Abrams has larger weakspots then T-80, and in case of successful penetration, takes more damage than T-80.
This isn’t even mentioning the hull and turret ring.
9 Likes
The abrams also has :
- Higher top speed forwards
- Higher top speed in reverse
- Greater acceleration
- Superior horizontal traverse speed
- Superior vertical traverse speed
- Superior gun depression
- Superior reload speed
- Superior shell
- Blowout panels
- More crew
- Not subject to damaged autoloader mechanics
5 Likes
You missed that I was talking about their turrets, since you said Abrams lacks some turret armor.
Also, T-tanks are way more cramped, have ammo and fuel tanks in hull and one less crew member, so I don’t think they’ll take less damage when penetrated.
Lying doesn’t help you
T 80 has
- Higher top speed (1 kph advantage)
- Better acceleration (24.5 hp/t v.s 27.2 hp/t)
- Better survivability
- Smaller silhouette
- Smaller weaker spots
- Smaller turret
- Autoloader
- No gyat (can depress gun behind it)
The T 80’s turret traverse is plenty fast. Never once have I died to its traverse being slow in a situation where Abram’s turret traverse woulda saved me.
Its reverse speed is fast enough. What situations have you been getting yourself in where the reverse speed has gotten you killed?
On the contrary, I’ve died multiple times due to Abrams gyat.
The only real advantage the Abrams has is more depression. I’ve definetly died to its depression, although can’t recall any specific accounts. There’s many times I’ve been unable to get kills due to hills. Having depression, and depression only is not a game breaker.
I have em both, I’ve tanked dozens of shots driving in the open with T 80 U and Obj 292. Abrams is disabled or severely damaged from 1 single penetration from just about anything.
7 Likes
This is simply not true.
I did.
I have them both as well and can tell you T-series tanks have one of the worst survivability in the game. The whole interior of their tanks is literally cramped with stuff, so any penetrating hit will do massive damage.
On the other hand, M1s have external fuel tanks in the front practically acting as single-use armor that will eat shells like candy. It also doesn’t have ammo scattered in the entire hull just waiting to be hit.
2 Likes
This is done to 68 kph
M1a1 AIM
T-80U
You forget that gear ratios exist and its not just hp/t that matters
4 Likes
- Higher top speed (1 kph advantage)
Made a mistake, I concede that the T-80 has a 2kph higher top speed.
The HP/t is different however this does not take into account gearing. There was a spreadsheet floating around the forum with test results and they’re basically the same in acceleration.
Everything else is just you trying to handwave the advantages the abrams has or downplay them.
3 Likes
There are thousands of examples of T-tank durability littering fields irl.
1 Like
That is legitimately just skill issue
Yeah, cause having a slightly faster turret traverse than a tank with an already pretty fast turret traverse isn’t a game changers.
Guess I can’t be too surprised when the only high tier American vehicles you have is LAVAD and jets.
I mean idk if I’d go as far as say better but with the armor addition I’m pretty sure I still sprint faster than an Abrams. Plus I can post up and aim behind me. It’s got its + and -
The Panzer IV is just sad, it can’t compete with the volumetric hell that is the T-34 or the buttery smooth stabilised Sherman.
Writing skill issue to cover up that he got it wrong.
3 Likes
Think you’re forgetting my slower abrams the 120S that has a 3K/D and is highly played. Wonder what your terrible excuse and handwaving for the metrics where the abrams is superior will change to in the near future since I’m almost about to start researching the abrams and have already had a quick play with the M1A1 aim. With which I found it already quite strong absolutely stock compared to the challengers I’m used to playing.
Regardless the facts stand, the abrams are superior in many metrics and the US was the favoured nation in the latest ground tournament where the US was selected by every team in every single game and had the best performance. They could have picked mighty russia with its T-80s but they didn’t, in a close range map of all places. The fact is the abrams capabilities grant it a higher skill ceiling than russian tanks.
So basically, skill issue.
3 Likes
Wait until they learn Challengers and Arietes are basically worse M1s with little to no advantages.
5 Likes
I’ve never really had issues with the hull of a T-34. It is usually easy to pen if you stay away from the drivers hatch.
who gives a about ground tournaments? we’re talking about random battles.
The translation of this is something along the lines of “I dislike that you are highlighting that the abrams was being picked over the vehicles I’m trying to claim are better than it, even in the situations that I’m claiming favours the vehicles I’m saying are better than it by the best players in the game. I also dislike that the reasons it was generally favoured were the strengths I was attempting to handwave.”
You’re merely too low skill to be able to use the abrams effectively and understand it’s strengths it would seem.
4 Likes
oh my bad, the Abrams is clearly the best tank in the game because it’s being picked over other premium packs by new players.
Does not follow from my post.
1 Like
Nope. bandwagon fallacy literally is your entire post.
2 Likes
Not even remotely. Pointing out that the top players in the game use a vehicle because it has a higher skill ceiling and is more capable than other nations in an environment where they need as many competitive edges as possible is entirely relevant.
You’re merely arguing out of ignorance because you do not have the skillset to capitalise on the strengths of the vehicle and use it to its full potential. This is not a fault of the vehicle. This is a fault of you.
1 Like