Gromnir

The FACT is that it doesn't matter how much your "legal system" is "able to effectively protect the fundamental rights o' various groups o' people," it does not matter when fascists take charge. Fascism is about the destruction of traditional post-enlightenment governments from within and has proven highly effective at it. The very idea that a political system can "effectively protect the fundamental rights" of its citizenry when the leadership no longer wants to is absurd. more nonsense. more rhetoric. you gots some silly notion that fascism is inherent different and requires different rules to prevent? why? besides which, there is a considerable number o' examples o' fundamental rights being protected in the U.S. in spite of opposition of the Leaders of government. where the heck did you go to school that you ain't aware that the Judiciary has opposed Congress and the Executive on numerous occasions? every time the Court strikes down a law or executive order as unconstitutional it is acting in opposition of the leaders of government. somebody needs a reintroduction to their high school civics lessons.... is too many such examples to list individually. yeah, there is some noteworthy examples o' the Executive functionally ignoring the Court, but such examples is noteworthy 'cause o' their rarity. again, tell us the legal mechanic utilized in Germany to prohibit nazi participation. once you learn the mechanic, many o' your mistakes and preconceptions will evaporate. btw, we can direct you to numerous sources that indicate a rise in the popularity o' neo-nazi groups w/i modern Germany. HA! Good Fun!

am not even close to overstepping. the internet is not the best source for such info, but no doubt you may find sources that relate to snipers attempting to replicate these long range shots with targets rather than people. is not pretty. am gonna extend the golf analogy. let us again take the hole-in-one example. does you really think that hole-in-one shots is a valid measure o' golfer skill? it is indeed true that pro golfers is far more likely to makes a successful hole-in-one shot than a tyro, but do you think that, if tracked, tiger woods, jack nicklaus, and arnold palmer would have mostest holes-in-one? of course the extreme range sniper shot is even more extreme... is more akin to the hole-in-one on a par 4. again, am betting that pro golfers far more likely to successfully makes a hole-in-one on a par 4 than their amateur counterparts, but does you honestly thinks that such shots is indicative of the golfer's skill. *shrug* is not about lack o' respect... is about having seen folks (military snipers) attempt to recreate these shots. you is waaaaayy overestimating sniper skills. HA! Good Fun!

Let me check, hmm, okay, hold on. Nazism was banned in Germany in 1945... it's now 2010 and The Left, KDP, etc. still legally operate... so at least 65 years. Uh, yeah they would have. The principles of the state cannot be made untouchable or immortal any more than the state itself can be made so. Germany didn't ban the Nazi Party because everybody believed that would be "wrong." When the Nazis came to power, of course, they started banning all the other parties. Do you think that if genuine fascists came to power in the USA they wouldn't do the same? now you is just spouting rhetoric. check your favorite wacky websites where you usually get your messed up stats... no doubt you see that neo-nazism has hardly been eradicated in post war germany. furthermore, you never bothered to consider the legal mechanic used to prohibit nazism in Germany. why don't you check and get back to us on that... maybe you learn something. your quote directed at Gromnir is... huh? no doubt you thinks you got a point. doesn't address the fact that Nazi Germany systematically denied political opponents and various unsavory groups o' their fundamental rights... including commies btw. if the German legal system had been able to effectively protect the fundamental rights o' various groups o' people, then the greatest atrocities o' the third reich woulda' been avoided, and it is possible that there woulda' been no 3rd Reich at all. HA! Good Fun!

1) krez is dumber than we thought if he thinks Gromnir is "proud" of the U.S. prison population. 2) pelican bay does not house folks being incarcerated for simple drug offenses. 3) what makes you think that the folks at Halden is not housing persons for drug-related offenses... poor reading comprehension we s'pose. HA! Good Fun!

that is the point. given the distance we are talking about, slight change in windage can result in being off-target by many (Many) meters. the likelihood of your spotter being able to actually identify where your first shot hit is similar to finding the proverbial needle in a haystack... unless you happens to get very lucky and your first shot actually lands in the immediate vicinity of the target. ... have these snipers go out to some mountain range or hills with similar conditions to afghanistan... have 'em simply practice hitting a target under similar conditions. you is gonna see these guys waste a great deal of ammo hitting shrubbery and rocks, and the worst part is that the spotters won't even be able to identify the rocks and shrubbery that was hit. these distances is way beyond what anybody trains, 'cause even the best sniper in the world is probably gonna be missing virtual every time... and missing by more than enough to make second and third shot adjustments. HA! Good Fun!

so? HA! Good Fun! So I thought you said chance had to come in. if 80% of these targets were at say 300 yards, a good sniper is not going to need luck to hit them. in regards to skill, we were only discussing the monster distances. the extreme distances is the ones where luck clearly supersedes skill as the most important factor in achieving success. we never suggested that high number of kills were based on luck. sorry raithe, but you got wrong. ever seen how snipers work? is almost always in teams of two: 1 spotter and 1 sniper. if your first shot is lucky enough to hit where your spotter may identify (even if you missed target) you can make adjustments to second or third shot. where you see genuine skill is if same sniper can do on tuesday and friday... or next week. HA! Good Fun!

