Jump to content


ARL V39: Worst tank in the entire game


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
92 replies to this topic

Saxton_Hale #1 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 06:45

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12813 battles
  • 146
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
As someone who has grinded every nation down almost every tree to some extent, I've seen a lot of tanks and had lots of hands on experience with them. Invariably a lot of them have seemed rather mediocre, but usually even those were passable. I used to hate the M6, but it was actually a lot of fun and has a lot going for it despite what seems like a lot of flaws. The JgPz is another one that people don't like, but I rather had fun with it. The low profile and good sloped armor make it easy to camo, it's decently mobile and can deal out some nice damage with a player that knows weakspots and timing their shots.

I used the dreaded AMX 40, and that's truly one of the least fun tanks I had used in the game. The armor is good, but against higher tiers it faced so regularly when I owned it it was dreadful. But no, there is no parallel, nothing that even comes close to the horror, the hideousness that is the ARL V39. I saw the specs on paper, and I thought it'd be an interesting but decent TD. Shoot, every tier 6 TD I've used has been pretty decent. The M18, Jackson, JgPz, SU-100 all were great fun. Guns look decent, it has no armor but no big deal it's pretty mobile for what it is right?

Then I bought one. My god. Words cannot express the terrible that this tank is. From the 14 degrees total gun traverse which is simply hideous, to the slow aim times with all the guns with penetration worth using, to a very lackluster rate of fire, I just cannot believe how bad this tank is. You must expose the entire tank to take a shot at anything and frequently you have to turn to keep up with fast moving tanks. The tank is so large it's easy to hit even from a distance, and the armor simply cannot bounce all but pea shooters from the likes of tier 4 lights. TD's can have some pretty mediocre stats but the gun is most important. The M18 has no armor, but speed and a good gun make it worthwhile. The ARL has no armor, mediocre speed in operation, and the guns are just bad. Not because their penetration or damage is poor, but because when combined with the platform they're very badly balanced. Most of the time in my ARL is spent waiting for the gun to aim in. Even after full aim in it very often will hit the dirt in front of a target at 300m. So now the cover has been blown, you will be shot to pieces by every tank and artillery will penetrate for full damage if you're not able to hide behind a rock quickly.

I'm sorry, I can make most tanks in this game work even if I don't like them but this tank is just the worst I've ever used. The 105 is the only gun with some amount of decent aim time and penetration and damage acceptable for the tier, but the 90mm aim time simply ruins the gun. Waiting around 9.5 seconds between shots on the 105 is unacceptable considering it's not even accurate. In that same time, 3601's, T-34-85's and E8's can fill you full of holes. If it could peekaboo that's one thing. If the gun was fast firing and accurate that's one thing. If the tank had some armor that's one thing. But this tank has NOTHING going for it. The way these guns work they're made to just go up close to shoot, and given what a terrible platform the ARL V39 is that would be suicide. Almost every other tank will fire as fast or faster than you and your damage is too poor to compensate for exposing yourself. The camo is too poor to remain concealed from a distance, along with the terrible accuracy and the constant hull turning to maintain a shot on the enemy tanks.

It's unbelievable that WG thinks this tank is ok as it is and see no issues. You can give the tank terrible gun traverse and fast aim times, or good gun traverse and slow aim times but on a TD if you give it neither you are basically just killing it. Of all the tanks I own and have used, I feel basically useless with this. It's a support TD even more than any other, it must hide behind many other tanks and take shots at opportunity targets and flee at the first sign of ANY tank that has spotted you. The SU-100 can bounce shots and is quite a versatile platform so it can do fine. The JgPz is a very small target, well sloped armor especially from a distance, and the gun is adequate if a bit underperforming if not carefully used (88mm). The M18 is a weakly armored, but mobile tank with a decent gun that's made better by its mobility and gun depression along with a turret. The Jackson is a well armored tank that can use its height to peek over hills and use cover very effectively and is still moderately mobile along with the turret. I can't think of anything good to say about the ARL V39. Even the 105 hits for less than 300 very often so I fail to see the perks to even using this gun. 212 pen at tier 6 is not needed if you know how to aim, and given the aim time on the 90mm I'm using the 105 over it but this tank just needs buffs very badly.

