Flame Halftrack

The T70 IS getting a nerf.
Also the T70 costs over 2x the price of the FHT and comes later when more counters are present. I don't think you understand how balance works. If a unit is over performing that unit gets adjusted. A unit doesn't get adjusted because an unrelated unit in a different faction with a different role with different timing gets adjusted. The Cromwell doesn't get adjusted because of the puma, the Katy doesn't get adjusted because of the tiger.

I'm just saying that the Flame HT is in a fine spot after this recent nerf. Cresc is asking for even more nerfs after everything that already happened. I know the T70 is getting recon nerfed and i think the t70 is also in a good spot.

It's exactly the same when Ostheer refuses to hardcounter (i.e. Puma) the T-70 and stall for medium armor instead. It's a risk and sometimes it doesn't pay off.

Yes you hardcounter with Puma when you don't even have a choice for puma. It's not like Soviets don't have every single tool in core choices to counter flame HT and it's not like it doesn't die super easily.

Might have something to do with the then 320mp into JUST teching, let alone if they teched any of the HQ upgrades (another 200+mp into making cons worse volks and 250mp for static model by model healing). Side teching for a zis makes it effectively cost 480mp (2 whole gren squads) which leaves one hell of a hole in your field presence, especially if they went t1 for penals costing a whooping 300mp.

Side teching isn't feasible unless you are wiping enemy squads left and right. You will be more than over run and you can be sure a shit the Maxim isn't going to be a force multiplier that will hold hordes at bay...

I find it quite hilarious that it is somehow totally acceptable that Ostheer needs to sacrifice an entire doctrine choice (vs T-70) or that OKW should sacrifice fighting power and build an early Raketten (vs Clown Car), but that the idea that the Soviets would have to adjust their build/tech order to counter an Ostheer strat would be completely inconceivable.

Not sure how those tech costs are really an argument either as Ostheer needs 380MP (assuming a T1 was built) just to get the T2 up, then another 200MP for the unit itself.

Bottom line is that the Soviets usually refuse to adapt to enemy strats and sometimes they get punished for it. Seems fine to me.

Flame HT is stupidly strong, ukf has no counters early enough

High risk, high reward. The vet buff only applies if the HT is not upgraded. We're talking about the flame HT. Just like how the T70 got its lethality nerfed. So if the flamer HT is getting another nerf, T70 should too.

For risk to be high, there needs to be risk.
Its not anymore fragile then any other unit around that time and there is no unit that has even remotely comparable firepower.

You want to know what is high risk high reward unit?
M3 with flame engies. Becauase if you lose M3, you may lose whole flamer squad with it, its also very fragile and has short range, FHT doesn't.

Your logic is also completely flawed.
Nerfs to one unit never are justification of nerfs to any other unit, especially on the other side, all cases are individual.

Yes you hardcounter with Puma when you don't even have a choice for puma. It's not like Soviets don't have every single tool in core choices to counter flame HT and it's not like it doesn't die super easily.

You talk about ATGs, which FHT roasts in seconds?
Or PTRS squads, which also happen to lose life to FHT faster then the other way around due to need to be completely immobile to deal said damage?

Flame HT is stupidly strong, ukf has no counters early enough

It arrives at same time as AEC can be build. Also you can built a PaK earlyer. So... the situation isn't worse than flame-carrier.

It arrives at same time as AEC can be build. Also you can built a PaK earlyer. So... the situation isn't worse than flame-carrier.

But you are not building FHT vs brits, you build 444, which counters infantry AND AEC AND wasp UC.

But you are not building FHT vs brits, you build 444, which counters infantry AND AEC AND wasp UC.

lol a 222 versus Brits? I would never build that unit at that situation. Tommies and Vickers have to high DPS versus the 222 to be useful + the op PaK which hits 90%.

I don't say brits are good, but a 222 is the worst counter. ^^

lol a 222 versus Brits? I would never build that unit at that situation. Tommies and Vickers have to high DPS versus the 222 to be useful + the op PaK which hits 90%.

