Flame Throwers Vs. Tanks

[soldier]

In short I think SPWAW gives a great rendition of the effects of FT in the game.RT

I still have a few problems with it. I don't remember seeing a tank immobilized by flame,or any systems damage occuring. I don't remember seeing crews bail from a tank hit by flame. What i have seen is the tank instantly pop. From 2 hexes flame tanks are quite accurate at instantly destroying opposing armour no matter what the conditions (wind rain etc). Troops themselves when hit by a flame thrower instantly lose half and retreat. This assumes that the squad is all standing right next to each other and i think experienced troops would be somewhat spread out. It seems likely that at least someone could maybe return fire just once and hit the offending FT (turning him into a human torch) but this never happens. The attacked squad is instantly in retreat. There should be some more variation in combat results maybe ?
Flames proper and most devastating use should be against stationary confined positions (pill box, bunker etc), not a terrible annihilator in all circumstances. Similarly troops easily walk through huge forest fires with only very minor suppression. And like everything else the smoke from fire acts like a force field in the open.
I'm not complaining about it and it doesn't really bother me (the smoke does) but i don't think its modelled very well at all .

[KG Erwin]

Soldier, in rain or storm the smoke dissipates quickly--on a clear battlefield, it tends to be more persistent (wind effects are not modeled). Given that combat is abstracted anyway ( with 5-minute turns, you have battles lasting only 2 hours or so), there is much that beggars credulity in real-life terms.

Once you firmly grasp that SPWaW isn't a simulation--it's a game, with the intent of generating the "feel", if not the actuality of WII combat, then I think you will appreciate it more.