anfiach

Don't stretch the truth in order to make your point. ---------- Post added at 03:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:39 AM ---------- IQ test are rather a joke. Men will generally score higher in logic and problem solving exercises because that is how their brain's are wired, however this has little to do with overall intelligence. Conversely, women will generally do matter with management skills because of the way their brains are wired. Some people are smart and others are stupid but sex isn't a qualifier.

Nice ffs, now if you could put vido of a band on a billboard behind them i will be hella cool

bECAUSE THE DEMO HAS MUCH LESS CONTENT oops caps.

No floating zone, it is unrealistic and additionally makes some players physically sick. There is nothing realistic about having arms made of rubber, better to have an increased rate of dispersion that makes close up encounters not too difficult to deal with but requires using sights to make long range or accurate shots and removes the dot in the center effect.

I don't know if it is new or not as I don't attend mass lan parties, they never have anything I wish to play, however I haven't seen such available outside of licenses for businesses. I'll take your word for it.Why not? If people want to play it, they can pay for it. BIS isn't a multi million dollar a day company with the luxury of giving free handouts. It requires the client to play the game, the game streams everything in real time from the HDD, so it requires the full game to play MP as well. Other games will download map info to a temp file for the duration of the round, ArmA 2 mission content downloads directly to your PC in a permanent cache file folder. To your last point, those are mainly the type going to these large lan parties, so, yeah....

Not at all, DR sucks hard but it was the first game that popped into mind when I was thinking of the bringing up sights feature. ---------- Post added at 04:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:35 PM ---------- I'm sorry, but I fail to see how this post assists your position in any way. You won't attract anyone that doesn't already have interest in this game with such a superficial addition to the features list. That also has no real impact on whether or not it is a good idea to do.

I don't know much about it but I would start by placing the warfare module

I don't like those crosshairs but the issue is the vanilla game. It should not be removed but rather widened like you said gamawa. Widening while running though is a bit senseless since you can't fire while running and the game already causes your ability to aim to be hindered while you are out of breath.

So you are asking BIS to develop a separate client to accomplish what the current client already does? Then allow it to be played by up to 3 more people for free? It is impossible to start a quick mission with anyone that doesn't have the game you are wanting to play, this doesn't make any sense. So are you really asking that BIS develop a licensed LAN version for sale to establishments that host lan parties? ---------- Post added at 07:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:04 AM ---------- If that is what you are suggesting, I guess it is their call but the likelyhood of getting many additional sales from Counter Strike junkies is slim to none.

Your argument is piss poor. It is better to argue that certain vehicles have a digital display that includes a map, but it isn't true for all vehicles and this is why most vehicles have a person to do the navigation while another drives. Triplehead and TrackIR add to immersiveness but are not unrealistic features like a hud map. Also it makes more sense to ask for the map to work as an overlay because the transition time is prohibitive and unrealistic. It simply takes too long to transition from reading the map back to driving or running. It is much like the transition to using sights on a rifle, it isn't a smooth transition, one of the few things that DR got right.

Wouldn't that effect everything and not just AI though?

The performance loss would be quite horrendous.

I can take a group of nuns and label them a combat unit, it doesn't make it so. It is rare to send females intentionally into direct combat and you are dancing around that fact.Innuendo? Yes, please take it upon yourself to be offended by that statement and further make a fool of yourself. I do not know the demographics of your nation so if there are more women than men in the population, naturally you might have a need for women. Additionally if your country is small this may further cause a need to recruit women into the military to fill out combat roles. The US military makes up roughly 1% of the population, there are plenty of men unwilling to do the job, why you would take that as a special insult directed at your country is beyond me. Still it is irrelevant with respect to the scenario that this game presents. I'll repeat for you, I have no issues with people making mods, they are free to mod all they want, I have no right to say no. I also agreed that females should have a complete set of animations. I do not agree that female soldiers should be implemented in the vanilla game/OA unless one of the factions uses them in direct combat roles. BIS is all about realism and accuracy. They do make mistakes, however, they do not knowingly fabricate information.

nvm..

I do believe I said, as appropriate, but if they don't have them IRL they shouldn't be there. If you were paying attention as of 2009 IDF women are allowed in combat roles doing the following: 1) Oketz Unit, which is essentially a K-9 unit that handles and trains dogs, 2)Search and Rescue, 3)Border Police, 4)Artillery Corps and 5)Caracal Battalion, a co-ed infantry battalion that is assigned to border patrol. These are not front line troops. I couldn't give a rat's behind what the Swedish MoD has to say because there are no Swedish forces in the game. If there is a need for women, perhaps they have a shortage of men willing to do the job. I can only speculate, it is a small country.

That processor is not up to the task, not even in minimum specs.

That's definitely an issue on your end, but I certainly don't blame you for not using it. It's a personal choice.

Big Brother is watching :D

Can't wait to hear about all of the problems with W7

I've been seeing this lately, but more like lag as they keep teleporting back and fore as they slowly track across the screen. May be a server issue though.

mmm, no, a static map is just fine and you can print one out. I don't have a problem with certain vehicles having this though as some utilize a real time dynamic map with tracking (FBCB2 for example) but only from commander positions.

Doesn't matter, in the US military women being placed in front line combat is the exception and not the rule. I have no issues with a mod being made but they should not be in the vanilla game. If the Russian forces do use women in combat roles then they should appear in game as such, we are after realism. Arguments about other armed forces are not applicable and neither are arguments based upon political correctness. I am not against females in game having the ability to use weapons either as it is simply a realism issue, women have the ability to pick up a weapon and use it. I do not agree with Celery's statement regarding female pilots, there is simply not enough evidence to reach any such conclusion. Darkhorse, your portrayal of IDF women is inaccurate and serving aboard a naval vessel is not the same as duty in front line combat. GoOB, there is no need for women on the battlefield, that statement is patently false. They may want to be on the battlefield and we can argue whether they should be or not but to say that there is some circumstance that requires their presence is simply not true.

I play with 0 deadzone, simply because I was trained that my weapon goes where my eyes go and that effect is not accurate, it doesn't feel right to me. Also my training taught me to turn and face my targets to make the most effective use of the ballistic armor that US troops wear these days so turning my body isn't an issue for me. I use free look to see areas that I do not wish to point my weapon, for example, at my team mates.

Rifle crosshairs should be more transparent and much wider to eliminate long distance aiming while still functioning as an indicator for weapon orientation and using menus, etc. WWII Online is great, but it doesn't have AI like ArmA 2, in order to limit the AI the same way players are handicapped by not having their muzzle glued to center screen (realism), the AI would be rather ineffective. For PvP it is fine not to have crosshairs.

I know quite well what ACOG sights include. How to engage quickly? I don't walk around with my CCO glues to my face so, pretty much the same as any other target. My question was simply aimed at why you would give up the advantage of a scoped rifle, especially one that does not have a large zoom factor that is problematic in close quarters.