And yet the KVT performs far better than the M1 while the Russian T-series in the tech tree and premiums are about the same. So, why isn’t the tech tree M1 on par to the KVT? Or maybe because we aren’t talking about the KVT nor do we have data on if it gets uptiered/downtier. However, from personal experience, I don’t see many KVTs in the uptiers when compared to the tech tree M1. And ooo, a year ago. That’s not now is it
Their argument has been “Oh but my Russian tanks” when Casino_Knight has 0 gameplay in it and Motorola hasn’t played it in who knows how long (longer than a month ago). I’ve been playing US 10.7 and RU 10.3-10.7 lately and the Russians are FAR easier to play
4 Likes
Maybe it is what it is and it is realistic bro, USA just doesn’t know how to build good powerful tanks, German and Russia are just better, even in Red Alert 1 and 2 the USA vehicles are mostly trashes that getting one-tab by the Russian, even when the game dev is a LA based company. The USA also doesn’t have anything memorable and creative like the Object 279, and the IS-7 is cool and the turret design of M103 literally looks like beavis and butt-head. And then you put the Abrams and Leopard 2 in a beauty contest do you think the Abrams will win?
USA vehicles takes so many L’s in terms of:
Cool factor
Aesthetic
Average player base skillset
Top tier winning rate
2 Likes
lol the bait in that one XD I mean, the US does have plenty of prototypes that could be added but Gaijin won’t because ~enter some reason Gaijin always gives~. I’d personally like to see the radar M42 or the 30mm GAU SPAA, etc to fill the gap between the M163 and the M42.
Also, no, the 105mm M1 is literally having to fight tanks with the APFSDS it came out with in 1980 against tanks that came out 10+ years after it was retired in 1995 (E.G. T-90A (2005), TMX (2010), Leopard 2A4M CAN(2009), T-90S (2018), ZTZ-99 Stage III (2004)) and MANY built toward the end of the 105mm M1 lifespan that it goes against with later in life ammo (and their first APFSDS far outperforms the tier IV M1 APFSDS as it’s literally the worst around that BR of MBTs). The tank is a pain to run as of right now because most maps force frontal fights
2 Likes
And yet the KVT performs far better than the M1 while the Russian T-series in the tech tree and premiums are about the same.
And? Some vehicles are worse stock than others. Some vehicles are better spaded than others. The matter of fact is the KVT is the exact same vehicle as the M1 and performs better than most MBTs at its rank including the premium 2A4.
So, why isn’t the tech tree M1 on par to the KVT?
It is. It’s the exact same vehicle. As I have already stated the only difference is that one requires a stock grind.
Or maybe because we aren’t talking about the KVT nor do we have data on if it gets uptiered/downtier.
We are talking about the KVT because the KVT is the exact same vehicle as the M1 and the US mains whole argument revolves around how the M1 apparently is not viable or capable without M833. The KVT disproves that. The fact that the M1 performs better than the german and soviet TT MBTs of the same BR disproves that.
Your uptier/downtier argument is moot because this data is inclusive of all uptiers/downtiers and you have absolutely zero evidence that the KVT/M1 is subject to more/less downtiers than any other 10.7 MBT. This is an entirely spurious claim. I can equally claim that the any other MBT gets more uptiers/downtiers at that rank which would hold as much weight (none) as you trying to make this unfounded claim.
However, from personal experience, I don’t see many KVTs in the uptiers when compared to the tech tree M1.
Unreliable anecdote with no evidence to substantiate it. Also does not logically make sense given that they are both 10.7 within the same nation.
And ooo, a year ago. That’s not now is it
Your ability to read dates is most impressive. You will be glad to know that there have been multiple bug reports for this exact same matter which have all been rejected under the same reasoning. However if you believe that gaijin suddenly no longer use available shells as a balancing metric and this no longer holds then I encourage you to make a bug report.
I very much look forward to it.
