Guest Posted November 25, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 25 2002,23:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Matt, do you believe that OFP renders the dot at infinity?<span id='postcolor'> As I understand it OFP red dot sight, like on the XM-177E2 is simply a transparent texture with a non-transparent dot on it (inside the scope), which would make it the same as a non-parallax compensating generic red dot sight. Which is kind of the whole point of this discussion. Or have I missed something??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Matthijs 40 Posted November 25, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 25 2002,23:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 25 2002,23:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Matt, do you believe that OFP renders the dot at infinity?<span id='postcolor'> As I understand it OFP red dot sight, like on the XM-177E2 is simply a transparent texture with a non-transparent dot on it (inside the scope), which would make it the same as a non-parallax compensating generic red dot sight. Which is kind of the whole point of this discussion. Or have I missed something???<span id='postcolor'> I guess so, I was discussing the real life thing, probably a misunderstanding about what I meant by "not centered". Then someone tags along, probably not knowing about parallax compensation, suddenly the next kicks in, talking about the sighting system already in OFP (or so I guess?) And all the time, I was talking about a real life Aimpoint, with parallax compensation. Hmm... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted November 25, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 25 2002,17:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 25 2002,23:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Matt, do you believe that OFP renders the dot at infinity?<span id='postcolor'> As I understand it OFP red dot sight, like on the XM-177E2 is simply a transparent texture with a non-transparent dot on it (inside the scope), which would make it the same as a non-parallax compensating generic red dot sight. Which is kind of the whole point of this discussion. Or have I missed something???<span id='postcolor'> You haven't missed anything... I was just wondering if he thought he made the OFP engine project the dot from infinity for his particular scope. Otherwise there would be an aiming problem. (this reminds me of that Supressor argument... vacuum, suction, pressure... lol) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted November 25, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Matthijs @ Nov. 25 2002,17:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And all the time, I'm was about a real life Aimpoint, with parallax compensation. Hmm...<span id='postcolor'> LMAO, so that's why all the confusion arose. EDIT: Oh yeah, and mine has more girth... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Matthijs 40 Posted November 25, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 25 2002,23:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(...) EDIT: Oh yeah, and mine has more girth...<span id='postcolor'> Girth? I'm not English, can someone tell me what girth is? Is it some sort of bug? Or some itchy irritation? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted November 25, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Matthijs @ Nov. 25 2002,18<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Nov. 25 2002,23:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(...) EDIT: Oh yeah, and mine has more girth...<span id='postcolor'> Girth? I'm not English, can someone tell me what girth is? Is it some sort of bug? Or some itchy irritation?<span id='postcolor'> girth = pi*d Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Supah 0 Posted November 25, 2002 Matthijs: Hij bedoeld omtrek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted November 26, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">omtrek<span id='postcolor'> I think I can figure this word out om-trek circle/around-trip/travel > circumfence </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">bedoeld<span id='postcolor'> bedo-eld hmm Red aiming point right? So, Hij bedoeld omtrek: Your red aiming point circumfence. lol Off topic enough isn't it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted November 26, 2002 "bedoeld" would be the same as "betyder" in Swedish, which means "means" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VXR 9 Posted November 26, 2002 DEnoir has the good answer about bedoeld hehe Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Matthijs 40 Posted November 26, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (supah @ Nov. 26 2002,00:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Matthijs: Hij bedoeld omtrek <span id='postcolor'> Yes, I do know what girth is, I was just pulling a leg with the bugs and the itchy rash. Â [edit]Let's keep it on topic from now...[/edit] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
