The standards to revise M1A2 SEPv3's armor NEED to be revised and calibrated

I don’t think it’s that deep. Australia simply uses KE-W A2 and not M829A3, so they are getting their true historical shell.

I, for one, am glad of this, both for accuracy reasons AND so that the main operator and producer retains the (ever so slightly) superior vehicle. The Australian SEPv3 is already getting a TUSK package they don’t have in real life, so that’s already an unhistorical extra option they are getting already just because it’s compatible. I personally

Likewise, you do not mention how the Australian SEPv3 uses KE-W, an M829A1 equivalent with nearly 600mm of pen that’s better than shells such as 3BM60 right away, while all American Abrams, including their SEPv3, starts off with M829, a long-obsolete shell with less than 500mm of pen.

2 Likes

So the HSTVL is even more worthless now.

1 Like

I am sad that Reddit is now filled with people talking about the AI thing on the Senrai Maiden tank…

Apparently, that’s more important than the implementation of two nations’ new top MBT which will be the best they can get in years. My post there was drowned by all of the AI discussion thing, so I was not able to gather as much attention from there as I intended.

13 Likes

Still baffles me the most meta air to ground missile wasn’t nerfed or balanced in any way when its existance can’t even be proven. And that Brimstone 1 SAL were added same update without MMW because FnF would be “too OP” (No brimstones should not get LOAL, just MMW, at least in the big 26)

5 Likes

That would mean buffing Britain unintentionally

1 Like

Are there any content creators you think you could get to talk abt this, cos didn’t spookston and redeffect do something last time?

Regarding CCs, I prefer to keep a low profile from them and not take the first step to interact with them, hahah.

I’ve had a few negative experiences with some of them. I am sure some of them would be nice to me, and maybe even not hate me; but I prefer not to gamble and risk more negative experiences.

1 Like

Same reason sparrow has more instantaneous pull than amraam for some reason

1 Like

A small update.

We, Crispy, TheRealSteve and Honda are working on compiling a response to Community Bug Reporting System

We’re continuing to produce an estimated value for the hull armor increase in relation to the turret.

We are not limited to only improving the hull armor, we also would like to find more details regarding NEA for both Turret and Hull. And other technologies implimented

If anyone would be interested in helping out regarding the M1A2 SEPV3, shoot me a DM.

10 Likes

Oh damn really? Who was it if you don’t mind me asking?

There were a couple of “ouch” experiences, and then was a really bad one, but since at least we could cordially leave the thing behind, I prefer to pretend it never happened and let bygones be bygones, hahah.

But I would be lying if I denied being afraid of more bad experiences, so I prefer to avoid the risk by being on my own and low profile whenever possible.

Back to topic, do you know why gaijin doesnt make the 150mm ballast and aps into a pre-production M1A2C, also i dont understand where the M1a2c cannot program m1147 round comes from

Its kinda funny how gaijin almost instantly responded to the ai criticism as if they havent been using ai for the longest time for images ingame, but its dead silence aside from the brick wall that is bug report manager #1 about the sepv3s DU. A clear denial of “it wouldnt be balanced” or an acceptance would be better than straight silence on probably one of the biggest issues with the US trees modern tanks as of right now (atleast in my echo chamber where im not thinking about the bug reports for the stryker and hstvl left on read)

The Game Is Completely Unbalanced and Unrealistic at Top Tier

I am writing this post out of genuine frustration. After thousands upon thousands of hours spent playing War Thunder with my friends, we decided to make this report in the hope that someone will read it and take action.

At top tier, both in Air Battles and Ground Battles, the game feels heavily unbalanced. Let me explain why.

First of all, Russian aircraft have access to the Kh-38MT missile, which in its current state feels completely unbalanced and unrealistic. Based on publicly available information, this missile does not perform the way it currently does in-game. Its speed and overall effectiveness seem significantly beyond what open-source data suggests, and this single weapon has a major impact on gameplay balance.

