tier decompression helped some nations.
Many US players agreed that M833 should have been implemented even when the round first dropped, and most especially after M900 was added to IPM1.
The M1IP and M1A1 utilized the newer turret style. The old M1 relied on “good enough” turret armor until the 120 and new turret could be brought up.
Historically, M1s carried M833 in quantity from 1984 onwards. Considering what they face in the current meta, it’s enough for me to say yes, now is the time.
Nothing you wrote has anything to do with acknowledging the simple fact that everything above the M1 moved up, everything at the same BR, moved up and a few things below, moved up. So nothing changed aside from it no longer sees 9.3, as is the case with every other 10.3 that got moved to 10.7.
Nothing in essence changed, unless you’re so desperately hopeless that you could only kill 9.3 tanks
The first sentence acknowledged that decompression helped some nations.
None of what you wrote just now speaks about parity, it speaks to your personal feelings about other posters in the forums. I have nothing more for you in regards to those interpersonal feelings.
Parity by giving the M1 the M833 won’t disturb the meta of the current line-ups.
Congratulations on continuing to not address the simple fact made. I know it conflicts greatly with your argument of why the M1 abrams is a special child and should be unduly buffed out of nowhere despite already performing well.
You can regurgitate the word parity all you want but it isn’t some sort of magic word that suddenly makes whatever you’re spouting true for lack of argument.
You continue to ignore that vehicles are a sum of their parts and continue to ignore differences in characteristics between vehicles that allow them to be at the same BR with equal or similar performance despite being stronger or weaker in certain areas.
Be it ignore ignorance wilful or otherwise.
Again, the point was acknowledged. That you decide to ignore it was acknowledged is on you.
You actively admit that parity is achieved by having the M1 face against vehicles developed over a decade after its creation. In point of fact, the M1 was largely mothballed by the time some even saw field service.
There is nothing about special treatment for the M1 in giving it its appropriate round at 10.7.
I don’t begrudge other nations’ vehicles being fixed, I’m pointing out that giving the M1 its proper top tier round would make the tank more enjoyable for the average US player (or any player who plays US, which includes many other nations).
Again, the point was acknowledged. That you decide to ignore it was acknowledged is on you.
It wasn’t, and still hasn’t been. You have not acknowledged it.
You actively admit that parity is achieved by having the M1 face against vehicles developed over a decade after its creation. In point of fact, the M1 was largely mothballed by the time some even saw field service.
Moot point, not worth the time it took to write. Vehicle age is unrelated in balancing and not a factor.
There is nothing about special treatment for the M1 in giving it its appropriate round at 10.7.
There is when you’re asking for an already adequately performing vehicle to be notably buffed without being raised in BR. As myself and others have pointed out to you but you’re too biased to notice your absurdity.
I don’t begrudge other nations’ vehicles being fixed, I’m pointing out that giving the M1 its proper top tier round would make the tank more enjoyable for the average US player (or any player who plays US, which includes many other nations).
And repeating myself for about the third or fourth time. As myself and others have pointed out it can get it’s round but will also get moved up in BR to reflect this. Which you can’t accept because you are biased.
Let me make it even more blunt to you.
The only one who has access to recent and reliable statistics on performance is Gaijin.
Gaijin balance based on the average vehicle performance.
Gaijin has not seen fit to add new ammo or move the BR of the M1 Abrams.
This indicates that Gaijin using the statistics that they have and we don’t consider the performance of the M1 to currently be adequate for it’s BR.
You, my, everybodies feelings are irrelevant. We do not have the data. This is how it is.
It is currently adequate.
Accept it.
Some vehicles suit certain playstyles better, but that doesn’t make them superior in the big picture.
M1 (as every other vehicle) has to have certain disadvantages to remain at it’s BR, that’s balance. Something that’s best in each and every metric when compared to it’s contemporaries surely looks busted.
I don’t mind giving tanks their historical rounds as long as things stay balanced. As I said above, I don’t think US has a major problem with their vehicles in high-top tier, it’s rather the lack of new, cool vehicles to keep veterans interested in the US TT. Of course, all of this is my personal opinion on the whole US issue.
