Login

russian armor

Flame Halftrack

PAGES (8)down
18 Sep 2018, 23:14 PM
#61
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 338

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Sep 2018, 10:15 AMStark




Exactly, +1

So unit did really well on a recent GCS2 and now people want to nerf it. Eh, all factions have counter to this unit so don't see the problem.

Unit fits ostroopen strat and mobile defence. Puma will be tied to tech so partly problem is solved


I agree yet WASP was nerfed so hard that grens can now walk through and faust ya (range bullitin + sprint ftw). FHT is balanced like old wasp was because they died so quick to AT guns or lights (222, luch, puma killed old wasp in seconds).

Flame vehicles should be scary but they should be a premium, this should go for KV-8 or Croc too. Make em terrifying and something you should focus your army on to safeguard infantry. I don't like this current screaming of OP because people want their mainline to walk through fire like some sort of terminators.

If there was an issue with old wasp then fix the timing or price, FHT does NOT need the same nerfs to make it a "meh" unit.
19 Sep 2018, 07:31 AM
#62
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066



I agree yet WASP was nerfed so hard that grens can now walk through and faust ya (range bullitin + sprint ftw). FHT is balanced like old wasp was because they died so quick to AT guns or lights (222, luch, puma killed old wasp in seconds).

Flame vehicles should be scary but they should be a premium, this should go for KV-8 or Croc too. Make em terrifying and something you should focus your army on to safeguard infantry. I don't like this current screaming of OP because people want their mainline to walk through fire like some sort of terminators.

If there was an issue with old wasp then fix the timing or price, FHT does NOT need the same nerfs to make it a "meh" unit.


Yeah but people wanted the uc to be more hardy so it could be used more effectively. I think that is one of the best things that happened to the uc. Unfortunately, it had to result in the wasp needing to be towed down as it was insane for a time lol.

Wasp is underwhelming though, certainly. I would simply make it a cheaper upgrade and be done with it.
19 Sep 2018, 07:43 AM
#63
avatar of HoverBacon

Posts: 204

Wasp is basically only good if you need to clear buildings as Brits literally have no other way of doing that reliably early game right now. Thankfully the vickers normally wins machine gun duels. It's not as good as the vickers upgrade (vet 2 vickers k reks hard)

It's not as good, but it's basically essential.
19 Sep 2018, 16:42 PM
#64
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 2725



Yeah but people wanted the uc to be more hardy so it could be used more effectively. I think that is one of the best things that happened to the uc. Unfortunately, it had to result in the wasp needing to be towed down as it was insane for a time lol.

Wasp is underwhelming though, certainly. I would simply make it a cheaper upgrade and be done with it.

There’s also the problem that it literally barely outranges grenadier fausts if they have the range bulletin and gets 1 shot by double schreck pgrens. This wouldn’t be so much of a problem if it wasn’t one of the only garrison clearing tools brits have.
19 Sep 2018, 17:11 PM
#65
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 6629 | Subs: 1


...
And this is bad design.

If want to replace a unit with a timing tax or build it at a point in the game past its prime, then I'm being punished just because a unit could have potentially come early and created shock value - that's just silly.
...

Not necessarily.

Generally speaking getting the price right for units is not very easy. But there are simple solutions for this issue.

For instance one could offer a discounts to lower tech vehicles once higher tech levels are achieved.
19 Sep 2018, 20:37 PM
#66
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066


There’s also the problem that it literally barely outranges grenadier fausts if they have the range bulletin and gets 1 shot by double schreck pgrens. This wouldn’t be so much of a problem if it wasn’t one of the only garrison clearing tools brits have.


