T90M i also prefer tbh man, that feeling of being able to hulldown without losing half ur turret is too handy
1 Like
“Looking at the combat weight data compiled for various Abrams variants and the weight of their turrets, the estimated change in hull weight is roughly 500 kilograms.“
They just read my post lol:
It’s of course caveated and all however, we did achieve something and it’s very nice to see there will be an increase of some kind. That’s a good victory in the realm of gaijin and modern western MBTs
1 Like
Who community effort to bring hull armor closer to real life performance on NATO tanks just for Relik to be buffed in a snap decision because USA got a new APFSDS 😂
At this point, my hate towards these bs updates turned into a circus and I do support these jokes from Gaijin
3 Likes
1 Like
At least the hull armor will get improvements in some way. All in all i still believe this update is a massive W for the abrams now that the turret ring is stronger
2 Likes
INB4 + 50mm KE and 100mm CE that doesn’t change gameplay whatsoever (the turret ring changes will be way more relevant)
1 Like
M829A3 was never designed to counter Relikt and it shows in game. It was never coded to ignore Relikt either. The buffs Relikt got are a massive nothingburger that were just bug fixes. (even though Relikt is overperforming at flat angles)
m829a3 should do better than most rounds tho m829a2 was designed for k-5 m829a4 is designed specifically for relikt and the gen 4 era found on the armata
A slower in every aspect T-80U*
Passing a message along for @TheRealSteve as he’s at work and hasn’t played WT in a while. His response to this:
Front Torsion Bars
Here we run into another important factor, the load on the front suspension. On the Abrams, the armor package and fuel tanks are positioned far forward, and all of that mass is putting pressure on the first pair of torsion bars. On other contemporary tanks, a comparable load is distributed across two pairs of road wheels, in this case however, it’s not. Adding several tonnes of weight in this area critically reduces the service life of the first road wheels, torsion bars, swing arms, and other components of the suspension structure. For such an alteration to be logistically possible, engineers would have to redesign the entire suspension system, and provably no redesign was undertaken
Last few pages of the PDF
“GVSC bridge study shows some SEPV3s weighing in over 90 US tons with accessories, how could a few thousand pounds of armor be an issue for the suspension?”
Additonally an existing SepV3 Crewman has said:
- We chewed through 2 torsion bars and several road wheels out here
- And this claim is very [redacted] disingenuous because when you account for the bra + mine plow on the 2 track and the bra + mine roller on the 3 track you start to realize that they weighs more than 2 tons
– Volujah Actual
4 Likes
I really do wonder if M829A4 incorporates a precursor projectile. Obviously datalink will allow the FCS to provide a more accurate firing solution. But the DOTE mentioning hard kill APS makes me think it has to have something of the sort. If the rumored stand off detonation of Malachite is true something like a precursor projectile would make a lot of sense in its design.
yeah the ADL is an interesting feature for APFSDS
given that it is designed to give information to the projectile, and the FCS should already know other conditions more accurately than any sensors in the round could know
the best explanation for it ive heard is that a portion of the round can separate in flight before impact and that that small portion will detonate ERA and activate APS so the main projectile doesnt have to deal with them at all
2 Likes
Yeah it seems pretty redundant for an APFSDS round to need targeting data directly fed into it unless it served other purposes as well.
Same here really don’t know what else it could be. Not sure how else you could make an APFSDS defend against an APS system.
the relikt buff was an easy to understand fix.
relikt has two plates. only the front one worked. just add the back one. done.
very different from trying to learn the effectiveness of an armor composition basically no one (and if they claim they do its larp and they need to be ashamed of themselves) knows exactly
honestly i feel theyll just make up some arbitrary number and make it so hitting the fuel tank armor will eat the shell but just hitting the driver will let it through (for 3BM60 and alike)
1 Like
Didn’t they replace much of the old wiring with fiber optic cables reducing the weight by a substantial amount? This should also factor into the increased hull weight from the denser composite hull setup putting more validity in the increased weight from the armor increase.
2 Likes
there is also other known weight reduction programs
but of course gaijin ignores all of that
another good example is switching to electric turret drive saves a lot of weight in the hull, but of course they cant be bothered to factor that it
4 Likes
yeah it seems like they are being maliciously ignorant of all the weight saving factors the Sep 3 introduced when they compare the extra weight to the previous iterations. First they tried to claim it was all in the turret but their new cope is even worse than the turret claim. Just tell the community to go fuck themselves at this point, they want the Abrams to suck on purpose.
Joke’s on you, Abrams doesn’t suck.
2 Likes