Jump to content


SARL 42 and Renault G1R are crap


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

____prophet____ #21 Posted 05 June 2015 - 04:29 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27977 battles
  • 1,652
  • Member since:
    01-30-2015

The G1R did get me nice WN8 while doing the grind (for laughs, just see how much dmg the M4 is expected to do for same WN8...) And playing derp in tier 5 has its fun moments; the shell velocity really does help. But I won't be re-buying this tank unless they do some wonders to it. There's no reason whatsoever why anyone would play this instead of M4 or Pz.IVH, both are simply a world better.

 

As for sixth sense - I refuse to play any tank without it, the only exception being temporary tier 5 and 6 tanks that I only use to grind that skill for a new crew that will then move onto some tier 8+ machine. People have different play styles, Me personally, I will never ever give up 6th sense (unless they give us a similar, universal skill).


Edited by alisuorittaja, 05 June 2015 - 04:31 PM.


vonpaulus73 #22 Posted 27 June 2015 - 12:10 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 12085 battles
  • 8
  • [-FCR-] -FCR-
  • Member since:
    03-10-2013

I slogged through the French medium tech tree to try out the SARL42. What a disappointment when I got there. Even against its own tiers it's a poor tank. As mentioned, its just not fast or manouvrable enough, and the same goes for the G1R - even with top engine/tracks etc.

 

I would recommend that anyone wanting to keep their sanity intact should steer clear of these tanks until WG buff them up some. Otherwise theyre a complete waste of time.



cracktrackflak #23 Posted 30 August 2015 - 12:40 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15167 battles
  • 706
  • [ARRSE] ARRSE
  • Member since:
    11-05-2011

In a bit of role-reversal, I decided to grind the SARL42 and G1R in order to create a decent crew for a CDC (i.e., I didn't want to play the CDC until I had sixth sense).

 

Now, I don't mind weak tanks, and seem to do quite well in some of them. However, I admit defeat with the SARL42 - this tank is so feeble that it can't even reliably dominate when its top tier and the enemy team is all tomatos and bots. I generally do ok with low penetration guns, but the SARL42's gun seems to struggle to pen anything. Again, I'm a good enough player to frequently carry or be top score from a bottom tier; however when the SARL42 is mid- or bottom tier, its just a complete waste of a game.



jopi_oettlul #24 Posted 23 February 2016 - 03:11 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 49512 battles
  • 26
  • [DPG2] DPG2
  • Member since:
    10-12-2014
the sarl isn't that bad....for a t4....in fact it's my best performing t4 tank by far. it's slow but the topgun actually does damage and is reasonably accurate. the only annoying thing is that i haven't seen a single t4 match anymore since i upgraded the gun....if  i had more t4 matches i would continue playing this tank because then it's fun despite the slowness...t5 match is ok...t6 is dreadful. the t6 matches are so frustrating that i will not use this tank anymore once i grind to the next in line....which reading from the experiences here will be a next tough cookie.

Eokokok #25 Posted 23 February 2016 - 03:43 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 18608 battles
  • 6,161
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

Well, SARL is not bad indeed, but it comes down to only real upside it has are the soft stats. 0.2 dispersion is actually really good at tier 4 med level, and closes comparison you can pick would be 4D, that has ungodly 0.29 - that one is truly unplayable piece of garbage even though it has almost 50% more DPM.

 

So yeah, SARL can pass at tier 4, the gun is semi-decent with the soft stats it has and it has enough armour to not get shreded to pieces by tier 3 autocannons which already makes it way better then 4D.



Rosetta_and_Philae #26 Posted 03 July 2016 - 12:12 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 48073 battles
  • 2,204
  • [WTFX] WTFX
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011
The Sarl is decent for its tier but the G1R is rank rotten for its tier.

FatigueGalaxy #27 Posted 03 July 2016 - 05:52 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 20327 battles
  • 2,191
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

View PostBismarcKriegsmarinePride, on 03 July 2016 - 12:12 PM, said:

 the G1R is rank rotten for its tier.

 

It's not bad. Just poor in comparison to M4 Derp.

Rosetta_and_Philae #28 Posted 09 August 2016 - 05:18 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 48073 battles
  • 2,204
  • [WTFX] WTFX
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

View PostFatigueGalaxy, on 03 July 2016 - 04:52 PM, said:

 

It's not bad. Just poor in comparison to M4 Derp.

 

Poor when compared to most of the other meds in its tier yes not just the Sherman.

Edited by BismarcKriegsmarinePride, 09 August 2016 - 05:31 AM.


FatigueGalaxy #29 Posted 09 August 2016 - 09:43 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 20327 battles
  • 2,191
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

View PostBismarcKriegsmarinePride, on 09 August 2016 - 05:18 AM, said:

 

Poor when compared to most of the other meds in its tier yes not just the Sherman.

