Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Who Uses Flame Throwers?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat: Panthers in the Fog >> Who Uses Flame Throwers? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 1/6/2014 12:55:28 AM   
CGGrognard


Posts: 594
Joined: 10/3/2013
From: USA
Status: offline 		Let's face it, with the larger map sizes in a Panthers in the Fog, there's little opportunity to use the support of a flame thrower. Plus the limited support slots
gives mr little inclination to use them. On occasions that they have been used, they have a shorter life span than an Opel transport! There just doesn't
seem to be a good battle to use them, unlike The Stalingrad mod for CC3 where "close combat" was actually a reality. That said, has anyone had any success (I.e. a kill, team survives battle) with a flame thrower team?



_____________________________

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." - Sun Tzu
Post #: 1
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 1/12/2014 2:15:49 PM   
Chris77

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 6/13/2013
Status: offline 		I absolutely agree with you. Once again we are back to the main problem, with this otherwise good looking game. The way the "requisition" system works, combined with the size of the maps, leaves little room for single flamethrower or sniper teams. When you can get a tank, you definetely go for that.

I guess Matrix went for realism with regards to the way the forces were deployed, and how the forcepool is put together. Had there been a "pioneer" or "assault" squad to choose, which would include a demolishion/flamethrower unit, it would have been a different talk.
It´s quite simply the biggest problem with the game. A force selection screen that allows the player to costumize his units with a higher degree of freedom, is the biggest wish I have for a future update and/or new release.

(in reply to CGGrognard)
Post #: 2
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 1/12/2014 3:23:40 PM   
CGGrognard


Posts: 594
Joined: 10/3/2013
From: USA
Status: offline 		It was the intention to make PitF historical, but in doing so, some of the things that were admired in previous issues, have become irrelevant. Battle group organization is important historically, but at the same time, players want to develop their own Battle Group organization. The question is how to bridge those two ideas?
Historical Battle Groups are good in that you as a commander must utilize your limited resources in the best manner possible. Given that there are larger maps limits the use of individual soldiers or teams effectively, especially flame throwers or snipers (are there snipers in PitF?). However, the player can use these limitations to enhance their skills. I'm certain any Commander would love to have their own choice of force structure given the mission.
A requisition system allows an open structure to build a Battle Group, and perhaps just as important, allow a Commander to develop their soldiers through out a campaign. Although not historical, it raises another set of challenges in how to build your Battle Group for any given engagement. If overpowered, the battle becomes boring as the enemy is easily discharged; underpowered groups just the same.
Personally I like historical builds because I believe it provides an opportunity to understand what Commanders at that time were dealing with. So flame throwers, snipers, AT teams do have a place in PitF, albeit limited.


_____________________________

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to Chris77)
Post #: 3
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 1/12/2014 3:54:17 PM   
mooxe


Posts: 314
Joined: 10/25/2003
Status: offline 		There's nothing wrong with leaving it to the player to form a historical selection of troops for battle. Most games are vs the AI anyways.

_____________________________

Close Combat Series

CCS on Youtube

Join Discord for tech support and online games.

(in reply to CGGrognard)
Post #: 4
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 1/17/2014 9:59:07 PM   
CGGrognard


Posts: 594
Joined: 10/3/2013
From: USA
Status: offline 		In a number of single player battles, I chose flame throwers over tanks, guns and AT teams. In every battle, not only were the flame thrower teams lousy shots, they were quickly dispatched. Perhaps it's why flame throwers are no longer used in armies.


_____________________________

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to mooxe)
Post #: 5
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 4/8/2014 10:13:24 AM   
Pvt_Grunt

 

Posts: 327
Joined: 2/13/2007
From: Frankston Victoria
Status: offline 		Our man Kim does......
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/kim-jong-un-executes-security-minister-3386271

_____________________________


(in reply to CGGrognard)
Post #: 6
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 4/8/2014 4:38:08 PM   
CGGrognard


Posts: 594
Joined: 10/3/2013
From: USA
Status: offline 		That's sick! Especially what was suspected to be done with the remains.


_____________________________

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to Pvt_Grunt)
Post #: 7
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 4/29/2014 9:37:39 PM   
STIENER

 

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline 		the "requisition" system BLOWS in this game. simple as that . it made what could have been a great game...mediocre at best. im hoping but have my doubts that the battle for Caen or what ever its called, will have some up grades to the "requisition" system.
Matrix should have stayed with the LSA "requisition" system and options.

i stopped playing PITF months ago and am playing LSA GJS mod.....which is very very good, but sorely needs some tweaks...Cathartes....where are you bro

(in reply to CGGrognard)
Post #: 8
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 5/2/2014 11:48:39 PM   
Ozymandias2

 

Posts: 52
Joined: 7/2/2011
Status: offline 		I use them specifically in a situation (Grand Campaign game H2H generally) where a cluster of buildings is closely contested (especially where both sides can start in the same building near a VL.) I never take more than one per battle, but, when I do, some 1/3rd of the time it can be a decidedly nasty surprise

_____________________________


(in reply to STIENER)
Post #: 9
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 5/9/2014 9:54:04 PM   
vobbnobb

 

Posts: 103
Joined: 9/23/2013
Status: offline 		Searched for the US flamethrower team but didn't find, am I missing something here?

(in reply to Ozymandias2)
Post #: 10
RE: Who Uses Flame Throwers? - 5/11/2014 5:27:25 PM   
SteveMcClaire

 

Posts: 4472
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline 		Flamethrowers were not issued to US Army units as part of their regular TO&E. They were handled by the Chemical Weapons service and issued for special situations like assaulting fortifications. So a US Army infantry or armored unit would not normally have any flamethrowers at all.

Steve

(in reply to vobbnobb)
Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat: Panthers in the Fog >> Who Uses Flame Throwers? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.109