BTGBullseye

Battlefield 4. But then I got mad. And then I started yelling. And then I quit. I don't get how I was so good at 3 and so shitty at 4.

4 is completely different in the way everything is done... It's actually easier for cheats right now. If you get someone repeatedly shooting you around corners or through walls, that's probly a hacker. Part of why I didn't get BF4 when I was in the Beta group for it.

OT: StarCraft 2

I do agree that the original Steelport was bit more fun in the long run, but SR3 wasn't in the vote list... lol

I just realized this wasn't here (at least not what I saw). I just found out about a source mod being released on Steam called "Insurgency." It looks very fun and tactical and I want it pretty badly.

It used to be a free HL2 mod, and it has been around for nearly a decade...

On topic: http://steamcommunity.com/id/btgbullseye/wishlist

StarCraft 2: HotS

I don't remember what it was called, but it was the final mission of the original Stronghold... Trebuchet kills were fun... I managed to win without even breaching the walls once...

One of my favorites from my childhood... 3d space tank FPS... I highly recommend you try it.

Well, the Republicans don't just get their votes from the white supremacy crowd. In fact, they more often get their votes by attacking anyone to the political left of them, through "Red Fear" tactics. this in turn causes policies to help the poor getting stalled in Congress, or not even passing. A good example of a Republican playing off racial AND economic tension is Rush Limbaugh.

I notice you're saying that in a way that would imply to most that the left doesn't do that... In fact they do it far more, and far worse than the right ever could. (95% of mass media is controlled by the extremest left)

Pepper-box style weapons have generally gone out of style for a simple reason... It's easier to get a Judge and fire .410 shot shell than it is to put 4 of any pistol round in a single-shot weapon. Same recoil, damage, range, and spread too.

The main problem in the USA isn't racial in origin, but economical... Race is just a convenient excuse for people (not you, but the people actually causing the problems) to avoid the underlying issues.

SR4 is the best of those on the list. Though I have yet to play GTA5 to compare myself, everyone I know who has played both say that SR4 is better.

Assassin's Creed 4...

Mighty fun, though the game does get a bit repetitive later on, just like all the previous games. (next playthrough I plan on getting the stealth armor ASAP)

Sounds pretty close to what my review of it would be...

Say, did you play Stellar 7 when you were young too?

Almost all the DLCs for Borderlands 2... Not the pirated version...

Assassin's Creed 4... Pirated version...

Wasteland 2... Pirated...

Wasteland 2... Not pirated...

That's about it so far...

Watch it.

I was not intending to include alcohol in that, apparently the system didn't get my edit...

There's always a lot of confusion about the differences because the answer is that there is no universal standard.

 

Every gun designer, manufacturer and military from the mid-1800 until the mid 1900s had a slightly different definition of carbine, and this creates today's confusion.

 

This is the period of the Industrial Revolution, when nearly every couple of years the technology of gun design and manufacturing jumped forward by great advances.

 

Early Rifles, since their invention as an improvement over muskets, needed to be long for several reasons.

 

One, the black gun powder they used was not very powerful so the barrel needed to be long to give the projectile time to get up some good speed from the charge.

 

Two, a shooter can be more accurate with a longer 'sight plane'..... the distance between the front and rear sights on a rifle. The longer the sight plane, the easier it is to aim at a target at distance.

 

This is one of the reasons the Americans won the Revolution over the British, as the Americans typically used very long Kentucky or Pennsylvania rifles that could kill a man at 200 or even 300 yards while the Brits and their German mercenaries had European short muskets and rifles, which did not have the same range or accuracy and were not good over 100 yards.

 

Lastly, as an infantry weapon, early rifles doubled as a stabbing weapon with bayonet. During the Napoleonic Wars, more men died of bayonets than gunshots, due to the time needed to reload.

Having a three foot long lance was a big disadvantage if the guy on the other side had a five foot long one!

 

Long rifles naturally have some drawbacks. They can be cumbersome and heavy.

 

Mounted Calvary were the first to demand shorter and lighter rifles. As these "Calvary carbines" were developed, different countries called them either carbines or 'short rifles'. There was no consistency, it was a terminology preference that varied by language. These were usually in the same caliber as their rifle counterparts. There were soon issued to artillerymen, engineers and wagon and truck drivers, as the smaller weapon suited their needs better than an infantry rifle.

