32 thoughts on “Flamethrower – possible new armament?”

  2. Could be a nice addition to quite an amount of tanks… It could damage/”destroy” engines, for when you are unable to detrack that enemy in front of you 😛

    1. I can’t see them do that, they can’t model it in the game in a logical way, realistically it would be a way to block the enemy view because if it was a damage dealing mechanic it would have to be overpowered against open toped vehicles
      I honestly can only see it as a PvE modification, they could, as an example, add ammo/fuel crates that could be destroyed easily with HE or flamethrower, or perhaps bunkers/gun emplacements where you could take them out with a few HE shells or a burst from a flamethrower

      NOTE: moving forward WG will have to add PvE, that type of mode can retain the players that usually quit early because of not understanding the mechanics and being seal-clubbed early in the game, and flamethrowers are a good mechanic for that type of game mode

  3. This is to counter wheeled vehicles – it melts their tyres so they can no longer move.

    1. Yeah, that was fun.

      But I can even remember a flame tank in CC2, Flammpanzer, based on Jagdpanzer 38(t), available to the Germans at one of the sectors. A real game changer on a Hero difficulty.

  5. Considering that at WG Fest they’ve said there won’t be flamethrower tanks in the game I think they will be coming later this year or next year.

    1. Now that I think about it, could flamethrowers be that new secret mechanic they were teasing in December: “In the near future we want to experiment with new quality mechanics. It’s too early to showcase any concept as we’re still working on them and we will continue our efforts during 2019. So just be patient, we are going to lift the veil of secrecy in the future!”?

    2. Flamethrower tanks…It’s something a Russian must be familiar with. Burning innocent victims en masse etc…

        1. Yeah from Belarus to Transnistria. The script of the Mongolian horde. Most people who have been choked by it remember it well…

          1. Being presumptuous and look down on the people he and his likes has oppressed. And deny of course.

            OP logic

            Remember Katyn (1939), mongol.

    1. Or, they could be completely overpowered. Does no damage, but every shot lights you on fire.

    2. Actually, in reality they were not. The problem was going close enough to use them in real life. But the reality is, tanks were quite vulnerable to flamethrower and other fire based weapons if one could get close enough to use them without being cut down by MG fire from the tank or its main gun, etc. Any open ports, the engine ventilation, anywhere the flames could get in from, would be pretty bad for a tank. In world war 2 at least.

    3. The flames can “suck” the air the engine was supposed to use to remain cool. What happens then ? Engine overheats and gets yellow or red damage (from the WoT panel) and can eventually be set on fire as well consequently.

  7. and after they finish with this thing we will finally get sgt.Oddballs E8 with loudspeakers that play music in combat and inspire friendly tanks around you and ofc premium ammo that makes pretty pictures

  8. WG will offer flamethrower tanks for the first week in every month… Like Frontline.

    Also, House Atreides wanted to know about sonic tanks. When?

  9. What would be the point of a flamethrower in a game with no infantry.
    The only use I could see is dynamic cover (burn bushes and/or fire barrier / smoke screen from a fire) but that sounds like way too much effort to implement for WG.

    1. Historically the flamethrower was used/seen as an AT weapon. The air the flamethrower sucks through its flame is air that the engine won’t get to remain cool. Resulting in possible overheating and/or the engine getting ablaze.

      1. Oh I didn’t know that. That’s interesting. But that’s probably only really used in CQC, and very situationaly. I doubt it would be useful in WoT in that form.

  10. I can’t see much use of it. Short range, I suspect low damage and only effective vs open top tanks or the Scorpion with it’s 1mm armor.

    WG have done stupid questions like that on their instagram for years. I don’t see why anyone of them should become real now suddenly. Done anything from MG’s to the Calliope.

  13. Yea lets totally use Flamethrowers against Armored Tanks. its not it was meant for killing troops or cleaning buildings, but why not. i just want to see how ppl try to get under 10 meters just to put flames at tanks and doing nothing but heat up, instead of shooting them at over 100 meters, but whatever maybe it would be usefull againts open tanks like TDs, but other than that, looks completly worthless to me, also that instagram picture they werent asking if u want that in the game, just in the tank as a imaginary idea

  15. Machine guns WG !!!
    Coaxial machine guns. To clean shit in front of a tank, knock fences, damage light tanks, opscure view.
    But no, next useless mechanic, next waste of time and money.

    1. Great idea, coax machine gun, hope it gets implemented sometimes. Also, coax small caliber cannons like on the Maus and the Swiss panzer would be nice.

  16. WG Q&A: We will not add flame thrower due to it’s too slow to deal damage.
    WG is never trustable though.

Comments are closed.