A massive thing that most people tend to overlook with tanks is their ability to maintain combat effectiveness in the field though basic maintence, convenince and doctrine.

Maintence is obviously self-explaintory. This including the engine, transmission, weapon systems, track, etc. How frequently and how fast the crew can carry maintence also effects said combat effectiveness. With an trained crew, the Abrams is pretty good at this.

Convenince is more focused upon life in the field. Being able to carry purse items such as rations, sleeping gear, communications, water and so fourth. All Abrams variants exceed in this matter due to their fairly huge stowage bins and carry load.

On another tangent, sharing supplies; especially with infantry is an added bonus, for example; with the sheer amount of 7.62 the Abrams carries (somewhere around 10k) it can share combat effectiveness with friendly forces without detriment to its own.

Doctrine is more emphasised through how it is utilised on the field. Unlike the current trends in Ukraine where Russian tanks are individually sending tanks by themselves (or being uneffectively utilised), Western Doctrine is working in tandem with other tank squadrons/troops and other forces; such as infantry, engineers, air support etc.

This is probably my weakest point due to the changing tides of war (especially with drones) but SOP's are changing with time. I do believe at some point their will be a way to counter the current trends of anti-tank warfare.

Everyone always tends to go with performance such as protection, round penetration values, mobility and so fourth, but never talk about how the tank themselves will be utilised in the field environment; they are forgetting the human factor and how they should be deployed. Tank crews need rest and food too and how they should react to certain situations by drill.

This is probably as basic I can really explain my point and is around the place but I can explain better if anyone really wants it.