Flamethrowers

[Mustang]

Okay... just a little thing on flamethrowers and why they seem to not be very usefull.

1. Okay... we all know that flamethrowers draw fire like a dead cow draws flies. Why? Well lets look at the facts. CM is as closely modeled after RL as possible. Now in the pacific theatre, the japaneese forces were primarily dug-in. They also knew that the U.S. forces best chance of nailing them was flamethrowers. They also knew that a flamethrower had a VERY good chance of taking them out and in the process roasting them alive. Therefore they become priority targets. And every other unit sees the flamethrower and targets it outright becuse it is ususally the greatest threat to bunkers, ect. However it seems to be overmodeled, I.E. tanks switching fire from cromwells to FT's.

2. Flamethrowers are slow. So slow they can't keep up with the infantry advance, and so they get killed as they plod across open ground.

The reason this wasn't a big problem in RL is that if you had a couple MG bunkers hosing down the area, you could wait for the flamethrower becuse the other option was to charge bravely into the spray of MG bullets, possibly take it out at great cost to human life and later your folks would get your meadal.

So if the FT is not needed, the infantry proceeds without it. But in the pacific theatre with the enormous amounts of bunkers, you pretty much had no choice but to wait for a FT if you didn't want your command to get wiped out.

And even though this is not the pacific theatre, a lot of this still applies. There is my theroy on FlameThrowers.

*Disclaimer*

I lay no claim to any expertise on this subject. My arguments are open to critisism and as a matter of fact I *hope* to recive some as to make a intresting informative thread. I rank as a 'buff' which means that I have a goodly load of knowlage on many subjects but I am not expert in any of them.

*Disclaimer*

[Mustang]

Hmmm.... I thought that somebody would have some thoughts on this... I personnaly have some un-answered questions about flamethrowers.

[109 Gustav]

Originally posted by Mustang:

Hmmm.... I thought that somebody would have some thoughts on this... I personnaly have some un-answered questions about flamethrowers.

Ask them, and I'll try to answer.

BTW, I think a lot of us would appreciate a little censoring on the sig. Dis is a nice forum.

[Mustang]

BTW, I think a lot of us would appreciate a little censoring on the sig. Dis is a nice forum.

Done.

Just a sec- I wrote down all my questions about flamethrowers into a notepad file somewere...

[Slappy]

Mustang,

I agree with the above and it is VERY true in CMBO where FTs were as good as dead within 100m of any enemy units. There have been several long threads on CMBO FTs that seem to be split into two camps.

Camp A: You need to suppress everyone within 100m of a FT to use it. If you do this, they can be very effective.

Camp B: If I could do that, I woulden't need the FT! I'll just use them on defence.

That said, I have found FTs in CMBB much more effective, even on the attack. I have maneuvered them into range and routed units with them 4-5 times in 2 CD scenarios which I won't list for spoiler reasons.

I think the differences are due to the following:

1. Extreme FOW- FTs remain spotted as Infantry? much longer and so don't draw nearly as much fire moving in.

2. Better suppression in CMBB- Area fire and MGs are much more effective at keeping the defender's head down.

3. Better FT mobility- They don't have access to any of the new move commands (assault, advance) but when moving, they keep up with the rest of the platoon putting them in a better position to fire.

Just some of my observations.

Slappy

[109 Gustav]

German flamethrowers are slightly better than the Allied ones since they can move at the same "move" speed as the rest of the platoon. Sure, their range is only 35m compared to the Allied 50m, but in most cases, once you get close enough it doesn't matter. In any case, flamethrowers are just too expensive to buy in QBs, so spend the points on a HMG or something.

As you may have noticed, the flame vehicles are quite effective. The wasp is the best, since it is fairly cheap and has a 75m range. In most PBEMs, it is considered gamey to get more than one. The German flametrack (IIRC 251/16) isn't bad either. The range is shorter, but you get a bow MG to help with suppression. Then there's the flammpanzer (a hetzer with a flamethrower and no main gun), the sherman croc, and the churchill croc. The crocidiles are excellent for infantry killing, since they have both a 75mm main gun and the flamethrower. The flammpanzer is cheap, but is utterly useless against tanks. The good news is that its frontal armor is more or less proof against zook rounds (but not piats) so you can get in range of American inf and come out alive some of the time.

