Seriously why are M1\2 Abrams so weak? They really need higher “Armor Penetration” for it’s Battle Rating the Armor Penetration just needs buffed. There almost like training tanks for other countries for their target practice.
1 Like
Abrams 0.2 KDR
T-80 0.2 KDR
Leopard 2 0.2 KDR
bro did you use an automation program aka bot?
3 Likes
the m1 i dont like but everything after that isnt too bad. its basically a light tank and not meant to brawl
Eh he’s a controller player, cut him a little bit of slack :P
2 Likes
I havent had any issue with the gun. Are you trying to aim center mass on everything?
And for top tier, i play everything assuming its armor wont hold. Dont expect drive around expecting to block shots.
heh I was mocking people who claim one thing is bad and then you find out they always have the same performance across all the vehicles they played even the ones they indirectly claims is stronger lol
Yee I suck with the controller 🎮 i need da PC
1 Like
Because gaijin devs and their " beliefs " that the U.S Military and General Dynamics have sat back for over 40 years and said " we are just going to allow the russians to be able to penetrate the Lower Front plate with rounds from the 1980s, and not do anything to stop them "
2 Likes
Bruh… I’d love if Gaijin would actually buff the Abrams one of these days
I am most impressed with gaijin’s ability to predict/model spalling inside abrams tanks. It’s clearly accurate since across the board it’s know abrams are designed for crew survivability first then fightability second. The Russians themselves have said how tough the few abrams taken out were. Yet in game every hit severely disables the crew or destroys the tank. The reality, as has been learned from war, is abrams should be as hard to kill as the t80bvm or leo2a7v…and the russian tanks should have the weak spots, fragilility, and crew survivability of current in game abrams.
1 Like
gaijin somehow thinks theres no spall liner in the tank either or and they dont seem to know what kevlar is.
1 Like
Well I wouldn’t really call it weak because it requires a higher skill sealing when comparing it to a T90m or 2A7. In other words, it’s a less forgiving tank.
The Abrams has the greatest potential to do a lot of damage because of it’s ROF, mobility and armor, people just need to take advantage of it.
Not saying the Abrams is without it’s flaws. Sure there are some inaccuracies but fixing those isn’t going to make the Abrams “good”. People just need to accept that they can’t play the same way as a 2A7.
What historical war gives rise to this “Abrams is amazing” belief ? Where they been used in like for like combat there have been loses. In what war did the US’s latest and greatest square off against Russia’s latest ? I mean the Gulf war a turkey shoot and Ukraine has seen NATO tanks destroyed in combat ,possibly by Russian tanks.
Seems like the M1s expectation is based on sci fi ,a war that hasn’t happened yet.
I think you could say that about many later MBTs in NATO’s ranks.Even tank commanders put little faith in competitions.
I just feel that there is some great feeling that the M1 is a legendary veteran of major tank conflicts in the same way the M4 was and I really can’t see where people get that from.No such history exists does it ?
All you have is a game and in that game people win top tier with 12 kills in an M1 on a regular basis right? Because we see that on Youtube.
Then we see maybe the same guy do the same thing in a T80, so what is this great unbalance?
1 Like
no U.S army standard tank has been exported, ever Ukraine Abrams are all export variants.
1 Like
Let me ask you this…if the Abrams is so weak irl…(especially in the neck/frontal breech) why are drones not attacking this GIANT weak spot and utterly obliterating the vehicle (and crew) like in game? Instead they rely on a mobility kill then send waves of drones/missiles to destroy the vehicle…and still no catastrophic explosion nor crew kill!
The reality is the Russian tanks have proven to be utter busts and incredibly weak compared to ALL Western counterparts. Why isn’t that reality reflected in the game thats supposed to reflect “realism”?
I can’t believe I’m having to explain this.
Video games =/= Real life.
1 Like
The game touts itself on realism. And now you admit the Abrams is artificially nerfed in the game by having weak spots exaggerated. They brag about lifelike models, armor, and ammunition! They supposedly get their stats from official sources. The gods also will not make changes that don’t have multiple “credible (whatever)” sources. This game is supposed to be a real and accurate representation of real life.
Mate, what are you going on about?
What does War Thunder’s combat mechanics have to do with the manner in which FPV drones are operated in real life? What does drone targeting have to do with video game metas?
You know what? Nevermind, this whole thing is so silly I’m not even going to get into it.
1 Like
Wow…slow? I’ll explain slower: All Abrams in game have a huge weakspot in the neck/breech. This shot will catastrophically destroy the vehicle and the crew. If this is true as per the gods following real life designs, then why are the drones IRL attacking this huge weak spot? Instead they target engines and tracks to disable then come back and waste a lot of ammo to destroy the vehicle.
The answer is: IRL it’s NOT the weak spot purported in the game! The designers want to believe it is so they make it so.
“mate” lmao where you from? NYC?
Drones are destroying the Abrams presumably or something is as we know what the losses are .In Ukraine they are supposedly not having tank vs tank battles and they are not having close range battles like the War Thunder game so as I said who really knows what happens when top tier tanks face each other because in reality it does not seem to have happened.
Assuming NATO tanks are much better than any Russian tank then what kind of game does that make in terms of balance? Presumably one had to be nerfed and one buffed or you have a vast OP vehicle.
They have not as I said because it seems they are not facing each other like our game,not that much.What they have found is that 40 tons is working better in Ukraine than 60 especially in the winter when the ground is soft.One of a million things that matter in reality and not in this game.Fuel is an issue ,spares might be, technical knowledge of the tank,lack of familiarity with the Turbine engine.None of this matters in the game. How easy the Abrams is to use is what makes it great for export but its of no value to War Thunder in game.
It also looks like a Russian tank may have taken out a Challenger. Every time a Russian tank does take out any kind of NATO tank everybody screams that it is some kind of inferior export copy crewed by foreigners but War Thunder represents US crewed tanks and Russian crewed tanks ,the skill parameter of crews is determined by the game.
I’m sure NATO tanks have been tested against the latest Russian gun NATO can find but again nobody is talking shells bouncing off ,they are talking a destroyed tank with hopefully a saved crew.
You need to actually look at your own game and compare the armour penetration values of any top tier tank with the actual thickness of the armour. It indicates its about who fires first not armour stopping damage from happening
Everybody in this game forum is obsessed with balance ,well if the turret ring silliness is actually what makes the M1 balanced in this game then Gaijin would be fools to remove it.
]Second fact is later armour is highly classified so Gaijins practiced of trying to historically replicate a vehicle falls flat on it’s face,you need to remember that.
Third dont forget that this a game that balances the M44 and M109 with WW2 German armour so it’s imagination all along.
You forget so many of us at any level can test play a vehicles and any top tier tank can one shot any other at any time.
In brief it can be said that no legendary Tank or plane is legendary in this game unless it gets a full down tier.If that happens too much then the player base moan like hell.