Cyanide

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ June 29 2002,19:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dont care if I get to shoot Russians, Soviet, Yanks, Czech, Turks, Greeks, Ozzies, Martians or Klingons, as long as I get to shoot someone <span id='postcolor'> just put Brits on your list and I bet you'll think a bit different...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ June 29 2002,19:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dont care if I get to shoot Russians, Soviet, Yanks, Czech, Turks, Greeks, Ozzies, Martians or Klingons, as long as I get to shoot someone <span id='postcolor'> just put Brits on your list and I bet you'll think a bit different...

v1.75 if I'm not mistaken

v1.75 if I'm not mistaken

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well by all means enlighten us as to how this addon is flawed...how is his knowledge of military equipment inferior to yours? <span id='postcolor'> all I said was that he has not changed the Russian weapons' characteristics to match the real ones. iI don't care about how good his military knowledge is in your opinion but if I see that he changes (i.e. improves) NATO stuff and leaves Eastern units unchanged or even worse off it disgusts me. He either has no knowledge of Eastern weapons whatsoever or had acces to unreliable sources. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Please give us some reliable sources of info as well...<span id='postcolor'> I doubt you can read in Russian but if you insist I'll find something for you ;) </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think its very sad to rip into a guy's hard work, no matter what you think of it...<span id='postcolor'> leave to me the task of judging his work and expressing my opinion on it, mate :)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well by all means enlighten us as to how this addon is flawed...how is his knowledge of military equipment inferior to yours? <span id='postcolor'> all I said was that he has not changed the Russian weapons' characteristics to match the real ones. iI don't care about how good his military knowledge is in your opinion but if I see that he changes (i.e. improves) NATO stuff and leaves Eastern units unchanged or even worse off it disgusts me. He either has no knowledge of Eastern weapons whatsoever or had acces to unreliable sources. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Please give us some reliable sources of info as well...<span id='postcolor'> I doubt you can read in Russian but if you insist I'll find something for you ;) </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think its very sad to rip into a guy's hard work, no matter what you think of it...<span id='postcolor'> leave to me the task of judging his work and expressing my opinion on it, mate :)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well by all means enlighten us as to how this addon is flawed...how is his knowledge of military equipment inferior to yours? <span id='postcolor'> all I said was that he has not changed the Russian weapons' characteristics to match the real ones. iI don't care about how good his military knowledge is in your opinion but if I see that he changes (i.e. improves) NATO stuff and leaves Eastern units unchanged or even worse off it disgusts me. He either has no knowledge of Eastern weapons whatsoever or had acces to unreliable sources. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Please give us some reliable sources of info as well...<span id='postcolor'> I doubt you can read in Russian but if you insist I'll find something for you ;) </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think its very sad to rip into a guy's hard work, no matter what you think of it...<span id='postcolor'> leave to me the task of judging his work and expressing my opinion on it, mate :)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This has been discussed over at OPFEC about AAronAsh's Realism Pack (in which he changed reload times<span id='postcolor'> just the name of this addon alone makes me want to throw up. this guy had absolutely no idea as what he was doing. i admire the work he's done with the famous "winter pack" but that "realism" thingy lacks the one thing it was designed for - realism ok, he changed the config files for NATO stuff - very well, but how about the other side??? he might be a specialist in Western warfare but he doesn't have a slightest idea about Soviet-Russian weapons and armored vehicles! As a result, this addon does not leave any chance for those playing for the East. Thank god, the BIS version of vehicles is not _that_ far away from reality.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This has been discussed over at OPFEC about AAronAsh's Realism Pack (in which he changed reload times<span id='postcolor'> just the name of this addon alone makes me want to throw up. this guy had absolutely no idea as what he was doing. i admire the work he's done with the famous "winter pack" but that "realism" thingy lacks the one thing it was designed for - realism ok, he changed the config files for NATO stuff - very well, but how about the other side??? he might be a specialist in Western warfare but he doesn't have a slightest idea about Soviet-Russian weapons and armored vehicles! As a result, this addon does not leave any chance for those playing for the East. Thank god, the BIS version of vehicles is not _that_ far away from reality.