//relic//

What's the point of a defensive ring around Baghdad anyway? Â From my non-military point of view, sure it's a political centre and would be nice to capture but it's not like you *need* Baghdad to control Iraq. It's not from my view a strategic point of interest in Iraq - I'd rather control all out other towns, oil fields, airports, military bases and so forth. Â Afterall, they wouldn't put their (if any) WMD labs in Baghdad would they...? Having looked at a map, it seems even moreso to me - I'd capture Umm Qasr for the port, as many towns along borders as I could and basically seal the country in for a time, until I deemed I could take Baghdad.

No no I wasn't trying to convert, it's just a scenario that I think would invalidate religion. I think if a religious person criticised me for being athiest I think it would drive me insane with rage...honestly

lol you're probably right Alien craft lands and two jehovas witnesses knock on the door of their ship with some brochures

Question to the religious: If we met aliens, and they had absolutely no concept of religion, or something that could be remotely contrived to represent your gods, what would you do? That would rule out the idea that your particular god created the entire universe, because presumable she/he/it would 'reveal' themself to that species too

Gomer Pyle -> Full Metal Jacket, that main guy in Law & Order:SVU At least I think it's SVU, there's so many shitty spinoffs its hard to keep track

I'd like to see links between the individual missions instead of a series of linear missions only linked by the storyline. For example - in the context of CWC, if you kill all 5 T-80's in one mission and completely rid the map of enemies, in real life it would be a sorer blow for the Russians than if you just made your way through by stealth. In OFP it doesn't make a difference, but I'd like to see it make a difference, so you actually achieve something when you go out of your way to kick ass. Alternatively, I'd like a dynamic campaign engine like Falcon 4.0 where you kill things and it actually makes progress in the war - e.g I'd like to see OFP the ability to get your AH-1 and take out a bunch of tanks and AA sites, have your ground forces move in and then that part of the island is more or less yours.

I'd like to see links between the individual missions instead of a series of linear missions only linked by the storyline. For example - in the context of CWC, if you kill all 5 T-80's in one mission and completely rid the map of enemies, in real life it would be a sorer blow for the Russians than if you just made your way through by stealth. In OFP it doesn't make a difference, but I'd like to see it make a difference, so you actually achieve something when you go out of your way to kick ass. Alternatively, I'd like a dynamic campaign engine like Falcon 4.0 where you kill things and it actually makes progress in the war - e.g I'd like to see OFP the ability to get your AH-1 and take out a bunch of tanks and AA sites, have your ground forces move in and then that part of the island is more or less yours.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HK (HunterKiller) @ Jan. 10 2003,13:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">To all you lads (and lassies) thinking about getting a GF4 Ti4600 i would say this, don't! for probably around half the price you could get one of the cards from Albatron, they are selling Ti4200's that are made using better quality pcb's and 3.3 ns memory chips, they are basically built to be overclocked and can easily be overclocked to beyond the specs of the 4600. The latest ones are also 8x agp compatible, i plan on getting one of these myself to replace my ageing radeon 8500le. And the cash you save on that could be put to good use on a new stick of ram, a faster cpu, or a nice new HDD. Have a look around you will see that these Albatron cards are very highly rated!. I think they are designated 4200 turbo or something, with the newest 8 x agp versions designated 4680 turbo or something similiar. Here's a link to one of several reviews done on these cards, or go to google and type in the name of the card and search around yourself...Albatron Ti4200 review<span id='postcolor'> HK, for a Ti4200 card the Albatron's are great Ti4200's. However, do not expect to OC it to even close to Ti4600 speeds anymore. The Albatron cards that all the reviewers received were using Hynix (?) ram, however Albatron has since changed to Samsung 3.3ns BGA ram, which overclocks poorly and robs the core of the voltage it needs to achieve oc's like 310-320. So basically - buy an Albatron now and you'll pay a premium price, but with nothing to show for it. You're probably better off buying an Abit OTES, Triplex 3.3ns or X-micro card as they achieve pretty good overclocks but don't cost as much as the Albatron.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Jan. 11 2003,05:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What's the answer?<span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">God doesn't disallow warfare.<span id='postcolor'> Interesting. Â You speak so certainly for something which has never had it's existance proven, and by all scientific logical processes would be immediately discarded as it's unfalsifiable. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That I can't answer since I don't believe in Him. It would make as much sense as if I asked you "If God is really all powerful, can he create a stone that's too heavy for even Him to move?".<span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Can atheists make a statement so stupid even THEY won't believe it? <span id='postcolor'> Why is that stupid? Â Because you personally cannot figure out a way to reconcile that question with your belief in "god's" (speech marks are to demonstrate my highly dubious reference to "god" as though "he" exists) infallibility? I see you're bringing your in-your-face christianty to here as equally as you have a 500x80 or something "FRUGALSWORLD CHRISTIAN BROTHERHOOD" sig at frugalsworld. Edit: LOL Tovarish said it already - whenever I see that particular commandment it makes me laugh because of the thou shalt not covet thy neighbours ass bit

lol owned You obviously know a lot more than I do, but what I said wasn't the result of casual googling - everything I've been taught and read in books on quantum physics has stated that quantum mechanics and gravity are currently irreconcilable hence theories like superstring theory

