darkness
Full Member
The avatar is here. YOU just can't see it.
Posts: 329
|
Post by darkness on Feb 8, 2009 18:39:42 GMT -5
Don't you just hate it when people say that if you use ____ gun that you have no skill?
Especially the auto guns or the heavy weapons?
But here's the facts: guns (other than marksmen rifles) were made for people with less skills; they replaced spears and bows, weapons that took strength to wield.
So bottom line: if you can't use a skilled weapon, YOU DON'T HAVE TO. THAT'S WHY THE ROCKET LAUNCHER IS THERE.
|
|
|
Post by dest1 on Feb 8, 2009 18:51:39 GMT -5
Using high powered rifles in public can lead to being jailed
|
|
sirpainsalot
Full Member
If you meet this person, be sure to have your taser.
Posts: 297
|
Post by sirpainsalot on Feb 8, 2009 19:39:24 GMT -5
lolololol Dest has a point. I dunno why would you be using guns in public, but you must be messed up Darkness! Just kidding, but forget rocket launchers, wai not lasers...? Well, at least once they come out, which is as soon as they are portable... When that happens, who knows?
|
|
|
Post by FireLeo86- Dark Knight on Feb 8, 2009 21:28:29 GMT -5
What game are you talking about? CSS or CA?
|
|
|
Post by MasterCheeze on Feb 8, 2009 21:51:48 GMT -5
Using high powered rifles in public can lead to being jailed Not where I'm from. @_@
|
|
|
Post by FunnyFroggy on Feb 8, 2009 23:17:48 GMT -5
Montana (Colorado?) lets people shoot high powered rifles in public (let's say in a park) without being jailed?
|
|
Arladerus
Full Member
What's the password?!
Posts: 326
|
Post by Arladerus on Feb 20, 2009 22:35:53 GMT -5
What game are you talking about? CSS or CA?
|
|
|
Post by MasterCheeze on Feb 20, 2009 22:41:23 GMT -5
Montana (Colorado?) lets people shoot high powered rifles in public (let's say in a park) without being jailed? Uh, yeah, and you only get a $50 fine or a night in jail for accidentally shooting someone. Shooting in bars is perfect though, and it's even better since 9/10 establishments in my town are bars. The other 1/10 is titty bars, but you can't shoot the performers.
|
|
|
Post by FunnyFroggy on Feb 21, 2009 2:45:33 GMT -5
.____. Fo' shizzle?
|
|
Reve
Full Member
GREEAWWWRRR
Posts: 343
|
Post by Reve on Feb 21, 2009 6:12:33 GMT -5
Montana is officially awesome @_@
Guns takes mad skills, so does swords and spears. The skill level is like the same. They're both equally difficult to construct. Guns got a hell load of mechanisms and things and swords need lots and time and attention for the heat treatment, hilt construction, tempering etc. Swords are beasts to wield against another swordsman because of all the grappling and reactions and the "feel" thing, but guns (Especially bazookas, actually) are beasts to tame with the recoil and everything, and the bullets are virtually impossible to avoid when on target so gunfights musta been really hard to win at, not to mention a scary prospect, scarier than swords because unlike swords, you can't see the bullet.
So the people who thinks that gunsmen are more "noob" than swordsmen are just... Uhh. Lol. Doesn't take much skill to fire a gun or swing a sword.
All that I have typed is made redundant if you're talking about CSS or CA.
|
|
darkness
Full Member
The avatar is here. YOU just can't see it.
Posts: 329
|
Post by darkness on Feb 21, 2009 19:34:02 GMT -5
Do note that construction of a weapon is usually difficult, but I'm more focused on one's performance in combat.
Think about this: a swordsman can only attack one or a few soldiers at a time during combat. Give a soldier an AK-47 and, given even simple training, he can sweep through a few people before going down. True, bazookas and other heavy weapons aren't a piece of cake to load, but they are akin to the ol' fashioned catapults and trebuchets, and those were a pain to load, but they were also a pain to transport; a bazooka is handheld, and I don't think that you could hold a giant counterweight to fling flaming chunks of cow at people.
|
|
|
Post by MasterCheeze on Feb 21, 2009 23:47:01 GMT -5
Someone that's good with a sword can usually kill more people before actually dying him or herself. Someone that's good with a gun, unless they're a sniper, is more likely to die quicker than the person that's good with the sword due to guns being deadlier. Don't you guys watch movies? You're safer being a master of close-combat in a close-combat fight than a master of firearms in a fire fight.
