VT4 is valid but the 1001E and the 99A are miles better, mobility + reverse gear>APS any day of the week
Quick reminder of the mobility gap between a ZTZ-99A and a T-72B3:
1 Like
Merkava:
T-90M:
Gun handling is one of the few things Ru 12.7 MBTs have going for them
Disregarding the terrible depression
Dude what’s that name🥀
Only Reload is really
i’ll just leave this here.
Your speed comparison table is incorrect
Distance traveled & maximum top speed =/= Acceleration.
What you linked has nothing to do with my chart.
4 Likes
Data comprehension of a duck
8 Likes
Insult to ducks.
4 Likes
It’s the best name wdym
Doesn’t sound right w and k don’t work together
Meanwhile ducks walk into traffic just because you mentioned them.
Average WT session vs Russ Bias
What the Russ and China tanks can do no other nation can
Non Existens Balance
1 Like
you mean like, have gun depression, good mobility and reoads?
or good shells?
Hey! I’ll have you know the gl-atgm is quite excellent actually. And the 99a has really good mobility, amazing really. But, yes, uhm other than that err yeah.
Armor that meets cold war minimal standard
1 Like
Just because USSR chose to upgrade 1955 tank over and over instead of making a new one, doesn’t mean that others did the same.
Got enticed by Shrikes coming only to enjoy 500 billion shilkas eating ord in NT, but enjoy the remainder of what I had to say from like a week or more ago.
Almost every merkava I kill is via the two rounds on the firewall, regardless of the version.
That is not a Merkava 4M.
Your average player won’t see the smoke to begin with because they have thermals duct taped to their head and ESS smoke is not visible though a TWS.
Maybe players who leedle and forget that their GPTS exists, but someone who actually understands the interaction even a little can bypass such. Then again as I’ve already said, a good chunk of the WT player base routinely forgets how basic features work soooooo.
Its not since you quantified it as a separate boon. Its either a utility feature and foldered into such or reverse speed stands alone, it cant be both in this context.
Imo given its a hydro final drive and it sports full speed forwards or backwards, I would consider that a valuable enough feature to let it stand alone on it’s own merit.
ESS is also quite a ways more useful if you enemies lack TWS as well, as said above, players who understand the interaction need only either flick on their TWS or hop into the GPTS to totally remove the ruse as only discharger, mortar and round smoke actually obscures TWS.
I will state that ESS is fantastic at around 9.x ish when dealing with planes that are just getting TV weapons and ESS can still obscure you from CAS.
To me, the bigger reason why the 4M would benefit from ESS is it’s reverse speed rather than discharge location. Being able to actually reverse into the ESS smoke in a time frame measured in seconds not minutes, regardless if its from the side or rear is what changes the overall situation.
Of course, hence why I speak to using it on objectives or caps, the actual dischargers can very much so do the same. The caviat still remains that the latter lacks a travel time that can actually hamper it’s deployment, the former does which makes it’s employment vastly more niche, unless you are a tiger II player and just keep firing yours for 30 minutes straight on a cap point making everything into a hotbox.
As far as I am aware, all commander .50s are either very similar or identical in traverse rate, and all are superior in traverse rate and especially elevation rate to functionally everything full stop.
Tracking targets can still be done from most CITVs in game and you get the boon of having TWS with most as well.
As it stands the commander’s .50 on the T-90M is still superior actually putting rounds on target, on the side of tracking targets, I would also give that W to the T-90M due to how recessed the CITV on the 4M is.
Said recessed CITV is by no means not usable as the inherent height of the 4M gives it a nice field of view, yet, the T-90M’s CITV can be used without having to move the barn of a vehicle that is the 4M into harms to do so as it is a rather standard elevated CITV.
Its not oplot height yes, but its not as bas the the 4M’s or any of the other very recessed CITVs on a number of other tanks, I’m looking at you nearly flush Leopard series CITV.
So that would be a yes. Traversal and overall range of fire still stands as superior.
Yeah I agree with that, after the HE changes they are indeed far closer in overall use cases. I do think that 3OF26 still retains a lower skill floor due to said roof shot and the overall charge, but as you said, the M339 can do skill shots that 3OF26 cant.
They knew it well enough to set both the forums and steam on fire when spall liners came.
The question there however is “which rounds”, also any penetrating hit that disables the engine or kills turret basket crew frontally is going to disable the turret as well so no you cant shoot back, especially after gaijin added a pump right in the center of the engine which, when hit, disables both the horizontal and vertical drives and also starts a fire.
Could always do that if you were at a high enough angle, exploitable though as in most cases you would just get tracked on the outside track.
AA autocannons, not actual autocannons, and autocannons can only harm the Leopard 2s if you hit the lower edge of the hull, which is normally caused by 35mm APHE memeage, something that effects nearly every tank in the game.
