Turret ring. Abrams armor is also not weak, it has one of the better armor profiles at top tier compared to minor nation tanks for example.
1 Like
Improvement wise you only gain ~200-250mm of KE protection on the later variants compared to the M1A1. Most people don’t even aim at the turret cheeks in the first place so they’re kinda nullified. In terms of areas that can be penetrated the Abrams has a large profile for having a decent armor layout. The turret ring should be volumetric, working primarily against autocannons.
1 Like
“only 200-250mm of KE”
So going from getting lolpenned in cheek by top tier rounds to impenetrable is just a disregardable advantage?
If you’re hull down, the cheeks will save you plenty. Swing your turret to prevent your breach getting shot and you are incredible hull-down.
Or just increase its thickness.
The armor is situational. As you stated hull down at longer ranges make it harder to kill, but that only works on specific maps under specific conditions. Your breech and turret roof are still very easy to exploit even when hull down. Increasing the thickness of the ring won’t do anything because the armor is still in 2 parts. Volumetric is the way to go as the armor isn’t 300mm thick (the overlapping causes that LOS thickness, but it’s not actually that think).
All armor is situational.
Abrams hull down at any range is incredible.
Breach is a weakspot on every top tier MBT, but atleast the entire turret isn’t, like an Ariete for example. The turret roof is not an exploitable weakspot. It only works if hes unangling his roof for god knows what reason.
I’m not exactly sure how thick it is IRL, but a flat thickness would be far better for the game instead of making it a volumetric mess, because its Gaijin.
The way they did angled performance recently means rounds to the roof even at a 90-100% ricochet angle still pen. The optics port on the roof is always going to pen even hull down again due to how Gaijin did things.
For example this guy got screwed by angle performance as the round pens the very top of the left turret cheek/breech and then ricochets off the roof inside the tank into the ammo door.
This is an extremely rare scenario that is not worth banking on at all. Most of the times this will ricochet. The 100% ricochet angle is 81, and that means Abrams roof will bounce 99% of level shots. The optic also doesn’t work in game unless you have an elevation advantage. @Necrons31467 can you post the image of how to use the protection analysis tool so he doesn’t pull up one that just… doesn’t work.
100% ricochet literally mean a ricochet.
That’s the definition of a non-pen.
Also, here’s the chart as requested:
1 Like
The point I was trying to make is even those high ricochet chances still penned just because of the terrible coding and issues with volumetric. It is extremely rare but I’ve had it happen in my M1A1. I’m not saying it’s a thing to base everything off of, but it’s something to consider.
If I had a recent replay of the shots I’m referring to I would gladly post it but I haven’t played my M1A1 recently in favor of grinding other vehicles.
1 Like
It very rarely does happen, but it isn’t “easy to exploit” per se.
Turret cheeks are huge enough to just ignore and go for the turret ring instead which is a guaranteed kill or disabling the tank or just go the hull which is a 100% one shot kill, turret cheek improvement don’t matter at all when you have these two huge weakspots.
And this shows me you have not a clue what you’re talking about.
Enlighten me then Sherlock.
1 Like
I’ve already elaborated in previous replies. Abrams also has autobounce UFP which has saved me a good chunk of times. (Unrealistically overperforming btw, should be penned by DM23 105)
I’d reckon he knows what he’s talking about considering he has a hell of a lot more games with TT variants of the Abrams than you do while maintaining a decent KDR.
1 Like
And if you didn’t read what he said, he said the LFP and ring were giant weakspots, not the UFP.
1 Like
That also doesn’t matter at all if you have the turret ring issue and the hull with the lowest protection against APFSDS out of it’s peers.
Whose opinion do you think is more valuable? Someone with a 5 K/D and 80% WR over 1085 kills or someone with 3000 kills, a 1.3 KD, and a 40% WR?
2 Likes
Someone who has played more games over a longer period of time, meaning they played with how the game changed, is more valuable. You strike me as someone who only wants to stat pad with KDR and only going for kills.
1 Like
So what I get out of this is as long as you have a weakspot, the rest of the armor is useless? Awful logic.
False. Leclerc, Leo 2A4M/2PL, Ariete, 2A5, the list goes on. The only real problem with Abrams is the turret ring being weak to autocannons. The rather weak hull really doesn’t matter all too much, as the rest of the tank more than makes up for it.
3 Likes