US ground vehicle tree on top of the tree, needs a buff

Is there though?

Jan 2026 data will be interseting. But based upon initial data from M1A2T. Its not the Abrams.

Their 2x SPAA options seem to be fine, better than several nations

Theyve got the HSTVL as a light tank option. Which is more than most nations

They’ve got a solid Heli (yes granted JAGM-MRs need a flight path fix, but most do)

Their fixed wing CAS is fine, perfectly average these days

What is missing?

I just think its a combo of being the most popular nation and so flooded with bad players and a notoriously easy tree

??? i dont see what the player base has to do with what i even said the tank exist so i want it in the game, i dont see how that is considered an artificial buff either.

everyone has modern IR guided glide bombs but the US

2 Likes

Have you seen the stats for this HSTVL? It’s simply terrible. It barely penetrates the side of a Relic, Soviet tanks are practically invulnerable from the front, and so are Leopards. You can’t shoot from a distance. Terrible thermal imaging, mediocre mobility. It has an inflated BR.

The AGM-179 is absolute garbage. They’ve been nerfed more than they’ve been fixed. They’re on par with the Spike. Terrible missiles, terrible radar on the helicopter. It can’t even lock on to targets behind bushes. They will never be fixed.

Mavericks are absolutely useless on the top-tier. Minimal training, very slow. Even Tunguska can knock them out.
Incidentally, regarding the CAS, since the KH-38MT entered service, the US hasn’t received a single new missile for the CAS. It’s about balance.

The most popular nation thing is ridiculous. We both know perfectly well which nation is the most popular in the game. The one that always gets the best weapons.

1 Like

So what do you want them to do then?

Add a rediculously overpowered MBT? As it stands I think the Abrams could almost do a with a few nerfs. Or at least a BR increase. 11.7+ ones are all under BRed.

Still waiting on that report to be actioned by the way.

AGM-65 Maverick likely incorrect flight performance

"As outlined on page 13 of ADA361645, with parameters of launch altitude of ~400m, airspeed of ~555 km/h and launch range of ~2.6km an AGM-65G is able to reach its target in 7.3s. This would mean an average speed of ~355+ m/s (mach 1+)

However in attempts to replicate this in-game, I have found times varying around 9s (+23%). And thus an average speed of ~289 m/s. In the included document, it is also mentioned acceleration of the 65G model is approximately 17Gs (~167 m/s/s) and 65D models 22.5G (~220 m/s/s), this isn’t the case in-game currently. As a result, due to underperforming engines and possibly drag, the test results discussed in the document is impossible to replicate."

I have a sinking feeling the next thing to turn up is going to be the P-JDAMs

More likely AGM-88

it would just be an abrams with hull armor ridiculously op is a bit of a stretch there dude, and why would they nerf the tank when the 2a7 exists. and for the BRs, the 10.7 Abrams is a good match for the 2a4 and t80 at the same br. m1a1 is just as good as the type 90, Ariete and Chally 2 why would it go up?

Sure, but it’s to specialized to really be counted since it relies on radar emissions so can’t be used to attack most threats.

Also it’s probably going to be an early variant (-88A, -B or -C)so be very much outdated, not even having GPS/INS backup guidance, or any of the fancy launch modes.

gbu 53 right now is the best option for general purpose US CAS, as a counterpart to SPICE-250 and other smaller IR glide bombs

2 Likes

The Abrams definitely does not need more nerfs lmao. If anything, it needs its numerous bug reports implemented. Also you don’t even own a single Abrams lol, you are talking about a tank you never even played is crazy work.

1 Like

M1A1 at 11.7 could easily be 12.0

and the M1A2 and Clickbait are easily 12.3 worthy, If not even 12.7. Easily the equals to the Leopard 2A5 or even 2A6

So like most top tier tanks then?

What makes the US special? Other than the players?

Whats that got to do with the price of bread?

It is objectively one of the best MBTs in the game.

A2 shell is the second best shell at top tier, but unlike DM53/L55 its got a 5 second reload, its arguably therefore got the best firepower at top tier.

Mobility, well above average for top tier.

Survivability, very good. Cna quite happily survive many direct hits

So please, Elighten me, why is the Abrams so bad that it is in desperate need of significant buffs?

on what basis?