so? HA! Good Fun!

am gonna disagree. am thinking that the frightening thing is learning that many such people is little different than the rest of us. we has met snipers and members o' the special forces. they got families. they complain that their wife wants them to cut the grass on a Sunday afternoon during a Bears playoff game. they have bad/good taste in movies and they like/dislike rap music. see 'em five or ten years after they is no longer in the military, and they gots beer guts and receding hairlines. ex special forces guy gets cut off in traffic by some clown who not use proper signals and their first reaction is to swear or give the negligent driver the bird... is no suppressed desire to kill. put some 45 year old ex-marine sniper in a lineup with 20 other regular joes and we doubt you can pick out the sniper... 'less he kept the haircut. ... am doubting that most o' those famous & successful snipers saw people as cattle... though perhaps some were indeed psychopaths. more likely those snipers were able to distinguish people from enemies; killing a person is morally reprehensible, but killing an enemy is acceptable and maybe even praiseworthy. maybe such thinking is specious or even delusional, but being able to distinguish enemies from people is a very human quality that literally millions of soldiers has exhibited over the centuries. HA! Good Fun!

dunno... these kinda super distance shots is not surprising from a statistics pov. after all, at such ranges you is no longer genuine distinguishing success from failure w/o a healthy dose o' luck. is kinda like a pro golfer making a hole-in-one, while blind-folded, and after he has been spun in circles a half-dozen times. sure, given enough attempts somebody is bound to make the successful shot, but is it a matter o' skill? make same shot on even 3 of 10 attempts and we would concede skill, but that just isn't the way things work. is the pro more likely to make such a shot than is the tyro? probably, but am still hesitant to identify it as a matter o' skill. the majority o' movement due to windage occurs within the first 20ft, no? but even so, at such a distance you gots potential for multiple different cross-winds and the drift due to windage gets multiplied the further the bullet travels. likelihood of first shot hitting target is minimal even with best luck. spotter helping you out is no doubt key, but seems unlikely that even a world-class spotter could follow trajectory of a bullet at such a distance... gotta simply hope that first shot hits or is near enough target so that spotter can be o' any use to the sniper. the sniper can account for temp and distance and any number o' factors, but is there any way to genuine account for windage at such distances? regardless, this is one feat o' marksmanship we ain't never been particular impressed by as it seems to depend on luck more than anything else. if is skill then you can replicate, no? ... or maybe we is just jealous... not jealous of successful killing a man at that distance, but as one o' those cliche Americans who were raised with a rifle in his crib, we got appreciation for feats o' marksmanship. HA! Good Fun!

"Slippery slope arguments don't work, since history implies the exact opposite thing. The Nazis were allowed to run free in Germany, do you remember how that ended?" am gonna assume you is being intentional ironic... or does we need point out the manifest hypocrisy o' the above quoted material? btw, nowhere did Gromnir suggest that draconian prohibition o' ideologies were ineffective as a means o' eliminating certain unsavory groups... no need to do so, 'cause if such means is indeed successful it only bolsters our argument and our belief that First Amendment protections is an essential fundamental right. HA! Good Fun! ps keep in mind that your own wacky argument works just as effective in reverse: the Nazis would never have been able to suppress opposition if free speech and other fundamental rights had been protected as they are in the United States. so, abandoning fundamental rights in the first place is what allowed for the third reich to come to and retain power.

Neo-nazis are not a joke. who suggested that neo-nazis is a joke? nevertheless, they got the same first amendment rights that your local VFW or NOW members got. you say that these guys is murderers? fine. arrest and charge with murder. unless the neo-nazi speech actual incites an immediate violent response, chances are their speech is gonna be deemed protected by the U.S. Constitution. ... the U.S. has its origins as a revolutionary government. you think that such origins maybe figured into the Framer's desire to protect speech? from the brit pov, the Founding Fathers were a bunch o' terrorists inciting rebellion amongst the colonials. there has been numerous groups that the majority o' Americans has considered unsavory... groups who has had their speech rights protected: jews, african-americans, gays, labor unions, etc. how many african-american organizations were vilified as murderous or terrorist? how many labor organizations were garnering similar labels during the first half of the 20th century? 'course everybody loves free speech, right up until the point when they realize that nazis, pornographers, gang members, and bolshevik wannabees is the folks that is benefiting from the protections o' the First Amendment. *snort* again, use google and do a search as we suggested... might also wanna check the following: Chaplinksy v. New Hampshire, & R. A. V. v. City of St. Paul. honestly, what is the point of free speech if only polite and acceptable speech is being defended? HA! Good Fun!

this might have been a noteworthy topic... if the year were 1976. use google or some other search engine... the following words may prove useful: NATIONAL, SOCIALIST, PARTY, AMERICA, VILLAGE, SKOKIE. the only speech that needs protection is the crap that most of us hate. HA! Good Fun!

