This ToePunch guy is really coping hard huh?
He could’ve just said he was bad at the game but instead he’s insistent on blaming the more than adequate tools.
Shameful display.
3 Likes
Simple answer: It is American and the USA have always been an enemy of Russia. Thus the Abrams is made to suck by the Russian dev team out of pure spite and bias.
You wrote all of that, and yet none of it directly counters what I said.
What a low quality post.
Insurgents and T-55s/early T-72s is exactly what it fought for the entire duration of its service lifetime.
1 Like
No it doesn’t
1 Like
It fought them, but its not the enemy the designers had in mind when it was designed. You still havent given me examples of when the abrams was shit on in its fights against peer forces in US service.
Ironic, coming from you. You don’t need to respond to what I said, but it does not mean that it didn’t counter what you said. You don’t need to admit being wrong to still be wrong.
1 Like
This is just you changing the text to suit your narrative. Living in your own seperate reality and such.
This is further made clear by the fact that you’re leaving out the ‘‘M1’’ part and focus solely on the M1A1.
These documents also make extremely clear distinctions between M1A2 SEP, M1A2 SEP v2 and M1A2 SEP v3, etc.
If at any point they reference the M1A1 HC, they will specify ‘‘M1A1 HC’’ just like they do with the ‘‘M1A1 SA’’ or ‘‘M1A1 AIM’’.
If you still don’t understand why that’s relevant, then any discussion here is hopeless as I’m essentially talking to a brick wall.
Now that other users have also pointed out the fact that you’re a typical US main, the full picture here starts to make sense.
1 Like
He want to bring 9.3 T-72M with 3BM6, fill with some T-55A to fight with 11.7 M1A2 then proceed to proud for that record.
2 Likes
You guys are just delusional if you think the M1A2 was made to fight insurgents and soviet-era tanks.
1 Like
Conversely, other users have pointed out that you’re a NATO hater, and thats starting to make sense.
This just has nothing to do with what I said. If anyone is living in their own separate reality, its the guy who brings up a source that states a DU armor upgrade to the front of a tank, and somehow still thinks that means just “DU in the turret”.
1 Like
Well it’s not like the M60 RISE / TTS did any worse during Desert Storm, either.
6 Likes
Yes, I clearly despise anything NATO and would never play such vehicles, certainly not hundreds and hundreds of matches with them.
It’s those darn Leopards and M1’s I especially hate:
I would never purchase expensive kits of such vehicles for example, just because of my immense and uncaged hatred of them.
Because that’s exactly what the text states, which I’ve shown you on three seperate occasions now.
Anyways, you’re blocked.
8 Likes
hold on
are you implying A1HCs have been upgraded to A2s?
Those are some nice kits. I was thinking of getting some myself, but it feels daunting as a beginner because it appears that you need a lot of other equipment that doesn’t come with the kit itself - and I’m clueless as to all the stuff necessary to actually assemble the kit, outside of what’s in the box.
A. Send photos of the finished if you can those are great kits (Currently working on a P-61 myself)
B. To be fair I bought a Tamiya PaK 40 kit, that doesn’t mean I like it or the specific side.
If you want some advice and/or help with model kits just ask, at the very least I’d be happy to answer any questions I can
rly? so the shots that disapear in the side of the t90 is when im playing against harry potter.
dude…
2 Likes
Why does my 500mm penning almost M900 equivalent APFSDS disappear/lose 99% of spalling through the Abrams turret ring?
I don’t think this is about Russian/American vehicles…
maybe they shatter on the turret ring.
im not talking about the usuall sights black holes that have been happening since forever.
im talking about the era actually stopping 120mm apfsds while refusing to accept proof that western era can stop 30mm apfsds.
the same duality of criteria presented here by the op about the t80 nvds.
and also the same duality of criteria that had the m1 be russian the wording “upgraded frontal armor” would be accepted for turret and hull.
while this difference in criteria doesnt change i dont think theres much use to continue discussions like these. we either have concrete evidence to put gaijin against the wall, like the leopards, or we continue to play theyr game and have to accept what it is.
I really regret buying the Hobby Boss Leopard 2A4M CAN, I’d suggest to avoid that one because the quality of the parts just isn’t great.
I also find photo-etch to be daunting, so I try to buy kits with minimal of that stuff, the Meng kit has none at all and the other two Rye Field kits are perfectly acceptable for me.
So far, the Rye Field kits are outstanding, quality is great, good instructions, good parts fits, etc.
Currently working on the M1A2 SEP v2, though it’s just a collection of parts that I’ve cleaned up and got ready for gluing.
Also got myself an airbrush so I just bought the cheapest kit I could find to test the painting on:
Once I’m comfortable using the airbrush I’ll start painting some of my more expensive models (ones I’m afraid to mess up otherwise).
Why’d you buy a kit you didn’t like if I may ask?
I think we might also have to move this discussion elsewhere as it’s not really on topic.
2 Likes