ComJak wrote:
well just to bring down the mood

the part I hate about flame throwers is that the flame thrower was rarely used in combat ever since WWII and even then, it was used sparingly. It's pretty unrealistic to see soldiers with flamethrowers running after soldiers with guns because that's just not the right way to use them.
Yes I understand the tactical value of an entrenchment clearing weapon but honestly, that's all it was good for. It was vulnerable to combustion and leaking and was heavy and restricted movement. Considering the modern combat motif of the game, I would not have hand held flame throwers because it simply is unrealistic to the extreme. It could be implemented just so that WWII and other mods could incorporate a flame thrower like weapon but I personally don't see a reason to have it in the vanilla game.
ComJak
A lot of people on this forum are firm believers of
the rule of cool. "The limit of the willing suspension of disbelief for a given element is directly proportional to the element's awesomeness."
I'm more of a realism/semi-realism guy myself. Flamethrowers could be possible if they were done like they are in Men of War, with somewhat decent range but with the possibility of exploding and killing nearby friendlies. Plus, people like setting things on fire, so...
(As for tanks, I'm really hoping there aren't any MBT's or anything, the heaviest thing I'd want to see is an M2A2 or a BMP3 or something, and even that's kinda pushing it. I don't know how susceptible to fire modern vehicles are compared to WWII ones.)