i still didnt see 2S38 in your account. are you going to prove what you said or not?
Hey moderators, what do you put on your popcorn?
Larger breach is benefit mostly
Since it just eats all the damage, if penned somewhere close
Only massive disadvantage of CR2E over Abrams is ammo rack amount and it’s locations
Other parts… its better/on par/doesnt impact gameplay
1 Like
And that lack of a functional ready rack heavily impacts the offensive capability of the tank, especially in urban combat scenarios
That’s my bad I thought I remembered you as a knowledgeable player
Sure. That’s legit but the anti-ERA darts are just marketing lies
Wish the irony of saying this about RU ERA at the expense of the Abrams armor and its darts wasn’t lost on you
I stand corrected i legit thought the UM2 had Relikt. Guess I underestimated the bias hahaha
Again who cares, whichever next tank stops your point and click adventure will be the best. Seems to be a common opinion among your fellow bias enjoyers though.
I did and I was right
Sparrows were never shit, ERs were better but only two with a worse radar. ER was a lot easier to notch than AIM7 and rightly so. 9L were demons and equivalent to R73s in terms of flare resistance.
Guess that proves that bias makes its enjoyers delusional
Spall liners armor and thermals are the only way it’s different compared to the 2A6 and yet it’s considered to be leaps and bounds better. 1. That proves my point about armor/weakpoint size relative to silhouette being the most important aspect of the game 2. The T80s still have better protection and smaller weakpoints with ERA and internal components often eating broadside or LFP shots to the carousel. T80s have the better thermal, the reliability of the autoloader, more ammo especially the 3OF26 which can one tap any NATO tank with a hit to the roof. T80s are also faster and smaller, easier to conceal with bushes, and a reload equal to the Leopards. The reverse speed is the only real downside but they’re best used aggressively as weakpoints are harder to hit in CQC. Could go on and on
At least it’s not stuck with a 6.5 or 7.1 sec load time.
:/
1 Like
It is after 4 rounds are fired lol
1 Like
Ig ‘knowledgable’ corresponds with delusional in your eyes then, claiming the 2A7V not to be the best MBT in game, let alone that’s it’s somehow worse than a T-series tank is just wild, and makes ne question the legitimacy of your statements
1 Like
How is a 530mm KE hull that reaches 570-600 at some angles wore than a 370mm KE hull first seen at 10.7 at 12.0, if I may ask…?
Challenger 2’s hull composite module can reliably withstand any stock and lower BR shell, as well as stuff like 3BM46, DM43, even OFL F1, 3BM60, etc, at times. The Abrams’ hull can be lolpenned by virtually any 10.0+ shell.
And the driver viewport weakspot is significantly smaller than the Abrams’ turret neck, which is essentially its entire center of mass.
Hold up, you do understand your large 120mm dart hits several panels of ERA at once right? Most people shoot center mass on ERA, so let’s say 1 panel equates to 60mm x 4 = 240mm protection, then it has to go through a road wheel or something, then into the side of the tank.
You have to do the math, it’s like the people who complain after hiting 70+ era panels and not scoring a kill.
Challengers are miles less consistent when it comes to survivability than the abrams, the main thing with the abrams is that they usually take 2 shots to kill due to the immense size of the thing, challengers are easily 1-shot from most angles, spall liner or not
Only part of CH2E where armor is worser - LFP
Seems awfully likely that the 2A7 only feels like it’s the best because it was the first time many players used to point and click had to actually aim for weakspots. Personally I didn’t play it much, and facing it I barely noticed that it was up armored. The spall liners also found on the T90M had more of an impact in the way i fight them
I’ll leave you to this imaginary ‘abwums bad’ debate then, you cannot seriously believe it’s worse than a CR2, of any model no doubt
1 Like
Abrams is bad in game, thats fact.
Any point/opinion that isnt simillar to your - wrong? Or what?
Or… it’s the gen 17 “Black hole” armor upgrade.
See look:
I don’t even think even your fellow bias enjoyers would agree with that statement
It’s also not how flyer plate ERA works so…
It’s not bad, I actually quite enjoy it.
Challenger is inconsistent in the sense that its armor may, or may not, withstand a shell.
Abrams is inconsistent in the sense that it may either die in one shot, or be severely crippled by said shot only to be finished off in a second shot.
In terms of survivability, I’m keeping the Challenger xD.
“Surviving” a shot is worthless when each and every single one of your modules is destroyed by it, along with half of the crew.
2 Likes
I dont have it cuz it behind pay wall but lets take another russian bias tank as example
I recently started to grind germany and when i got to t72 i creamed over myself
This is my best performing tank it was heaven to play a russian tank that have autoloader armor and good gun with the low profile i got 2 nukes before i even fully spaded it
Same with t44 and t54(exept the nukes) russian bias is so real
And 2s38 is the most op russian bias maybe after the pantsir
Try to play small nation learn the game and come back to the 2s38 with knowladge i promise u u will farm nukes
Oh also is3 was strong
In israel i played the tiran 6 which is t62 wasent bad at all either
U dont see how russia has berly if any bad vehicles? Rly?