Login

russian armor

Why the flamer HT is not addressed in WBP?

24 Dec 2016, 22:36 PM
#81
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1

I don't see much constructive here, especially if this is a weak attempt to provide cover for insulting the balance team.

If the wasp is not at as good as it should be make a thread about that. I have yet to see a reason the FHT is not a fair unit considering its high cost, and limited time frame, after which it has to be defensive. It also loses its ability to reinforce units, and yet the vet is largely targeted at that function.

At most this unit needs a slight change to damage to garrison since it can be hard to react with less than full health MGs, but even that has to be slight since it really is designed to punish defensive building play.
25 Dec 2016, 00:57 AM
#82
avatar of Cresc

Posts: 378

I'm with you on this OP, but apparently the naziboos in this board are still arguing out of reason.


A nerf is overdue for this unit, and no it has nothing to do with it being weak.
Relic already said that they felt flaming vehicles are overperforming and adjusted them all in consequence.

I think that as incompetent as they are they just forgot about the Flame HT.

1- It instawipes squads in garrisons
2- It does a crazy amount of damage to AT-guns and AT inf, what I mean by that, is killing a Flame HT with your team weapons or infantry demand that you blob around it.

3- It gets veterancy too fast.
Actually that one is just the blatant proof that it is overperforming, considering how many kills it needs to get vet 3.
If it gets them that fast it is because they kill fast.

And you can witness this in every game where it is used.


But, I already know what the wehr fanboys around here will say...
25 Dec 2016, 04:14 AM
#83
avatar of JoeH

Posts: 88

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Dec 2016, 00:57 AMCresc
I'm with you on this OP, but apparently the naziboos in this board are still arguing out of reason.


A nerf is overdue for this unit, and no it has nothing to do with it being weak.
Relic already said that they felt flaming vehicles are overperforming and adjusted them all in consequence.

I think that as incompetent as they are they just forgot about the Flame HT.

1- It instawipes squads in garrisons
2- It does a crazy amount of damage to AT-guns and AT inf, what I mean by that, is killing a Flame HT with your team weapons or infantry demand that you blob around it.

3- It gets veterancy too fast.
Actually that one is just the blatant proof that it is overperforming, considering how many kills it needs to get vet 3.
If it gets them that fast it is because they kill fast.

And you can witness this in every game where it is used.


But, I already know what the wehr fanboys around here will say...


Yeah Wehr is totally dominating every game with the flametrack. LUL! Meanwhile allied Infantry is still all demigods that wipe squads in seconds, but hey thats just a silly fact you do not have time for that.
25 Dec 2016, 05:08 AM
#84
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 930

One way of easily making the unit less more retardedly strong is removing one of it's guns.

Why does this particular unit gets TWO flamers while everyone else have one?

and to all the retards saying "j-j-just stay away!11!" well, you can't, because for some reason the flames "supress" all infantry (they hit the dirt or run around looking for cover) every time they get hit by flames making them unresponsive, just like the old guards dance bug.
25 Dec 2016, 06:56 AM
#85
avatar of Cresc

Posts: 378

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Dec 2016, 05:08 AMzerocoh
One way of easily making the unit less more retardedly strong is removing one of it's guns.

Why does this particular unit gets TWO flamers while everyone else have one?

and to all the retards saying "j-j-just stay away!11!" well, you can't, because for some reason the flames "supress" all infantry (they hit the dirt or run around looking for cover) every time they get hit by flames making them unresponsive, just like the old guards dance bug.



Reduce the DPS, slightly, problem solved.
Also I think the damage it does on garrisoned units is actually a bug.


25 Dec 2016, 07:31 AM
#86
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611

So ingame, you go by the name :

Axis=OP+Retarded Player Choice.


Hmmmm.

A casual observer may assume you are biased.



25 Dec 2016, 07:45 AM
#87
avatar of zerocoh

Posts: 930

So, in the forums you go by the trend:

Shitpost about something completely nonsensical

hmmmm.

a casual observer may assume you are just a bad troll.
25 Dec 2016, 08:20 AM
#88
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Dec 2016, 07:45 AMzerocoh
So, in the forums you go by the trend:

Shitpost about something completely nonsensical

hmmmm.

a casual observer may assume you are just a bad troll.