1 Like

I agree that the firepower is one of the best at top tier. Mobility wise is average its in line with a lot of MBTs that have similar mobility. Survivability is definitely not good, it’s one of the easiest top-tier MBTs to knock out/ disable, like seriously, this ain’t 2017 anymore, but you would know that right, you’re very experienced in playing the Abrams. Also, implementing bug reports that Gaijin modeled wrong should not happen because it would buff it?

1 Like

Such as, the average is around 60 kph. Abrams is closer to 70

It has a notably higher forward and reverse speed than a lot of MBTs at top tier and better PTW as well. Which usually means better acceleration.

Compared to what though?

Ariete or Challenger or Type 10?

Or the Leopard 2A7 and T-80s?

By my account, its perfect acceptable for top tier, best no? Worst? not even close, its like the 3rd or 4th best survivability at top tier at the moment.

But thats not what is being asked for.

A3 or A4 shells? so a significant increase to firepower that you yourself agree with is already one of the best at top tier.

BR Drops? Like I said, I already think half of them are under BRed and those that maybe arent, are walking a very very fine line.

and i’ve yet to actually see an accepted report regarding the Abrams armour being wrong. At least no more significantly than any other MBT at the moment. And if that was fixed, would it actually make a difference?

Turret basket? Is it actually an issue? or are US mains just mad they were one of the first?

So what is there to actually fix? to buff? Why is the Abrams so urgent?

Also the idea that the US needs the Sep V3 (I assume with notable upgrades over the V2 with some of the aforementioned unreasoanble additions like better shells) being added in a vacuum to and I quote:

Is just insane. Quite frankly, the US needs new 12.7/13.0 MBTs less urgently than more than a few other nations at the moment.

US, German and British winrates are pretty similar at 12.7, the difference is insignificant.

I thought I had seen the limit of your copious statements earlier, but I guess I can still be suprised.

Coming from someone who has actually played most of these MBTs, unlike a certain british main that likes to make questionably and overconfident statements, the Chally spall liners give it a slight edge in survivability over the Abrams.

However that is also where the advantages of the Chally 2 end.

maybe if you play this game with your monitor turned off, which tbf is something a lot of players seem to do.

5 Likes

Compared to the 2a7/stv122 and T80, which are the tanks it fights most of the time.

Survivability is definitely some of the lowest on the abrams because of the turret basket and no armor aside from the turret cheeks which most maps in this game don’t allow you to take advantage of . legit anything that pens is an insta mobilty kill.

What do you mean that’s not what is being asked for, it’s legit being ask for the last two years.
M1 Abrams (all subvariants) incorrect turret ring // Gaijin.net // Issues
Abrams (All) incorrect fuel cell bulkhead thickness and model // Gaijin.net // Issues
Hydraulic Pump of all models of M1 Abrams is incorrect. // Gaijin.net // Issues

And the turret basket cmon It was proved that it had nothing to with the turret drive and they implemented it anyway that’s why people were mad and that includes the Leo too.

You’re asking for nerfs it’s obvious you’re ill-informed but I don’t even know why I’m arguing with you when you don’t own any top tier mbts outside of UK. You don’t have any merit.

1 Like

So?

You agree, its around the 3rd or 4th most survivable MBT at the moment?

What about every other top tier MBT at the moment?

Okay, a few reports. How does this significantly differ from other MBTs?

Spoiler

Bug List

Challenger 2 Bugs:

Mobility related

Armour/survivability

Base Armour

External Armour

Internal Armour

Other components

APS

Weapon Systems

Optics/Thermals

Main gun

Other armament

Miscellaneous

Challenger 2 Suggestions;

Right? But that also affects the Leopard equally, a tank you quoted as having better survivability?

So why is the Abrams special? Why is it suffering so much?

And OP is asking for notable and significant buffs for an MBT that is by all accounts fine. Just US mains are bad

Why do the US need A4 shells to “compete”?

So you consider the M1A1 at 11.7 reasonable?

Right? and? A2 rounds quite happily one shot everyhting in return? Whats the issue?

Why should the Abrams get special treatment and require multiple rounds? Though I have seen more than a fair share take 2 rounds to kill.

Not any more than L27/DM53/3BM60/M322 etc do as well, but again you are just another overconfident nation main talking about things they have very little knowledge about (seeing as you can barely handle the high tier MBTs of your own nation).

1 Like