I just don't like pineapple
Search
Search results: 393 found, showing up to 50
Yes, andkCC-Marley wrote:
Beriev Be-2500
go
[img]http://i30.tinypic.com/2cgehkw.jpg[img]KuSTaV wrote:
Who the fuck wants a plane thats four times heavier than an An-225 and costs about the same as 89 to 59 C-5 Galaxies?
Zzees guyz
It will exist in a decade or so, blame the russians and their desire to build bigHurricane2k9 wrote:
what the fuckAcerider wrote:
An-26
http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/53253/Megatonne.jpg
It's a concept that'll probably be introduced in a deacde, weighs four times as much as the An-225 and will cost around 10-15 billion a unit
Thanks wikipedia
An-26
It's a concept that'll probably be introduced in a deacde, weighs four times as much as the An-225 and will cost around 10-15 billion a unit
Thanks wikipedia
I speak for all of us when I say:
Cooooorrect!Karbin wrote:
Douglas A-3 Skywarrior ?Acerider wrote:
http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/53253/Imajetyay.jpg
It's cause people immaturely posted football players and shower jetsUzique wrote:
i love how some anal fucking moderator put (Aircraft) as a suffix to the thread title
what the fuck else could it be?
75 pages of comparing shower-jet heads?
jesus christ. whatever makes you feel important, mods.
It sucks on your own thoughRTHKI wrote:
zombie mode + friends = fun
Yes.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Ea-18
Nope, though the airframe is the e/f superhornet one.RDMC wrote:
Is it the F-18F, refueling variant?Acerider wrote:
Nope, but it is an F-18 variant. E's the super I think. Though, don't think of this as a fighter or attack aircraft, think a totally different designation. It's fairly new.RDMC wrote:
F-18A SuperHornet?
It's actually an [Insert designation here]-18A
Don't think fighter (F)
Think more attack and something else. It's a fairly new variant but boeing's building them in high numbers.
D:menzo wrote:
HI guys, my dad died yesterday so i will be posting less for a while. should i make a thread for karma whore purposes?
Updating cheer up thread
Nope, but it is an F-18 variant. E's the super I think. Though, don't think of this as a fighter or attack aircraft, think a totally different designation. It's fairly new.RDMC wrote:
F-18A SuperHornet?
Kinda...
Name and variant please
Name and variant please
Sukhoi T-50 concept?blademaster wrote:
http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/7444/ruskijet.jpg
For all we know I'm better at them than you, like I care.Uzique wrote:
pace you're so fucking lame when you try to phrase yourself to sound more intelligent than you actually are.
you have this incessant need to pigeonhole and classify and demarcate everything; SOMETIMES THERE IS NO COMMON REFERENCE.
also you're talking to me about the rudimentary, no-shit-sherlock basics of games i have played infinitely longer and infinitely better than you
just stop talking
Jeeze, our posts are so predictable. Go for something a little more... alright no fricking word 4 it.
First, I know that were dont all have good hand-eye. Secondly, I wasn't reducing any mentality. Thirdly, 90% of bf2's combat is not at close range, and with the bad hit reg multiple shots are needed. CS is mainly hand eye. The one who shoots first accurately wins. In bf2, the one who wins usually does it by keeping a steady rate of fire, even semi-automatically, however innacurate. Third, I don't use that example to dumb stuff down, because if I used big words you might not understand it and cry. And fourthly, when I talk about something I know nothing about you guys call me on it. Here I'm talking about stuff I do know about, not pulling it from my ass. So treat my opinion as valid, not a troll attempt or something. Fourthly go exile yourself.Uzique wrote:
pace stop talking out of your absolute ass
we are not all born with an inherent gift of perfect hand-eye coordination.
if we were then everyone would be fucking jet fighter pilots and brain surgeons
you can't reduce games down into an x>y or '1 is more skilled than 2' mentality. i know it's convenient for your dumb ass, but you can't.
Or just nerf mortars and tubes life bf2 did but in bf2 they weren't as unfair. Well, the tubes at least, they had no mortars. Yeah, I'm saying that games become all about handeye coordination and reaction time, which your born with, than about strategy and tactics, which you develop after practicing for a while. CS is about having great aim and doing it quickly, bf2 is about gaining strategic ground, chokepoints, and teamwork.TimmmmaaaaH wrote:
Well one of the few FPS's that has always been solid and worth playing is CS so saying blah blah make it like counterstrike isnt really a bad thing.Acerider wrote:
I agree, but developers want to speed up the game play by taking out the strategy. Plus people think only campers go prone. Jeez, games need strategy, no matter how much it slows the game, becauseotherwise games will eventually turn to counterstrike. That is to say, they'll lose strategical elements.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Screw god damn chest-high cover that you can't duck under.
