Half the shells literally disapeared, even if it went in it won’t spall not like other tanks.
Then they didn’t hit the ammo because there was no shells left anymore, just like the object 292, the shells literally go through the ammo and damaging the ammo making one of them yellow and that’s it.
Muh…Reload, Muh…Mobility, when the Tank literally made of plastic.
Glad to know that ammo not detonate/burning shenanigans still a things. And not just me going schizo.
If we’re going to cherry-pick our examples.
Here’s a lower BR M1A1 one-tapping me frontally with the first shot whilst I can’t even penetrate his mantlet.
Simple, he aimed correctly at your weakspot, and you did not + skill issue.
The point is, is that both are cherry-picked instances to prove a point.
Insert everyone in this forum that has said “Adding armor to the LFP wont help the Abrams no one aims there.”
The guy is literally against anything thats gonna benefit US, either its an improvement to the Hull or DU.
Fuel tanks are explosive protected in t90m though
The spall liner has nothing to do with it.
But that’s probably not modelled in War Thunder.
In War Thunder, they are probably modelled as “external” due to the spall liner separation, hence why not only there are no fuel tank explosions, but also no fire damage to the crew from it. Instead, it extinguishes itself after 5 seconds, like all external fires.
It’s not burning because it’s designed to nit burn. The filler consumes enough heat to reduce temperature
I mean ingame.
Ingame we don’t have those mechanics.
Ingame, the fuel tank IS set afire and IT burns. It just doesn’t deal any damage to the interior or the crew.
Ingame there are two kinds of fuel tanks: internal, and external. And T-90M’s are modelled as “external” to simulate the fire/explosion-proof design but it is not determined by real life mechanics because they are not modelled ingame.
Ingame, it’s just external because the spall liner is separating it from the crew compartment.
Of all the people I wouldn’t say necrons has a skill issue. He could probably stomp half the people in this thread (myself included) without even trying.
At this point you just glazing his skills, also many people in this thread are pretty good players + i replied on his replay he posted.
I respect either good players or knowledgable people on this forum, and I’m more inclined to agree with those people.
So yes I respect the opinion that goes over 2.0 in their 11.3+ Abrams slightly more than the of the people here that go negative in their abrams, like some of the people here. (I’m neutral on opinions from people going ~1.0, because at least they know how to use the tank.)
I dont think so.
We dont even know what kind of playstyle does he have or if he plays with squad(which gives massive advantage btw).
Not to mention he doesnt even play with top Tier Abrams but rather prefers to use M1A1/M1IP which are vehicles that has really good performance for their br, i also noticed he hasnt touched to his Abrams for a long time which means his opinions about top Tier Abrams are most likely outdated.
As far as i can see he has 4 games in M1A2 with zero percent Winrate while having 2+K/D ratio which means he’s either purposely statpadding or has very campy playstyle.
I would also like to see a couple of these changes as well
In game we had since the old age call “exterior” / “internal” fuel tank.
What did you talk about ammo storage for!! Every other arguement was valid.
Is it really all that respectable when it’s clear KD padding for self/forum ego? An average KD of 2+ but an average score of around 800 and an average team placement in the 30th percentile. That’s extremely above average in one category but way below average in 2 others that help indicate a players value. Idk about you but to me that’s more padding than a room in an insane asylum.
To me your stat card is more indicative of a good player. Well rounded and above average in every leaderboard category shown.
Yes, hitting his mantlet while driving full speed over uneven terrain, much skill issue.