I don't say brits are good, but a 222 is the worst counter. ^^

Yeah, I know you wouldn't.
It doesn't really work in non competitive modes like 3v3 and 4v4.

Doesn't change the fact that it is the go-to way in 1s and 2s.

And no, tommies do not have high dps against it, its the very reason why 222 is so extremely effective against UKF and vickers can be just flanked/circled, because guess what? No AT snare on anything, but that is about to change.

Yeah, I know you wouldn't.
It doesn't really work in non competitive modes like 3v3 and 4v4.

Doesn't change the fact that it is the go-to way in 1s and 2s.

And no, tommies do not have high dps against it, its the very reason why 222 is so extremely effective against UKF and vickers can be just flanked/circled, because guess what? No AT snare on anything, but that is about to change.

Thats is why the 222 got so expensive. It is NOT to waist it and it will be a waist at such situations. Also it becomes irrelevant in lategame. Instead of T70 and AEC. Ok, it is better at AA as Ostwind...

If you fight frontal versus 2 Tommies at a range the MG has good DPS you will lose 2/3 of its HP. Thats not how a AI verhicle should work like. And UK will get a AT-grenade.

The way to go, more armor for the 222. Normal rifels and normal MGs shouldn't pen it. Lets say, Vickers without Vet and Maxim.

Thats is why the 222 got so expensive. It is NOT to waist it and it will be a waist at such situations. Also it becomes irrelevant in lategame. Instead of T70 and AEC. Ok, it is better at AA as Ostwind...

If you fight frontal versus 2 Tommies at a range the MG has good DPS you will lose 2/3 of its HP. Thats not how a AI verhicle should work like. And UK will get a AT-grenade.

The way to go, more armor for the 222. Normal rifels and normal MGs shouldn't pen it. Lets say, Vickers without Vet and Maxim.

I would let Vicker's penetrate it as well as MG42 can Daimler. Anyway Daimler armour is too high anyway as it was the same as 222 --> Armoured Car, not a damn light tank.

I would let Vicker's penetrate it as well as MG42 can Daimler. Anyway Daimler armour is too high anyway as it was the same as 222 --> Armoured Car, not a damn light tank.

Only with Vet1 ability. Which Vickers gecomes passive heat with Vet too.

Edit: German T2 and T3 is simply dead. 251 can work with 100% micro. And Panzer 4 can work, if map has many corners to hide.

I'm just saying that the Flame HT is in a fine spot after this recent nerf.

The recent "nerf" changed almost nothing. It's timing is the problem, not it's veterancy rate.

And cannot believe that you actually said the cost decrease from 120 to 90 and changes that came with it where a net nerf. There were 3 other changes besides the cost that occurred in that patch:

- Ready aim time was buffed by half a second
- The garrison multiplier was nerfed by .25 (you could literally insta-melt full health squads)
- Vet 3 cooldown bonus for 251s MG now applies to flamethrowers

So a cost decrease, 2 buffs, and 1 nerf.

You: "This is clearly too much nerfing, this unit shouldn't be touched"

I find it quite hilarious that it is somehow totally acceptable that Ostheer needs to sacrifice an entire doctrine choice (vs T-70) or that OKW should sacrifice fighting power and build an early Raketten (vs Clown Car), but that the idea that the Soviets would have to adjust their build/tech order to counter an Ostheer strat would be completely inconceivable.

Not sure how those tech costs are really an argument either as Ostheer needs 380MP (assuming a T1 was built) just to get the T2 up, then another 200MP for the unit itself.

Bottom line is that the Soviets usually refuse to adapt to enemy strats and sometimes they get punished for it. Seems fine to me.

I'm searching through the text y oh quoted but can't find how you got the idea where I think the puma as is or clown car are fine. I've read it a few times so if yuu would care to highlight it for me it would be much appreciated.