I dont think that was really what you were saying though. New FPS's just need -10000 explosives and tubes and +100000 recoil and they might become worth playing again. Ignoring the huge amount of crippling bugs that BC2 has, if you removed tubes, mortars and carl gustavs from that game it would be a lot of fun to play.
I suppose what I am saying is fuck this game.
YesUser007Gamer wrote:
Alenia G.222 / C-27 Spartan
That's a G.222 in the picture but same thing
Ioan's awesome. Andhe loves 747's but who can blame him, they're awesome.mtb0minime wrote:
Hey you guys remember that Ioan guy? Haha I had completely forgot about him until I saw a van with a Romanian flag on it this morning.
Thanks
Guessing em is fun too
Guessing em is fun too
YesM.O.A.B wrote:
Myasishchev M-55X
Yes, and thanks:Karbin wrote:
Myasishchev M-4 "Bison" variation VM-T ATLANT
Post again
Heard it on the radio last night, Obama said the US special services were in the process of recovering the packages but didn't say that they seized them yet,glad they did.CC-Marley wrote:
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20101029/Airports.Suspicious.Packages/?cid=NET_SZHeadlineRSSLinks&attr=article_news_general_Airports.Suspicious.Packages
Clash of the titans (1980)
9/10, great in-depth storytelling, though the best part is how into the mythology it gets.
Funny how the new one had the special effects the old one so desperately needed butlacked the storyline.
9/10, great in-depth storytelling, though the best part is how into the mythology it gets.
Funny how the new one had the special effects the old one so desperately needed butlacked the storyline.
Sniped. Very nice. Your turn.FEOS wrote:
RF-5
bump.Acerider wrote:
Then it was for profitHurricane2k9 wrote:
NooBesT wrote:
Acerider wrote:
I don't like the second one. Why sue? If your really angry and want to avenge your mom's death, try to put the girl in prison for manslaughter. As stupid and retarded as that is, how in any way does money make up for yourmoms death? 50% of sueing cases are cheap ways to get cash quick in my eyes, and therefore disgusting.She died three months later of unrelated causes.
Actually I'm more concerned that sueing is more for profit than vengeance or compensation. Not in all cases, but in many. Likethe women who burned her hand on mcdonalds coffee and sued because the lable never said it was hot and won the suit and a million dollars. That's not compensation, that's profit. Though now that you mention it, vengeance seems to be behind the suing of the four year old more than profit. Cause a four year old can't pay the money back, but it can cripple the family. Maybe the daughter of the victim thinks that the 4 year olds family shouldn't get off scot free for what they caused, no matter if they knew what they were doing or not. Only God knows why these lawsuits happen though.Turquoise wrote:
Well, compensation is the point of a lawsuit -- not vengeance, although I realize a lot of people get confused on that.Acerider wrote:
I don't like the second one. Why sue? If your really angry and want to avenge your mom's death, try to put the girl in prison for manslaughter. As stupid and retarded as that is, how in any way does money make up for yourmoms death? 50% of sueing cases are cheap ways to get cash quick in my eyes, and therefore disgusting.
It's like how people utilize criminal cases as a vengeance system rather than a justice system. Sometimes, vengeance and justice are the same thing -- sometimes not.
I don't like the second one. Why sue? If your really angry and want to avenge your mom's death, try to put the girl in prison for manslaughter. As stupid and retarded as that is, how in any way does money make up for yourmoms death? 50% of sueing cases are cheap ways to get cash quick in my eyes, and therefore disgusting.
Didn't they do that cheap "never found the body" bullcrap when Gordon got shot? Sure, the director can say "oh he was wearing bulletproof vest" but he still could've had broken ribs and shit. And yet he's fine a few days later and helping batman to beat the Joker.SEREMAKER wrote:
they could bring in his daughter that kidnapped the body and brought to the pool thing to bring him back from the deadDoctor Strangelove wrote:
"The Dark Knight Rises"
That sounds like it would be the title of a third "Dark Knight Returns" comic.
Also I think that Ra Al-Ghoul might be the villain again. You didn't actually see him die at the end of Batman Begins, but I would like to think that Nolan is above that cheap "never found the body" bullshit.
