So lets go over this. This is the angle that it uses when vertical angle is turned off. This is NOT a realistic depiction of shooting in the game in post scenario unless you are playing idk, an HSTVL. A more accurate test would be with higher angle that makes sense for an engagement.
Which is this on a more even level as the last time I checked, a t80 is no 3 feet tall. Now to be fair I will take the same approach for both the t90M and BVM
Now if you look REALLLLLLY closely. There is much more penable area on the Abrams given an actual scenario. Please bother to understand the game and how the protection analysis works before making claims using it.
I mean its funny to me how you show abrams upper frnt plate as pennable, meanwhile that can never happen because its a ricochet 100 percent of thee time
(red is non pen area, orange is situational which I will get into)
I decided to do some testing* regarding this. I will concede most rounds ricocheted, however as long as the round hit the upper half of the plate it would still cause considerable damage as the round ricochets into the turret. This ranged from orange turret ring (which is not great) to killing commander and gunner, taking breech and turret ring.) The orange as marked is a coin toss on what Gajain is feeling for the day. Right side is inconsistent and not worth doing due to only taking loader and or breech.
*test range will not behave as game does 100% accurately with a comparable round (DTC10-125. Found on the Al-khalid-i. They have ~1-3mm pen difference although round weight is different) because I cant be bothered to grind out 3bm60 or to push the Abrams down the hill every time it gets killed.
And with this I would like to bring up another point. The size difference and
The frontal area on the Abrams that CANNOT be penned under the assumption that the entire slopped plate cant be penned and ricochets wont happen is considerably smaller than the frontal area of a t series tank. The LFP alone is a little under 2 times the size (and I don’t feel like getting dimensions to find the exact ratio) the t series alongside the lfp. Alongside this the t series typically have less severe consequences upon a pen with most common damage being autoloader, driver, and engine. This compares to the Abrams where a typical pen will take driver, engine, and a majority of the time 1-2 more crew members. Assuming both UFPs cant be penned besides optics and the Abrams turret ring which I will accept as comparable to the roof area on t series tanks the rest can be considered even.
The whole argument that they have “similar pennable area” is quite bogus. Go play the Abrams. Go play the t series. The T-80 is less pennable and more trolly from the 1000 games in Abrams variants and 370 in t-80s ive played.
Honestly what am I doing. Its 5 AM and i haven’t slept lmao. Its the war thunder forms. I stayed away from here for a reason tell saw this post.
If you don’t know how to play them then there isn’t problem in the vehicles. I play them day to day and I never ever thought that they are performing bad or are miserable. Stop blaming vehicles when there’s problem in your playstyle/overall skill.
They should model the autoloader completely, and give 3bm59 to the t80bvm and t90m with better spalling. That’s all they can do about them really, maybe the t90m could get arena-m
I’d say top tier Russia is in a more or less fine state, if anything a little on the above average side. Their Relikt can eat APFSDS for breakfast and have a lower profile than most NATO tanks, the 2A7 is insanely good and one practically more or less needs to go pixel hunting to shoot a weakspot to guarantee a non-volumetric choke.
This , maybe give it the irl reload as well. Iirc they could reload faster, cause let be honest it wouldn’t make that much of a different in the grant scheme of thing
It’s visibly well over 200mm thick. Even the current ingame model would be well over 200mm if it was just turned into Volumetric instead of a flat 50mm thick plate that clearly isn’t 50mm thick.
and
