Same. Thats just been my experience in killing them, specificly referring to the Merkava 4s that is. I do have a Merkava 3 but I don’t consider my time with it indicative of the 4s and such due to the entire hull re-design and all the changes made.
I do very much so fear for the Merkavas for when they get the same turret basket nerfs like the M1s and Leopards, that void space sometimes seems to save the crew, having a massive basket might end up guaranteeing spall ending up somewhere near the turret crew.
No problem, but yes, I am indeed aware of the post pen meme that is the 35mm KDA API, namely in it’s ability to cause cupolas to implode like a dying star.
Odd then that marders are still played and commonly do well.
Competing nations and lineups are not used in vehicle balancing only performance metrics.
In the case of interior modules, the only tangible difference between both vehicles is that the XM246 carries it’s ammo in the turret while the Gepard carries it in it’s turret basket, both are boxes with 5mm of armor present.
The placement of the guns on the 246 may also be considered better placement armor wise, but the Gepard does have the FCR in the same position.
I will agree that the 246 does sport overall better armor due to it being on a M48 hull and having 25.4 mm RHA all over the turret with 6.6mm HHRA ontop of it, although, this only fully protects it from HMG fire.
However, I do think that the lack of APDS heavily harms the 246 in ground combat situations and it’s vastly inferior radar search volume harms it’s awareness compared to the Gepard.
I’ve seen it do quite well at 7.3, it’s biggest issue is, as stated, its girth.
All RH202 mounts sport the same performance, the XM800T’s M139 mount is indeed better but the base RH202 mount’s performance is already high enough for it to not be a tangible difference. The stabilizer is what matters the most, but that alone I dont see as being enough to put a 1.0 BR difference between the weapons.
Already spoken at length about it’s mobility so I wont repeat that.
Still the case that vehicles are not balanced against what nations they can fight or their lineups, only vehicle performance. Still sports the same standard RH202 mount. It is overall easier to .50 than the XM800T, yes, but thats only out to range, around 300 meters. At gremlin tank ranges where you would be .50ing one of these things, neither’s armor really can do much against .50s, you might bounce at higher angles on the sides of the XM800T, but it’s entire front volume is not going to do much, just like the Wiesel.
As of now, the XM246, to me, either needs the KDA APDS, or needs to get it’s AHEAD styled proxy rounds, the PGZ09 already gets similar rounds at 8.3 as well.
XM800T wise, I would have vastly less interest in it at 8.3 due to the M3 CFV already existing in my 8.3 lineups and being largely a superior pick.
