HellToupee

woa cool, im using cvs winx to, but i havnt been impressed with it aces high an old game with bad gfx ran slow, but ill have to see how fast ofp is.

that missle would be coming so fast you wouldnt have time to react.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Mar. 23 2003,16:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Casualties may go up soon, let's hope not.<span id='postcolor'> one side will have them, and both sides soldiers are just as inncoent as the other.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jester983 @ Mar. 23 2003,08:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It looks pretty good. But Im not very thrilled about 3rd person shooters. It still has a way to go before it can beat ofp. And besides I doubt you can make addons for the game too.<span id='postcolor'> if the source code is realeased like they say, u should be able to do more with addons than in ofp.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Beno @ Mar. 22 2003,21:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 22 2003,09:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh yeah, and some highly obnoxious CNN reporters rambling about non-existent snipers<span id='postcolor'> Lol, yeah. A soldier fires a single, aimed shot at another group of soldiers and suddenly he has qualified as a sniper.<span id='postcolor'> a sniper is a shooter from a conceled location, a sharpshooter is one very good at shooting.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 22 2003,18:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This was about the second resolution that USA/UK wanted to force through. One should also note that USA did not abandon that resolution because of French/Russian/Chinese vetoes but because they lacked the majority in the SC to get it through. None of the permanent members needed to use it's veto.<span id='postcolor'> no one ahs used their veto yet but im sure they will use them the next chance they get, the US didnt give teh UN a chance, they ignored the UN just as saddiam in 1998, they cant expect anyone to respect teh UN now since they did it its almost sayin hey guys since we do it everyone can. If iraq had no oil im sure their would be no invasion.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 22 2003,18:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">8--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Mar. 22 2003,068)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">france has also stated they would veto any resolution that gives the US admin rights over iraq, if the US wants to fight an illegal war they should not benefit in any way, the UN should have control of rebuilding iraq and the US and its allies should pay for it.<span id='postcolor'> An organization that maintains Libya as the chair-country of the UN Human Rights Commission can hardly be considered the ultimate arbiter of international law. But whatever.<span id='postcolor'> its still ebtter than having the US decide international law

france has also stated they would veto any resolution that gives the US admin rights over iraq, if the US wants to fight an illegal war they should not benefit in any way, the UN should have control of rebuilding iraq and the US and its allies should pay for it.

gun aye, i played u back in the interstate days

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (whisperFFW06 @ Mar. 18 2003,10:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Seems you don't read replies and dismiss them by "nothing it impossible". As I said, it was a choice by BIS not to build bf1942, but OFP, and you'll agree that there is a huge difference in many fields between them : AI, physics (mainly damage model, and environnement like trees and bushes), editor and scripting, etc... What technical argument can you give to show that it IS possible to implement JIP? And, second though, why, ooh why, if JIP is such a boost in MP game and fun, so such a boost in sellings, why didn't BIS implement it, as it is so possible to do? Why? - They are lazy? Seeing the works done since the JIP issue has been brought up, I don't think so. - They are "stupid", and can't have a clue how to do it? Look back, see what OFP offers, and dare say so. I hope they'll find a solution to implement it, but seeing the replies, I'm afraid it is impossible, and won't insult them saying they are wrong. Whis'<span id='postcolor'> mainly because ofp is a single palyer game, its mp only with resistance a year later did it get its own net code, thing is mp was hardly a selling point of ofp, says it sold 1 million yet online players is in the hundreds or a thousand or two and that is next to nothing, thats not even an income, so you can see why ofp hasnt become very multiplayer focused, they have improved it but its still pretty much just sp.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Renagade @ Mar. 18 2003,09:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Renagade @ Mar. 17 2003,21:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ Mar. 17 2003,20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Get used to it because with the lack of an equal opponent (like Russia) we are going to see more of this open aggression. There is nothing to stop the US, not even the populations own opinion, and the government knows it.<span id='postcolor'> What about china and russia,hell u never hear of what the chinese are up to anyway <!--emo&<span id='postcolor'> U misunderstood me long,i was meaning their military capability in a major war scenario. heell was a typo it should of read hell.<span id='postcolor'> Im pretty sure china is very powerful, they have the biggest army by a long shot, they would be quite capable of defeing from air attack as well, dont jus write them off as a bunch of poor farmers.

from what my friend tells me, now he lived their iraq was doing fine untill the gulf war, so sanctions just might have sumthing to do with its current state of civilian population.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Announcement: Optional first-person perspective viewpoint - 2003-02-25 We are proud to announce that due to public demand, our forthcoming Online Military Tactical Shooter, Söldner: Secret Wars will offer an optional first-person perspective viewpoint. Initially, Söldner: Secret Wars was designed to only offer a third person view because of the incorporation of stealth elements in gameplay. However, the huge online community that have followed each stage of Söldner: Secret Wars development expressed a desire for a first person view. In an attempt to create the ultimate gameplay experience we have listenened carefully and have now included an optional first person view. To make perspective changes as easy as possible, gamers will be able to switch view at any time with a simple key stroke. Teut Weidemann, Managing Director of Wings Simulations said: “We have listened intently to the opinions of gamers who have posted their comments on the secretwars.net forum and have implemented this key gameplay feature as a direct result. By reacting to the comments of gamers, we aim to make a game that the online community will have a huge desire to want to play.†The screenshots below show the third-person mode of a player in various stances: standing with Normal aim, standing with Precision aim, kneeling, lying down, and the final shot of first person perspective. Gamers are encouraged to offer their thoughts and opinions on this and anything else relating to Söldner: Secret Wars on the official SSW forums .<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kegetys @ Mar. 16 2003,22:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Mar. 16 2003,05:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ofp never did get far online when it could have beaten all others.<span id='postcolor'> How can you beat others where there is no competition? <span id='postcolor'> well bf42 is a close one, i hate it but i bet many ofpers probly went to this as it has popular mp, i know a few who did they were nice guys, fact is ofp is a great game but its mp dosnt go beyond coops and CnH really, no JIP is a limit on time and numbers. Also from the mp annoyances thread, two of the top annoyances is quitters and waiting for the game to start, those two problems would be eliminated, side switching and auto balance also would be good.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (placebo @ Mar. 17 2003,01:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Mar. 16 2003,03:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">there are games that do far more than ofp<span id='postcolor'> Such as?<span id='postcolor'> mmorgs, this planetside etc allgence freelancer.........

