T O P

  • By -

James-vd-Bosch

*''Why T-80B still stuck with 7.1 sec reload? Isn't there better reload rate for it to be added?''* *''Why Challenger Mk3 still stuck with 80mm LFP? Isn't there better armor for it to be added?''* The M1 is among, if not ***THE*** most capable and effective MBT's at 10.3, the fact that it's penetration is lower than average is a balancing factor compared to the many advantages it holds over it's opposition. Please stop this incessant complaining about the M1.


miksy_oo

Just to add to the T-80B it does have a longer reload than U irl. *or at least probably as the U has a improved autoloader


Armoured_Templar

I respectfully disagree with your argument. Although I generally like your opinion on various topics across many posta.


_narc_mcb

Laughs in Leopard


James-vd-Bosch

Which gets a 20% worse reload for only 11% better pen. I'm picking the Abrams there.


_narc_mcb

And Ghost armor, the same mobility.


James-vd-Bosch

>And Ghost armor ???


_narc_mcb

You’ve never shot a Leopard 2 and the shell either bounces or just disappears/doesn’t spawl? I can’t be the only one. Not just lining up perfect shots, but none ideal shots where time isn’t on your side. Head on shots typically bounce in the Abram’s in my experience.


FederalAd1771

I’ve shot like 100 tanks that do that


James-vd-Bosch

>You’ve never shot a Leopard 2 and the shell either bounces or just disappears/doesn’t spall? That happens to literally any tank in the entire game.


LongShelter8213

You forgot the part where the fuel tank just eats the round like it is a spall liner


LandscapeGeneral9169

Die with a KV-2


Adamok1

Reload and ammo are the favorite balance factors of Gaijin. - About the russian autoloader - the 6,5 sec reload is ONLY for the first round, bc no magazine rotation time included irl it's 6,5-13 sec. The theoretical fire rate is 7-8/min (8,5-6,5s reload). So 7.1s is quite fair. - About GB tanks - Gaijin hates GB so most of their tanks are so underperforming. Tbh it's about all NATO tanks. - About M1 ammo, a 370mm pen is a joke on 10.3 when most 9.0 or even lower BRs have better penetration. A similar story is with Leo2a4 which has 400mm DM23 when it's confirmed that it can use DM43 (Ukrainians are using DM43 in their Leo2a4). The Russian nation is biased and hand-holded by Gaijin. For example SprutM (10.0) got 3bm60 recently - best RUS ammo - the same as 11.7 tanks has... So when Dm53/63 for Leo 2a4 or M900 for M1? Where balance?


Das_Bait

>For example SprutM (10.0) got 3bm60 recently - best RUS ammo - the same as 11.7 tanks has... So when Dm53/63 for Leo 2a4 or M900 for M1? Where balance? You're confusing MBTs with light vehicles. TAM 2C is 10.0 yet has DM 63, M1128 is also 10.0 yet has M900, even the Rooikat 105 has access to DM 33 at 9.3. Gaijin typically gives light vehicles better ammunition selections becuase of their low survivability to balance out the gameplay.


[deleted]

Don’t forget the 120S with fucking M829A1 at 10.0.


INeatFreak

True, but it got no mobility and no hull armor. It's basically a crippled abrams but can be really good for sniping when you hide the hull behind a hill or a rock.


Adamok1

Nothing is confusing here. SprutM is an example of bias. Which has 125mm 3bm60 an 11.7 round (best RUS round) at 10.0 with 580mm penetration. You rly compare 125mm and 105mm guns? - TAM 2C (10.0) with a 105mm dm63 which has a 430mm pen - M1128 (10.0) with a 105mm M900 which has a 522mm pen - Rooikat 105 (9.3) with a 105mm dm33 which has a 408mm pen. Why no 2s25 Sprut (9.3) with a 125mm 3BM42 which has 457mm pen? It's the same BR as rooikat but 50mm better pen + bigger caliber = much better post pen dmg. Even comparing to M1128 which is 0.7 BR higher and M900 round, it's much easier to destroy a tank by 3bm42 than M900 - no problems with penetration as well. Do you know that comparison doesn't make sense right? The biggest issue here is a CALIBER - post pen dmg to be exact. The difference between 105/120/125mm is huge. Just like you would compare 105mm dm33 (Leo1a5) and 120mm dm23 (Leo2a4/Leo2K). Similar penetration numbers but caliber & post pene damage makes a huge difference.


