BVM has a worse reverse gear and worse maneuverability which leads to worse overall mobility.
Being faster to accelerate in a straight line does not make mobility.
So L27A1/OFL 120 F1 are functionally identical rounds too? Cause I am pretty sure there are many people who would disagree with your take that the “3rd worst” round by a margin is “functionally identical”.
BVM lacks turret armor which makes it more difficult to play than Abrams when its mobility is worse as well.
it has signifigantly faster turning and better acelleration for the same top speed. The 8 mph reverse gear (which isn’t even bad) isn’t even nearly a deal breaker.
comparing Abrams’s round to T-80’s round is no different from comparing the German 75mm to the American 3 inch.
Abrams* lacks turret armor.
I just want the chart to either be taken as evidenced or dismissed.
At this point it’s cherry picked, when win rates are high for some nations it’s “because their vehicles are so OP!” But for some other nations it’s “highly skilled players use these poor sad vehicles to achieve wins”
And the same is true if they have poor win rates “lol get better scrub” or “see! Look how bad these are!”
The Tiger 1 is fine but it tends to face a lot of vehicles that negate its advantages and it takes some time to learn(you also go right from the Pz4 which is just a real shock to some players)
The Pz4 honestly there is no reason it shouldn’t be doing well, yes, it’s a glass cannon but not a lot of tanks can take a hit at that BR and the PZ.4 has a very solid gun.
It’s kinda the same with 8.0
You’re moving from heavy slow tanks that can take a hit back to glass cannons that require you to learn a new playstyle.
Absolutely this.
You can’t just turn around and say that US top tier is nothing but bad vehicles because the win rate is low on one hand and then dismiss the fact that the same chart shows germany doing terribly from 3.0 to 10.0 as being nothing to do with the vehicles but bad players.
It’s prime cherrypicking.
Having 11km/h reverse speed is actually bad for top tier. Even some WW2 vehicles will have comparable reverse speeds, which just goes to show how much do they lag behind in that regard.
Abrams still have better turret armor than BVM.
I bring it out almost every game but even though I love to (CAS) The Pantsir-S1 makes it too hard, since I mainly face nations such as Russia, I play agist it a lot so a lot of the time they just intercept my Mavericks before they hit, the only way I can get around this, Is by firing a lot at one target. But since I’m facing Russia there is almost always 1-3 of them up at any given time.
“Similar to top tier Abrams attracted the biggest lobotomized USA players possible.” this can’t be more true lmao although I don’t play Germany much my 8.0 with them is ass like all the time but top tier wise, they seem good.
because majority of us mainers - deaf-blind consolers.
Just had a game where Click-Bait failed to see my Stormer AD in the middle of an open field for like 20-30 seconds. Was quite funny to see how long it’d last.
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.
The abrams also has :
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
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.
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.
This is done to 68 kph
You forget that gear ratios exist and its not just hp/t that matters
- 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.
There are thousands of examples of T-tank durability littering fields irl.
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 -
