Pantsir already has equivalents, as it’s a useless top air that can’t frag CAS players being semi-good. There’s a reason I only died once to Pantsir unintentionally, and why I teach players how to do CAS when they ask.
Also, top tanks shouldn’t inherently be lolpenned… please play 4.0 again and re-learn armor, it’ll make you a better player for 11.7. Of course some will get lolpenned by M829A2 such as Leclerc, Ariete, and the hull of 2A5 as examples, but a race to the bottom isn’t a fun one especially when USA would be the exclusive user of such a round.
For me I haven’t been struggling with Abrams… mostly HSTVL since I’m spading that, but I bring my M1A1 HC out as well.
Partially cause I use tank doctrine and do my best to avoid onion layer 4 where armor is 100% necessary.
@SanguineSerpent
T-14, 2A8, SEP3, and so forth can come in the future.
They are equivalents though… Though T-14 is inferior to both IRL, they’d be equivalents in the context of War Thunder despite T-14 being inferior on paper and in practice.
It objectively doesnt have any. It has the best missile, range, and radar thats not even giving you a warning. No other AA comes even close to that package. And its not helpful or valid for any argumentation to just flex with own skills and experiences, it simply doenst matter and should be avoided.
Again, going against me as a player or my skill doesnt make your point more valid. Anyway, I dont speak about lolpen any tank. M829A3 can specifically defeat older ERA, found on many tanks with soviet origins. And even then, the turret armor still cant be penetrated. Its about the UFP which would be defeated, just as most NATO UFPs and any Abrams UFP can be penned right now by any top tier round.
I think before adding any, newer tank, the current lineup needs to be filled with other light vehicles or SPAA, since the top is already very thin. But he SEPv3 would certainly help the US, although other nations would get things like the T14 in response. Thats far in the future I think and will involve the implementation of hardkill APS.
Pantsir’s missile range is 12km against jet CAS targets last time I tested it, it allegedly increased to 13km.
It’s only 18km against drones and helicopters.
Radar warning doesn’t mean anything in ground cause you’re flying as if you’re always locked anyway.
Its missile isn’t the best, that goes to TOR-M1’s though that one’s a hard 12km range.
I’m not a skilled CAS player, I’m semi-decent, Pantsir’s just easy to avoid.
M829A2 is what defeats older ERA, which it does in War Thunder as well despite the spaced armor issues War Thunder has with APFSDS rounds.
USA top is the largest lineup in the game with the best light tank… Only Sweden comes close, and Germany close behind with the best MBT in the game.
And as San said, hardkill APS has been in the game for a while now.
How does the type of target make a difference? The missile can get to a distance up to 18 km no matter the target. And of course, radar warning is sth to be aware of, and the lack of warning is a bonus for the pantsir. Although the TOR has 42 Gs in comparison to the pantsirs 32 Gs, but its way faster with 1300 m/s, the TOR has 850 m/s. So what the TOR brings to the table is more missile overload, the pantsir has a gun, a faster missile with more range and a better radar. Absolutely not equivalent by objective standards, and not to speak about the ADATS, Otomatic or nations without any top AA like Israel.
The lineup is definetly large, but not very competetive in comparison to sweden, germany or udssr. Dont know what you mean with the best light tank, there are way better tanks like the 2S38 (multirole) or the BMP2M, thats mostly reffered to as the best light in the game. I agree with germany having the best MBT in the game.
You are right. I wanted to clarify that things like trophy or arena should be implemented when introducing tanks like the armata or the SEPv3.
Speed, altitude, and maneuverability.
Going mach 0.91< at over 8000 meters altitude over 13km away, semi-perpendicular to the SPAA, the missile will only hit you once every 3 shots when manually guided at 13km, and never if you do minor adjustments in direction.
Pantsir’s missile loses a large chunk of its maneuverability after 12km and quickly becomes ~18G missile, vs the TOR-M1’s 33 sustained Gs out to 12km.
USA has the 2nd best CAS only behind France, with the 3rd best tanks ahead of China and Soviets, 1st place light tank, and largest lineup.
2S38 is no where near a top light tank, it’s a Soviet Strv 9040C, only good around the 10.0 area. BMP-2M has equivalents in half the tech trees, and again only good around 10.0.
Well yeah, but since trophy system is already in-game, it shouldn’t be too difficult to transfer it to the Sep V3.
Apparently Challenger 3 will have trophy system, and apparently the Leopard 2A8 would have trophy system too.
The mantlet weakspot isn’t as large as on many other vehicles, the UFP is resistant against any and all APFSDS and the turret cheeks are immune to DM53 at point blank range.
Second best ammo at 11.7, if you are unable to score kills with the immense level of firepower these M1’s have, the issue lies squarely with you as a player.
