Not really. Germany gets with them the most. China almost always matches against them (in high-top tier)
1 Like
Gotta love another forum post where the Devs ignore provided sources for a vehicle or weapon and debunk it with reasoning and sources they would kick back at us for using. This reads like the stinger post all over again. Time for another update of grinding anything else but US ground.
Which is entirely true but it then needs to be taken into account that the vast majority of players are much closer to the floor, which makes 80s inherently perform better.
2 Likes
I don’t fully disagree, however the statshark stats show no significant difference between the BVM and the SEPs in K/D and K/S. Only in winrate, but there are multiple factors thst influence that (Mi-28NM, KH38MT, Pantsir SM-SV) which makes that harder to judge.
2 Likes
I swear, the elitist discussion around skill floors and ceilings usually ends up justifying the current unbalanced slopfest that GRB really has turned into.
Thank God content creators are getting louder at the obvious underlying issue the ‘skill floor/ceiling’ argument usually tends to hide under the carpet, which is selective realism and, like it or not, a whole spectrum of biases.
3 Likes
whether you like it or not
It’s E-sport Ready
If this game is E-sports ready, then I'm a competitive Unturned player.
/s as if it wasn’t clear enough
1 Like
Part of it is that redfor has a bottomless supply of vehicles that in the end perform roughly the same as eachother (stick together a lineup of 72b3, 90a, 90m, 80u, 80bvm. Sure some can be ufped by dm53 but anyone who can aim is aiming for weakspots anyways), so given the same kd the team with more vehicles will do better.
Although the same could definitely be said for abrams, however 95% of the US playerbase at toptier is clickbaits with that and the AIM in their lineup and nothing else.
Part of it is the then bottomless supply of insanely good CAS with the best air defense preventing the enemy team from spawning any CAS whatsoever.
1 Like
No way you just said 90A performs roughly the same as BVM.
1 Like
Let me elaborate and explain why there’s such a paradox between K/D and win rate.
The Abrams does have some strong points, such as its gun depression and reverse speed. But in my opinion, it has more drawbacks than advantages.
- Speed — The Abrams is actually quite slow at top tier.
- Lack of effective armor Even if you’re playing hull-down and only exposing the turret, the huge weak spot around the gun mantlet makes the tank very difficult to play. Enemies can often penetrate that area and one-shot you.
Shots through the gun mantlet can not only penetrate but also instantly destroy the tank. Because of this, the Abrams performs best as a light tank. If there are flanking routes available, it can take up a position and ambush enemy vehicles.
However, one mistake is all it takes to get destroyed. You simply don’t have any room for error.
To me, the Abrams feels more like an M18 Hellcat than a heavily armored main battle tank.
Even with these characteristics, the Abrams maintains a fairly decent K/D ratio. This is largely due to the strong U.S. players who continue to play the nation despite all its shortcomings.
But that’s where the good news ends. The real problem is CAS. U.S. CAS is simply terrible — probably the worst in the game. To make matters worse, the U.S. is constantly matched against the USSR, which has the strongest air defense systems and some of the strongest CAS aircraft and helicopters in the game.
2 Likes
90a is probably the only one there that’s a stretch because it doesn’t have gaijin’s hallucinated 40/40 gun handling
Sorry but this is an unbelievable amount of copium. It’s only somewhat slow if you run it with the ERA kit. However if you run it with the ERA then it’s a you problem.
It’s also an incredible CQB tank, hell it’s probably one of the best CQB tanks in game. It’s just that a lot of people can only think of 1 form of CQB while forgetting pretty much all the basic elements of this game.
Probably mostly just the multi nation players that still appreciate how incredibly potent the Abrams can be. There are still many US players like you who need to be carried to victory.
I mean the US has just as deep of a lineup as that with the SEPv2, SEPv1, M1A2, M1A1 HC, M1A1 and IPM1. It’s just that a lot of players don’t want to use them.
Yeah I did add that just before posting because it came to mind, I just don’t usually think of their lineup as large because nobody uses it.
1 Like
We’ll see that when the Aussie versions drop in the British tree. That’ll back up the Chinese Abrams data.
If you add squadron vehicles, premium vehicles and the new vehicles from this update the potential lineup sizes for both US and Russia is absolutely massive lol.
I expect some of the British mains on this forum to maintain a 2.0 K/D in it, at least for the ones that tried to act like they were good players being held back by the Chally 2.
Even if you remove the ERA armor, it will still be slower than the T-80BVM.
Sure, it’s a great tank for close-range combat if it’s sitting in an ambush and shooting enemy tanks in the side. But if you run into a BVM head-on, the BVM will get the first shot off because a T-80BVM player doesn’t need to look for weak spots on the Abrams.
With the Abrams, you have to carefully aim for weak spots. Against the Abrams, you can simply shoot center mass and still have a very high chance of destroying it.
1 Like
3 Likes
The Abrams is an incredible tank in head on fights.
Like I said, people just forget all the basics and when they say head ons they just think thst it means 2 MBTs just sitting still in the open, which is just a beyond limited view of brawling in WT.
1 Like
Neither does T-80U.