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (whisperFFW06 @ Mar. 16 2003,13:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">JIP issue has been discussed 100ed times here, as Kegetys pointed. The point is : it is not (or "extremely hard", to say the least) feasible, due to OFP architecture (ie. state of every object/script/variable is passed across network, making synchronization impossible to achieve when joining), it is a choice between JIP and editor/scripting/behaviour flexibility of OFP. BIS choosed the lattest, I won't blame them on this, I'll THANK them. There is no JIP because OFP is the way you love it. Period. This is a TECHNICAL issue, I don't understand why pple keep repeating the same request when there is no point doing so. Unless BIS do find the holy grail solution and entirely rebuild netcode, AI code and scripting (by "scripting" I mean scripts and editors possibilities) code (which is, apart from graphics and physics, what makes OFP what it is now), as it has been repeated numerous times, JIP is not feasible and won't be made. This is a choice, and who would blame?<span id='postcolor'> nothing is impossible, there are games that do far more than ofp and yet have JIP, scripting timing might be a factor but who knows, BIS have just said back way before resistance JIP not possible with current net code. Thing is for online it should have been an option, ofp never did get far online when it could have beaten all others.

i fail to see how most servers r private, most are public, the majority dont hide away they play on public servers. What hes saying is ofp needs to have more acessable mp, ofp has a very small online community because mainly of the huge task of getting into a game, long waits etc, sum people just dont have a time, if u have a hour of time to spare you dont want to spend 30mins of it waiting. The jip is the biggest set back limiting length and size of games and turning huge numbers away considering ofp sold 1 million, including these features he lists wont make ofp CS, thats a stupid argument, just as stupid as it will bring hoards of CS players, CS players are the least likly people to come any way. InNZ we had 1 server, one aus server poped up recently and the NZ server has not been used since, basically ofp just died in NZ online.

nothign wrogn with quakers, quake was a very good game, even games absed on the quake engine that have far better team workers that other games like RTCW. One thing to rember AI listen to you they obey commands, human players, they are stupid wont follow orders get lost and have no idea what they are doing, best to rely on ai.

lol i dont think we are the ones ignoreing the truth, if there were truthful reasons hell people would support the war, but since their isnt the majority is against it.

ww1 was a stalemate, no sides came close to decisive victory, the frontlines barly moved, all that happened was slaughter after slaughter after slaugter, ww1 was a terrible war, many soldiers were driven mad, everyone of them who went to the trences im sure lost all that national pride BS, they all thought it would be a great adventure.

im sure without lend lease the germans would have won, a quote from a russian general to stalin "they can push us back to the urals, and we will still win" Also the sherman was much hated by russian tankers, it was weak,and had high profile, the t34 was a far better tank, lend lease was around 8% of what the soviets had.

losing connections a bummer, i only have one server to choose from and its always empty, another annoyance, also waiting 30mins another annoyance, the worst thing tho is the people.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 12 2003,18:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 12 2003,06:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So when can France expect to have the Statue of Liberty back? <span id='postcolor'> When can the US expect to have the freedom hundreds of thousands of our troops fought and died two times to give them back?<span id='postcolor'> Well, then I think you woldn't mind going back to being a British colony, right? Without France's help that is what you would have continued being, pobably until the 1950's when Britain released most of its colonies. But then again, the Germans would have run over Britain, so you would probably be reciting "Heil to the Führer" in school. It's funny how you like to mention the help that France got from you in WW2 but completely fail to mention that without them your little "War for Independence" would have been a failure.<span id='postcolor'> ild say the russians over run the germans, the brits possbly could hold back the germans a little longer, their navy was far better overall and they managed to win the BoB bythemselfs with help from the clonies. But the russians im sure once taking europe would have the reasources and the manpower to go all the way.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Mar. 12 2003,12:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This is the stupidest thing I've heard since the naem change of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone to Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone to "dumb it down" for American audiences. What an insular attitude, bordering on racist. It's the same dumb reasoning Australian band Shihad had to change their name to Pacifier in the USA - apparently Shihad sounded too much like Jihad (terrorist connotations).<span id='postcolor'> ooo thats evil u called a NZ band australian !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Mar. 12 2003,17:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mister Frag @ Mar. 12 2003,12:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It seems that MOAB won't hold the title of biggest conventional bomb for long, the US military is working on "Big BLU", a 30,000 pound monster, which would be almost 50% bigger than MOAB. <span id='postcolor'> What next? Hollow out a B-52 and fill it with explosives then fly it via remote control to the target? (The US experimented with this in WW2 with B-17s). Think of how much explosives you could shove into a B-52... Might not take off though <span id='postcolor'> i think a few sides did that, even sum purpose built planes, i also think brits used to load up sum landcasters and send them on their way.