Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX

I have a 5.1 speaker system, so I use that. I have quite thick walls so I don't bother using headphones at night or anything - neighbours haven't complained yet. Although I think I make more noise when playing Soul Calibur with my flatmate.

Heres the idea in its simplest form: pressing duck while in a vehicle (boat or car) makes your avatar try to duck below the level of the windows, so that they are harder to shoot from outside. Drivers could do it also. However, it would be vital to only allow this ducking from first person view - which would severely reduce your view of the road ahead, making it only useful for bursting through roadblocks/ VCPs/ whatever. If it was allowed in third person, then you could just do it all the time with no penalties. Unless the lower 3/4 of the screen was obscured. When in armoured vehicles, pressing duck should make you button up. When in helicopters, you need duck to fly the thing, and anyway ducking wouldn't do any good in 99% of helicopters. Most planes wouldn't have the space to duck. Maybe the cessna (equivalent). I don't see this as making you immune to bullets or anything. All it would stop would be those bullseye headshots through the glass - and you wouldn't be able to drive around while ducked - you'd just crash into things. If the damage system is upgraded (and I know we'd all like it to be,) then the metal frame of a vehicle should not stop bullets but could deflect/ slow down some of the smaller, less powerful ones. (simulated in OFP1 by those in a car taking some damage when the exterior body is damaged). A big lump of metal like the engine, though, could stop rounds up to 12.7mm - making duck handy against roadblocks - although the engine should of course be damaged by getting shot

As Suma said, the mission maker can have different players on different terrain detail (and even viewdistance) - which is very handy for pilots

It's already like that.... press the walk toggle and use your iron sights...

How many missiles do you think should fit in one tube?

So its an urban warfare 'sim' minus the urban? It sounds less and less appealing the more I hear about it, sadly.

If you don't know what the word means, don't use it, please. I'll discuss political stuff in this reply but not general religion as far as possible. No, it's like saying since its NOT SECULAR, and it IS based, partly or fully, on Islam, then it is a type of Islamic government. This seems like a fairly straightforward concept. And now you appoint yourself arbiter of what is and is not 'truly Islamic' despite your lack of knowledge about the Quran. No. To have an Islamic government, the laws, statutes etc would be based partly on Islam and have Muslim leaders. That is all that is required to meet the definition 'Islamic Government.' That doesn't mean it is a government that all Muslims like, or agree with. It IS, however, an Islamic government. So that makes them Secular? Because two or more Islamic factions disagree on their interpretations??? Where are you getting these incredible definitions?? They are NOT secular. The influence of Islamic clerics that disagree with them. Clerics they agree with are not suppressed. Different interpretations. How can you claim to know anything about this topic yet completely ignore the idea of different factions having different interpretations? They are not secular governments; they are governments using different interpretations of Islamic law (for the most part). Why are you insisting that they can be lumped together into secular or Islamic governments then? And nations under Islamic law. So they are Islamic. Not secular. You do understand, apparently you are just using 'secular' to confuse the issue. And not, therefore, secular. Human rights activists also try to suppress movements which wish for more accordance with Shariat law. Stoning people to death for not wearing hoods is not generally accepted. In the UK there are some problems with 'Hardcore' muslims who try to enforce Shariat law on their own families, but who then break UK laws. So forgive me if I don't see that as a bad thing. Yes, and that is wrong. That doesn't make (one of) the other alternatives 'right.' And I told you that religion does not deserve respect just because it is religion. You seem to think that 'militant Islamic beliefs' do not deserve respect, but 'moderate Islamic beliefs' do. How about a little consistency, not hypocrisy? Why is one half-assed interpretation better than another? They are both equally 'valid'. Don't confuse respect for with tolerance. We gracefully tolerate others beliefs, unless they cause problems (Jim Jones, Rev Moon, David Koresh, etc) in the West. We do not have to respect them. I do not respect those who believe all infidels must be annihilated. I do not respect those who believe martyrdom in a suicide bomb is the quickest way to paradise. I do not respect those who believe the world is flat and orbited by the sun. But as long as people's beliefs are not causing harm, we tolerate them - sometimes even when they do (Catholic Priests+ alter boys, Creationists, etc) Exactly. Except that you don't have to respect ANY of their beliefs- that's just hypocritical to respect one interpretation but not another - you just have to behave tolerantly. That is pretty obvious, is it not? We should attempt to understand them the same way we attempt to understand victims of brainwashing; because that is what they are. We don't respect the brainwashing material; we shouldn't respect their insane beliefs. Psychological NO, NOT IN MY INTERPRETATION, IN THE BOOK. Read the links you gave. All the passages I referenced are in there. Please read it. Did you miss the part where I said that about Abrahamic religions? No, I'm being truthful; you ARE a hypocrite, in that you claim tolerance and respect, but do not tolerate and respect some interpretations, and seem to be a liar, in that you claim that there are no passages in the Quran justifying violence, and even that you claim to have read it. No, I'm trying to make you think a little about some of the BS you posted. Their book is myth, made up (possibly by well meaning persons, but made up nonetheless) hundreds of years ago, as is the Bible, as is the Torah. They need to accept this fact. That they get angry when the vaguest hint of truth concerning their books is brought up is their problem, not mine, and one of the main driving forces of religious hatred and violence. You on the other hand seem to think that thousand year old lies are worth more than 5 minute old lies and that in that time these lies have somehow become worthwhile. They haven't. You seem totally unable to see anything negative about religion, even when the evidence is right in front of you. No matter how many times I ask you just to read the hate filled, violence inducing bullshit in these books, you simply ignore it. The same passages are in the links you just posted. Maybe your in depth study wasn't that in depth. Please remember that I only posted VERY few of the hundreds of such passages that are in the book, a detailled reading of almost any chapter will yeild similar results. You are the one with the closed mind. Yes you are. And I'm not bitter about religion; I just don't like it. I don't like insane beliefs that make people want to cause violence and hatred. That includes religion, Nazism, Racism, etc. YES, there is. There is only ONE reality. What nonsense. No matter what delusions people have, they do NOT change basic facts about reality. That is utter, utter, bullshit. I'm really not trying to disparage you or annoy you, but really, that is just so profoundly, utterly antithetical to reality I must express that somehow. yes, it is. You apparently percieve it through rose-tinted glasses, but it is exactly the same reality. Once you delude yourself with this bullshit you will believe anything. There is no such thing as subjective truth. Beliefs are subjective, truth is not. They think they are getting an infinite reward, and they are brainwashed, sometimes from birth. Religion. Confusing respect and tolerance again. Wrong. Yes, they do. They just don't follow every part of it. Obviously. The same way Christians don't follow every part of the bible, otherwise you'd never see any priests with more than one shirt. The fact is, by the tenants of the Quran, they should not be friends with ANY non-believers, in fact they should really be waging Jihad on them. .....which would be.... treating them the same way we treat cult members.... with people who they can empathise with.Must you repeat everything I say? yes. And? Do we just ignore them? Good. Then cease talking about religion. Cease calling Islamic governments 'secular,' and stop discussing how the Quran has no parts justifying evil, because it does. Talk about the thread, and stop talking (wrongly) about religion.

