Why do ingenery need sturmovie ingenery to get flamethrowers?

Other factions can immediately make flamethrowers. Why not soviets?

It would be OP I guess  :P. Conscripts can already get molotovs. Adding flamers to the mix just screws with stuff  :P

thats like saying fast grenades for U.S. eliminates flamethrower needs... Molotovs aren't free. Maybe if there was a 50 munition one time cost (no munitions upkeep in the whole game) to allow a conscript squad to throw molotovs for free on a cooldown basis

I was wondering the same myself. There really is no good reason for this requirement, especially considering how easily the ingenery die.

Molotovs are incendiary devices, grenades not. So you cannot really compare both. They are more similar to Panzerfaust/Panzerschreck or AT nades/Panzerschreck decisions than anything.

i agree. the inerjy squad does not need a buff. thats the whole point of strumovie inerjy's.

if you consider with snipers around.you just need to kill 1 of the pio and he has to retreat.but with ingery since its a 4 man squad.it would be problem.

Also remember that a 4 man squad can recrew a team weapon and then still retreat and reinforce again.

Its not a bug its a feature :D

You have molotovs in early game to clear buildings. Same as PE doesn´t  have flamethrowers but a incendiary nade, it doesn´t break gameplay.

The Panzer Elites incendiary nades are a lot more affordable and have better range than the molotovs though. The molotov range nerf was too much imo. It's by far a much poorer option than the incendiary grenades, or the flammenwehrfer.

Dot.Shadow wrote:
The Panzer Elites incendiary nades are a lot more affordable and have better range than the molotovs though. The molotov range nerf was too much imo. It's by far a much poorer option than the incendiary grenades, or the flammenwehrfer.

Quit whining about prices until you see 1.6

Dot.Shadow wrote:
The Panzer Elites incendiary nades are a lot more affordable and have better range than the molotovs though. The molotov range nerf was too much imo. It's by far a much poorer option than the incendiary grenades, or the flammenwehrfer.

Lol? Molotovs are by far cheaper and faster to get. I talk about the new patch because there is no point of discussing old things.

Killar wrote:

Dot.Shadow wrote:
The Panzer Elites incendiary nades are a lot more affordable and have better range than the molotovs though. The molotov range nerf was too much imo. It's by far a much poorer option than the incendiary grenades, or the flammenwehrfer.

Lol? Molotovs are by far cheaper and faster to get. I talk about the new patch because there is no point of discussing old things.

Basically this.

And in 1.5 is 50 munitions and 100 manpower for unlimited throws between Navals and Conscripts...So what exactly are you crying about?

Panzer elite Incdy is 20 munitions IIRC, if not 15, per throw. Either way, you only get 2-3 throws for the same cost as the Molotov upgrade. On top of that the molotov upgrade doesn't cost fuel. (This is 1.5 I speak of.)

You have to be the least nice balance team I have ever written to. I'm not "crying", I'm stating my opinion you ****hole.

I'm not even going to bother posting my opinon anymore, the balance team is way too arrogant and mostly interested in harrasing posters here.

Edit: I've seen this kind of behaviour from the balancers in nearly every thread. Their replies are mostly based on "lol *impy that person doesn't know anything about CoH*. The lack of respect for the community is shocking, especially towards people who haven't even posted anything rude and offensive. If you seek to drive people from this forum, you've succeeded. I'm outta here.

Last edited January 14, 2012 at 2:09 PM by Dot.Shadow

Dot.Shadow wrote:
You have to be the least nice balance team I have ever written to. I'm not "crying", I'm stating my opinion you arsehole.

I'm not even going to bother posting my opinon anymore, the balance team is way too arrogant and mostly interested in harrasing posters here.

I do apologize if I come across like this but recently the way I've read your opinions is that you are Soviet Biased. We try to be as neutral as possible (Or else would there be balance?)

You also imply that we do things for no good reason or because we feel like it.

Dot.Shadow wrote:
There really is no good reason for this requirement, especially considering how easily the ingenery die.

Everything we do goes through hundreds of pages of internal responses and we rigorously test everything and come up with our own solutions.

You are most certainly welcome to post your opinions.

