In my (anecdotal) experience, about 98% of engagements happen below 2000m, most below 500. Why does a 2km shot matter when sniping reliably is impossible anyway in this game
2 Likes
It’s so convenient. The Abrams basically has no armor except for its turret cheeks—just shoot anywhere below that. But Soviet MBTs require you to pixel-snipe weak spots with a slow shell that flies in an arc. At the same time, Soviet MBTs got a “showcase” shell with extremely high velocity and decent penetration, enough to hit an Abrams anywhere except the cheeks.
Its literally worse than 3BM60.
Only thing it did was make stock grind better and BVM got its 6s reload now.
What would change if it was 3BM46 instead? Nothing. Stop crying.
1 Like
Even from a range of 1 km, the projectile is already traveling along an arc and penetrates even the Abrams’ upper glacis plate.
I don’t understand the first 2 screenshots? The roadwheel and the entire LFP are right there? Just shoot them?
As for the clip, unlucky, should’ve aimed more right and lower (OR SHOOT THE LFP, WHY ARE WE NOT SHOOTING THE LFP) so you can avoid this volumetric trap.
We’ve already provided multiple examples of how the Abrams LFP and UFP are well protected. Abrams is still the only MBT that can reliably bait with the LFP. It has worse armour than two (2) Russian tanks and both of them are T-90s, the shittiest tank known to mankind
As for shell speed, 100m/s difference is just a matter of adjusting slightly (or using the LRF and not caring about shell speed at all)
1 Like
There is almost no difference anymore — he can penetrate the Abrams in all the same places. An extra 40 mm of penetration doesn’t matter at all against Abrams armor. The only one that can’t penetrate the new Abrams is the 3BM42. Everything else no longer matters — whether it’s 500 mm, 550, or 600 mm of penetration. There is basically no difference, because all of them can penetrate the Abrams hull at any angle, the gun mantlet, the upper glacis, and under the turret — everything is essentially a one-shot kill.
Is this any different to Abrams pre-update? If anything the new FCS block made Abrams LFP better due to it tanking spalling.
This is not even an isolated occasion, its consistent. I don’t get what you are complaining about.
Spoiler
Exactly, that’s what I mean. You have to aim for a specific pixel and roll the dice to see the chance of penetrating a Soviet MBT. At the same time, the Abrams can be killed anywhere except the turret cheeks from any angle. But the Abrams has a 630 mm-penetration shell, which still can’t penetrate Soviet MBTs in about 80% of areas. But yes, the shell does have higher penetration.
1 Like
You had the LFP RIGHT THERE. You chose to go pixel hunting but you aimed poorly and it didn’t work out. The LFP was there the entire time and you’re the one to blame for not shooting at it. You don’t get to complain about having to go pixel hunting when you take unnecessary steps and don’t aim at better weakspots
4 Likes
2000m is a completely unrealistic engagement range and it also does not penetrate regardless.
4 Likes
Well clearly the Trophy and SEPv3 are enough to draw back the good players to the US side. And they are not wrong, the trophy and SEPv3s are absolute beasts.
Holy skill issue. (Not that it’s a suprise though)
2 Likes
In case this is not obvious, this is sarcasm.
“How dare a shell pen a weakspot”
3 Likes
That guy can’t get anything right in his testing.
Ignorance or maliciousness, your call.
6 Likes
Has to be malicious if he’s willing to edit images to make the armor look worse than it actually is.
I just like to check in on this place from time to time and it’s always the same old boring dead horse arguments about the best MBT in the game… 😔
4 Likes
You probably didn’t notice that in my video any hit to the gun mantlet resulted in a one-shot kill. In your video it didn’t even hit a crew member. That’s exactly where the difference in balance is.
I showed this intentionally to reveal all of the Abrams’ vulnerable areas, because WT doesn’t display them correctly.
3BM42-2 passed testing and trials. That’s how we know it’s performance in relation to the original 3BM42 and 3BM60. The literal placard that shows the penetration of 3BM42, 3BM42-2, and 3BM60 with a target located at 2000m that has armor angled at 60 degrees is on the forum you started about Mango 1 and 2.
1 Like
I would like to see the videos and results of these tests.
Then we would have to remove M829A3,DM53 and basically all modern ammunition as well because there is no such thing for them. They are all classified so good luck trying to find a video.
1 Like