Jump to content

Stag

Member
  • Content Count

    1316
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Everything posted by Stag

  1. Stag

    Help

    Thanks Kevbaz. I've got fas.org under a hotkey, but that second site has answered a few more questions. Still no plan view, though.
  2. Stag

    The "community"

    Neither I nor Tankieboy ever once said anything like "crap," or "shite," and though my first post in that thread could have been more informative, all criticism was accurate and intended to be constructive. Yet you cited that thread as one which proves your point. I think Benu has it right here; why the hell should I sit quietly while you accuse me of flaming? It seems to me you need to examine your own attitudes as well. I'm out of here.
  3. Stag

    The "community"

    I never said they were piss, I said they weren't quite right. There's a world of difference.
  4. Stag

    The "community"

    Start here.
  5. Stag

    The "community"

    I made that comment because it happens to be true. Don't you think it would be better to be informed while it is still an alpha than a few months down the line? What happened to Martin was totally unwarranted. I was disgusted by the number of people who branded him an egotist when he pulled the plug. But it seems that here ANY discussion regarding an addon, meant to be constrtuctive or not which doesn't include the phrase "I want to have your children" or something equally sycophantic is to be classed as flaming. Okay, from now on I'll keep quiet. Accept my thanks for the addons you have done and the addons you undoubtably will create. No more criticism. But also take it as read that I will never, ever, want to have your children.
  6. Stag

    Challenger 2!

    I beg your pardon, I should have explained, But if you accept tankieboy's offer of help, I'm sure he would have explained all. British vehicle camouflage for the European theatre is not two shades of green; it is green and black. The "stripes" would be broader and simpler.
  7. Stag

    Challenger 2!

    You forgot to mention the Camo pattern, TB.
  8. Stag

    Ofp combat photography 2. no pics over 100kb

    Obviously faked. Marines didn't use MARPAT in '93. Nicely done though.
  9. Stag

    Ofp combat photography 2. no pics over 100kb

    Coming along nicely.
  10. Stag

    Ofp combat photography 2. no pics over 100kb

    Wardog, that looks like a nice O.H. Perry-class frigate... Â is it a static model? Are you making it? Yep. It moves, but the pad is just barely landable due to the size limitation. I'll be doing a sectioned static to go along with it for Helo ops. Maybe someone who knows scripts can produce a seamless method of switching between.
  11. Stag

    Ocean

    All true. But in the context of OFP, there's got to be something to be said for the ability to call in nine sixteen-inch rifles on "That Bloody Sniper."
  12. Stag

    Ocean

    Three words: Iowa class battleship. Meaningless. It's very possible that one mod team's conclusions regarding the strength of a unit would be very different to anothers. You may find that Iowa out-gunned and out armoured by a Sverdlov. In other words, both sides would have to be done by a single mod, or two or more mods which agree on a common set of values.
  13. Stag

    Ocean

    Like I said, It's a project I'd already started. Even if the Mk.13 is removed, the Perry would still be a good option for 1985. Be a good option against that Kilo Class as well.
  14. Stag

    New c-130 by hawk

    Hm. I missed this update. thanks for the heads up
  15. Stag

    Ocean

    The problem is, that while there appears to be a load of logistics vessels and capital ships around, there are very few actual surface combatant types. There is the Pauk class corvette and the Miraj for the East, and the Freemantle class for the West. But there's two problems: 1. Ships that size (Even the Pauk) would rarely be seen in consort with a carrier group. 2. The real biggie is the disparity in strength between the two sides. The developers of the East surface units took the direction that the surface units are floating bunkers; put even half a dozen Freemantles up against one Miraj and the Aussie boats will get kicked out of the window, even though I suspect that in RL the Freemantle's main armament would outrange that of the Miraj, and cause far more damage per shell. I started work on a Perry class FFG some time ago which in view of the latest slew of addons I began working on again, but even this is the least of the vessels which would be part of a Carrier Escort Group. then there's another problem; if I were to actually get the thing to the point where I would feel comfortable releasing it, who's to say that an Eastern unit brought out in response would have weapons and systems which would accurately match the Perry? It's understandable that people would build the sexiest or most useful units first, but really we are only at the very beginning of naval actions for OFP. I'm not saying they won't happen, but I think it will be a long while before the units will exist for a realistic engagement. with what we have now, there would be no radar piquet, no layered defence to penetrate, no helecopters to act as missile decoys for the carriers, not point defence systems capable of killing missiles... you get the idea. In the meantime, there's nothing at all to stop the production of even a 51x51 km map of bare ocean so the carriers and air assets can slug it out with each other.
  16. Stag

