Beastttt

9mm anything is not going to have the punch should you need to shoot through a hvy wood doors barricades and such also it will take more hits to drop a drugged up fight till dead opponent

what was the weapon that was fired that we see what looks to be missile with curved fins(that would seem to gave been folded against the body) the video looked great thanks

they are wooden barrels for me they are too squared should look more like a football(american)with the ends lopped off they need to be more oblong I act at renn faire and we use lots of barrels as props so I see them often

can we say Syrian Massada wonder if the oil will last 8 days

there is the email icon just to the left of the quote function

so are we looking at a static table using the CMx2 engine for animations or are we going to get a game where we can sail ships around and vie for position like in fighting steel

Steve care to comment on what Dan has posted in the WW2 MNB forum Battlefront.com Administrator Member # 42 posted February 10, 2007 14:04 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No, CMx2 can not do naval without massive amounts of new code. Which means you'll never see a CM naval game Steve

I really liked fighting steel and the NWS guys mods added a whole lotta play time to it but it could use a new engine to support the advancement in graphics

could have been worse they could have used starforce

2 things abot enigma you should know 1 it has starforce protection that maleware wrecked my combo drive on my last computer(SH III) 2 the full game only only has pts and dd's also the game hs no support so no bigger ships no fleets

I figure it is what the placing player sees like a mine marker the opponet probably won't see it at all or just a big flash of light and a lot of noise

tried the demo did not like the interface

could VIED placedsay as along the road along with dummy vehicles with say an ambush marker(from CMBO or covered arc)and then it would gun up the engine and rush a vehicle to attack it of course the allies would have thermal to see if the engine is running(countered by having the engine off but takes more time to get to target) unbuttoned might spot the driver waiting giving more time to spot(countered by snipers,claymre type mines allied snipers on overwatch countered by roving units out searching for just this

say WW1,WW2,modern granted the ranges would be a whole heck of a lot longer but the terrain would be simpler(islands here and there maybe a coast line I've been on the forums for battle stations midway and all I see is an arcade game that has so many things to make it gamey(crash your aircraft so you can launch more sooner instead of going back to rearm) ranges are way too short Fighting steel I love it and the guys at nws have done wonderfull mods to it but this is an 8 yr old game and could use a rebuild from the ground up Dangerous waters good but only has 1 surface ship and is more a sub sim(granted 1 of the best) want fleets Fleet command limited in aircraft load outs(scenario based) needs to be able to be a command that can be given in game like in harpoon(I have 97 and 3

anybody see this? http://www.neatorama.com/2007/01/23/skyguard-laser/

will there be Wild Weasles to take out the active sensor AA(long to medium range)

the question is how crazy are the chinese when we can nuke the whole country should they nuke California and I live in Ca it also depends on who is in power here if we would respond or not of course if the Twainese have there own nukes there is an other question