Hi. I'm making a coop mission for WGL. I don't usually put respawn into my missions, but this one could be a bit too hard, so I've given the option of 0,1,2 or 3 respawns by teammates reviving others. I'm using doolittle's revive respawn script for this... but the thing is, once the respawn amount is reached, the player still respawns, they just don't get moved from the respawn marker to where they died. (revive script requires respawn set to marker) Apparently there is no way to 'stop' respawning once it's in the description.ext, although feel free to contradict me. The other idea I'm playing with is having the player go into Kegetys spectator script once they have used up their total amount of respawns... but I don't know how. Anyone know how to lock them into it without them actually being dead?

nothing about killing anybody. Different versions. Different translations, different layout even in some cases. The version I have does say that. Ever considered different versions? them you said that in 4:74 the koran said but my copy said again nothing about killing. WHAT? Are you blind? That IS about killing. fortunately your quote refers explicitly to SLAYING AND LOSING LIFE. and i read AGAIN, ARE YOU BLIND? ITS TALKING ABOUT BURNING PEOPLE WHO DON'T BELIEVE. You think burning innocents isn't bad? What kind of creature are you? Alternatively, YOUR version is very bad or YOU haven't read it very well. Thats another possibility, isn't it. Given that the bible was 'sanitised' on many seperate occasions, I'm betting that's what you've got - a nice, clean, re-interpretation of the Quran - strange that a book supposedly dictated by a god would ever need that..... Of course, YOUR interpretation is the only correct one??? HA! Your interpretation is no more (or less) valid than the fucktards who think it justifies* murder and oppression. Ballocks. Some of the events in these books never, ever happened. Not all books are based on reality - especially religious ones. *it does PREACH murder and oppression, obviously, but that doesn't make it justified