What does it take to get them to fix such broken and non-worthwhile tanks like this? The AC Mle '46 appears to be fine, I don't see many but it looks like a French JgPanther and that tank is pure excellence. Starting to lose my hope that any nations besides the original 3 will ever get really well balanced tanks.

swiggins #2 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 06:48

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7443 battles
  • 822
  • Member since:
    10-22-2011
give it more range and camo and gun traverse

ComradeHX #3 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 06:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 12586 battles
  • 5,790
  • Member since:
    12-02-2011
200+ pen is not good enough.

easy8tanker #4 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 06:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 11006 battles
  • 2,224
  • [3A82B] 3A82B
  • Member since:
    12-05-2011
There have been worst tanks.

For example the A-20 and the 38nA. Those tier 4 lights use to see tier 9 matches. Around that time I had the nA and had to free xp my way through that tank.

swiggins #5 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 06:58

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7443 battles
  • 822
  • Member since:
    10-22-2011

View Posteasy8tanker, on Jan 16 2013 - 06:57, said:

There have been worst tanks.

For example the A-20 and the 38nA. Those tier 4 lights use to see tier 9 matches. Around that time I had the nA and had to free xp my way through that tank.

>For example the a-20 and the 38nA

>38nA <--------i think its more worse than the a-20

Saxton_Hale #6 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 06:59

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12813 battles
  • 146
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
Last game I shot at a Cromwell who wasn't even moving that was about 200m from my position. Fully aimed in I missed three times before I finally hit him. The RoF is so bad, after I killed the Cromwell an Su-122-44 had enough time to get shot by me, I tried to run he tracked me, then he had time to reload before I could repair my tracks OR reload and kill me. Every day I use the ARL V39 it just adds losses. I'm extremely tempted to blow my 77k free XP and just get the AC Mle '46. I like to avoid this though because I use my free XP sparingly and usually on modules on tanks that really need them (IS-3's BL9 for example).

I've used the 38nA and A-20. A-20 was ok, not great but it got by ok. 38nA I really didn't use much. I was a noob when I had it and had been using all tier 5 tanks and when I tried using it I disliked it so much I just free XP'ed to the Pz IV. Nowadays, I would've just grinded it out. Very few tanks do I just free XP and skip completely. Tanks like the Lee are much better than the ARL given their tier. The Lee is deadly as a top tank, and it's still rather adequate in a tier 5 match as well as a 6 if you play it correctly. I'm of the nature that most tanks are decent, but some require a very niche way of playing. The ARL V39 is just flat out bad. There's no niche to playing it other than just cowering behind everything and everyone and hoping you can hit anything. The 105 deserves to have a RoF of something like 7.5 and the 90mm can maintain a slower RoF but this tank seriously needs a buff to aim times or gun traverse range. 14 degrees is just pitiful.

weesh #7 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 07:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 9500 battles
  • 2,202
  • [KIMBO] KIMBO
  • Member since:
    09-11-2012
Sounds miserable.
Congrats on doing better than 50% in it.
What was your damage per game?

W4RM0NG3R #8 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 07:02

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6350 battles
  • 379
  • [HARMD] HARMD
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012
So you understand my pain with the Somua SAu-40. That makes me feel better, thank you. xD

+1'd.

Also, I enjoyed using the A-20. Was a pretty decent light tank. And the 38NA? Eh, not so much, but had a fairly decent last researched gun.

Edited by W4RM0NG3R, Jan 16 2013 - 07:04.


Saxton_Hale #9 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 07:07

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12813 battles
  • 146
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
The SAu-40 wasn't that bad, but I know most people don't like it. I didn't use the derp on it, I forget the one but the gun just before it that's around 100 pen. You had to know when to expose yourself but I found the tank to be a kinda fun little thing.

