This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
2 Likes
It should be a modification, not a new vehicle. Don’t make the grind worse than it already is…
7 Likes
Yeah why not
Merkava 4 got another copy with the APS, same for the chally.
Im sure they gonna do the same with t90m
1 Like
I call upon the Russian bias to prevent this.
4 Likes
When gaijin adds the M1A2 SepV3 with the APS. Sure
1 Like
3 buffs for the russian tech tree 1 was the under br bmpt now the autoloader buff a 9.0 tank with 6.0 sec autoloader and now aps for the most hard to kill mbt how great
1 Like
Oh very great for the russian company of course
1 Like
Yes, they buffed all the MBTs, but some of them also got nerfed. BMPT and BMPT-72 have been nerfed four times since they were added to the game. And of course, the T-64B’s BR changed from 9.7 to 10.0, so it can get uptiered to the T-90A.
2 Likes
? SEP V3 blows this thing out of the water with no contest. SEP V2 can get APS, if you really want it.
Try convincing Gaijin to add it. That won’t get you far
And even if gaijin did add the SepV3, I doubt its performance would be any different from any existing Abrams in warthunder. Reason? Blatantly obvious why
A 9.0 tank with 6s autoloader? Damn didn’t know the T-64A got downtiered to 9.0.
Its 9.3, with:
No mobility
No gun handling
No armor, it can get UFP penned by M735
No survivability
No smokes
No thermals
No reverse
No depression
No rooftop MG
Also, the 90M is hardly difficult to kill. It pops 95% of the time with ease.
4 Likes
Is it a nerf if its one the br it should have been and two systems that should have been on the tank to begin with? its not like with other tanks where they just removed armor or withhold rounds for balance purposes.
It would be the best top tier tank in the game, as the LFP is rumored to be atleast 600mm, but thats just speculation. It would have the best armor at top tier, with weakspots smaller than 2A7, and the other pros of Abrams.
1 Like
I’m all for it dude. And I sincerely want to see that happen
T-90M got a whopping 0.1 second reload buff, not exactly something to write home about given that it’s still the slowest reloading tank across all of top-tier.
T-90M shouldn’t be the hardest tank to kill, and even if it were, that’d still not make it a good vehicle.
War Thunder is about having the mobility to reach powerpositions quickly, have consistently good firepower and the ability to be versatile and quickly react, the T-90M is pretty terrible at all of these things.
Besides, we have quite a few MBT’s with active protection systems and they’re hardly game-breaking, in fact, the T-72B3A is among the worst 12.0+ tanks in the entire game.
3 Likes
Because the SEP v3 doesn’t offer the benefits which are particularly relevant to this computer game?
Let’s see what the SEP v3 brings:
-
Improved turret cheek armour: Mostly pointless because the standard M1A2’s are already immune to every APFSDS round head-on.
-
Increase to 67 metric tons standard, 71 metric tons with Trophy and ARAT II: It’s going to have a notable decrease in mobility.
-
Improved hull frontal armour: Very unlikely to reach protection levels required to stop 12.7 APFSDS given that the volume to the armour was not physically increased. Opponents will also still simply aim for the gun shield, turret ring or sides.
-
People expect the SEP v3 to come with M829A3, but there’s absolutely no guarantee of that and it just as easily could be implemented for the SEP v2.
-
People expect the SEP v3 to come with Trophy, but again, could easily be mounted on the SEP v2 as well and there’s no guarantee Gaijin adds it for the SEP v3.
-
People expect improved thermals, but the SEP v3 doesn’t use them as they were planned for the SEP v4 which ended up being cancelled.
1 Like
Definitely no, at least not now, active protection systems, specially hard-kill are very niche in the eastern designs (e.g. Soviet Union and China tech trees), personally I don’t want it again (T-72B3A is already there), and if it’s implemented, as modification, minor changes should always be a modification, otherwhise we would have two 2S6 using as example (with stock 2S6 and modified 2S6M1 as radar, missile and thermal imaging device improvements).
Although it may be pointless, additonal armor is good if not better. Especially if it makes up to fill the void fo the additional weight which gaijin may not “guestimate” enough to add appropriate upgrades.
This increase in weight equates to improves armor and or additional systems that would improve the leathality of the abrams.
Added weight does not just magically appear on a vehicle without significant changes.
Since the Abrams is much heavier at that point and it’s clear in play style that hull down engagements is a strong point for abrams, this would not change anything
It does not need to be enough to stop 12.7 rounds. It needs to be enough to stop lower BR rounds. Equivalent to that of modern leopards and perhaps even the Type 10’s thicked part of armor effectivity.
Good, weak spots are existant on ALL top teir vehicles. That should be the case. And the norm which does not change any argument of added additonal hull armor.
Completely up to the devs of course.
I would hold off on this speculation if and when the v3 is added and if gaijin decides to add it. If the T-90M were to get its upgrade of the Arena APS, I would expect the abrams and other nations to recieve similar APS as well.
Tell me, how many people were asking for the reactive armour tiles on the SEP v2 to be a removable module in order to save weight?
Mobility > Pointless added armour.
Like you said, wouldn’t change anything because if you’re facing a hull-down Abrams, it makes literally zero difference if it’s a M1A2 or a M1A2 SEP v3, you’ll still have to aim for the exact same areas.
The only difference is that the SEP v3 is slower to reach the hull down spot.
SEP v3 is just a sidegrade to the existing M1A2 SEP and that’s fine, but I’m just trying to temper people’s expectations regarding a SEP v3 in War Thunder.