And wrongly ...which is then NOT secular. What has their being dictatorships to do with their being allegedly 'secular'? Are you claiming that secular governments are dictatorships? That no dictatorship could not be secular? No, you said that they aren't Islamic governments because some people disagree with their interpretation of 'Islamic', which is total nonsense. They are Islamic governments if they are based on someone's interpretation of Islam. Which is not what you said. The historical context of slaughtering innocent 'infidels'? WHAT PART OF THAT DESERVES RESPECT? It's well-meaning but idiotic people who think people's beliefs deserve respects 'because they are beliefs' - no matter the evil and hatred that comes from them - that cause the problems. Hypocrite. "nothing in the Qu'ran justifies killing innocent women and children as far as I have found." Liar. The book condones and justifies killing innocent women and children. There is no historical context that will change that fact. Get used to it. Read it yourself. Every couple of passages has references to Allah's displeasure towards unbelievers, and many have directions as to what believers should do to unbelievers. Read the bloody thing before claiming nonsense. Sadly you seem so bent on defending religion that you cannot see the huge problems it creates. You think that beliefs automatically deserve respect. They don't. You think that thousand year old lies are somehow better than 5 minute old lies. They aren't. It is necessary to understand why people believe such utter nonsense, yes. It is not necessary to give it any credence whatsoever in the process. Do some homework, genius. Abrahamic religions = religions of the children of Abraham = Christianity, Judaism and Islam = those religions incorporating the Old Testament (in various incarnations.) The religions themselves; the books themselves, are full of hatred, examples of violence condoned and done 'in the name of god,' intolerance and cruelty. That most people who claim to follow these religions are actually nice people is because they don't listen to these parts, they listen to their own empathy for others instead of their book's hate. I certainly was not saying all persons of X religion are evil, backwards people- only the ones who really listen to what the book says, not ignoring the bad parts. I have several Muslim friends. Although, of course, they are not hardcore muslims, because if they followed the direction of the Quran they would not make friends with unbelievers. No. I'd prefer to let them make up their own minds, instead of listening to bullshit others have indoctrinated them with. Deal with them as we do with brainwashed cultists; it's not their fault, but they are misled. Did I say we shouldn't understand them? I did agree with some of your post, or were you too busy frantically trying to weasel out of your erroneous statements?

Sorry, no. If you can't use this EXTREMELY simple editor, thats your fault. Simplifying it any more will make it almost useless.

IN- TER - CHANGE- ABLE Admitting of exchange or mutual substitution.

Damn those secular governments, stopping their holy way of persecuting and oppressing others (especially their own women.) Forcing people to accept others basic human rights is hardly oppressing them. If governments 'oppress' muslims, it's not due to their being secular. Really? List these secular governments. ALWAYS. Rubbish. There are islamic governments, but others disagree with their interpretation of the Quran. Fact of religion; no two people have the same interpretation of the books (since they are so vague and wooly.) Have you even opened the book? *EDIT* - I GOT THE PASSAGE NUMBERS WRONG - 2: the cow: 002:024. A fire has been prepared for the disbelievers, whose fuel is men and stones 002:099. Only evil people are disbelievers 002:178 Believers must retaliate (kill in retribution). Those who transgress will have a painful doom. 002:191 Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. 4: the women 004:089 Have no unbelieving friends. Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them 004:091 If the unbelievers do not offer you peace, kill them wherever you find them. Against such you are given clear warrant These are interpretations of what the passage say. I invite you to use the links provided to see for yourself what the various interpretations say. *end edit* The entire book is filled with this type of crap. Do you just look at the pretty pictures? How can you make such a ridiculous statement? Wrong. Any teaching of the abrahamic religions incorporates hundreds of passages teaching hate, violence and intolerance. There is little difference between the extremist teachings and the 'moderate' teachings; the moderates just have enough human decency to ignore the crap in the books. This is right though. Or indeed not having fundamentalist christians like bush and his cronies dictating policies. Agreed.

Bear in mind that if the planet is smaller than earth, in order to have similar gravity it'll have to spin a lot faster, resulting in much shorter days/ nights.

...Because that's obvious... if you put the viewdistance to 50m you could run maximum terrain detail on a p3 450 and 3dfx card

Yes - the US. Bush and his cronies think this is a religious war, and think they are the 'good' side.

http://hem.bredband.net/b102693/ofp/veryhigh.jpg 1280x960 1300+ meters viewdistance Very high terrain detail No lag Put viewdistance to 5000 then try that again. Hardware does not exist yet.

put the date in OFP to June 8 then skiptime 122721.37878

Don't be ridiculous, religion is *never* a cause of evil

Or tell a Scotsman, Irishman (N.I. or not) or Welshman that they are 'english'

People who use 'english' to mean 'British' or 'England' to mean 'The UK' - at least two of which tools in this thread.

BRITISH Soldiers NOT ENGLISH. Ignorant ...... kids.

I have the script I'm using leaving people on an empty island once they've used all their respawns.... but I don't want them just sitting there twiddling their thumbs. I want them to at the least be able to use Kegetys spectator script.

But the game itself is absolutely terrible... this list doesn't mention any real gameplay fixes at all...

... You think textures are applied to animations? Read the thread next time.