ak1287

I think you're making a generalization that you can't defend or prove.

That's actually understandable. I use sarcasm so much, that I generally substitute it for any form of verbal communication. So what I deem as obvious sarcasm really seems like normal speech to everyone else.

Yeah. That's exactly what I was saying. ---------- Post added at 14:41 ---------- Previous post was at 14:40 ---------- I think I either wasn't thick enough with the sarcasm on the first part, or you missed it.

My big question; if I get 100 signatures on my letter, does that invalidate this one? Joking aside, I don't really care about Comrades in Arms, no offense, or their opinions. I disagree with some of their ideas, although I think it's safe to say that everyone will find at least one in that letter that they find agreeable. What I did like was DnA's response letter. It definitely supplied insight into the entire development process that I think a lot of people were lacking, either through willful ignorance or just plain stupidity.

Eh. I'm on the opposite end of this spectrum, but whatever.

That's basically every thread on the forums, and it usually comes down to the same 4 or 5 people making the same arguments and insulting (directly or implicitly) the people who disagree with them. Calling someone a 'casual' because they want something you don't agree with is stupid. Reporting someone's post because you disagree with the content is stupid.

Same thing that's with Metalcraze's mocking in his posts. It's like watching 2 five-year old kids argue; one of them may be right, but if they're both calling each other 'doo-doo head,' it's hard to respect either one.

The condescension is strong with this one. Seriously, I'm not sure if it's intentional or not, but you kind of sound like a milsperger jerk (I'm not sure what the forum policy actually is on harsh language).

Thanks for the chuckle. I haven't read such speculative, unmitigated bulls*t since the Zimmerman verdict.

That's simply not true. I've seen someone shot with a hollowpoint. Hell, I HAVE shot someone with a hollowpoint. They were definitely in pain, for sure, and they definitely weren't 100%, but they were still alive, could still move, and didn't die or get incapacitated immediately, or even quickly.

With a 9mm bullet? That actually sounds fairly plausible. I mean, getting shot with a 9mm is traumatic, but it doesn't equate instant death, even a good portion of the time, and even without armor. Theoretically, there should be a better wound animation, and ideally there would be specific results if you shot certain areas, but I think it'd be stupid to have people die every time with less than three shots.

.... If you add everyone up, yeah. Technically, you have 58 who are more or less indifferent. You have 15 who refuse to play with 'futuristic' assets, probably because they're reactionary knee-jerkers, as opposed to actually evaluating the systems and assets in the game, and correlating them to what is already in production. Personally, I see this entire argument as downright laughable. If no one had told me this game was set in 2035, I wouldn't have known, because the assets for the most part just seem like slightly fictionalized versions of current assets.

Not by much. Given the option to be positive, or to complain, people will complain 90% of the time.

I wouldn't know. I generally don't shoot civilians. But, of course, there are the people who have survived multiple gunshot wounds even without kevlar.

So, we're going to assume that none of the units in A3 wear kevlar.