Sherman Firefly

In case you hadn't noticed, the game is at least loosely based on the events of 1939-1945. You might want to look it up.

But since you've missed my point entirely anyway, let me rephrase it for you. I was pointing out that if you say the value of the firefly is primarily in its alpha strike, then it's the only unit in the game that requires munitions at every encounter to do its primary job. Yes its powerful enough to one shot a stationary medium. Plenty of units kill mediums without spending munitions.

You can ignore that I said historical if you want - the point stands that the tank exists because of its (currently lackluster) main gun and not the tulips attached to it. Or if you want it in game terms the value of the tank should be in the 440/155 part (you know, the most expensive dedicated TD in the game short of an Elefant/Jagdtiger) and not the 50+100 per shot munitions part - bringing it in line with how every other unit in the game works.

At no point did I say I wanted all tanks to do the same thing, so please take your strawman and shove it elsewhere.

i putted in bold the irony in your post.

Seems that you forget that a lot of units depends in ammo to do some great things, now they tried to add it in Tank gameplay, and its a cool thing. now if you dont understand that you dont play with a Firefly the same way you play with others TD, you should just not build Firefly

•  
  

  4

  VS

  RtN.The Phalanx Midconflict Dick Smith ★

  ╬OKH╬Keigo Lawrence of Arabia [ƒocus]™隆美尔

  Double Firefly Rampage

  by: pigsoup map: Essen Steelworks

  6

  -

wasn't really sure What I thought of Fireflies until this game.

Firefly is definitely fine in 3v3+. Unique and fun, too.

It is fun when you are not on recieving end


High burst damage ability with high instagib potential - isn't something I would like to see in CoH2, even if it costs a puddingload of muni.

i putted in bold the irony in your post.

Seems that you forget that a lot of units depends in ammo to do some great things, now they tried to add it in Tank gameplay, and its a cool thing. now if you dont understand that you dont play with a Firefly the same way you play with others TD, you should just not build Firefly

Again you're extrapolating a point that rather specifically did not say. Would you like me to do the same? Would you like me to say you're implying that every tank in the game is bloody identical? It's pretty pathetic really. Try reading more thoroughly.

I'll try one last time. Many units in the game do good stuff in addition to their main role with munitions spend. For an alpha strike the Firefly requires munitions spend. If the main role of the Firefly is the alpha strike from tulips then it's the only one that outright requires munitions spend. I'll even go further and say that if this is the case then the firefly gun is too weak for its cost or the tank itself is overpriced.

If you see a firefly, move.


"Nah I will be standing here to see if his tulips dare hitting ma pantha"

Again you're extrapolating a point that rather specifically did not say. Would you like me to do the same? Would you like me to say you're implying that every tank in the game is bloody identical? It's pretty pathetic really. Try reading more thoroughly.

I'll try one last time. Many units in the game do good stuff in addition to their main role with munitions spend. For an alpha strike the Firefly requires munitions spend. If the main role of the Firefly is the alpha strike from tulips then it's the only one that outright requires munitions spend. I'll even go further and say that if this is the case then the firefly gun is too weak for its cost or the tank itself is overpriced.

You can't have Insane alpha strike ( enought to one shot a medium tank) and a fast reload gun, it already have the same damage as jackson main gun, but slower reload, and +80 damage at vet 3, so a total of 280 damage

"it's the only one that outright requires munitions spend"
- He is the only one that can one shot a medium tank, its original

It is fun when you are not on recieving end


High burst damage ability with high instagib potential - isn't something I would like to see in CoH2, even if it costs a puddingload of muni.

i only used tulip once. rest, I relied on tank commander and firefly's damage output to quickly vet. but i did almost insta gib command panther the one time i used it.

i agree, tulip at this stat is not needed and i do not think nerfing tulip need a compensation either.

Stop it, FF is not intended to be useful in every matchup on every map and in every situation.



Speak for youself. Jt, elefant and pak43 were in game forever as well as pak walls. If you lost your tank to FF its not because "omg op/bad design nerf plx" its because you were outsmarted and outplayed.

FF offers counters to threats allied armies struggle to counters such as 17 target-size predator-cloak jp4 and blitz-away from everything panthers. If you take away FF ability to burst tanks in exchange for DPS increase/cost decrease, it would not become useful because you imagine it should, but directly opposite.

Besides there is zero reason brits with their beefy tanks should have jackson clone. Especially in 1v1.

I see more value and importance to having a cheaper and more accessible tank destroyer than an impractically expensive TD with an impractically expensive ability.

Comet and cromwell are very good generalist but by no mean suited to take on the axis heavy alone.

The only cost-effective Anti-tank weapon the british really have is the 6 pounder and that's just not enough.

The current tulip give the Firely firepower to even surpass the likes of pak43 and elefant, along with the price tag and impracticability to match. It would have been good for a doctrinal ability but it's not suit for an important role as the British's tank destroyer.

i only used tulip once. rest, I relied on tank commander and firefly's damage output to quickly vet. but i did almost insta gib command panther the one time i used it.

i agree, tulip at this stat is not needed and i do not think nerfing tulip need a compensation either.

the firefly without the tulip is severely overpriced.

