Gollum1

Don't think it's an EOtech, looks like ACOG. The more you know...

Would be interesting if you could post/link to this picture. I thought the SFSG was supposed to be operational in 2008 at the earliest? Well, who knows with these special units. If that Brit in the picture is trying to blend in, he certainly isn't doing a very good job of it.

It comes with a removable carry handle as standard, altough an Elcan sight is usually used in its place, at least by all other forces that use the C7/C8. Are you saying that SAS C8s are shipped with Trijicon ACOGs included? Doesn't seem very standard to me, but what do I know. You're absolutely right. I just wanted to include it since it is often considered a "tactical" feature. Interesting that you should mention those more mundande parts, since, as I already mentioned, this photo shows SAS using 10.5" barrels on their AR-15s. No Diemaco (nowadays Colt Canada Corp. I guess) weapon that I know of has a barrel of that length as standard. Another example of customization. And is that a vertical grip I see? Furthermore, what's that fuzzy extra magwell? Some kind of ready-mag system? This is becoming awfully technical, isn't it.

SEAL: - Extendable buttstock - Optical sight - Flashlight - IR illuminator - Vertical grip SAS: - Extendable buttstock - Optical sight - Flashlight So the difference in someone "not embracing" pimpage is a few hundred grams of useful stuff? The SEAL has only one additional electronic component. Maybe I should count the suppressor too? I can find a bunch of US special ops with even less addons than the SAS guy has, does that mean that the SAS have gone gear-crazy? This is just being blown way out of proportion. I think the pic shows that even SAS don't have some weird KISS-principle. Thanks, I asked our NCO at the entry tests about it and she said that they were promised the same thing a year ago and haven't seen a trace of m/05 yet. PS: bonus pic of the ideal tactical setup (yes, it's a joke pic)

I don't know what to say. A holosight, telescoping stock and vertical grip enhance all those traits. A rail system increases your options. I'm responding to the viewpoint held by some that "real men" don't need all those fancy gadgets that break down and oh no that rifle looks ugly. They are not useless, nor are they unrealiable. The only prohibiting factor to them is cost, and partly weight and size, which I think they more than make up for. The topic is about this SOCOM-modded AK. Despite people mocking its looks it is exactly what the pros are calling for right now. These are highly trained and experienced people who trust their lives to their weapons. They are exposed to extreme conditions and need their rifles for more than range use. After hundreds of rounds through other's similiar setups (I'm just a poor student with a .22) and comparing it to a standard configuration, I have a feeling where they are coming from. That's all I'm saying. edit: I was accepted into the FRDF today, so I guess I'll have "some" close contact with "bling" AK-type weapons when they start issuing m/05 stuff early next year...

Pics of some gear confiscated off SAS by ING/police during that whole prison breakout drama show an 10.5" AR with ACOG, tan-coloured flashlight and some non-standard handguard, along with a Minimi Para They definitely have a lot of "personal" setups, I guess they don't all have RIS on their carbines for nothing... I guess you're right about the SEALs, they did look out of place.

IR illuminators? Flashligts? Sights that require you to line up one less element to the target? I don't really know what's not to like, seeing as how the big names like EOtech, Aimpoint etc. have all been proven to be reliable both by government testing and operational use. You make it sound like Skynet or something I can sure see the differences in results for myself when doing some real-life type shooting with high-quality gadgets.

"Most people" is right, but elite units are familiarized with a whole bunch of non-standard firearms and have a lengthy history of choosing the best tools for the job, regardless of political constraints. Even regular US troops in Iraq are being forced to buy a lot of stuff out of their own pockets, including weapon add-ons. That's more than politics at play. US and UK units, for example, have gathered an absolutely huge amount of experience from being in constantly hot operations for almost 5 years now. The special forces of large powers like France, Russia (GRU spetsnaz and others have had large quantities of "pimped" AKs for quite some time), UK and US have constantly been part of some operation for decades, even if it isn't widely publicized. There's just no way to compare KoVa's nonexistent (?) operational experience, nor its size, to these. And that's not even mentioning SWAT teams all over the world who are going the same route! These guys don't have experience? That's a lot more than a "couple" of exceptions. I don't know, I'm just naturally going to default to the opinion that actual (elite) combat troops who have money, freedom and experience, experience, experience know what they are doing. These troops usually choose a short AR-15 (arguably the most modular rifle/carbine at the moment) with a very large amount of "toys", even if these troops aren't NATO and would be more representative toting their nation's standard rifle. I think the only reason KoVa is still using the MP5 is that they don't want to tax logistics with 5.56? Just speculation. Don't take my tone as rude, by the way.