 

I can't agree. My personal list:

Posted Image

M4 and T-34 are miles better than most tier 5 meds, especially when you consider tier 6 and 7 battles. G1 is quite far behind them but having a derp gun already makes it better than most tier 5 meds with peashooters.



Eokokok #30 Posted 10 August 2016 - 10:45 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 18608 battles
  • 6,161
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012
Better then 5/4, yeah, legit list...

FatigueGalaxy #31 Posted 10 August 2016 - 10:56 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 20327 battles
  • 2,191
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

View PostEokokok, on 10 August 2016 - 10:45 AM, said:

Better then 5/4, yeah, legit list...

 

To be honest, I kinda missed the fact that this tank was buffed. I remember this tank as something really crappy...

My bad. I'd say it's equal. V/IV looks like a decent tier 5 med but derp gun (probably the best one on this tier - except RoF) makes up for a lot.

 

V/IV is not obtainable anyway so it doesn't affect my list at all. In fact, you could exclude all premiums and G1 is still better 5 other meds, equal to 2 and worse than 3.



Eokokok #32 Posted 10 August 2016 - 11:32 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 18608 battles
  • 6,161
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012
Then I get it even less, how are Jap tanks good in your eyes? Or T-34 being better then 3/4? You opinions are strange, no offence, just curious.

FatigueGalaxy #33 Posted 10 August 2016 - 12:22 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 20327 battles
  • 2,191
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    02-09-2011

It's because I put everything into comparison. It's just my (bad) habit. I also consider that 2/3 of my battles will be tier 6 and 7 battles so derp guns or DPM and high pen guns are a big "+" to me, while health, armour, mobility are less important (you'll be playing as TD most of the battle anyway).

Then you have to consider fun factor (derps have higher).

 

So, Chi-Nu is good because good pen and premium ammo pen, good damage and gun depression, decent DPM, good accuracy and decent mobility (top speed is meh and hp/t is bad but it's compensated by terrain resistances). It's better than almost all tier 5 meds with 75 mm guns because they either have low pen (german meds) or really bad DPM (Skoda). I don't count Shermans because nobody uses 76 mm.

Chi-Nu Kai is exactly the same, except gun depression.

If you don't compare Chi-Nu to other 75/76 mm gun meds - it's just a meh tank. Being better than most other tier 5 meds with peashooters makes it a good tank.

 

T-34 has broken DPM with 57 mm coupled with 189 mm APCR pen which means that even if everything goes wrong and you get only one opportunity to do damage - you will probably do enough to not consider this battle as "bad". In short: in many cases, when you have a bad battle, you can just yolo somebody and still get decent damage and XP. It's so easy. You can decimate equal tier tanks in 10-15 seconds.

 

btw. I made another mistake with Sherman III. It's almost identical to M4 (except gun depression) which, of course, makes it better than the G1.



BP_OMowe #34 Posted 23 October 2016 - 12:38 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 24764 battles
  • 2,048
  • [-GY-] -GY-
  • Member since:
    01-08-2013
The easiest buff for the Renault G1 would be to allow the 75mm SA44 into the stock turret

leggasiini #35 Posted 23 October 2016 - 01:21 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 15394 battles
  • 6,259
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostFatigueGalaxy, on 09 August 2016 - 10:43 PM, said:

 

I can't agree. My personal list:

Posted Image

M4 and T-34 are miles better than most tier 5 meds, especially when you consider tier 6 and 7 battles. G1 is quite far behind them but having a derp gun already makes it better than most tier 5 meds with peashooters.

 

I played ~130 battles with it, 3 marked it, and still do ocassionaly play it just because i like derps alot. It can be fun at times, but lets be honest, its simply trash. Most of time its rage including because of how terrible the gun handling is (worse than other derpers; worse bloom, worse aim time, worse accuracy, etc.), as well as how much slower it reloads and the fact the tank is sluggish AF. Pz IV H and M4 flat out beats it at everything outside from shell velocity. And while it has derp, no, its much worse than most non-derp mediums. Only some of the worst premiums are worse, but some of that tier's premium mediums are literal jokes on tracks (Matildas and M4 Imp).

 

Now my version of your list:

 

M4 Improved - agreed, no explainations needed

Sherman - agreed, sherman is better at everything expect shell velocity and side armor (that is useless anyway even on G1 R if its enemy has brain)

M4A2E4 - disagreed, M4A2E4's armor is better and it has pref MM

M7 - disagreed, M7 is fast and has good gun (the USA version of 6pdr)

Matilda BP & Matilda IV - agreed, although these are more heavies than mediums

Pz 3 K -. agreed, this thing is just a joke

Pz 3/4 - disagreed, Pz 3/4 is nice combination of decent gun + mobility and acceptable armor

Pz 4 - this thing shoudlnt be listed, its not in the game. Its a placeholder or something (look at its gun lol, it has short 75mm. SD model aswell)

Pz 4 H - disagreed, see M4

Pz 4  Hydro - disagreed, see Pz 3/4, also pref mm

Pz t-25 - disagreed, Pz is fast and has ok gun

Pz V/IV - absolutely disagreed, this tank is apparenlty OP after it became tier 5. Hey cmon it has panther's hull armor and mobility...at tier 5...with pref mm...

