We were hacked. Several times over the past two weeks, in fact.
While all passwords are encrypted and salted, it's recommended that you change your password here when you can.
Re: The sniper rifle that should have been in SF...
This gun was in BlackHawk Down when the two guys came to the second heli to rescue the pilot. Its like the SVD with semi-auto but with M24 lvl of damage.
Re: The sniper rifle that should have been in SF...
Originally posted by unlimitedmp
I don't know... the M24 does its job nicely.
If a semi-auto sniper rifle was added for the US, it would probably have the same specs as the svd. I'd rather use the M24 than another svd-like gun.
U mean, the same specs as the SVD in game. THe M14 DMR IMO is better than the SVD, it is a very proven design, it is lighter, and it has a 20 round mag. Anyways, while we're talking about sniper rifles, what do u guys think if the Spetsnaz got the VSS Vintorez (5.56 caliber silenced sniper rifle).
Re: The sniper rifle that should have been in SF...
Originally posted by SK
Oh god, not this again. This is an old urban legend, many people bring this up, yet they are never able to quote the part of the hague or geneva conventions that supposedly contains this "law". This is because there is no such law, period.
Most western countries signed the hague and geneva conventions btw (not only the US "which seems to be the only country that follows them"), the US is oftentimes rather slow in signing conventions that could hinder it´s freedom of action. For example it is one of the 40 countries that did not sign the 1997 ban of AP mines treaty.
Uh...shows how much you know. LOL
It is NOT urban myth. It would have taken you only a few minutes of searching the information and you would found proof enough. The use of the .50 caliber as a weapon used against human targets was and has been challenged several times. In 1999 the ICRC (The Swiss) attempted yet again after being successful with laws against laser blinding weapons and anti-personnel mines, to out law the .50 caliber as a weapon against human targets. In particular they were focused on the Raufoss round. In January 2000, U.S. legal review reconfirmed legality of Raufoss .50 cal. Multipurpose round for anti-materiel and anti-personnel purposes. This is where the confusion comes from. In particular what was used as the course for this objection to .50's being used against humans was:
1907 Hague IV (Article 23e, Annex) prohibition on unnecessary suffering.
As someone noted earlier, the damage from a .50 can be defined as causing the exact above statement. While it is not a "LAW" persay, it is the morality issues that come with it. THAT is why according to US military legal departments it is deployed carefully. Has it been used against human targets? Yup...does not mean it hasn't been challenged.
To boot, I ought to be in the know.
Marine Corps 90-96. We were the first Marine's Issued Barrett .50 sniper rifles to use in the sandbox. They are lawful weapons, although rules of engagement (policy and tactics) may limit their use.
Originally posted by Tactical_Marksman
Tango 51? It's basically an M24 (accurized Remington 700 platform). I'm so frustrated I just don't know what to say...
Um...the Tango 51 is a bit better then a M24. They are guaranteed to shoot .25 MOA. M24's are tuned to shoot 1 MOA. That translates to some serious difference on point of impact. :p Tactical Operations makes some of the DAMN best rifles out there and the care show in building their rifles.
Re: The sniper rifle that should have been in SF...
Originally posted by blackwindseminole
They are lawful weapons, although rules of engagement (policy and tactics) may limit their use.
With you bud.
Most all instances in situations were people use the .50 in BF2 it would never be used in real life. A 7.62 (308) bolt rifle with an auto ranging scope would be used in place.
But BF2 is not real life, the .50 in BF2 is not even close to being as powerful as in real life. This gun is simply just a different flavor in the game. That is what this is. A game.
Re: The sniper rifle that should have been in SF...
