Jump to content


FV201 needs buffs.

FV201

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

Vampire_Izumi #1 Posted 14 March 2019 - 07:01 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 25706 battles
  • 2,971
  • [LEONI]
  • Member since:
    12-06-2015

i see nothing going for this tank.

 

Armor and Gun Comparison to Black Prince and Firefly

compared to the Black Prince it's tier 7 TT counterpart the Black Prince has better:

  • Armor:

Turret: the Black Prince has a WAY stronger turret than the FV201. 

Hull Armor: the Black Prince's Hull Armor is as Thick as the FV201's turret armor, but FV201 has a large elevated Machinegun port and WAY thinner hull armor.

Turret: Black Prince: 240/95/102 VS FV201: 152/89/89

Hull:    Black Prince: 152/95/51   VS FV201:  76/51/38 

 

  • Gun:

Wile both tanks have the same Damage, Rate of Fire and Aim time, the Black prince has Better Accuracy and penetration. for some reason the FV201's pen is still the same as the FireFly, which is a whole tier lower.

Tank Name:           Black Prince:                     FV201                       Firefly

Rate of Fire:               13.95                             13.95                        12.77

Penetration:          200/244/44                     171/239/38               171/239/38

Damage:              150/150/190                   150/150/190             150/150/190

Aim Time:                   2.30s                             2.30s                          2.10s

Accuracy:                    0.34                               0.35                           0.38

 

Mobility:

now you may think this is where it will make up for all of it's other poor stats... compared to the Black Prince, yes it is MUCH faster with a little under double it's top speed. but the Mobility overall does not make up for the poor armor and lackluster gun.

FV201:

Top Forward Speed: 36kph (Black Prince: 20kph)

Top Reverse Speed: 16kph (Black Prince: 12kph)

Power To Weight Ratio: 14.32hpt (Black Prince:12hpt)

Hull Traverse: 30deg/s (Black Prince: 20deg/s)

Turret Traverse: 36deg/s (Black Prince: 30deg/s)

Terrain Resistance: 1.2 / 1.4 / 2.1 (Black Prince 1.2 / 1.4 / 2.3)

 

Note: FV201 does not have PMM and has to meet tier 9.

Note2: the tank also has worse Concealment compared to the Black Prince. (Black Prince Concealment Rating: 20, FV201 Concealment Rating: 18)

 

Overall thought:

this tank has no upsides compared to the Black Prince except that it is a Premium tank and that it can move faster. so it basically gives up armor and pen/accuracy for marginally better mobility and Premium Benefits. it is bad enough that this has to meet tier 8 with no armor and basically a slightly better version of the Firefly's gun, BUT it also has to meet tier 9. 

 

is it currently worth getting? No, just get a Boilermaker or a British Bulldog. they may be 1 tier lower but they are Fantastic tanks.

does it need a buff? Badly.

 

Suggested Buff:

i recommend buffing the pen to 200 and  give it the same turret thickness as the Centurion I or Caernarvon's upgraded Turrets (254/89/89)

OR

give it PMM and the 200 pen buff.

 

these 2 are easy buffs that could make this tank Competitive and Relevant in my opinion, because atm in my opinion it has nothing going for it and is a huge waste of 4,950 gold due to being bad at everything.

 

(sarry for the huge post, just wanted to say that this tank needs some sort of help.)


Edited by greenteam117, 14 March 2019 - 07:06 PM.

     A lie about a lie turns inside out upon itself. - Magane chikujoin   

Marks of Excellence:


Albapfalzd3 #2 Posted 14 March 2019 - 07:54 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 21390 battles
  • 2,646
  • Member since:
    04-07-2017

Preaching to the choir, preaching to the choir. 

 

Roy



ACS138 #3 Posted 14 March 2019 - 09:01 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 19310 battles
  • 646
  • Member since:
    10-25-2014

It's fine as is: a Premium tank that is slightly worse than TT counterparts. Also, tank was buffed recently: accuracy for sure, can't recall what else. Anecdotally, I have a higher winrate in that tank that my overall average by a fair (not huge) margin, of over 5% (averaging both the regular and Black editions). Majority of those stats were before it was buffed.