View Postweesh, on Jan 16 2013 - 07:01, said:

Sounds miserable.
Congrats on doing better than 50% in it.
What was your damage per game?
On which tank? I'm still grinding the ARL V39 if you're referring to that. I have so little sanity left purely because of this tank. I'm grinding British heavies, I actually liked the Churchill I and VII - the BP seems good to me too but it's had an absolutely horrible losing streak since I've bought it. I have no idea what is up with the teams lately, but if this keeps up I'm going to have to sit out. My win rate is dropping, and I'm having no fun playing when every game is a loss no matter what XVM says nor what the team actually does.

Edited by Saxton_Hale, Jan 16 2013 - 07:08.


weesh #10 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 07:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 9500 battles
  • 2,202
  • [KIMBO] KIMBO
  • Member since:
    09-11-2012

View PostSaxton_Hale, on Jan 16 2013 - 07:07, said:

On which tank? I'm still grinding the ARL V39 if you're referring to that. I have so little sanity left purely because of this tank.
I am curious about the ARL V39 stats since you have managed to stay above 50%

Saxton_Hale #11 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 07:32

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12813 battles
  • 146
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
Oh the ARL V39, it'd well below 50% now because of the losses I've had in the past two days. Very unimpressive at 31 battles, 14 wins 17 losses 12 survived, 36 destroyed, 6 most killed, 73% hit ratio (No clue how it feels like 50%), 326 avg XP a battle. Very bad stats, but I just can't do much with the ARL.

Another thing, why does it look so much like WG wanted no one to get French TDs? The XP costs are way higher than say the T25 AT, which is 45k XP to the AC Mle's 58k. Also, the Jackson has a 1.7 aim time with a decent reload time gun, good armor, and a turret. If that's in the game and ok (I think it's great) why can't the ARL V39 get a RoF buff and an aim time buff? I can't see how people would cry ARL V39 is OP and you see the Jackson gets a turret, fast aim time, decent accuracy, and armor. There's just no reason the ARL should be this bad, and it's really just balancing issues I think. The platform isn't good, but the guns are even worse.

W4RM0NG3R #12 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 07:40

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6350 battles
  • 379
  • [HARMD] HARMD
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012
May I ask what your tips are concerning the Somua SAu-40? Because my WR for it is terribad to an absurd level. I recently bought and equipped the 105mm for it and I can finally do some respectable damage at-distance, but still seem to have trouble.

Perhaps it's my position picking, or hanging close to the Heavs isn't the best idea. But if you have any advice for this below 2K battles N00b. I'd appreciate it.

Saxton_Hale #13 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 07:46

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12813 battles
  • 146
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
I don't know that I'm really great at giving advice, because my playstyle is wildly dynamic based on team make up and the map. It's been awhile since I used the SAu so I don't remember so well. The thing is to try and engage targets that are fighting someone else. I think it has decent gun depression if I recall so it can sort of hull down a bit (The ARL cannot do this hardly at all). It's hard to describe to me though, because the ARL sounds like the SAu - weak but can only engage targets if they're busy. But the SAu has decent accuracy, RoF, and penetration to do well against the tanks it faces so I guess that is where it shines over the ARL V39. I had a 53% win rate in the SAu, which is about average for me. Just a thoughtful consideration, don't engage enemy tanks until you're sure you can outlast their return fire - if they do fire back. Distracted enemies many times ignore the SAu, this is where you can take advantage of that. The sides and backs of KV-1's are particularly juicy to the SAu, and they rarely expect you're the tank doing the damage to them. Just always have an escape plan if they turn their attention to you. Many people engage but have no where to run if the enemy engages back and that's the biggest fatal error with TDs. One shot and then running off and hiding is better than sitting there getting 3 shots off but dying in the process. Many times they won't chase after you, and this all goes with working with your team (Yes, it's hard in public matches but it generally works out ok I find).

W4RM0NG3R #14 Posted Jan 16 2013 - 07:56

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6350 battles
  • 379
  • [HARMD] HARMD
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012
Well I normally do follow that mentality of engagement due to the SAu's armor being more paper than anything, like the T-28. But all in all, thanks a bunch for the additional advice, Sax.