 

Around the turn of the 18th into 19th century, bullet technology made leaps forward with high-powered smokeless powders and jacketed, spitzer bullets that flew faster and longer. This made the need for a very long rifle obsolete, so rifles became shorter.

 

The uniquely-American Old-West lever action rifles sometimes were called carbines, often for the short-barreled versions. These were "horse-guns" as they were made to be carried in a scabbard by cowboys and the like.

 

For the Americans, the Spanish War of 1898 was a decisive event in rifles. The U.S. had superior ships and technology and resources and manpower except in one critical area, the soldier's rifle. The Spaniards had German-designed Mauser rifles firing smokeless powder while the Americans had Norwegian-designed black powder rifles called a Krag-Jorgensen. The Mauser was such a superior rifle that many US soldiers gladly tossed away their issued Krag rifles for a captured Mauser.

 

The US first tried to license the Mauser for their next rifle, but decided to just copy the design almost exactly at the Army's Springfield Armory. The result was the 1903 Springfield, which was in service through the Vietnam War era. This "rifle" by any account of the day was actually a carbine, but never called a carbine.

 

Around this time the British developed the SMLE (Short rifle, Magazine fed, Lee-Enfield), which was a medium-length rifle that served as a compromise between rifle and carbine. They wanted one weapon for all purposes, to make logistics easier.

 

All industrialized countries went this route, with the difference between carbine and rifle became more blurred.

 

The next confusion that comes about is the development of a weapon to replace the pistol and revolver for rear-guard and support soldiers. What became the M1 Carbine bore almost no relation to the M1 Garand rifle, although many Americans think the Carbine is the baby brother of the Garand. It's actually not even a Carbine, because it shoots an underpowered pistol round that is completely inappropriate for a combat soldier. Still, the US GI loved the lightweight "long pistol" and the word carbine gets even more confusing.

 

The same thing has been going on since, with the term "Carbine" used for a weapon generally shorter than something else called a rifle. The M16, by traditional standards, is a carbine. Legendary gun writer and guru Jeff Cooper considered them as such. Just about any modern "assault rifle" is actually a carbine.

 

So the word's meaning has changed and continues to change. Sorry for going on so long, you asked a question that I have pondered and researched for years.........

Hope that answers your question.

It's not really that obscure... I have it, but it's not worth it's current price IMO.

AC5 is good, but Prolimatech is better, and less expensive...

The thing is that the Jews aren't doing anything to deserve the treatment that the Muslim countries are providing... There has never been any religious restrictions in Israel... Israel allows Muslims to come and go from their holy sites freely...

The only reason there is fighting is because the people in charge in the Muslim communities are trying to get more power, and they're using religion to get it.

As for the U.N. stuff... Go watch Black Hawk Down... (the U.N. troops refused to let more than the "maximum recommended occupancy" to ride in their APCs, even though it was live fire combat) I knew the family of one of the guys that died in that mission... The U.N. troops don't care about others in the warzones they occupy, only themselves.

both alcohol products and tobacco have their primary function of being consumed for their taste, rather than their effect.

You are so naive...

Living in a run down trailer with an overweight alcoholic wife, 3 kids and a pick-up truck? What does that have to do with guns?

And get good thermal compound for your CPU! The stuff you get with the CPU will work for about 4 months, then you'd get better results from mayonaise... Try getting Prolimatech PK-1 or better...

I personally believe that Israel should not be a country. The entire strip of land that is deemed "Holy land" to so many different cultures should not be given to any particular government or religion. Israel should be a UN policed no-man's-land where anyone desiring to pursue their religious interests can live without fear of persecution. I certainly don't believe giving the Christian, Jewish, and Islamic holy sites over to a Jewish government was a good idea EVER. Fuck the USA's desire to have a foothold in the middle-east. I'd rather TRY to resolve a 2000 year conflict than spend money taking care of some small country across the world from us that only pisses off the majority of people out there anyways.

The UN is crap... They can't defend shit, and their soldiers don't care about any of their missions, only themselves.

You really should give it a try... Some shooting ranges have rentable guns. There's no feeling quite like holding that kind of power in your hands.

Just legalise absolutely everything and let natural selection take its course. Sounds like a good plan to me.

In many respects I would agree, but in others I thoroughly disagree...

Many recreational drugs are addictive physically, meaning they cause your body to require the drug to continue to function properly, and those should always be banned. The ones that do not do this should be allowed, though with some regulation. (people shouldn't be allowed to give their 3 year old marijuana nuggets, etc.)