but i saw them knock the elephants off the cliff :dizzy2:
lol
Printable View
Don't forget one guy (the gay-looking one) killed a rhino all by himself.
Maion
You sure he didn't just shoop da whoop ?
That aside, sidearms of one kind or another were as ubiquitous as bad breath. EVERYBODY had one, and often several.
Would there be any particular point in putting them in as actual secondary unit weapons ? Most of the time, heck no. Consider them subsumed into the unit's normal attack values.
Seriously, did you just discover encyclopedia dramatica last week? Jeese, why don't you jsut link to the wall of pain and get it over with?
Nah, I've known it for a long time. I just bust it out when I'm bored and feel like spreading some memes around in the suitable contexts. Any mention of 300 is, naturally, Asking For It... :smash:
lol...most likely.
And in a forum like this, you better be ready with sarcasm proof shields when 300 is unleashed, or you'll be gone in a flash lol...
Yes - just as they realistically should. If I get knocked down with my bayonet-equipped G-36 assault rifle due to a blow with a similar thing that glances off my helmet and I am miraculously able to get up again before being overrun, shot or just stabbed with that same bayonet, I will rather grab my Feldspaten or combat knife than go grappling for the dropped assault rifle on the ground while the enemy is within centimeters of me... Or at least a pistol. This is theory of course; I have never been in an actual melee engagement - but the above quoted course of action sounds plausible to me.
This is also true - so having swords for hoplites would be more of an aesthetic thing than a technical gameplay-related issue.
I did not know of it until one of Watchman's posts directed my attention to it. Thus, I say that ovation is due rather than criticism.
i didnt mention 300. i hate that movie. and your personal attack earlier was not welcome watchman. I'm not some fool who doesn't read history. I ask questions cause i dont know everythin g.
I'm afraid I'll have to agree with CP for your reply, Watchman. Highly unprofessional to attack someone who just wished to ask acouple of questions and get some answers. I'd be angry myself as well.
Maion
Watch me care. Bugger should work on his reading comprehension if he doesn't want snarky and curt replies from people who don't feel like reiterating what they just said about why secondary weapons are best avoided.
To everyone else but Watchman: If the Spartans had secondary weapons in EB 0.8, and are since removed, where the animations removed too, or just the EDU changed?
Yes. That is, however, irrelevant as the change involves nothing more than removing or adding a line of text in the DMB file; the important issue is if the *model* has been designed to alternatively wield sword, for if it has not, the best you're going to get is soldiers fencing with an invisible sword - the worst, them using the sword animation with the spear...
True, though conversely nobody's forcing C_P to be a butthurt twerp either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx300
And I *am* among the few people who actually understand how the system works who still bother posting in the public forums, so eh. Nobody's forcing me to do that either.
Yes, I'm pretty sure people will apreciate you posting here if its going to be in that style.Quote:
True, though conversely nobody's forcing C_P to be a butthurt twerp either.
And I *am* among the few people who actually understand how the system works who still bother posting in the public forums, so eh. Nobody's forcing me to do that either.
They don't receive that style unless they fail Reading Comprehension 101 as patently as C_P did back in post #24 (where, I would add, he's positively asking for trouble with that "...either you're all retarded or..."). And then get all butthurt and whiny about the response, like anyone was going to care.
Oh, and then the units that *do* have sec swords spawn threads like this. So, yeah.
Run its course. Thread closed. Bye Bye.
Foot