BF2S Forums Special Forces Aerial Service Ribbon

Searchy, Searchy. Search is your friend.

Most of the time, atleast. (Two days ago I searched for "Wheelbarrow", and now I keep getting these popups trying to sell me a new wheelbarrow, damn adware)

Anyway, it was likely forgotten to be removed or somesuch like that, expect it to be removed in a patch, but it probably won't be.

I....corrected myself immediately after. Wow...jump on my back guys.

<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:

I thought one of the intentions of SF was to provide players who are tired of getting jet, chopper and tank raped with an equal playing field.

There's no such thing as "an equal playing field".

Well....I half agree.

To me, SF just brought Battlefield one step closer to Counter Strike. Ick. Battlefield 2 itself took away the massive (dur) battlefield aspect. Granted, modern wars aren't fought much on empty desert plains like El Alamein (just so I don't get pounced upon by the hyperactive "I'm smarter than you" jerks on this site, there was 73 Easting and many many maneuvers in open terrain in recent wars), or DC Oil Fields.

I was disappointed that the maps are small enough that fighters can only go so high, or fly in a straight long only so long before they hit the map boundaries. Make the skies bigger, that's one way to keep fighters from raping you.

But you're right, it wouldn't be Special Forces without it focusing on infantry-based gameplay. Navy SEALS don't control the skies, and MEC insurgents probably don't strive for air superiority.

As I have said many many many times, keep the game interesting by adding more stuff without huge changes. When Wake Island came out I was so happy....A NEW MAP! If only they'd produce a new map every few months, like EA did with Battlefield 1942 (i.e. Battle of Britain) and a few times with Vietnam, I would be a truly happy gamer.

Not that I am not hugging my monitor every few second anyway, mind you.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:

I thought one of the intentions of SF was to provide players who are tired of getting jet, chopper and tank raped with an equal playing field.

There's no such thing as "an equal playing field".

Just so I can say it,

In real life sometimes,

Have you ever heard of the geneva convention?

          Part III. Methods and Means of Warfare Combatant and Prisoners-Of-War

                  Section I. Methods and Means of Warfare

                         Art. 35. Basic rules

                 1. In any armed conflict, the right of the Parties to the conflict to choose methods or means of                             
                    warfare is not unlimited.

                 2. It is prohibited to employ weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature
                    to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.


So yes. In real life it is against said convention to use a 20-30 mm GAUSS cannon to kill one person. Or a carpet bombing. Or an artillery strike. Or a tank shell. Or a burst from a chopper's gun or rockets. ALTHOUGH there WAS this SWEET VIDEO of a chopper firing on people standing around vehicles. It was awesome. And horrible. At the same time. *shudder*

You just have to watch it.

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/helicopterkills.html

Last edited by n1nj41c l337ne55 (2005-12-07 21:20:30)

That interpretation is not correct

This subject can up during the 1st gulf war when Apache Choppers where owning Iraqi infantry and everything else for that matter.

Some people said it was too extreme. But the argument that prevailed was this. Do you expect the chopper to  land and engage them with rifles. The answer is obviously NO!!! Do you expect me to get out of my AA vehicle to engage you on an equal playing field NO!!!

Some will debate this but I am a veteran of may law of war classes/discussions (having taught them and been a student) and I know what is generally accepted in the military community.

Shooting sombody with a GAUSS will kill you faster and you will not suffer more.

Last edited by fizz85 (2005-12-07 21:21:15)

I agree it would be a waste of an asset. I depends on how important the guy you want to kill is.

But what's the differance? One flies the other does not? Bullets from a tank will kill you justa s dead as those from a chopper.

I understand what you are saying but you are confusing the size of bullets and where they came from with extreme or unnecessary suffering.

The following is an example of somthing illegal. Because it alters the standards accepted and it is not the original purpose of the following.

You shoot somebody with an M16 5.56mm FMJ no prob. You are issued this round. It is illegal to alter that round. Say you blunt the tip of it or put grooves, change it to somthing like a hollowpoint (like an X on the tip),  so it tumbles more and causes more damage... unnecessary damage. That is considered illegal.

You change the way the bullet flies to cause more damage than is the standard. You deviate from the accepted norm.

It sounds stupid but this is an example of what is considered causing unnecessary suffering. I hope I kind of cleared this up for you. It is an idea more than something you can put you finger on.

Last edited by fizz85 (2005-12-07 22:06:44)

I'm serious. The word is BICKERING.

Like a bunch of sixth graders. I know more because I was there. I know more because I was in the army. Freaking A guys. Let some things GO!

<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

<{SoE}>Agamemnar wrote:

... you get my point hopefully.

Likewise... hopefully...

Your argument doesn't make much sense.

What argument?

a) I didn't think I was really arguing any point at all! Making one, yes, but not arguing it.
b) We actually agree.

I got your point, I don't think you got mine.

fizz85 wrote:

I agree it would be a waste of an asset. I depends on how important the guy you want to kill is.

But what's the differance? One flies the other does not? Bullets from a tank will kill you justa s dead as those from a chopper.

I understand what you are saying but you are confusing the size of bullets and where they came from with extreme or unnecessary suffering.

The following is an example of somthing illegal. Because it alters the standards accepted and it is not the original purpose of the following.

You shoot somebody with an M16 5.56mm FMJ no prob. You are issued this round. It is illegal to alter that round. Say you blunt the tip of it or put grooves, change it to somthing like a hollowpoint (like an X on the tip),  so it tumbles more and causes more damage... unnecessary damage. That is considered illegal.

You change the way the bullet flies to cause more damage than is the standard. You deviate from the accepted norm.

It sounds stupid but this is an example of what is considered causing unnecessary suffering. I hope I kind of cleared this up for you. It is an idea more than something you can put you finger on.

Ok. I still say I understand that point. But you don't use a tank SHELL to kill somone. You don't use a 120 mm cannon kinetic roudn to kill ONE PERSON. Do you get my meaning. Also, the keyword in the quote was SUPERFLUOUS. I understand using a tank's mounted 50 cal. I kind of understand the choppers tribarrel, even maybe in the extreme, the planes GAUSS cannon. But I'm not talking about that as much as A) the tanks main gun, B) the choppers rockets or hellfire missiles, or C) any bombs or missiles from a plane to kill ONE INDIVIDUAL PERSON. I know its ok to shoot somone with the fifty cal and even the rotary cannon's, but NOT THE MAIN GUN, the missiles, or the rockets or the bombs. And no I'm not counting head people. I understand your point but it's kindof irrelavant to what I'm talkign about. Do you understand yet?

Heres a good summary-

You don't use a Tomahawk to kill an infantryman.

Boomerjinks wrote:

Ever notice how you guys would rather argue about the real world implications and technicalities of warfare than actually talking about the freaking game?

lamers.

And dude. WTF. We know it's just a game, but why don't you go somewhere else. People are talking about no level playing field. We're talking about rules that TRY to level the playing field. In REAL LIFE. You know that place where people take whatever advantage they get? We're talking about how there are rules there but, in the game, people use noobtoobs, carpet bombing etc. to take out ONE PERSON. Generally I don't believe in overkill, except in special cases like NUKES, and the like, and THESE EXAMPLES. And WTF, what 6th grader has heard of the geneva convention. If your gonna use a similarity use a relavant one.

And BTW, it's called the EDIT button Mr. Two-posts-in-a-row

Last edited by n1nj41c l337ne55 (2005-12-08 20:30:46)