Where are flamer towers and hardpoints?

[Rommel]

Is there some reason that these are not included?

[aubergine]

Scavs use flamer towers. And in Contingency mod I think there are flamer hardpoints.

The only time I've ever used flamer defence structures is in Contingency mod, because they are strong enough not to get blown to pieces long before the enemy gets in range of them. In normal WZ, I find them almost entirely useless as static defence structures except in a few rare cases if I can hide them behind terrain near choke points.

[Rommel]

I was thinking of them as good defense against massed army rushes - the slow reload time of other towers and hardpoints can make them a bit useless against massed armies, where flames will damage lots. I know we have the flame bunkers, but these are killed off quickly by inferno units. I am sort of looking at some kind of counter to inferno / plasmite hover rushes.

[The Overlord]

I am sort of looking at some kind of counter to inferno / plasmite hover rushes.

Use walls.. lots of walls. Also, using the red bodies help.

[Rommel]

True this Overlord - in fact I just finished quite a long game where my opponent was using flamers to rush me. In the end it was about patience, something I normally lack... I ended up pushed back to my base and while my factories were destroyed a few times, the flamers didn't have the capacity to damage much my massed hardpoints and such.

After that it was just a matter of building up my heavy twin assault cannon and battening down the hatches until I got to groundshaker. Unfortunately for my opponent he didn't think to research to groundshaker and once I massed my groundshaker emplacements then units, it was all over.

In the end though, this is not a solution because a good enough player would have had ground shakers as well and due to the fact that I was held at my base by his continual flamer / inferno then plasmite attacks he would have had the advantage of territory and all would be lost.

[Rommel]

double post

[NoQ]

Flamer bunkers are really weird. Sort of the most useless defense you can imagine: it never reaches the enemy unless the enemy uses flamers himself, and if he does, then they get destroyed almost instantly (bunkers burn very well, unlike walls, towers, or hardpoints).

The only use for flamer bunkers is the one depicted in several spots of the campaign: you might have noticed that sometimes a well-placed flamer bunker behind the corner cannot be shot until you get into its range.

Flamer hardpoints would have been a very useful defense, actually. They would effectively stop the enemy from moving through before destroying them, and they would also aggressively block any pure flamer offense.

Maybe allow some? At least for the standard T1 flamer. Or at least emplacements, to put some in front of the wall.

[The Overlord]

Flamer bunkers are really weird. Sort of the most useless defense you can imagine: it never reaches the enemy unless the enemy uses flamers himself, and if he does, then they get destroyed almost instantly (bunkers burn very well, unlike walls, towers, or hardpoints).

The only use for flamer bunkers is the one depicted in several spots of the campaign: you might have noticed that sometimes a well-placed flamer bunker behind the corner cannot be shot until you get into its range.

You must not play much high oil (NTW), NoQ, as flamer bunkers are very helpful in such games. For example, when defending, no one wants to go into the flamer bunkers later game after mortars have become dominate to the point of cyborgs being of little use. This makes the opponent kill the flamer bunkers (which have a lot of kinetic defense) taking a while - while your incendiary mortars attack their units.

Even when your opponent has flamer cyborgs, they usually will avoid the flamer bunkers as it can be devastating against them when your opponent is trying to attack your mortars quickly (even if you have no mortars, your units can be positioned behind them to shoot over).

All in all, it is a good tool to use when defending. I can see why you might want flamer towers/hardpoints, but i think there are more pressing issues for the devs to develop then this at the moment.

[Jorzi]

I agree that flamer bunkers are quite useful in NTW games as a form of area denial. Ironic though that their weakness turns out to be other flamers.

[anonim17465]

I recently wanted to check a tactic, where I will use solely a fast artilery, in hit-and-run mode, and will hide in walls when attacked.
Just one problem, when enemies are too close to the walls, my own artilery destroy that walls in a second. So, I need something that will keep enemies away from my wals, like flamethrower hard point... But wait, it does not exist by some reason

Why? It may be usefull. Even if tactic described above isn't good, I still want to try it out, but I cant...

Bunkers are not good against rush at all (they are useless because they can't fire through walls and couple of flamethrowers will destroy them in a second)

[montetank]

Why? It may be usefull. Even if tactic described above isn't good, I still want to try it out, but I cant...

I agree completely. For a long time now i wondered why scavs have flamer towers and i have not the chance to try it out.

[crab_]

Flamer bunkers sometimes useful in low oil games.
You can build 1-2 of them and be sure enemy army will not pass. Enemy army will be forced to destroy your bunkers.
For example. Machinegun towers or couple of MG bunkers cannot stop enemy army because damage is too low to be noticeable for 20-30 tanks passing your chokepoint..
Of course Flamer bunkers are usable if you play Flamers and did not researched another tech.

I think Flamer hardpoints/towers were removed from game because we have too long Build Menu.
Flamer hardpoints could be very good counter against incoming enemy flamers

[anonim17465]

Enemy army will be forced to destroy your bunkers.

if they will include 10% of flamers in their army, destroying the bunker will not be a problem at all. MG can destroy bunkers good too.
The thing is that you can't use a defence structure that uses close combat if the same structure is very weak in close combat...

[richard14110]

Is there some reason that these are not included?

Did you read my topic at viewtopic.php?f=30&t=11500 within this "Ideas and suggestions" forum? There seems to be no feedback from you...

[ClockWork]

I agree completely. For a long time now i wondered why scavs have flamer towers and i have not the chance to try it out.

...Because the 'scavs got it right. When the project went on researching the flamer, they said, "Screw it, we don't have walls, put it on a bunker."