2 Likes
Then it will get it’s ass moved up to 9.0 bro, the angle pen of M774 is 215mm, most 8.7s best ammunition has 160-ish and I mean you look at the Chieftains, T-62s, even LMAO at the T-55AM-1 at 130-ish, but but but USA mains going to say “uh laa laa they use barrel ATGM bro it should be 9.0”, that german light tank has a 200mm pen with 4 second reload but it doesn’t have stabilizer and its a light tank… Object 122MT 120mm gun only has 160mm angle pen which is more common in that respective br but USA needs 215 to compensate for their lack of -insert text here-.
I’d say we move the M1 Abram down to 10.0 or better yet 9.7 and give it the M833 because… that will compensate the turret ring issues and because ussr has 3BM42 at 9.3. 2S38 is 11.3 and HSTVL is 10.7
3 Likes
It is interesting, I have looked at the manufacturing dates of the M1 Abrams and the T72B and the imbalance is clear.
The M1 Abrams (1979), carrying the M774 (1980) as its best bullet is Br10.3. Regarding the issue of dates between the tank and the bullet there is no problem, but now comes the funny part. The T72B (1985), carrying the 3BM42 (1986) as its best bullet, the curious thing is that despite being more modern, carrying a better bullet and better armor, the T72B is Br10.0. I imagine that is because the Abrams has better thermals and mobility, but as a historical balance it is little less than a kick in the ass.
Your personal opinions might not reflect the objective truth, have you thought about that for a second ?
For the 100th time, date of introduction means nothing in this game.
You say it’s a pain, I say it’s not a pain, so what now ?
Have yet to see any evidence that proves M1 struggles at 10.7.
2 Likes
You may be right, the Abrams’ Br could be reduced to 9.3 or 9.7, leaving it as is, with the same bullet it carries.
What I would do would be to give the M60A1 RISE the M774, and the M60A3 TTS the M833, leaving them at the Br where they are or at most raising them by 0.3.
I was going to comment how people genuinely will believe this last paragraph but I thought I should let the fishes bite first lmao
It can go down to 8.3 and it will be doing hella alright, since Falcon can solo it cqc from the front and I’ve killed it with Tiger 2 also from the front, that is downright embarrassing you know. So M1 Abrams at 8.3 will make America great again. The turret ring weakspot ouch, T-54 shoot it then it goes boom, 0-1 against T-54. Let’s be clear, T-44 with 85mm will OHKO it from the front, M1 Abrams should go down to 7.7, because the FV4202 also has stabilizer, when they encounter each other their chance of killing each other is about 50/50, 7.7 seems balance hmm, FV4202 and Carnaevron will has an easier time killing the M1 Abrams from the front than killing the T-55AM-1 because of the turret ring, also 99.9999999989% of maps is cqc I heard so M1 Arbams cannot use its strength at all. I’m looking forward for this br change and very excited about it :)
2 Likes
Well yeah the Caernarvon has a better armour profile than the M1 because you can’t pen the turret ring of it with 30mm APFSDS. We established that nothing else matters for armour profile other than that one characteristic.
4 Likes
Absolutely bro, it’s all about armor, like why don’t people acknowledge it?? that turret ring though, imagine facing fv4202 and it aim at your turret ring and you get disabled, if it struggled to 1vs1 against a 7.3, then it has no business at 10.7! its a simple concept to understand. TO-55 will kick its ass in the city, just aim at the turret ring, both vehicle having full stab so the M1 will not be any quicker at all, also APHE is OHKO when penned so M1 loses again, very likely. 7.7 is being generous since I heard nobody praise about its reload so I assuming that it is useless, also reverse speed doesn’t help their KDR so also useless.
2 Likes
What with some of the red herring and strawman argument here ? clear the threads please.
They messed up the sounds of the game like big time for headset users like me, can’t enjoy the game anymore so come here to have some friendly chitchat with fellow WT players.
1 Like
I love when they use the line: “B-b-but they’ll just take their time and aim at your turret ring, other armor doesn’t matter”.
Then you see the same people complaining about armor on T-series tanks without realizing the same sentence from above can be used here as well: “B-b-but they’ll just take their time and aim at your driver’s port or LFP, other armor doesn’t matter”.