The biggest problems for flame vehicles and tanks of all varieties are zooks, shrecks, fausts, and piats. Flame vehicles have to get within 75m or 50m of the enemy, placing them right smack dab in zook range. Suppressing the area with tank or mortar fire before a flame attack helps some, but you should never rely too heavily on flame vehicles.

[Vergeltungswaffe]

I have found flamethrowers far more useful, thusfar, in CMBB. The fact that you can suppress the enemy more realistically allows you to maneuver troops like FT up to the front line and actually do their job without getting killed far behind the MLR.

[Chad Harrison]

For the longest time, I thought they were useless in CMBO. But, now playing these scenarios on CMBB, I have been able to use them in canned scenarios. They work great, its just getting them to the front. I try to keep them always moving and just hope that they do not get shot. Once you get them in close, they work wonders on ANYTHING! Whats better now is the ability to command combat engineers with satchel charges to attack anything! Great fun on heavy buildings

Chad

[Holien]

Hi,

Can anyone tell me how to get tanks armed with guns and flame weapons to fire the damn flame thrower.

I should know this but I have forgotten.

I need this asap as I want to flame a certain person!! He has set fire to my bread factory and I want revenge!!!

H

[Redwolf]

Isn' it just "use main gun? - No!"?

I'm pretty sure it is.

[Maxx]

Originally posted by Holien:

Hi,

Can anyone tell me how to get tanks armed with guns and flame weapons to fire the damn flame thrower.

I should know this but I have forgotten.

I would love to know this too. Firing the flame weapon as indirect fire please (vehicles).

[ November 13, 2002, 10:22 AM: Message edited by: Maxx ]

[Holien]

Hi Wolfie...

Nope I have used area target with the main gun and within the range specified of the flame weapon but it just fired the gun not the flamer.

I want to fry a whole bunch of things that are not in sight but would be hit by the splash!!!

H

[demoss]

No reference handy, but a while back it was tested & confirmed that the way to get a flamethrower tank to use the flamer in an area attack is to say NO to Use Main Gun?

Assuming, of course, that you're in range.

[Holien]

Thxs will try that. I had thought to give it a go, but will try it.

H

[Skolman]

Lads, i never had a problem using the flamethrower mounted on a vehicle.I guess you have to be very close to the target area and I am always using the main gun aswell. FT`s can be very dangerous in CMBO, especially in city figths, but you have to be very carefull to use them. You just need a lot of experience i think !

[Casey]

I have found vehicle mounted flame throwers to be extremely usefull.

Try set buildings/terain on fire to deny enemy forces lanes of advance or defensive positions on or near an objective.

Have done this many times to great effect.

[Holien]

Just a quick report. Indeed the way to get flame is to target area and say no the main weapon...

Pity as it would make sense to use both?

H

[Gpig]

Interesting, since you CAN use both.

I definitly remember using a crocodile and ordering it to area target an enemy held section of woods. When asked "use main gun," I said "yes."

The Croc fired it's 75mm, MG's AND it's flamethrower. Laid waste to that area, I can tell you!

Gpig

[demoss]

I'm not sure, but I suspect the use main gun - no being needed may be a change from CMBO to CMBB.

[laxx]

hi,

i like to use flame throwers as part of a 3 person team (tank hunters, sharpshoots, ft) as an anti-tank squad.

Sharpshooters to force hatch down on the tanks, tank hunters to kill the tank. Flamethrowers as backup weapon. I have also killed t-34s with Flamethrowers at close range.

[NewSocialistMan]

I'm surprised that no one has touched on the healing power of smoke barrages when using FT units. I managed to get all of my FT units safely across the street in many cityfight scenarios simply by smoking the street.

Once they are within distance, they just lay waste on anyone within their kill distance.

Probably the nastiest use of FT's I've personally been responsible for was in the Dzerzhinski Tractor Works scenario, where my two FT teams managed 36 infantry casualties and two mortars between them.