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This has been discussed over at OPFEC about AAronAsh's Realism Pack (in which he changed reload times<span id='postcolor'> just the name of this addon alone makes me want to throw up. this guy had absolutely no idea as what he was doing. i admire the work he's done with the famous "winter pack" but that "realism" thingy lacks the one thing it was designed for - realism ok, he changed the config files for NATO stuff - very well, but how about the other side??? he might be a specialist in Western warfare but he doesn't have a slightest idea about Soviet-Russian weapons and armored vehicles! As a result, this addon does not leave any chance for those playing for the East. Thank god, the BIS version of vehicles is not _that_ far away from reality.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But a single round is all it will take to disable or in some cases destroy an enemy tank. The gunner wouldnt have to keep shoving rounds into the cannon because of this. And with the accuracy of modern tanks, both Eastern and Western, neither an autoloader or a manual loader would be under enormous stress, other than combat stress and fatigue of course <span id='postcolor'> a tank battle is not a firing range practice. when a tank is moving around rough terrain (and they do so they would be harder to hit) the firing accuracy obviously drops.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But a single round is all it will take to disable or in some cases destroy an enemy tank. The gunner wouldnt have to keep shoving rounds into the cannon because of this. And with the accuracy of modern tanks, both Eastern and Western, neither an autoloader or a manual loader would be under enormous stress, other than combat stress and fatigue of course <span id='postcolor'> a tank battle is not a firing range practice. when a tank is moving around rough terrain (and they do so they would be harder to hit) the firing accuracy obviously drops.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But a single round is all it will take to disable or in some cases destroy an enemy tank. The gunner wouldnt have to keep shoving rounds into the cannon because of this. And with the accuracy of modern tanks, both Eastern and Western, neither an autoloader or a manual loader would be under enormous stress, other than combat stress and fatigue of course <span id='postcolor'> a tank battle is not a firing range practice. when a tank is moving around rough terrain (and they do so they would be harder to hit) the firing accuracy obviously drops.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aaron Kane @ June 27 2002,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ummm... I'm not talking about ingame Cyanide. Â S.F.F.R. and I were talking about real-life loading speeds. Â <span id='postcolor'> OK, even if so: a human reloader would only be able to keep a high reloading rate for a couple of gunshots. If you've ever seen how big and heavy a modern tank's shell is you would understand this. No matter how strong a person is, a reloading mechanism is better in combat.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aaron Kane @ June 27 2002,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ummm... I'm not talking about ingame Cyanide. Â S.F.F.R. and I were talking about real-life loading speeds. Â <span id='postcolor'> OK, even if so: a human reloader would only be able to keep a high reloading rate for a couple of gunshots. If you've ever seen how big and heavy a modern tank's shell is you would understand this. No matter how strong a person is, a reloading mechanism is better in combat.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aaron Kane @ June 27 2002,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ummm... I'm not talking about ingame Cyanide. Â S.F.F.R. and I were talking about real-life loading speeds. Â <span id='postcolor'> OK, even if so: a human reloader would only be able to keep a high reloading rate for a couple of gunshots. If you've ever seen how big and heavy a modern tank's shell is you would understand this. No matter how strong a person is, a reloading mechanism is better in combat.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aaron Kane @ June 27 2002,22:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm not talking about when the tank is rolling along, firing at targets. Â I'm talking about when its sitting perfectly still, without a care in the world, and the loader has to load the cannon as fast as possible. Â Are you saying its impossible for him to do it in approximatley 3 seconds? Â If so, maybe 4? Â I'm sure they can load in 5 seconds.<span id='postcolor'> Maybe in lab conditions but I believe you shouldn't be talking about this here - we're talking about a tank's perfornamce in OFP, other stuff is kinda irrelevant... Try it yourself - put 2 tank crews @ Intro island and you'll see that the T80 would always get destroyed first, both crews having the same level of skill of course, simply because the M1A1 would fire more shells. As simple as that. 2 Space Alex And you definitely were not thinking when saying that </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Humans are faster than machines. <span id='postcolor'> It would've been funny if it weren't SO ridiculous. My first thought was to try imagine a soldier with a WW1 rifle firing with a better rate than his mate with a morern assault rifle. It's absolutely the same in case of MBTs.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aaron Kane @ June 27 2002,22:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm not talking about when the tank is rolling along, firing at targets. Â I'm talking about when its sitting perfectly still, without a care in the world, and the loader has to load the cannon as fast as possible. Â Are you saying its impossible for him to do it in approximatley 3 seconds? Â If so, maybe 4? Â I'm sure they can load in 5 seconds.