Jump to content

Airstrike - Make It Napalm


57 replies to this topic

#21 One Medic Army

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,985 posts
  • LocationBay Area, California

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:07 AM

View PostKoniving, on 12 April 2013 - 11:01 AM, said:

Personally, I was hoping for a destroyable aircraft rushing in and dropping bombs and/or harassing a particular mech.

It'd give me a reason to do this other than destroying the Atlas.

Posted Image

RAWR!!!!

Does it burn when you pee?
You might want to get that looked at ;)

#22 Tice Daurus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,001 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationOak Forest, IL

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:07 AM

I fully support this suggestion with napalm loads. However, I've already suggested that Inferno SRM rounds be put in months ago, and the DEV's said that they wouldn't touch my idea of Inferno SRM rounds until AFTER release. So if they aren't going to visit my idea until after full release, this means that this idea would be further put into the backburner after MY idea.

#23 Juree Riggd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 128 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:08 AM

I want my swarm LRMs too ;)

#24 Denno

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 483 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:12 AM

I mentioned before that smoke, for cover, could be a type of arty selection, but I hadnt thought of napalm. Genius!

#25 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:15 AM

View PostOne Medic Army, on 12 April 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

Does it burn when you pee?
You might want to get that looked at ;)

It does actually. But that's okay. I spend most of my time peeing on other mechs as you could probably guess. ;)

#26 Grandmaster Ramrod

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 81 posts
  • LocationComfortable Leather Chair

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:17 AM



#27 MaddMaxx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 5,911 posts
  • LocationNova Scotia, Canada

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:18 AM

View PostKalley, on 12 April 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

was like omg arty troll.........

then

O_o

i like that idea


Yah! No worries though. Post #14 looked after all the left over Troll bits. I want to play that game he is making, it called "Perfect". It would have to be so sweeeeeeeeet... ;)

#28 Clit Beastwood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:27 AM

Thanks for the positive response! I originally thought of it for a few reasons - one, it'd be a neat way to light up maps like RCN, two, it'd be a temporary barrier "denial of access" to certain areas, i.e. drop napalm across a tunnel entrance, and three, well, like I said I think it would look awesome. I envision an initial "heatsplosion" and an area effect fire that slowly dies down. Anything hit in the original explosion would wind up covered in sticky fire, anyone running through it afterwards would just have the temporary heat exposure. Seems like it'd be a slightly more tactical weapon at that point.

#29 Tabrias07

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 482 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:28 AM

this is an awesome idea

#30 HighlandCoo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 772 posts
  • Locationbehind you

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:30 AM

Airstrikes and arty are totally useless at present. I endorse ANY change that makes that fact less true.

#31 Corvus Antaka

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 8,310 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationInner Sphere

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:45 AM

I agree. big napalm fire bombs would rock for airstrikes, and the strike should drop in 1 shot. Arty strikes should hit an area over a period of 5 seconds with 5 hits.

#32 Gevurah

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Flame
  • The Flame
  • 500 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:34 PM

I'd love to see a viable area denial weapon like this.

+voted.

It'd be cool to see artillery be a 'high damage output over large area' setup and napalm be used for area denial.

#33 Clit Beastwood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:41 PM

napalm - 20m wide, 200m long? what dimensions would work?

you could effectively block off a tunnel opening from inside the tunnel, you could rain death on a bunch of people in a canyon by hitting it lengthwise. Aim it like TAG instead of smoke canisters, thus requiring LOS and some risk to the dropper, and less chance of spamming. Alternatively, it could be a "canister" dropped by a light mech - I just want to avoid zero risk use of the napalm strike.

I'm going to really fess up here - I recently started playing old-school scorched earth, so I have napalm on the brain :)

#34 GODzillaGSPB

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,031 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:46 PM

Yep, nice idea. The only effective use of arty I've seen once in a match on Tourmaline. As I usually do with my Jagermech I positioned myself, with other mechs, on a ridge and opened fire. Enemy saw us and used an arty strike. I saw the red smoke under my mech and withdrew. Took no damage BUT I and another mech both withdrew from the ridge and stopped firing, so it had a positive effect for the enemy team. But of course after the short pause we went back there again and continued the barrage.

If that would've been napalm and would've kept on burning, the position would be impossible (or not favorable= to use for a longer period of time.

That's why I support the idea. I wouldn't even want an additional type of arty - though I bet PGI would gladly add more possible MC items into the game *g* - and rather see the current one replaced or the napalm-effect simply added to it.

#35 gjnii

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 77 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:47 PM

sounds awesome to me... improving airstrikes by adding tactical capability instead of just some more damage is an excellent idea.

being able to drop a mini-caldera from caustic onto the map sounds like it'd be a pretty great power.. if it does a little damage and blinds some vision modes, even better.

#36 TehSBGX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 911 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:50 PM

It's usefull but not OP and there might be some builds it effects more than others making it situational too. Yep, I'm all for this. Consumables being good but situational is perfect.

#37 Levi Porphyrogenitus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 4,763 posts
  • LocationAurora, Indiana, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way

Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:54 PM

I think you don't mean napalm. I think you mean Inferno missiles.

Aside from that mistake, I like your idea. However, since PGI likely would be looking for more ways to make money, why not offer both kinds of air support? Bombs and Inferno MIssiles both as options should work just fine.

#38 Clit Beastwood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,262 posts
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:59 PM

No, I really do mean napalm. A sheet of flame, not individual pockets of sticky fire.


I think it'd help mitigate "boating" of some weapons, since there are threads about
1. Airstrike sucks.
2. Boating ppc's sucks.
3. Alpha strikes suck.

Seems like a way to curb all three, as well as being some temporary cover to reposition as an enemy approaches.

#39 Lord Ikka

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,255 posts
  • LocationGreeley, CO

Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:11 PM

Like the idea of napalm. +1

#40 Smeghead87

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 303 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:12 PM

I love the smell of good ideas in the morning.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users