I personally consider the Abram to be in a somewhat similar situation as the Leclerc. Clearly not bad compared to others at its BR, but also not equivalent to 2A7 and cie.
As for which is better, I don’t really know, my only experience with the M1 is the AIM. I do think it’s harder to kill them than the Leclerc tho but it comes with its own problems
Edit : the vehicles that I believe should go up are the T80BBM, T90M, leopard 2A7 and derivatives.
The vehicles that are good but not exceptional are the type 10, Leclerc, M1. Vehicles that could go down are the ariete, challenger 2 and merkava. I don’t really have strong opinions the Chinese tanks and the challenger 3. They would probably still be okay at the same BR as the Leclerc and cie, but I wouldn’t say they are quite as good
Also, « going up », « staying at their BR » and « going down » is solely considering them in a vacuum, I’m not considering lower BR tanks. This might require an overall increase in BR with decompression
Japan can be given Italy treatment and given a better performing NATO compatible round with same or lower pressure than Type 10 [SHARD for those wondering].
T-14 with Vacuum for Soviets.
China can get M1A2T with M829A3+.
Israel can either be given Italy treatment or a new round is found to be fired out of Merkava.
Everyone else is more straight forward.
Obviously at that point, even if we got better armor representation, everyone’s lolpenning each other.
However, we will have to go through with it, I don’t see why we would put Leopards everywhere, and why the Taiwanese branch wouldn’t have its M1A2T. Same for Thailand’s VT-4.
Also, aside from in service vehicles, the past few years have also proposed a bunch of MBT propositions, from EMBT, Abram X, China also has some stuff. While many are tech demos, a bunch of them are stated to be at least tried (for example EMBT ADT140 and leopard 2 ACR as well as Abram X should be undergoing testing as of now or in the very near future). I don’t think every country would have an option tho and that is the main problem with those additions
Just like the t90, I’m not considering the kdr, wr… I’m solely going off from what I have experienced fighting them (can’t really say of using them since I’m a pure French main breed, with some squadron vehicles), and from talking with people that do play multiple of them.
Merkava lacks both firepower, armor and mobility compared to the leo at top tier. That’s mostly because the engine deck doesn’t absorb the rounds of high penning rounds that just go through it to kill the crew.
What they lose in raw penetration they get back in reload speed, so firepower as a whole is pretty similar.
Merkavas also get good thermals and don’t have to deal with NATO humps or turret baskets. Mk4 got their engines upgraded so the mobility deficit is far less noticeable.
Their reload speed AFAIK is identical to the M1 at 5s (or they buffed it more ?). To me, even with the turret shape being better than the M1, I find it overall far worse than the M1A2. Each have pro and cons, but the cons of the merkava outweighs the pros
Mobility was improved on Mk4, but it’s still only better than the challenger 2 at top tier (aside from T series reverse speeds obviously), which isn’t great either
Well, comparing it to 2A6, the nato hump of the Leo is also very small and mostly usable only at close range, and with the best top tier rounds. While using the OFL 10 F1, I find it extremely unreliable to kill them near the turret. UPF of both is pretty bad as well, but the turret of the Leo 2 is overall better armored even if the Merkava can be bouncy at times.
Overall, the main benefit the Merkava has over the Leo 2 is reload speed, but it loses to even the M1 and Leclerc in pretty much every over metric.
I just don’t think the Merkava in its current implementation is as good as the Leclerc, M1, Leo 2A5/A6…
It might be better than the ariete and maybe challenger 2-3 tho.
Leopards have the hump and those annoying depression angles over the side.
I think they’re all pretty close to each other.
It’s just that people think 2A5/6 are still some of those ultra good tanks while Merks and Leclercs are utter trash.
Ah I didn’t understand what you meant by hump. Thought you talked about the bullet trap dsign of the turret rings
And this in my opinion is just as false as saying they are all on par. I am not saying that there needs to be full 1.0 BR between the 2A6 and 2A7, or Leclerc and T80BBM, but that overall between say the ariete and the leo2a7 and T80BBM we should potentially have an entire 1.0 br separation with the other tanks in between.
Fair enough, it’s true that the Merkava does have better reload now which I often forget. I still disagree on the mobility. The Leclerc is currently a tiny bit slower at low speed in acceleration and overall handling compared to the Leo 2A5/6, but I still is quite significantly better than the Merkava from what I can see
Bruh why do i see people saying that the leclerc is better than the leo 2a6
Dm 53 from the l55 literally low pens the leclercs turret cheeks depending on the angle of course
You have a massive breach that gets pen by any round that has at least 60 to 70 mm of pen even lower like a 20 mm apfsds
Compared to the leo you get composite armor on the breach
And for the person that was talking about the hstvl
Any hstvl player at least knows that you just aim for the breach or the lfp because the hull armor can’t even survive m735 to the hull
Ive been pen by a 30 mm on the ufp and it killed both of my crew members so it really doesn’t matter
Its even worse when it comes to its protection against heat or atgms
Any atgm can effectively overpressured you ufp
Commander thermal is huge bonus when i comes to the leo because it makes it easier to spot tanks hiding
The leclerc only gets Commander thermal on the s21 while the leo has it on the 2a5, 2a6 and 2a7
Dm 53 vs ofl 120 f1
I do think i need to clarify since we all know which one is better
Mobility wise they are pretty close but the leclerc has better mobility
Leclerc does get a better reload which is nice it most scenario
Overall is the tank bad? No but its not that good either
Stating that it has a good winrate doesnt meaning that the tank is good
It just means that the players that are playing france are doing good in the tank