Quad vs Flammenwerfer

New topic

New Reply

Posts: 258

Quad damage was doubled in recent update making it a decent rival to the mighty FHT. Both upgrades cost same 120m. Which one do you think is better now? Which one you use more? Vote and tell why do you think so.

Pros of FHT:
-better against garrisoned troops.
-comes much earlier.

Pros of Quad:
-resistant to small arms fire
-good range
-suppression
-better mobility(overdrive helps it survive in late game)
-it can shoot down planes

Both vehicles kill infantry very fast now and its hard to tell which one is better in this aspect.

Posts: 2181

I'd say German Halftrack is more useful because it comes earlier.
When you compare them side to side without timing the M5 is better without a doubt but the higher armor doesn't mean much when it will still die to 2 at shots.

Posts: 138

The m5 is still one of my favorite vehicles. Same with the Ostwind... They're both just really cool.

Posts: 59

I think the biggest advantage of the quad over the flamer is its range. Combined with overdrive the M5 is a whole lot more survivable and can most of the time be incredibly useful throughout the whole game. A flamer halftrack lasting the whole game is a rarity.

Posts: 1734

Permanently Banned

problem with m5, while it comes out, there will be already a pak or/and pggshrek or/and tanks.

Posts: 59

That depends on you build order, If you rush an M5 after something like 4 cons and a maxim an M5 will be out way before the fist tanks and also before the first pak. And even then, a Pak is not a problem at all on any map that has shot blockers

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Apples vs oranges as reinforcement and cost is the only things the two have in common, but if I was to choose one, hands down FHT. It arrives before tanks, can effortlessly retreat kill, doesn't matter where infantry is, it can reach it, even over the hedges with ground attack.

25 Nov 2015, 11:09 AM$nuffy

Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.

Good Stuff here

Multi Quote

Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41

After the ~12 minute mark when there are vehicles out on both sides the quad is more useful because it has more range and mobility and performs AA. The impact of the vehicle showing up as early as possible is far higher for the flameht because it can be built several minutes earlier, and the flameht also has more abuse potential like shooting through complete shockblockers because flames don't get blocked by anything, they just warp to the target location..

Posts: 3293

due to asymetical balance its hard to compare to units despite them being the same type of unit. they have very different impacts in each army as well as use styles.

that said I think I like the quad better due to its uses in the soviet amry not having another aa anything and that it scales much better into the late game than a flamenwerfer.

though probably...
1v1 flamenwerfer is better
2v2 and up: Quad upgrade

ps: im not including the current balance in my thought process.

Failure is always an option.

It's a happy massacre?! (yes, yes it is!)

Caffeine illegal for WiFi's to ingest in 48 states, 2 colonies, and 1 providences.

To make most awesome thing in universe combine Bears and Nicholas Cage!

and remember kids, we didn't start the flame-war!

Multi Quote

Posts: 187

Have to say i prefer the quad. Range helps keep it away from at. FHT is great at counter attacks/retreat killing but sometimes i just need the munitions for other things.

Posts: 254

a quad ht is awesome for babysitting teamweapons. imo its a great addition to the t2 t3 strat with atguns and t34s, albeit hard to keep alive that late in the game