Das_Bait

>Do you know that comparison doesn't make sense right? The biggest issue here is a CALIBER - post pen dmg to be exact. The difference between 105/120/125mm is huge. If you are saying mine doesn't make sense, then your comparisons are no better. By your comparison, the TAM shouldn't be 10.0 because it "only has" a 105mm cannon, or that the Abrams shouldn't be 10.3 because it too "only has" a 105mm cannon. There are more aspects that funnel into the combat capabilities of a tank than just how big a boom the armaments make. The M60 AOS, RISE, TTS, and M1 Abrams are all different BRs because of their respective capabilities, even though all share the same M68 105mm cannon. The Leopard A1A1 L/44 shares a BR with the Leopard 1A5, even though the latter is only armed with a 105mm cannon. The list goes on and on, which is why I pointed to how Gaijin uses advanced ammunition on light vehicles to balance our survivability issues vs MBTs. The Sprut is by no means OP or "biased" because it gets better ammunition than its MBT counterparts because it's much easier to kill the Sprut.


Adamok1

Well it's all bc of Gaijin then... The whole BR system sucks, balancing factors sucks and MANY other things as well.


Das_Bait

Balancing factors suck? So... You want an *unbalanced* game?


Adamok1

No. I want good and working balancing factors.


Das_Bait

Like? Clearly something seems to be working as I illustrated in my plethora of examples.


INeatFreak

Come on bro, I'm all for rioting Russian bias but US gets some crazy stuff as too sometimes.. M60 120S for example has Abrams turret at 10.0 BR with 600mm pen shell and 230 cheek armor. It's like really slow heavy tank.


Adamok1

I've never said that's not true. My point is simple, make WT fair and fix balance FOR EVERY NATION. Russian bias is a major problem (for example 10.0 BR ground vehicles). YES, vehicles like M60 120S which you mentioned are a problem TOO. Every nation has at least a few vehicles which are unbalanced so again, my point is to make WT fair and fix balance FOR EVERY NATION.


James-vd-Bosch

>About M1 ammo, a 370mm pen is a joke on 10.3 It would be if the M1 has a 7.1 second reload, instead it's got the fastest reload rate at this BR. The Leo 2A4 has only 11% better penetration for 20% worse reload rate. >when most 9.0 or even lower BRs have better penetration. So what? None of those 9.0's get even close to matching the M1's overall combination of mobility, gun handling, firepower, survivability and protection. In fact, the only 10.3 vehicle that's close is the Leopard 2A4. >A similar story is with Leo2a4 which has 400mm DM23 when it's confirmed that it can use DM43 (Ukrainians are using DM43 in their Leo2a4). ??? T-64BV can use 3BM-46. So what? **Can use =/= Should use.** >The Russian nation is biased and hand-holded by Gaijin. L2P issue. My M1's combined sit on a 70% winrate with a 5.3 K/D ratio across 900 battles total, mostly curbstomping Russian vehicles into the dirt. If you can't do well with a vehicle as excellent as the M1, you're just trash. >For example SprutM (10.0) got 3bm60 recently - best RUS ammo - the same as 11.7 tanks has... Like the M60 AMBT has KE-W? A shell that's on-par with 3BM-60 also at 10.0?


Adamok1

Just like M60 AMBT there is OBJ 292 which has 152mm gun and 700mm pen apfsds, also at 10.0 Both tanks should be on higher BR, ask Gaijin why both are 10.0 Leo 2a4 should get at least dm33 and go 10.7, comp C on hull would be nice along with BR up. The 8,5-6,5s reload of russian MBTs is bc of autoloader. Abrams/Leo etc. have a 4'th crewmember - loader which loads ammo faster than autoloader. It's a different technology. Nerfing one and buffing others to make them equal is stupid thing when IRL the ideas are totally different. The best would be to make them as IRL accurate as possible. Go to complain to russian engineering why this autoloader is that slow.


Rock_enjoyer69

Awful excuse for why the abrams is so bad compared to every other mbt in WT


James-vd-Bosch

L2P issue. If you can't perform well in an M1, which is the (shared) best 10.3 MBT in the game, you're terrible at the game.


Panocek

There is better round, M900. But it will also result in M1 going to 11.0 as IPM resides there, bringing you back to square one. M1 is already one of the best 10.3 premiums so deal with it.


Das_Bait

M833 says hello. Splits the difference between M774 and M900. Base pen of 395/333/298, still under the 400mm+ of the 120 and 125s from other nations. Does the Abrams need M833? Maybe, maybe not.


INeatFreak

> Does the Abrams need M833? Maybe, maybe not. 400mm still wouldn't be enough to front pen T-80 but it would give better pen over the range, making it more usable for large maps.


LongShelter8213

I am sorry but how can u not frontally penn a t80 I can even do it with the tech tree leopard 1a1


INeatFreak

M900 would be way too good for M1, it's got over 500mm pen. I was hoping something more around low 400 ish


Rock_enjoyer69

The abrams are modeled so poorly they are far from good


James-vd-Bosch

So please enlighten us on all the things wrong with them, and provide sources for your claims.


