|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:01 pm
lol... I know that.
But .408 Cheytac "Intervention" isn't the best sniper rifle ever; and it only gained notoriety after it had been on that show.
Maybe the best Anti-Personel 2000 yard sniper rifle...
But that's a pretty tight niche. xp
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:17 pm
I know I said its my favorite of all not the best of all
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 10:37 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:52 pm
No one ever wins when they start an arguement or conversation with you do they.....how intresting that is indeed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 5:13 pm
There is no winning or losing an argument.
And if you lost, somehow, magically, it wouldn't be losing to me, it would be losing to the world.
This becuase, most of my "Arguments" are explaining to someone why their wrong or why their idea wouldn't work; which usually isn't an opinion, it's a fact, based on scientific evidence.
And facts are solid evidence.
Which means that "Winning" an argument with me would involve telling me the truth about something that I didn't know the truth about, which would be teaching me something, which wouldn't be an argument.
Most of what I do tends to be "Hostile Teaching"; that is, I teach someone why their idea wouldn't work and what the truth is; it has nothing to do with me being right and them being wrong, only with teaching them the facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 8:52 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 11:58 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 4:37 pm
Well, a mech with hands could be useful on the battlefield by picking up injured soldiers and hauling them to a medical field, and provide defense against very violent enemy units that regularly try to kill everyone. Definitely doesn't need a head, but maybe rig up two gatling guns into an oversize-rifle for it, and you might get a very dangerous heavy machine gunner. lol
That, and speed isn't everything. It has momentum, and far fewer moments to hit some brakes. Having a lower speed than your typical cheetah would be a good thing to not smash face first into building and end up killing yourself. :F
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:22 pm
The key to a mech is mobility, which is why you would use one. And the key to hands is mobility and versatility.
And you need neither in a tank- why have hands to carry around a rifle when you could just integrate the rifle into the mech?
The primary purpose would probably be as a medical mech.
Or a as rescue thing etc. given it's ability to respond to a series of pretty interesting situations.
The only purpose of a mech would be to serve as some kind of extension of the hand- something you could do with your body only if you felt no pain, could get repairs in a repair shop, didn't have to worry about dieing, and could be made out of steel and have unlimited strength to do so.
Which would mostly be in rescue situations were you need absolute control in order to keep someone safe- say as in a surgery, lifting up or tearing the roof off a car, carrying a soldier out of battle, the like; it wouldn't really be an effective combat weapon.
Versatility, yes. Utility, yes. Increased capability, yes. Possible medic, explosives ordinance handler, dangerous very intense specific jobs... yes.
Combat capabilities? Not really.
Basically, it's like this.
Why put a scope on a Howitzer cannon?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:32 am
Who said you had to put the scope on the Howitzer? Put it in the guy's hands, he'll probably be able to see alot better with it then. XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 8:14 pm
lol xp
The point is, when you have a radar, GPS, sonar, and enhanced thermal x40 visual view... Why use a scope?
So, when you have a tank, with a 120mm smoothbore high powered 5 mile range 1,000,000 joule projectile, and .50 caliber machine guns and 7.62mm machine guns with a crap load of ammo... Why give it arms and legs?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 12:07 am
You're probably right, but the tank with arms and legs would definitely work as that medical bit you said, among a few other specialized roles that would cut down on losses. lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 5:39 am
A mech is awesome, to say the least. But in reality, it's inefficient.
A wasp has wings and stingers, a cheetah has teeth, claws and enormous speed, a bear is huge with claws, teeth, and very protective hide (a 9mm bullet won't pierce the skull of a bear). Humans...
Humans have intellect and arms and legs that give them versatility. But humans cope.
If a human had long range projectile stingers, would he really need a gun? Would probably never would have invented them.
So if a human builds a tank with a gun on it to fight for him, becuase he doesn't have a projectile shooting stinger weapon thingy on his body... why go backwards and make his tank have arms and legs when he's got a stinger that shoots projectiles?
A good adaptation of a mech, however, could be a strength increasing suit coupled with body armor and a host of other things, I.E. something shaped like a human becuase it surrounds a human. No reason to make a human shape when you don't need it to be doing human things- but a medic unit would make sense.
3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
