It is currently Wed 22 May 2013 11:17

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon 12 Mar 2012 10:14 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Tue 28 Feb 2012 05:26
Posts: 73
Location: Rhode Island,USA,North America,Earth,Milky Way,Space
Wiz33 wrote:
Why are they in game in the first place. Flame tank got banned by the Geneva convention a long time ago. Learn to deal with infantry the right way (by having inf of your own and using artillery).
because this is around the time period when they realized that flame throwers sucked

OT: you shouldn't think about realism when it comes to a video game think about it would you use the things if they weren't good against anything?
the only thing i have to say about flame vehicles is that the Zippo needs more fuel XD


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 12 Mar 2012 10:22 
Offline
Lieutenant Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat 14 Jan 2012 22:34
Posts: 2023
Oh and Flame thrower are not banned.. there are still some in french Army...

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 12 Mar 2012 21:15 
Offline
Specialist

Joined: Sun 11 Mar 2012 04:28
Posts: 17
OK. maybe it was not banned but I think most armies have removed them from the active inventory (except for very specific purpose) by the 70's. Once infantry unit have access to LAW, Flame tanks are just sitting bombs. I certainly have not seen any field manual that advise it's use in an anti-infantry role.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 12 Mar 2012 21:17 
Offline
Lieutenant Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat 14 Jan 2012 22:34
Posts: 2023
In french army there are....

Some lessons from Indochine and Algeria i think....

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 12 Mar 2012 21:38 
Offline
Colonel

Joined: Thu 17 Nov 2011 01:53
Posts: 2530
Sucks the French guys dont have FAMAS though :(

All around, I think the flamethrowers are modelled unrealistically out of necessity. They're a solid choice for an anti-rush unit. Without them, alot of stupid spam would be much more effective.

EDIT: Suprised this fellow wasnt modelled as an alternative:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M202_FLASH

A less capable RPO Rys alternative for NATO use. Given to some special forces unit of course. Give it to Delta Force, and change the Carl Gustav to Rangers, and Stinger to SAS and you've got yourself a nice system I think :)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 13 Mar 2012 04:17 
Online
General
User avatar

Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 22:17
Posts: 5093
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
A russian variant of your incendiary rockets launcher:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPO-A_Shmel_(Bumblebee)

I like that! :mrgreen:

EDIT: Oh dawg: The RPO is the SPETNAZ's weapon in game!

_________________
"Rocks are OP. Paper is fine" signed: Scissors
Image
My Youtube Channel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 13 Mar 2012 06:44 
Offline
Sergeant First-Class

Joined: Sat 12 Nov 2011 03:03
Posts: 144
nato needs a unit thats a mirror of spetz that has the FLASH.
that and it'd be SO COOL


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 13 Mar 2012 06:54 
Offline
Specialist

Joined: Mon 12 Mar 2012 10:47
Posts: 17
My only issue with flamethrower tanks is that they can kill other tanks.

This should not be. Losing a T80 to a flamethrower tank is just... stupid.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 13 Mar 2012 07:22 
Offline
Chief Warrant Officer

Joined: Thu 30 Jun 2011 15:12
Posts: 616
Hear7breaker wrote:
My only issue with flamethrower tanks is that they can kill other tanks.

This should not be. Losing a T80 to a flamethrower tank is just... stupid.


I agree - armour is far too easily affected by flames. It should panic them, but no so easily destroy them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 13 Mar 2012 08:49 
Offline
Second-Lieutenant

Joined: Sat 25 Feb 2012 06:18
Posts: 797
Location: Québec
Space wrote:
Hear7breaker wrote:
My only issue with flamethrower tanks is that they can kill other tanks.

This should not be. Losing a T80 to a flamethrower tank is just... stupid.


I agree - armour is far too easily affected by flames. It should panic them, but no so easily destroy them.


Since modern tanks are sealed from the exterior by their NBC protection, they are probably thougher against flamethrower. But in World War II, tanks could be destroyed by molotov cocktails or flamethrowers with a little luck.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group