Limitations of the engine maybe? as has been noted, this feature has very little impact on gameplay. how much resources is a developer gonna devote to such a feature? green shield and red shield abstractions is gonna be cheaper to implement than a more realistic animation. got multiple kinds o' armour and multiple kinds o' weapons, no? gonna use same ricochet animation for plasma rifle as for sniper rifle? the meaning of red shield is very clear and is less demanding to implement... or so we s'pose. HA! Good Fun!

nope. didn't say they were better. i said, subjectively speaking, that they felt different aesthetically...to me. is this still confusing? no. your attempt at a rationalization is very clear. HA! Good Fun!

not really. especially if you read my posts. we have, to our disservice, read numerous twink posts... gives all the more credence to our observation. and as for your second point... rrrrriiiigggghhhhttt. in any event, to keep on topic, am hopeful that josh addresses enoch query regarding damage types. am having a hard time believing that obsidian would utilize a single, generic damage type. HA! Good Fun!

another 12-string blues master, leadbelly http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbCJtxEFlSA...feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blI2dXHyBj0 @ enoch, charlie parker easily makes our top 3 for jazz.... never saw the eastwood film 'cause we just couldn't picture forrest whitaker as charlie parker. HA! Good Fun!

* i defended the use of the text-box in FO1/2 as appearing to me to be not hand-holding, but representative of a different sort of aesthetic. point, meet bulls-eye. some pretty wacky hardcore fallout fan rationalization there, eh? at best it represents serious intellectual dishonesty. in any event, turned on or off is kinda silly as red shield provides extreme limited hand-holding... hardly the kinda thing that genuine effects difficulty slider. as others have mentioned, the red shield seems like a n00b feature. HA! Good Fun!

as noted by josh earlier, red shield is of very limited practical usefulness as it simply indicates whether a seeming lack of movement on enemy health meter is due to dr or an overwhelming pool of health. HA! Good Fun!

um. no. reading comprehension fail. do not pass go. do not collect $200. no need for you to be dishonest. fibbing = fail. in any event, the red shield is a minor (albeit consolized) improvement over "the enemy simply isn't dying" method espoused by twink as we will at least be made aware when dr complete negates damage. enoch suggestion of actual animation feedback would be the ideal, but am not thinking that such an approach is practical given the resource limitations inherent in game development. HA! Good Fun!

Hope that can be turned off. I wonder what they mean by that there are new camera modes during combat, or if that is just referring to being able to use the iron sights. yeah. i'd hope a consideration for hard-core mode will allow this option to be turned off. because while i like what Sawyer says here: i think i'd get the impression that my weapon isn't effective if the enemy simply isn't dying. admittedly, i went from raging to "meh, whatevs" after his explanation though. at first i was like "another ****ing consolized hand-holding goddamn mother****ing etc etc". sooooo you thought red shield were "consolized hand-holding" right up until josh reminded you that the fo1 hand-holding were far more detailed. *chuckle* is probable a lesson for developers to couch descriptions of any fo3 feature in language such that one may easily draw parallels to the original fo incarnation. HA! Good Fun!

dr is not typical Yes v. No. maybe you still damage folks in power armour when using your trusty hunting rifle and no red shield appears 'cause the damage done is greater than the damage threshold o' the armour. however, chances are that your hunting rifle ain't doing full potential damage neither. damage Reduction... key word is kinda obvious. but red shield not tells you how effective dr is... only tells you if the dr of foe is significant enough that they complete shrug off the damage dealt. better than nothing, but not great. as for messy... HA! not need separate icons. you already got the shield thingie, so why not add a few color variations to show degree o' dr effectiveness? add a couple extra colors is messy? HA! Good Fun!

taj mahal-- statesboro blues http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQMU1S8FhKg&NR=1 blind willie mc tell (possibly the greatest 12-string piedmont picker... evar)-- statesboro blues http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwA8eH5dwAU...feature=related HA! Good Fun!

sounds... crude. such a scheme is indeed a better feedback feature than forcing the player to squint at a foe's health meter and guess whether lack o' visible health meter movement during combat is due to the strength o' the foe's armour or is resulting from the critter's extreme large pool o' health. red shield is an improvement, but a small one... 'less DR is equal crude. enoch's question is a valid one: is dr uniform for all damage types? does game actual recognize damage types? if not, then red shield is sufficient, but lame as an aspect o' combat is simplified to the point o' stoopidity. if damage types is varied and amours provide equally varied protections (e.g. tesla armour providing relative superior protection to energy weapons,) then player is still forced to trial an error his way to enlightenment, no? better than nothing... and no doubt w/i a month o' the game's release, a nerdling will create a comprehensive armour/damage chart and post it on a fo:nv wiki thus dispelling any sorta unnecessary dr obfuscation. HA! Good Fun!

anybody heard o' the block scheduling system gaining popularity in high schools? students have 4 classes a day, and each class is approx. 90 minutes in duration. for obvious reasons, not every kid has pe on their daily schedule. to meet fed & state requirements related to student physical exercise, students not currently taking a pe class in school must provide a note from their parents regarding the student's physical activities. am actual not certain o' the logistics o' the parental note, but it sounds kinda sketchy to us. where implemented, the block system has had a significant positive impact on standardized test scores (though we thinks that some o' the positive gains is a result o' smoke 'n mirrors) but we has seen no studies measuring student fitness trends resulting from a block schedule. HA! Good Fun!