So far I’m not enjoying Israel, the 8.0 lineup is huge but pretty bad, 8.0 br in general is bad, in particular I find M48 and M60s without a stabilizer to be really bad, so glad I didn’t buy the magach 3 ERA or the Italian M60.
once you get the Magach 5, you will obtain happiness
1 Like
That’s my dream tank ( after the merkavas)
Would the Russians openly say their vehicles are not 45 tons and instead 80 tons? Is increasing the weight a good lie?
Gaijin won’t buff the armor because they think it’s currently too light with that much composite to have good armor. If they make it 80 tons, the Merkava can receive its armor buff and become the heavy tank of top tier like it should actually be.
The Sabra uses the same 120mm as the Merkava Mk.3 and would fire the same rounds while also having extremely good armor and an APS system. It would be a pretty solid 10.3 in my opinion.
1 Like
Incorrect information =/= lie.
Armor and mass are irrelevant.
Aren’t there quite a few photo’s showcasing the low thickness of the UFP array? And that it’s pretty limited in terms of LoS thickness?
Genuinely asking, I’m not particularly informed on this topic.
Merkava 1-3 definitely have a weak UFP.
Not the case for the Merkava 4 though.
While not exactly the thickest armor, it does pass a certain threshold where armor becomes heavily dependent on its design and composition, rather than its LoS thickness.
2 Likes
There are things that can be deduced simply through logical-deductive reasoning. For instance, I accept that the Merkavas of series 2 and 3 weigh almost the same as series 4, even though they have worse armor, considering that IMI had its own process for developing competitive armor, like that which the Israeli military industry manufactures today. That is, the Merkava series 2/3 had problems known to everyone in different wars. Precisely, series 4 applies improvements based on those learned lessons.
The vehicle is large and weighs 80 tons, so what is your assumption about its armor? Air armor like the Namer, which weighs 60 tons without having a turret? There is no logic in the Namer, nor in the Merkava series 4.
Then you get things like the “Object 279”… Unfeasible in real life, but in the game, they work wonderfully.
No high-level vehicle is based on even remotely real data, for obvious reasons. The people who presented reports on the 2A7V, showing photos of the thickness of the sides, were ignored.
So, if the Merkava sucks, it’s because Gaijin deliberately wants it to. It is enough to give it, logically speaking, characteristics similar to those known to everyone: a heavy tank, less agile, but with a better-protected crew.
They can start by removing the damn shells they deliberately put behind the engine.
2 Likes
The compartment (air) between the removable armor appliqués and the turret core is also not modeled. But as always, photos are not sufficient proof and the rest of the primary sources are not public. It’s the same old story.
1 Like
So, every single IDF statement about the Merkava, which says it’s 80 tons, shouldn’t be believed because one single military page miswrote 65 tons?
2 Likes
Why should the Merkavas be heavily nerfed based on testimony alone?
Then how do you think you can make the tank better
@captainistaken
Armor, which is exclusively proven with information about… the armor.
I see @el_Argentino is accusing all Israel tech tree players of being trolls.
One day he’ll stop attacking the WT community and actually agree with us that Merkava needs fixing.
They did.
Armor is very related to weight.
This car weighs 1.4 tons and it’s about the same size as the aml 90
Which weighs 5 tons. And if you shoot them both with a 9mm the aml 90 will be completely fine while the mini cooper will have a hole in it
1 Like
Not armour per se.
Your example doesn’t quite translate to heavier MBT’s.
The structure of a vehicle is by far the dominant decider in overall weight, the actual (composite) armour inserts are comparatively very light.
The Merkava would still be heavy with the same armoured steel structure and same overall dimensions, but all composites removed.
For curiosity: Give me your best guess as to what percentage of the weight of an M1A1’s hull comes from:
- The structure?
- The suspension?
- The composite armour?
The Merkava 4 design phase began in 1999, and articles on it claimed the IDF took measures to reduce the hull’s weight, including by using aluminium structures where possible. To insinuate the Merkava 4’s empty structure would weigh a whopping 20 tons more than not only its contemporaries but also the Merkava 3 - is a huge logical leap.
2 Likes
I’m not entirely sure why you’re saying this to me, given that I’ve never stated any such things.
All I said was that the structure of an MBT often makes up the majority of the weight, and not the composite inserts. Would you disagree with that?
They are not there when you don’t run full ammo. Like why would you ever even run that ammo loadout, at that point you deserve to get ammo racked lol.
3 Likes