Necrophore #15 Posted Jan 18 2013 - 22:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 25956 battles
  • 2,437
  • [LONER] LONER
  • Member since:
    02-19-2012
I was starting to like the ARL (57%), probably because anything with those goofy over-the-roof tracks seems to bring me luck (58% on BDR, 60% on B2). The only frustrating parts were the limited gun deflection and it's habit of being thrown into tier 8 battles against KV-5's.

On the other hand, I could not do anything to get the S-40 to work (21%). I've been meaning to buy it back one of these days and see if I can get that black mark off my chart (especially now that I can run spreme rounds through if I get really desperate).

Edited by Necrophore, Jan 18 2013 - 22:04.


timwahoo #16 Posted Jan 19 2013 - 07:42

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11207 battles
  • 1,587
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011

View Posteasy8tanker, on Jan 16 2013 - 06:57, said:

There have been worst tanks.

For example the A-20 and the 38nA. Those tier 4 lights use to see tier 9 matches. Around that time I had the nA and had to free xp my way through that tank.
38 has more camo than any other german, that has to mean something. Infact if you return to it after youve learnt a bit about the game an have a decent crew with 3+ perks the 38 can be brilliant. Admittedly it is tough for a beginner for sure

This TD has no good attributes

The OP was able to rant about it for paragraphs without even mentioning the useless turret on top

Friendorpho #17 Posted Jan 19 2013 - 08:30

    Captain

  • Players
  • 18268 battles
  • 1,057
  • [RTR] RTR
  • Member since:
    04-10-2011

View Posttimwahoo, on Jan 19 2013 - 07:42, said:

This TD has no good attributes

Above average penetration is one good attribute.

However I personally believe that you must suffer through these low tier tanks in order to earn the right to progress to the AC MLEs and AMX50Fs. Trust me, it is worth the suffering.

rayman49 #18 Posted Jan 19 2013 - 20:59

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 9543 battles
  • 373
  • [U_P_A] U_P_A
  • Member since:
    03-24-2011
My recommendation, as I'm am currently doing, make sure you get a nice crew early on before grinding the line, either play the tier 2 or 3 a shit ton until you get some good camo and sixth sense, this can often relieve stress from tough grinds. I'm currently doing it myself

timwahoo #19 Posted Jan 20 2013 - 07:07

    Captain

  • Players
  • 11207 battles
  • 1,587
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011

View Postrayman49, on Jan 19 2013 - 20:59, said:

My recommendation, as I'm am currently doing, make sure you get a nice crew early on before grinding the line, either play the tier 2 or 3 a shit ton until you get some good camo and sixth sense, this can often relieve stress from tough grinds. I'm currently doing it myself
Yes that is good advice

Tzimiskes #20 Posted Jan 20 2013 - 17:10

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 3145 battles
  • 28
  • Member since:
    12-24-2012
I love the V39, but I acknowledge it was a massive step down from the S-35 CA at first.  At 211 battles I'm now only matching my S-35's survival record.  I was at 51% wins for a bit, but I've dipped below out of carelessness.

It is a slug until you get the second engine, for which you need the second suspension (you need it for anything) and that, along with being stuck with the SAu-40's crap gun for a while, was very discouraging at first.  However with 4/5 of my crew at 100% and 77% camo and my radioman at 98%, I've found myself to be getting quite stealthy and nimble.  With the low traverse, you absolutely have to support from a distance or you will get flanked and die.  That was different from the S-35, which I could creep up to someone and peek around a corner while remaining mostly behind cover.

I usually mount the 105 mm.  The DCA 45 AC is nice when I get MMed against the higher tiers, but it's overkill on penetration while not killing enough when I'm at the top or middle.  I have binoculars, vents, and a rammer.

It's certainly not an overwhelming death machine, but that's what appeals to it for me.  It's quite a challenge now fully-upgraded and competently crewed and that's what I like.