And yet, nations like Israel, Britain, Italy, France, Japan and China all seem to play offensively just fine, even whilst their MBT’s largely have worse armour protection and often worse survivability too.
The turret ring should be highlighted more, but I get your point.
You are excluding the BVM (or T-80UK), T-90M, and the Leopards / Strv 122s here.
You also do not take into account other munitions, like 120/125mm HE, in which case the UFP and roof would be green.
It would probably be best if you do 125mm HE for all MBTs, and compare them.
BVM is significantly weaker than T-80U in armor. T-90M is the only Soviet tank as armored as 2A7V.
However, T-90M is also the slowest of them, with the slowest reload and “one of the worst APFSDS rounds”. So while T-90M is rather superior to T-80BVM, it still has flaws compared to the competition and IMO the Abrams and ZTZ-99A are superior to the T-90M which itself is superior to the T-80UK which itself I find superior to T-80BVM.
There’s areas on the other vehicles which should be highlighted more too, so it balances out in the end.
There’s also not much I can do about this until Gaijin refines the tool.
Those vehicles have plenty of downsides to off-set their armour advantage.
The point is that people act as though these M1’s have the armour profile of the Ariete, which is absurd.
These two are the flavour of the month vehicles, you can take any other MBT and compare it to these two Leopards and they’ll come off worse.
But that doesn’t mean that any other MBT is a poor vehicle just because they don’t stack up with these Leo’s.
US CAS is very good, no questions about that. For me, russian MBTs are better than the abrams because of their better protection, even though their mobility is worse in reverse. Refering to the HSTVL as the best light tank is very controversial to say the least, as most lights can do the things it can do but better… but all of that misses the original points of this thread, so I think we should agree to disagree and go back to the topic :)
Yeah absolutely, I didnt want to say that its difficult to implement hardkills for these tanks. Just wanted to say that these more advanced vehicles should come with it and thats far in the future for me, because of a lack of proper lineups with other vehicles at the top ground BRs.
Yes reload rate is great, and as I said, could be nerfed when implementing the A3 ammo. But for me it would be better to be able to kill vehicles more efficient with your first shot instead of disabling sth important and then kill it. And it would give the tanks a more distinct feature than a kind of super loader with robot arms.
Good comparison, but as it was said, some very important vehicles are missing. And I agree with the fact that tanks like the challenger, merkava or ariete need to be adressed as well, I just havent played them yet. To say they are good in the offensive is a bit over the top, considering how slow the challengers are or how squishy the ariete.
I havent said once Im struggling with the abrams, Im getting some good games with it. I just want to try to objectively compare it to other tanks. Since War Thunder is highly dependend on skill, a good player can always get great games with bad tanks. But to balance the game, equally skilled players should get equal results with their vehicles, and atm, some vehicles are just clearly worse than others.
You’re essentially asking for the M1’s to receive the ability to roflpen it’s opposition.
That’s asking for major trouble because other nations will want the same treatment and you’re back to square one.
Firepower is just fine as it is.
You said that the firepower isn’t sufficient because you have to aim for weakspots.
Aiming for specific parts of an opposing vehicle is a core gameplay design of the game, there are very few vehicles with the ability to lolpen anything they meet, and they have significant drawbacks in other categories that compensate for this.
The M1’s are easily strong enough in other categories where the ability to lolpen opposing tanks simply wouldn’t be fair.
Stuff like the T-90A, Challenger 2 TES, Ariete PSO, Challenger OES, T-72B3, etc. are vehicles which don’t stack up well to their competition or don’t suit the META. I can understand complaints about them, but not the M1’s.
That being said, I’m all for the remaining nations to receive vehicles on-par with the Leopard 2A7V and Strv 122, that includes the M1A2 SEP v3, but that doesn’t mean I believe the current M1’s in particular need more buffs or are unique in their suffering when matched against the aforementioned Leos.
Its not fair to summarize the points Ive made like that, its a straw man argument. Ive already told twice that its not about oneshotting every opposition, its about defeating Kontakt 5 in the hull. Not even the turret, just the hull. That means the T80BVM or T90 would still be immune to it, since they have relic, but tanks at 11.3 or below would be easier to kill. Dont know if it would affect the Leo or 122s, but I doubt it, since the ammunition isnt designed to defeat these tanks.
Other nations have other things going for them like better armor at the leos or higher T Series, the Challenger should be included here too but isnt well protected in its current state, so having worse armor but better killing power against certain vehicles shouldnt be a big deal.
Understandable. I still think better ammunition would help the US to get more on par with the current top nations, and the A3 needs to come anyway, maybe with the SEPv3, which would then lead to more seperation to the lower ranks, where that kind of ammunition would be too OP.