Originally posted by Gergnoodle
damn good to see some one knew that simple truth actaully more than just snipers time and time again little ole canada comes out tops in world shooting events
little known fact that canadian sniper set Unrecognized world record for longest sniper kill in afghanistan woot woot
and that m14 someone was spouting being the sniper weapon of choice it;s just a damn m16 that fires 7.62 friggin crap
you calling an M14 crap? then why has the army been using since the early 50's and through out vietnam and into present day iraq? the M14 came before the M 16 and the M16 originaly fired 7.62 and personaly I like the M14 better it has a better feeling when shooting the M16 is also fairly new well the ones we use now " M4 "
Re: The sniper rifle that should have been in SF...
The M-16 was NOT originally in any 7.62 caliber. The M-16 is the military designation given to the AR-15 developed by Armalite (Eugene Stoner) as a sporting rifle. From day one it was designed as a .223 Remington/5.56 Nato rifle (indeed, those calibers were created for the project).
Re: The sniper rifle that should have been in SF...
Originally posted by blackwindseminole
Uh...shows how much you know. LOL
Even after your comment, everything I said remains valid. There is no ban of .50 cal ammo use vs personnel in the hague or geneva conventions, period.
It is NOT urban myth. It would have taken you only a few minutes of searching the information and you would found proof enough. The use of the .50 caliber as a weapon used against human targets was and has been challenged several times.
If something was "challenged" is completely irrelevant. Heck, the whole military gets challenged time and again by some people, but that doesn´t mean it´s banned.
In 1999 the ICRC (The Swiss) attempted yet again after being successful with laws against laser blinding weapons and anti-personnel mines, to out law the .50 caliber as a weapon against human targets. In particular they were focused on the Raufoss round. In January 2000, U.S. legal review reconfirmed legality of Raufoss .50 cal. Multipurpose round for anti-materiel and anti-personnel purposes. This is where the confusion comes from.
Confusion doesn´t mean a ban either.
In particular what was used as the course for this objection to .50's being used against humans was:
1907 Hague IV (Article 23e, Annex) prohibition on unnecessary suffering.
As someone noted earlier, the damage from a .50 can be defined as causing the exact above statement.
I know of the "prohibition of unnecessary suffering" article in the hague conventions (that´s why I brought them up, the original poster only talked about geneva conventions), but basically any weapon can be defined to and can cause unnecessary suffering. Actually, a .50 cal hit is more likely to not cause any more suffering when used against people than many other rounds.
While it is not a "LAW" persay, it is the morality issues that come with it. THAT is why according to US military legal departments it is deployed carefully. Has it been used against human targets? Yup...does not mean it hasn't been challenged.
Well mounting it on every second vehicle in iraq (where all you shoot at is basically personnel and some softskin vehicles) isn´t exactly what I´d call "careful deployment". Add to this AARs like these:
XM107: The Barrett 50 cal Sniper Rifle may have been the most useful piece of equipment for the urban fight – especially for our light fighters. The XM107 was used to engage both vehicular and personnel targets out to 1400 meters. Soldiers not only appreciated the range and accuracy but also the target effect. Leaders and scouts viewed the effect of the 50 cal round as a combat multiplier due to the psychological impact on other combatants that viewed the destruction of the target.
My spotter positively identified a target at 1400 meters carrying an RPG on a water tower. I engaged the target. The top half of the torso fell forward out of the tower and the lower portion remained in the tower.”
325th PIR Sniper
Marine Corps 90-96. We were the first Marine's Issued Barrett .50 sniper rifles to use in the sandbox. They are lawful weapons, although rules of engagement (policy and tactics) may limit their use.
Well with in the beginning there probably were doubts about wether it´s lawful to use them etc. ,apparently those don´t play such a huge role anymore though, as can be seen from the above quotes.
The bottomline still is: There is no ban on .50 cal use vs. personnel, this is a urban (military) myth.
Re: The sniper rifle that should have been in SF...
Originally posted by renegadex9
It sucks that there are no new unlocks for the sniper class in SF, all the other classes seem to have one.
Yea that really p!sses me off. SF is about stealth and not being seen. The art of surprise. Then surely the sniper is one of the most stealthy weapons. Hiding at a great distance and picking them off one by one.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment