Nope, it would bring the M1 into line with light tanks and TDs at and below 10.7 M900 is not a rare shell at 10.7.
That video is eight months old at this point. You should probably consider the acquisition new material. solely due to the fact that the 10.7 bracket has received additions since then so it no longer accurately reflects the bracket And beside an appeal to authority is pretty poor form.
And Jon here directly even demonstrates the issue if you would care to watch the video at the provided time stamp.
“You have everything, right? What else do you need, man? A shell that penetrates 900mm or what?
Like you have good Mobility, good gun handling, a decent shell, amazing reload what else do you need, Right? It’s as good as it gets at this BR”
He proceeds to pop out of cover, spots a Leclerc not looking in his direction and-
Takes his well aimed shot at the center of the LFP and-
-It doesn’t penetrate, the LFP.
“I just failed against the MSC, I’m dead. And Then I do the biggest fail in my life and it’s over”
Takes return fire in short order because he over committed to the push which damages the Turret basket & and removes the tracks, and dies to the subsequent round.
“I had all the time in the world to aim that dude, that was such a beginner mistake and threw like that to a clear camper dude. He was side on I could have aimed for the turret and I shoot the strongest part of the MSC”
M900, possibly even M833 would not have struggled with this shot. M774 is clearly not serviceable a top AP round at 10.7 and should be replaced.
Lie #3.
You can overmatch the turret roof, mantlet is vulnerable, overmatch side armour, LFP is easily large enough to be a consistent weakspot and the turret ring, though small, is still viable at close ranges.
I don’t think you understand what overmatch is. Overmatch is a shell mechanic where the diameter of the shell is larger than the armor thickness is. Gaijin used to have a more in-depth model but has reduced it to “overmatch occurs if shell diameter +1 > armor thickness”. All this does it remove ricochet chance, which is not the case in where you’re shooting it. Seeing how the diameter of M774 is somewhere around 20mm (as M833 and M900 were 24mm and 23mm respectively), it sure as hell isn’t overmatching the armor.
You also cherry picked the small areas where the M774 can hit the T-80B through the front, being pixels for some of them (the drivers port and turret ring, which are very easily eaten by volumetric). Sure, the commanders hatch can KO the commander but will more likely leave you with no ammo in the breach and them returning fire. Vice, in comparison (also, don’t ask me why the hit analysis doesn’t show everything it can pen. I guess it’s deciding to bug out?)…
And, as an extra bonus, the the 125mm HEATFS and ATGM can overpressure all M1 Abrams (just showing the 105mm but it’s the same event throughout by hitting the MGs or top armor). Fun fact, the 9M112 is nigh impossible to ricochet or splatter as the 100% ricochet angle is 90*
Tbh M833 would not warrant a BR change. A ~20mm penetration increase would not change its BR. (Also my OCD is angry at the fact you opened the thread with Abram and not Abrams lmao)
It ABSOLUTELY DOES uniquely suffer when dealing with BMPTs are you kidding me rn???
it has the least capable round for doing so, have you ever even played the abrams recently? you CANNOT pen a bmpt from the front in a combat situation let alone kill it in a single shot with M774. it is borderline impossible, especailly when they are W keying the entire time… you cant even go through the lower plate on either version espite being able to on normal T- Series tanks. And even if you flank, a side shot has to be perfectly 90 degrees flat angle and you have to shoot IN BETWEEN THE ERA PANELS THAT COVER THE ENTIRE SIDE or the round will just do fucking nothing. And then what? youre sat there with your precious 5 second reload you care about so much staring at 2 30mm barrels and 4 missiles all of which can kill you with pretty much a single click frontally.
So yes the Abrams DOES uniquely suffer when dealing with the bmpt and there is no way you can tell me it doesnt, i have clip after clip to prove it from myself and even other players.
The M1 has worse armor than the Booker(due to the paper for a turret ring), and the slightly superior mobility isn’t a significant advantage.
It doesn’t reload faster, is just as susceptible against common HE & AP rounds. (if we ignore issues with missing hull blowout panels) they have a similar layout.