Meanwhile, NATO aircraft are still missing several capabilities and weapons that should be available. The Meteor missile is absent, radar performance often feels inconsistent, and many Western systems do not appear to perform at the level they should.

The Russian LMUR missile is another example. Its in-game performance appears significantly better than what publicly available specifications would indicate, particularly regarding speed and effectiveness.

These are only a few examples of what many players perceive as a broader imbalance affecting NATO vehicles. In many matches, it feels as if NATO nations are fighting vehicles that belong to a much lower Battle Rating while facing Soviet and Russian equipment that consistently performs above expectations.

Then there is the BMPT. I find it difficult to understand its current implementation. Its cannon accuracy feels unrealistically high, its survivability is exceptional, and in many situations it becomes extremely difficult to counter effectively. As a result, it often feels overwhelmingly strong compared to comparable vehicles from other nations.

The same concerns apply to Russian anti-air systems. At top tier, they often appear to dominate the battlefield to such an extent that it becomes difficult to understand why players would choose other nations if they are looking for the most competitive experience.

I also hope, although probably in vain, that Gaijin will finally stop using fantasy values for vehicles such as the M1A2 SEP V3 and start implementing them according to realistic performance data. For years, many players have felt that NATO equipment is consistently underperforming compared to available information, while Russian vehicles often receive far more favorable treatment.

At this point, it feels obvious that NATO weapons and vehicles are heavily nerfed, while Russian equipment benefits from what many players sarcastically call “magic armor,” “magic survivability,” and “magic missiles.” Whether intentional or not, the perception of bias has existed for years and continues to grow with every update.

I understand that balancing a game as complex as War Thunder is not easy, but from the perspective of many long-time players, top tier currently feels heavily skewed in favor of Russian vehicles. The result is a gameplay experience that is becoming increasingly frustrating and, in many cases, simply no longer enjoyable.

Players are not asking for one nation to dominate another. We are asking for consistency, transparency, and realistic implementation standards applied equally to all nations. If realism is the goal, then it should apply to everyone. If balance is the goal, then it should be balanced fairly for everyone.

We hope Gaijin will take a serious look at these issues and consider balancing changes based on realistic performance data and fair gameplay rather than allowing one nation to dominate across multiple areas of the game.

4 Likes

I’ve heard enough, let’s give the Abram’s a 4 sec reload

Is someone actually arguing that the SEP3 doesn’t have armor improvements compared to SEP2?

2 Likes

yk they do the same thing with leos…
we are still rocking less protection than the swedish trials results proved to be the case

1 Like

No but this is essentially what this thread has been hyperfocusing on, despite being acknowledged several times by gaijin staff (works better for the entire creating outrage thing I suppose).

This is basically the exact same situation we had with SEPv2 with the sole difference being that this time, we know (and can / have proven) that there were some sort of hull armour improvements, but as with SEPv2, we have no figures as to where, what and by how much anything was improved.

And no, I do not see proposed armour packages for earlier versions, that we know were not implemented, as sufficient figures for SEPv3.

Aslong as we cant even prove which exact part of the hull (The hull is not just the lfp, ik shocker) has been improved without even a vague figure by how much, I doubt this will lead to any changes unfortunately.

So like a bunch of stuff that Gaijin does?

They mostly implement whatever fantasy they have or whatever they “believe in”.

The SEPv3 is going to weight 67 tons w/o tusk. Which is a 4 ton increase in weight.

The APU is at most 400 kg, so you are going to tell me with a straight face that the 2 fake 150mm RHA plates added to the turret front (again, Gaijin’s fantasy and they don’t even provide 150mm extra protection) weight a total of 3.6 tons combined?

3 Likes

I believe to recall the APU was 190 kg, and the tank went through a series of weight reduction measures… so we may be looking at 4+ tons worth of “150mm extra cheeks” xD

Perfect sense, yep.

1 Like