Stop neglecting top tier US

i swear, if it was me, that T-80UK (his third kill) would have killed me after reversed to take the shot. He was totally open sideways and just luck that the enemy didnt saw him

then why pipe in? You are basically just saying you agree, I’m even starting the Italian tree and French next because Germany is way to easy. But yeah USA def isn’t bad, though on the other hand this disparity shouldn’t


be allowed

1 Like

The thing is most Us players who has high Tier Abrams also plays with other nations, not to mention a lot of them actually agrees that Ariete’s,Leclerc’s and other tanks that has historical inaccuricies should recieve their fixes.

Meanwhile Us haters comes on this thread, claims that Abrams are fine and refuses to even understand what people trying to say to them.

See the difference? I believe you can.

3 Likes

it isnt overstated. As the sep abrams 30 - 35% of their Hull armor

Its clear you don’t play this game at top tier. The abrams gun depression allows it to peak over a hill and fire at a target, which completely puts its Hull in the direct line of sight of an incoming round. This would stop the abrams from ever being destroyed in a long range fight, or even if the abrams is moving over terrain. Then Everyone is not hitting the same shots directly into the turret ring, that shouldnt even be a weakspot.

1 Like

Yeah no. I know you are all black and white and only care about 1 single stat in this game, but I disagree hard with this.

The Abrams are decent to somewhat good. If the absolutely ridiculously strong tanks like the 2A7s and Strv 122s were not in the game, the Abrams tanks would be closer to the top than the bottom of the top tier MBT ranking.

3 Likes

But they are. Many of them. Hence every other nation (not excluding America of course) needs direct counterprts, not something that, on your own words, is barely:

Of course they need the proper counterpart. I have been asking for the SEPv3 for months now.

I just think that, and sorry for being extremely blunt here, calling the Abrams mediocre is absolutely beyond braindead.

3 Likes

“Decent to somewhat good” in a meta dominated by tanks that can get nukes by themselves is mediocre by comparison, yes.

1 Like

Every tank can theoretically get a nuke by itself.

Few days ago I got enough spawnpoints to spawn a nuke in my namer 30 (forgot to spawn it though). Does that now make all other average IFVs around that BR suddenly mediocre?

Your definition of what is good, average and mediocre has always been skewed because you only care about a single hard stat in game: armor. Always have and always will.

mediocre is reserved for tanks like the Arietes, Challengers and Merkavas. The Abrams is at worst average. I personally rate them as above average.

1 Like

Precisely! Hence a good player getting a nuke with X, Y or Z vehicle proves nothing.

No. I don’t “only care about armor”; but when two tanks are nearly identical in every way, except one of the tanks ALSO has twice as thick armor while not having any downsides… there certainly is something to consider.

Mediocre, average, whatever, you name it- the point is that the Abrams should not be beneath pretty much half of its counterparts, and it being above the very worst ones does not make the situation any better.

The top Abrams tanks, which are the pinnacle of the U.S tree, should be OUTSTANDING, just like the 2A7s and 122s are. Instead, it’s just “average”. The workhorse MBT of the most powerful military on the planet. “Average”. See the issue?

Not to mention that, as I said, no nation’s MBTs should be above or beneath the rest by any significant degrees- I am only talking about the Abrams here because it’s the American thread. I have talked about Arietes, Leclercs, Merkavas and Challengers (etc) on their respective threads.

4 Likes

Using YouTuber videosfor these conversations are not good anyways because influencer and streamer opinions don’t reflect the community as a whole and can also severely hurt the game.

Ok

insert rainbow six siege

Because, as I have explained multiple times to no avail:

When tank (X) and tank (Y) are nearly identical in every way… except tank (X) ALSO has twice as much armor than tank (Y), there’s a clear superiority there.

It’s not JUST about the armor.

Why do you think I never bring up T-90M? Because it has armor, yes, but also enough downsides balance it out.

The 2A7s or the 122s have the armor and also NO downsides compared to the Abrams besides the faster reload. The difference in armor and survivability (don’t forget about the spall liners) is more significant than the one provided by the faster reload in this context.

1 Like

With that Logic every nation players has huge “skill issue” problems considering Cavenub performs almost similiar with every single top Tier tank.

Seriously dude the amount of coping and hatred you have is amazing.

2 Likes

you brung him into the equation not us, and the fact some peoples opinions arent based on them trying the abrams, not even once.

also nice job, who here is going full nuclear

2 Likes

+Look, Abrams is great, this player has a 4 K/D with it.
-That player also has a 4 K/D with Ariete PSO, the performance of a top player is not an indicator of a vehicle’s performance- or would you say Ariete PSO is great based on the same logic you applied to the Abrams?
+CoPe

(?)

8 Likes

I love how American/Abrams haters storm in into every single Abrams/American concerns-related threads raging about how great America/Abrams actually is and how much of a noob all of us are and how retarded we are when we disprove their points, but then we are the ones “going full nuclear”

3 Likes

90% WR. 99% he plays with a squad of 4. Russian teams are too trash for that WR

Also as it stands the SEPV2, Chally 3, Type 10, Ariete, Merkava Mk 4, Leclerc, and ZTZ99 are not even close to Leo2A7 standards yet all are 11.7. But this is a discussion on the USA tree not those.