exactly, we cant have a sepv3 hull be better than a t-72b hull
At this rate the LEO 2A8 will have the same hull stats as the Leo2A7 even though they are completely new hull designs
i thought it was just the first leopard variant in a while to have new hulls produced but they would be the same? might be wrong tho
Nope Leo2A8 is a completely new design with new armor but looks the same. Almost like… The SEPv3
2 Likes
Youve completely misunderstood me
its not even 50mm btw
genuinely an actual joke lmao
Dw the sepv2 trophy KE modifier was dropped 10% in the hull, so the sepv3 is actually a 12% increase, which is still 1/3 of the absolute minimum it couldve been increased by
1 Like
Moderators are closing all the Abrams posts in general and ground pointing out issues and discussions how long before they close this one too
This is just another CR2 complaint post
That’s because you already have this one to complain in.
2 Likes
Not that im gonna get an answer but since the m1a1 hull went up in armor value is that the new standard for m1s, meaning the sepv3 hasnt actually recieved its NEA package yet?
Now talisman the SEP.
1 Like
Changing the rewards for something I paid real money for is criminal
It’s a 17.1% increase, which is a reasonable change with no change to the interior structure.
Without proof the interior structure changed, what are they supposed to do?
Also, if SEP V2 Trophy KE modifier dropped by 10%, that would mean SEP V3 has a 30.1% increase, cause math; however, the SEP V2 Trophy KE modifier did not drop.
I mean the documents that were sent in said 35%.
They also nerfed the inner bulkhead to 9mm despite having an accepted report from 3 years ago with proof it was supposed to be 1 inch.
Then they took the turret cheeks/side and lowered the KE/CE multiplier… which counteracts the armor increase. Not completely, but it is a bit of a head scratcher.
… and then we don’t have the propper model or composit side skirts on every abrams.
If they could get all this right I’d think raising the over all BR would be great. They already needed to go up, especially with the new vehicles. Should have 14.0 GRB at least.
2 Likes
What are you talking about?
It’s the best MBT in the game 2nd to none now, it has armor upgrades.
I personally have not read the 35% document you are citing, and would love to do so [no, I am not dismissing it]; and as long as it’s unrestricted.
For now 17.1% increase is fine, but even if it was 35%, that’s ~512; but that would require internal structure changes such as filling the space behind the array with more array.
There was a major report that the community worked on that was denied like… 2 weeks ago? That was part of it.
Honestly, it’s a huge read with everytbing they submitted.
The Spanish Avenger was one of the contributors and shared a link… I think in the dev thread for the abrams armor. (Might have mixed up my chats and be replying in said thread).
At work right now, but it was a pretty impressive report.
Also, your assumption that the array would need more space is incorrect. Armor research has only managed to increase armor capabilities without increasing space required - we aren’t operating with straight steel but exptic materials that involced chemical, heat, electrical currents and lacing materials with particles. If we were dealing with simpler or older armor tech… yeah space would have to increase. But we aren’t. And Gaijin did say in 2021 with a blog post that they’d have to reaspnably estimate those increases with limited info.
This has contradicted their current stance which is dont give us classified info but we required classified info in order to make the changes.
I don’t disagree that the abrams is strong in the right hands. I do however think we should correct the available BRs and then give it… and the other nations their corrected armor packages. Would go a long way to helping the community as a whole feel better about their preferred nations and allow for actual balancing.
4 Likes
Edited it Alvis because I missed part of whay you said.