Why the flamer HT is not addressed in WBP?

Nerfing most of its counterpart and ally light vehicle to a nearly useless state but keep this squad wiper machine remain its lethality?What kind of balance is that?

If it's wiping your squads then you are way out of position and not well prepared.

If it's wiping your squads then you are way out of position and not well prepared.

So all the light vehicles should not be nerffed by applying this shit theory.

So all the light vehicles should not be nerffed by applying this shit theory.

It doesn't have the DPS to wipe unless you're not paying attention, or way overextended.

OP, you are kidding right?

Just keep your distance man

OP, you are kidding right?

Just keep your distance man

We are talking about balace, right?
Why do they nerf M20,M15 AA,M5 Quad, Luch and T70 in WBP while you can just keep your distance or build an ATG to prevent them from wiping your squad or counter them?

I would like to quote the reasons in WBP to nerf these unit.

M17 Quad:
"We wanted to tone down the performance of the Quad to be in-line with Light Tanks and other suppression platforms. In order to make infantry counters to this unit viable, the M17 can no longer suppress enemy squads on the move."from WBP

Just keep your distance man?

T70:
"We feel that the T-70’s high damage and AOE allowed it to wipe infantry too effectively, particularly if they are clumped in cover."from WBP

Just keep your distance man again?

The flamer HT's high damage and DOT also allowed it to wipe infantry too effectively particular if they are clumped in buildings and covers. lollll

The patch is too stupid, nothing to say more.

It doesn't have the DPS to wipe unless you're not paying attention, or way overextended.

Every light vehicle get nerf in WBP also don't have the DPS to wipe unless you're not paying attention, or way overextended.

M17 Quad:
"We wanted to tone down the performance of the Quad to be in-line with Light Tanks and other suppression platforms. In order to make infantry counters to this unit viable, the M17 can no longer suppress enemy squads on the move."from WBP

Just keep your distance man?

T70:
"We feel that the T-70’s high damage and AOE allowed it to wipe infantry too effectively, particularly if they are clumped in cover."from WBP

Just keep your distance man again?

The M17 AAHT had instant suppression and full mobility, which while you could retreat from, was unfair because it was a almost a force-retreat on any infantry it could see. I didn't think there was anything wrong with the T-70 because it was a glass cannon, but it did have very good DPS and could wipe a retreating squad if it got a few good hits in. The Flame Half-Track is neither of these things and has half the range as well. It is a non-issue.

flameht does to much dmg to units in buildings and also has to much dps

there is no problem with the flame ht. Maybe a l2p issue here.

how often do you lose models/ squads to a grenade/ mortar?
how often do you lose models/squads to a Molotov
there is your answer why
burst damage relying on RNG (goes both ways)
flame damage relies on your enemy sticking around and getting burned
the counterplay for a FHT is to move, for other lights it was retreating

playercard pls

how often do you lose models/ squads to a grenade/ mortar?
how often do you lose models/squads to a Molotov
there is your answer why
burst damage relying on RNG (goes both ways)
flame damage relies on your enemy sticking around and getting burned
the counterplay for a FHT is to move, for other lights it was retreating

Air supremacy before totally relies on enemy sticking around on a big red circle on map, hence it get nerfed, why?

P47 totally relies on enemy's tank AFKing, but it get nerfed, why?

WASP before totally relies on enemy sticking around also, yet it get nrefed, why?

The counterplay of the above examples is to move only and they all get nerfed due to axis players whining.

Well, I finally notice complaining Axis unit is not acceptable on the forum. I am guilty ,sorry.

The M17 AAHT had instant suppression and full mobility, which while you could retreat from, was unfair because it was a almost a force-retreat on any infantry it could see. I didn't think there was anything wrong with the T-70 because it was a glass cannon, but it did have very good DPS and could wipe a retreating squad if it got a few good hits in. The Flame Half-Track is neither of these things and has half the range as well. It is a non-issue.

The flame HT is more lethal and potent than you think of. Actually its damage output is even more consistent than T-70. It can wipe a retreating squad and have very good DPS that totally not rely on RNG and can 100% wipe out garrisoned team weapon that can't leave the building before the first hit.

The only conceivable issue with the flamer HT is the amount of damage it deals to an enemy squad, if they are garrisoned (damage is high enough, that the squad might be dead by the 2nd burst).

Elsewhere, it's a fragile, high-cost, high-risk investment.

Technically the flamerHT has been nerfed in three ways, though, indirectly:
- Improvements to squad spacing (obviously doesn't affect garrisoned squads)
- Availability of 222. If you go flamerHT, you probably can't afford the necessary 222's needed to protect your flanks.
- Soviets and Brits now get better access to anti-vehicle capability regardless of tier pick (Penal PTRS, UKF PIATs, UKF AEC)

I don't think that anti-garrison damage is such a major concern though. We will try to address this more thoroughly though in the future, if/when we are given the chance to normalize flamer-vehicle damage across the board (Flamehetzer )

Guy are right, flame HT are hight damage unit.

OP you have gotten some good feedback here, especially in Mr. Smith's comment. If you are having problems with the FHT still please post in the Replay Review section of the forum. My feeling on this unit is that it is completely fine and its power is well moderated by its low health and high vulnerability.

OP you have gotten some good feedback here, especially in Mr. Smith's comment. If you are having problems with the FHT still please post in the Replay Review section of the forum. My feeling on this unit is that it is completely fine and its power is well moderated by its low health and high vulnerability.

+1

OP you have gotten some good feedback here, especially in Mr. Smith's comment. If you are having problems with the FHT still please post in the Replay Review section of the forum. My feeling on this unit is that it is completely fine and its power is well moderated by its low health and high vulnerability.

This is a balance issue. I can deal with it doesn't mean anything. It will be simply op when compare to other nerfed light vehicle in WBP.

Just a thought: To be honest, everything that has flamer equipped while also having good mobility/flexility are just not really good for balance. I mean, Rifleman with flamer got remove due to the squad's good mobility and utility, now Penals Battalion is getting its flamer remove since they have similar problem (good mobility + all-round range when get flamer). In my opinion, the UC/Hetzer/Flamer HT/Crocodile shouldn't be a thing (Well, it already is, but seriously, the problems they created are far more worse than Rifle/Penals with flamer):‎
- The UC can be easily dealt with LVs, but then you'll have to rush LVs, which relatively starts the whole LV meta (Not saying it's the direct reason, just a small contribution to it)
- The flamer HT basically has the same problem like the UC, while also has more lethality that the UC (300 degree turning guns while faster than the UC). To be honest, I would rather want to see the 251 being a small-arm-immunity reinforcement halftrack with no flamer upgrade. Maybe give it a 38mm AT upgrade (Basically the Raketen on top of its now open top when upgraded) rather than the flamer.
- Hetzer got its limited turret-cone like the UC, but seeing it can take down one of its counterpart easily (AT guns), it's one of many reason why you rather rush for tanks than get AT guns.
- The Churchill Crocodile has the same problem like the Hetzer, except being way more bucky, which make it less risky when yolo charging than the Hetzer. ‎
In all honesty, Flamer should only be issues to Engineer units and incendiary barrage for mortar units. ‎