very late to the discussion, but western era packages are all drastically underperfoming, why is that?
so you want the dev team (which has limited manpower) to add a shell to your already good tank which in your words is only good in a minor way?
I reckon that small change of improvement isnt gonna take more than 2% of man power they have
Id take any small buff that actually help in some scenarios instead of nothing at all
If they can copy paste event then they for sure can do some small improvement
3 Likes
Why are you comparing the M1 Abrams reload rates to an autocannon when did I mention that fire rate was not important? Fire rate can only do so much and in no way is the M1 an autocannon. The Abrams struggles to engage other MBTs (not to mention in uptiers). The 2A4 has better protection and doesn’t have blatantly big weak spots like the M1 turret ring. Also, it’s a bit of a stretch to think everybody has an aced crew. The vast majority of Abrams have more than (the oh so amazing reload like a 2S38 according to you) 5 seconds. It’s not like the 4 seconds that Type 90 can enjoy, the 6/5 sec reload it has is not that far off from 2A4. It’s not broken it only gives a 1sec advantage to only a small part of the playerbase for the M1. And again, the difference in pen between USSR and the M1 is crazy. You can’t expect a round like M774 to work fine when it’s used by a tank a full BR below, and pen is as much meta as reload is, even in top/high tier.
Ah yes, because doing Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V isn’t what we’ve been getting for most updates for months if not years. Adding a shell to a tank isn’t going to require a full day of work, nor will it require a full team to do.
2 Likes
No it doesn’t.
doesn’t have blatantly big weak spots like the M1 turret ring
Gunner sight. Mantlet. THE ENTIRE HULL that can be penetrated by T-55As APDS )))
1 Like
Armour, maybe… survivability? No.
1 Like
In some ways, yes.
But more penetration also means more spalling.
And I’d say 1-Shotting enemies is more useful (especially when you’re not flanking / able to) than slightly better reload rate.
1 Like
You get additional 36mm of flat pen and 22mm of 60 degree pen when switching from M774 to DM23.
If you were comparing M774 to 3BM42 or something, I’d agree with you, but the difference in this case is surely negligible.
M833 is not needed for abrams, but would be appreciated
1 Like
If the difference is so negligible, then why all the resistance to the M1 getting the shell it should be using in M833? Especially when the DM23 the Leo 2A4 gets is still a direct upgrade in every aspect in comparison even to that?
Or the Leo2AV which is as close to ‘not an Abrams’ but an Abrams gets and it gets 105 DM33 while being 10.0 vs 10.7?
6 Likes
Because great tanks don’t need any buffs ?
1 Like
Let me guess, M1 is suffering and critically needs M833 at the very least. Am I right, buddy boy ?
2 Likes
You two might want to tone it down a bit and remain respectful towards each other.
Quick reminder: 3.1.1 profanity, obscene and offensive language, words, phrases, and abbreviations (including their disguised forms).
It ain’t about being soft or not, It’s about respecting the rules.
1 Like
I wouldn’t say critically needs, but it’s pretty blatant it’s left with M774 for ‘"some reason’", while the tanks it’s facing are getting 3BM42, TAPNA, DTC-10, and 3BM60.
Even the tanks it’s allied with get 120mm: DM23, OFL G1, DM33, M332, and L27A1
2 Likes
I’m respectful towards him, which can’t be said for vice versa so I have no idea why did you ping me ?
I’m tagging the two that are having the conversation, there’s no need to feel threatened. Keep the discussion going now, thanks.
And those tanks struggle in other areas. Every tank needs to have tradeoffs.
Thanks for admitting that NATO tanks are superior to Russian ones
You can thank the designers for that.
NATO tanks will always have the upper hand against Soviet tanks because of Soviet doctrine.
3 Likes