AMX-30 ACRA (France - Ground RB) 8.3 → 8.0
This vehicle is similar to the US M60A2, but is physically weaker and much less versatile, which I believe would justify a small BR decrease to 8.0. The ACRA missile is superior to the MGM-51B used by M60A2, however this is essentially the only advantage the AMX has.
Apart from the cupola weakspot, the M60A2 is actually quite well protected for BR 8.3, especially in downtiers, and as it has a stabiliser it can fire on the move and throw off the enemy’s aim while not losing much accuracy itself. The AMX-30 ACRA is much more fragile, while at the same time the lack of a stabiliser means that it cannot simply push out and fire like the M60A2, it must take time to get into a position and let the gun settle. The base AMX-30 is fairly stable despite not having a stabiliser, but this is sadly not the case for the ACRA version, which suffers from severe gun bounce anytime it moves. It takes a long time before the vehicle is able to fire after repositioning, and even small movements can cost several seconds before it can engage a target. The result is a vehicle that is much more vulnerable than the M60A2 when it tries to get into position, and at the same time it is also much easier to penetrate and destroy.
The AMX’s secondary shell option, the MUC unguided rocket, is also a very poor option. It has a lot of drop and very little penetration for a munition of this size, which makes it useless for 90% of fights. The manual rangefinder does allow some accurate fire at a distance, but the MUC needs to hit small weakspots to penetrate other tanks, so even with the rangefinder this is a struggle. It is not enough to hit the tank, MUC needs to hit very specific points to be effective, which is just not practical.
Contrast this with the M60A2’s M657A2 HE shell and laser rangefinder, which are a much more potent combination. Although this HE shell has only 2mm more penetration, it is stealthier than the MUC rocket and can be very precisely aimed using the M60A2’s LRF. Because of this, the M60A2 can take only HE shells and still be an effective tank, using its LRF to quickly target roofs and other weak points through which it can overpressure an opponent. The AMX-30 ACRA simply cannot do this with MUC as it lacks the speed and precision that the M60A2’s LRF provides. MUC might have been effective with an LRF, but as the AMX doesn’t have one, it simply isn’t a useful ammunition choice.
Given that the M60A2 is stronger and can fire on the move, the AMX-30 ACRA is clearly the weaker and more situational vehicle. Although the ATGM is superior, this is also present at BR 7.3 on the AMX-10M, so it would not be game-breaking for the AMX-30 ACRA to fire that same missile at 8.0. A small BR decrease would do a lot of good for the AMX-30 ACRA and would also allow for it to form a stronger BR 8.0 lineup alongside the AMX-30 (1972).
