If someone made a mod, who would want flame throwers instead of, say, rocket launchers or something. Personnally I would want the flames because it is a cool thing in RTCW to see and to use. To me it would be a worthy download to my mod list for this game.

------------------
http://dba.gamepoint.net/images/buybonds23.jpg http://mohaaplatoon.tripod.com

Lt. Yeager =[SE]=
Platoon Leader
HOORAH!!!!

Kinda off-topic, but...

Are flamethrowers outlawed for use against infantry by the Geneva convention?

Seems like an awful way to die.. http://www.alliedassault.com/ubb/frown.gif

There are flamethrowers in the game man, no need for a mod.

------------------
http://www.j-body.org/registry/jbo/spiewalk.jpg
feindliche Übernahme

More spam weapons? I don't know, I guess if there were server limits on them it be ok.

YAH! We should have them in mp.

I think napalm currently is outlawed, but not necessarily flamethrowers. Not sure when it was outlawed either. They sure as hell used napalm in Viet Nam.

Now, chemical weapons like mustard gas or chlorine gas would be really nasty...

if Flamethrowers will be added later, then the enemy death animation sequences have to be remaked too, to make this death because fire death isnt the same as being killed by bullets or explosions, so this addition if it is gonna be made its going to take a long time to develop dont you think??

I agree, death sequences would have to be changed to compensate for someone being scorched to death, rather then a bullet in their head.

------------------
http://www.j-body.org/registry/jbo/spiewalk.jpg
feindliche Übernahme

yeah, flamethrowers were widely used by both the allies and axis during ww2. Axis even had a bunch of half-tracks with mounted flamethrowers.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by spiewalk:
There are flamethrowers in the game man, no need for a mod.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

no there are not.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mizat0:
yeah, flamethrowers were widely used by both the allies and axis during ww2. Axis even had a bunch of half-tracks with mounted flamethrowers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

so did allies. they used flamethrowers mostly for bunkers.

------------------

Flamethowers would lag everything out.

Yeah, all that is true about it messing with the game like FPS wise, but if someone devoted the time to it, it would be a neat MP mod. Oh, and I don't think this would be constituted as Off-Topic because it deals totally with the game. If I asked, "Should flame throwers be used to cook hampsters?" That would be Off-Topic. Correct?

------------------
http://dba.gamepoint.net/images/buybonds23.jpg http://mohaaplatoon.tripod.com

Lt. Yeager =[SE]=
Platoon Leader
HOORAH!!!!

I think it would cool to fry a few of my MP friends :-P

spook

Ya know, they probably got rid of the flame throwers they were planning because RTCW's are really nice - not that RTCW is a better game (which it isn't at all).



[This message has been edited by quiettempaccount (edited January 20, 2002).]

lol... they scapped em cause rtcw's were better lol... interesting theory but i think they never planned it because it could end up looking a bit gruesome for a teen rating... but yes rtcw's are quite the eyecandy

------------------
Next to God...
...A Grunts Best Friend
http://home.att.net/~steinert/_borders/medsym.gif

throwers would be great in MP only if the fuel tank exploded once shot and there is Area damage for surrounding soliders

------------------
http://trenchsig.20m.com/images/trenchsig135.jpg

Achtung!

hey i just remembered this lol its a video of a flamethrower... http://gearmedia.ign.com/media/hardc...e_01182002.mpg
---disclaimer---
there IS profanity in this video so if ur offended... turn volume down or dont watch
err... that didnt seem to work for me anyway so try here then scroll down to video "flame on" if u got a broken link
http://boards.ign.com/message.asp?to...309&replies=51

------------------
Next to God...
...A Grunts Best Friend
http://home.att.net/~steinert/_borders/medsym.gif

[This message has been edited by jujumantb (edited January 20, 2002).]

[This message has been edited by jujumantb (edited January 20, 2002).]

[This message has been edited by jujumantb (edited January 20, 2002).]

While the Flamethrower would be cool especially on the Omaha map, I think the Sticky Bombs would be a shit load better! Even more so in the MP games! http://www.alliedassault.com/ubb/biggrin.gif http://www.alliedassault.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
http://dba.gamepoint.net/images/sig1_mohaa.jpg

Close isn't good enough unless you throw a grenade!

mods shall bring all that we dream of from MOH, and more!!!!!

------------------
http://trenchsig.20m.com/images/trenchsig135.jpg

Achtung!

Flame throwers and incendiaries such as napalm ARE ALLOWED on human targets by the Geneva convention.

I don’t see why we need them.
Ok they where used during WW2 but, c'mon..
They look nice but do we really want Q3TA/RTCW feeling in this game...I know I dont..enough with the chaos already!! http://www.alliedassault.com/ubb/smile.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hellbaby2065:
Kinda off-topic, but...

Are flamethrowers outlawed for use against infantry by the Geneva convention?

Seems like an awful way to die.. http://www.alliedassault.com/ubb/frown.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

After WW2 yes, but both Axis and Allied powers used them.
I would rather burn to death in 10 seconds instead of choke on my own bile on in a field hospital after 2 weeks...
Just me, though.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by piedude:
While the Flamethrower would be cool especially on the Omaha map, I think the Sticky Bombs would be a shit load better! Even more so in the MP games! http://www.alliedassault.com/ubb/biggrin.gif http://www.alliedassault.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're very turned on by Saving Private Ryan, aren't you?
I can just see you watching it waiting for the sticky bomb part...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by quiettempaccount:
Ya know, they probably got rid of the flame throwers they were planning because RTCW's are really nice - not that RTCW is a better game (which it isn't at all).

[This message has been edited by quiettempaccount (edited January 20, 2002).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

RTCW actually has a very decent flame thrower, but it isn't very accurate.
1) It goes 10 feet then stops, IRL flame goes 40 feet and then drops in glops on people and ground, scorching everything.
2) It does very little damage to the person.
Well, duh.
3) It has very little effect on a soldier.
Turning into a crispy critter would kind of make me turn into a Jahova Witness on crack...
4) The flame was alot less coordinated.
IRL the flame would dance out of the jet sparatically.
[edit]
Forgot, flame throwers are usually 2 barrels of napalm and one barrel compressed air.
Breathing when firing the goopity goop would be very harsh.
Obviously, everyone knows napalm burns all the oxygen in the area and as thus breathing is *slightly* hampered.
Also, not being prepared for shooting a jet would knock somebody on their ass, and quite possibly exploding the 3 tanks on your back and taking out your squad.
People weren't just handed flame throwers and told, "Use this burn them big time."

[This message has been edited by KillorLive (edited January 21, 2002).]