Project Reality Forums

Guys i was wondering if Tear gas could be added like they have in SF.
i think it would be an awsome addition specially on jungle maps.... what does everyone think?

Realisticlly no, Cool factor yes.

If we're going to make dangerous airborne smoke-type agents, lets just be men about it and break out the white phosphorous. None of this nancy-pants crybaby gas.

Or we could not, and say we did.

White phosphorus is awesome. I think it was that film "We Were Soldiers" where this guy gets hit in the face by one and they have to cut his flesh off or something, either way it looks pretty awesome.

Well the shrapnel tend to dig into skin and then reignite when the doctors expose it to the air it's really nasty stuff.

tear gas in use by a military... not too realistic as far as i know.

there was a notion about using the tear gas effect or someting like a tear gas effect when you are losing blood, or as you get more and more hurt.

White phosphorus burns the skin and flesh and the clothing is not affected. They use it in The Middle East a lot even though it is a chemical weapon. So white phosphorus is realistic and can be added you just need to be able to make the body charred and the clothing have a little dust. Have it as like an arty strike type thing that the commander can lay down.

It isn't used in Iraq "alot" as far as I know, it was only used in Falluja. That stopped after the international community made a big fuss out of it.

Apparently it's okay to blow people's brains out with .50cal bullets and rip off limbs with grenades, but when you use white phosphorus *GASP* you're suddenly being "in-humane".

How the fuck is war supposed to be "humane"? The entire basis of war is killing the other guy, who cares how you do it? Whether you shoot him or burn him, it's still going to happen.

Azn watch the language buddy.

White phosphorous is good for ambushes, i cant see why it cant/should'nt be in-game.

AznLB is right thogh Trog, i agree that tourture and anythink that will effect you forever should be looked at but war is war.

Wasn't disaggering with him simply saying to watch the swearing. Actually I agree with the war is war statement but still say there should be some limits.

is napalm still used?

Ashumuto wrote:is napalm still used?

I don't think so... good weapon, though.

'[R-PUB wrote:trogdor1289']...there should be some limits...

Torture

No, we don't use Napalm. In an urban application Napalm would cause too much collateral damage anyway.

AznLB wrote:Torture

No, we don't use Napalm. In an urban application Napalm would cause too much collateral damage anyway.

Who cares? If its an enemy we are bombing, does anyone actuly care?

innocent civilans care about being hit just by being by the enemies.

Ashumuto wrote:is napalm still used?

Not by the US anyway. Whilst they never did get round to signing the anti incedury weapons agreement (I forget its actual title) they decided to stop using Napalm and flame throwers (not good for public opinion, apparently). The US airforce now uses the Mk.77 firebomb, which, according to their press office "has a remarkably naplam like effect".

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... s/mk77.htm
Actually lists the Mk77 as Napalm. However it also said that they were destroyed a while back "yeah right".

reason i brought up tear gas, is because it exists...
Now not only that but it adds a whole new tactical level to the game.
Like in special forces.. You smoke a room and move in while the enemy is dazed.

Nuclear weapons exist. The Devs chose not to include this feature because they're not actually used by any of the classes or armies mentioned in the game. Nuclear weapons would probably add a tactical level to the game, but sadly they were turned down too. I can just imagine dropping one in a room and killing everyone in a 5 mile radius.

Tear gas is real, but that doesn't mean any grunt in the army uses it. And besides, that means they need to add gas masks which will waste yet another weapon slot that could be taken up by something even cooler.