M4 Silencer

[ZomboWTF 527]

lol and all silencers in the game should be useless untill they put sub-sonic ammo

into the game ,doubt they've even thought about it. Regular ammo used with a

silencer is just as loud as without it after several shots. Might aswell use a taped

on plastic gallon milk jug.

The .22 ammunition as well as the .45 ACP ammunition both do not make sonic booms

they both are very well suited for silencers (FNX and .22 Amphibia) which are the only silencers in the game to date

 

The M4 ammo goes beyond sonic speed, but thats not a silencer, it's a supressor

[Karmicdebt 46]

The .22 ammunition as well as the .45 ACP ammunition both do not make sonic booms

they both are very well suited for silencers (FNX and .22 Amphibia) which are the only silencers in the game to date

 

The M4 ammo goes beyond sonic speed, but thats not a silencer, it's a supressor

both ammunitions come in subsonic and regular. there are .45 apc  and .22 that make booms 

 

 

"At present, the Defense Department does not have subsonic bullets "classified for use in the calibers provided by any DoD service." That doesn't mean special operations forces never use them. Commandos have used subsonic bullets since World War II, though these are mainly effective in smaller guns like the .22 and 9 mm caliber pistols. Subsonic bullets and fairly large-caliber war rifles, on the other hand, don't mix very well."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/20/tech/innovation/subsonic-bullets-wired/

Edited May 16, 2014 by Karmicdebt

[Chaingunfighter 917]

I have a cool suppressor story: last night my wife was giving me sass so I put my sock in her mouth.

But seriously, I think what would best solve this argument is the removal of the M4. :3

Because that's a very reasonable and plausible idea.

[Grimey Rick 3417]

Because that's a very reasonable and plausible idea.

 

This game would be leaps and bounds better with just civilian weaponry and barely any ammunition. So yeah, remove the M4.

[Katana67 2907]

This game would be leaps and bounds better with just civilian weaponry and barely any ammunition. So yeah, remove the M4.

 

How do you figure?

[agentneo 337]

How do you figure?

 

to be fair the 60 round clips are a bit over powered with the amount of ammo currently lootable, but it will be balanced in due time with more civilian and non-fatal weaponary, i would hope. The Ak coming up apparantly holds a 75 round clip with a special clip so that will be interesting. Its fairly balanced against the Mosin anyway, I like the m4. But the amount of guns and ammo overall in this stage probably makes it seem a bit OP.

[Katana67 2907]

to be fair the 60 round clips are a bit over powered with the amount of ammo currently lootable, but it will be balanced in due time with more civilian and non-fatal weaponary, i would hope. The Ak coming up apparantly holds a 75 round clip with a special clip so that will be interesting. Its fairly balanced against the Mosin anyway, I like the m4. But the amount of guns and ammo overall in this stage probably makes it seem a bit OP.

 

Sure, but that's to do with rarity and the fact that they haven't balanced the loot to any tangible extent.

 

Nothing to do with the arbitrary "civilian"/"military" divide, or anything to do with the weapons themselves. Bullets kill folks regardless of what weapon they're shot out of, the weapons that are most lethal per-shot are "civilian" weapons (i.e. the Mosin and SKS, even though they're both former military service rifles).

 

Most of the weapons in-game have military and civilian applications. The M4A1's alpha status (in terms of it being "the best") in DayZ is highly... highly debatable as well.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Katana67

[sokaku 50]

How do you figure?

 

Bullets are too cheap. Think of it potentially being like a Mad Max scenario. Bullets become very valuable commodities, and the decision to "spend" them on a certain situation becomes a much bigger decision. I don't think they need to get rid of the M4, but ammo needs to be made a lot less harder to come by, and magazines should be found with either empty or with rounds. Then a decision to fire at another survivor becomes a question of "If I spend 20% of my ammo getting the drop on this guy, will he be carrying at least that much?" Right now with maybe an hour travel time and scavenging on low-pop servers, that question is over < 1% of your ammo.

 

But the game is in early, early stages and loot doesn't spawn. Server hopping is already more time consuming which is a good thing. I'd love to see a much more restricted ammo model implemented for the hardcore game mode. I think it would definitely change player interactions.