Hey, insulting isn't legal on the forums. If you wouldn't do it and treat everyone civilly, you'd have no reason to worry about someone reportingyou. If you yourselves abstained from insulting, you'd be fine with people getting punished for insulting others. Treat everyone nicely, and if they say something stupid ignore it.burnzz wrote:
then why do you anonymously karma me about going to war?Acerider wrote:
See? Internetter's are decent in real life.oh, nevermind. UnkleRukus hit the nail on the head.UnkleRukus wrote:
Becuase you always have ulterior motives. You're simply here to get people banned for insulting you.Acerider wrote:
I just said that. Why do you get defensive when I compliment or always claim I have alternative motives?
I just said that. Why do you get defensive when I compliment or always claim I have alternative motives?Uzique wrote:
pace i fucking rule at life what are you talking aboutAcerider wrote:
See? Internetter's are decent in real life.Uzique wrote:
live with 2 girls but wouldn't insult them with that
OrangeHound wrote:
Ragequit ... lobbying to get back with a new account, and will be back shortly.Acerider wrote:
Surgeons
See? Internetter's are decent in real life.Uzique wrote:
live with 2 girls but wouldn't insult them with thatjustice wrote:
Isn't there a woman around to do that for you?Uzique wrote:
that just made me so hungry
think imma cook steak tonight
Oh, sorry.11 Bravo wrote:
that wasnt my point, pace. but people do it all the time.
That doesn't work for crap. Allyou have to do is aim and you can kill a hopper. For movement to work, equip a gun that lets you run fast, prefferably an SMG, find your target, circle him as fast as possible and blast him with your gun. Wworks excellently.11 Bravo wrote:
movement lol....you mean hop around like a tard
I still played it when it came out. I'm not trying to boost some sense of experience. It was a great game, just trying to promote that. Besides, there is very little difference between a guy who's played a game three years after it came out and when it came out.Uzique wrote:
pace shut up you were like 8 when cod1 was releasedAcerider wrote:
You prefer the large maps with tons of equally useful cover, the tremendous kickback on the guns rendering the ironsights only useful when fired in bursts and the lack of explosive cheap weapons that cod1 featured?Uzique wrote:
ITT two people trade opinions on call of duty after clearly being introduced by the modern warfare series
hardcore just doesn't 'feel' like essential call of duty. the cautiousness, insta-deaths, the camping... it just isn't what the game is about.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
Me too. Though cod2 and four were also fun, but I played Cod1 the first so it sets my standard for a good cod game
you're just like finray... name-dropping the older games to try and boost some weird sense of gaming 'prestige' and 'experience'
Cod1 was fun, I enjoyed it. Not boosting any image of myself as a cod1 pro. Just saying it was fun
You prefer the large maps with tons of equally useful cover, the tremendous kickback on the guns rendering the ironsights only useful when fired in bursts and the lack of explosive cheap weapons that cod1 featured?Uzique wrote:
ITT two people trade opinions on call of duty after clearly being introduced by the modern warfare series
hardcore just doesn't 'feel' like essential call of duty. the cautiousness, insta-deaths, the camping... it just isn't what the game is about.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
Me too. Though cod2 and four were also fun, but I played Cod1 the first so it sets my standard for a good cod game
Lol that's the way I got cod2. Played cod1 when it came out though. Damn I thought it was the holy grail 7 years ago.Uzique wrote:
supposed to be smart? sorry, snipers didn't work that way in scrims in cod1/cod2. try again.
and no you didn't "play cod2, quite a lot"
you got the game about 3 years after everyone stopped playing it, so you could feel all 'leet and act like you'd played a real 'gamers' game.
just stop pretending, it's fucking sad
No I understand there's a lot of fighting, but it's not a huge integral [part of the game, just a stress relieverUzique wrote:
you're fucking insane to try and defend hockey on the fighting
wrestling has less fighting in it than hockey
Which is why most of the entertainment value does not lie in intermission fighting. Most of it is in the plays, the teamwork, and the goals, and the hits. The fights are just a small part.Uzique wrote:
you know you play a shit sport when most of the entertainment value lies in intermission fighting
Badasstuckergustav wrote:
I wear MY sunglasses at night.RTHKI wrote:
if you stay out of the sun you cant wear sunglasses and remove them dramaticallytuckergustav wrote:
Tanning is bad for you anyways...keep your skin nice and young looking and stay out of the sun.
The strange part is this seems like not even a scam.eusgen wrote:
http://miami.craigslist.org/brw/wan/2030782291.html
Craigslist ad:
I have park place and need boardwalk to win a million dollars I will split winning 50-50 with u
Or if you have Vetnor ave I will split winnings 10k u 15k me
If you have pacific ave and pennsylvania ave I will split winnings 35k u and 15k me
My email is [email protected]"
LOL
Yeah, but we the people made it this waySuperior Mind wrote:
This thread: yikes.