Random idea: flamethrower/flamethrower tank?

[captain communism]

I honestly do not care if this has been suggested eleventy billion times before, so before you post something to that extent, save your breath.

I'd just like to know if the flammpanzer II was ever actually used in combat, what the situation was, and possibility of ever achieving a flamethrower in the UT2.5 engine/RO. I don't have the programming skills required to create such a weapon (though i may know someone who might, given time).

I'd personally love to see something of this sort in order to clear out those pesky bunkers filled to the roof with russians (or germans, there is a BT-7 variant with a flamethrower [designated OP-7], though i'm completely oblivious as to its specifications)

As for flamethrowers for infantry, it's a far less plausible weapon, due to the inherrent dangers of petroleum, but they did exist. Of course, this weapon would pretty much only be useful in smaller maps. I wouldn't actually implement it in game.

On another note: possibly on the off chance that TWI intends to bring a new version of RO onto the UT3 engine: destroyable terrain would be a definate plus in terms of tank vs. infantry combat.

 

[Gamburd]

I would like to see the Flamethrower used as an infantry weapon; Give us Flamethrower!!

I guess the flames could extinguish after several minutes (easy out), or you (more complicated) utilize it so the flames would might (randomly) spread to burn other rooms and buildings.



Some one made a motorcycle for the Mahkovo (The Post Office / Church) Map.

How difficult would it be do design a Flamethrower??

 

[Basil]

Interesting idea but I guess it would be very challenging to implement. It would be done properly it would be completely different than current projectile and melee weapons, and I'm not sure if it worth the trouble.

 

[Jono]

It has been suggested many times before and the idea has had the same responses over and over again.

http://www.redorchestragame.com/foru...t=flamethrower

http://www.redorchestragame.com/foru...t=flamethrower

http://www.redorchestragame.com/foru...t=flamethrower

http://www.redorchestragame.com/foru...t=flamethrower

http://www.redorchestragame.com/foru...t=flamethrower

Oh, and sorry for ignoring the opening sentence to this thread but, you know, i don't care either

 

[Gamburd]

Proposed Flamethrower Rules for RO (Unscientific; just suggestions)

1) Only Engineers or Squad Leaders can operate the Flamethrower.

2) Every time it is used, has a 1/4 chance of running out of fuel and is removed from the game (permanently, so if you have two flamethrowers, and one runs out of fuel, you only have one left, and that can also run out of fuel when used.



(That's what the Squad Leader boardgame suggests; it uses a (two dice) diceroll (9 or > /12); if 25% is considered too high, you can lower the probability of running out of fuel to something like 1/5 etc.; but something in the weapon's nature should reflect the fact it may run out of fuel).

3) Destroys all support weapons (MGs; rifles; pistols; artillery cannons)




A Mod for EA Games's Battlefield 1942, called Forgotten Hope (FH), has a Flamethrowing tank, but it doesn't have a hand held Flamethrower.

It just shoots flames and they disappear very quickly; nothing catches on fire.




One could just introduce it in RO, and then perhaps later work on all the detail about things catching fire.

If someone made it, we could also use it in the Iron Europe Mod; unfortunately, we don't have the time to develop it.



Iron Europe needs YOU to VOLUNTEER TODAY!!!

 

[LogisticEarth]

Proposed Flamethrower Rules for RO (Unscientific; just suggestions)

1) Only Engineers or Squad Leaders can operate the Flamethrower.

2) Every time it is used, has a 1/4 chance of running out of fuel and is removed from the game (permanently, so if you have two flamethrowers, and one runs out of fuel, you only have one left, and that can also run out of fuel when used.

That's what the Squad Leader boardgame suggests, using a (two dice) diceroll (9 or > /12); if that is considered to be too high 25%; you can lower, like 1/5 etc., but something should reflect the fact it may run out of fuel).

3) Destroys all support weapons (MGs; rifles; pistols; artillery cannons)

Have you even played RO? Why the heck are you including dice rolls and stuff like "has a 25% of running out of fuel"?

If it was implemented, there would be a specific ammo limit, just like every other weapon. You're also talking like weapons spawn around the map and are picked up by people.

