No they aren’t…
There are completely on two different levels of effectiveness. To say that they are equally OP is being disengenous.
What makes thr F15 op is soley because of its gbu39 paired with the mavericks. Its what makes the mavericks barely usable at medium-long range instead of it being useless
The heck are you getting this from? The M1 series has, for a very long time, a middle of the road elevation and traverse speed, its always been worse than the high end T series tanks and the leopards.
EG all M1s spin at max 34 degrees per second and elevate at 19.2 degrees per second without crew mods.
Meanwhile every single leopard since the 2A4 spins at 34 degrees per second and elevates at 32 degrees per second.
The leclercs are at 34 and 32.
The BVM is 34 and 32.
The T-90M is 34 and 32.
Heck you have to go to 11.0 before any Russian tank gets bad gun handling.
The tank most equivalent to the M1 series gun handling is the Ariete at 34 and 16 respectively.
Ditto to everything above since thats gun handling.
Is literally equal bar having 1 degree more gun depression compared to the leopards and ariete, the Challanger has the same but I doubt anyone is saying that tank is fantastic.
Man you really have no idea what you are talking about, 4x to 12x is vastly superior in game, the Type 10s have the best optics at 4x to 13.3x.
I’m not even going to address the remaining drivel here since its just myths stacked on myths.
As a fighter. Nothing in the game still compares to the KH-38MT, its not even remotely a contest.
Both the Eurofighter and F-15E are not close to unkillable CAS currently, that crown goes to the SU-30SM and SU-34 and nothing will top them until air launched cruise missiles are added or the KH-38MT is removed from the game like it should be.
I’m sorry I have an aced crew in my M1A1? Also only the early variants have the 3-10x optics. The newer ones get the 3-13x optics. None of what I said was a myth it’s purely from my perspective as an opinion. There’s no need to be so hostile over someone’s opinion.
Cool and?
Yes I am aware, as already stated 4x to 12x or 4x to 13.3x is vastly superior to both, the early M1s suffer even more, thank you for furthering my point.
You repeated multiple myths which others have already countered and cited blatantly incorrect statements about present equipment. I have no interest in repeating what has already been said here.
The only truth you brought up was that the later M1s have acceptable ammunition and the armor sometimes works.
Everything I stated from my point os view is subjective to me aside from concrete stats. Again you do not need to be hostile. Sure, the Abrams are worse in some areas in others, but it doesn’t mean it’s the worst MBT in the game. The M829 series of ammunition is perfectly acceptable for top tier engagements. You don’t need a lolpenn round to do good. The armor in the turret is sufficient in the M1A1 and onwards for threats you can face. The hull armor has the same weakness as every other MBT, being the LFP. With an aced crew the Abrams excels, with a base crew it’s average, not the best or the worst. It all comes down to playstyle with the Abrams, and that’s where a lot of people get it wrong. I think I’m qualified in my opinion to say it’s one of the best tanks if played correctly from my stats with it. You can disagree respectfully with that.
That is very much not the case as per what others have refuted you with.
Where have I claimed such?
I have not claimed otherwise.
I have not claimed otherwise. I agree with the statement that the armor on the M1 series “Sometimes works”.
That is very much not the case on multiple MBTs, especially after the turret basket nerf the M1 series received.
This same exact statement applies to every tank in game.
And once again, I can say the same about a myriad of vehicles.
I do not seek to refute your own success with the vehicle. I do however find your personal success irrelevant if you go around reciting myths and false data which I chose to refute.
I am seeking to stifle the propagation of misinformation, which you, knowingly or unknowingly spread.
Listing out all the actual useable tank , leaving Merk/Challies/Type 10/Ariete/Chinese tank out. Yeah sure you definitely didn’t claim so
Lol , lmao even
I see stat shaming, I automatically think your argument is invalid.
Just because someone has bad stats (and mine are awful before you check), doesn’t make their argument invalid.
You free to ignore other people opinion , don’t have to actually reply to it when you don’t contribute anything else. I don’t care if you are bad but if you say that the other person personal success are not important while your stats are like that. Then you should not say anything, especially when you claim A or B good and own non of them
Idk man. But when theres this one guy talking crap about top tier when he doesnt play top tier i find it reasonable (im talking in general)
Meh, I call out shitty behaviour when I see it. Stat shaming someone isn’t necessary. A simple “Your own stats say you’ve never played top tier” would be sufficient.
It’s a lazy thing to do, rather than actually refuting their argument.
Sound like cope but ok whatever make you happy bro
When somebody claims vehicle XXX is OP or something, and then you check their stats with it and its like 0.6K/D you know the person is spreading lies.
you can think “arguments are invalid” but thankfully, facts do not care about your feelings
I mean, whatever you want to think my dude. Not sure exactly what I’m supposed to be coping about, but you do you.
It makes you question their arguments.
Your perspective on the game might change with your skill level, which is why low level people in CS always complained about P90 or something like that, meanwhile for people in higher ranks it’s a non-issue.
WT has it’s own P90s as well (looking at you 2S38).
My claim is that it sports a middle tier traverse and elevation drive, thank you for listing the vehicles below the middle tier of vehicles as I listed those above it or equal to it.
I also love the fact that your own statement proves to me that you did not read my post given you complain that I supposedly did not mention the Ariete when such is literally sitting right in the middle of the post but you conveniently left that part out. Here, to help you since it seems like its hard for you to actually read, I’ll quote it here for you.
Man you really did not read anything I posted prior did you, or you are trying to gaslight me, hmmmmm. Man people here really do not know that the search function exists do they.
Oh hey statshaming nice, now tell me where does that disprove the values I’ve pulled out of the game anywhere? Oh wait thats right it does not nor does P51ACE1943’s experience make said values not exist in game.
Ignorance is bliss
Don’t even have to look at your stats, the only people who dismiss other people stats because they felt like it doesn’t contribute to the conversation they are having are either bad at the game or barely play the zone where they are talking about. You are both of them, imagine me having to “gaslit” you. When you shoot your foot twice and tried to blame me for it. Maybe play more rank 7-8 and fix your M1 stats then come back, you can’t even look at the Abram from all aspect and you cherry picked some of them to justify that “M1 are worse in A and B”.
Like I don’t have to try to gaslit you , when you gonna fumble the bag anyway.
I mean, a bad players experience is going to be pretty consistent, and can tell when a tank is “bad” or “good”.
Stat shaming is just a lazy way of trying to win an argument, is elitist and further more, does nothing to refute figures from the game.
Unless w’e’re now declaring that only “good” players can have an opinion on vehicles etc in the game? Because that’s ridiculous.
My dude just dumps a bunch of unrelated quotes that do not support his argument at all and just re-iterate mine.
I chose to dismiss stats because that does not change the literal vehicle stats present in the game nor the design philosophy of the vehicle I’m speaking about.
Yes it does not contribute to the conversation because your performance in a vehicle does not change the literal hardcoded values of it.
Get back to me when you actually know about the vehicles you speak of or try to claim I did not talk about.
Just keep cutting away the parts of my argument that you don’t want, sadly that does not make them any less relevant.
Oh its very obvious at this point that you are given you continue to ignore my statements, misread and twist my words and quote only what you want to quote.
I find its hilarious how many people on this forum can only produce bad faith arguments or gaslight opponents at this point, like yourself.
Its a cop out for people who have no argument to stand on and always has been, especially when speaking to the technical specifications of a weapon. The entire KH-38MT situation has brought this to light all over the place with people even trying to conflate the AGM-65D as somehow being equivalent to the KH-38MT then deflecting counterarguments made out of technical data with stat shaming.
Such happens all the time on here.
i mean stat shame is situational because im pretty sure a dumb argument coming from a guy that has 10kd would surely make his arguement correct because hes good at the game right?
