Isekai Tensei Soudouki - Vol. 8 Ch. 64 - In Purgatory

[Statci]

@Fussion oh I’m aware of that but I was specifically talking about the Ancient Greek fire which was said to be really strong but people couldn’t rly figure out how the my made. I know that in the present to now you can make similar stuff but I just didn’t think calling that Greek fire would be correct.

 

[ReficuLSolbaiD]

@sambucety there are 2 kinds of flamethrowers, one that uses liquid gas and another that uses a gel like substance called napalm. The liquid gas is not a warcrime, as it is just spitting out really hot flames. Napalm. however, has been outlawed due to its destructive nature. It sticks to whatever surface it touches and burns at temperatures well above what you could get from normal gasoline or engine fuels, capable of even burning through cement walls given time. The true horrific nature, however, is in the fact that if someone attempts to put the fire out the gel will spread and burn them as well, meaning that if someone gets napalm on them, you just have to watch them burn to death. Even the use of water will merely make the fire burn hotter.

 

[urmumske]

@ReficuLSolbaiD You have this completely cocked up in your head. ALL Incendiary weapons are banned in use against or among CIVILIANS AND FORESTS, napalm is not particularly banned over any other flammable fuel for use in weapons.
I think your primary confusion comes from the distinction between a TORCH and a FLAMETHROWER. A torch uses aerosolized fuel and is not designed as a weapon and so is not counted as a weapon until used as a weapon (since the fuel is aerosol it does not cling to a target and so unless its used on a particularly combustible material already on a person it would be difficult to kill someone with). A flamethrower uses liquid fuel so it will stick to most surfaces and continue to burn so long as the target is within effective range range. Both of these would be equally banned in use against or among civilians and forests though; an incendiary tool used as a weapon still counts as a weapon.

 

[Garnt69]

Purged the invaders!

 

[REDRED]

fufua so Balude takes the front lines. I expected as much🤔

 

[TheFirst]

it's not a war crime as it's a different world they don't have a Geneva Convection to ban it.

 

[kaito]

at first I thought they would be pumping poison gas...

 

[kipi]

guns? nah fck that WE GOT FLAMETHROWERS!

 

[sambucety]

@ReficuLSolbaiD I never knew that there were rules in fucking wars hahahaha, may the best win gl hf ? holy crist

 

[ReficuLSolbaiD]

@sambucety lol well I was informed that it was switched to ALL incendiary weapons within civilian and forest areas x.O; but there are several agreed upon rules. These "rules" are essentially things that neither side want done to them regardless -.- most of them are to protect civilians, like I'm pretty sure you'd sacrifice the right to fill a no militarized zone with mustard gas if it meant the enemy couldn't do it to you x.x it does become a big issue when you are facing against terrorist organizations though, as they are not bound by the regulations that we are, so using IEDs in civilian areas and strapping bombs onto little children is all good in their eyes!

 

[Kingseeker]

Fucking finally! Balud at the frontlines is always dope

 

[feha]

@sambucety rules in war is pretty much like what @ReficuLSolbaiD said, things that is agreed upon because you dont want them done against yourself. Just like stuff such as having to declare war before attacking, and other similar stuff like not killing the messengers, the reason countries don't try to gain an "unfair" advantage (for those things where that makes sense, unlike the messenger thing) by doing them anyway is because is because they aim to Win, meaning they will persist and be inflicted with the consequences of other countries knowing they dont play by the rules anyway.
A losing side can however start doing such things as ruining the land before retreating from it (ie. poisoning wells), as they don't expect to survive anyway, and want to inflict anything they can out of sheer spite. Had they any chance to win or ever regaining the territory, then that would obviously be something they wouldn't do, but if there can be no consequences?

Then there is also the few rules that are only there because of "suffering", stuff like those knives that are intended to inflict painful injuries that kill slowly rather than outright kill, or various chemical weapons. Things where a country has no reason to fear it being used against them but simply doesn't want it done anyway, because of sheer goodwill (maybe those decisionmakers had seen enough pain on the battlefield already to want some change for things that doesn't affect their win-chances either way? Or maybe it is out of moral reasons - as in, the stat that if it goes too low then people desert)

 

[jessiej]

@TheFirst Honestly, i dont see a problem with it provided its used to defend your country from an invader. The defender should do anything and everything in their power to protect their people and win the war even if they have to commit 'war crimes' on the side attacking them, provided its in self defense...

 

[MF0012006]

According to my knowledge...Flamewerfer usually are powered by compressed air, but they are just holding a cylinder withoutextra stuff to hold compressed air....how would that work?

 

[SetsugoKioshi]

*Erika song plays*

 

[Nk9bjP4A]

This will be the longest battle in history. Several months? Maybe half year?

 

[Mangadexorgy]

are they using are they using somekind of flammable liquid?
water didn’t work so im assuming it’s gasoline, but how would they get gasoline or is there a more primitive flammable liquid?

 

[Owyn]

@Mangadexorgy
dude, have you even heard of greek fire?

 

[Kokuho]

too all of you primitives,

yeeting pressurized oil that gets lit at the last second also works as a kind of flame thrower

 

[kikix12]

@Wireath Arrows shot at a wide arc have a definite maximum speed of fall. And that speed of fall doesn't give them enough power to hurt any armored target at all. Basically, shooting in a high arc will do literally nothing against fully armored people. Even a straight shot from 50m needs a lucky hit to do much on its own.

Furthermore, they use CROSSBOWS. Using those to manage strength of shooting is rather...impossible. Even if the crossbow will be made for that (most aren't, as far as I know), crossbows advantage is being used by inexperienced people. People like the ones that they have. Controlling the distance of an arc with a shooting weapon would require a lot of training, but at that point, using bows and arrows is simply better.

Basically, arrow rain is just a scare tactic. It can do nothing except hope for hitting a soft spot on an unarmored target (most in real-life medieval wars, really) to wound them, with the bleeding killing them. The shot won't. If they don't have a good helmet, then hitting them in their eye MIGHT kill them, if they looked up. If they looked down...yeah.

In other words...arrows are overrated. They were tactical weapon, not killing weapon.