Anyone using flamethrowers consistently well?

[Shooter]

I've been trying to figure out how to make my flamethrower unit more useful. Other than making himself a spectacular barbecue, he's not much good in any battles I've had so far. It seems like the AI will target him as soon as he's spotted. Killing is quick and fairly easy.

Any tips to keep them alive long enough to become a nuisance?

[Buckeye]

Well, I can't claim too much expertise, but you need to do at least a couple things:

First, don't bring him up to the front lines until you have a target in mind. When you do, he needs lots of buddies around him for support.

Second, you need to lay down lots of suppressive fire before you try to bring him to bear on a target.

Third, don't waste him on isolated squads, because he only has a few squirts. Go after buildings where troops are hiding/suppressed, pillboxes (from the flank and only when suppressed), and even AFVs (if you can catch them unaware, which isn't easy).

Others will probably make additional suggestions. But with some good tactics and a little luck, you may get a chance to toast a few of the enemy. It's great fun to watch, but only if it's you doing the frying.

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

"Don't lie to me, Gustav! You're a stinkin' Mac user!"

[chrisl]

In a somewhat gamey tactic, FTs are great for scouting, because they draw fire like nothing else. Even the most disciplined troops will come out of hiding to shoot at them.

(No, I don't do this with them-- I do the careful walk up and toast thing).

[John Kettler]

Shooter,

I haven't used one offensively yet, but a flamethrower makes a dandy ambush weapon...as an ex-French tank under Wehrmacht command learned the hard way last night. Sadly, he had

several friends close by (StuG IIIs), who proceeded to hammer the heroic duo entrenched in scattered trees into eventual oblivion.

As far as offensive operations go, I strongly recommend lots of suppressive fires, obscurants and using every terrain wrinkle to maximum advantage.

Hope this helps.

John Kettler

[ June 27, 2002, 04:35 AM: Message edited by: John Kettler ]

[Cybeq]

Hmmmm.... Interesting topic. I just got the game myself so my only comment is to chime in with Shooter. I played the gold demo assault on the segfreid line and I kept my flamers safely out of the fray. When I felt brave enough to move them from hiding and make German flavored pop tarts they up and surrendered on me! DOH!

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

"To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence." -Sun Tzu, The Art Of War

[Shooter]

Chrisl: You're right about flamers attracting fire like magnets! Kinda reminds me of the 88mm gun in SP...

John K.: I've tried using them in ambush and have found that, if conditions are right and they are stealthy enough, I can manage squirting off one shot before burning for it. When I do get the shot, I usually get a 50-50 chance at doing some major damage.

I'll keep testing ideas and will let you know if I find a method better than the excellent ones given already. I have a feeling gammon bombs and molotovs will be better than flamers against tanks.

[Guest Imperator]

Here's an interesting (and probably gamey) use for flamethrowers:

Set a row of tiles on fire to create a lasting smokescreen. Sure, it cuts both ways, but it's great for things like moving your units laterally without coming under fire, or making a slow advance past enemies on a flank. Flamethrower teams rarely have more than 4 or 5 tiles of flame, so investing in a flame tank isn't a bad idea. Other gamey ideas include flaming three sides of a box to get a defensive position that can't be flanked, making a prison for captured troops and a haven for crews and FOs out of ammo, or blocking a road. (If you burn just 3 tiles on each side of the road (you don't need the corners) and put antitank teams with LMGs there, the enemy will have a very hard time getting past there except for a wide flank, which may not be practical with vehicles.) You can burn across woods laterally to stop enemy infantry from attacking through there, if that's what you're expecting. You can create artificial bounds for your tanks; they can pop out from behind a burning line, fire a couple of shots, and reverse back to repeat it the next turn. In some cases, you can use a flame tank to trap infantry inside some woods, making them useless for the rest of the battle. The smoke is also useful if you fear aircraft. Set the ground behind your pillbox on fire and it's safe from a rear door attack. (The crew will also have a tough time bailing out, but that's their problem, those cowards. Set the sides on fire too and you're safe from demos.) In urban combat, set a whole row of buildings on fire and you only have to cover the streets in between, which makes it much easier to defend. If you're feeling doubly gamey, set the area around the victory flags on fire, and defend the streets.

To summarize, if you want to use flamethrowers in a gamey way, set the battlefield on fire.

[Shooter]

Just a tad gamey for me. It will make me pray my opponents aren't pyros!

[Guest Imperator]

I would hope no one is gamey enough to try that bloody nonsense in a PBEM.

[Blue Macs]

Setting the battlefield on fire is however a realistic withdrawing tactic for burning up supplies you leave behind and giving you cover. the germans did this retreating from the eastern front

[Shooter]

Blue Macs: True, scorched earth tactics were indeed used to deny territory, etc. I don't know of any battles where fire was used as a defensive feature though, do you? Sounds like something I'd love to read about/build a scenario of in the future.

Imperator: Hehe, yeah, I hope none of my opponents read your reply! I'd have to think a bit to figure out a way to beat that one....other than demanding to play with 'rain' set as the weather conditions!

[nijis]

I don't know if flamethrowers were ever used historically as a terrain toaster, but it strikes me that denying the enemy the use of a particular house, or maybe even creating a barrier of burning woods between you and the general direction of attack aren't gamey. Taking advantage of the predictably 20 meter by 20 meter immobile square shape of the flame is definitely gamey. I wouldn't try the first tactic in a PBEM unless there's some consensus on the matter, though.

[Formerly Babra]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Imperator:

Here's an interesting (and probably gamey) use for flamethrowers: Set a row of tiles on fire to create a lasting smokescreen.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wouldn't call that gamey. Rommel set houses on fire to provide a smoke screen for his crossing of the Meuse. I've read of Crocodiles deployed on the flanks of an advance to a) kill anything on the flank and seal it off with a wall of fire.

