Id like to see some what do you think , you can flame just about anything helos armour infantry etc
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- Expansions/Mods »
- Special Forces »
- Flame Throwers
Are those things really used anymore for real? The only thing I hated about them in other games is they dont have enough kill value and the enemy usually can still be killing you while hes flamin on!
anyway It would be kewl for sure to see them smoking a tank!
anyway It would be kewl for sure to see them smoking a tank!
too bad, 1 shot in the back tanks, BOOM Dead...
mmmmmmm fire
Sweet beans, just like the napalm in BFV, i loved that stuff, so much fun man! good suggestion, but then EA would have to create burning plants, etc. and they are to fat and lazy for a cool job like that.
You're kidding, right? Special Forces units do not use flamethrowers. Regardless of the era.
I'm pretty sure flamethrowers have been banned, (as such,) because burning to death is one of the worst ways to die ever. Except for that monk on the cover of "Rage Against the Machine"'s self titled album. He seemed cool with it.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
totally yea
Horrible death, fuck yeah, but dying by C4 planted at flags is as terrible... or being roadkilled by a tank.... you end up like a tomate slice... aghhTyferra wrote:
I'm pretty sure flamethrowers have been banned, (as such,) because burning to death is one of the worst ways to die ever. Except for that monk on the cover of "Rage Against the Machine"'s self titled album. He seemed cool with it.
yea i cant imagine being sprayed with naypalm just to burn for the last minutes of your life, god that would suck , but hey they still havnt banned incindary bombs , which in a sence are about the same thing, if you get cought in one,
Ironic really.Tyferra wrote:
Except for that monk on the cover of "Rage Against the Machine"'s self titled album. He seemed cool with it.
Im sure he wasnt cool ;-p
Flames usually lag a game.
Yeah Tyferra is right. Flame-throwers (more specifically napalm) have been banned by the Geneva convention for use in warfare. No country is allowed to use napalm anymore in although I'm sure covertly it is being used.
I'm having Half Life TFC flashbacks here......
Nobody can piss off an entire team like a tker than a flamethrower....
Nobody can piss off an entire team like a tker than a flamethrower....
hmmm well maybe there should be restrictions on the flamer (like only getting it once you reach colonel, and whem you die no one else can use your kit, as to avoid people TKing your for your flamer) but fuck the geneva convention, flamers FTW!!!!!!!!!
There should be fixed flame throwers that u can use... or even flame tanks like in C&C games, if uve played them. As for taking out helos, i dont think so. Itd be cool to make a "wall of fire" on roadways ...
i have always wanted one of those....and maybe they could add throwing knifes like on bf1942: secret weapons
Disagree RTCW had flamethrowers for the multiplayer part of the game and the servers used to hold 32 players and never lagged anyoneTrollmeaT wrote:
Flames usually lag a game.
Yea thats true.Knight`UK wrote:
Disagree RTCW had flamethrowers for the multiplayer part of the game and the servers used to hold 32 players and never lagged anyoneTrollmeaT wrote:
Flames usually lag a game.
or if you reached a full squad a squad member could be given a flamer and then its be up to the squad to protect his back because one shot in the gas tank and BLAM!! bye, bye whole squad....
i realise this thread is old.. but someone revived it and i read it...
this monk was not killed by a flamethrower... his name was Thích Quảng Ðức and he burned himself in a protest against the unfair treatment of buddhist ... im not totally sure about this, but with fire isnt it generally asphyxiation that kills ya cause the fire is eating up all the oxygen?Ty wrote:
I'm pretty sure flamethrowers have been banned, (as such,) because burning to death is one of the worst ways to die ever. Except for that monk on the cover of "Rage Against the Machine"'s self titled album. He seemed cool with it.
The C4 and the roadkill would be a quicker death though. I saw a picture of a charred lady on a street curb in WWII. It was horrible, it was just a black body.Stratocaster wrote:
Horrible death, fuck yeah, but dying by C4 planted at flags is as terrible... or being roadkilled by a tank.... you end up like a tomate slice... aghhTyferra wrote:
I'm pretty sure flamethrowers have been banned, (as such,) because burning to death is one of the worst ways to die ever. Except for that monk on the cover of "Rage Against the Machine"'s self titled album. He seemed cool with it.
Flamethrowers would be too graphics in a game anyways... unless the enemies run with their arms flailing and screaming, then it would be quite funny!
Last edited by ryan_14 (2006-10-14 09:13:20)
It would be cool but I don't think the engine can render so many particles without lagging to death.
pfft... Flames are for nubs.
Hand me 3 WP grenades and were set.
Hand me 3 WP grenades and were set.
flamethrowers were in the 1942 mod for BFV and were fun. A friend of mine would snipe out windows of a building and I would stand next to an ammo box and cover the door in flames. n00bs still ran thru it and got burned to death. Good times.
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- Expansions/Mods »
- Special Forces »
- Flame Throwers