Well it used to have insane range and would completely counter Ostheer tier 1 at a point. You can't give it better range and more potency damage wise. Its either one or the other. I would prefer it doing more damage, but that would require the uc to be less tanky, as it is quite easy to keep alive now apart from its horrible pathing
19 Sep 2018, 20:49 PM
#67
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 2725



Well it used to have insane range and would completely counter Ostheer tier 1 at a point. You can't give it better range and more potency damage wise. Its either one or the other. I would prefer it doing more damage, but that would require the uc to be less tanky, as it is quite easy to keep alive now apart from its horrible pathing

Yeah it’s a tricky unit to balance for sure. Maybe giving it more DoT would let it be a hit and run unit against stationary targets (read: mgs in buildings) without doing so much immediate damage and without having to buff it anywhere else.

90 muni is also a bit much for a flamer on a vehicle even lighter than the ost flame track IMO.
19 Sep 2018, 22:54 PM
#68
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3402 | Subs: 1


Yeah it’s a tricky unit to balance for sure. Maybe giving it more DoT would let it be a hit and run unit against stationary targets (read: mgs in buildings) without doing so much immediate damage and without having to buff it anywhere else.

90 muni is also a bit much for a flamer on a vehicle even lighter than the ost flame track IMO.


More dot would make it pretty cheesy I think. Plus we went through the whole normalizing flame damage thing a bit back.
What about a buffed target size? Make it a bit harder to hit so it can do what it needs to? Or an ability to spurt flame a bit further and an acquisition price reduction on the wasp? Kinda pay per use but not entirely?
20 Sep 2018, 05:26 AM
#69
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 2725



More dot would make it pretty cheesy I think. Plus we went through the whole normalizing flame damage thing a bit back.
What about a buffed target size? Make it a bit harder to hit so it can do what it needs to? Or an ability to spurt flame a bit further and an acquisition price reduction on the wasp? Kinda pay per use but not entirely?

True. IMO its still a better solution but it would take some careful tuning. It’d obviously be awful if all it had to do was just roll up at max range and spurt flames for like half a second and run away to kick an mg out of a garrison.

Any target size reduction significant enough to make a difference would make the thing into a frustrating rng nightmare for both sides IMO. Imagine the thing just dodging like 2 schreck volleys by luck and cheesily escaping or getting hit with one and just dying.

And then pay per use defeats its purpose as an actual garrison clearer. You might as well just throw nades and arty flares at that point and have a vickers k UC that doesn’t have any of the issues the WASP does.
20 Sep 2018, 14:04 PM
#70
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3402 | Subs: 1


True. IMO its still a better solution but it would take some careful tuning. It’d obviously be awful if all it had to do was just roll up at max range and spurt flames for like half a second and run away to kick an mg out of a garrison.

Any target size reduction significant enough to make a difference would make the thing into a frustrating rng nightmare for both sides IMO. Imagine the thing just dodging like 2 schreck volleys by luck and cheesily escaping or getting hit with one and just dying.

And then pay per use defeats its purpose as an actual garrison clearer. You might as well just throw nades and arty flares at that point and have a vickers k UC that doesn’t have any of the issues the WASP does.

So improved mobility then?
20 Sep 2018, 16:12 PM
#71
avatar of Kharn

Posts: 264

Whatever the change, the main frustration with this unit is generally how effective it can chase you down on retreat and melt health squads. It deals a ridiculous amount of damage to retreating squads.

Otherwise I don't have much of an issue with it.
20 Sep 2018, 16:47 PM
#72
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3402 | Subs: 1

What about improving the wasp firing arc so it doesn't need to be almost right on to shoot? Just a few degrees more traverse could help a lot with being able to hit and run garrisons.
20 Sep 2018, 17:35 PM
#73
avatar of Cresc

Posts: 368

flame HT is just the old T70, I don't see how this is ok, but since it's an axis unit nobody cries op.
21 Sep 2018, 14:19 PM
#74
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 1824

UC is a great car..one of the best in early into midgame...its much better than some other expansiver cars.

idk what u talk about...you shredd models fron enemy while dont need MP for it...easily selfrepair..and kill the next 3-4 models.

with flamer its get much better in so many ways. and this for a low price.
21 Sep 2018, 15:53 PM
#75
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 447

UC is a great car..one of the best in early into midgame...its much better than some other expansiver cars.

idk what u talk about...you shredd models fron enemy while dont need MP for it...easily selfrepair..and kill the next 3-4 models.

with flamer its get much better in so many ways. and this for a low price.