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 09 2003,07:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The problem is that QM's energy definitions (energy states) don't work with classical electrodynamics (ED) which is the base for relativity. According to ED a moving electron induces an electrical and magnetical field. Doing that it loses energy. QM states that in an atom the electrons are in discrete energy states while they are moving. If ED was correct all atoms would implode since its electrons would lose their energy and collaps towards the nucleus. Also the statistical nature of QM, including Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is not compatible with the causality axioms of the theory of relativity.<span id='postcolor'> That's all so wrong. Quantum mechanics is incomaptible with gravity. Quantum mechanics was developed to explain shortcomings in classical physics - for example the ultraviolet catastrophy. QM explains what classical physics could not - it provides a way in which electrons can assume stable orbits, by introducing matter waves and requiring that a stable orbit be composed of an integral number of wavelengths of the electron. QM explained this successfully - this is not the reason the two theories are incompatible. The primary reason that relativity and quantum mechanics cannot be united into a GUT (as well as g + strong/weak nuclear force) is because the uncertainty principle does not work well with gravity fields and attempting to introduce gravity into quantum mechanics equations just results in an infinite loop integral. It couldn't be renormalized either. One such infinite is where virtual particles that are a consequence of the uncertainty principle would curve the universe into an infinitely small singularity.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 09 2003,06:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As it looks today, the solution to that lies in quantum mechanichs. QM is today still completely incompatible with both the special and general theory of relativity. We know that there is something wrong, but we don't know what.<span id='postcolor'> See below

Someone summarise that Nature article for me - did they use gravitational lensing?

:rolleyes: That whole test was stupid, I could have just told them I was biased and made it a lot simpler. Â Who likes fat people anyway Tolerance.org are such homos, do they really expect people to be completely free of bias and not make judgements on the sorts of things they're testing?

Cmon hell's there aren't that many idiots at GP; granted I've been away from OFP since the HSC began like 15 weeks ago, but still...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">333MHz FSB CPU', 333MHz DDR, Serial ATA and AGP 8x <span id='postcolor'> We have those all now?? My Epox 8RDA+ is lacking SATA and RAID which is pretty godamn annoying but the FSB is 200, the ram is running sync and it has AGP 8x (not that 8x means a thing for perforance)

OFP:R GTA III F1 2002 with GT racing mod Morrowind would be second but it goes to 5000th because of the shitty engine, bugs and so forth They're the only three I've enjoyed, the rest have been crappy. BF1942 is the worst game in the world, I hate it and I hate it's stupid supporters. I suppose it comes from the fact they're all gay CS kiddies but nevermind...

I doubt you'll see much of an improvement at all in OFP and games in general. It would be useful and give a large performance boost for a graphics edition workstation or something, but not really for games.

I doubt you'll see much of an improvement at all in OFP and games in general. It would be useful and give a large performance boost for a graphics edition workstation or something, but not really for games.

I routinely got 150k per map iirc.. I know I got that mch on the one where you're in the captured ruins surrounded. I'd say I got 50 infantry kills on that map, I killed every single tank personally, and I shot down the three helos.

As a fan of Falcon4, the community there has done a lot to replace and improve the original models of the game in terms of authenticity, quality, aesthetics etc Are there any mods for OFP that have better models & textures that simply replace the original models or are they all addons that require specific support in custom maps?

Interesting read - just makes me wish even more I lived in the US so I could actually learn to use 'real' firearms as opposed to the .22 match pistols I have to use in Aust

I have nfi about ballistics - I don't have any first hand knowledge or training in the area and virtually every site I've seen on the net has a different theory on terminal ballistics. Some say the hydrostatic shock kills Some say regular shock kills Some say it's dependant on the permanent tissue damage and thus the calibre of the weapon Some say hollowpoints are great because they have a lot of stopping power, some say stopping power is a myth

I like 'De Oppresso Liberio' the best - Green Berets right?

It's been around as long as religion, but religion is an outdated concept and hence the absence of religion can't be an anachronism Anyhow - that's the clinch point, since god can be assumed to not exist, they can't justify it. Yeah, if one did exist and he said "go kill some civilians in cold blood, or i'll send your ass to hell" i'd probably do it but since one doesn't...