ERA doesn’t eat spall sir.
The ERA stops the round even generating it. Massive difference. You say that as if you’ve survived mega amounts with them when your KD is relatively equal. If they had extremely high survival rate you would of survived more.
You can take the hits before it pens, once it pens the survival rate is low af on the T- series tanks all of them.
You have also barely, if at all ,used any of the other Tseries E.G T72B, B 1989, B3, T64A or B, T72A which shows the difference. the survivability is dog water, teh armour is not.
As it is wrong on the Merkavas, arietes, leclercs, and proven to be almost half the IRL levels of protection as per the leaks.
ERA stops a good 70% of round being able to spall in the first place, bugged relikt bags used to be a nightmare to fight, and the carousel is still broken
I don’t think they are going to add those Sabot Rounds. ERA is the single only good thing / Armour Russian Tanks have; China only has good Armour at the UFP / Turret - the entirity of the whole Tank else is a One-Hit, they dont even have their spall liners yet and even at the front you get so many and large weakspots makes the UFP and ERA there useless anyway lol
but probably never going to be added due to it making all of russias mbts just paper tanks, they are already worse in everything from pen to reload to gun depression etc. the overperforming ERA is the single only thing making them viable lol so gaijin is definitely not going to take that away from them by giving other nations MBT their stronger darts
Again that Isn’t survivabilty the prevention of spall generation isn’t eating the spall, it’s preventing it in the first place.
that is the armour protection not the survivability of thje vehicle.
The black hole fuel tank on what? my CR2, Abrams, Leo2, Merkavas, leclercs or even type 90s all soak spall like mad too. It’s not something special for Russian tanks and has been proven time and time again.
It’s an RNG percentage based chance.
M1A2 Sep V2 entered service in 2008 from what I can find.
So its only 17 years old, not 20.
Whilst yes, there are more modern tanks, such as the Leopard 2A7V that entered service in 2021. There are also older tanks like the Challenger 2 that entered service in 1998 that has to fight the M1A2 Sep V2 and Britain has yet to get a M1A2 Sep V2 equivalent tank. We are still waiting for a combat capable variant of the Challenger 3. (Challenger 3TD is missing so much of everything… it would be 10.0 if it wasnt for the DM53)
The M1A2 Sep V2 is the second best MBT in game right here, right now and quite frankly. Should NEVER have gotten the reload buff it got and should have remained on the 6 second reload like the Leopard 2s did with the higher pen round. As it stands, most of the 11.7 Abrams (incluidng the clickbait) should be 12.0
The CR2 variants like the TES or the BN are very modern? 2018 itself. Though aye the point stands all the CR2 protection levels are severely slashed on top of the ammo rack situation.
Couldn’t agree more, and they’re my most used MBTs at top tier so it’s not as if I’m dying against them often xD
The TD needs removed from the game, I’ve taken it out 4 times and will not use it one more damn time, it’s laughably pathetic.
I’ve got an expert crew in the 2a5 and I’ll say the difference in reload is noticable, it’s just over a full second longer. even the DM53 L/45 isn’t much of an downgrade it’s 10ish more pen for a full second reload faster.
Also that has happened to me in my CR2 and saved me a few times. As well as my abrams, the nonsense of it’s fuel tank doesn’t stop spalling is ridiculous, occasionally at the right angle it can cause issues, same as any tank
Eh… Technically. 2014/2016 respectively for TES and OES but the base tank and shell is unchanged and those modifications are mostly for dealing with IEDs and are so poorly modeled it’s hauling an extra 10t for the sake of it.
The BN is a technology demonstrator that adds APS and better optics. No idea when it was demonstrated. Maybe 2018? But Id still consider it weaker than the Sep V2 bar the 4 rounds of APS.
But the only Challys I touch these days are the base and 2F because you stand a chance at a downtier
Yep. It might be the weakest top tier tank in the game. There is no reason for it to be on your lineup unless you are desperate for the DM53
Not really true either, It got a plethora of upgrades to the optics, commanders scope, new thermals / sight for the gunner, laser warning system , even a thermal for the driver as far as I’m aware.
I also do believe it got a new FCS as well.
So it is heavily upgraded in comparisson the older CR2 tanks.
The Abrams aren’t much different contextually compared to the ones used in the 90s either, it’s upgraded but really not in areas that affect WT that much.
I rarely see them at all now adays, especially with all the engine nerfs and removal of LWS etc.
It could realistically be 11.3 even with teh DM53, a damn 8.0 tank can one tap it frontally, through the breach xD
DM53 out of an L/55 as well so not even the “good” version.
But still a Challenger 2 with APS on the roof and only a tech demo, not even a tank that actually entered service.
Still the same armour, engine, shell, etc. Things that actually matter in most cases
Sure its got upgraded optics, but thats about it and the LWS is niche, but useful. But its still at its core. a 1998 tank with addons.
Id still take the Abrams over the CR2 at the moment, at least its competitive.
Yeah… either that or it needs a 5 second reload. Was dumb to not give it that much, at least then it would be a clear firepower upgrade over the CR2. At the moment its trading a usable round+ready rack for reload
Wait, you used the baseline CR2 introduction date? That’s just sad, use the latest major version. I used the M1A2 introduction date. For the Leos, 2A7 would be the latest major version ingame
Challenger 2 is 1998. That is literally the tank we have at 11.7.
Challenger 2E is 2002 (1 of our 2 “12.0” tanks)
2F is 2004.
TES/OES (if they are even worth touching) is 2014/2016
BN is a 2018 Tech Demo
All versions of the Challenger 2 use the same everything at its core. Just with different things slapped onto the side. None of the ERA provides additional protection, the only upgrade of note is the engine from the 2002 2E or APS from the 2018 BN. Beyond those 2 points. Its a 1998 tank.
If the M1A2 Sep V2 which is a 2008 tank is just an upgraded version of the M1A2, then the Leopard 2A7V is just an upgraded version of the Leopard 2A5.
Comparing M1A2 (1993) with Leopard 2A7V (2021?) and claiming “US Mains suffer” is just hilarious.
What next? US needs M829A4 vs DM53 whilst deniyng DM73/DM83 from respective tanks?
But even the M1A2 (that is somehow at 11.7 not 12.0) massively outperforms most nations 12.0 tanks, let alone 11.7 tanks.
You guys keep talking about real life service dates completely ignoring that, in SEPv2’s case, NONE of the upgrades from 2008 was implemented.
The improved turret armor (side and front) wasn’t modelled.
The 2003 M829A3 wasn’t implemented.
The “2008” M1A2 SEPv2 is no different from the 1992 M1A2 in War Thunder beyond the thermals and the fact that it’s slower and heavier because you can’t take off the TUSK for some reason.
In War Thunder, functionally, U.S is still stuck in 1992. There is no “2008” tank because there is nothing 2008 about it.
In fairness of this. M829A2 + the Abrams 5 second reload gives it the best firepower in the game bar none. Sure the DM53/L55 combo gets a little more pen, but at the cost of a lower RoF. the A2 is more than enough though to pen any situation.
As it stands, they probably shouldnt have gotten a the 5 second reload buff and should still be on 6 seconds to maintain balance with most nations.
