I agree here too, though the LFP doesn’t stop any round past ~ 105mm DM63 (430mm+) The UFP is still good though.
Better survivability on what basis?
Turret ring is exposed regardless of what angle the autocannon is coming from, so while that’s nice, it’s not a huge benefit.
I agree with this.
I can’t really verify it without asking some of my friends, but I assume you are correct.
That’s also true, though pretty situational. I can’t say that I’ve had the time or situation to do that with just a 50.cal (especially after they nerfed its belt size). If it were the 2K’s 20mm though…
Not without increasing your risk of ammo detonation while hull-down.
Agreed, though Leclerc’s APFSDS round is good enough, with the difference in spalling usually being the same or similar. I do like how M829A1 can UFP the T-80Us sometimes, though.
Simply due to larger crew count. There would be an argument pre-basket for Leclerc but not post.
I found it to be very useful against BMPTs, as most of them don’t even know the Abrams has the composite sideskirts and will try to aim for sides like they would on any tank, to no success. Of course you are on a timer for until the sideskirts blow off, but its a good chunk of time.
I prefer to take this risk. I honestly do not recall being one tapped through cheek through ammo all that much with it either, nothing more than usual.
That thing is demonic. Toxic as hell on 2K/MBT/KPz.
My argument is that you cannot ammo rack the Leclerc nearly as easily while hull-down as with the M1A1, even if it’s decently comparable.
The blowout panel usually stops most rounds (even if they penetrate the cheeks), and even if you do shoot the breech / right-side cheek, the chance that it explodes is less likely than shooting the cheeks with the Abrams because the Leclerc’s ammo is spaced out more evenly, and is not slanted diagonally.
550RPM 30mm APDS shreds through rather quickly it from my experience, and more times than not they just go for the turret ring anyways.
I prefer taking more ammo than the first stage too, but I can’t say I share the same experience.
I one-shot kill M1A1s and Type 90s through their turret cheeks quite often with the Challenger 2s.
I will say, M1A1 getting detonated through turret cheek isn’t that common overall. Its quite hard to tell if its an M1A1 or M1A2, so most people will aim for the breach.
While yes M1A2 can wiggle and just parry it, most shots on M1A1 turret will be for the breach, which is better than being dead.
Pretty iffy, especially if it’s a downtier where the M1A2 wouldn’t exist (or a 10.7 match for the matter).
Besides, it’s not like they wouldn’t be missing their shot.
Hull-down, I’d say the Leclerc has a better chance at surviving a shot (and possibly even returning fire) than the M1A1, though I’d say they’re just about as survivable as one another when shot in the hull. The extra crew member is nice on the M1A1 but the turret basket + engine shot usually allows an easy follow-up shot anyways.
Really depends on the situation, but I from my experience, if the BMPT catches you lacking, 9/10 times your turret basket gets taken out before you can react… then your tracks / barrel, then your crew members… and then you’re dead.
Yeah in that case you could wiggle your turret on M1A1 and parry the 2A4 for example. You know for sure he doesn’t have a round powerful enough to cheek you.
That is probably true.
I disagree here. Both can get basket engined just as easy, but M1A1 has a higher chance to survive (assuming the shooter does not follow up, either you trade shots or he is killed by a teammate)
It depends on how badly he catches you off guard. If its a second or less before you shoot him, theres a good chance you will live. But if its like 2 or 3, you are most likely dead.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
