Making Enlisted a Better Place №5

[doshskia]

its obscure knowable due to how hollywood and games like to always perpetuate the GOOD and the winners but none of the bad

[Bravo_two_Six]

@116344108

you are forgetting that the pressurised propellant is flammable and that there is a flame at the end of the flamethrower? it would not be instant but it would make ye go up in flames

Not always, it depends on the system in use.
The US M2 for example, wouldn’t explode, it would just leak petrol/ kerosene everywhere. If the propelling gas was struck, it would pop like a deodorant tin. It wouldn’t explode or burst you into flames. Most systems used compressed Nitrogen, which is non-combustible.

All this comes from the standard hollywoodism of “lets make that explode for the effects”.

As Voyo says, the ignition is away from the fuel and a bullet wouldn’t ignite the fuel itself 99% of the time.

[doshskia]

@41048361

compressed Nitrogen

in the late war not the early war

@41048361

explode

lets replace this with fireball

@41048361

If the propelling gas was struck, it would pop like a deodorant tin

and disperse the gas every where

@41048361

bullet wouldn’t ignite the fuel itself 99% of the time.

this is true but the gas would spread to fire around you very quickly

[Shiivex]

so, keofox…

why cant we have flametrowers and/or mortar soldiers in another types of squads?
why there isnt a premium sniper/flametrower/mortar/bomber/radio squad yet? and we already have campaigns with 3 premium assaulters (normandy for example) ?

[Bravo_two_Six]

@116344108

in the late war not the early war

Nope, Nitrogen was the favoured propellant, certainly with the Axis and the FmW.35 from the start.
Even the “Kleinflammenwerfer” of 1917 used this gas due to its known non-combustible status.
The E1 variant (1940) of the M1A1 we see in game also contained an upper compartment to contain pressurised Nitrogen gas, it also had Hydrogen fitted, but this was to act as the ignition system, as it is incredibly flammable.

Nitrogen also doesn’t damage its surroundings and is pretty harmless to men and machines, and also performs superbly under pressure. Which is why the Axis systems used it.

The ROKS.2 system also used it, I believe, which entered service in 1935. The tank propellant tank is hidden under the fuel tank which is also disguised (on the ROKS 2) as a soviet issue knapsack.

@116344108

and disperse the gas every where

And the gas would disipate, causing no damage… as it does not combust. The very reason it was prefered.

@116344108

this is true but the gas would spread to fire around you very quickly

Only if there was something near you to ignite it.
Which, there likely wouldn’t be in the time you’d ditch the backpack and run away screaming.

Either way,
The original point the user made about correcting it so that they ‘Explode’ when shot is obsurd.

[WidowMakerUk73]

Thank for enabling resistance on flame troop 2

[Project_ICEY]

@doshskia

excuse’s that people make up about how its unfair that flame throwers have been buffed

And flame throwers ACTUALLY need a buff.
—An opinion from a not-flamethrower player(doge)

@GermanKrieg

make them explode when someone shoot at your flametrooper back.

That’s not realistic actually.A bullet would hardly lit the liquids inside.That even didn’t take extra protection like safe gas into account.
Also,I haven’t seen any report about flametroops exploded to death from ignited fuel backpack(WWII period,I have done some homework about this before.)

@Norse_Knight

allow more squads to have flametroopers.

Main battle squads(rifles,smgs)should be not taken into account.And to make engineers,ATs and radio ops to have flame troops sounds not only fun but also does great to balancing.