scout 0 Posted April 3, 2002 u just dont get it. it was regiment commanders course....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted April 3, 2002 Why are you surprised. That's the way things are done on Malden. Don't you rememer Private Armstrong becoming Lieutenant Armstrong in just a couple of months? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpaceAlex 0 Posted April 3, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 03 2002,03:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why are you surprised. That's the way things are done on Malden. Don't you rememer Private Armstrong becoming Lieutenant Armstrong in just a couple of months? Â <span id='postcolor'> That's because he was really good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpaceAlex 0 Posted April 3, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ April 03 2002,01:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In the ambush mission, I think you are the only guy below the rank of Lieutenant! LOL! Everyone in your platoon is a Major, Colonel or Captain. Since when did they use Colonels as squad leaders? And since when were Captains used as riflemen? These guys on Malden must have an excess of officers or Col. Blake is big on field commissions. Â <span id='postcolor'> Majors and captains are there in the original campaign because u don't know how to command soldier in earlier missions. So, if the leader dies next soldier will take command, if that soldier dies next one will take command and so on. The last one is you. That's why we have colonels and captains. Look at the names too. Names of the soldiers are always the same. Group section is there just for better perspective (To know how many soldiers do u have in your squad) and for giving or taking weapons from them when you take command. And that's all. I suggest that u stop thinking about that because it's pointless. Â Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MadGav 0 Posted April 3, 2002 This is probably because the guys at BIS all did national service and hate officers as a result? Oh, look! There go another 2 colonels! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Satchel 0 Posted April 3, 2002 Hahaha, i think thats the top answer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGFs TopGun 1 Posted April 3, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ April 01 2002,20:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't even know why you call it 'NATO' equipment when all there is is U.S. units and vehicles. Where's the Canadian stuff?....eh?<span id='postcolor'> Is all the Canadian stuff just obsolete US equipment anyway? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darkhawk 0 Posted April 3, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IGFs TopGun @ April 03 2002,22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ April 01 2002,20:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't even know why you call it 'NATO' equipment when all there is is U.S. units and vehicles. Where's the Canadian stuff?....eh?<span id='postcolor'> Is all the Canadian stuff just obsolete US equipment anyway? <!--emo&<span id='postcolor'> you call this obsolete equipment! M109 ADATS is a sweet weapon it can take out aircraft as well as Tanks at up to 8000M away you would not even know what hit you! The Coyote is one of the best recon vehicles in the world US dose not have anything like it! The Leopard MBT And in my mind I think we have a better clothing and I know what you are going to say about us wearing green camo in afganistan but our armed forces decided to update the gear and we should be seeing some desert uniforms out soon in the next few months. IGFs TopGun I know you were just joking around Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
110 0 Posted April 6, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ April 02 2002,01:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't even know why you call it 'NATO' equipment when all there is is U.S. units and vehicles. Where's the Euro stuff? The Brit Stuff? The Aussie stuff? The Canadian stuff?....eh? That doesn't really bother me though, it would take alot of work to model all that stuff and find a way to put it in the game. Oh well......... Tyler<span id='postcolor'> Wouldn't it be kewl if each country had there own mini-expansion! a British expansion with voice acting and equipment. a Aussie expansion with their voice acting and equipment. but then there is the internet just downloaded the Famas with some French troops yesterday from the lost brothers. 110 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
