Jump to content


Aussie AC 1 Sentinel For Sale!


  • Please log in to reply
146 replies to this topic

Tirenious #41 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 20:22

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 22369 battles
  • 11
  • Member since:
    01-13-2016
PLEASE PUT THE QF 2pdr MK. X-B gun on this tank!!!!!! As it is currently it can hardly pen anything!

geeknik #42 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 20:25

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 18854 battles
  • 82
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View Postwerecat, on Mar 23 2016 - 10:49, said:

Notice how the sign in the picture . . . erm . . . "censors" a certain part of the tank

 

I thought that was the Wargaming art department telling us NO, don't buy this tank.

pflynhi #43 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 20:54

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 28700 battles
  • 221
  • Member since:
    08-13-2012
worst prem to date, for those of you that really want a tier 4 prem get the valentine 2, or wait for a B2 sale. They only ever see tier 4 MM unless you fail toon.

otacon237 #44 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 20:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 25222 battles
  • 4,370
  • Member since:
    01-08-2012
I mean...they have to buff it right? It can't really be that bad, right? It's worse than a cruiser 2pdr I mean fair enough it has a bit more pen but still. I was thinking of grabbing this after work but I think those $10 would be better served towards a copy of hitman

Willy_W_Wonka #45 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 21:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 47945 battles
  • 11,476
  • [_D_] _D_
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

View Postaethervox, on Mar 23 2016 - 11:36, said:

Who cares?

Another 'Lollipop for Suckers'.

 

 

 

At least it is cheap and not another pointless iPhone.

Lord_Van_Hammer #46 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 21:16

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 23817 battles
  • 60
  • Member since:
    10-19-2013
No Thanks, garbage.  Very least something with a **ck should have good penn.

4GOD #47 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 21:25

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33801 battles
  • 888
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013

View Postgpc_4, on Mar 23 2016 - 12:58, said:

Can we have the tier VI Sentinel with the 17pdr? That might actually sell.

 

What makes you think the AC4 won't have a 3.5 second aim time?

Edited by 4GOD, Mar 23 2016 - 21:25.


4GOD #48 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 21:32

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33801 battles
  • 888
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013

View PostTirenious, on Mar 23 2016 - 14:22, said:

PLEASE PUT THE QF 2pdr MK. X-B gun on this tank!!!!!! As it is currently it can hardly pen anything!

 

You can live with the X-A, since it has the same sort of pen that the PZ III does. But the aim time is ludicrous. it should be 1.9 sec exactly like the Matilda. Add the fact that the tank is slower than snail sex and it's just a joke. You've got a tank that you can't hit worth beans, can't maneuver at all and unless you're spamming gold probably isn't going to pen much. Don't even get me started on its anemic DPM.

 

Sad to say there are some players who bought it claiming in pubby matches that this is a great tank. Uh huh. Anything you say, tomato.


Edited by 4GOD, Mar 23 2016 - 21:38.


4GOD #49 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 21:35

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33801 battles
  • 888
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013

View Postotacon237, on Mar 23 2016 - 14:57, said:

I mean...they have to buff it right? It can't really be that bad, right? It's worse than a cruiser 2pdr I mean fair enough it has a bit more pen but still. I was thinking of grabbing this after work but I think those $10 would be better served towards a copy of hitman

 

If they were going to buff it, they should have done it in supertest. Seriously, Wargaming is nuts for trying to get people to buy this piece of junk. I keep telling them but they don[t seem to get it. There is ZERO point in having a premium tank at low tier other than for tourneys. No one in their right mind would take this take for that reason.

gpc_4 #50 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 21:36

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 43505 battles
  • 4,826
  • [DHO-X] DHO-X
  • Member since:
    07-06-2014

View Post4GOD, on Mar 23 2016 - 21:25, said:

 

What makes you think the AC4 won't have a 3.5 second aim time?

 

2.01 aim time.

http://www.tanks.gg/wot/tank/ac-4-exp



4GOD #51 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 21:54

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33801 battles
  • 888
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013
I'll wait until its out before looking up its final stats.

coat1 #52 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 21:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 20197 battles
  • 2,104
  • [GSKYO] GSKYO
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011
Wow WG adding more to it the dumpster fire and here I was thinking they couldn't have gotten any worse. Boy was I wrong.

coat1 #53 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 21:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 20197 battles
  • 2,104
  • [GSKYO] GSKYO
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

View Post4GOD, on Mar 23 2016 - 14:54, said:

I'll wait until its out before looking up its final stats.

 

It's out I know reading is hard.

4GOD #54 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 22:01

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33801 battles
  • 888
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013
The AC4 is not out, the AC I is. I know reading is hard.

olddirtynapkin #55 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 22:11

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 34173 battles
  • 115
  • Member since:
    07-06-2013


otacon237 #56 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 22:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 25222 battles
  • 4,370
  • Member since:
    01-08-2012

View Post4GOD, on Mar 23 2016 - 20:35, said:

 

If they were going to buff it, they should have done it in supertest. Seriously, Wargaming is nuts for trying to get people to buy this piece of junk. I keep telling them but they don[t seem to get it. There is ZERO point in having a premium tank at low tier other than for tourneys. No one in their right mind would take this take for that reason.

 

​well the same thing happened to fv4202 andkanonen they got buffed after enough ppl complained

 

​and there's plenty of point to it, crew training for example. I'm not going to put a firefly crew in 4202 when I have an action x crew un there so I put them in Matilda bp instead

 

but srsly even Matilda bp is better than this crap



Southern_Comfort #57 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 22:15

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 36170 battles
  • 760
  • Member since:
    07-14-2013
Wow, that aim time reminds me of the T49 top gun, at least the T49 has speed and does a lot of damage on a high roll. Sorry WG, going to pass on this thing!:D

4GOD #58 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 22:20

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33801 battles
  • 888
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013

View Postotacon237, on Mar 23 2016 - 16:13, said:

 

​well the same thing happened to fv4202 andkanonen they got buffed after enough ppl complained

 

​and there's plenty of point to it, crew training for example. I'm not going to put a firefly crew in 4202 when I have an action x crew un there so I put them in Matilda bp instead

 

but srsly even Matilda bp is better than this crap

 

Doesn't the AC I use FIVE crew, not four?

 



Liberty75 #59 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 22:39

    Captain

  • Players
  • 46678 battles
  • 1,588
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012
Needs a BIG buff to aim time, another 20 or so horsepower upgrade, and a slight increase to alpha to make it serviceable.

4GOD #60 Posted Mar 23 2016 - 22:40

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 33801 battles
  • 888
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013
I'd buff the damage to 55, the aim time to 1.9, and lower the terrain resistance to that of a Pz III. It still won't be zipppy, as 330 hp is the historical amount. But it needs to have some better mobility, thus lowering the terrain resistance.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users