That’s one of the things I don’t like about the game. The fact that, simply due to the devs’ laziness in not doing things properly, a meta ends up being created that only benefits vehicles with certain characteristics (fast tanks, tanks that use APHE, or those that can deploy CAS early in the match). These are the things that competent devs would review to improve the situation and balance it through the necessary changes, whether it’s better maps, better damage models, etc.
1 Like
To be fair, you do well. Your stats are well above the average for the tank, with a 1.55KD v 1.11 lifetime of the Abrams (it’s even worse if you compare recently with a 1.03 avg for the last few months), and you’re in the top 4% of players. Beeschurger has been slamming kids with a 3.43 KD and is top 3% of players. I mean hell, even I do well a 1.50 KD with most of the games being non-aced but I’m also top 4% and that doesn’t negate the general player base is struggling with the tank. The reason I bring that up is, for example, I find the Russian tanks far easier to play as I’ve got a 1.92 KD in the T-80B while the lifetime KD for the vehicle is 1.02 and last 7 months stats say it has a 1.08 KD (which has increased remarkably this month with a 1.2KD).
I mean… argurably? I find myself brawling in the T-series far more as they can take a hit while I get either one hit KO or get totally immobilized and unable to fire back in the M1 as a round will take the turret controls and engine in one go.
1 Like
I personally think the M1 should get the M774 as the Tier I and M833 as the Tier IV (the M735 is just painfully anemic for that BR). The M900 was just because the Abrams has historically been the worst performing MBT at that BR for once they started adding vehicles past that for the general player base and would at least give it something for what it fights.
So, from what I’ve found while looking into the different ammunitions in game for fun, DM63 and DM53 are the same round but DM63 got a more temperature stable propellent to give it similar performance in different conditions. As for what WT does, I don’t think it would do anything to add it other than just add lines of code to name it differently.
If it gets downtiered, it does at least have the ability to eat what gets thrown at it as that’s what it was built around (iirc, it was originally to stop 3BM22 until they could get the long turret design built). However, even then its fighting tanks that get MANGO as the tier I unlock, a round directly designed to counter it. The armor/ammunition balance is unarguably off for the M1 for where it’s at now.
A good chunk with the M735 and then I usually get punished for it by either one tapped or immobilized with loss of turret control, because Gaijin added the hydraulic system controls to the Abrams but not the T-series, when I get shot in return. And that’s the thing, when compared to other tanks at the BR, usually the M1 is one tapped entirely or is unable to do anything because their damage model includes more systems and doesn’t have the armor to really survive being hit. Also, I am laughing about the enemy stopping in the middle of the field because I see it isn’t just me seeing this a lot recently XD And yes, there are times the reload can be better but that’s if you survive being hit, which the M1 almost 99% of the time won’t even from the front. The argument isn’t that a reload can’t be useful but that the reload is far from the deciding factor in the fight. It’s usually only good for a finishing shot before moving on.
I mean… kinda of hard to when your team is dropping like flies. Seriously, idk what’s up lately but the 1/2 death and gone players are bad atm.
Iyeah it depends on a lot of factors. I prefer the Abrams due to a combination of reload, mobility and gun handling. However I can also see why/if someone is more comfortable in a brawl with a tank that has armor.
It’s not a bad tank in the right hands (as we’re all great examples of it tbh). I do enjoy the shoot and scoot tactic with it, which it does well at. I just know that’s about all it can get away with. At least with the T-series, as long as I keep the LFP down, I know it can usually take a beating if I have to expose myself down a lane to either get the initiative or get caught in a bad spot.
1 Like
Do I really need to play every nation to top tier, in order to determine that in fact the Bug reports for the M1 that have been accepted would probably be fairly beneficial if they were implemented.
Are you going to compensate me for time spent?
Is playing a leopard going to somehow make me figure out how to make the M1’s invulnerable to overpressure aside from having gaijin action various reports to correct the internal model?
Are small caliber AP threats and CE systems irrelevant what about;
Autocannon AP(e.g. M971 / 2A42’s AP )
Autocannon APFSDS (30mm Mk 258 /2A42 APFSDS)
High performance cannon AP (3BM42 / M900)
and CE threats (3OF26, 9M112 & 9M120)
And besides for both the M1 & M10 the UFP is invulnerable, LFP and Turret cheeks is penetrable so according to the protection analyses(unspecified range).
Are you seriously only basing this claim off acceleration with no empirical testing? and besides where is the cutoff for a significant quantality; 3 seconds, 5 seconds? In a void sure but mobility is hardly only constrained by Acceleration. for example I wouldn’t generically that the M1128 has greater mobility than the M1 Abrams just because it has the higher top speed. But it can prove decisive in some edge cases, let alone would one consider that the minimum turning radius of wheeled vs tracked (Pivot mode, never ever) is accounted for.
For example how do said metrics show themselves in a timeline of various power positions on a maps These stats don’t help turn these metrics into workable insights, that one can directly leverage to improve.
Not the claim, is that; evidently as shown M774 is not suitable and a replacement is necessary thus replacement with a more performant round should occur, the question therein is that is M833 sufficient or is the more powerful M900(A1) required.
Further if such an addition would also necessitate a reload rate reduction (most likely from 12RPM > 10) in order to improve balance.
Remember the M1 is not autoloaded and both ammo availability and reload rate are a balancing tool in themselves, and reserved by Gaijin.
I personally think that the M68A1 & M256 both going to 12RPM was unneeded and only deployed due to the fact that none of the Bug reports were going to be fixed, in order to prevent the BR reduction the stats obviously dictated at the was required for balance.
Answering your concerns regarding spall liners, MBTs and Aircraft
However, we’re not satisfied with the current effectiveness of all M1 variants with a 120 mm gun, so we’re looking at other ways to improve them.
The first consideration is the addition of a new M829A3 shell which we’ve also seen requests and suggestions for. We’ve discussed this option, but the addition of this shell in comparison with the M829A2 will not enhance the Abrams capability against top-tier vehicles that are equipped with modern armor and built-in ERA systems. We’re still considering the possibility of adding the M829A3 shell, but as a first change, we’re going to increase the rate of fire of first-stage ammo from 6 to 5 seconds per shot on an Ace level crew, which’ll make the Abrams more effective against all opponents. This rate of fire is possible considering the size and weight of most shells for 105 mm guns are comparable to shells for a 120 mm gun. This is due to the fact that the 120 mm cartridge case is partially combustible, while the 105 mm case is metal. For example, a 105 mm shell with an M900 projectile has a length of 1003 mm and a weight of 18.5 kg, and a 120 mm M829A2 has a length of 982 mm and a weight of 20.3 kg.
[/quote]
Do any other vehicles have acknowledged bug reports relating to the effectiveness of the Turret ring, gun shield and Side skirts; at least outride the Ariete?
I’d agree; video evidence of a single event doesn’t really hold up to scrutiny does it, that why statistics are our friend, you just need to know how to use them properly.
Well, its clearly not otherwise evident in the video you have selected as an exemplar.
I just think they would have different problems, and as the topic is narrowly constrained to the M1 they aren’t directly relevant.
I didn’t know that nations play games, hmm might as well go see what the US thinks then. It’s most certainly not what is taken into account when balancing things, is it.
Because no newground is covered by your claims so there is no need to come up with groundbreaking reasoning.
Proof?
1 Like