 

Maybe that tank just clicks for me, I dunno. I do have fun most games I play in it. But more importantly it feels to me it is exactly what Premium tanks should be.


Edited by ACS138, 14 March 2019 - 09:01 PM.

"Be moderate in your temper, and unyielding in your principles. Or change your mind and yell about it"

Wroclaw #4 Posted 15 March 2019 - 09:26 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 54761 battles
  • 4,608
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View PostACS138, on 14 March 2019 - 09:01 PM, said:

It's fine as is: a Premium tank that is slightly worse than TT counterparts. But more importantly it feels to me it is exactly what Premium tanks should be.

 

that attitude can go take a flying leap. no-one wants premiums so over-performing that they dominate the normal free versions. but the idea Premiums need to under-perform in order to be acceptable is garbage also.

 

this tank is "fine" - are you serious ? . . . . . . . its weak everywhere & it carries a pea-shooter. its the joke of tier 7 heavys.

 

if they are going to leave it as is, then at a minimum it should get PMM.

 

if its going to continue to see tier 9 then it needs the BP gun stats & a buffed turret. at a minimum.


Edited by Wroclaw, 15 March 2019 - 09:28 PM.


Koncorde #5 Posted 15 March 2019 - 11:10 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 24403 battles
  • 1,746
  • Member since:
    06-08-2014
I felt bad earlier crushing one in my T26E5. I could see him trying, and he had full desert camo on and everything which made me feel all the worse when he lasted about 18 seconds as I penned him with auto aim.

Blossomy_Hippo #6 Posted 15 March 2019 - 11:21 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7471 battles
  • 501
  • [ALPI]
  • Member since:
    12-10-2015
A tier 7 with a Cent. III turret? NOPE!

*PS4 Stats*

 

 

 


Vampire_Izumi #7 Posted 15 March 2019 - 11:52 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 25706 battles
  • 2,971
  • [LEONI]
  • Member since:
    12-06-2015

View PostACS138, on 15 March 2019 - 06:01 AM, said:

It's fine as is: a Premium tank that is slightly worse than TT counterparts. Also, tank was buffed recently: accuracy for sure, can't recall what else. Anecdotally, I have a higher winrate in that tank that my overall average by a fair (not huge) margin, of over 5% (averaging both the regular and Black editions). Majority of those stats were before it was buffed.

 

Maybe that tank just clicks for me, I dunno. I do have fun most games I play in it. But more importantly it feels to me it is exactly what Premium tanks should be.

 

if this is "Slightly worse" to you, then wow, i wonder what you consider Under powered. this tank literally has nothing going for it. most tier 7s are not even afraid of it and will bully you with no care and i mean ALL classes, light tanks, mediums, TDs and heavies see you as a EXP Pinata. 

this tank has no armor, poor mobility, poor penetration, poor shell damage, poor accuracy (in terms of shell damage) and sees tier 9.... this tank would have troubles with most tier 8 and 9 medium tanks due to no pen, a pea shooter and  for the fact that it can be penned EVERYWHERE. this tank also can not flank anything due to it having awful mobility...


Edited by greenteam117, 15 March 2019 - 11:56 PM.

     A lie about a lie turns inside out upon itself. - Magane chikujoin   

Marks of Excellence:


Koncorde #8 Posted 16 March 2019 - 12:36 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 24403 battles
  • 1,746
  • Member since:
    06-08-2014

View PostBlossomy_Hippo, on 15 March 2019 - 11:21 PM, said:

A tier 7 with a Cent. III turret? NOPE!

 

It wishes it had the Cent 3 turret, which is now exceptional since the buff.

 

The FV201 is mounted with some hybrid Cent 1/2 turret. I am not sure what turret it actually had historically, but if it had the tier 8 turret it would become a tough nut to crack when hull down and give it time to peak and poke with the pea-shooter.