Surrounding units with flame does seem a bit gamey though.

[Guest grunto]

load them on a vehicle and rush them to the point of attack. sometimes that works. one time i had one straggle way back and crawl up the valley in vot. when he got to the town there were some isolated american half squads around and this flamethrower unit proceeded to flame 4 of the plomville buildings.

so yeah it helps to move them up behind friendly infantry but i still dream of getting one into place via passenger movement on a vehicle.

say you have four tanks... load them with:

1 platoon hq

2 squads

2 baz/pzk

1 hmg (.50 cal/hmg42)

andy

[muzzlehead]

On the offense: Use your flamethrowers as a diversion to the actual attack. Send them up a flank away from the main force. When the main force is in position a turn before launching the attack, start lighting up terrian. It attracts the enemies attention and forces that may have been released to deal with your main thrust may remain to guard against another possible threat.

As Tank support in towns: with the AFV button up have the FT move in and flame potential ambush points and hiding spots.

[Wako]

One way to get around the fragility of flamethrower teams is to get a flamethrowing vehicle. The Wehrmacht has a couple and I believe the Allies do to.

In a PBEM game I was recently playing with Fionn, he ran a SPW flamethrower right up to a church that I had a well entrenched platoon in and set it on fire. A very useful (and quick) way to get pesky infantry to leave the cover of buildings.

I was laughing at this SPW thinking that a few grenades would take care of it while it was firing it's MG in a futile gesture at the church when this curving tongue of flame comes out and faster than you could say Zippo, it was all over for my boys.

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

wako

"All models are wrong - some are useful.'' - George E.P. Box

Check out my CM webpage at http://ccpirate.webjump.com

[Fionn]

That little beauty is the 251/16 and is currently, along with the 250/9, my favourite toy to play with in CM .

It is absolutely wonderful for taking care of anyone who likes to defend from buildings. Simply run a couple of these beauts in and set fire to his whole defensive position . Great fun

[Buckeye]

Yeah, but next time, Fionn, keep an eye out for Ami 50 cal MG and zooks! I've learned my lesson!

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

"Don't lie to me, Gustav! You're a stinkin' Mac user!"

[Bertram]

As for putting fires as a 'gamey tactic',

In the house to house fighting in Arnhem both sides put houses on fire, to rout out defenders, when retreating to deny the other side the cover, and to light up the terrain during night fighting.

Bertram

[Jeff Heidman]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bertram:

As for putting fires as a 'gamey tactic',

In the house to house fighting in Arnhem both sides put houses on fire, to rout out defenders, when retreating to deny the other side the cover, and to light up the terrain during night fighting.

Bertram<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the tactic that most people were claiming was overly gamey was setting terrain on fire such that your enemy cannot get to the victory flags.

That is a bit gamey, although it would be hard to do since you do not actually have to posess the flag to get it to change sides.

Jeff Heidman

[tar]

It would seem that one reason the flamethrowers igniting parts of the terrain works out to be gamey is because the fire is so well behaved. In reality, depending on wind and other environmental factors, the flames would move about and thus be much less desirable as a defensive barrier in close proximity to one's own forces. The suggestion of burning the area behind the bunker door would be less attractive if there were a chance that the fire would spread to the bunker itself -- which would be one of the real world concerns.

Maybe fires should be able to spread? A call for enhancement?

[Guest Imperator]

If you really want to use FTs effectively, hide them in foxholes near a road. They work particularly well near junctions and bridges where the enemy vehicle will often stop or slow down to turn. If the FT is exposed, it's a one-time use thing, because the TacAI loves to target FTs, but even so it's worth it for anything more than an empty truck.

If you can move them through good cover, try a wide flank. Enemy troops do not appreciate napalm shooting from behind them while they're taking cover from other threats in front.

[Demangel]

"It would seem that one reason the flamethrowers igniting parts of the terrain works out to be gamey is because the fire is so well behaved. In reality, depending on wind and other environmental factors, the flames would move about and thus be much less desirable as a defensive barrier in close proximity to one's own forces. The suggestion of burning the area behind the bunker door would be less attractive if there were a chance that the fire would spread to the bunker itself -- which would be one of the real world concerns.

Maybe fires should be able to spread?

A call for enhancement?"

I totaly agree with you on this one tar. Adding a wind effect in this game could make it even more interesting... Your smoek shells etc would have to be placed differently, and fires would have to watched closely! ESPECIALY in very dry gournd conditions where a fire could start many meters from the first one!

[Priest]

I have found that the Jeep and the Flamethrower go very well together. I was playing an mission and after suppressing an area where a bunker resided with about 4 squads I rush the jeep along the one side of the bunkers field of fire (the bunker itself was taking a lot of fire) and managed to get along side the bunker. The flamethrower jumped out moved to about 5m and away we go. The .50 cal on the jeep was added insurance while the flamer was doing his job. I have been able to use this tactic multible times with a moderate to good success rate. You just have to use the jeeps advantage (speed) with the flamer disadvatage (speed). Great way to get at bogged assault guns too.

Priest

[Guest kking199]

Consistent no, but I think I understand how to use them now, most of the suggestions here are excellent. FT charateristics, small, slow, powerful, terror weapon. I think it is obviously a great ambush weapon against any target. Great weapon to clear out an area (building, woods). For me, the difficulty is being patient when using this team, because they are so slow. The Jeep/FT combo is a great idea. My last battle, I used 2 FT's with a Comp HQ as a emergency defensive line, they were in woods. It worked great, drove the Inf back into my Art barrage or into a Platoon of Inf or into 2 HMG fields of fire. I will agree that using FT to block a Victory location is gamey, but using to redirect or block access elsewhere seems logical, and certainly historic.