<span id='postcolor'> Maybe in lab conditions but I believe you shouldn't be talking about this here - we're talking about a tank's perfornamce in OFP, other stuff is kinda irrelevant... Try it yourself - put 2 tank crews @ Intro island and you'll see that the T80 would always get destroyed first, both crews having the same level of skill of course, simply because the M1A1 would fire more shells. As simple as that. 2 Space Alex And you definitely were not thinking when saying that </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Humans are faster than machines. <span id='postcolor'> It would've been funny if it weren't SO ridiculous. My first thought was to try imagine a soldier with a WW1 rifle firing with a better rate than his mate with a morern assault rifle. It's absolutely the same in case of MBTs.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aaron Kane @ June 27 2002,22:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm not talking about when the tank is rolling along, firing at targets. Â I'm talking about when its sitting perfectly still, without a care in the world, and the loader has to load the cannon as fast as possible. Â Are you saying its impossible for him to do it in approximatley 3 seconds? Â If so, maybe 4? Â I'm sure they can load in 5 seconds.<span id='postcolor'> Maybe in lab conditions but I believe you shouldn't be talking about this here - we're talking about a tank's perfornamce in OFP, other stuff is kinda irrelevant... Try it yourself - put 2 tank crews @ Intro island and you'll see that the T80 would always get destroyed first, both crews having the same level of skill of course, simply because the M1A1 would fire more shells. As simple as that. 2 Space Alex And you definitely were not thinking when saying that </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Humans are faster than machines. <span id='postcolor'> It would've been funny if it weren't SO ridiculous. My first thought was to try imagine a soldier with a WW1 rifle firing with a better rate than his mate with a morern assault rifle. It's absolutely the same in case of MBTs.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (billytran @ June 27 2002,19:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW - Was the CZ-75 used by Soviet or Warsaw Pact armies? Â I'm pretty sure it was.<span id='postcolor'> err.... WHAT??? There were NO foreign hand weapons in the Soviet army. But we used to have some great pistols such as the Stechkin, the Makarov hand guns jus to name a couple.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (billytran @ June 27 2002,19:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW - Was the CZ-75 used by Soviet or Warsaw Pact armies? Â I'm pretty sure it was.<span id='postcolor'> err.... WHAT??? There were NO foreign hand weapons in the Soviet army. But we used to have some great pistols such as the Stechkin, the Makarov hand guns jus to name a couple.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (billytran @ June 27 2002,19:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">BTW - Was the CZ-75 used by Soviet or Warsaw Pact armies? Â I'm pretty sure it was.<span id='postcolor'> err.... WHAT??? There were NO foreign hand weapons in the Soviet army. But we used to have some great pistols such as the Stechkin, the Makarov hand guns jus to name a couple.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (placebo @ June 27 2002,19:0)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Does it matter? I mean if Bis had put the SA80 into the game but given it the wrong ammo size I wouldn't care, the fact is that a weapon important to me as an Englishman had been put into the game. IMO you should be proud, don't whine about a minor technicality <!--emo&:)<span id='postcolor'> OK mate, I've been silent long enough  :) Now I have to make my point: the game is kinda strange regarding Soviet weaponry. Not that I'm saying it's biased or whatever but I just cannot understand the reasoning behind some technical differences between "real things" and those in the game. Say we take MBTs: Well, the Abrams crew consists of 4 guys - driver, gunner, commander and the gun-loader (I'm sure there is a more technical word for his job but I don't know it :) ). At the same time, the Russian T80 does not have this fourth crew member - the gun is reloaded by a mechanical device. Now here comes my question: how come in the game, the Abrams takes less time to reload than the T80??? (both crews being of max. skill). The only possible guess woulfd be that the American tank crews have some kind of super-humans messing with the shell reloading who are faster/stronger/have more endurance/whatever else than a mechanism... Weird that. MBT moving speed: somehow the values for M1A1 (and other NATO armored vehicles) are significantly higher than those in real life. However the T80 and other Russian tanks are kept at their real speeds. A strange advantage for NATO, no doubt. Not that it worries me too much but when playing online, both sides are supposed to get equal resources to begin with If one side has unfairly faster and improved as opoosed to those in real life vehicles what kind of a fair game are we getting? Now to this Resistance thing: I'm very glad we're getting this expansion. But look at the addons that come with it: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Guns FM-FAL HK G3A4 UZI Hand Guns Tokarev T33 CZ75 Skorpion Sa61 Glock 17 Beretta 92F <span id='postcolor'> If I'm not mistaken, it's 3 guns and 4 hand guns for NATO and no assault rifles and only 1 (!!!) hand gun for the USSR, isn't it? Moreover, the West had more guns to choose from even before this update. Yes, NATO consists of many countries, and many of them developed and produced their own pieces of equipment. But it's a game for god's sake! IMHO such unfairness in the weapons department would harm online games. Just take say sniper rifles: East - the SVD. Full stop. Nothing else. NATO - M21, G36a, Steyr, XMS. Even without these addons from Resistance, the choice for NATO is a lot richer. I'm not "whining", as placebo has put it, I just prefer to play for the East online. And these incorrect weapons settings will work against me even more than before.