Flame Halftrack

PTRS are supposed counter to cars, if they cant even counter cars there is no point in them at all since they make penal squad useless vs infantry.

It's not even direct damage thats the problem, thats combination of two flamers and dot damage. You cant stay and fire at that thing with PTRS because squad will burn down faster than halftrack gets destroyed and you cant run either you'll get burned on retreat and if you get halftrack low its just ninja smoke and you lose because PTRS cant target ground

That's what I said give pages ago. Panzer Tactician smoke is the main offender.




I'd hardly call an infantry light AT squad a counter to an anti-infantry vehicle. AT guns with snares/mines do well in deterring the 251 and honestly I think most of its effectiveness comes from the stubbornness of Soviet players of calling in softcounter PTRS infantry instead of ATGs. Every German player knows the T-70 is coming and has to prepare counters for it (laying tellers, building pre-emptive PaK/Panzershrecks or even choosing an entire doctrine), but Soviet players somehow seem to refuse to adjust their build orders to face the inevitable flame 251. And they get punished for it.

I think the flame damage itself could be toned down (and duration damage increased) a bit so it isn't as wipey on retreat while remaining as effective against regular targets. But I also think the T-70 wipe-on-retreat potential should be toned down similarly.

There's somewhat of a timing difference between the fht and the T70 allowing for more time to prep. Additionally the Soviet have to chose between penals who get the prts or the lackluster Maxim supported by lack luster cons to have access to the zis. It's like comparing the luchs and the centaur, except in this case the luchs has much more power...

The UC vs Volks thread happily established it was acceptable OKW should sacrifice their build order to get out an early Raketten to counter it (which is a valid argument). I don't see why this shouldn't be the case for the Soviets. If they want Penals but don't want to get rekked by a 251, they should build T2 and get a Zis instead of stubbornly stalling for their precious T-70 with softcounters. If they want to take that risk, they should be willing to accept that PTRS do not hardcounter the 251 and that they might lose units to it.

Damage of the flame halftrack is insane, anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't seen any other flamers perform. It's got better performance with its flamers than a Crocodile, a 12-14 CP Call in doctrinal for the British on a heavy tank.

Yet this half track can skip up to buildings, melt the occupants, burn it to the ground (almost no flame weapons can do this anymore btw). Kill anything as it retreats and does this all while getting the vet1 ability to detect infantry and possibly have some smoke (because we need smoke on every axis vehicle we can, what if you made a mistake? Oh dear!).

Flamer chasing is probably the most obnoxious thing in this game right now. In fact it's SO good that not only is it annoying to play against, but when you play Wehr you're hamstringing yourself if you DON'T do it. It should have its lethality/dot damage lowered and it could receive 20-30 munition cut to the price as 100 munitions is a lot.

As stated, it makes it very difficult to counter when the infantry designed to counter it are being melted faster than you can fire on the damn thing. I'm not saying Half track vs Penal the Penal should win, but 2-3 Penals w/ the upgrade should be able to scare it off.. instead it flames you and you limp back to base... and pray he doesn't follow you to wipe.

The UC vs Volks thread happily established it was acceptable OKW should sacrifice their build order to get out an early Raketten to counter it (which is a valid argument). I don't see why this shouldn't be the case for the Soviets. If they want Penals but don't want to get rekked by a 251, they should build T2 and get a Zis instead of stubbornly stalling for their precious T-70 with softcounters. If they want to take that risk, they should be willing to accept that PTRS do not hardcounter the 251 and that they might lose units to it.

Except OKW don't have to pick, they can build a Rak at T0 so it doesn't really disrupt anything. It doesn't cost them any fuel, and it doesn't cost them any teching....

They can still go Battlegroup or Mechanized.. this isn't the same at all.

Early Raketten costs OKW precious fighting power and arguably map control, as established in the other thread. Besides T2 would delay the Soviet teching by 160MP and 20FU so that's hardly disruptive. They can also get Tank Hunter doctrine to hardcounter the 251. I stand by my point about Soviet reluctance. I think they are generally spoiled by dominating build orders so much.

I have aknowledged that Panzer Tactician smoke should go, and that the flamers shouldn't be as powerful against retreating units. Other than that, I remain convinced that the rest of the 251's performance is fine and most of its effectiveness comes from reluctance to adjust build orders for hardcounters.

Picking an obscure doctrine nobody uses to counter the 251 isn't a viable option. You shouldn't need a doctrine to counter a core unit.

Also, you pick up a Rak to counter the Bren and you KILL IT. So now you're "field presence" is higher than the Brit who honestly, how are you struggling to fight the Brits?

They're the worst faction right now since their Spring nerfs and the fact they weren't even played in the last tournament should be a real eye opener.

Volks have such value, you should be wiping them off the field. The bren is the crutch of the UKF early game and you can easily wipe that out w/ a Rak as its the BANE of all light allied vehicles.

Picking an obscure doctrine nobody uses to counter the 251 isn't a viable option. You shouldn't need a doctrine to counter a core unit.

Are you kidding me? Did you miss the entire Mobile Defense meta against T-70 for the last 6 months? Also IIRC in the GCS2 qualies there were multiple occasions Tank Hunters was succesfully used (by Luvnest I think) to deter Ostheer light vehicle rush.


Anyways I have made my point, we can agree to disagree.

The T-70 hasn't the wiping capacity of the flamers that not only murders shit super fast, but denies cover to your units unless you want to see them evaporate even faster.

A single teller can take out a T-70, you get access to Panzershrecks, fausts without side tech and the AT gun comes in the same building as your HT.

