How exacly?
Russian aphe performance is objectively better
With short 90mm u cant pen tiger 2 from the front exept the muchin gun port and even that is a gamble
The first usa tank to pen tiger 2 is the t261e1 on 6.7
Means if ur playing a tank below 6.7 and u face king tiger u are screwd
Meanwhile u have russia with the isu-122 on 5.3
Also side note KT was op
Now its just great(might be still op we will wait and see)
The 90mm also works great on the M36, b3cause unlike the M26 family the M36 actually has mobility going for it.
There’s not a whole lot of vehicles at the 10.3 range, so it might be a bit misleading.
It’s definintely not ‘‘decent’’ as it’s the second worst at around the BR of 10.3 I can find.
Decent cuz there is alot of vehicles that are like or very close to u
Also alot of ppl doesnt even have expert crew
Guess it is “user error”…or the fact that i play AB…where you cant hit and run so well…
Turrets on most M26 family tanks can take a hit or two…unlike M36 :)
Never could use M36 very well…much better on M10 where the relative armor is much better…
Not sure if “op” applies…but was one of those tanks that are “above average” at their BR. My doubt on the “op” is that they were probably at the right BR…higher would make them “too weak”…
But this also applies to T34(42) some M26 family tanks and a few on other nations…there are several “above average” tanks…and makes more sense to me that KT or T34 are some of them as they are “historical” vehicles…
What annoys me is “ahistorical” vehicles being “dominant”…but this is a bit offtopic…
Fair enough I can imagine that the M36 won’t work as well in AB, but in RB the M36 is absolutely goated (I personally even prefer it over the M18).
False equivalence fallacy.
You intentionally chose the weakest part to counter the strongest part of T-80B’s turret.
The only reason I angled it was so no one could argue that it was “the breach area” of the armor, because people did that previously despite the breach area of T-80B being ~200mm of protection instead of 430ish.
I know that, aircraft seem to be the worst with a 75mm cannon protruding from EVERY orifice. As mentioned in a previous post of mine regarding Russian BIAS…" can’t wait to see a RUSSIAN MGB with a spare triple 12" turret that happened to just be laying around".
What are you talking about ?
I’m merely recreating what you call “T-80B’s cheeks are ~430mm thick.” (thou it is a BVM on your pic.) on Leo 2A7V:
Yet another false equivalence fallacy.
You can’t compare weakspots to strongest armor.
Also your image proves that 450mm is larger than 250mm.
Keep defending Russia all you want with false equivalence fallacies, I’ll call them out each time.
BTW, here’s the turret ring shot of T-80BVM which is still not 450mm of the Leopard weakspot shot:
“Clearly as armored as a Leopard 2A7.”
You are the one who is keep cherry pick the weak spots on the BVM…
Or is the 430mm strongest point of BVM cheeks ?
What is the poor Ariete doing here ?
ERA is not the permanent armor, it’s a “don’t shoot here” warning while the rest of the turret is entirely weak.
Abrams weakspot area is as large as the standard turret area of the T-80BVM which itself is weak.
There’s a reason almost all players at top BR shoot the turrets of T-80BVMs, it’s weak and easy to deal with.
And Ariete is here because it’s turret is still weaker than the T-80B’s.
Edit:
And yes, without the sometimes-single-use arrow heads, the armor behind 2A7 is around 600mm thick from the front; I am aware.
Except the 6.5 second reload is incorrect. For a full reload, gun centering, loading and locking the breech on T-64B, and T-80Us, is 6.0 seconds.
Considering the game doesn’t account for hun centering, and given the fact, the T-80U loader can load as quickly as 3.78 secs given where the next shell is, it makes 0 sense to be 6.5 in game.
It should be 6.0 secs in game at worst.
For the T-80U, UM2, UD, UE-1, and UD-1 they should all be 5.5 - 6.0 secs
Now the BVM is odd, because it can get long rod darts, 3bm60 which makes it every other, which definitely makes sense for a 6.0 sec reload.
What’s funny, is for the Leo, you used a very unlikely position for the T-80BVM, as it sits lower than a Leo2a7V.
And for the BVM, you picked an angle far lower than the Leo sits.
Your argument is very invalid with these images.
Complain to Alvis those are his positions to “prove” how BVM armor is weak (430mm cheek armor) . I merely recreated them with Leo.
Is the Apache’s gun under-firing or am I just lucky? I’ve had a hard time shooting down multiple planes at point-blank range, and it always misses.
Translation: Is the gun on the Apache a dud or am I just lucky? I’ve had a hard time shooting down planes point blank for a while now, and they always miss.
The Apache fires a bit sporadically and has low velocity rounds. Not the best for shooting anything moving but does decent dmg when it connects.
KTH was easily 7.0 material pre-nerf.
