Survivability isn’t just about armor. It’s about being able to get out of dodge when you’re in trouble. Which the Abrams happens to excel at. And, again, most of the time you survive the first shot, which is huge compared to the T-series tanks. I do genuinely think the Abrams isn’t the worst off. And I do genuinely think it’s not that bad compared to stuff like the TK(X), Arietes, Leclercs, and Challengers.
I’m not suggesting it’s the best, simply that it is not as bad as people make it out to be. It can be hard to realize - it took me a while and if you look at my old posts I’m sure you’ll see I was a staunch Abrams defender- but it’s, in the end, the truth.
That’s a great point! That shows that people with worse equipment, who generally do pretty poor, are doing pretty well in the Abrams. So again. Maybe it isn’t the Abrams model that’s an issue.
GB, France, the US, Japan, and China currently dont have a vehicle better than the Abrams. Even if France receives the 2A7, that is still 3 nations that are worse off than the US in every regard. And for a nation like Italy, once you die in the 2A7, that’s it- you don’t get a different Leo and are forced to play the Arietes which aren’t great.
I’d also say the Merkava Mk. 4 is not better than the Abrams, but I don’t have enough experience in it or against it to justify my claim. Currently my only big justification is worse top speed and acceleration in comparison to the Abrams, as well as a marginally worse round.
Nothing will ever be enough if the operator is a US main, give the Abrams a 4 seconds reload still they barely maintain 1kd and are permanently chat-banned.
Ok, same with the Leo. Or the Autoloader on the T-XX tanks. I’d rather be in an Abrams with no turret ring than EITHER of those with no basket or autoloader, because at least I know I can back away and quick
This suggests that too little time has passed for the statistics to be accurate.
Besides, if you look at revivals and kills, the US team is better than the Chinese one.
And if the statistics don’t get much worse? Then what? Is the Abrams magically different because it’s Chinese? It’s functionally the same tank.
And even on release Chinese players have been doing better than when the US A2 SEP released, and it has to face more difficult opponents. So that does also say something.
And yet they are still doing better in the Abrams. Even though they are overall worse. What does that say?
Funnily enough, I had this exact discussion with somebody else the other day. You don’t really feel the top speed difference in the Merkava because it’s not that easy to reach the 72kph in the later, heavier Abrams. Furthermore, the accel is very similar to the naked SEP. The SEP v.2 with tusk in fact accel slower than the Merkava IV and has worse HP/T. On top of it, the Merkava IV can reverse at 64kph with the same engine power/transmission output as forward mobility.
The very small difference with the round isn’t something you’re going to notice between the two. From there, the Merkava has better turret armor for hull down, LWS(if not SEP v.2), more smoke, APS, IRST with HE shell to shoot down helicopters, much better damage model(no turret basket), better side armor against autocannons, and the ability to rotate the turret 360° without being blocked by the engine.
Honestly, the only thing really noticeable in the Abrams is the -10° of depression versus the Merkava -7°. It blocks a few sniping spots but most spots are still perfectly usable.
I can understand that. It’s not exactly like the Merk is a well played tank. I do think that the Accel, when spaded, makes a difference - though that’s just the Unladen SEP or standard A2, not the V2. I also think the Depression is to be noted- -3 degrees is a big difference with some of the sniping spots in game, I’ve come to realize.
I also think their is something to be said about survivability. The Merk, having its engine in the front, means that if it gets shot in the front, it’s dead. It can’t manuever or move away, unlike the Abrams. I’m not terribly experienced so maybe I am wrong - but I definitely feel like that is a factor not worth diminishing.
Overall I’d consider them tanks of equal level because where the one struggles I feel like the latter excels, generally. So, again, not drastically better, but more level eyed in my eyes if that makes sense.
200k battles is more than enough to generate an opinion… Even if every player has 100 battles on it, that is 2,000 people who have the tank, which is not an insignificant number.
Engine in front can also be an advantage during side shots, not even kidding. Because it put forward all of your mobility(Driver-Engine). So a hit in the back will just go through without doing anything as long as you don’t take full ammo load. Meanwhile the Abrams will be immobilized by any kind of side hit not center of mass.
One thing to note about the Merkava turret armor, here’s pretty much how it look like against 3BM60 at 500m. Only reliable pen is inside the red box. Yes, even the upper mantlet can stop incoming rounds, which I think makes it the only tank in the game capable of doing that. It’s that good to peak hills against Russia.
That’s the thing, having played the two tanks a lot. I feel like the Merk IV does everything a little bit better than the Abrams. It’s a better sniper, and a better brawler. It also has more soft tools like APS to survive. The Abrams was better before turret basket + the Merk had Leopard 2 reload speed time. But since turret basket + merk having 5-second reload, it’s pretty yikes.
I think that’s fair. Does the Merk have a turret basket? If not, do you think that affects performance?
I think, in my head, I see the Merk Mk. 4 as it arrived on release compared to the Abrams on release. Obviously it’s different now. But oh well. Not much that can be done.
It doesn’t have one. It has a sort of big pump near the turret ring now but nothing as handicapping as the turret basket. And yeah, it affects survivability a lot. Like, any hit in the Abrams right now will kill your turret, forcing you to retreat. And if it goes through and wreck your engine, you’re a goner.
In the Merkava, you’ll lose your engine for sure but your tank will often be combat effective following that, allowing you to just kill the guy now reloading. That also mean that a side shot center of mass can let’s say snatch your loader and commander, but your gunner will still be up, rotate the turret, and give you the kill that way. Meanwhile in the Abrams, your turret is stuck.
You really feel the lack of a turret basket in the Merk IV, like really really.
