Jump to content


New Firefly completion line fix remake. AC4 for tier 7 wih 600HP engine.


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

ArcticTankHunter #1 Posted Aug 31 2018 - 22:30

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 14735 battles
  • 575
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

So I'm scrapping my old thread. No need to move Firefly up a tier. Now lets talk about the new tanks. If you have ideas on new tanks that should be added to complete firefly line feel free to link me. I'll add it so Devs can see.

 

AC 4 really need to be added as tier 7. The premuim one doesn't count because its called AC4 exp with a weaker engine. I'm pretty sure WG is thinking about it already.

 

The line will be finished with these tanks added.

Tier 7: AC4 option between 17pdr and 25pdr which is perfect for tier 7 due to its top speed also.

AC4 also has 525hp, 510 and 600 hp engine design. We already have fake tanks in the game that aren't actually built. I can't see why the engines can't be added.

25pdr has AP ammunition(they had AP and APBC rounds).

 

Premium tier 6/7: AC3 Thunderbolt with its 25pdr derp gun. 25pdr is close to an 88m which is actually an 87.6mm gun. We have panther 8.8 as tier 8 so one tier lower wouldn't be much a problem.

Tier 8: Fv4201/T95 90mm There are multiple guns or turret for this tank to have its own research even though we have a premuim one with a worst turret than XM60.

For those complaining about already having premuim tank click the link. I prefer all those turrets and guns to be a research tree than having multiple T95/Fv4201 as premuim tanks. It is stupid, one premuim is enough. Making a non-premium line is possible without having to make them all premuim tanks there are simply way too many versions. So don't you dare complain about it being premuim tank. We have the same premuim tanks as non-premuim already like Cromwell B or Rudy.

Tier 9: Vickers MBT Mk1

Tier 10: Centurion AVRE(165mm Centurtion Derp gun) or Centurion MK12/13 or T95 Chieftain 120mm. The T96 Study F is Canadian version and should be on Canadian line.

 

The premuim T95/Cheiftain is using 90mm gun.

 

Proposal tanks for cross research:

Tier 6 to Comet and AC4 or Challenger line(Maybe Cromwell could lead to Challenger as it would be a more historical research) is Centaur tank. Like how we have Churchill GC or Kv-13.

Tier 5 between the Tier 5 Crusader and and Tier 4 Valentine will be Sherman 5 to tier 6 Firefly and Cromwell.

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by ArcticTankHunter, Sep 01 2018 - 20:11.


CynicalDutchie #2 Posted Aug 31 2018 - 22:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 41117 battles
  • 3,943
  • [CYNIC] CYNIC
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011
Last thing we need is more derp guns.

RickPatton #3 Posted Aug 31 2018 - 22:40

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 33510 battles
  • 1,302
  • [ANV] ANV
  • Member since:
    03-13-2014
:bush:

ArcticTankHunter #4 Posted Aug 31 2018 - 22:47

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 14735 battles
  • 575
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

View PostCynicalDutchie, on Aug 31 2018 - 22:32, said:

Last thing we need is more derp guns.

 

British derp guns are balanced. They are smaller guns compare to Russian or Japanese derp guns.

DVK9 #5 Posted Aug 31 2018 - 23:11

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 25415 battles
  • 652
  • [-TX-] -TX-
  • Member since:
    05-15-2013

The AC line sucked rocks. With the promise of speed and a "good" gun it looked like a good purchase. 

Sadly I was suckered by WG into paying for a decrepit POS.

Did I learn, sadly no the AC7 also turned out to be a POS.

Most Prem tanks are underpowered, undergunned or lack armor.

Not even a chance to get a better engine or gun.

 

If it is a prem tank I aint buying. Supposed to be premium for that teir, to me that means it is top gun, wrong.

 



ArcticTankHunter #6 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 03:18

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 14735 battles
  • 575
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

View PostDVK9, on Aug 31 2018 - 23:11, said:

The AC line sucked rocks. With the promise of speed and a "good" gun it looked like a good purchase. 

Sadly I was suckered by WG into paying for a decrepit POS.

Did I learn, sadly no the AC7 also turned out to be a POS.

Most Prem tanks are underpowered, undergunned or lack armor.

Not even a chance to get a better engine or gun.

 

If it is a prem tank I aint buying. Supposed to be premium for that teir, to me that means it is top gun, wrong.

 

 

Sadly though if they give it the speed. It will be like Cromwell with a 17pdr. If anything the 390 hp engine should be a tier 7 tank. The tank also uses HVSS tracks. Just like the E8 during Korean war. That is on the Canadian line suggestion. The tank should have accelerated faster first place.

_Gungrave_ #7 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 03:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 43745 battles
  • 16,299
  • [-SRP-] -SRP-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostArcticTankHunter, on Aug 31 2018 - 22:47, said:

 

British derp guns are balanced. They are smaller guns compare to Russian or Japanese derp guns.

 

Its not a matter of them being balanced its just a simple fact of not needing more derp guns.

