Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

999 pen shows that weapon is flame (tb grenades, FT's..)
just made a WP grenade, causes BIG fires, but usually not so deadly, good for urban areas

Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

That's not a bug, that's a special code for "not ordinary penetration".

Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

But wouldnt that make Flame weapons much more effective against armoured vehicles then say weapons that use HEAT in the game?

Since the RPO-A Shmel can take out even the best MBTs in the game with a single shot. Then you wouldn't even consider using standard AT weapons, since the Shmel can be used on a variety of targets. It also provides anti-TI screen.

Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

Not really, flame weapons aren't sooo effective,or else the armies using ATGM would be saying ooga booga, ALSO, it is a waste of ammo to use a RPO-A Shmel against a HMMWV or similar vehicles

Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

I was referring to WinSPMBT, firing a Shmel @ a soft skin vehicle (truck) results in a devastating amount of casulties. I've been using it more then RPG type weapons in the game, since if alot more effective.

Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

The ‘Russia’s Arms’ (Оружие �*оссии) directory of Russian weaponry seems to say that the RPO-A thermobaric warhead is “intended” for use against infantry in buildings, fortifications and vehicles (soft skinned or lightly armoured).

There are two other types of rounds for the Shmel. The RPO-D, which is a red phosphorous smoke round and the RPO-Z, which is an incendiary round that can be used against buildings, soft skin vehicles and terrain covered by inflammable vegetation.

‘Russia’s Arms’ also says that in terms of blast, blinding (smoke) and incendiary effect these rounds are equivalent to 122mm artillery projectiles of a similar designation.

Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

P.S. The RPO-M, also known as the RPO PDM-A ‘Shmel-M’, is an improved version of the RPO-A. The blast effect of the RPO-M thermobaric warhead is said to be comparable with that of a 155mm / 6" HE artillery shell.

Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

Just as a point of note:
In the older games RPO's where lethal against tanks. In one game I nailed about 30 Leopard 2's with them. They've been downgraded at some point recently. Despite encountering a great many RPO rounds with my tanks they've not been killed (Bailed and routed yes, but not dead).

Now if you want a Weapon to be scared of, have a look at the US 40mm TB grenade launcher, that offs MBT's alarmingly well. In one game recently I was using some Cougar MRV's with engineers as route proving for my main attack. They got ambushed in a city by a platoon of chieftains. So they dismounted and cleared out the tanks with those grenades.

Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

Still, those are far more expensive, i use AT4/LAW/Bazooka/Panzerfaust/RPG for attacking light/unarmored vehicles

Re: Smoke vs buildings
 

Back to the original topic, I saw today an article in a newspaper about a military fire brigade of a certain garrison here in Finland: this year they have had to extinguish several small forest fires started by the phosphorous in smoke shells.

Griefbringer