And there is a HUGE fucking difference between manpower out towards earning armour and manpower used for side teching/lateral teching. The whole point of the penals getting PTRS is to allow t1 some AT and provide a defense against lights. Ironically t1 should be the counter to a FHT not the t2 that the FHT is designed to counter.

As for costs, the MP is extremely important because as I said in my previous post, side teching to get a zis is a massive manpower investment and manpower directly impacts field control which oddly isn't even an area Soviet excell in due to poor performance from their t0 units and higher than average price in their t1/2 units. Side teching for a zis you could build a con squad and unlock healing. My only point here is that it's far too costly the side tech and preteing that it's even an option is very biased thinking. People pretend that building a Rak too soon has too heavy an effect on combat capability despite starting with a Sturm squad and having very effecient volks yet throwing 480mp at side teching and rolling out a zis is somehow feasible

If you can force them to side tech you have wine the match because there is no way you can't press that massive advantage of 2 squads, especially if you are inducing panic and bleed with something like a FHT.

Katitof makes good points here,

222 beats british at gun, and it beats vickers. If you dont have AeC or PIATS yet, you're dead.

For risk to be high, there needs to be risk.
Its not anymore fragile then any other unit around that time and there is no unit that has even remotely comparable firepower.

You want to know what is high risk high reward unit?
M3 with flame engies. Becauase if you lose M3, you may lose whole flamer squad with it, its also very fragile and has short range, FHT doesn't.

Your logic is also completely flawed.
Nerfs to one unit never are justification of nerfs to any other unit, especially on the other side, all cases are individual.

It's hard to destroy the fht right off the bat but a single zook or pair of ptrs will seriously damage it putting it out of commision for a while so u can get stuart/t70/at gun. Keyword MAY lose engis. You use the same logic all the time in your arguments. FHT doesn't roast at guns any faster than T70 can kill it. Anything not in garrisons the fht and t70 have around equal lethality unless u blob troops against a fht.

Just think about it. U can usually get one wipe if you're aggressive with your FHT costing the opponent 240-300mp. Try and chase another squad into the base, I guarantee, you'll be met with either t70,stuart, AAHT, AEC, bunch of ptrs/zooks. The chance of you escaping a light vehicle is around 0% and the chance of escaping handheld at is around 25%. You'll lose a 200/90/30 unit while only killing a 240-300mp unit in return. I'd say the FHT is more expensive than any inf unit even if they had a bar.

Counternig FHT with penals is really hard. U need 2-3 squads and n element of luck. Otherwie, they get can make 1 shot max, and then get roasted. Because penals need to stand still to fire PTRS, and standing still vs FHT is deadly. U can try to stay and try to take second shot, but it will most likely end with penals retreating in low HP, and fried on retreat path. Soviets can counter FHT if they didn't go for T1 and go for T2 from the start. If you build T1, u need 440 MP and 20 fuel just to side tech. So if u take T1, IMO, the only way to counter FHT is mines and PTRS ambushes.

Katitof makes good points here,

222 beats british at gun, and it beats vickers. If you dont have AeC or PIATS yet, you're dead.

Royal-Engeneers become AT-Grenade. So 222 becomes a piece of shit again.

I am for a Vet or tech-ability for increaced penetration to perform better in late-game.


Back to topic. I think we all agree now, that the 251 changes arn't that huge and OK.

Royal-Engeneers become AT-Grenade. So 222 becomes a piece of shit again.

I am for a Vet or tech-ability for increaced penetration to perform better in late-game.


Back to topic. I think we all agree now, that the 251 changes arn't that huge and OK.

Not being able to steamroll whole factions early game with no support is hardly same as becoming piece of shit.

And its not supposed to perform better in late game(although its THE very best and cheapest light vehicle with THE very best scaling in game thanks to being immune to 2nd ATG shot being a kill shot at vet) , its T34 of light vehicles, mobile, cheap, fights both infantry and armor, effective in numbers, but outclassed by more expensive stuff.