“w/e”? Also just apply 3OF26 to gunhouse, commander’s hatch, or CITV, target obliterated, prior to the nerfs, 3OF26 was quite happily lauded as a anti M1 option against the new SEP V2 because you could hit the CROWS .50 anywhere causing overpressure due to the range 3OF26 had, such is no longer the case but you can still hit the base and cause such.
Incorrect, the maxed gun handling is as follows for the M1A2 and onwards
34 degrees per second horizontal
19.2 degrees per second vertical
For reference the T-90M’s maxed gun handling is
34 degrees per second horizontal
32 degrees per second vertical
The leopard 2s sit at the same speed at the T-90M / BVM / B3 / Leclerc
The M1 series sits next to and slightly above the likes of the Merkava 4M, Ariete, and China’s indigenous offerings, with the worst tanks gun laying wise at top tier being the Challenger 2s and Japanese tanks, the oplot also sits there (somehow given it should be identical to the T-90M.)
So no, the M1s are not top of the line gun handling wise when comparing top tier like we are, they actually sit right in the middle of the pack under the best options.
- Holding faith in random MM teammates to do anything
You also very commonly outright die on a normal penetrating hit the hull that would disable your turret anyway.
They do not, such is not the case because the tanks are marked as “External fuel tanks”
The tanks add CE protection, the 9mm of armor does not add any tangible amount of protection.
Incorrect, a penetrating hit on the LFP of a T-90M or a Type 90 that has the round pass exclusively through the fuel tank will not generate any additional spall as fuel tanks alone cannot generate spall and the tank will catch any spall passing through the tank until it is destroyed.
This means that when the sabot is exiting the rear of the fuel tank the only object dealing damage is the dart itself, by comparison any sabot exiting a M1’s tank will generate new spall that can cause damage as it is passing through the bulkhead.
There is no round within the 105 or 120mm arsenal of the M1s that can do anything remotely like 3OF26, the only round that is overall viable is M830A1, however after the HE nerfs it and every other shell got, it’s already limited effectiveness is very low now, requiring a near direct hit on any helicopter or aircraft to do a viable amount of damage.
I cannot in good faith say that HE-OR or M830A1 even come close to making up for a missing HE rounds here.
Turbodarts are all of the sabots producing in excess of 450mm of flat penetration and has been a catch all term for them since 2019.
The M1 series has above average round performance at every BR, numerous vehicles have equal or superior rounds at the same BR ranges. Russia, the UK and China are the only nations that commonly fall behind the US in sabot power at top tier, every other nation has rounds that are very close or superior.
More or less everything DM53 equipped, which is Italy, Germany, Sweden, Japan and France all are superior by a tangible margin, Israel is close in performance, while Russia, the UK and China are all competing for the lowest performance turbodarts at top tier.
My time watching the official comp streams tell me no. I see Japan picked quite often and as of late due to the US being stuck with the F-4J as it’s primary fighter for some reason while other nations, eg Japan, gets a F-15. Italy was and still is rather popular due to the leopard 2A7HU.
Personally I find the Challenger 2E to be inferior but to each their own.
Should not stop you from picking another 12.7 though, there are a good number of them, I bought up one above that I find to be terrible at 12.7 that I would think you would agree on.
I take it by “NATO qualities” you just mean they have functional reverse speed?
As none of the vehicles above can claim to have effective armor, the Arietes in particular.
Given someone else has posted other evidence I will save my time in this regard.
Ah yes, because 4 km/h somehow adds almost a full two seconds of acceleration time.
I have yet to see such be the case.
It seems you have just forgotten the entire latter half of that sentence, I don’t even think while driving the 292, I’m able to tape my W key down and somehow get a 42% WR and any actual kills while not having to put in even a modicum of effort.
You are still inferring skill and efficacy in the grand majority of the WT player base. People with auto track doing the aiming for them still have issues hitting targets.
Already talked about above.
Hmmm no, you seemed to care quite a bit until someone else came along.
You still seem to act like stat shaming means anything here or to me.
That is extremely rich.
Still cant admit that they modified the data to suit them, such a shame.
And the word itself also exists and has a standard use and meaning in the West, unless you are a staunch Soviet supporter for from the cold war ear such would mean nothing to you.
Now, something like Orc on the other hand is a actual relevant insult to those of Russia, but such has not been used.
Once again, rich for someone who vehemently refuses to admit their fault.
I am deeply sorry if defending the weak and helpless is uncommon and / or unwanted but I believe those in the West call such a “virtuous pursuit”.
“The other dude started talking so I chose to harass him”
I don’t believe such a omission is as good put to text as you may seem to think.
