Sherman Firefly and Sherman II Leaked?

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

some time ago, following data appeared on official American World of Tanks tankopedia (the portal wiki). The data belong to four tanks: Sherman Firefly, Sherman II, AC I “Sentinel” and AC IV “Thunderbolt”. So, is this the first leak into what the Firefly branch will look like?

Unfortunately, no.

You see, these four models have something in common. They have all been modelled for quite some time (in some case, maybe for even two years). Yes, the Firefly model actually exists, there was even a screenshot released at some point, long time ago. Of course, these models are not in HD, as there was no such thing as “HD models” back then. In any case, all four tanks exist on the internal WG server and for some reason, someone (probably by accident) added their data to the US site. It was deleted after a short while, but someone took screenies.

Of the four tanks, the Firefly line will have the Firefly itself and the lend-lease Sherman (whether it’s the same vehicle as this Sherman II, that is unknown). AC I and AC IV are not scheduled for release anytime soon and there is no regular branch planned for them (as you can see from the gun choices, they are clearly intended as premium tanks). It’s not the “real deal” – Firefly branch tanks are, as far as anyone knows, not tested even interally (let alone supertest), but it gives us an insight into the way WG wanted to implement the Firefly.

azvdSIH

J3Wr1b8

Ko87bxR

t8mYPXJ

56 thoughts on “Sherman Firefly and Sherman II Leaked?”

        • We’re not all on the heathen ASIA server, some of us are on NA thank you very much :P.

          And we’ll stop whining about the sentinels when they get them right and give us our damn tanks.

          They’ve gotten the crew on the AC-1 wrong( there should be no radioman, commander handled radio ,the 2nd hull crewman was there for the sole purpose of opperating the hull vickers MG) and the armour on the AC-4 wrongi-sh (depending on if they’re using the AC-1 hull as was used for the prototype, which is what the thumbnail appears to show, in which case the engine is wrong) anyhow

          • @Bones: “…And we’ll stop whining about the sentinels when they … give us our damn tanks.”

            That.

            Just take our money, for Pete’s sake. Heck, if I’ll drive a TOG II, I’ll drive a Sentinel.

            • I’m an Aussie on the SEA server, and I’d be happy to have the Sentinel in any form. Realistically, the ACIV as a tier 6 premium tank seems like the best fit; there’s no need for a second tier 6 UK premium MT.

          • World of tanks replaces all Machine Gun operator positions with radiomen. This is why tank T-28, M2 Medium & one of the Vickers have 2 radiomen.

  2. Tier 4 premium sentinel; 12,62 hp/t, 64 pen / 45dmg gun doesnt look too good for a medium tank (not to mention price, 1500g is ok but for tier 5). Still this data would be probably changed when / if released.

    • It has the Mk X-A 2 pounder, which is the stock gun on the matilda, so it’d be 78mm pen with AP, 121mm with APCR.
      Plus .36 accuracy and a 1.7 sec aim time, assuming the gun soft stats remain the same. Its not great but considering the armour sloping and the mobility (top speed and traverse) it could be alright, kinda like a tier IV Ram II with better mobility and worse gun

      • EDIT: can’t read this morning.

        Also keep in mind the gun stats are quite old, the Sherman II has the 105mm derp with 150mm pen HEAT round there. I really doubt that’ll happen.

        Don’t get me wrong, the AC I with a Little John gun would be beastly, a Matilda which can do nearly 50kph? Frontal armour rivalling the Valentine? Would certainly give the M8 a run for its money when it comes to fast firing, fast moving balls of death, and it would bounce most tier 4 and under.

        Most likely then gun would be similar to the Mk X though, and you’d have to buy premium ammo if you wanted that kind of performance (as per WG’s MO)

      • Somehow, i dont think it will get a 17 pounder at teir 5 . 171 pen is more then you get on most apcr at teir 5. Soo, yeah, i think not. Only if the wg devs have had too much stronk vodka. Well, we may be in with a chance then! :P

  5. There’s 2 Sentinels there…one is premium, the other costs 243k silver, so must be researchable. And I’ll take the premium one as a crew trainer…its a medium, with 5 crew slots, so my Centurion crews will feel right at home, along with my leftover Cromwell member.

  6. These are old stats for the gun most likely, which will probably get rebalanced. I mean, I’d take that 18.4something reload with 150dmg and 171 pen any day of the week, but it might be a bit too much for Our Friends From The Soviet Union….

    the butthurt would flow strong in those t7 and t8 heavies if I got my hands on such a gun :D

        • 17pdr has higher damage because historically it was a more powerful gun heavier shells and a higher muzzle velocity, just because has the same caliber doesn’t mean it will have the same performances, u have into account barrel length, shell weight and propellent, ballistic shape of shell and perhaps a few other things. 17pdr was concidered one of the best 76.2mm around at the time and certainly one par if not better with apds then the 75mm L/70 of the Germans.

    • Because otherwise it would suck.

      17 Pdr shell weighted significantly more than German Panzergranate 39/42 or American M62, though.

      • Nixxie I did say historically on par if not better then the 75/L70 with apds, so in game equates to slighty better pen and damage.
        Basically stop assuming all guns with the same calibre perform the same, evident from all of the 100mm and 122mm guns all with differences performances.

    • 85mm S-53: 160 damage
      84mm 20pdr: 230 damage
      88mm L/56-71: 240 damage
      90mm Anything: 240 damage

      Someone want to explain why you go from 160 damage at 85mm to 230 damage at 84mm?

      Damage scaling with caliber doesn’t make sense anywhere. This is jsut another example.

      • Gun performance has nothing to do with caliber. you can have a huge gun that shoots a shot so slowly it has no pen. (my opinion)

        Damage caused relates to(In my guess) shell velocity, barrel length and design, Shell weight(not always related to size) and the shape of the ammunition fired out of said gun. most of these guns also fired different ammo(I think, please take this as a thought not a fact, I’m stating my opinion on why, not truth)

  9. Premium Sentinel looks like a fast stock AMX 40..
    Nice armor bit low hp. Looks a bit crappy. The other T4 prems have much better hp with the armor.

  10. Look at the view ranges. To me that looks like these are from YEARS ago, before the great view range rebalance that saw every tank have a rounded number for view range.

      • Tank combat is a very sexual thing if you think about it. Size doesn’t (necessarily) mean combat efficiency, penetration is crucial, some tanks are sexy while others are just cheap crap…and regarding tactics, it’s all mostly about getting behind enemies ! It’s so obvious in French military terms. ^^ But in some way, UK already invented it in WW1 with their weird tank naming (males & females).

  12. “Yes, the Firefly model actually exists, there was even a screenshot released at some point, long time ago.”

    AFAIK that was just the Sherman III and Grant we’ve seen

    Sherman II is the tier 5 US MT

  15. Looks very promising, obviously those aren’t the final gun stats. I know Firefly will have the 17pdr but there’s no way it’ll have 18 RoF. Too good to be true. More like 12. Not to mention the T5 med having 17pdr – impossible. Hopefully it’ll have a good gun, the T5 meds desperately need one solid specimen to fight the overpowering T5 heavies.

  16. One of those sentinels has a credit cost, the other a gold – it’s possible one’ll just be a one-gun branch-tank.

  17. I don’t care if the line merges to Death Star at the end.

    I’m so sick and tired of grinding my AT 7 and I wish to try other line.