Unlike the Abrams, the Merkavas DO have some seriously trolly survivability!
This is explained for a number of reasons:
1- The driver sits at the side, not middle of the hull. Therefore, a center of mass hit will not take him out.
2- The tank is VERY tall; the turret crew sit very high into the fighting compartment.
3- Even though the armor is deficient on paper, it’s surprisingly, inconsistently trolly. Modules, angles and volumetric shenanigans will often either make shells fail to penetrate or fail to deal any significant damages inside the tank.
4- Smaller amount of critical modules (no FCS or turret basket), placed more conveniently (behind the turret cheeks, instead of the hull).
TKX and Type 10 basically do what the Abrams does, but better. Overall, they aren’t stronger or more survivable; but they are just about as mobile (despite the broken steering and underperforming acceleration) while having an autoloader which is also even faster.
Type 10s also do not have any of the advanced or extra modules at all, they are more empty and have less weaknesses, therefore. The front fuel tank may often absorb shells and spalling and the armor can turn out as trolly as Abrams’.
The only advantage the Abrams has over the Type 10 is the gun handling via faster traverse speeds and wider depression and elevation angles. Other than that, Type 10 is better.
Yes, yes indeed. I disagree as much with the “worst MBT” narrative as I do with the “second best MBT” one.
To me, the Abrams is the perfectly average MBT ingame. The problem is; the Abrams tanks could, would and SHOULD be better than they currently are if they were properly implemented.
If they had their faults and inaccuracies corrected and they were depicted faithfully as they should and as every tank should be, SEP and SEPv2 would very easily move from 16/19 to 7/6 on my Ranking, respectively; and AIM would move from 17 to 8.
See where the outrage comes, at least in my case? Knowing these tanks are 10 positions below where they should be…
But it’s the same outrage I feel regarding Chinese MBTs, Challengers,Merkavas, Type 10s, Oplot, etc.
I just want each and every single MBT in the game to be correctly depicted; faithful to their real selves. I have no biases towards nor against any MBT or nation; I just hate artificial nerfs, bugs and inaccuracies.
Yes, and as you said, everyone is nerfed at the moment
But previous experience often results in the US getting a notable advantage for at least a while. Id be worried about full strength M1A2 Sep V3 with M829A4 for several months before anything similar added to anyone else. (if anything else was added, still waiting for M1A2 equivalents for several nations)
The last time the Abrams had survivability was pre 2019 that’s where most of the people get the assumption from. Now it’s a shell of its former self, and this is coming from someone who does exceptionally well in Abrams I was here when the Abrams first came out back in 1.77, and I have seen the survivability go down over the years to where its at now. If they model sepv3 correctly, it will be a pretty nice addition. The turret would around 960mm of protection which someone made an estimate of what the turret armor could offer based on weight increases over the years with different versions of the Abrams https://forum.warthunder.com/t/m1a2-sep-v3/80241/303. The hull should offer 550 plus armor based on the fact that they managed to get that back in the early 90s with potential hull armor improvers for the base m1a2. I personally believe it’s at least 600 since we have had considerable technological advancements in armor compositions since then. But ya Idk why people still bring up the Abrams survivability debate that has been long gone for years. It doesn’t help that gaijin ignores all the bug reports for the Abrams that are waiting to be implemented either.
The SEP V2 is not actually as slow as its said to be. If you boost yourself with 1 shell (shooting backwards) it equalizes with the V1. Now you obviously can’t do that in most scenarios, but just to put it into perspective.
So you have to make yourself defenseless for a minimum of 5 seconds, not counting the fact that having your turret pointing backwards is literally the worst position you could be in, it takes time to traverse to face any threat
Fair enough. But the SEPv2 has to be noticeably worse than the base SEP or even M1A2 in mobility, otherwise so many people wouldnt independently complain about it
This could be partially solved with an overall rework of tank mobility with Regen steering and better torque modeling. Or they could let people remove TUSK
Too bad they don’t add the USMC AIMv2 and FEP. And a FEP with the AIDATS upgrade but idk if it exists since it seems to be cutting it pretty close to when USMC got rid of their tanks
This is largely why I think they are all under BRed. The 11.7 Abrams are way too strong for 11.7. heck the 11.3 ones are better comparisons to most nations 11.7s