Here’s something unrelated.
I got OHK from the front by T-34-85 that sits at 5.3 through the turret ring of my 10.3 TTD. Gaijin better lowers it’s BR or I’m going to cry my eyes out.
EDIT: Or they could simply increase the BR of T-34-85 to something like 10.0, because it’s obvious it can deal with tanks there. It’s critically undertiered anyways because Russian bias.
4 Likes
I understand that people are in the mood to talk after such things.
But maybe others relate topic can help you with that or PM
Else mod might come and lock this down.
Yes, well, but these are either errors in the armor model or the developers’ mania for looking for COD or Counter Strike Tanks. If the developers start doing their job correctly, these errors will be solved soon.
The problem is with the shift in BR’s was for all 10.3 which went up to 10.7:
- the full down-tier shifted to 9.7 a BR range sparsely populated by most TT:
- GER, has the Begleitpanzer 57, Gepard 1A2, Wiesel Ozelot there;
- USSR, has t-64B, 2S25M & Khrizantema-S;
- UK, only Stormer AD;
- JPN has the Type16 & CTWV RCV;
- ITA, has no 9.7;
- FRA, has the most with: Vextra 105, AMX-40, Roland 1, VBCI-2, CV-9035NL;
- China, only ZLT 11;
- SWE, has CV9035Dk & CT-CV 105 HP;
- ISR, only has Merkava 2D;
PS. used GFAB BR ratings, cause that is what i play.
So chances for getting a full down-tier are slim to rare.
GER, has some 10.0-3;
USSR has solid 10.3;
UK has 10.7, then straight to 11.7;
JPN has no line up till 11.3;
ITA, has 10.0-7 line up, then 11.3;
FRA, has no line up till 12.0 after 9.7. (not counting 2A4NL which isn’t here yet)
China, same as USSR;
SWE, jumps from 10.7 to 11.7 line up;
ISR, no line up until 11.3, Merkava 3’s.
On their old BR of 10.3, their was a very large change to be top or middle tier in the MM, now chances are middle at best and lowest at worst, due to the plethora of 11.3-11.7 in every TT. Looking at the tri-facta of tanks, Armour, mobilty & firepower, compared to its peers the M1 (with M774) falls behind in the firepower department. Armour & mobility depends on which MBT it faces:
- leo2A4(all variant), matches speed, and armor, but have better firepower in DM23(410);
- CR’s, lack mobility (speed), but have better firepower in L26(471);
- T-series, lack mobility, but have armour and firepower in 3BM42(457);
- Ariete, less mobile, less armour, but better firepower in DM33(481);
In an uptier even the weakest round DM23 (which has 40mm of extra pen compared to M774), can handle themselves better.
At the end of the day firepower is KING, because it gets you damage and or kills, which translate to SL & RP. especially in GFAB, where the flow is faster, and snapshot determine the outcome of an engagement more often then well aimed shots. A better round will make it easier to damage and or kill the enemy.
And lets face it, the increase is minimum and would still result in the lowest penning round at BR 10.7.
5 Likes
Your entire line of argumentation is based around the unfounded assumption that the only thing that allowed the M1 to perform well before being moved up to 10.7 along with the rest of the 10.3 vehicles was purely dependant on the 4 or so players that would be in 9.3 vehicles in the event of a full downtier.
Except the evidence we have available with the data we have access to shows that basically all of the 10.3, now 10.7 vehicles saw a very small change in performance however relative to each other they are still performing more or less where they were before the change. The M1 is still performing better than the 2A4 and the T-80B.
The facts are that the evidence we have available do not support the notion that the M1 is performing poorly. The facts are that as gaijin have not changed it in a long period indicate that they do not see it performing poorly with their statistics.
At the end of the day firepower is KING, because it gets you damage and or kills, which translate to SL & RP. especially in GFAB, where the flow is faster, and snapshot determine the outcome of an engagement more often then well aimed shots. A better round will make it easier to damage and or kill the enemy.
This is entirely subjective opinion.
3 Likes