Flamethrowers/napalm a little too overpowered?

[Usaball]

Playing several matches as the North, I find that I can not move without getting spawn-killed by napalm, and even if 20-30 feet away from a flamethrower, find myself somehow burned to death. I know it is historically accurate to have these things in the game, but does anyone believe that flamethrowers/napalm strikes are too op or rather the opposite?

[Herr Flick]

Originally posted by PFC Chyorny 29ID:

Originally posted by Cyber Diver:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hfRTp9tCic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=704123z9K14

I did this once fired into a bunker and there must have been 5 or 6 VC the screams were loud VERY loud

[TasteDasRainbow]

Considering an RPG can kill a helicopter full of guys, or even on maps without helis it can wipe buildings full of enemies, I think things are fairly balanced as is.

Thinking of examples like Cu Chi Alpha bunker, Bravo buildings. Hue city garages, etc. There are so many possibilities for RPGs to kill 10+ guys a life.

Are both of these weapons extremely strong? yes. Should both of them be extremely strong? yes.

Otherwise we may as well just put rubber bullets in the Cobra too, because a skilled pilot can get an upwards of 100 kills a game at times.

[=(e)= Lemonater47]

The flamer is a little bit of a glass cannon.

You're fat and can only kill dudes 25m away. If the range were actually realistic it would be nearly 50m. Real flamethrowers are no joke.

Even at a distance of 15m an even 1 on 1 fight. The flamer and the other guy will likely both end up dying. Bullets travel faster than fire. It's not exactly a win for the flamer if he dies too.

[Some Portuguese Bean]

Originally posted by =(e)= Lemonater47:

The flamer is a little bit of a glass cannon.

You're fat and can only kill dudes 25m away. If the range were actually realistic it would be nearly 50m. Real flamethrowers are no joke.

Even at a distance of 15m an even 1 on 1 fight. The flamer and the other guy will likely both end up dying. Bullets travel faster than fire. It's not exactly a win for the flamer if he dies too.

but mah insta death

next we will see people complaining about the rifle grenade launcher because you can destroy helis with it

[batmack8989]

I just happened to enfilade 4 guys, including 1 flamer, with a DP28 as he saw me. He shot first, but by the time it took for the flame to reach and kill me, i killed all 4. I never pick it myself, if i pick Combat Engineer it is usually for the M37 , C4 and WP

[Herr Flick]

Originally posted by =(e)= Lemonater47:

The flamer is a little bit of a glass cannon.

You're fat and can only kill dudes 25m away. If the range were actually realistic it would be nearly 50m. Real flamethrowers are no joke.

Even at a distance of 15m an even 1 on 1 fight. The flamer and the other guy will likely both end up dying. Bullets travel faster than fire. It's not exactly a win for the flamer if he dies too.

I’ve got the flame to shoot quite far I just aim the trajectory up and it can go a few meters further, also as you say bullet travels faster than fire and countless times I’ve died but the enemy dies as you hear the screams of death BUT it doesn’t count as a kill???

[=(e)= Lemonater47]

Originally posted by Sgt Zippo:

Originally posted by =(e)= Lemonater47:

The flamer is a little bit of a glass cannon.

You're fat and can only kill dudes 25m away. If the range were actually realistic it would be nearly 50m. Real flamethrowers are no joke.

Even at a distance of 15m an even 1 on 1 fight. The flamer and the other guy will likely both end up dying. Bullets travel faster than fire. It's not exactly a win for the flamer if he dies too.

I’ve got the flame to shoot quite far I just aim the trajectory up and it can go a few meters further, also as you say bullet travels faster than fire and countless times I’ve died but the enemy dies as you hear the screams of death BUT it doesn’t count as a kill???

I've noticed the same thing as you sometimes.

Being on the receiving end of similar incidents I think reflected flames or spot fires (flames on the ground) end up not giving the credit to the flamer when he's dead. Whereas direct flames will give the proper credit. Something to look into for sure. Doesn't count as a suicide for the victim either. Just gives the credit to nobody.

[Morrow.J]

No they aren't...They are NOT OP... its freaking NAPALM man...You aren't going to survive if it hits you....even if for arguments sake you did, you would still be a non combat effective casualty for the sake of game mechanics. Flamethrowers are very obvious as to where they are, they are an AOE weapon and powerful, their weakness is that the GI with the flamer is VERY Slow and has VERY limited ammo.

[ReV0LT]

The only ridiculous thing about the flamethrower, IMO, is that they can go through small holes without spewing fire all around the holes.

[Azrael]

I enjoy the screams of the burning people ingame and always smile or even laugh, when I hear them, depends on the number of people burning at once. But I'm not a monster since these are only the screams of pixel people, so that's ok.

[Cyber Diver]

Originally posted by Azrael:

I enjoy the screams of the burning people ingame and always smile or even laugh, when I hear them, depends on the number of people burning at once. But I'm not a monster since these are only the screams of pixel people, so that's ok.

Damn you sound like you shoot up pixelated schools for a living.

[Some Portuguese Bean]

Originally posted by Azrael:

I enjoy the screams of the burning people ingame and always smile or even laugh, when I hear them, depends on the number of people burning at once. But I'm not a monster since these are only the screams of pixel people, so that's ok.

https://youtu.be/704123z9K14

[Zombo]

The flamethrower is only good in certain situation, generally close quarters fighting in confined areas, or where it can safely shoot over the heads of hidden enemies in trenches or behind sandbags. Otherwise they are pretty easy to counter.

Napalm, and the artillery in general, I have always found to be excessive in this game series. To the point I often avoid defending or attacking cap zones because of the repeated barrages every few minutes. Thats why i mostly play support roles, where I can avoid it most of the time.

[Some Portuguese Bean]

Originally posted by Zombo:

The flamethrower is only good in certain situation, generally close quarters fighting in confined areas, or where it can safely shoot over the heads of hidden enemies in trenches or behind sandbags. Otherwise they are pretty easy to counter.

Napalm, and the artillery in general, I have always found to be excessive in this game series. To the point I often avoid defending or attacking cap zones because of the repeated barrages every few minutes. Thats why i mostly play support roles, where I can avoid it most of the time.

I enjoy being the odd guy who runs side by side the explosions while i keep the supressed people

[Azrael]

Nah, it's just realistic, if your team doesn't identify and kill flamethrower guys early, it's just bad in defending.
Even if you don't have direct sight, every chimpanzee could cook and throw a grenade to a region to deny an area, it isn't that hard.

I never saw a flamethrower shooting through an objective, but they can shoot through windows and I believe that is, what happened to you, since it isn't a bullet but a cloudy jet of flame, so even if you're ducked right behind the window, hiding you from sight, you're still toast, especially if the flamer aims at the roof, ricocheting the flame down towards the floor.