 

[dogbadger]

One could just introduce it in RO, and then perhaps later work on all the detail about things catching fire.....

 

[IVIARSHALL]

the same again and again ... all the time... THIS Game is not Team Fortress 2 or whatever... and if our Developers introduce it, they need to introduce other special weapons 2... Flamethrower would be 2 IMBA... and this is realistic, so all the special weapons, that are used too less are not included... and they shan't be...

 

[Gamburd]

Have you even played RO? Why the heck are you including dice rolls and stuff like "has a 25% of running out of fuel"?

If it was implemented, there would be a specific ammo limit, just like every other weapon. You're also talking like weapons spawn around the map and are picked up by people. Today 01:01 PM

To answer your questions, yes, I've played RO since February 2007.

I'm trying to inject a little reality into the game; I could be wrong, but I think the fuel used in the Flamethrower would be a more difficult commodity to come across on the Eastern Front than bullets.

I think my proposal would perhaps better reflect the fact that frontline troops didn't ALWAYS have UNLIMITED amounts of supplies (or were freshly supplied everyday).

These types of weapons like the Flamethrower would have been previously used before in combat, perhaps days or hours before a battle.

They wouldn't always have had a full tank of flamethrower fluid lying around ready to be used.

So, every time you use it in the game, it would have a 25% (or perhaps lower, if that seems too high; I use the boardgame Squad Leader as a reference because it was a boardgame in which the game's developers tried to reflect and incorporate as much realism as it could into its simulation of World War II combat) chance of running out of fuel.

It would be somewhat similar to how the MG breaks down in RO; they also had that (i.e., MGs breaking down) in the boardgame Squad Leader.

These are recommended suggestions, but I think if we assumed that the Flamethrower always had a fuel tank of fuel on hand, that would, IMO, be very arcadish gameplay.

In many respect, the design of SQUAD LEADER was one of the most difficult game concepts Avalon Hill (a {really the} leader in the boardgame industry and the company that designed Squad Leader) has undertaken. Infantry combat in World War II was incredibly complex . . . The infantry fighting of WWII was a melting pot of tactics, skill, nerve, luck, and sudden death.

Throughout the design of Squad Leader, high emphasis was placed on playability . . . [y]et, it was also to create a game that really captured the fluidity and unpredictable nature of infantry combat.

SQUAD LEADER Designer's Notes, 4th edition, 1980

 

[Jager]

this is on the UT2004 engine correct ? There was a UT mod that implemented a flame thrower that worked fairly decently, called Ballistic Weapons mod, I think it was. I may be wrong.

 

[LogisticEarth]

I'm trying to inject a little reality into the game; I could be wrong, but I think the fuel used in the Flamethrower would be a more difficult commodity to come across on the Eastern Front than bullets.

I think my proposal would perhaps better reflect the fact that frontline troops didn't ALWAYS have UNLIMITED amounts of supplies (or were freshly supplied everyday).

These types of weapons like the Flamethrower would have been previously used before in combat, perhaps days or hours before a battle.

They wouldn't always have had a full tank of flamethrower fluid lying around ready to be used.

I might be wrong in this, but flamethrowers were usually issued in very specific assault situations, not just regularly present on the battlefield. In this case, the weapons would be prepared prior to the assault and were likely to be filled. The German flamethower used compressed gas and simple gasoline as fuel. These things were not uncommon to have lying around.

These are recommended suggestions, but I think if we assumed that the Flamethrower always had a fuel tank of fuel on hand, that would, IMO, be very arcadish gameplay.

Arcady? Any more arcady than always having 5 SMG magazines, always spwaning with two grenades, unjammable guns, and infallible ammunition? Given the fact that these flamethowers really only had a few seconds of fuel, were effective to a range of 25-30 meters at best, and blew up spectacularly if you looked at them wrong, they'd be realistic enough.

Your issue is with non-uniform supply issues, which is a valid arguement. But the whole game suffers from this, and the supply situations were different throughout the war.

