Sure the initial XM-815 protection package, was that low but very little is known about any of the multitude of modular packages that were created after that point. After-all the “IP” (Improved Protection) array was designed in parallel for the M1E1 (M1A1) and was later backported to the 105mm armed hulls as the M1IP so it’s not as if they weren’t cognizant of the pending shortfall in protection and took steps to address it.
They could at least for the baseline M1 add M833 or M900(A1) to make up for the poor performance of M774. to actually make them some kind of a threat frontally outside 500 meters or so, to much of what it could see. After-all it’s not like slightly better ammo would do that much to prevent 3BM42 from going though the armor with few issues at 2000 meters or more.
3BM60 is on-par to worse than NATO rounds.
It’s not penning the turrets of most NATO tanks, and the UFPs of many NATO tanks.
Meanwhile the turret of T-80BVM gets penned by even DM33 which is one of the many methods I frag them.
And of course on CQC maps the side armor of all tanks is equally worse than all rounds.
IRL sure, but it’s very clear the game rarely ever takes IRL examples when it comes to how things actually work in-game.
I also thought like that before this happened
relikt type ERA should be almost useless against darts at 90 degrees but not in russia wins simulator
Ok and in your mind if that was not the case in game russian tanks would maintain their current BR?
Would it matter? how far do you think they would go down. They wouldn’t be the only tank with paper for armor just look at what the Italians bring to the table.
More than 5 degrees of gun depression and 4km/11km reverse? 7.1 sec reloads… hand cranked turret traverse… gee idk.
There are still positions where they can go hull down. Gaijin is at least is aware of the limitations and have made efforts to retain some positions that are useful to them.
Why would you ever need to go backwards? just return fire things will be fine, and with the serviceable ammo there is far less an issue. After-all with the recent addition of the erroneous modeling Turret basket they are far more likely to actually be able to shoot back.
So don’t get so close that it becomes an issue, reload rate only counts if they can survive to actually reload.
So conceptualize where your opponents will be and don’t blindly rush around corners, or also turn the Hull to improve horizontal traverse and increase the chances that the armor scheme will do its job.
For the vertical traverse, just be mindful of elevation changes and take care to decrease it’s rate of change.
It’s far less of an issue at range due to how angles work anyway.
I honestly cant tell if you are trolling or not.
And im not trying to say things like ariete belong at 12.0, i dont think anything in game currently should even be the same br as the 2a7/122. Gaijin has been smashing way too much stuff at 12 0 without decompression. I also think they are afraid to put only 1 or a few nations tanks at the highest rank as it might hurt nationalistic feelings, but the reality is germany and the US just make better stuff than everyone else.
No, because they have countless other crutches that they would need to lose as well.
Well if there is countless lets hear 3.
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
to also add, wasn’t there only 1 T80B and t80U fitted with thermals, though all of em have it?
If that were the case then the DU hull for the abrams would also be viable on the m1a1 (sense there’s 5 of em thats been tested with it.
And what happens when ammo cooks-off on Abrams ? Right crew abandons the tank which quite different than what happens in game. You adding rules that will hurt every one
Yet it is not best or second best AP round which is main armament for the game.
comparing a tank with blowout panels with a tank that doesn’t have them is the kind of good faith arguments i’m used to from russian mains. not going to bother
Have nothing to say huh ? Cool well don’t expect any one to care about your arguments
Jesus Christ, if you want to say that eastern technology is useless just say it, don’t play games. When comes to arguments and you guys are actually counterargumented, start pulling stuff from God knows where, sometimes, if ERA was overperforming T-72AV (Turms-T) would’ve a usable vehicle today.
2 Likes
i explained why his first point made no sense and why it was a bad faith argument, apparently that’s too hard to read for both of you, guess that’s why you play russia
still only cited 2/8 of the points i made, but maybe in your mind they stop existing because you don’t like them? lmao
They want stuff nerfed, but also to stay at the same BR. I don’t mind id rather things be realistic as possible, but if what people say is true then you would have russian tanks capping out at 11.3 with the BVM at best. And it goes both ways with wanting things buffed, people want stingers to be as strong as strela, but then you have a manpad sitting at 10.3 that can’t engage helis with 4-6km AGMs and CAS with mavs and other TV missiles they can’t engage.
The other problem is russia has become the boogeyman for all the random BS that happens in game as if they are the only tanks that benefit from weird things happening, or it becomes a cope for taking bad shots that for instance only graze the autoloader (I know because I had a horrible time with this w/ the al khalid till I learned I was aiming too high since it has the lower profile autoloader).