fire weapons?

[kvuo75]

big -1 if it damages GV's on the basis of cooking the crew alive in a big steel preassure-cooker or the engine/paint catching fire. Napalm spreads out in a rather large area, doesn't it?


Would just be a way to keep the GV's on the concrete even with the reduced icon range (you wouldn't need to be real accurate if your bomb will cover 200ft radius).

this is actually a great point. more ways to kill gv's easier = less gv's.

[bangsbox]

lets some what keep with the times at least a little bit boys; i know are graphics are kept at a lower standard the the rest of the gaming comunity (the new battlefield3 for pc has better graphics then ps3 or xbox versions), but moving forward you guys should pick up a 60 buck video card. I think for the most part are graphics are limited by that survey, that is conducted when you first download the game on a PC (i think lol).

[EVZ]

I wouldn't mind Napalm for towns, don't recall the distance and width of the destructive power

I think Napalming a Town in the WWII era would have been prosecuted as a war crime. Hmmm, HT could add a nice firing squad animation for violators ...! As someone else mentioned, Napalm is effective against SOFT targets ... It ain't gonna fry any GV crews in a sealed environment. It would be a nice choice for that line of troops running towards town ... maybe toasting Barracks & Hangers? I know it was used in the later pacific landings ... But ? not sure about European Theatre. Limit use to the Corsair and Hellcat ? ... ?

[MK-84]

this is actually a great point. more ways to kill gv's easier = less gv's.

Just to toss this out there, if the tanks buttoned up, I'm fairly certain a flamethrower is not going to do much to it.

The only thing I could see this used for would be for the town, but...
How to represent graphics?
would these weapons effect hardened targets, or is the advantage of them that they are specific to their target, and the disadvantage that they hardly effect other objects?
Since the town yields the most perks and dmg for a bomber, would they take that too frequently?
wouldnt this affect the entire balance of game play in some form that would need to be addressed?  and if so, how?
Other than a town building, what else would these weapons be any use of?

[SpencAce]

would love to see this happen, i love all those varients of the m4 tank, but especially the flame tank version

[Gr8pape]

Would be neat to see troops running, then burst into flames, run around in circles, then pop like a firecracker.

[bangsbox]

Just to toss this out there, if the tanks buttoned up, I'm fairly certain a flamethrower is not going to do much to it.

Naplam would suck all the oxygen out of tank and kill it's crew and cook them I'm sure this must of happen to a german tank at some point, not to mention molly cocktails took out tanks with alot less fire.

[EVZ]

Naplam would suck all the oxygen out of tank and kill it's crew and cook them I'm sure this must of happen to a german tank at some point, not to mention molly cocktails took out tanks with alot less fire.

You've been watching to many movies ... Naplam doesn't burn for long you know ... in the movies you see this big splash of flame, they don't show the black strip that's all that's left 30 sec. later. WWII tanks sealed up pretty tight and even if oxy was "SUCKED OUT" most of us can hold our breath for a min or two. Molitov Cocktails were usually employed against tanks that were in a tight environment and ground assault mode with hatchs open and machine guns manned ... So it's possible drivers were burned or gunners hit, but they didn't disable the tank ... Their main effect was to break the coodrination between tanks and accompanying assault troops to isolate the tank and make infantry assault on it possible. Some german tanks suffered from chronic fuel leaks, but diesel doesn't burn hot enough to cause any real damage. Ocassional problems may have ocuured if fire reached the tanks electrical wiring, but that would be a fluke I think.

[Tank-Ace]

Actually, molotov coctails would sometimes be thrown at the rear engine decking, in the hopes of the engine going up.

[Butcher]

well i know you butcher your always in the back i killed a tiger 1 and 2 with an m18 today from 50 and 100yrd and today a rook m16 raced passed my tiger at 25 yrd, i couldnt even spin the turret so i just let him go. there would be many uses for fire not including town. Yes what it could do can be done with stuff we already have, but who knows maybe you can even burn out a tank on other side of the berms giving it a niche to that dreaded/ boring wait for who is going to round the corner.

Churchill Oke had a 75mm and flamethrower, would be an interesting little tank to play with, not sure how many were built, but its biggest draw back would be 15mph top speed - might as well spawn in and AFK 20 minutes to get half way near a base

[bangsbox]

Churchill Oke had a 75mm and flamethrower, would be an interesting little tank to play with, not sure how many were built, but its biggest draw back would be 15mph top speed - might as well spawn in and AFK 20 minutes to get half way near a base

our german halftrack carried 2 independent flamethower guns and coud spray rather far and is much faster then a churchhill  also t34s had one aswell not to mention m4

[bangsbox]

in Korean war they found that napalm killed 3x more tanks then rockets. also Israelis in the 1967 war used napalm effectively to destroy enemy tanks.

http://books.google.com/books?id=4ReRq5vVGAMC&pg=PA379&lpg=PA379&dq=has+nampalm+ever+destroyed+a+tank&source=bl&ots=oLcKyb8l8m&sig=OcJEFzxV4GqE8fkL8rhpDz3Pq5M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=m0ACT9jKL8ng0QG216G1Ag&ved=0CBwQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=has%20nampalm%20ever%20destroyed%20a%20tank&f=false