1 second reload boon is, imo a minor improvement
Already highlighted above, such is not the case, the T-90M sports the best in class gun laying abilities alongside the Leopard 2s.
4M
34 degrees per second horizontal
15 degrees per second vertical
90M
34 degrees per second horizontal
32 degrees per second vertical
I have already stated such to be true
The T-90M sports a timed HE shell as well, and 30F26 sports very similar penetration capabilities after the recent HE nerfs, I hold both vehicles equal here
Both vehicles have 12 dischargers, the smoke mortar is a niche system that is not close to as useful as the standard dischargers.
300 extra horsepower and a better transmission will do that yes, I do still find most of the tanks there bar the ZTZ99A to be still inferior in performance to their Russian competitors. I am also aware that said tanks are also missing numerous features which could make said situation not the case as well.
I personally find the VT4s in general to be quite a ways inferior to the like of the T-72B3A however, they are similar, but the B3A’s APS is quite a ways superior due to charge density and it’s overall armor layout and gun handling is superior by a fair margin.
Year claims that the VT4 / A1 is better than the likes of the T-90M / Arena which I fully do not agree with primarily due to the inferior gun handling and the fact that most Chinese tanks have a massive, weak LFP and generally inferior overall armor.
1 Like
Yeah, 1>2 in your reality, we got it
1 Like
Unless he’s taking full ammo, that rack isn’t filled. Taking that much ammo and dying to it is on him.
I thought we were discussing the difference between the average RU and NATO tank’s depression, being 4-6 vs 8-10.
And before they can see you, you’ve already shot them, as they barrel around a corner seeing smoke in third person.
I forgot to mention that the mortar doesn’t blind you if you use it, as it throws the smoke a good ways in front of you. Another advantage is that you get much more pops out of the Merk vs 90M in total. After you use up your 12, 90M is out, while the Merk has more than 20 to its disposal.
All the rage was the Leo 2A7 and 122, they didn’t sacrifice much for the stupid levels of surv. Nowadays post spall liner nerf it’s not much of a difference to have them. It’s noticeable, but not the ridiculously stupid change it once was.
I’ve had my v3 and Trophy eat L/55 DM53 to the LFP only losing 2 crew and mobility, plus the FCS which is rather useless.
Are we really being this petty over the vertical drive. Beyond like 15 deg/s the difference is not very noticeable and entirely ignorable. The horizontal drive is more important, and as long as you aren’t running around with early Russian verticals, you are fine. For this reason, M1 still has top of the line GH.
Which is why I try to avoid getting hit, but I will say I’ve had my moments with randoms.
I’ve found getting outright onetapped in the Abrams somewhat uncommon compared to other tanks, due to the lack of large ammorack (T-80) or small crew, plus the random bs they added in (FCS Basket etc). While basket is a net negative, the FCS is basically a spall liner that doesn’t vanish.
They are external because of the bulkheads. As for the bulkheads adding CE prot, I’m not sure, I will check when I’m home (compare it to a Leclerc or T80 fuel tank)
I meant that as a comparison to Leo 2, which doesn’t have fuel tanks in the LFP. The Abrams LFP is not much different in spall to a Leo 2, both tanks (excluding reworked dm Abrams) are disabled by an LFP shot.
M830A1, the TF shell, and HE-OR all have their own uses. While they cannot do the things 3OF26 does, the Abrams is the only tank to have the HEOR shell that pens the BMPT turret and overpressures its crew. While the BMPT isn’t much of a threat nowadays, it’s nice to be able to nuke it hull down.
The MPAT is still extremely useful no matter how much nerfs it’s gotten.
Firepower includes reload, in no way is a L/44s firepower better than an Abrams, as I believe A3 not only has more pen, it has anti-era, and a much better reload. L/55 while possessing more pen does not have enough to make a noticeable difference. Japan is the only nation with arguably better firepower, with the downside being a terrible ready rack and its replenishment times.
And my time watching sqb, private, and public tourneys tell me otherwise. While the US lineup in public tourneys is not the exclusive pick, private tourneys almost always end up with Abrams vs Abrams.
Recently tried it out, 2E is still a solid tank. I’ll be honest I’m on my phone and don’t remember what you’re comparing it to but I’d play 2E over BVM but I won’t say it’s outright better ? Tho it dusts all the other RU tanks no contest.
For 12.7s my bottom 3 picks would be (best to worst): Black Night VT4A1 T-90M (and its Arena variant).
Reload, mobility, reverse, depression.
Exclude depression for the 99A and VT4, and the reload is only slightly better.
WZ still has better mobility but the same reload.
VT4 also still has better mobility and reverse but it’s less of a difference than the other CN tanks put up.
I’ll post my own evidence when I’m home.
1 Like