The US tech tree is the only tech tree that has make-believe vehicles in it at higher Tears you have the HSTVL WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN A PART OF THE US ARMY ALSO, THE MKT Which is never ever been a tank So it’s cool for them to make up equipment, but not even give the nation the right stuff
You have the Bradley as the top-tier fighting infantry vehicle are you crazy? We start making Bradleys in the 80s and switch to the striker and LAV infantry fighting vehicles which none are displayed correctly in the game.
HSTV-L is not make-believe. The prototype is being refitted for museum exhibit if I recall correctly.
Like I said, make believe it was never added into the United States Army
Many tanks in Top Tier haven’t been a part of their armies and/or are “make-believe” (going by the same standard you used for HSTV-L) and it’s not a U.S thing only;
Challenger 2E
Challenger 3 (TD)
Vickers Mk.7
AMX-40
AMX-32
AMX-32 (105)
KPZ-70
And if we are going by the army service criteria, then you also have Leopard 2PL, Leclerc AZUR, VT-4, and a long etc.
The 3BM42 going through the cheek there is pretty damn questionable when you ask me.
But also, the T80 tradeoff is then equalized with ERA.
And if you look you see the round impacted at the thickest part, left turret cheek, then somehow turned 45 degrees. First picture.
There’s a myriad of reasons;
- netcoding
- desync
- volumetric
- spall generation (it’s inconsistent across the board)
- the dreaded aiming issue
etc
1 Like
No, you’re wrong. Those are tanks that they’re going to add that vehicle was never going to be added to the US Army it was A D.A.R.P
Project that was canceled
None of that changes what I’m throwing up for consideration.
HSTV-L didn’t serve in the U.S army.
Challenger 2E didn’t serve in the British army.
Challenger 3 (TD) didn’t serve in the British army.
KPZ-70 didn’t serve in the German army.
AMX-40 didn’t serve in the French army…
Etc.
Apart from being wrong, I don’t even know what point you are trying to raise anyway.
And that is partly why I’m making this opinion be known. If others would stop attempting to throw sarcasm in my face, and actually address the obvious point of balance, I’d be much obliged.
Realistically, we know the T80UD carries 3BM42 at 10.0, we know ‘elite’ players play without thermals just fine, so would M1s with M833 and crap thermals be so OP at 10.3?
You at least gave a more honest answer at the end than in the beginning, and for that I’ll thank you and others who did so.
IPM1 is the best tank in the US tech tree hands-down and it’s funny because that tank never seen combat and only stayed in the US inventory for one decade
Also, gaijin only has representation of the US Army. They have no Marine Corps vehicles. I guess they’re probably scared of marines.
Because it’s M60! Damn M60, not highly mobile Abrams. Both are not equivalent to Leopard 2A4, they are simply better than it in every possible way, and you want to keep them with the same BR???
Let’s add a new T80 and put it at 10. 3 Given an amazing penetrator, decent armor, no thermals and will call it balancing, lmao that’s the Gene mindset
Ariete down to 5.0 pls
Man, are you complaining about the 292?
It going through is always a 50/50, with 452mm of perforation it’s a schrodinger’s APFSDS that may or may not perforate the right cheek if the circumstances are just right.
But also, the T80 tradeoff is then equalized with ERA.
And it’s traded off (again) by the gun-handling (24/6 versus 40/24).
And if you look you see the round impacted at the thickest part, left turret cheek, then somehow turned 45 degrees. First picture.
So you got gaijin’d (this is more common than you’d think), and that has nothing to do with M1A1/M1IP being too weak or DM23/3BM-42 being too powerful, it’s all to do with the game’s engine being more dated than at least 50% of WTs playerbase.
1 Like
Aren’t the M1A1HCs’ marine corp?
1 Like
No that’s not USMC that Army