First, it's slow. It's the second slowest allied tank in the game. The slowest is the centuar, and the calliope (if you count the calliope as a tank). It's slower than even the jpz4.

the 17 pounder also have a really long reload time. At 10 seconds it's as slow as the reload on the isu152. Even the elefant and the jagdtiger reload faster. The Firefly crew are basically brewing a cup of tea in between every shots.

its durability is average. Same hp and armor as the USF 75mm sherman.

it's not quite bad, as the 17 pounder still possess amazing accuracy and high penetration that give it a consistent dps, but there's no way it's worth 440mp 155fuel. Right now the Firefly is the most expensive non-doc TD in the entire game, but I would still rate the jpz4 higher.

OPs idea aint bad but noobs wont know wtf is going on and lelic will make it all buggy wwhere pros exploit the shit out of it.

I see more value and importance to having a cheaper and more accessible tank destroyer than an impractically expensive TD with an impractically expensive ability.

Comet and cromwell are very good generalist but by no mean suited to take on the axis heavy alone.

The only cost-effective Anti-tank weapon the british really have is the 6 pounder and that's just not enough.

The current tulip give the Firely firepower to even surpass the likes of pak43 and elefant, along with the price tag and impracticability to match. It would have been good for a doctrinal ability but it's not suit for an important role as the British's tank destroyer.



the firefly without the tulip is severely overpriced.

First, it's slow. It's the second slowest allied tank in the game. The slowest is the centuar, and the calliope (if you count the calliope as a tank). It's slower than even the jpz4.

the 17 pounder also have a really long reload time. At 10 seconds it's as slow as the reload on the isu152. Even the elefant and the jagdtiger reload faster. The Firefly crew are basically brewing a cup of tea in between every shots.

its durability is average. Same hp and armor as the USF 75mm sherman.

it's not quite bad, as the 17 pounder still possess amazing accuracy and high penetration that give it a consistent dps, but there's no way it's worth 440mp 155fuel. Right now the Firefly is the most expensive non-doc TD in the entire game, but I would still rate the jpz4 higher.

because its initial damage is so high, having two of them is not twice more effective but with 480 damage possibility, i'd say almost quadruples the effectiveness.

because of this, i think firefly works in 3v3+ most def.

not sure about 2v2- though.

You can't have Insane alpha strike ( enought to one shot a medium tank) and a fast reload gun, it already have the same damage as jackson main gun, but slower reload, and +80 damage at vet 3, so a total of 280 damage

"it's the only one that outright requires munitions spend"
- He is the only one that can one shot a medium tank, its original

They should keep the 17 pounder reload the way it is, but greatly increase damage, or give it APDS rounds. Those APDS rounds in real life were extremely powerful; heres an account from a german tank which was hit by 17 pounder APDS:

"The British gun fired a small high velocity projectile. I saw one of our tanks after having been hit by it. There was a small hole punched in either flank - one the projectile's entry point, the other its exit. The tiny munition had passed through the vehicle with such speed that everything within the hull not welded down had been sucked out through the exit hole. Including the crew. We never identified their bodies, for all that remained of them was a red stain upon the ground extending some twenty metres from the wreck."

i putted in bold the irony in your post.

Seems that you forget that a lot of units depends in ammo to do some great things, now they tried to add it in Tank gameplay, and its a cool thing. now if you dont understand that you dont play with a Firefly the same way you play with others TD, you should just not build Firefly

to turn it around, the firefly is the one tank that need a huge munition drain to be effective, on top of being the most expensive non-doc tank destroyer in the game. It's an huge disadvantage for the Firefly.

It's a great feeling to be behind in a game and you scrape together enough fuel for a firefly to counter your opponents tiger, only to have no muni for tulips (that according to some ITT justify 10 seconds of reload for 200 damage)

Well it's either that or buy a Churchill

because its initial damage is so high, having two of them is not twice more effective but with 480 damage possibility, i'd say almost quadruples the effectiveness.

because of this, i think firefly works in 3v3+ most def.

not sure about 2v2- though.

having two firefly also mean twice the drain on munition.

Why are people treating the british as if they have infinite munition?

having two firefly also mean twice the drain on munition.

Why are people treating the british as if they have infinite munition?

they don't... if you're shooting tulips every time you see a tank... you're doing it wrong.
i believe most players are just referring it as a finisher ability. i think they're great in team games as long as they don't run into a shrek blob.

The turret speed and acceleration definitely needs to go up first....



PS: buff its gun mantle model, it's wrong

"The British gun fired a small high velocity projectile. I saw one of our tanks after having been hit by it. There was a small hole punched in either flank - one the projectile's entry point, the other its exit. The tiny munition had passed through the vehicle with such speed that everything within the hull not welded down had been sucked out through the exit hole. Including the crew. We never identified their bodies, for all that remained of them was a red stain upon the ground extending some twenty metres from the wreck."

I hope you aren't being serious

brit apds confirmed for warping spacetime