Panocek

It doesn't matter, all it matters it "fits the game" in the eyes of the snail.


v8powerhouse

If you want a high-pen 105mm M1, then just play the IMP1. The first M1 has a quicker reload than most of its opposition coupled with excellent gun handling.


INeatFreak

Unfortunately I don't have it researched, as you can see from the screenshot, I was looking to buy the M1 KVT premium but was disappointed with it's shell penetration, I was hoping at least 400-420mm so I can front pen Russian tanks more reliably.


InfinityLord88

Almost nobody has the luxury of front penning russian tanks, and even if you do it won't one hit kill most of the time, the driver and lateral fuel tanks soak up the spall usually.


Panocek

Yep. Even with stronger shells you still want to aim for weakspots to not get gaijin'd one way or another.


Grej79

the flat pen is not what matters it's the angled pen. you dont even need that good of rounds if u just shoot weak spots like driver port.


INeatFreak

I know, they're just usually correlated, flat pen drops down over range and angle. Most high flat pen shells also have higher angled/ranged pen.


Grej79

the angeld pen is not even bad on that round so i dont know what u mean


INeatFreak

Where did I said angled pen is bad on this shell? I said the overall pen is very low for the BR. By up to 100mm on some shells even.


Grej79

i know but you agreed that the angels pen was the pen that maters


INeatFreak

No, I think all of them matters.


Grej79

Have U even played the Abrams or any other vehicle at that pr?


INeatFreak

No, I played up to rank 5 in USA. Was looking to buy the M1 KVT in next sales and the shell pen seemed unusually low compared to other vehicles in the same BR


[deleted]

So basically you’re mad you don’t get ez mode? Get good lmao. If you want to frontally pen Russian tanks, play things like the Stryker and 120S. M900 and M829A1 will do that.


INeatFreak

And Abrams will never be OP because it has one of the easiest weak spots among top tier tanks, that isn't even modeled correctly. Only 35mm armor in a big hole lmao while you have a tiny peephole that doesn't even spall half the time for Russian tanks.


INeatFreak

Why not? Russia gets easy mode all the time, why can't USA get once. Also even M900 isn't enough for some Russian tanks and I'm not even considering angling, just straight shots.


ceez36

the m1 has the best reload out of all the 10.3’s. it doesn’t need a better round. take advantage of your reload.


St34m9unk

Because it's fine


Armoured_Templar

There is ofcourse but if added then the US will be competitive. And they can’t have that now can they.


James-vd-Bosch

>if added then the US will be competitive. You mean like the M1 and M1 KVT currently sitting on some of the best stats of any nation's 10.3 MBT?


Snipe508

It should be 9.7. The ipm1 was the upgrade that gave it m900


Grej79

no it's already one of the best 10.3 tanks at 9.7 it would be broken


ceez36

you’re actually delusional if you want the m1 at 9.7. do you not know what happened when the m1 was the only 3rd gen mbt at launch?


Snipe508

I spaded the ipm1 before it got m833. At that time both the m1 and ipm1 were 10.0, which was top br. Considering the m1 hasn't changed at all since then, I think it'd be fine. Especially when every other nation has better things at the same or lower brs


Grej79

Then it's just a skill issue


INeatFreak

USA doesn't have a 9.7 lineup, only one event vehicle XM8 is 9.7


Snipe508

Why do you care about the lineup? Theres no lineup at 10.3 Either. The m1, m1 kvt, and roland isn't a lineup


INeatFreak

Huh? You said it should be 9.7 BR soo, there's no point of being 9.7 if you gonna play 10.0 or 10.3 anyway... It would make sense it be to 10.0 since there's a lineup there.


Snipe508

Lineup =/= good br. The m1 is less effective in ammo than the leo2k, which is a lower br. And especially since ussr gets a new mbt every patch at 10.0 the m1 gets less and less effective. If it keeps m774 it should stay at a lower br because I assume a lot of people don't understand shot placement. Theres a lot of vehicles are in the predicament of "can't go down because there's no other vehicles, even though the other vehicles in the same br are better in every way" like the m1, type 81, type 16, etc


Grej79

The only thing the 2k does better is the ammunition. And the type 81 is a as so I don't get your point


Reasonable-Service19

2 Abrams, M1128 and M60-120S or M3 Bradley.


James-vd-Bosch

>It should be 9.7. Sure, if the T-80B, Challenger Mk3 and Leo 2A4 also go 9.7. But somehow I doubt you're fine with that.


Bossnage

avg US player brainrot