I am so going to use brits and the uc now. You totally changed my mind about brits. Would you happen to sell some shady penny stocks too?
21 Sep 2018, 16:24 PM
#76
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 1824



I am so going to use brits and the uc now. You totally changed my mind about brits. Would you happen to sell some shady penny stocks too?


maybe u dont see any streams where famous caster build it mostly right after the first MG. and doing nice stuff with it. It isnt that bad like someone want to tell us here..
21 Sep 2018, 17:28 PM
#77
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13953 | Subs: 7



maybe u dont see any streams where famous caster build it mostly right after the first MG. and doing nice stuff with it. It isnt that bad like someone want to tell us here..


^How to spot someone who wasn't paying any attention to CGS2.

If its such an amazing unit, why pro players are avoiding it like fire(pun intended)?
Is it because only one faction axis heroes struggling for 50% WL ratio are capable of fully understanding and utilizing the unit?
21 Sep 2018, 17:32 PM
#78
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 1824

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Sep 2018, 17:28 PMKatitof


^How to spot someone who wasn't paying any attention to CGS2.

If its such an amazing unit, why pro players are avoiding it like fire(pun intended)?
Is it because only one faction axis heroes struggling for 50% WL ratio are capable of fully understanding and utilizing the unit?


how often was the brit faction played? more than 10times?
talk more about your statistic knowledge...its funny bro.
21 Sep 2018, 21:27 PM
#79
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 2725



how often was the brit faction played? more than 10times?
talk more about your statistic knowledge...its funny bro.

More than 10 times less any of the other factions, sure. It also lost almost all the games it was picked in.
21 Sep 2018, 22:29 PM
#80
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 6435 | Subs: 1



how often was the brit faction played? more than 10times?
talk more about your statistic knowledge...its funny bro.


I wonder WHY would that be the case. Why didn't Refero or Hans brought them to the finals were serious games were at stake (the only 2 players who decided to use them at all during the qualies).

In fact, why not check what all the finalist were playing during it and before ? Or even better, add USF into the mix and compare it to GCS 1.

When you have people who "mained" certain factions dropped them completely, that's a big red flag. Say, Devm's with USF and HH with UKF.

It's also "funny" to compare the ratio of factions picks during the qualies between the overall stats and the ones who made it into the finals.

Allied faction picked was basically at a rate of 4/7 SU, 2/7 USF and 1/7 UKF. On the other hand, finalist had a 80% SU pick (84 over 105 games). Honorable mention to HH who brought both USF n UKF into the mix, because if that wouldn't be the case, both USF/UKF turnover would had been a joke. Refero picked only 3 times UKF (lost in all) over 13 games, Luvnest used it once (and lost) over 14 games. He did use USF once. Same with Von and Jesulin (1/18 and 1/12 respectively).

---------------------------------------------

Going back to topic. Just take a look at what Nosliw/SturmP/Stark said. Addressing the PUMA is basically going to fix the issue. It could be less of a retreat wiper but i'm not sure there's an easy way of reducing that in comparison to small arm fire. You can't just cut down DPS in the same way.
PAGES (8)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Finland 17
Peru 14
United Kingdom 0

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • The British Forces flag isi
  • Soviets flag Brickman
  • Ostheer flag Artavick
  • Ostheer flag [c.B] Brosras
uploaded by Isildur

Board Info

144 users are online: 2 members and 142 guests
egixe, Providence
89 posts in the last 24h
983 posts in the last week
3568 posts in the last month
Registered members: 73658
Welcome our newest member, egixe
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM