Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
learn to play it. It's up to people if they want to play certain tanks? If you find it hard, others may not?
But yet the game is cosntantly expanding there trees so ''waste of space'' in the tech trees really doesn't matter?
Also dev time? if they put the tanks premium the benefit will be money for them + players will get flamethrwoer tanks. Therefore it doesnt ''waste space'' in normal tech trees and if players want flamethrower tanks then the option is there ? I see no harm in it?
dev time is still dev time regardless of what output it gives. why cant they add proper premiums?
it still wastes space in the trees
i wouldnt even want one of these useless things being added as theyd just drag down my team, unless you take them to Stalingrad and theyre more OP than tier 1 SPAA
It isn't even necessarily the whole point of them in the game, it's more the iconic tanks etc. 1) The game is a vehicle simulator/arcade game based in WW2 and the Korean war. Flamethrower tanks were quite a prominant thing in both conflicts, up until mid korean war atleast.
2) The game has a lot of missing vehicles, a lot, there are more important things etc. just the point of me asking was seeing if they'll put it in. Even my original statement states ''It doesn't need to be urgent'' - yet you're still ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ like a ♥♥♥♥♥ about how precious their time is :)
its a game, they dont have to put in every single metal thing with wheels
theyre missing a hell of a lot of stuff that was more prominent than flamethrower tanks. leaving out AT tanks is practically criminal if it were a simulator
you asked if it was going to be added, i told you to the reasons it wouldnt be added.
if they spend a second of dev time they can be spending editing a line of code to fix all the guns that need it in order to add flame thrower tanks, i will be thoroughly disappointed
if you mean you want them added after theyve added every other available 'normal' tank and fixed every known bug, knock yourself out. although by that point i'll have a rather grey beard down to my knees
1.Flamethrower only work at like 20-50m at best you will rarely face tanks at such short range even on brawler map
2.The damage mechanics have to be expanded to include the heat of the tank and fire entering the vent holes
3.Then I want CW payload on the rocket tanks if that's added
Flamethrower tanks are entirely pointless in a Tank vs Tank vs Airplane game.
Flamethrower tanks are designed to fight entrenchments and infantry, not Tanks. While you could set some tanks on fire, provided you'd get the flamestream onto the back of the engine, where they suck in the air for the engine.. (this would mostly only effect T-34 line)... but that alone would mean you would not only have to catch the guy in the back, but also it would need to be one of the tanks that are susceptible to it.
Might be in one of the earlier tiers.. like 1 or 2, 3 at most, and compared to any other tank, you'd have no chance of outright killing a tank. You could at most set it on fire, and as anyone knows that had their tank set on fire, there is even an achievement for not putting out the flame and killing someone while burning.
So basically what you are asking for is a Tank, that cannot hide (the flamejet gives it away), has to be extremely close, can only really harm a tank from behind, and will most likely die even before their target is dead, because the guy you just shot, will in all likelihood realize that putting out that fire is a waste of time as long as you are around, and instead turns the turret and kills your tank.
That would be one helluva frustrating experience... and the Devs would need to put all the extra physics into the game to let the game know where the tanks could be penetrated by liquid. That is one massive effort for a tank that will be frustrating as hell to play.
I mean... in theory every Tank with a Howitzer could fire a shell containing mustard gas. Mustard Gas was still being stockpiled and (rarely) used during WW2, and since we are not beyond experimental technologies in this game, the possibility would be there. What i am trying to say is.. the reason why that shell isn't in the game is most likely because of how much effort it is to find out which and where a tank is penetrable to these attacks, and to code it accordingly.
unless you count various types of smoke...
and i highly doubt phosphorus smoke would be any good against armoured targets
AFAIK they didn't. But Mortar and Artillery Shells did... which is why in theory Howitzer Tanks could use them.
biological weapons were readily stockpiled as a deterrent although none was every used. except Britain accidently Anthraxing Scotland, whoopsie
Anthrax certainly seemed popular, certainly among Britain and Japan
Germany was the exception, instead stockpiling Taban and Sarine gas
all of it was tested with bombs
so aerial Anthrax bombs could be fun ;)
not entirely sure they'd help in a tank battle though. Germans might have a monopoly on that :P
flame throwers would literally have to get withing pissing distance, and since everyone fights buttoned up in warthunder theyd be limited to destroying the engines of tanks, and killing open topped tanks
unless warthunder adds a tempreture aspect to the game, allowing you to pressure cook the crew yummy
Nothing wrong with a semi-effective tank (honestly a flamethrower would be more effective than worthless assault guns that can't pen anything), but adding entirely new game mechanics specifically for it is a bit much.