Pz V/IV A - see above

Ram II - disagreed, like slower M7 with more health, still better

Sherman III - disagreed, Sherman III is worse to regular M4 but still superior to G1 R at almost everything

T-34 - agreed, no doubt of that

Turan 3 PT - agreed - sort of, if Turan had actual ammo capacity i would say it would be better than G1 R

Chi-Nu - agreed, although its not much better, everything on it is bad expect depression, pen, dmg and accuracy, which gives it atleast some sort of role

Chi-Nu Kai - agreed, comparable to Turan 3; trades depression for all around slightly better gun and actually having enough ammo

Type T-34 - disagreed, Type, while inferior clone of T-34 is still better than G1 R

Skoda T24 - disagreed, although only slightly. If it had better RoF though it would be one of the best tier 5 mediums, but the RoF really holds it back

 

View PostBP_OMowe, on 23 October 2016 - 01:38 AM, said:

The easiest buff for the Renault G1 would be to allow the 75mm SA44 into the stock turret

 

 Still wouldnt do anything because the 75mm is absolutely trash on G1 R. 100/120 or so pen imo makes the 75mm totally useless because G1 R is not even fast enough to flank in some ocassions. Have fun being in tier 7 match, because atleast derp will do damage.


Edited by leggasiini, 23 October 2016 - 01:21 PM.


Eila_Juutilainen #36 Posted 23 October 2016 - 09:02 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 21258 battles
  • 3,883
  • [102ND] 102ND
  • Member since:
    11-04-2012

Eh, I think G1R is being underrated by you guys. Leggasiini, you say the only good thing about the G1R is the shell velocity, but in my experience the shell velocity is actually quite a valuable asset as it makes shots at longer ranges so much more likely to hit enemies. And even if it's the 'worst' of the tier 5 derp MTs, I still wouldn't say that automatically makes it bad.

 

Actually, before I went and posted the above, I decided to check the performance graphs at WoT-News: http://wot-news.com/...F11_Renault_G1R

The G1R actually performs pretty averagely, same as Pz 4 H. so the two tanks are apparently actually pretty equal. M4 Sherman on the other hand somewhat overperforms. Quite surprised, myself.


Edited by Eila_Juutilainen, 23 October 2016 - 10:22 PM.


leggasiini #37 Posted 24 October 2016 - 11:55 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 15394 battles
  • 6,259
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

It would be so much better if it had much better gun handling. I mean, it already has worst depression, worst view range, worst mobility and worst DPM of all derp mediums, so why it has worst bloom, accuracy and aimtime?

 

Accuracy: 0.54 -> 0.51

Aimtime: 2.6 -> 2.3

Buff dispersion values so it has best gun stats of all tier 5 derpers, NOT WORST

Increase view range from 350 to 370 or even 380. (cmon it has huge cupola yet its view range is crap...).

 

This would make G1 R much better tank. It trades DPM, mobility and gun depression for better capabilities at long ranges (gun handling, aim time, accuracy and shell velocity) and side armor. It now has niche as "derp sniper".

 

Or:

 

HP: 450 -> 550

turret front: 60 -> 80

Increase DPM a slightly; not too much so it still has worst DPM

 

This would make it like heavium, which makes very much sense because it leads to heavy rank. Its tougher than ither derp mediums but at cost its slowest, has worst gun handling and worst DPM of derp mediums. As nice addition, it has better velocity.



Eila_Juutilainen #38 Posted 24 October 2016 - 12:52 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 21258 battles
  • 3,883
  • [102ND] 102ND
  • Member since:
    11-04-2012
I get where you're coming from, but personally I don't feel it's a bad vehicle at all. My G1R is doing just fine and I enjoy it greatly. And the statistics I linked seem to back up that the vehicle is doing well, so I don't think it's going to get a buff.

leggasiini #39 Posted 24 October 2016 - 12:59 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 15394 battles
  • 6,259
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

Well, its not necessarily as bad i say it to be (in my eyes though no ways its good enough), it certainly should be buffed or atleast something done to it, because no one plays it. That is partly because of that there is no point grinding through this thing, when you can grind through BDR and unlock 90mm for ARL. Who knows, maybe WG would do medium line from G1R to AMX 30.

 

Lets be honest, though, do you think it would break the game if it got some buffs?



Eila_Juutilainen #40 Posted 24 October 2016 - 01:15 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 21258 battles
  • 3,883
  • [102ND] 102ND
  • Member since:
    11-04-2012
Honestly, I think the pointlessness is the biggest reason nobody plays it. Same as FCM36, nobody seems to play the thing and it took me forever to kill one for Expert: France.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users