Damn bro , talking about every scenario but can only cling on to the “2km” gun sizing with the enemy to counter a point that he didn’t make
Why would i know what a person who doesn’t know what he yapping about along with what point he making and defending when himself doesn’t know what he yapping about ?
Damn babe , thank for the stats checking cause you have nothing else and cherry picking stuff to fight back , love the struggle , i recommend looking at air stats cause it’s peak bad( I am not an air main). Thank babe , haven’t checked my stats in a while. Love that they doing good.
Edit: remember to check the rank 4-5 , it’s also all bad , i want you to be happy even if it’s a meaningless victory. Thank for wasting my time , thought that i would have been able to get an actual talk but all i got is le Panther throwing cherry picking insult <3
Then next time try to be less douchebag before calling people suck on this game cause you might never know which one of them is actually better than you :)
In this case you tried to prove your point by claiming that i suck at this game but turns out its the other way around.
If anything im the one who wasted my time with someone who has no idea what his talking about :)
I suggest be more humble and gain more experience before talking about certain things :)
My opinion is somewhat similar, but I would phrase it as the Abrams is not as forgiving. The agility and firepower are things I really like, but it has a terrible tendency to lose the turret ring after nearly every shot. This wouldn’t be so bad if you didn’t also lose the engine or driver at the same time which is often the case.
Not true, both shots got taken instantly and resulted me by dying, you can aim generally on M1 and it will pretty much give you either heavy damage or one shot.
Another example, T72B3 took a very fast and general shot at me and it resulted me by getting heavily damaged, sure i didnt die but i lost my all combat capabilities and in return someone finished his job with one more shell.
You getting killed in game doesn’t mean I’m not right.
You need to aim to disable vehicles, M1 included.
I hope this one is pretty self explanatory.
Hitting M1s in the hull isn’t a free kill.
You do realize M1’s UFP can bounce DM53 from point blank range, right ?
You do realize exterior fuel tanks can eat shells from point blank range, right ?
M1’s hull is decently protected and surely isn’t a free kill.
That “cherrypicked point” isn’t really small for your information.
Also, do you realize you just said: “Just aim at the parts that you can penetrate consistently” but in different words, basically proving my point.
I just proved that to you and you can do whatever you like with that information, it isn’t my problem.
You can pretend that M1s are paper thin and will evaporate upon impact if that makes you happy, but this won’t change how things are in reality.
You just proved that if you specifically aim Abrams cherrypicked hull section you can actually not penetrate but guess what, if you aim slightly to right side or center or even general direction you will penetrate that hull.
Best part is why would anyone aim to hull armor when you can just one shot/heavily disable Abrams through turret ring.
The only real thing in here you’re just desperately trying to prove your point by using cherrypicked scenario, as i’ve said before i expected better than you.
I only agree that the frontal fuel tanks sometimes stops rounds, but otherwise the Abrams is quite vulnerable. It may survive a penetration and it often does, but the shot is so debilitating that you are are dead with the next shot since most of the time both the turret ring and engine are gone. I do not experience these issues as much with other tanks.
Oh so you actually need to aim to consistently OHK/disable M1s, got it.
Try not aiming above the track for starters.
Leclerc produces quite different results when hit in the same places on the UFP. I’m like 10+ shots deep on Leclerc’s UFP and I still have to bounce one shot. It’s quite obvious M1 has an effective UFP that can bounce the best rounds in the game, which can’t be said for poor Leclerc.
So if shooting to turret ring is equal to aiming properly what takes to kill Leo2a7/Strv122, T80BVM/T90M? Surgery?
You still didnt got the point, nobody even cares about shooting those places when you can basically target their lower plate or turret ring, plus having mediocre hull armor never bothered me to begin with considering my most played tanks are Leclerc.
First photo doesnt show anything.
Second is basically the same photo that you tried to prove your claim and 3rd one also got cut when xray was about to show what’s going on.
Still people doesnt even bother to specifically aim to those place when they can target lower frontal plate and turret ring.
I couldnt care less about your opinion on Abrams hull armor cause like it or not it can be easily penetrated if you know what you’re doing, only new players will struggle due to choosing certain points to shoot.
Hull armor never bothered me as much as turret ring,mislocated pump,wrong protection on turret armor, wrong thickness on bulkheads and similiar problems did.
Does Sep variants deserve better hull armor? Yes ,is it the most important problem on Abrams family? Certainly not.
If you aim to the sides of LFP fuel tanks may get in your way. UFP is largely unsecure to aim at, while turret cheeks are a no-go zone as well.
You’re basically left to aim at the center of the LFP, turret ring and area around the gun. This vulnerable area isn’t much larger than the vulnerable area found on other tanks, so in general armor profile of M1s is quite decent.
I’m aware of its strengths/weaknesses on paper, I’m talking about post penetration though. Using the Type 90 and 2A7 made me realize why the Abrams feels vulnerable after getting shot. For all intents and purposes, it has similar weaknesses to other tanks on flat ground. I expect the tank to get penned in many situations, but I found that whenever I do get shot, I usually am unable to respond because the turret ring is almost always disabled AND I can’t run because the engine was shot out. The large turret ring is also an incredibly debilitating weakness and has always been a reliable shot to kill an Abrams. This is not to say the tank is bad, I was able to get a nuke with the SEPv2 by itself. But I maintain it feels oddly vulnerable compared to its NATO peers.
Going for a specific part of the tank (in this case turret ring) is quite literally aiming.
Why even care about armor in the first place when you can just aim at weakspots and ignore all those places that won’t give satisfactory results ?
My point is that you have to aim to disable M1s, just like you need to aim to disable Leopards/T-tanks, it’s the same deal and I just proved that to you.
First photo doesn’t show “anything” because nothing happened outside those small sabot things hitting the track and making it red.
Second photo quite literally shows “Ricochet” from shooting pretty high on the UFP and quite close to driver’s port as well.
Third photo is basically DM53 bouncing off of driver’s port and making turret ring and optics orange.
Four hits by DM53 to different parts of the UFP and M1 still hasn’t suffered a critical hit. That’s one weak UFP, right ?
First of all, none of this is my opinion, it’s facts that everyone can check for themselves. A big chunk of M1’s UFP will produce bounces. Do whatever you want with this information.
I was mostly focusing on the armor layout from the “outside”, but yeah post penetration damage is pretty big because it doesn’t have spall liners. Having no spall liners is probably the biggest con it has over western counterparts.
This is probably because most penetrating shots happened to go through your turret ring since it’s the most enticing place to aim, or your pump got hit by spall. I’ve heard from some people that the placement of Hydraulic pump isn’t correct, but don’t know how accurate that is. Having it’s location changed could be a pretty decent buff to the overall sturdiness of your turret ring, thus making turret ring + engine disabled combo much rarer.
