Jump to content

Flammpanzeren in CM2 EastFront?

Recommended Posts

They do list several FlammPanzer on the "Resources" page for Combat Mission on the main Web site, so it looks like you'll get to play with them in CM1.

What I would love to see, though, is that Churchill engineer assault vehicle with the huge--what? 280mm?--gun that is included in CC2. Man, do I love that thing! It's kind of like the Allied equivalent of a Sturmtiger. More fun than a wrecking ball!

If it *is* in the list, and I'm ignorant of the nickname it's listed by, please let me know.

Dar Steckelberg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think that flamethrowers are _very_ overrated in CC series. In CC3 pretty much everyhing explodes or dies the moment flame touches the unit, and I don't think that is realistic.

Psychologically a flamethrower is very effective weapon since just about everybody is afraid of getting burned. But in practice you had to get very near the enemy and it is not too easy to hit individual soldiers with the flame jet. Also, heavy winter clothing could protect soldiers quite well when worn. (*)

Of course, a flamethrower was effective if it could be aimed at bunker openings or some other nonmoving target.

During Winter War and early Continuation War Finnish army captured about 30 Russian flamethrower tanks (T-26 based, 3 different models). In 42-43 _all_ were converted to have 45mm guns. The reason: it was found out that flamethrower tanks were pretty useless in real battles. The visibility from T-26 was poor and the tank had to advance way too close to enemy infantry to be comfortable. When the tank was near enough to use its flamethrower the enemy infantry was close enough to throw Molotov coctails.

Of course, other flamethrower tanks were better designed than T-26 (notably Crocodile), but they had the same weakness that they had to get quite close to the enemy.

(*)When I was in army we had an exercise where we put out napalm fires with old winter overcoats and blankets. We would pour napalm over a dummy, set it on fire, and then every one would put the fire out on his turn. We also covered one of our sergeants (a volunteer wearing winter clothing) with the stuff and torched him. He only lost his eyebrows. That was definitely the most interesting excercise that I participated during my army term.

- Tommi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Big Time Software

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I personally think that flamethrowers are _very_ overrated in CC series.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well put. In fact, Atomic has repeatedly been poked fun at for their over use of all things that produced flame. These were engineering vehicles that were designed to take out fixed fortifications. They were NOT designed to drive around the battlefield roasting random enemy soliders.

We will have some flame tanks in CM, including the British Crocodile.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest R Cunningham

That was my quote, but I can't remember if I posted it under my Nom de Plume (E. Waugh)given to me by old Mick(xe5) or not. I spent some time surfing trying to find a suitable screenshot from "A Bug's Life."

In fairness to Atomik, the flamers never really were all that prevalent in the game simply because they were expensive and often not very effective because they are vulnerable. They were (and are) very prevalent in those screenshots they use to entice Joe Sixpack to make an impulse purchase so he can roast somebody. And you have to admit that their flamethrowers are prettier than anything from a "Gather and Overwhelm" style RTS game. I think they implemented the group command just so they could get the synchronised flaming for those screenshots. I never use the group commands in CC3. Though I wonder if sometimes KZ hasn't watched too much Beavis and Butthead "Fire, Fire, Fire. Heh heh, fire is cool."

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Create New...