Flames

Enkidu, three times its been explained to you.

If you still dont understand the difference between what a Flamer does to a 4man unit relying on armor as compared to a 6man unit, as well as weapon crews, as well as on garrisons then thats your problem and repeating the question like a parrot isnt going to get you a different answer.

You didn't answer my question. My question isn't whether or not a pio flamer is equal to an engi flamer, my question is, why should it be? Are combat engi flamers better in most situations because their targets have smaller unit counts? Yes. They also cost more to buy and reinforce than pios. Not only that, but flamers are the only upgrade soviets have to their vanilla infantry where Ost have more options. If you want a higher dps upgrade, get an lmg on a gren; if you want to clear out a building, get a flame pio.

If pio flamers were buffed to make them force off 6 man squads just as fast as engis force off 4 man squads, then I can't think of any reason why engis should remain a 240mp unit while pios only cost 200. Isn't the flamer discrepancy the sole reason why engis are currently more expensive?

Since Pio MP40s are only SLIGHTLY inferior to K98s at long range (DPS wise) and better inside 30m (see: the max range of the MP40), I'd just say buy a metric butt ton of Pios and ignore the Flammenwerfer. The MP40 DPS thing is also why Assgrens just kill everything they look at. Stick them in cover and duke it out with enemy squads at extreme range--and beat them--for extra lols.

Combat Engineers, despite being more useless than Cons most of the time (though they cost the same to produce, take up the same popcap, and cost 30 mp to reinforce vs 20 for cons??? ) will need a ROKS-3 to be anything short of useless cannon fodder that can throw out a demo charge or two assuming you haven't wasted all of your munitions frantically trying to AT nade/Molotov the mass of FHTs and Assgrens/Pgrens (respectively) most OH players seem to zerg these days.

TL; DR, Pios don't need flamers, Engies do. OH trumps the SU in the small arms department, hence I think flamers beating the stuffing out of OH infantry units is just fine.

Doesnt need to be "better".

Just make it so it hits more models but for less DPS.

Something to account for systemic unit size differences, especially to maintain its effectiveness vs garrisons in a balanced way.

One of the recent patches increased flamethrower DPS vs buildings for both factions and both flamers were similar efficient vs buildings. The German one took slightly longer, but was in the meantime confronted with less opposing fire in the mean time since most buildings do not feature 6 windows.

Overall the flamers are quite similar in efficiency, though I agree the German one feels weaker and is used less. It's simply even more RNG dependent than the Soviet one. CE-Flamers profit from it's high penetration negating the 1.5 Ostheer infantry armor while vice versa the Pio-Flamer profits from the higher density of Soviet squads hitting multiple entities far more often. With sustained casualties the second is no longer true, while the first still is, which makes the CE perform slightly better - at least, that's my experience.

Since somebody else brought it up (I think WiFi). There are still retreat modifiers, but different ones than in vCoH. In vCoH units got .5 damage, in CoH2 they get .5 incoming accuracy. Since flamethrowers have 11 accuracy they hit a retreating squad exactly like a normal one.

Edit: Urgs, I totally forgot to mention that the Ostheer flamer is also used less since you could get a LMG42 for the same price on Grens which is more useful, while Soviets have mines or Molotovs which can be exchanged for a flamer if the opponent plays infantry heavy. Merging in the field to increase the staying power of the CE may also be a pro, but I guess not many people use that.

What it boils down to, is the CE Flamer hitting Ost units as if they are 4 Cons (which they aren't), as opposed to Pio hitting Sov units as 6 Cons.

The window argument is an interesting one, but is equally applicable to Ost depending on where either units Flamer targets the building. If its from a blind angle, the profit is equal, except that the Sov Flamer still hits harder in proportion than then Pio Flamer does.

Its quite simple. Increase the AoE template and reduce the DPS on Ost Flamer, for the same net result asymmetrically. Flamers are too central and crucial a Garrison counter for this kind of imbalance in effectiveness to remain.

Since Pio MP40s are only SLIGHTLY inferior to K98s at long range (DPS wise)[...]

You do know that Assault Grenadiers and Pioneers use different MP40s, right?

last i checked they got rid of retreat modifiers. so unless the flamethrower has something specific then yea your guy is toast.

ie: they never had retreat modfyers in coh2.

Wtf really? I've always been under the impression that there was a simple modifier on retreat. But thinking about it, it makes a lot of sense, and I'll bet this may have just been mystified due to attack move having infantry switch targets, thus making it seem the retreating squads take less damage. (Not getting shot in favor of non-retreating units is certainly taking less damage.)

What it boils down to, is the CE Flamer hitting Ost units as if they are 4 Cons (which they aren't), as opposed to Pio hitting Sov units as 6 Cons.

So? One or two man conscript squad can't scratch anything. You can almost cap a point and build a bunker in front of that squad with impunity. A one man grenadier, specifically with an LMG, can deal a significantly larger amount of damage, (I think the numbers were akin to four PENAL squad members to one LMG.) and has armor which allows for better movement to and from battle and garrisons without taking killing damage from small arms fire.

The window argument is an interesting one, but is equally applicable to Ost depending on where either units Flamer targets the building. If its from a blind angle, the profit is equal, except that the Sov Flamer still hits harder in proportion than then Pio Flamer does.

Except for the LMG thing, yeah, that is true.

Its quite simple. Increase the AoE template and reduce the DPS on Ost Flamer, for the same net result asymmetrically. Flamers are too central and crucial a Garrison counter for this kind of imbalance in effectiveness to remain.

Not necessarily, unless you're suggesting that the AoE template would only be affected when the pioneers are targeting garrisons. They would become less effective at fighting infantry in all circumstances outside of garrisons. It also affects issues of friendly fire concerning extremely close range units.

Trying to get the same net result out of asymmetry by making changes on only one level of one aspect of gameplay is a surefire way to either undermine the point of the asymmetry, (making it meaningless), or to further upset balance due to the volume and variety of options that achieve similar results (Mortars, grenades, etc).

last i checked they got rid of retreat modifiers. so unless the flamethrower has something specific then yea your guy is toast.

ie: they never had retreat modfyers in coh2.

yea it turns out i was wrong. however the modifier doesn't modify damage anymore it modifies received accuracy.

yea it turns out i was wrong. however the modifier doesn't modify damage anymore it modifies received accuracy.

.5 recieved accuracy. this means sniper rifles which have an accuracy of 1 will miss half the time when shooting retreating squads. for some reason, relic chose to give flamethrowers an accuracy of 11 though. that means flamers will still hit a squad every time while it's retreating. like wifi said, they will take full damage as well. besides, the real damage from flamethrowers isnt in their dps (which, other than the kv8, is actually quite weak). most of their damage comes from crits, just like molotovs.

Its precisely the crits which is the problem. If a flame crits against ostheer, it does alot more damage than a flame crit against soviet.

As previously said, the balance issue is crits, due to smaller squad sizes for ostheer. I have had a 4 man squad wiped in 1 sec to a molotov due to 4 crits at the same time, a well spent 15 munitions.

Flame weapons being based on criticals is silly to begin with. Sometimes flamers almost instantly kill two members of a vet 2 PGren squad. Sometimes it fires at vanilla grens for ages and barely scratches them. They should base them on constant DPS instead, make them more reliable and better at clearing garrison. And remove the Hollywood-esque tank explosion from the game, too. Nothing more frustrating than sinking your first ammo into a flamer to even the playing field against AssGrens only for the damn thing to burst as soon as battle is joined. Yes I know it's been toned down, but I want it removed completely.

Also making some sort of retreat modifier would be great.