C&C 4 Unit Profile - Nod Flame Tank

[Sonic 296]

The second Command & Conquer 4 unit profile for Nod has been posted on the Official C&C Site. And this one gives us a look at the Flame Tank. Its great to see the in game appearance of the Flame Tank has been improved since we first saw it. And as always this profile features a short in game video, concept art and extra information. Here is a sample....

 

"The construction site was shut down for the night, but we heard rumbling. We thought maybe Jenkins was doing some late night maintenance, but then everything just... everything.... We were surrounded by fire, swirling around us, incinerating the equipment, burning people alive, engulfing the entire camp, and in the center of it was this black monster, this devil belching inferno everywhere... I was sure I was in hell." - Henry Liu, TCN Construction Worker, Sole Survivor

 

GDI has always had reservations about the questionable and "inhumane" use of flamethrowers in combat, but the Brotherhood of Nod has held no such compunctions. The "Devil's Tongue" Flame Tank is rightfully feared for its ability to immolate entire infantry divisions and raze complete structures in a matter of seconds. GDI's inability to provide cost-effective infantry protection against flame weapons has made the vehicle a key weapon in Nod's arsenal for nearly a century, and, despite some minor tweaks, the Flame Tank has remained largely unchanged throughout.

Click here for the full Nod Flame Tank profile.

[Nmenth 291]

I'm glad they changed its design, unfortunately, I'm not so sure the new design is actually an improvement... It looks too vulnerable and squished.

 

Also, this unit would be a better choice for the name Salamander.

[Luk3us 63]

They need to stop throwing around buzz words like they mean something, tis most annoying. I don't really like this redesign either, but its too late now, guess this is the end product.

[Malevolence 6]

No doubt the design isn't perfect, but the new capabilities such as the trail of fire looks good.

[Silverthorn 0]

Although not perfect, but at least it's way better than the boxy flame tank last time.

 

Anyway, I hope the QA department fix the other model problems like the still awaited Avatar & the Nod engineer.

[ApornasPlanet 9]

Its great to see the in game appearance of the Flame Tank has been improved since we first saw it.

Too bad it still looks like ****.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Sonic
Don't attempt to circumvent the bad words filter

[ORCaLoVeR 0]

i dont understand this. As up to now, every GDI unit looks fantastic (exept that Orca rocket tank thing)

 

Yet everytime we see a Nod unit..............

 

Only the salamander and centurion looks good imo

[Sonic 296]

Also, this unit would be a better choice for the name Salamander.

The Flame Tank is a traditional Nod unit, why would they call it the Salamander? Please explain.

 

new capabilities such as the trail of fire looks good.

I felt that was the best part in the little video actually.

 

Anyway, I hope the QA department fix the other model problems like the still awaited Avatar & the Nod engineer.

As we posted in the news previously the Avatar could be getting a redesign. Nothing is changing with the Engineer though.

[Crusader1 0]

From what I have seen of all the C&C4 units are not well designed, just 1 or 2 may be ok but the rest are not well designed, they look like they been rushed in to the game.

[ORCaLoVeR 0]

From what I have seen of all the C&C4 units are not well designed, just 1 or 2 may be ok but the rest are not well designed, they look like they been rushed in to the game.

The GDI designs have been very good for me atm. Only the orca and rocket orca tank thing needs a redesign imo.

 

But the Nod Unit designs so far....

 

The guys developing needs to understand that this aint Ra3. Tiberian universe always had serious looking unit designs. Most Nod units looks like they are straight from Ra3, cartoonish and unreal.

 

Take the juggernaut. Its whole design make sense(Yes the short barrels have a purpose)

 

But then they stick a a huge pot on it wich fires some sort of mortar? The idea of the mortar is ok, but make it look realistic then

Edited December 5, 2009 by ORCaLoVeR

[ApornasPlanet 9]

From what I have seen of all the C&C4 units are not well designed, just 1 or 2 may be ok but the rest are not well designed, they look like they been rushed in to the game.

qft

[Nmenth 291]

The Flame Tank is a traditional Nod unit, why would they call it the Salamander? Please explain.

I have no problem with them just calling it a Flame Tank (although TS called it the Devil's Tongue), my point is not that this unit should be called the Salamander, but that the Salamander should not. There are lots of flying mythological creatures that represent fire, naming a flying machine after a mythological creature that does not fly makes no sense. So if they liked the name Salamander and really wanted to use it, this tank would have been more suitable to bear it.