Yeah... I don't even know what this discussion's about anyway. >.>
|
|
Reve
Full Member
GREEAWWWRRR
Posts: 343
|
Post by Reve on Feb 22, 2009 1:39:02 GMT -5
Think about this: a swordsman can only attack one or a few soldiers at a time during combat. Give a soldier an AK-47 and, given even simple training, he can sweep through a few people before going down. True, bazookas and other heavy weapons aren't a piece of cake to load, but they are akin to the ol' fashioned catapults and trebuchets, and those were a pain to load, but they were also a pain to transport; a bazooka is handheld, and I don't think that you could hold a giant counterweight to fling flaming chunks of cow at people. Their performance is still dependant on the context of the situation. Given simple training with a rifle, you still can't exactly "SPRAYLOLOLRAMBOOO" and expect to be able to be successful at killing a huge group of people. There's the recoil, and overheating, the pain from the recoil, the possibility of the gun flying out of your hands and the aiming can go totally off. And if the huge group of people are also having guns themselves, you won't even be able to fire a shot and even then you'd probably last barely two seconds. Unless you're John Rambo. For unarmored swordsmen, you will be able to face off against a big group as well, but it'll turn out the same way as the gunmen. You have swords, they have swords, but the thing is they can overpower you with numbers by going behind you and things within seconds. Unless you're Sir Kenelm Digby. Technically, bazookas and rocket launchers are improvements from trebuchets and catapults, they draw on the idea but replace the massive unwieldy bulky things with modern technology If it's a team of knights against a team of modern infantry, though, I'll put my bet on the infantry. It's the very reason why knightly arts were abandoned in the first place. It's not because guns and things were easier to wield, hell no, but it's a heck lot more efficient than swinging a zweihander around in all that armor for hours and hours on end. (My position is that swords and guns were equally difficult to wield and neither was more "noob" than the other, but the only difference is that guns were more efficient.)
|
|
darkness
Full Member
The avatar is here. YOU just can't see it.
Posts: 329
|
Post by darkness on Feb 22, 2009 12:39:07 GMT -5
Also note, my argument may be a tad odd off because I just studied WWI. Might still be regarding to trench warfare.
Given the new fire 'n' duck techniques and the airstrikes and nukes, people have become more adapted into running for cover.
Given the same circumstance with a combat knife, unless you're going stealth, you can't go knife-a-slashing hoping to hit something vital. We can't say the same with a gun; given a spray 'n' pray method, lead is still a toxic substance to us. Even if one doesn't hit something vital, the burn of the shot and the poisonous potentials make for a more probable kill, if even by slight, than a knife wound.
|
|
Zhlink
Junior Member
Yup, yup.
Posts: 149
|
Post by Zhlink on Feb 22, 2009 22:26:44 GMT -5
Back in those days, swords were considered to be the latest, advanced, hippest thing that swept through town. Later after the discovery of gun powder and flintlock rifles, swords begun to die out. The, people added more sophisticated mechanics into guns to allow for semi-auto or auto. Range, power and speed begun to increase after decades of modification. A regular sword fight lasts from 3secs, to a few minutes, depending on the skill of both users. However, a regular gunfight takes about 2+ minutes, since now there's the safety(?) of distance in place. All in all, there's no such thing as a *lousy* sword or gun. Each has it's own pros and cons. A sniper can't spray (Rambo style ) but can pop off heads pretty well. Still, If you pit a gunslinger against a swordsman, someone's gonna get owned real bad. @ darkness: Do you know that every gun requires skill to use? I can give an unskilled person as much rocket launchers as he wants, but most likely, he'll end up misfiring or being unable to reload the damn thing. And don't jump to conclusions if you've never used the thing before. (Yes, I have thanks to NCC training.)
|
|