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (placebo @ June 27 2002,19:0)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Does it matter? I mean if Bis had put the SA80 into the game but given it the wrong ammo size I wouldn't care, the fact is that a weapon important to me as an Englishman had been put into the game. IMO you should be proud, don't whine about a minor technicality <!--emo&:)<span id='postcolor'> OK mate, I've been silent long enough  :) Now I have to make my point: the game is kinda strange regarding Soviet weaponry. Not that I'm saying it's biased or whatever but I just cannot understand the reasoning behind some technical differences between "real things" and those in the game. Say we take MBTs: Well, the Abrams crew consists of 4 guys - driver, gunner, commander and the gun-loader (I'm sure there is a more technical word for his job but I don't know it :) ). At the same time, the Russian T80 does not have this fourth crew member - the gun is reloaded by a mechanical device. Now here comes my question: how come in the game, the Abrams takes less time to reload than the T80??? (both crews being of max. skill). The only possible guess woulfd be that the American tank crews have some kind of super-humans messing with the shell reloading who are faster/stronger/have more endurance/whatever else than a mechanism... Weird that. MBT moving speed: somehow the values for M1A1 (and other NATO armored vehicles) are significantly higher than those in real life. However the T80 and other Russian tanks are kept at their real speeds. A strange advantage for NATO, no doubt. Not that it worries me too much but when playing online, both sides are supposed to get equal resources to begin with If one side has unfairly faster and improved as opoosed to those in real life vehicles what kind of a fair game are we getting? Now to this Resistance thing: I'm very glad we're getting this expansion. But look at the addons that come with it: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Guns FM-FAL HK G3A4 UZI Hand Guns Tokarev T33 CZ75 Skorpion Sa61 Glock 17 Beretta 92F <span id='postcolor'> If I'm not mistaken, it's 3 guns and 4 hand guns for NATO and no assault rifles and only 1 (!!!) hand gun for the USSR, isn't it? Moreover, the West had more guns to choose from even before this update. Yes, NATO consists of many countries, and many of them developed and produced their own pieces of equipment. But it's a game for god's sake! IMHO such unfairness in the weapons department would harm online games. Just take say sniper rifles: East - the SVD. Full stop. Nothing else. NATO - M21, G36a, Steyr, XMS. Even without these addons from Resistance, the choice for NATO is a lot richer. I'm not "whining", as placebo has put it, I just prefer to play for the East online. And these incorrect weapons settings will work against me even more than before.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (placebo @ June 27 2002,19:0)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Does it matter? I mean if Bis had put the SA80 into the game but given it the wrong ammo size I wouldn't care, the fact is that a weapon important to me as an Englishman had been put into the game. IMO you should be proud, don't whine about a minor technicality <!--emo&:)<span id='postcolor'> OK mate, I've been silent long enough  :) Now I have to make my point: the game is kinda strange regarding Soviet weaponry. Not that I'm saying it's biased or whatever but I just cannot understand the reasoning behind some technical differences between "real things" and those in the game. Say we take MBTs: Well, the Abrams crew consists of 4 guys - driver, gunner, commander and the gun-loader (I'm sure there is a more technical word for his job but I don't know it :) ). At the same time, the Russian T80 does not have this fourth crew member - the gun is reloaded by a mechanical device. Now here comes my question: how come in the game, the Abrams takes less time to reload than the T80??? (both crews being of max. skill). The only possible guess woulfd be that the American tank crews have some kind of super-humans messing with the shell reloading who are faster/stronger/have more endurance/whatever else than a mechanism... Weird that. MBT moving speed: somehow the values for M1A1 (and other NATO armored vehicles) are significantly higher than those in real life. However the T80 and other Russian tanks are kept at their real speeds. A strange advantage for NATO, no doubt. Not that it worries me too much but when playing online, both sides are supposed to get equal resources to begin with If one side has unfairly faster and improved as opoosed to those in real life vehicles what kind of a fair game are we getting? Now to this Resistance thing: I'm very glad we're getting this expansion. But look at the addons that come with it: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Guns FM-FAL HK G3A4 UZI Hand Guns Tokarev T33 CZ75 Skorpion Sa61 Glock 17 Beretta 92F <span id='postcolor'> If I'm not mistaken, it's 3 guns and 4 hand guns for NATO and no assault rifles and only 1 (!!!) hand gun for the USSR, isn't it? Moreover, the West had more guns to choose from even before this update. Yes, NATO consists of many countries, and many of them developed and produced their own pieces of equipment. But it's a game for god's sake! IMHO such unfairness in the weapons department would harm online games. Just take say sniper rifles: East - the SVD. Full stop. Nothing else. NATO - M21, G36a, Steyr, XMS. Even without these addons from Resistance, the choice for NATO is a lot richer. I'm not "whining", as placebo has put it, I just prefer to play for the East online. And these incorrect weapons settings will work against me even more than before.