Metalrodent #9 Posted 16 March 2019 - 12:59 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 10186 battles
  • 14,430
  • [KMD]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

View PostKoncorde, on 16 March 2019 - 12:36 AM, said:

 

It wishes it had the Cent 3 turret, which is now exceptional since the buff.

 

The FV201 is mounted with some hybrid Cent 1/2 turret. I am not sure what turret it actually had historically, but if it had the tier 8 turret it would become a tough nut to crack when hull down and give it time to peak and poke with the pea-shooter.

 

The Centurion turret in the game (bar the stock Cent 1 turret) on all the related vehicles is from the Mk 2 Cent, and thus they should all be the same thickness. However WG likes to add random Mk numbers to turrets and such so that they can change the stats and make you regrind them. The Cent Mk 8 (then 10 through 13) did introduce a new turret, and could probably be worked into a decent tier X.

 

But anyway, I haven't played the game since the 201 got it's small buff, but from previous experience the armour buff would be very helpful, as a slow ridge poker with no chance of safely ridge poking is somewhat redundant.


<a data-cke-saved-href='http://i.imgur.com/sCeAbYa.gif' href='http://i.imgur.com/sCeAbYa.gif' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/sCeAbYa.gif</a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s...sCeAbYa.gif</a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s...bYa.gif</a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s...gif</a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'>http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>

There’s a mask upon my face
I can’t live without
So you won’t recognize me
When I am in the crowd


Homicide810 #10 Posted 20 March 2019 - 06:45 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16989 battles
  • 63
  • [TRIK]
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013
The only thing I would realistically ask for is to have the same gun that shoots the same ammo on two different tier 7 British heavy takes have the same penetration. Accuracy aside even because that would have other factors affecting it in real life. The almost 30 extra penetration that the Black Prince gets is absolutely unwarranted and unexplainable. The same gun... the same ammo... should do the same penetration and damage. Please raise the penetration of the FV201 to match the 200mm of penetration that the Black Prince currently has. Why buff the underwhelming gun on one tank, but not the other? I don't disagree with the other requests for buffs. My main concern is the penetration though. Thank you. 

Koncorde #11 Posted 21 March 2019 - 09:33 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 24403 battles
  • 1,746
  • Member since:
    06-08-2014

View PostMetalrodent, on 16 March 2019 - 12:59 AM, said:

 

But anyway, I haven't played the game since the 201 got it's small buff, but from previous experience the armour buff would be very helpful, as a slow ridge poker with no chance of safely ridge poking is somewhat redundant.

 

The 201 didn't get the buff, which is the point of my comment.

 

And yes, I assumed you were using the in-game turret mark system rather than real marks. I always assumed the 201 probably had the original Cent 1 turret, but I have seen reference to an early cast Cent 2, in which case ideally WG should upgrade the 201's to match the same tier 8's.



Koncorde #12 Posted 21 March 2019 - 09:35 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 24403 battles
  • 1,746
  • Member since:
    06-08-2014

View PostHomicide810, on 20 March 2019 - 06:45 AM, said:

The only thing I would realistically ask for is to have the same gun that shoots the same ammo on two different tier 7 British heavy takes have the same penetration. Accuracy aside even because that would have other factors affecting it in real life. The almost 30 extra penetration that the Black Prince gets is absolutely unwarranted and unexplainable. The same gun... the same ammo... should do the same penetration and damage. Please raise the penetration of the FV201 to match the 200mm of penetration that the Black Prince currently has. Why buff the underwhelming gun on one tank, but not the other? I don't disagree with the other requests for buffs. My main concern is the penetration though. Thank you. 

 

We all raised the same question when the patch notes came out. The 17lb now has multiple different versions, all sporting different performance values, across 7 or 8 tanks in multiple classes.

 

To be fair, the US 90mm has the same issue (although not as pronounced).



PLK180W #13 Posted 21 March 2019 - 03:20 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 61 battles
  • 7,625
  • Member since:
    10-29-2014

View PostBlossomy_Hippo, on 15 March 2019 - 11:21 PM, said:

A tier 7 with a Cent. III turret? NOPE!

