Yea the SEP and SEPv2 is just there for the sake of giving US 12.7 even tho they are not a 12.7 tank lmao.
Why are they not 12.7 tanks?
They are within top 3 12.7 tanks in game currently
I dislike how Gaijin made them all the same. Before they were all given M829A2, each one played slightly differently and got lower BRs as a result. Now there’s no point in grinding all of them if they all play the exact same.
SEPv2 is maybe a 12.7 thanks to its newly added LWS and more smoke which is great, it helped me lived more than a few times in the age of FnF CAS, but the SEP are barely any different than the M1A2 at 12.0 despite being .7 BR higher
The Turrets are just as strong as a Leopard when you play hull-down. The sheer fact that there are still M1A2 at 12.0 when the Merkava Siman 4 and Arietes are 12.3+ is insane.
1 Like
ehhhhhhhhhhhh in my experience the Sep V1 is stronger, generally more resistant to shots especially in the turret, and its drastically easier to spot targets with thanks to new optics (I don’t rely on thermals very often- they often times are more a hindrance then help in my opinion).
BUT this argument is anecdotal so is a logical fallacy.
Edit: Both tanks generally are rather weak in CQB thanks to the massive hull and size of them, but again the SEP with the add on package is definitely more survivable in my experience.
Yeah, and I agree on bigger maps. But surely not useful on the majority of small maps where you are rarely firing over 500m
Honestly? You’d be surprised. My counterargument is Alaska, that main road that connects B and C points is littered with stuff. The finer optics help me figure out if its a tank or an object, and also make it easier to actually aim at the small parts of the tanks that are sticking out. It does make a difference, but its nominal map to map.
I will also say though that I feel like a majority of the maps I have been getting as of recent have been big sniping maps. I haven’t seen many city maps at top tier, not currently at least. So that also may be why I feel it as hard as I do.
I’d argue the Abrams isn’t good at CQB, but it’s situational. If you’re in a position you can hide your hull or force an enemy to round a corner, you have a very good chance. If you’re the one pushing a corner, the Abrams doesn’t do well.
It’s not. No. The T-series tanks are a million times better simply thanks to size and smaller weakspots (coming from experience, not just saying this. I’d take a T-72M1 or Turms out in CQB any day over Leos or Abrams). Its a heck of a lot easier to aim at the LFP of the Abrams (which is huge) and the turret ring of it then the trunnion or LFP of a T-90.
But thats CQB.