echo9835

I few thoughts on the tank, the 4-1 looks badass, the unload speed is really bad, 37% camouflage is quite solid, and the penetration is crazy good. It does have some weaknesses however as 380 base view range is pretty meh and the tanks agility is not amazing. We have not seen this thing's soft stats at all, so it could have abysmal ground resistances or .5 turret traverse dispersion or some shit like that. We also have not seen its armor profile, so 120 on the turret could be meaningless if it is only in 1 section, sort of like the Tiger P's hull armor is meaningless. Over all the Bobject 4-1 looks like a direct competitor to the Batchat 25 at tier 10. It sacrifices view range, HP, unload speed, and 1 shell to gain penetration on its standard shells and much better aimtime. Oh and also the ability to regularly fuck tier 7s. If I were to bring the tank more in line with other tier 9s, I would cut the alpha to 360, the time between shots to 3.3 seconds, reduced the standard and premium pen, both by around 30, and make the accuracy something like .35 as a start. I would probably also increase the aimtime by .4 seconds or so. Maybe more. After that a round of rentals to randos on the live server for 48 hours because the supertest does not test anything.

Lies. Slander. Heresy. Churchill Game Carrier.

I want Komarin back because I know it would piss off everyone, but maybe I am just a chaotic neutral at heart. I do miss Swamp, Windstorm, Sacred Valley, and South Coast. I feel that Wargaming's map department hit rock bottom with Minsk and they could not make a worse map if they tried. So why not bring back imbalanced maps? How could it possibly get any worse than Minsk?

Why isn't it Soviet, anything this good should be Soviet.

Resident scrub here. PM me if you don't mid playing with a light blue player. Best of luck out there. My in-game name is the same as my forum name.

Oh come on now, lets not bring silly little things like facts into this. I compared it to fast(ish) tanks. I could have compared it to the TOG II. :p

Oh totally, the gun needs to be fully aimed and the armor is not very good at all. I've found that playing it as a fat ass TD instead of a heavy lets you damage farm tier 5 scrubs like nothing else. Simple camouflage abuse and patience makes this thing absolutely ridiculous. It is not a stand up brawler like a T-150 or KV-85, but it makes a monstrous second line support tank.

There is really no comparing this tank to any other tank at tier 6. The 105, if it was any better, would be overpowered. On the ARL it is simply serviceable. With 223 base pen, 330 alpha damage, and a base RoF of 5.6 it has everyone else beat on pen, and almost everyone else beat on damage. The gun has in class dispersion values that compare almost favorably to the 122 on the KV-85, another gun that shoots stuff. It has armor that bounces almost anything a tier 4 can throw at it, as long as they don't shoot the turret, and it can actually sidescrape (no joke here it can). In the mobility department the ARL clearly outpaces other moving tanks like the O-I and Churchill VII. With a blistering top speed of 37 kph and 16 power to weight it outpaces tanks carefully selected for being slow. Truly a powerhouse of tier 6, only the venerable Churchill game carrier can compete with this stale baguette shooting monster. Also why the hell does this thing get a bullshit gun? Like what the actual fuck Wargaming? It just deletes tier 4s and 5s. I might have to keep this tank for "3 marking".

yeah but why? Did arty really need another re-balancing? I know it is broken, but this won't change how most players feel when the 3 artillery fountain of shit starts spraying them. From the clicker scum's perspective the choice is meaningless. The premium, no stun HE is the clear winner here unless you need stuns for missions. The AP is so weak in comparison to the Premium HE that it is almost entirely worthless. HE should (in theory) do more damage than the AP to lightly or moderately armored targets, and the penetration is not enough to contest a lot of heavies frontally with the generally poor accuracy of SPGs. That means that even in a shotgun situation, AP is not the ideal choice. against LTs, paper TDs, and most MTs, the AP does significantly less damage than HE and risks bouncing or disappearing into an the tracks. Against HTs and tough TDs, the HE might do less damage, but the heavy armor of those tanks means that AP risks bouncing.It is at best a soft removal of stun, so why not just remove stun? The changes in question don't really accomplish half of what Wargaming wants them to and don't address the other issues that artillery create ( insane crew damage, death of a thousand cuts, maps with no artillery cover whatsoever). So yeah, I am a bit confused as to why Wargaming did this in the first place.

they plan on lowering the total stun time too. I'm not complaining, I am just confused.

This is sort of removing stun mechanics from the game. Who the hell would try to stun over more damage?

Binoculars, a gun rammer, and GLD is probably better. Hell, run optics instead of a GLD for some BS spotting memes. I have found that the camouflage net is pretty underwhelming unless it is on something optimized for passivity. Like an E-100 protecting arty or a Manty. The times where a camo net is useful appear far less often at higher tiers and the aimtime or on the move view range will probably save your life more often than passive camo bonuses.