Great Suggestion - Fuel !!! -1 reply

Please wait...

Uncle_Sam

Pass me a Lucky Strike...

50 XP

23rd December 2003

0 Uploads

1,120 Posts

0 Threads

#11 16 years ago

Precisely. Adding fuel to the mix would take away from the action. Example: You're team needs you to come bomb something in the stuka immediately. But damn...you can't because you have to refuel before you can get over there. You're team loses. I dont want to see fuel added into the mix.




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

16th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#12 16 years ago

Hmmm maybe make the Opel Blitz carry fuel and ammo, then there would be a reason to use them.




Uncle_Sam

Pass me a Lucky Strike...

50 XP

23rd December 2003

0 Uploads

1,120 Posts

0 Threads

#13 16 years ago

There already is a reason to use them. Get in, drive, become a statistic.




merkava01

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

29th May 2004

0 Uploads

13 Posts

0 Threads

#14 16 years ago

If my source is correct, the Tiger tank had a range of about 75 miles. I think the biggest FH maps are about 2-3 miles from border to border (I'm guessing, could be smaller). So, if they added fuel it would take around an hour (which is about the maximum set time limit I've ever seen in a big server) of constant driving for it to even get close to needing fuel. So it's basicly pointless.




[BFE]projecTile

I'm way too cool to Post

50 XP

7th February 2004

0 Uploads

163 Posts

0 Threads

#15 16 years ago

You would have to divide those 75 miles through a certain factor since those 2 miles on a bf42 map are supposed to be, lets say, 20 miles. After 2 minutes the tiger would just stop and needs to be refuled. I think it would be a nice addition and could be a strategic element espacially on maps where one certain tank dominates. Question is : Is this even possible to code ? A tank just stoping but not blowing up or anything ??




zero_zero

I'm sonic the spacehog

50 XP

17th November 2003

0 Uploads

363 Posts

0 Threads

#16 16 years ago

getting weirder every day here for GTA3 I say yes for FH I say no




mondogenerator

Wolfgaming.net *****istrator

50 XP

24th September 2003

0 Uploads

568 Posts

0 Threads

#17 16 years ago

No vehical bar the rocket planea IRL would be used long enough to refuel in FH. The vehical that would probably burn fuel fastest is the planes and even then the least fuel economic ones could fly full throttle/RPM's for 30 minutes (BF109's primarly).

OT: Why can't people be a bit nicer when someone posts a suggestion thats already been brought up? Not a positive thing for a community to be rude to each other when you could be nice.




Petey

Flow

50 XP

6th October 2003

0 Uploads

193 Posts

0 Threads

#18 16 years ago

Vehicles already have to go back when they run out of ammo. What would be the point of adding fuel to go along with that?




peckens

peck peck peck wooodddddd

50 XP

26th January 2004

0 Uploads

431 Posts

0 Threads

#19 16 years ago

i think its a good idea




Lateralus

Ad astra per aspera.

50 XP

5th October 2003

0 Uploads

441 Posts

0 Threads

#20 16 years ago
peckensi think its a good idea

Other posters in this thread have put forth specific reasons why it is a bad idea, and you are offering nothing.