banimod / etpro / ettv forums

The current flamethrower fires so slowly (ie the flame takes a long time to get up to max range) that you can easily run outside its max range before you get hit.

You only need a couple of metres start and you can outrun it. Additionally it fires so slowly that just about every weapon in the game can kill a flamethrower before they even do any damage.

I am all for having as much strategic diversity as possible in the game so I think it would be a good idea for something to be done with the flamethrower to make it worthwhile even considering using it.

I don't think its damage really needs to change. I don't think its range needs to change. The only thing that needs to change is when you click your mousebutton it doesn't take so long for the flame to start hitting at the max range. Currently standing mg is a more effective close range weapon.

While the flamethrower has always had this problem since hitsounds were removed for it (its only saving grace), i have just about never seen anyone using it (except as a humiliation weapon at the end of the game). I'd rather see only one useless class/weapon loadout in the game and soldier smg already has that spot locked in.

Flame sniping \o/

yes, please make the flamer more like a sniperrifle and add a scope

thanks a lot, this will be a great addition for competitive play

In NoQ they made Flamer great.. not too strong.. not too useless.

BTW: real flames (from flamer) burn faster that in real life.. yeah it's true - flamer is useless (exclude Seawall Battery and Rail Gun) in basic Wolf:ET.

don't like flame thrower, play engineer, give the medics someone other than a FO to heal

Just don't make flame thrower to another pf-like weapon, that is hard to escape ;p this type of weapons is bad for et... and only make people to flame on chat ;p

flamer stays but should be more powerful

I'm not talking about making it an all powerful weapon. I am talking about juicing it up a tiny bit so it at least is something you would CONSIDER using. ET has 8 classes essentially (considering all soldier weapons are totally different). The more classes the more strategic options. At the moment you can't really consider the flamer as a class - only as a joke. Unless you get really unlucky you are far more likely to be killed by a pistol than a flamethrower.

Seriously if you see a flamer, even at close range you can just backpedal while shooting and you probably won't take any damage. The flamer walks so slowly that he can't chase you. By the time he changes to a real ranged weapon he will be dead.

The only weapon that a flamer can compete with is a knife. Attacking an unaware opponent from ultra close range.

Every other heavy weapon has a place in the game. Every other heavy weapon has a situation where it can be a good strategic choice. The flamer...it never does.

Every other heavy weapon has a place in the game. Every other heavy weapon has a situation where it can be a good strategic choice. The flamer...it never does.

that would be your opinion, other people may have a different view

I want my Venom back.

well the flamer can be used in small confined places such as small tunnels. I'd say it's best use in the game would be if there are a group of people with an objective, the flamer would be the last in the line and would face backward. At the very least it could block the enemy's vision so he could not accuratly shoot the flag carrier.

Nail wrote:

Every other heavy weapon has a place in the game. Every other heavy weapon has a situation where it can be a good strategic choice. The flamer...it never does.

that would be your opinion, other people may have a different view

Okay then you name a place where a flamer would be a good option. Even in the smallest corridor - if they know you are there - you are still going to get killed be smg or spam long before you do any damage. And if they don't know you are there then you might do a tiny bit of damage before your target backpedals out of range and takes you down.

As for blocking sight of a doc carrier... I'm not talking about frivilous or novel uses. I mean real strategic options.

If you have a height advantage or there are good chokepoints then panzer is a good choice. If there is a good chokepoint on fairly level ground then mg42 becomes an option. Offensively, mortar can be used to clear common defensive camping positions. Defensively, mortar can be used to protect an objective or to spam a choke.
If you have totally smashed the pants off your opposition, you have 10 minutes to move the truck 5 metres to the end and you are already spawncamping then flamer becomes a good option then for some humiliation...

Can you see the difference?

no, your monsterous ego blocks the view

true its a joke. I remember the day our soldier took flamer, went into the side entrance on b4 and set everything on fire. Should have heared our ts when he shouted "Engi dead and gibbed, 2 medics dead and gibbed."

A flamer can be a nasty weapon to block an entrance completely. There are a lot of examples where I decide not to go up because you know above you the flamer is waiting for you (and no, nades won't kill him everytime).

Nogen.
I agree 100%
If one is to compair the flamerthrower with any other soildier class weapon, it does not even come close.
The mg undeployed is much more leathal weapon in cqb than a flammer.
The fact is as it stands u cant kill a PF soilder with full health before he is able to let one rip.
I would say, extra range, extra area of effect and damage masively increased, and faster "flight speed" of the flammes.
It should be a feared weapon, and more powerfull than a PF at close range. imho..