BigDuke the point I was making WAS resources you need to take into account that it takes about 16 yrs min to build their guidance system also their guidance system can on occasion fail to detonate properly or even get intercepted also it seems that at best the enemy can only field about 2 or 3 aday the guidance system also can be intimidated before it ever gets programed and just will not have anything to do with the programer the next weapon system I see that needs to be designed is one that seeks out the programers and elminates them however the programers seem to have a defence that shields them from most attacks attacks on the programers probably needs to come from a different direction This is an insurgency in Iraq we're talking about. Not the natural selection of bullfinches on an isolated Pacific island. The point to this munition is that it allows a U.S. squad in contact to land about 100 kg. of explosives on something with the accuracy of a sattelite-guided munition. As the Iraqi resistance has shown, there are other ways to get explosives next to things you want to blow up. Car bombs. Roadside bombs. The most accurate explosive delivery system the insurgents have is the Jihadi, a/k/a as the suicide pedestrian bomb. Though not perfect, this weapons system has a dramatic advantage over the U.S. GPS-guided munitions, as the Jihadi is guided by an intelligence light years better than any smart weapon - the human brain. If this zippy U.S. munition costs a million bucks (say), how much does the insurgent version cost? Explosives: $5 - 20 Care and feeding of Jihadi: $5 Religious support: Free Bribes to local security: $100 - $1000 Prior intelligence collection: 0 - $100 Max cost of weapon system: $1,130 Min cost of weapon system: $110 Like any weapon a suicide bomber is not perfect. In firefights he's pretty ineffective. He can't carry 100 kg. But on the other hand his CEP is a whole lot better than five meters. If a suicide bomber functions properly, he detonates within centimeters of the target. Still, every once in a while a suicide bomber will panic and blow up the wrong people. Once in an extremely great while a suicide bomber will defect to the infidels and tell them everything he knows, which of course a GPS-guided munition will never do. That said, we have to remember GPS-guided munitions are only as effective as the targeting information the humans give them. In the case with the house and the AK firers, a laser-guided munition would be pefectly happy to blow up if it found valuable hostages or children or critical intelligence inside the building, while a suicide bomber - theoretically - might think twice. But no matter how you argue which system is more effective tacticaly, price-wise the insurgents have a hands-down edge. For the cost of one U.S. weapon, the insurgents can launch somewhere between 900 and 9,090 suicide bombers. Theoretically, of course, there would remain the possibility the U.S. could still get the better of this exchange rate if it was willing and capable of outspend the insurgency by a factor of roughly 1,000 to 10,000 to one, and both sides were equally determined to keep launching explosives until they ran out of resources. But if the Iraqis are willing to be more ruthless than the Americans - i.e., more willing to expend resources to win the war - then even these calculations out the window, and the real equation is even more in the Iraqi favor. All of which, of course, begs the question: Is there a more cost-effective way of getting rid of a couple of obstreperous Iraqis with Kalashnikovs, than a million-dollar GPS-guided munition? I can think of a few possibilities: 1. Bribe the AK firers 2. Bribe the AK firers' relatives 3. Pay the police and judges in the AK-firers' neighborhood a serious salary. 4. Keep the Americans out of the neighborhood. None of those options, of course, makes American business much money, or will advance the careers of conventional arms-tracked U.S. military personnel. I think this is a big reason why we get repeated lickspittle reports on zippy new weapons systems and "awesome" U.S. tactical capacity, and few to no reports what might be the he smartest way to use civilian resources - taxpayer dollars -to have a chance at winning the war. </font>

if it saves our troops lives then it is a good thing to me as for the others to replace the snipers the I see it kind of like the kzinti if you kill enough you might find 1 who is willing to talk and negotiate darwin at work

just means that they where close enough to fire at a high angle with a guided weapon did you see the launch angle in the video they were pushing 70 degrees to horz and the FO would just need a laser range finder hooked up to a GPS data link

I'd have to say if you don't have to worry about counter battery fire then they are just as good as sp arty that is the only advantage I see that sp has over towed

when I used the word contents I was refering to the personal inside the Stryker I figure that an airbust would only have the shell casing for fragments to cause damage along with the shock wave and in general is really only useful against exposed infantry,unbuttoned vehicle crews ground bursts will throw out a heck of a lot more fragments also the shock wave will be striking the side of the vehicle with more of a chance to strike the wheels or knock it over as opposed to pushing it down(figuring on an over head burst say no more than 30 degrees off angle the over hang of the vehicle should shield the wheels from direct fragment strikes)

Direct 120mm mortar hit Short of a heavy bunker no vehicle would survive Direct 85mm artillery round hit HEAT ammo maybe if it hit the slat armor APHE no Direct 122mm artillery round hit as above 152mm artillery round at 15 meters impact contents yes but wheels will be trashed 85mm AT gun at 750 meters HEAT ammo if it hits the slats 82mm RR 107mm RR if it hits the slats

you use the LRDG to spot and call in attacks very rarely would they attack themselves call in heavier cav(helio troups) airstrikes cruise missle attack their biggest problem will be IFF ID'ing but calling in a fighter to pull a WW mission to see if it can spook them into doing something stupid or because they are vehicle bound they will have access to better spotting equipment bigger cameras to spot weapons at longer distances shotgun microphones for long distance hearing just being out there to spot is a big advantage if they have a radio to call in with

see the need for lg rng lt cannon to scrub off sensors unless there is a sensor out there that can take a 20mm to 40mm auto cannon hit in this scenario just plain old HE should do the job or use an anti-radiation prox fuse weapon standoff range 100' it will be like using EMCON in a modern naval battle have it active you most likely will see it coming unless they spoof you but they will know where you are exactly don't go active harder to find you but much less time to react to attacks