Ok, so what threats does it mange to deal with the the booker can’t? HE can overpressure though the roof and the Turret can’t stop Tandem GL-ATGMs, So it’s not CE threats.
Arguably the wheeled nature prevents similar employment, but access to M900, and an unmanned and lower profile turret make the M1128 far more effective when Hull down / in defilade. And with the recent changes to the T series autoloaders, there are grounds for upping the reload rate to 10 RPM from 8.
Both the M1128 and M10 already have M900, so I’m not sure how bringing the M1 up to par with the prospective addition of M900 would be better?
M1 has better mobility, gun handling and armor (no matter how much you cope) than the M10.
M1 has better mobility, gun depression angles, reload than the M1128.
As it currently is the M1 is already the shared best/shared highest potential 10.7 MBT in GRB, so yes super buffing it with M900 would absolutely mean an increase in BR.
Unless you also want rounds like DM43 and 3BM46 for other 10.7 MBTs.
Can you quantify the advantage of this superior performance in some way? I don’t particularly care for heuristics.
The only thing it does better is vertical traverse, and at 10 deg/sec (M1 is 28) is more than serviceable considering the speed of rounds at this BR, it’s otherwise similar.
Ok, can you provide examples of threats that the M1 can deal with that the M10 can’t? It’s not stopping 3BM42.
And besides the M10 has thermals for all three stations instead of gunner only, and they’re 800 by 600, not the paltry 500 by 300 found on the baseline M1 so also improve the resolution enough to make them serviceable for more than just surveillance.
Not in a straight line, on roads. M1128 is strictly faster so over long distances it has the advantage by more than the M1 has over the T-80 for example. The second you ask it to turn, the story is different of course but well that’s not the point is it and it’s not like there is some objective standard course we’re using to calibrate results.
They are erroneously modeled over the sides, also the proper use of the Hydro-Pneumatic suspension system can restore some additional declanation if used appropriately.
The reload delta could change in the near future and as it was implemented as balancing concession may be changed for the Abrams as issues are fixed.
I don’t particularly think it would impact the US’s 10.7 lineup so why not, I don’t have an issue should that happen as all it would do it’s best to devalue armor, and the M1 (or any US option for that matter) is not in anyway relatively well protected.
You are comparing tank destroyer and quasi tank destroyer/ligt tank to “medium” tank, when through entiriery of WT BRs tank destroyers have better firepower than medium tanks of comparable BR.
M1 Abrams with M900 woudl be much closer in perofrmance to IPM1 than to 2A4 so there would be BR increase, simple as.
Im kinda getting feeling that most people on this thread that call Abrams armor bad expect to face tank obj 292 and are surprised when it cuts through while at the same time thinking 2A4s armor is equal to 2A7V.
Why? it lacks the improved armor and the slight edge in mobility won’t go very far. On top of the increase in average performance of rounds encountered in the 11.x bracket.
Look I’m not expecting it to do real well, but people don’t seem to realize that the armor was designed with the Soviet 115mm gun in mind(IPM1 crash program to refit armor developed for the M1E1 to existing hulls to make up the numbers in Europe until units could backfill the M1A1). And it practically won’t see one tank armed with it in a lineup often without people uptiering 9.3’s. It needs help in other ways to even things out and yet progress has stalled on the bug report front.
With M900 they ould have same shell and basically same mobility yet one is expected to sit at 11.3 and other at 10.7 due to marginal decrease in protection.
Doesnt sound logical.
Bug reports should be obviously fixed for any vehicle, Abrams is no exception.
After any bug fix is implemented, BR can be reviewes but only then.
Cool historical tidbit, irrelevant in balance department.
Its current config is on par with 2A4, maybe better (or worse) depending on who you ask.
I personally prefer Abrams over 2A4 nowadays.
As for global stats, whats there to tell. Average global KD is 0.6 or something so its clear average WT player struggles to pour water out of boot with instructions on the heel.
Should game accomodate for literal idiots or should it force them to learn how to utilize tools provided to them properly?