 

We have the Tiger 131 at tier VII which has a tier VIII turret, plus Hammer, T23E3, T-VI-100., they're all tier VII Premiums with tier VIII Turrets...

 


Through The Mud And Blood To The Green Fields Beyond

PLK180W #14 Posted 21 March 2019 - 03:34 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 61 battles
  • 7,625
  • Member since:
    10-29-2014

View PostKoncorde, on 16 March 2019 - 12:36 AM, said:

 

It wishes it had the Cent 3 turret, which is now exceptional since the buff.

 

The FV201 is mounted with some hybrid Cent 1/2 turret. I am not sure what turret it actually had historically, but if it had the tier 8 turret it would become a tough nut to crack when hull down and give it time to peak and poke with the pea-shooter.

 

Originally fitted with a Mk.II Centurion turret, it was also equipped with a 20-pdr during testing, though the guns penetration was deemed insufficient to deal with Soviet heavy tanks at the time.

 

Quite where the 17-pdr came from I have no idea, apart from that would have been the standard armament of a Mk.II Cent.


Through The Mud And Blood To The Green Fields Beyond

Koncorde #15 Posted 21 March 2019 - 04:51 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 24403 battles
  • 1,746
  • Member since:
    06-08-2014
That'd be nice. 20lb A barrel, Cent 2 turret. Nice alternate to the Black Prince.

Wroclaw #16 Posted 22 March 2019 - 02:22 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 54761 battles
  • 4,608
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

the 20lber would have to have reduced stats to suit tier 7.

 

but to keep it seeing tier 9 its needs the turret & the gun buffed in some way. its a joke of a heavy as is.

 

Koncorde, on 21 March 2019 - 09:33 AM, said:

 

The 201 didn't get the buff, which is the point of my comment.

 

 the accuracy used to be .39 if you can believe it.


Edited by Wroclaw, 22 March 2019 - 02:24 AM.


Homicide810 #17 Posted 22 March 2019 - 03:28 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16989 battles
  • 63
  • [TRIK]
  • Member since:
    08-20-2013

View PostKoncorde, on 21 March 2019 - 09:35 AM, said:

 

We all raised the same question when the patch notes came out. The 17lb now has multiple different versions, all sporting different performance values, across 7 or 8 tanks in multiple classes.

 

To be fair, the US 90mm has the same issue (although not as pronounced).

 

Yes, but my point that I specified is that it is the exact same gun model. Not a different variant of the 17 pounder. If the same tier tank has the same exact gun model then the penetration and damage should be the same. I know other people have said it. It's just frustrating and something that Wargaming needs to change.

Koncorde #18 Posted 22 March 2019 - 10:00 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 24403 battles
  • 1,746
  • Member since:
    06-08-2014
I don't disagree, I was making the point that it is widespread.

There are multiple instances of the same issue across a lot of tanks. The 17lb on the Achilles, Boilermaker TOG II, are the same (QQF MkVII) as the Black Prince apparently. While the AT8 has the AT variant, as does AT7 with different stats (well, just a reload difference), as does the AT15A and (worryingly) the AT15. The Challenger gets two 17lb variants, the top one being the same as the AT8. The performance of which is different based on the two different turret configurations (which don't match the TOG2 even though it has a Challenger turret).

There's then the Black Prince, which has a tier VIII souped up version of the gun, duplicated on the Caerny and Centurions with slightly different stats again (I think).

Same issue exists with the us M3 90mm on the Jackson and M6, T29, T20, T25A2, T25/2, Pershing.

The British A and B barrel 20lb's also have different stats, as do the American 75mm and German 76mm etc.  

In short, WOT's internal consistency sucks.

greatblondino #19 Posted 15 April 2019 - 07:32 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19657 battles
  • 1,135
  • Member since:
    01-22-2016
this tank needs a preferential level of fights like 131 up to 8 lvl, in fights on 9 lvl it is completely useless. characteristics can not be changed)





Also tagged with FV201

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users