[Aaron Kaufman 0]

It might just be my eyes, but how in the hell does the Flame Tank look anything like a Salamander? =) I'm seriously questioning some of the art direction opinions lauded around here, lol.

 

Yes, I am being serious. Have you ever looked at real Salamander? If Salamanders looked like Tanks, i'd be collecting them daily.

 

-APOC

[VampireA05 0]

to me, its look primitive than Devil's Tongue. like Kane's high school project.

[Nmenth 291]

It might just be my eyes, but how in the hell does the Flame Tank look anything like a Salamander?

 

Yes, I am being serious. Have you ever looked at real Salamander? If Salamanders looked like Tanks, i'd be collecting them daily.

Are you saying the flying machine was so named because it looks like a salamander? I don't think so...

 

There are two different creatures called "salamanders", little amphibious critters that crawl around, eat bugs, and like water. This doesn't sound like a flame tank other than crawling on the ground, or a flying machine... The other salamander is a mythological animal that resembled real salamanders or lizards, but bathed in perpetual fire. Fire? Now we're getting somewhere; the Nod ship can discharge waves of fire, but it neither crawls on the ground nor bathes in its inferno. The Flame Tank? Why, it crawls on the ground and can lay down a trail of fire.

 

Now which one fits the description of a salamander better?

 

There are a lot of mythological choices out there for a flying creature of fire, why not call it a Dragon, Phoenix, Firebird, Corposant, Vulcan, or Wyvern? There are probably a few more good names I can't think of right now that would be more fitting than salamander.

[Gben 20]

I don't like the wide, landscape orientation of this flamer. But that's my opinion APOC.

Watching the video, I thought the trail of fire was cool... but made no sense.

As a 'melee' unit, for the lack of a better word, why would it leave damage behind it as it charges toward the enemy fortification???

It's shown fleeing enemy tanks, I would expect a frontal assault would do more damage than a trail of liquid along a fixed position...

 

At least reading the text explains it's similiar to the RA3 Kirov effect.

But does it damage friendly units??? Are other flamers immune to the effects?

 

.

.

.

I have no idea what a salamander looks like, but I agree with Nmenth's comments about it not suiting Nod's AIRSHIP since it's a land based animal.

Still... many a WW2 plane had "shark' motifs and other non-flying animal connections.

[VampireA05 0]

how about Kodiak...

[Nmenth 291]

I have no idea what a salamander looks like

A real salamander.

 

Mythological.

 

Does that better represent a firebomb-dropping airship or flame tank?

[Silverthorn 0]

I still have a doubt about that, Sonic. If the engineer is left unchanged, fans will still remain angry of why the crappy design, it's not Red Alert! Moreover, even with story backgrounds why the scorpion tail design and that, sometimes it's more of an excuse to cover their biggest mistake.

[Sonic 296]

Nmenth, by your logic the Orca should be renamed as well. An Orca is a Whale and as we all know Whales can't fly.

[Malevolence 6]

I don't know what is seriously up with the salamander unit naming. To me, it's fine, and it's absolutely fine for an airborne unit since GDI had an ancient classic unit called the orca and the classic Kodiak back in TS. So, what's the big fuss about?

 

As for the naming of the flame tank, maybe it'll be cool to give it a codename instead of just "Flame Tank". Maybe something meaningful and creative to match with the new trail of fire capabilities as compared to the previous generations.

 

I think this retooled model looks acceptable, though not too fanciful to Nod's standard concept of weird alien and classy, it looks pretty ... acceptable for me. (Or maybe I couldn't think of a better design for it anyways)

[VampireA05 0]

Nmenth, by your logic the Orca should be renamed as well. An Orca is a Whale and as we all know Whales can't fly.

 

if they gonna rename that, i prefer 'Pigeon' bcoz it have this habit to drop 'bombs'.

[ORCaLoVeR 0]

Or simply Phoenix

 

 

I still like the name Salamander though

[Nmenth 291]

Nmenth, by your logic the Orca should be renamed as well. An Orca is a Whale and as we all know Whales can't fly.

Actually, I've always wondered why they called them Orcas... (and technically, they are dolphins, not whales)

 

The difference though, is that when the Orcas were named, there was no navy to compete with for the name, but here, the Flame Tank much more represents a salamander than the Nod airship. If the airship was the only fire-using unit in the game, I wouldn't have so much of a problem with it, but it's not, so I do.

[ORCaLoVeR 0]

it is just a name guys. Calm down.