ScreamingWithNoSound

Hmm... analyse this phyc major. I didn't say anything about you being a poor leader or being a dangerous person... not even to your self... but you managed to formulate those ideas alllll on your own. Now *that's* interesting... OK, I must admit, there was a typo there, should have read: Soldiering is now more dangerous than ever.

You're spot on there Krechet! British tanks during WW2 sucked, BIGTIME!

Point is, we've paid for the game, so why shouldn't the devolpers give us a few things that we want? The point I was trying to make, was that we have as much right to ask for a particular addition, irrespective of the actual campaign setting. After all, if the campaign didn't say US vs USSR, then it could quite easily have been something else. And don't even think about 'but the campaign setting is US vs USSR', because that the responce of a retart who isn't capable, or worse, willing to consider the point. Contrary to popular opinion, the world doesn't revolve around the USA. (sorry)

Are you playing the single missions, thinking they're some kind of tutorial? My advise is don't! Just jump straight into the campaign, because that includes all the tutorials as and when you need them. You'll also need the practice fighting, before you're able to command effectively.

For the record, I *think* the best tank in the world is the Leopard 2... Germans have always been fantastic engineers... look at WW2, they, inside 4 years, went from having the *worst* tanks in the world, to having the best. Don't get me wrong, I use to live next door to one of the factorsy where Challengers were built (ahh... the sweet sound of that turbine engine at 7:30 in the morning...), that is, until they moth-balled the plant. The thing about the British, the people at the top don't understand investment... We are the best inovators in the world - Jet engine, HTML, Dyson vacuum cleaners , but we never spend the money on developing the ideas... that's why all the equipment we have is so poor. Take the SA80 - introduce in 1989-1991. It was soooo bad, that you have to clean it RELIGIOUSLY and even then, if it gets a bit cold or a bit hot or a bit dusty, you'll get 1 round from it, before it jams... The pre-production was so bad, that if you put 60 round through one on full auto, the plastic grip around the barrel would literally melt! As for British soldiers. They are the best. It says so in the advert! But seriously, even American officers can see that our training techniques are superior. Not much good when you gun won't fire though SBS are the real top dogs... the word SAS is deliberately put about to cover up the fact that the SBS was involved. Also for the record, std issue to British special forces is either MP5xxx (for close quarters) and M4 Carbine (general / field). For some reason, they don't bother with SA80s...

Hmm... Mr Soon to be 2nt Lt? Did you ever stop... and consider that the USA is not the only country on the planet? Did you ever stop to consider, that one of the reasons OFP is so good now, is the most of Europe guinea-pigged the game, for YOUR benefit? (That official aswell! - CM/BIS wanted to use the European release, to get feedback, so the US release would be up to scratch) Did you ever stop to consider that someone who isn't American, who has completed the game and is wanting to create missions for their own enjoyment, would like to use troop from their own country? I'm British. Why create a mission with US army vs USSR, when I can do 2 Para vs Argentine Army? Do I want SLRs? You bet your commission I do! Huh... none of this mamby-pamby 5.56mm crap! Incidently, you talk about 'the campaign setting', well, if you create your own missions, they don't have to be part of the campaign setting. They just happen to be taking place on the same islands. What would be wrong with me creating an entire campaign that was Britain vs USSR... or Britain vs USA for that matter? Or how about US vs US? Do you have your commission yet? Good luck. Soldier is now more dangerous than ever.

I'd have to disagree on both counts. Due to the performance limitations involved (try setting the draw distance to 5000 and you'll see what I mean), I can see little value in larger calibre sniper rifles. All they would do is take the challenge out of sniping - removing the need to do head-shots. There are plenty-enough vehicles in OFP. OFP is all about grunt work. To me, the tank / helicopter missions, even the special forces missions are an almost unwelcome distraction - there are SOOOO many tank, heli, 1 man vs. The World games, that it's REALLY refreshing to just be thrown in the deep end, with just and M16 and a few grenades... The vehicles that are in the game are more than sufficient - the T80 and M1A1 are almost identical (as fare as gameplay goes). Would the Leopard 2 or Challenger 2 be much more different? Besides, what about the sequal? I mean, you do WANT a sequel, don't you? More of the same, just better, more refined... with more stuff? How can you do that when you've exausted the original? I still haven't seen a good collection of missions that take full advantage of the units that are currently available... what's the point in having more stuff if you aren't going to use it? And to finish the rant.... BIS have done an outstanding job of creating a game that is balanced, fun and worryingly realistic... we don't NEED any more! (Edited by ScreamingWithNoSound at 9:20 pm on Nov. 23, 2001)