Again, if the Abrams has ~200mm of KE protection for the turret ring then that would be a whole different story. The BMPT would then have to go for the side armour, or use its ATGMs, or try and hit the barrel (which can be relatively easy or difficult depending on the range).
1 Like
M1A1 without turret ring would be so damn good against autocannons, due to the mentioned sideskirts.
1 Like
100%, but that’s assuming the M1A1 stays at 11.7… which you are suggesting to move to 12.0.
The only MBTs that would struggle with its turret cheek armour then would be the Swedish T-80 U, the PT-16, the MSC, and the T-80UD/BE (I could be forgetting some others but I believe those are the only ones).
The rest of them already get at least ~490mm pen rounds (120mm DM33, DTW2-105), or more (3BM46, 3BM60, DTC10-125, L27A1, etc).
I mean I guess so.
The shooter may not be able to take another follow-up shot in some cases (like if said teammates were with you), so I agree with you here.
The trade of shots is quite rare though – at least at close ranges.
That’s true.
1 Like
Yes, I primarily wanted its armor advantage over 10.7s to be largely diminished, and instead we could have an M1A1 (Early) at 11.3 with M829 as its top shell, which would be pretty balanced imo.
Current M1A1 vs 10.7s is just plain oppressive frankly, especially with M829A1.
1 Like
That’s fair.
I think all the Western 11.7 MBTs are quite oppressive… but then again, I think it’s largely down to BR compression. I think the M1A1 may have just as hard of a time dealing with things like the 2A7V and M1A2T that are just a 0.7 BR higher.
I wouldn’t be opposed to this.
Do you think the IPM1 should be 11.7 for an extra ~30mm more penetration then?
Lmao and I remember people saying it was fair to move it to 11.7 when it was at 11.3.
1 Like
Which is why I mentioned moving the top BR of tanks up to 13.0. Now to solve the absolute mess that is 7.7-8.7’s compression…
Yes, it should be 11.7 as is. Even US players are doing relatively well with it on statshark, sitting at a 1.4 K/D as of February.
Oh yeah, and M829 is 470mm, while M900 is 522mm, so its more like 50mm.
1 Like
That’s fair.
Not only that, the compression at 5.7-7.3 and 8.7-10.3 😅
But I assume Gaijin will just move compression upwards just like how they did with the Jumbo 75 going from 5.3 to 5.7 and facing the Tiger II H.
If we want complete decompression then the best way to do it is by working from lower to higher tiers.
Top Tier at the moment is much nicer than it was half a year ago, but it still needs some tweaking too. (VT4A1 somehow being 12.7 and the VT4 being 12.3 is still incredibly stupid.)
I mean, if there were such a thing as an M1A1 with only M829 at 11.3, I think it would be better BR-for-BR than the IPM1 at 11.7.
From what I remember it was ~480 - ~490mm, but I could be wrong.
I think this is it:
Though this is an old screenshot, so it may have changed recently / will be changed.
Ah okay, they nerfed it…
1 Like
Possibly. I’d say that extra 50mm does make a difference in shots like 2A4 Loader cheek, T-80B UFP, and a few more.
1 Like
Possibly more consistent turret-cheek ammo-racking, but that would be at the cost of facing 12.7 opponents, facing 12.3s more often, no longer facing 10.3 opponents, and facing 10.7 opponents less often… all while making your armour less meaningful.
T-80B gets UFP’d by M829 anyways since it only really has roughly ~420mm worth of KE armour (if you include the ~10mm of KE protection two patches of K-1 ERA blocks provide).
1 Like
Yeah, it would be better BR for BR than 11.7 M1IP, but I think this hypothetical Early M1A1 wouldn’t be oppressive at 11.3. Not to say that you said this though.
It does, but the consistency on M900 is a lot better, making it a shot you can go for almost every time if you need to.
1 Like
I can’t really say M900 is all that different to M829 in that regard (at least when I played Vickers Mk.7 with its ~471mm pen dart (L26)).
470 - 420 = ~50mm residual penetration.
522 - 420 = ~100mm redsidual penetration.
I haven’t had much issues one-shotting them through UFP with 105mm DM63 (~430mm) either, but it’s probably easier to kill both crew members with the second bracket of spalling (>50mm residual penetration).
In which case, the IPM1’s M900 would have a better chance at getting into that bracket than M829.
1 Like
I see.
Yeah it probably wouldn’t be oppressive, but it would still probably be the best 11.3 tank at that BR (though the Merkava Mk.3 and the T-80 U may give it a run for its money).
1 Like
So if the IPM1 goes to 11.7 and the M1A1, Type 90, and Challenger 2s go to 12.0 (assuming ground gets decompressed to 13.0), then the Al-Khalid and MBT-2000 will no longer be out-classed / lol-penned in most cases 😅
I’m not sure if the T-80Us should go up after the reload buffs, and the Merkava Mk.3s.
As much as I don’t like their gameplay, I can’t say that they aren’t performing well.
I know this is one person but they have been doing very well in them compared to their other top tier vehicles with similar sample sizes:
(Roughly same timeframe)
Might be a hot take, but I think the MBT2K/Al-Khalid-I could still be 11.3 in this hypothetical scenario. I also think T-80U and Merk Mk.3 will be just fine at their respective BRs after this decompression.
Mind telling me who that player is? I gotta watch some of his replays to see how he plays, a 6+ KPS is ridiculous.
That’s what I was thinking too. The armour is much worse than the T-90As / T-72B3s or T-80 Us (for that matter), effectively gets the same round as the T-90As / T-72B3s, with worse gun handling over the T-72B3s.
It just gets better reverse speed and neutral steering over the 11.3 T-72B3 (though that in itself is a huge plus).
That being said, I think it’s better than the Swedish T-80 U, which has better armour… but worse gun handling, thermals, reverse speed, and a much worse dart (it’s stuck with 3BM42), so maybe it’s fine at 11.7.
What I would say needs to get lowered is the VT5, though.
It’s just an M1A1 (P) at 11.7 with no armour, worse gun depression… but gets no NATO Hump, better thermals and the ability to drone and scout. 11.3 would make more sense for it.
The Booker should probably go to 11.0 too.
Maybe. I can’t really tell for sure. They both may have a field day if the other MBTs get moved up though.
He’s from M3RCV, ranked 6th on the monthly leaderboards for KPS.
I don’t know how he plays (whether he spawncamps or not) but just from looking at his win rate and average team position, it seems like he one-spawn leaves quite often, and leaves matches without spawning if it’s an uptier fairly often.
But I agree that an average of 6.5KPS is crazy, let alone at top tier.
1 Like
I’d say they’re close enough to be at the same BR honestly.
For sure. It could be 11.0. It went from 10.7 to 11.7, absolutely massacred. Still playable but overtiered af.
1 Like
You think the reload and the better armour is equivalent to the much worse round, reverse speed, thermals, gun depression (to a degree) and gun handling?
Yeah I could see that.
Maybe the same BR as the Booker since it’s more mobile but has worse gun depression and round.
1 Like
Yeah the reload and significantly better turret make the T 80 U’s disadvantages feel less… disadvantageous.
I cannot be asked to play another 7s vehicle, it’s torture. The upcoming ZTZ96B is looking promising though.
1 Like