Perhaps I was a bit blunt, but in the early mornings I don't have much tolerance and besides, the Soviets have a full overhaul in 1.6, so save opinions until then. Every aspect of 1.5 has since been changed, even though 1.5 was a huge improvement on balance. Any balance complaint made about 1.5 at this point is most likely obsolete.

I guess its b/c of how easy it is to get molotovs and the amount of infantry they get is the reason they dont get flamers. You could flank and use arty (if CS has vet) and the conscripts that are flanking can throw molotovs, adding further dmg. Other factipns early on dont have as many options to clear out the enemy I guess so giving the SU so many options may make them OP.

But then again Im no expert so.....take my opinion with a grain of salt :P

A post that doesn't have much actual backing to it comes across as "crying".

Dot.Shadow wrote:
The Panzer Elites incendiary nades are a lot more affordable and have better range than the molotovs though. The molotov range nerf was too much imo. It's by far a much poorer option than the incendiary grenades, or the flammenwehrfer.

You say that the range is shorter than incendiary nades but ignore the benefits, mainly being cheaper, doesn't slow teching, more spammable and is available on a more throwaway squad. It is also used against axis who are more likely to use buildings, cover and heavy weapons which the molotovs excel at fighting.

About the flamer issue, ingenery are the best basic flamethrower troops available once they get the upgrade. Therefore it makes sense to have to tech for it, when it also gives powerful assault infantry which dominate on the open field. Brits and PE don't even get flamethrowers and they manage vs buildings.

And yes, when we make changes months ago to something and have someone bring it up it annoys us somewhat because we forget you don't play with our version. We're not all perfect.

Quotebenefits, mainly being cheaper, doesn't slow teching, more spammable

also it uses commen sense, for example, which is more readlily availiable and cheaper, incinadary grenades or vodka?

stealthattack1 wrote:

Quotebenefits, mainly being cheaper, doesn't slow teching, more spammable

also it uses commen sense, for example, which is more readlily availiable and cheaper, incinadary grenades or vodka?

Never quite thought of it like that, good point  ;D

Cranialwizard wrote:

stealthattack1 wrote:

Quotebenefits, mainly being cheaper, doesn't slow teching, more spammable

also it uses commen sense, for example, which is more readlily availiable and cheaper, incinadary grenades or vodka?

Never quite thought of it like that, good point  ;D

Makes sense  :)

Dot.Shadow wrote:
Edit: I've seen this kind of behaviour from the balancers in nearly every thread. Their replies are mostly based on "lol *impy that person doesn't know anything about CoH*. The lack of respect for the community is shocking, especially towards people who haven't even posted anything rude and offensive. If you seek to drive people from this forum, you've succeeded. I'm outta here.

...  :-\  I might still be new to the forums, but in most (if not all) posts by devs, balancers and even donators are very polite, I use the examples of people asking for help producing maps, installing and (in my case) discussing "veterancy"

I'm sure his tone might have been misinterpreted, as is common on the internet, so I suggest forgiveness, and a game of COH?

its also possible to explain it in simple words
every army needs weaknesses

one of the soviet weakness is that they get later flamers and minesweepers then other armys

evilSpike wrote:
its also possible to explain it in simple words
every army needs weaknesses

one of the soviet weakness is that they get later flamers and minesweepers then other armys

I believe their real weakness is Soviet need to rely on multiple type of units more than any other faction...
But this thing also work...

Thats why:

Soviets have molotovs to clear buildings. If they have additonal flamers from the start you can imagine in what trouble the axis player would get...
Or in other words: Imagine PE with a flamer and incendiary nades

I just think SU already has enough options to clear out buildings. Although I think the molotiv range is a bit too short. Cocscrpts must get extremely close in order to throw itt, usually resulting in their death (even though they are suppose to die :P)

@Dot.Shadow: Everyone has bad days. And I can imagine doing this stuff is stressful. And although I dont always agree with everyones behavior, Im willing to forgive and forget for its what makes healthy relationships. I suggest we all do so :)

[quote author=Fishhunterx link=topic=7253.msg104842#msg104842 date=1326927818]
I just think SU already has enough options to clear out buildings. Although I think the molotiv range is a bit too short. Cocscrpts must get extremely close in order to throw itt, usually resulting in their death (even though they are suppose to die :P)
Still is irritating when you have to pay the MP of 1-2 conscripts to throw a firebomb.