Firemoth #8 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 09:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 37466 battles
  • 4,079
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

the thing here is that you list good top speed, but forget that HP/Ton is terrible. you might be correct that the AC4xp has a bad engine, but its only 11.6hp/ton. your own source of wiki says the AC4 is rocking a 397hp engine, pushing the total to a whopping 13.2hp/ton. thats basically in the same ballpark as a chi-ri when it accelerates

 

combine this with how criminally underarmoured the AC is (64mm frontal, which is worse than a chi ri), and a 25pdr derpgun as an option (90mm HE is going to be worse than the 105 HE on a sherman) leaves me wondering just what exactly does this tank have going for it?

 

17pdr at tier 7 is bad, see challenger before buffs.


Edited by Firemoth, Sep 01 2018 - 09:53.


Duqe #9 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 10:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 26841 battles
  • 8,520
  • [BE_ER] BE_ER
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View PostDVK9, on Aug 31 2018 - 23:11, said:

The AC line sucked rocks. With the promise of speed and a "good" gun it looked like a good purchase. 

Sadly I was suckered by WG into paying for a decrepit POS.

Did I learn, sadly no the AC7 also turned out to be a POS.

Most Prem tanks are underpowered, undergunned or lack armor.

Not even a chance to get a better engine or gun.

 

If it is a prem tank I aint buying. Supposed to be premium for that teir, to me that means it is top gun, wrong.

 

 

I mean, they're pretty fast when you compare them to a Matilda.

ArcticTankHunter #10 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 17:33

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 14735 battles
  • 575
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

View PostFiremoth, on Sep 01 2018 - 09:53, said:

the thing here is that you list good top speed, but forget that HP/Ton is terrible. you might be correct that the AC4xp has a bad engine, but its only 11.6hp/ton. your own source of wiki says the AC4 is rocking a 397hp engine, pushing the total to a whopping 13.2hp/ton. thats basically in the same ballpark as a chi-ri when it accelerates

 

combine this with how criminally underarmoured the AC is (64mm frontal, which is worse than a chi ri), and a 25pdr derpgun as an option (90mm HE is going to be worse than the 105 HE on a sherman) leaves me wondering just what exactly does this tank have going for it?

 

17pdr at tier 7 is bad, see challenger before buffs.

 

No it is not bad. Challenger is bad becuase it isn't as fast and it has less camo due to height. It was also A TD with not enough pen as a TD . TD have mor penetration per tier. I know you'll complain about the engine. AC4 was planning to have a 510-600 hp engine. So it would be faster than Comet. 17 pdr isn't actually bad for a medium tank. If anything the 77mm is bad on Comet side even then Chi Ri has a much worst gun the 75mm(They should give Chi Ri its 88mm gun.

 

Plus you do know for a fact the Challenger isn't as fast or agile compare to the AC4/other mediums at tier 7. The 17pdr will fire much faster than BP or Firefly. Now tell me what tier 7 tank should fit in Firefly line because I can't think of any other tank. AC4 with 600 HP engine and a higher penetration gun than Comet will make Comet a total joke. Plus it would go 60kph like the premuim tank. It is very suitable as tier 7 compare to all the other fast tier 7 mediums.

 

25pdr they removed the AP shells from Artillery. 25pdr has AP shells that can be premuim ammo.


Edited by ArcticTankHunter, Sep 01 2018 - 17:48.


_Bagheera_ #11 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 17:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 35355 battles
  • 5,560
  • [ICON-] ICON-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

how many of these threads are you gonna make?

 

It was a bad idea in the other thread and its a bad idea here. You are one of the few if any people complaining about that line of tanks. I had zero issues with my firefly and will have few issues with the challenger when I get it. 

 

Strictly a YOU problem. 



Flarvin #12 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 18:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 53204 battles
  • 14,715
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Post_Gungrave_, on Aug 31 2018 - 21:41, said:

Its not a matter of them being balanced its just a simple fact of not needing more derp guns.

 

So what is the perfect mystical ratio, for derp verse non-derp gun’s? 



ArcticTankHunter #13 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 18:30

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 14735 battles
  • 575
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

View Post_Bagheera_, on Sep 01 2018 - 17:59, said:

how many of these threads are you gonna make?

 

It was a bad idea in the other thread and its a bad idea here. You are one of the few if any people complaining about that line of tanks. I had zero issues with my firefly and will have few issues with the challenger when I get it. 

 

Strictly a YOU problem. 

 

Read the thread properly or GTFO. You can't compare TDs with Mediums due to MM system.


Edited by ArcticTankHunter, Sep 01 2018 - 18:32.


Flarvin #14 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 18:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 53204 battles
  • 14,715
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostArcticTankHunter, on Sep 01 2018 - 12:30, said:

You can't compare TDs with Mediums due to MM system.

 

What? 



_Gungrave_ #15 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 19:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 43745 battles
  • 16,299
  • [-SRP-] -SRP-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostFlarvin, on Sep 01 2018 - 18:26, said:

 

So what is the perfect mystical ratio, for derp verse non-derp gun’s? 

 

Less is better because we don't need a lot of them.

Flarvin #16 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 19:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 53204 battles
  • 14,715
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Post_Gungrave_, on Sep 01 2018 - 13:04, said:

Less is better because we don't need a lot of them.

 

So it is just a single person’s opinion based ratio. 

 

Far from being the community consensus the ‘we’ is trying to convey. Cool. lol

 

 



_Gungrave_ #17 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 19:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 43745 battles
  • 16,299
  • [-SRP-] -SRP-
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostFlarvin, on Sep 01 2018 - 19:20, said:

So it is just a single person’s opinion based ratio. 

 

Far from being the community consensus the ‘we’ is trying to convey. Cool. lol

 

More derps just dumbs down the gameplay even further when mid tiers already have enough derps. You're so concerned with trying to ridicule me or use sarcasm that you're blind to the concept of game balance.



Flarvin #18 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 19:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 53204 battles
  • 14,715
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Post_Gungrave_, on Sep 01 2018 - 13:37, said:

More derps just dumbs down the gameplay even further when mid tiers already have enough derps. You're so concerned with trying to ridicule me or use sarcasm that you're blind to the concept of game balance.

 

More opinions do not make one’s original opinion fact. 

 

All I see is you posting opinions, and acting like they are fact. 

 

Take it however you want. 



ArcticTankHunter #19 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 19:56

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 14735 battles
  • 575
  • [OSU-V] OSU-V
  • Member since:
    05-22-2014

View PostFlarvin, on Sep 01 2018 - 18:33, said:

 

What? 

 

That is a fact. The reason why Challenger sucked is because MM is trying to balance the vehicle classes. Challenger 17pdr didn't have enough penetration or high alpha as a TD at tier 7 until the 32pdr was added(heck it was one of the lowest penetration tier 7 TD ever). Compare to other TDs it gave the team slight disadvantage because Challenger didn't have the penetration and damage per shot as a TD to help support against rushers.  Neither was Challenger fast especially that turret traverse or armored like the AT15A. The only tank comparable to Challenger was the E25, but the has prefer MM and way better camo.

 

But, the AC4 will be matched up with other tier 7 mediums like Comet, Chi ri or Leo who has less penetration, heck the only meduim tier 7 that has more penetration than the 17 pdr is Panther, Chinese T-34-1 and the T34/100 making it the 4th highest pen as tier 7 tank. This gives the team a bit more advantage against tier 8-9 vehicles. Plus the AC4 is lower profile and much faster than Challenger when it comes to stats as it should be like a fast medium tank.

 

As I said, AC4 at tier 7 is comparable to Comet and will do a better job than Comet. It is going to have better stats overall compare to the premuim Tier 6 AC4. The MM system has been doing this for a long time so you don't get heavies all on one side. Medium = Mediums, TD = TD and Heavies = Heavies most of the time.

 

Though I have been seeing some MM where one side gets LT the other doesn't, but only very small differences.


Edited by ArcticTankHunter, Sep 01 2018 - 20:06.


Flarvin #20 Posted Sep 01 2018 - 20:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 53204 battles
  • 14,715
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostArcticTankHunter, on Sep 01 2018 - 13:56, said:

 

That is a fact. The reason why Challenger sucked is because MM is trying to balance the vehicle classes. Challenger 17pdr didn't have enough penetration or high alpha as a TD at tier 7 until the 32pdr was added(heck it was one of the lowest penetration tier 7 TD ever). Compare to other TDs it gave the team slight disadvantage because Challenger didn't have the penetration and damage per shot as a TD to help support against rushers.  Neither was Challenger fast especially that turret traverse or armored like the AT15A. The only tank comparable to Challenger was the E25, but the has prefer MM and way better camo.

 

But, the AC4 will be matched up with other tier 7 mediums like Comet, Chi ri or Leo who has less penetration, heck the only meduim tier 7 that has more penetration than the 17 pdr is Panther, Chinese T-34-1 and the T34/100 making it the 4th highest pen as tier 7 tank. This gives the team a bit more advantage against tier 8-9 vehicles. Plus the AC4 is lower profile and much faster than Challenger when it comes to stats as it should be like a fast medium tank.

 

As I said, AC4 at tier 7 is comparable to Comet and will do a better job than Comet. It is going to have better stats overall compare to the premuim Tier 6 AC4. The MM system has been doing this for a long time so you don't get heavies all on one side. Medium = Mediums, TD = TD and Heavies = Heavies most of the time.

 

Though I have been seeing some MM where one side gets LT the other doesn't, but only very small differences.

 

You are comparing it to an OP pref-mm prem tank? 

 

Cherry picking at its best. lol

 

Actual server performance data, shows the challenger out performing many other tier 7 tech tree TDs. With above average players overperforming in it, while below average players are underperforming. 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users