    Sir william gates

    So Capitalism alone promotes greed? So the black markets in the Eastern bloc are what, Supply and Demand? Singling out Capitalism is as fatuous as the statement "All men are potential rapists." Richard Branson started Virgin Records from his garage around 1970. Unfortunately this left little room for properly trampling upon the necks of the Proletariat, so I guess we know why he went on to become a multi-billionare. If he had it so easy, why don't you give it a crack? A few years, and you'll never see a P45 with your name on it again. The previous sentance is enough to prove to me that you have a lot in common with "Le Petomaine" See Branson, above, although perhaps "Worked" would be more apt. If he did nothing else (Which I very much doubt) he supplied the drive which made Virgin the name it is today, with employees in retail, rail, aviation, communications, and God knows what else. But hey, it's easy, right? I almost missed this; you're saying that anyone who creates successful business is a thief? Man, you need professional help. And you know nothing about me either, sonny. My work experience started in the seventies, when the then Labour/socialist Government pissed off the unions so much that they went on strike against them. I was made redundant the first time in 1982 because it was uneconomic to keep the place (Phoenix Tubeman) open. The next job I had I stuck out for three years. once I saw two people go into the bosses office to ask about a pay rise; they had their P45s within an hour. Next I tried self employment, which lasted two years before I had to jack it in; Do you know how I know Branson and Gates flogged their nuts off? Because I tried it, and I couldn't make a go of it. and another thing; I never said anybody was "Too Lazy." Not having the will, the drive or even the ability necessary to create a successful business does not make anybody lazy. You said it was easy, GO FOR IT! Of course, the downside is you soon run out of people to blame for your situation. BTW when the unions brought down the Labour government in 1979 and the Tories got in, the Socialists proved just how out of touch they were by producing one airhead policy after another. Britain suffered nearly twenty years of unbridaled Capitalism because of those clueless fucks, but I digress. Redundant again, and then 10 years in a place I thought was stable; until the company we sub-contracted to decided it would be cheaper to run ther own people directly and overnight 99% of our business disappeared. Now I'm in a steady job which gives me enough money to provide for my family and even gives a bit extra. But the company I work for has just been bought out, and this time next year I have no idea if I'll still be employed by them. Blame who you like. I don't point at the rich and say they are to blame for EVERYTHING. One thing I do know; if I still have a job this time next year, it will be no thanks at all to a Socialist. The market will go the way it goes, but a Socialist will really fuck things up. Life is hard boy. DEAL WITH IT. You count investment as Lending? fair enough. So the banks don't make the rules eh? Don't tell me, let me guess; it's the Bavarian Illuminati? To the members of those European countries which do have apparently viable Socialist governments and think I'm being over the top, let me give you an example of what we're dealing with; Last year, the BBC held a competition where the public would vote for the person they thought was the greatest Briton of the previous thousand years. Antony Wedgewood-Benn, a leading socialist put forward as his candidate; Oliver Cromwell. Why? Because He transformed Parliament? Because he created a standing professional army, basically, The British Army Army as it is today? Nope. Because he was a Regicide. During his time catholics were ruthlessly persecuted, something which if he didn't actively support, certainly he did nothing to stop. But it's okay, he lopped the King's head off so he must be a cool dude.
  17. Stag

    Sir william gates

    Maybe because despite it's flaws, nobody has come up with a real contender to knock Microsoft off its perch? If anything cried out to be designed by a committee, it would be a standard computer operating system. Where are they? still working through DOS For Dummies? Bollocks! Life promotes greed. If it didn't there wouldn't have been such an elaborate black market in the USSR. People wanted more than the State was prepared or capable of giving. Entrepreneurs filled the gap; the fact that their actions were illegal in "Utopia" only drove the prices up. There's nothing unfair about it. At a National level, entrepreneurs take what they work for. Anybody has the opportunity to start a business and do their best to make a living out of it. It's Socialist Bollocks to blame those who ARE successful for the lack of will of others to go out for their slice of the pie. Others may just be satisfied with what they have, and couldn't give a toss about Bill Gates, or especially, Karl "I've got a great idea let's fuck half the planet up" Marx. But there are those who for no fault of their own are unable to contend. And for them capitalist system must be counterbalanced, not with Socialist, but with humanitarian ideals. Funny. I thought I was just observing what had happened in the past. "Theorys" give me a headache and do sod all for my sense of humour. Now You're getting it! But not quite there yet. It should be: "What drives a person to work harder?" Not necessarily. They could reinvest the money into loans which get repaid with interest. So the borrowers only see the value for a short term. They eventually work off the amount they owe (which was used to purchase something) and pay more money back to the lendees. The work they did generated more profits for the lendees company (this example assumes standard business wages and practices). So in reality the rich get richer both off of the amount they lent (in form of interest) AND in the work the laborers did for their company (profits). The laborers only received what they wanted (or in some cases what they are ALLOWED to borrow - based on their worth as estimated by the lendees) And back to the original argument that the rich work hard for this money -- as you can see they didn't work very hard at all in that example. True, except for one thing: as far as I know, Gates or Branson are not money-lenders. Banks make those rules.
  18. Stag

    Sir william gates

    It's very logical. Enough people want the item he's selling. If the Capitalist system of the USA were dropped into China tomorrow, the consequences would undoubtably be disasterous. If, on the other hand Chana had been allowed to EVOLVE it's own capitalist system, a far more stable situation would exist. But if you're talking about "Capitalism" of the kind which brought about the Chinese revolution in the first place, well we know what happened to that. But I wonder what would have happened if the revolution had followed the French model, rather than the ramblings of a niave prick of a political theorist?
  19. Stag

    Sir william gates

    No. those poor will exist and always have, despite the existance of billionaires. Like I said before; it would take far more than the money of the top 10% to solve that problem. There DEFINITELY isn't enough money in the world to solve the third world's problems. Where the hell would you start, even with the capital? Assume you have enough cash to dump into a poverty-stricken country. First, a sizeable amount gets stolen by the administration, more gets blown to shit by the opposition who suddenly find they are about to lose whatever influence they had, and finally, get this, because we live in the real world, not Oz, the will of the First World population drops off when results begin to be seen. Why? because you are using their money to set up an industrial infrastructure which will grow to be in direct competition with the donors. The public will be the first to reach into their pockets in time of emergancy in the Third World, but once they hear that jobs which were theirs are going to a country who's infrastructure their tax money helped set up, they will be far less sympathetic. Cynical? yep, but also probably true. Although nobody will say it, and if you spoke to any individual they would deny it, they don't want to share what they have with the Third World, because the way things are set up now, somebody in the First World will miss out. Something needs to change, and one thing I do know; wishful thinking about a political theory which after a century has been unequivocally proved to be bollocks is not the solution. The problem is Us, and it always will be.
  20. Stag

    Sir william gates

    Cuba? edit:Oh btw, communism and cosialism are 2 diffrent things And I wonder what will happen there when Castro dies?
×