Just one example: Vert.grip, RIS, sight, IR light, flashlight... And as for it being an American thing: Not true at all.

What a strange and fuzzy statement. "Most people who config their rifle in a certain way don't know what they're doing and if they do know what they're doing from actual experience well, uh, no-one can ever be 100% sure of anything anyway"? The fact that there's an annoying "pimp-my-AR"-trend going on among civilians doesn't say anything about about the real usefulness of the concept, but I think the fact that these "fucking leathermen" are in heavy operational use among all kinds of SF every day, around the world, does. Gee, I just can't situate myself in any of those groups.

The military-grade electronics used on these rifles aren't nearly as flimsy as people think, and they have extremely long battery lives. They have been battle-proven, and even if they have a (extremely small) chance of failure they dramatically increase the usefulness of a rifle. I can personally say that an AK or AR with a good red dot becomes a whole new killing machine. And if they fail, you can just take them off and use the original sights, no loss at all.

Chill out Delirium, I'm on your side

Or maybe I should start using [sARCASM] tags so everyone can understand? Regardless of your absolutely ridiculous statement that Serbian etc. special operations forces don't "care" what they use, they use the same attachments as these mighty Western forces you mention, the only difference is that the platform is an AK instead of an AR.

Oh yes! How funny that armchair commandos like American, British, German, Israeli, Australian, Italian, French, Norwegian, Polish and Jordanian (better stop here before I take up the page) special operations forces and SWAT teams want their rifles to be modernly equipped! In fact, everyone who can afford it seems to be sticking a ridiculous amount of useless gizmos on their rifles! How silly! Games forum posters know how it should be, those sights and vertical grips are all just dead weight and makes the rifle look ugly! We should go tell the Serbian, Bulgarian, Slovenian, Czech and Slovakian special forces that use "modernized" AKs like this, I'm sure they will love our input. Only the well-respected "drug, Islamic and Communist guerrilla" expert special forces circles seem to be free of this stupid craze.

Wrong, the best tank killer is a LGB dropped from 10.000 feet while the tanks crew are hiding in the desert at night far away from their vehicle because their obsolete land battle ships have become guaranteed coffins because they attract the attention of aircraft. Besides their role has been taken over as well by tank hunting helicopters like the Cobra, Apache and Hind. As a tank crew today other tanks are the least of your worries, keep an eye on the sky Hmm, I wouldn't be so quick to make statements like that, I remember a quote by an Iraqi tank unit commander: After the bombing campaign he had about 34 of 40 tanks operational, after one engagement with an Abrams unit he had 4. Especially helicopters can be surprisingly vulnerable to ground units, even units equipped only with small arms. Even a reasonable HMG team can ruin any helo's day. The NATO bombing campaign against Serbian ground forces in Kosovo mostly ended up destroying decoys and some ridiculously small amount of AFVs, Wikipedia says 13. Sure, shooting rusty Iraqi tincans that have zero training, poor command and no air support or AA in the middle of the desert is easy, but that's just one situation.

Explain to me why a tank destroyer is better at destroying tanks than tanks themselves (Medium-Heavy tanks or MBTs), with examples, please. edit: assuming you mean "tank destroyer" by tank "hunter", I've never even heard that term before. edit2: After reading up, apparently the Ferdinand's designation was "panzerjäger", I wonder if the English equivalent has ever been used as a term in English-speaking militaries though.

If you mouse over the different "coerce", "joke" responses etc. you'll see the character's facial expression change on each option. If a wedge is full (completely orange) on, say "boast", then you have a big effect by clicking on that. If that person likes "boast" responses then you'll get lots of points by clicking on it when the wedge is full. But don't use a full wedge when the person hates that response! The problem is that you have to click on all four responses during a round, including the responses that the person hates. So ideally, you have to click on the responses in such an order so that you use the full wedge on the best option and the little wedge on the worst option. This results in more disposition. The tricky part is that the wedges rotate each time you choose a response, so you have to choose a correct order. The wedges are randomly placed at the beginning of each round, so sometimes you are at a disadvantage from the start. But don't think on it too long, the disposition steadily falls while you wait. If you are an Apprentice in Speechcraft you can spin the wheel yourself once per round, which helps a LOT. You typically need lots of rounds to raise someone's disposition until they like you enough, when the disposition is maxed out a message will let you know. Some rounds you will fail, and some rounds you will succeed. Just keep trying the game, you will get the right feel and rhythm in a while, it took me some time to figure it out myself.