I think you're making the assumption I only played allied factions. I've fought many a T-70 and while it's a great unit, it's a unit the Soviets lean hard on to gain field dominance and if you deny that it can be a knock out blow as it cost them quite a bit of fuel to field the tiny terror that is the T-70.

The UC vs Volks thread happily established it was acceptable OKW should sacrifice their build order to get out an early Raketten to counter it (which is a valid argument). I don't see why this shouldn't be the case for the Soviets. If they want Penals but don't want to get rekked by a 251, they should build T2 and get a Zis instead of stubbornly stalling for their precious T-70 with softcounters. If they want to take that risk, they should be willing to accept that PTRS do not hardcounter the 251 and that they might lose units to it.

How are you with math? So building a 270mp unit in t0 that can retreat when threatened and cloak to stay out of trouble deviates okw from their combat potential despite starting with the most aggressive engineer unit in the game AND volks only cost 250mp.

Assuming it's say the 3rd unit built you spend a total of 770mp on units and nothing on teching. You have 3 combat units and a back capper
That is some how comparable this for the soviet:
Conscriot for 240mp
Build t1 for 160mp
Build penal for 300mp
Look at that already up to 700mp
But wait, there is more!
The combat ineffective CE is withdrawn to base (not back capping)
Spends another 160mp building t2
Then another 320mp to build a zis.

So 3 combat units (if you can somehow count CE as a combat unit...) and an AT gun for Soviet costs 1180mp and 30 fuel as well as spending time in base building (something okw doesn't have to do)

So for almost the cost of 2 volks the Soviet player can side tech and get out an AT gun totally the same!

This is why you have to wonder if these people play both sides of the coin because their arguments are glaring one sided....

This is also why Soviets spam infantry out of the gate so they can win the MP war vs the OKW. As 5 man volks are very cost effective and provide a nice faust wall without side-teching.

Early Raketten costs OKW precious fighting power and arguably map control, as established in the other thread. Besides T2 would delay the Soviet teching by 160MP and 20FU so that's hardly disruptive. They can also get Tank Hunter doctrine to hardcounter the 251. I stand by my point about Soviet reluctance. I think they are generally spoiled by dominating build orders so much.

I have aknowledged that Panzer Tactician smoke should go, and that the flamers shouldn't be as powerful against retreating units. Other than that, I remain convinced that the rest of the 251's performance is fine and most of its effectiveness comes from reluctance to adjust build orders for hardcounters.

The building doesn’t counter flame ht though. That’s what the 320 mp at gun is for. I don’t think the flame ht is OP or anything, but frankly I don’t see how spending 480 mp and 20 fuel is comparable to 270. Bit of a ridiculous argument and not equivalent at all. Again, I don’t think flame ht is OP but you're dragging your perceived cross over the UC into the flametrack thread without any good reason. Also, if you really want to get into it, okw starts with a potent combat squad and does not have to construct buildings in the early game while soviets start with 4 man conscripts and the need to construct buildings right off the bat. Soviets will always have less very early game combat power. Raketen can also be safely used for early game capping because it can retreat.

Depending how your read his sentence, he isn't wrong at all. To have Gren, you need T1 which also unlock faust.
Now you can also lose your faust ability while still having Grens.
...

Actually you can have Grenadier without T1 since you can call them with 250. Is their any point on this debate thou?

He's just waffling at the idea that its hard to use light vehicle when Axis naturally have a faust screen while most allies either require side tech or veterancy (or none if you're brits) to protect yourself from LV attacks. You can effectively snare tanks as Axis while you get your panic AT gun out. Sure it costs munitions, but only munitions. SU has to side tech which slows down a counter while axis don't need to side tech to counter.

I mean imagine if a the Rak was tied to the Battlegroup? I mean why not, the Mechanized has the Puma for AT, then you got Rak's in Battlegroup for your AT

Then we'd have the debate on how necessary it is to have BG.. sort of like how necessary it is for SU to have Support tier as Penals wont be fighting off the Flamerhalftrack that easily (or at all!)

Also, the fact that FHT made the scout car irrelevant.

Axis naturally have a faust screen while most allies either require side tech or veterancy (or none if you're brits) to protect yourself from LV attacks. You can effectively snare tanks as Axis while you get your panic AT gun out. Sure it costs munitions, but only munitions. SU has to side tech which slows down a counter while axis don't need to side tech to counter.

Allies have side techs, axis have higher teching up.

Also, the fact that FHT made the scout car irrelevant.

It didn't, because 222s primary role is countering lights like M3, UC or dodge. Pair also handles AEC with ease.

Also, the fact that FHT made the scout car irrelevant.

The 222 costs no munitions and can kill any light vehicle that costs less than it does.

Wait, people actually invest 90 munitions into a vehicle that dies to two AT gun hits and can't move fast enough to avoid the second AT gun hit after the first lands even at max AT gun range?

I always thought people bringing up "but the flame halftrack" as some kind of argument about Ostheer's T2 being potent was a joke/troll.

Wait, people actually invest 90 munitions into a vehicle that dies to two AT gun hits and can't move fast enough to avoid the second AT gun hit after the first lands even at max AT gun range?

I always thought people bringing up "but the flame halftrack" as some kind of argument about Ostheer's T2 being potent was a joke/troll.

The lines when you set up an AT gun is the firing arc. If you are outside of that it can't shoot you (this rule doesn't apply to machine guns for some reason) after you take the first hit, move OUT of the arc instead of remaining in it, your units will survive much longer. Exit arc stage left, not backwards. You can thank me later for revolutionizing you game experience.