after the events on the other day i take my time to inspect france and japan tanks (i didnt really did it before) and…
Wow, better lower plate protection…
Idk how ppl come here to type that abrams have better armor… But who knows, maybe im playing another game…
On abrams KD, im manage to get 1<KD on abrams 11.3, get a nuke yesterday (prof bc i know its insane: https://i.imgur.com/onvYyDg.jpeg)
maybe isnt much higher, but compare ~1.5KD and 1KD with the dif more than 6K games… good luck change any number there
still 1.5 isnt really much higher either, specially when he has 10 k matches with the previous leopards
Let’s just compare the Abrams vs the (underperforming) TKX against one of their main opponents, 3BM60:
Even in spite of the underperforming inner cheeks (wtf are those holes), I unironically prefer Type 10 over the Abrams.
At least its hull armor is functional against 3BM60 and anything lower than that (and even better shells at some angles and ranges), while the Abrams is lolpenned by DM33.
And leaving armor aside, it’s smaller, it’s faster, it’s autoloaded and has the fastest reload in Top Tier, at 4 seconds.
So again, let’s compare my performance on Type 10 vs the Abrams: oh, what a surprise. Much better, again. Why could it possibly be?
1.52 vs 0.97 K/D… yeah, I get I am not great, but I think the fact that, as an average player, I do better on most Top Tier MBTs than I do on the Abrams should tell something.
you know that to he manage to have 1KD on leo 2A7V he have to die ~3800time WITHOUT kill ANYONE right?
The more sample you have, the more exact value you have.
Those values is almost written on rocks dude…
Can you get the same test with M829A1? Bc i shot the ring turret on TKK today and it got gaijined…
I know i play 11.3, dont get M829A2 and etc… But i still think the problem is the same ± (just a little less on M1A2)…
dude no matter how you look at it he didnt do much better with the 2a7v a .5 kd difference is not large, not to mention that YOU talked about the “leos” not the specific 2a7v and with those he does nearly the same with them.
Same as 3BM60!
Type 10/TKX’s armor is just very trolly, hahah. Inconsistent, but trolly.
I have good experience with 2A4, thats why i typed that way, I just put it together. And 0.5KD difference on 6K games is really big dude…
its the same as someone coming here and saying that they have 15KD on M1A1 bc the had ONE game and kill 15.
it is not, is just killing an extra guy every other game
its the same as someone coming here and saying that they have 15KD on M1A1 bc the had ONE game with it and kill 15.
Again, the amount of sample you have, the more certain you have of something. And not even me saying, its the mathematics lol
Wanna see something even funnier?
The Merkava Mk.4s are often regarded as some of the worst MBTs in Top Tier, particularly due to their severely underperforming armor.
Welp…
I do better on the Merkavas than I do on the Abrams BUNUJAHUAHUAJAJAJA
1.15 (and rising ever since I spaded it) vs 0.97
The WR is on the low side compared to my other MBTs because Israel keeps getting matched with U.S, though.
I also perform better on the CHALLENGER 2s (except for basic 2 and TES), also regarded as some of the worst MBTs, than I do on the Abrams:
If someone can explain to me why I can do better on Challengers or Merkavas compared to the Abrams when the Abrams is suppossed to be so great… I’m all for it.
Idk what to say to you dude, i dont really have the experience on japan, the only thing i did is the protection analysis.
But what im saying there on my response is the amount of samples vs certain of result. on that dude you can certain that he play BETTER on GER than US…
US players need to bring this, and not faceplant so much.
There are still improvements to be made to the Abrams.
I’m going to talk about my experience vs the Challenger 2s (which will be the same experience as the noobs that buy the click-bait).
Any challenger 2 11.3 vs US 11.3:
Any US 11.3 vs challenger 2:
WOW, pretty much the same thing, no?
So abrams shit as challenger i guess (I know it’s not the best parallel, but it seems to make sense)
Implement equally strong MBTs for everyone.
You notice none of the tanks you deem “powerful” got nerfed, let alone all the powerful MBT beyond what you think is powerful.
M1A2 has slightly more armor over 2A5, slightly more pen due to the superior round, the reload of a Leclerc, and among the fastest movement.
But somehow M1A2 “bad” cause it’s not a Strv 122, which fires a round worse than M829A1.
You switch playstyles/get more comfy maps.
They did.
Leopard 2A7’s spall liners are barely cosmetic right now.
Look at this spall, through the “spall liner”. It’s like a frag grenade went off. Leopard 2A7’s spall liners worked properly at first, but, upon complaints of how OP it was, they were turned into… whatever they are suppossed to be now.
Or here:
The Leopard spall liners are no longer functional at all. Same goes for T-90M’s spall liners, turned cosmetic as well after complaints about how OP T-90M presumably was because of them. Challenger 2’s hull spall liner works, but not the ones on the turret. Basically spall liners are barely a cosmetic to gimmick right now.
So you think the Merkava Mk.4s, the Arietes (till just now that Italy got 2A7V), the Challenger 2s… are “equally as strong” as the 2A7s or the 122s…?
Not really, I play all of my MBTs the same way; semi-agressive assault, with strategic positioning when the situation cals for it, but always directed towards pushing the enemy back to the spawn after capturing the zones (sorry, I couldn’t camp even if I got paid for it xD)
