It does
More total T-80B/BVs were equipped with Agava than the total number of Arietes ever built, and this is a game where you’ll likely have more Beigleits or HSTV-Ls or Object 292s on your team than the total number built, that is to say, prototypes have been in the game since beta and always will be.
Sure, now lets see your source for that.
İ asked to another person and he couldnt bring that, i expect better this time tho.
The other guy was also only 300m away
My mistake, 50 were equipped according to BTVT, so less than the total number of Ariete’s, but still it’s a lot more than the single unit prototypes you commonly find at all BRs, like the CV-90-105/120 or HSTVL or Radkampfwagen or whatever else.
http://btvt.info/3attackdefensemobility/suo_history.htm
If you think 3BM42 is better than other rounds just because it has better 0 degrees pen you are bad at WT
Abrams fuel tanks currently create no spalling, and haven’t created spalling since I’ve owned them which is at least 2021. Fuel tanks on all tanks create no spalling because fuel acts as a spall liner, and mild thin steel used for fuel containment doesn’t spall.
@Necrons31467
Some corrections: Armor should be LOS effectiveness not flat thickness.
Gun depression of T-80B is -6 over the front, -5 from the turret itself, -1 from the turret angle.
@MuricaxSuffers
Due to the design of Ariete and Merkava, they can’t reload as quickly as Abrams or Leopard 2.
If you think 3bm42 sucks at 10.3 in any aspect you suck
Not what he said.
And a terrible response to a post that itself had an underhanded insult in it.
no, it doesn’t. Its almost as if you people say things, and don’t actually understand the tanks design. When it was engineered anything at 81+ degrees was found to deflect APFSDS rounds.
It has much more spread out/sporadic weakspots than both the M1 and 2A4 while also in general being smaller, with the only downsides being somewhat worse mobility (not even 2 hp/ton less, barely over one second slower time to 45km/h) and worse gun handling (but getting the second best round, only missing 14mm from being the best).
The one-shot area on it is much larger though (entire LFP, drivers viewport+turret ring) and more consistent. Yeah you can pen the Leo 2 in more places, but lower right hull if he brings 14 rounds will just kill the engine and lower right hull will just get the gunner, which isn’t a big deal given the Leo 2 has commander override. Oh, and that’s another thing, the T-80B doesn’t have commander override, and has one less crew, so it’s easier to cripple and kill if you pen.
I’m not agreeing with the OP that the T-80B needs a downtier, it’s just also not the best 10.3, the 2A4 being generally better in most situations.
this is historical accurate
Name one.
İncreased spalling on Abrams.
Fuel tanks generates more spalling rather then reducing most of the times.
Turret Ring armor is still not buffed and not changed to volumetric armor.
Overall protection level is still wrong.
When Turret is looking at back main gun should have more depression.
Think these are more then enough.
There is no difference between the spall of the Abrams compared to any other contemporary MBT. If you believe it is, open the .blkx file and show us.
Again, block file figures.
That isn’t a nerf, that’s an oversight. Much like every other vehicle and its volumetric armor, it will be added in time.
Wrong compared to…?
Unless the gun can phase into the engine deck, no. This isn’t GHPC.
Doesnt matter, you asked and i answered.
Gaijin increased the spalling level on Abrams.
Sure Show me then.
You’re talking like volumetric just added last patch and its a compeletly new mechanic.
Compared to Swedish trials which Gaijin loves to use that outdated source, also there are multiple bug reports on protection level for Abrams, you can stop bein lazy and check it out.
Gun itself can basically almost touch to engine deck in order to increase gun depression. Same problem occurs on HSTV-L, that tank should also have more depression on certain angles.
İf you dont know then its your problem.
Non-answers are not answers. I can say that the Abrams is broken and is constantly nerfed because it only uses spaced armor. That isn’t true, but I can say so and try and pass it as such.
Again, prove it.
I’m acting as if volumetric vehicles are being constantly added, and the Abrams has not been fully implemented.
Compared to swedish trials using EAP, it was then tweaked to match stated effectiveness of domestic packages. They even pointed out the disparity between the Swedish Abrams and the in-game Abrams.
Every bug report I see is from people crying about the Abrams not being impenetrable and unstoppable, then using Youtube videos as “proof”.
I’m not the one grasping for non-answers.
You’re not smartest person arent you?
İt doesnt matter if all the tanks has increased spalling levels, from the day that M1 Abrams was added gaijin increased spalling effectively,
Please, disprove it.
And how many years has passed since volumetric has added to the game or how many years has passed since Gaijin still refusing to fix armor level on turret ring?
İt doesnt, even turret cheeks still missing armor values and Side armor on turret is massively underperfoming.
Didnt talked about any videos that states Abrams are impenetrable, cheap bait at its best.
No you’re just constantly throwing random claims without any evidence while calling my claims are false.
Either disprove it or stop trying to throw cheap baits.
Here, HSTV-L gun depression report from old forum.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/b4ogshUDi1jN
İncorrect armor protection level for Abrams.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xK4GPBS59dUL
İncorrect bulkhead thickness on Abrams.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/BcMSgWYhwd5k
Missing Spall Liners.
i literally have people on my youtube channel who think that abrams doesn’t have increased spall. These people are delusional. The abrams gets hit anywhere and its like a shotgun cone shaped spall kills the entire crew.