Let me explain it for you.

The OP's in game name is "Axis=OP+Retarded Player Choice".

Its a bit like turning up to a human rights rally with a shirt that says "I hate niggers" and expecting to be taken seriously.

Most people that are ranting in this post are Allied fanboys that either have a history of anti axis posts or have few axis games under their belt.

If the flame halftrack was that batshit op then they would appear in every game, on streams and in tournaments, which they do not.

Complain all you want ZeroCoh, your taken about as serious as "aaa".
26 Dec 2016, 00:53 AM
#89
avatar of Cresc

Posts: 378



Let me explain it for you.

The OP's in game name is "Axis=OP+Retarded Player Choice".

Its a bit like turning up to a human rights rally with a shirt that says "I hate niggers" and expecting to be taken seriously.

Most people that are ranting in this post are Allied fanboys that either have a history of anti axis posts or have few axis games under their belt.

If the flame halftrack was that batshit op then they would appear in every game, on streams and in tournaments, which they do not.

Complain all you want ZeroCoh, your taken about as serious as "aaa".




Sorry to disapoint you, but many other players agree that the flame HT is op.
And you can check my stats, I'm as well ranked with axis as I rank with allies.

It's not really a good way to prove your point, about claiming one is a fanboy, it's good to expose you as a retard.
26 Dec 2016, 01:34 AM
#90
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Dec 2016, 00:53 AMCresc

Sorry to disapoint you, but many other players agree that the flame HT is op.

Hmmm, I think you may need more than 2 or 3 sympathisers to make that claim.

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Dec 2016, 00:53 AMCresc
And you can check my stats, I'm as well ranked with axis as I rank with allies.

That is correct, however the total number of games you've played for allies is around 1235 as opposed to around 317 for axis. It is reasonable to say you favour Allies.


jump backJump back to quoted post26 Dec 2016, 00:53 AMCresc
It's not really a good way to prove your point, about claiming one is a fanboy, it's good to expose you as a retard.

My point was and still is, that the people supporting the OP's position are pro allies. That still remains unequivocally true and nothing you say changes that fact.

Lastly, I think your claim that you exposed me as a retard needs a lot more work, maybe you and your mummy can look up its meaning and she can explain it to you.:lolol:
26 Dec 2016, 03:27 AM
#91
avatar of Cresc

Posts: 378

allies is around 1235 as opposed to around 317 for axis. It is reasonable to say you favour Allies.



It doesn't matter, you said "only a few axis games", as I said, the number of games is still there and the I 'm better ranked with OKW than I'm with Soviets, I don't favor any side in particular, this is just your opinion.


My point was and still is, that the people supporting the OP's position are pro allies. That still remains unequivocally true and nothing you say changes that fact.


It doesn't, as I said, it's your opinion, and as always it's always coming from those who have no playercard to show.

Lastly, I think your claim that you exposed me as a retard needs a lot more work


I said said that it's only good at exposing yourself as a retard, not that you're one or I exposed you.
Seeing how you still fail at comprehension read properly, it's safe to assume you are.
26 Dec 2016, 06:46 AM
#92
avatar of FalseAlarm

Posts: 182

Permanently Banned
You are validating the claims stated by the OP by replying to this thread.
26 Dec 2016, 08:14 AM
#93
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

It is always helpful when a balance thread disintegrates into who is a fanboy debate. isn't?

Happy holidays everyone.
26 Dec 2016, 13:32 PM
#94
avatar of siuking666

Posts: 707



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


L2p
27 Dec 2016, 02:16 AM
#95
avatar of kingdun3284

Posts: 392

Never give a damn reason why nerfing all the light vehicle that are even weaker and less threatening than FHT but leave FHT alone and accuse me of being biased? Dont u feel shame when claiming yourself being objective?lollll

I am pro ally or not doesnt mean anything to the balance. The op stuffs remain op.
27 Dec 2016, 02:31 AM
#96
avatar of JoeH

Posts: 88

You are validating the claims stated by the OP by replying to this thread.


No it does not. Calling someone out on their bullshit is not validating them it is taking away the validity of their complaint.
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

679 users are online: 679 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49098
Welcome our newest member, Coh2_Relaxed
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM