Use the survivability onion philosophy and you’ll do extremely well
Don’t be there
Don’t be detected
Don’t be acquired/identified
Don’t be hit
Don’t be penetrated
Don’t be killed
1 Like
You forgot the most important thing, the first layer:
“Don’t play war thunder”
Yeah, a change really needs to happen.
-
Fix the bug with the horizontal drive. any hit to the engine compartment disables the turret drive. Combine this with the recent turret basket change and it’s just… shit.
-
Revert the ADATS change where the flare burns out and you can’t even see the missile after a couple of seconds.
-
Review the turret ring protection. I can kill the things with a bushmaster frontally, knocking out it’s turret drive and then it’s just dead. It’s pretty stupid.
2 Likes
No, but the fact that they have too many people on it. Not that they can’t play well on tanks except clickbaits, it’s just that there is no one on the floor. Literally I see nothing on the floor and all the points get capped and then we loose.
All you have to do is look at the people replying to you, see what nation they main ~ Russia ~ and know that nothing you type is going to get through to them. They are a special bunch.
What are you talking about? The Abrams was a Tank designed to Go head to head with Soviet armor, and out flank them and keep going and taking more and more ground. U.S Armored warfare has never been to just sit and wait. The FCS on even the Abrams has always been superior to anything the Soviets or Russians have ever made, and we knew this, they still have yet to figure out how to make a battle worthy vehicle that can even depress a hill or go in reverse when needed.
Of the many years of reading posts on the Internet about the Abrams, the amount of lies and wrong information from people who generally have no clue what they are referring to has never stopped shocking me.
Please stop typing things like saying it was made to be hull down, you are referring to the Brits and the Germans. The Abrams in this game are not up to U.S Army production standards, and they certainly can’t be used the way they were designed, gaijin has gone out of their way to make sure they are incapable of doing that.
dayum
wait
DAYUM 113 MILLIONS SL?
BRO
AH HELL NAH
AH HELL NAH
What? USA has unkillable OP CAS, it has meta tanks, and its SPAA is sub-par and not the worst.
Win rate does not determine vehicle capability.
1 Like
Im sorry unkillable OP cas? Are you on drugs?
Decent Cas but no where near as good as the Su34 and Su30.
It is considerably worse than the Vt1 slingers and pantsirs hence why people see it as one of the worst. Though it’s much better than the OTO, type 81 and maybe even the TOR/HQ (depends on preference).
7 Likes
The F-15E has an extremely favourable matchup vs everything in the game that isn’t a Eurofighter.
You can kill 2A7 frontally with same Bushmaster aswell btw,ZTZ99A can be .50 called from front and T-90M/BVM can also be killed easily through front with the Bushmaster.
The Abrams is top three best tanks in the game. Want to know why so many think it is bad? Because they refuse to play it properly. The Abrams was not designed to be thrown into battle against 16 other tanks firing at it. It was designed for a support role.
There’s a reason why Leopards and Challengers sit in the back: they were designed to snipe.
There’s a reason why T-Series tanks are shorter and sloped: they were designed for flat terrain and CQC.
There’s a reason why Japanese and Chinese tanks are so fast: they were designed for flanks and ambushes.
Want proof of what the Abrams is? Take a look at the doctrine of the US forces. What did they do back in the 90s? That’s right, they let their air force swoop in and take care of the majority of the opposing ground forces. The Abrams only had to fight a few stragglers that were not carpet bombed.
What did the Abrams do in Afghanistan? They were rarely in any tank battles. Why? Because the US Air Force took care of the Afghan tanks, so the US tanks played a support role.
What did the Abrams do in Syria? Support role.
What did the Abrams do literally anywhere? They were used in a support role.
What do level 9 players that just bought the Click-Bait do? They rush into the battle, guns blazing, and then cry because everyone knows the weak spot of the most common 11.7 vehicle.
I can’t tell if you’re serious.
2 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
I’d say it’s more daft to assume that Japanese and Chinese tanks are particularly nimble compared to things like the Abrams and Leopard (they aren’t) or that Russian tanks are designed for CQC (Grozny says привет). Every tank is designed to be the best it can possibly be, in every possible way, while accounting for manufacturing costs and local engineering capabilities. Reducing this to obnoxious specializations is infantile.
Bruh adats cant kill anything that manouvering judt s little. JUST CUZ U CANT SEE THIS DAMN MISSILE
1 Like
If the Soviets were to have invaded the Fulda Gap, the Abrams stationed there were ordered to hold them off for as long as they could. Sounds like defense right? It had great mobility for repositioning and the turret armor was made to be resistant to projectiles fielded at the time. Sure in the long run they probably would have been offensive, but the tank does extremely well in a hull down position.
Except that’s what they are. Different doctrines require different strategies. Unless you really believe the Type 10 can brawl, especially with zero armour. Or that the T-90M can snipe with it’s no gun depression. Or he’ll, the Leopard can brawl, despite the massive disadvantage of a massive power pack.