 

[Spetznaz]

i have an idea about how you could resupply a flamethrower

make it to where you have to go back to your spawn point where there will be a 55 gallon barrel like item waiting for you or a jerry can and its the only way to resupply.

and for the flamepanzer make it to where you have a set amount of "flame time" say 2 minuntes of constant flame and once your out then the vehicle has to respawn before anymore fuel is avalible

just a suggestion

 

[Slyk]

For those who are clueless about technical demands:
Possible? Yes
Probable? Eh
Game play value: Minimal
Technical impact: Very high
Worth the time vs benefit? NO

It can be done, might be by someone, but would take a lot of effort for little pay-off and would seriously impact any setting in which it is used, ie: framerates etc. would plunge.

 

[ripa]

i have an idea about how you could resupply a flamethrower

make it to where you have to go back to your spawn point where there will be a 55 gallon barrel like item waiting for you or a jerry can and its the only way to resupply.

and for the flamepanzer make it to where you have a set amount of "flame time" say 2 minuntes of constant flame and once your out then the vehicle has to respawn before anymore fuel is avalible

just a suggestion

You need a compressor to refill a flamethrower. You can't just open the tank and pour some fuel in. It needs to be pressurized.

 

[GiantHurtBall]

Proposed Flamethrower Rules for RO (Unscientific; just suggestions)

A Mod for EA Games's Battlefield 1942, called Forgotten Hope (FH), has a Flamethrowing tank, but it doesn't have a hand held Flamethrower.

It just shoots flames and they disappear very quickly; nothing catches on fire.
Iron Europe needs YOU to VOLUNTEER TODAY!!!

Thats not true Forgotten Hope also had portable Flamethrowers like the Flammenwerfer 41 on the Map "pavlovs house" at the german spawn it was kit you could pick up...and i think on the "later added" maps with the aussies against the japanese there were also plenty of flamethrowers if im not mistaken the map's name is ..."operation catherine" or something like that ...

 

[Oldih]

If someone just could make similiar flamethrower as in RTCW...

 

[th3flyboy]

i personally like this idea, but it would take some serious coding to implement properly, the only proper flamethrower I've seen in a game is the one from the farcry 2 preview, the wind actually effected where the flames would go, the ground would affect how long the flames would burn, things like that, it's not a matter of whether or not it would be nice to have, it's a matter of proper implementation, maybe with ue3 and ageia physx we may have something like that, but probably not, odds are more likely that we would need something done on a massive scale, it would probably require a recoding of the engine to implement properly, sure, I'd love to see a flame thrower, but i would not want to see it implemented unrealistically, if i fire that sucker, i wanna have the possibility that stupidity could get me killed from the flames coming back at me.

 

[metternich]

I dont see this happening. Firstly, it would be compleatly useless on most maps in most situations. The flamenpanzer III (I believe a bit more common, and wouldnt blow up to one AT rifle round) was used in the sieges to burn out buildings. So, Leningrad might use one, but when you consiter that the tanks pretty much fight eachother on that map, it wouldnt be worth it. If you used it in the field on an open map, it is pretty much yelling at the other team "COME AND GET ME! I HAVE NO ARMOR PIERCING ABILITIES AND NO RANGE!" An infantry based flamethrower would actually be quite fearsome on some maps, especially urban maps (unless you happen to be standing next to it when it gets shot). At anyrate, it would require a new component to the engine, at least I think, as it would not be a projectile weapon, or something that would be based of of 'critical hits'.

 

[D3terioNation]

This aint closed yet?

 

[Gunwing]

To be histoicly correct. Flamers saw vary limited use on the Eastern front. Although I will admit they are uber cool. But another factor is that Flamer tanks were made mainly by the US, and British, as well as the Germans. But mainly they were uesd in the Pacifc and Western Fronts where a flamer would be perfict for clearing out the large ammount of under brush, caves, and bunkers that both sides uesd in combat.

How ever on the eastern front, unlike what you see in COD: UO sorry fanboys........ They were only uesd in urban Warfare not in assaults agenst trench lines. They where vary expensive, and prime targets so much so that by the time the game takes place (1941-1945) they were no longer in front line survice in the easstern front.

Also the developers said that as with the Unreal 2.5 engine it's way to taxing on most PCs to make flamers work correctly as they would have in real life without major FPS drops, or massive online lag issues.