I have almost exactly that setup, with lots of characters it gets really choppy I'm afraid, especiall outdoors with all the vegetation. It's playable with pretty OK settings, but prepare for some frustrating situations. It hasn't stopped me from playing, at least. The requirements aren't "insane" at all, my friend's 3,2 ghz/1gig/X800 runs it great on high settings. Unless you want to set all viewdistance LODs on max, when I could remind you that almost no computer can play 5-year-old Resistance on max terrain detail/LOD/viewdistance settings.

Even if you get it to render the environment the FPS will be unplayably low on that card, I'm afraid.

Been playing it all week already. I like it. Gripes: - Robotic walking animations - Can't top off the magazines of rifles! - Bugs here and there, nothing game-stopping though, haven't experienced a single crash yet. - Very inaccurate German MGs - Dropped weapons and ammo don't react to lighting and stick out like sore thumbs. - Tank maps (nobody cooperates and Arad is butt-ugly) - The font used and the messages in the form of ugly strips of paper seems amateurish, reminds me of a mod. Some areas simply need more polish to get rid of that mod feel. - Level design isn't the best, some maps are just big walk-fests without any chokepoints. - Bad AA support, sometimes it works for me and sometimes it just takes FPS without having any effect. I have to set it in the control panel. At times the game can be really magical, like in a 32-player game on Basovka where we held the AT Gun position for the whole game as the Soviets. I was just madly running back and forth in the first trench, butt-smacking and spraying enemies to death with my PPD-40 while I could hardly see from being stunned by artillery and grenades. Or the time on Arad when I was in the attic of a house calling in artillery on German tanks, destroying a couple, until a German shell came out of nowhere and cut me in half. But it also killed a German who had snuck up behind me with his bayonet. Good times...I only wish I could play with some more organized teams.

Yeah, and if they would be enclosed in cubes of Cobham armor the casualties might be reduced even more. There are already complaints that U.S infantrymen's armor ("happy gear") is too hot and heavy. Hell getting many to wear the plates was a pain in the ass until they started enforcing it. You have to strike a balance between protection and combat effectiveness. Extra armor reduces your effectiveness in combat by reducing your mobility, endurance, reaction time etc. and that is just as likely to cause your death as anything. Extra armor for convoy duty is another issue. edit: not saying that the existing vests can't be improved, but saying that "troops died because of too little armor!" is as clear as saying that people need water and food to survive. A less sensationalist approach in that article would be to say that the military has recognized flaws in the vests and are now working to correct them. It isn't some big scandal. Hell, if this war has ANY success story, it is in terms of the individual body armor the troops have. An honest headline on this subject would be MILITARY INVESTIGATES IMPROVEMENTS TO ARMOR THAT HAS SAVED THOUSANDS OF LIVES IN IRAQ.

What do you think about this article with included video, Bals? Maybe it was just a really long adrenaline rush and he collapsed, "useless", afterwards? Note that the 7.62x54R round he was hit with is quite a bit more substantial than an AK round. I read in Time magazine about Operation Anaconda, the reporter mentioned a U.S soldier being hit with 2 7.62x39 bullets in the chest and immediately springing back up and rejoining the fight. Accounts like this surface regularly. I think the 6000 or so flawed Interceptors that the USMC recalled make up about 3% of the fielded Interceptors in Iraq. edit: Damn, didn't read the thread, posted on the last page Sorry, well my point still stands.

All I know is that something should be done about flying corpses, either blow them apart or add some ragdoll. Either one would be really fun.

I think it's a fair way to make up for the fact you cannot "feel" where you're pointing the gun . ""Feel" where you're pointing the gun"? It's much harder for me to shoot without aiming in real life than it is in OFP with disabled crosshairs. Your arms behave much more variably in real life than they do in OFP. Why not? Elevation is a factor in OFP right now but you don't even have the option to adjust your sights to it. (than != then)