I think we can all agree that the Leopard 2A4 is overused whereas not many people use the Abrams' or Challengers. So let's do something about it. Have a look at this:

M1A1 ABRAMS - 135 points

Accuracy: 10
AP power: 9
Ammo: 25 rounds
Speed: 50km/h
Armour: 9 Front / 7 Side / 2 Top / 2 Rear
Stabilzer: Exceptional


CHALLENGER - 140 points

Accuracy: 9
AP power: 9
Ammo: 40 rounds
Speed: 45km/h
Armour: 10 Front / 8 Side / 3 Top / 3 Rear
Stabilzer: Very good


LEOPARD 2A4 - 145 points

Accuracy: 10
AP power: 10
Ammo: 30 rounds
Speed: 70km/h
Armour: 10 Front / 5 Side / 2 Top / 2 Rear
Stabilzer: Exceptional

It's the combination of 10 accuracy, 10 AP ammo and 10 front armour that make it stand out - pretty much the most important things about are the best. Yes, there are some price differences, but they don't matter at this price range because everybody goes for the best. I don't understand why Leo's stabilizer was buffed, it had apparently been just "good" by the time of this trailer.

I'd like to keep all 3 tanks diverse and filling different roles. The Leopard 2A4 should remain the fastest tank with 10 front armour, good for advancing, but it should be forced to stop for maximum accuracy - stabilizer nerf. The M1A1 should remain less vulnerable to flanking at a cost of keeping its 9 frontal armour, it should remain slower, but it should have the best stabilizer so that it is accurate at this speed. The Challenger should remain the best defensive tank, the least vulnerable to flanking and with the lowest probability of running out of ammo in combat.
Since the M1 Abrams only has 9 front armour, it swaps its AP value and price with Leo.

Not a final suggestion, just brainstorming. So feel free to disagree, but you should you come up with your own solution if you do. *CHANGES IN RED*


M1A1 ABRAMS - 145 points [from 135 pts]

Accuracy: 10
AP power: 10 [from '9']
Ammo: 25 rounds
Speed: 50km/h
Armour: 9 Front / 7 Side / 2 Top / 2 Rear
Stabilzer: Exceptional


CHALLENGER - 140 points

Accuracy: 10 [from '9']
AP power: 9
Ammo: 40 rounds
Speed: 45km/h
Armour: 10 Front / 8 Side / 3 Top / 3 Rear
Stabilzer: Very good


LEOPARD 2A4 - 135 points [from 135 pts]

Accuracy: 10
AP power: 9 [from '10']
Ammo: 30 rounds
Speed: 70km/h
Armour: 10 Front / 5 Side / 2 Top / 2 Rear
Stabilzer: Exceptional

_________________

So you effectively killed Challengers by giving them worthless AP 8. Leopards got worse in shooting while moving which is what Leopards are supposed to do.
And then you effectively also buffed M1A1 Abrams to the extent it is a no brainer to use them.
Oh and let me guess you also come form USA?

Please try a little less lethal changes mate.

So 8 NATO AP 10 Tanks? No thanks.

_________________

The changes are a bit too extreme I'd say.

How much accuracy can compensate for that? The Challenger is meant to be bulls eye - accurate.

I don't think they're supposed to be the best in all criteria that matter the most. That 10 penetration and 70km/h speed has to have a trade off. Besides, having a good stab doesn't mean it won't hit anything. It could be changed to 'very good' perhaps. Remember, this is brainstorming

Buffed how? +1 accuracy -1 AP. It's a balanced change.

Nope, Slovakia.

Like what?


Criticism alone isn't helping. You may have missed that this isn't even a suggestion, it's brainstorming ffs.

_________________

Here's a brainstorm: reduce the range of heavy tanks and suddenly side armor is worth more, making abrams and challys more useful without even needing to rebalance them between each-other.

Ok let me put this in a constructive way.
Accuracy and AP Power don't exactly work +1 and -1 the other.

1 Point accuracy increases 5% chance of hitting something.
1 AP point gives 1 extra hitpoint damage per shot.

AP power is basically a far more critical stat. With 8 AP the challenger can't hit T-80U or T-80BV even when they come close. The gun will be inefficient.

M1A1 Abrams will take 1 extra hitpoint damage per shot from front but it will get side armour(which is game changingly amazing) and 10 AP per shot which is quite high.

Now to also elaborate to what Hegemon said PACT has 2 Tanks with 10 AP+(T-80U) which can damage a 10 Armour at max range. With your changes NATO will have effectively 8 such tanks.

What is more PACT has 6 tanks with 10 front armor. NATO have 12.

_________________

I would suggest this :-

M1A1 ABRAMS - 135 points

Accuracy: 10
AP power: 9
Ammo: 25 rounds
Speed: 50km/h
Armour: 9 Front / 7 Side / 2 Top / 2 Rear
Stabilzer: Exceptional


CHALLENGER - 140 points

Accuracy: 9
AP power: 9
Ammo: 40 rounds
Speed: 45km/h
Armour: 10 Front / 8 Side / 3 Top / 3 Rear
Stabilzer: Very good


LEOPARD 2A4 - 145 points

Accuracy: 9
AP power: 10
Ammo: 30 rounds
Speed: 70km/h
Armour: 10 Front / 5 Side / 2 Top / 2 Rear
Stabilzer: Very good

Mine is a blatant Leopard nerf so it is not so obvious a choice. Guess what?
Challengers will become a good alternative to Leopards thanks to being filled with armour. Abrams will still remain useless. I see no way how to correct an abrams since buffing it armour wise pushes it into Challenger territory and buffing it gun wise pushes it into Leopard territory.

Buffing up the speed by 5-10KM/h would make it fit in the middleground with actual efficiency, without being historically incorrect.

Well, it'll still have 25 sucky-rounds but...

_________________
"Rocks are OP. Paper is fine" signed: Scissors

My Youtube Channel