The Uselesness of Flamethrowers
- Thread starter PossiblyInsane
- Start date
Hmmm well maybe they might not be very affective against zombies... IF THEY WERE REAL
But back in WW2 their very helpful in clearing motar pitts a trenches from enemies in really devastasing destruction
But back in WW2 their very helpful in clearing motar pitts a trenches from enemies in really devastasing destruction
They are used to burn down wooded areas that guerrillas use to hide. Notice the heavy use in Vietnam? Also they are good for burning alien bio-mass in Alien Swarm, but that might be unrelated.
Real flamethrowers ain't your traditional short-range low-ammo knockoffs you see in so many games.
They're long-range and that shit keeps burning.
They're long-range and that shit keeps burning.
Its easy to clear/kill a room of enemies with them too. I mean, think about it. when you;re on fire and you run into someone, you get that person on fire. plus fire jumps a nd catches other materials, and with the crowd logic of "run like shit when shit goes down," you'll get alot of people.
Primarily they were used to clear bunkers but their real value historically was terror. People are afraid of fire in a way they are not with bullets which they can't actually see.
One word: Intimidation. Yes they are effective for clearing foxholes and ect. but so are grenade launchers. But flamethrowers are extremely intimidating, I mean, imagine a 50 yard line of fire sweeping across your comrades, closer and closer, leaving them sreaming, thrashing piles of flesh on the ground. I'd prolly be so scared i couldnt even breathe, much less fight back.
You try staying in a bunker with your machine gun while someone is using a flamethrower to burn out all the oxygen you need to breath. That's what the US army/marines did during the war in the pacific.
It ain't useless buddy, it's only extremely situational.
It ain't useless buddy, it's only extremely situational.
I don't think that trench and bunker warfare is done that much anymore, but they're very effective at clearing both of those things. Remember that scene in Saving Private Ryan where they fire the flamethrower into that bunker and it just roasts everyone? That's a fairly realistic interpretation of the effects of a flamethrower. They're also good in close quarters urban combat if you don't care about preserving buildings, and they're fantastic terror weapons.
It's a terrifying and highly effective weapon. The trade offs were worth it. The only reason they're not banned is because they're probably the most sadistic weapon in existence. Also, you can't cause a flamethrower to explode just by shooting the tank. The fire produced comes from a mixture of two chemicals that are rather innate by their self.PossiblyInsane said:
Now, considering zombies, if a zombie is made by a virus infection like in Resident Evil, then flamethrowers are the absolute best weapons. The heat would cook the viruses while a bullet would probably just spill the virus.