[Katana67 2907]

Bullets are too cheap. Think of it potentially being like a Mad Max scenario. Bullets become very valuable commodities, and the decision to "spend" them on a certain situation becomes a much bigger decision. I don't think they need to get rid of the M4, but ammo needs to be made a lot less harder to come by, and magazines should be found with either empty or with rounds. Then a decision to fire at another survivor becomes a question of "If I spend 20% of my ammo getting the drop on this guy, will he be carrying at least that much?" Right now with maybe an hour travel time and scavenging on low-pop servers, that question is over < 1% of your ammo.

 

But the game is in early, early stages and loot doesn't spawn. Server hopping is already more time consuming which is a good thing. I'd love to see a much more restricted ammo model implemented for the hardcore game mode. I think it would definitely change player interactions.

 

Right, which, again... has nothing to do with the weapons themselves.

 

It has to do with the rarity/availability (or lack thereof) of ammunition. And the acknowledged problem of server hopping... and the WIP loot system. Of an Alpha state game.

 

Nothing to do with the weapons being "civilian" or "military".

[Grimey Rick 3417]

I don't think the US would be too quick to jump to Russia's aid, so I don't really buy the story of them setting up camps as a "last stand against the infected". And even if that were the case, why have we been looting M4s and even more ridiculous guns from Russian hangars and ATCs for several years in the mod? Shouldn't these American weapons be more or less restricted to the camps themselves? It just feels so cheesy. You could come up with any number of back stories to make an excuse for including American weapons in the game, but I can come up with just as many as to why they shouldn't.

This is a relatively primitive area of the world, but I have no doubt that it'll be just as riddled with ridiculous weapons like the AS50 (among others) just like its predecessor. I was hoping this game would focus more on the actual fight for survival than on how many people I can frag with my leet American weapons.

I'd rather treasure every bullet I found for that old rifle I managed to salvage from a barn I slept in last night, taking great care not to damage it with every shot I'm FORCED to take as it's my only means of protection. I'm just not sold on what this game is becoming, and I can't say I'm surprised.

[maybeme 22]

I'd rather treasure every bullet I found for that old rifle I managed to salvage from a barn I slept in last night, taking great care not to damage it with every shot I'm FORCED to take as it's my only means of protection. I'm just not sold on what this game is becoming, and I can't say I'm surprised.

This.

I loved my CZ550 in the mod. Ammo was pretty rare for me and made every shot count. Loved that gun more than anything. Loved the sights, loved the zeroing, loved the look.

Wish they would bring it back.

[Katana67 2907]

I don't think the US would be too quick to jump to Russia's aid, so I don't really buy the story of them setting up camps as a "last stand against the infected". And even if that were the case, why have we been looting M4s and even more ridiculous guns from Russian hangars and ATCs for several years in the mod? Shouldn't these American weapons be more or less restricted to the camps themselves? It just feels so cheesy. You could come up with any number of back stories to make an excuse for including American weapons in the game, but I can come up with just as many as to why they shouldn't.

This is a relatively primitive area of the world, but I have no doubt that it'll be just as riddled with ridiculous weapons like the AS50 (among others) just like its predecessor. I was hoping this game would focus more on the actual fight for survival than on how many people I can frag with my leet American weapons.

I'd rather treasure every bullet I found for that old rifle I managed to salvage from a barn I slept in last night, taking great care not to damage it with every shot I'm FORCED to take as it's my only means of protection. I'm just not sold on what this game is becoming, and I can't say I'm surprised.

 

Well, you're in luck. Chernarus isn't Russia. And the universe in which DayZ is set isn't the real-world!

 

The story of NATO weapons in Chernarus is explained by the events of ARMA II, see my signature with quoted statement from Chris Torchia. We don't need to make up backstories, that's what they're going with.

 

"Primitive," whatever the hell you mean by that (I assume you mean poor), areas of the world are often highly militarized. Chernarus is no exception.

 

They've stated they're not interested in putting in anti-materiel rifles, fairly early on.

 

Again, your actual issue appears to be with the availability of ammo... not which weapons are in the game.

[Grimey Rick 3417]

Well, you're in luck. Chernarus isn't Russia. And the universe in which DayZ is set isn't the real-world!

 

The story of NATO weapons in Chernarus is explained by the events of ARMA II, see my signature with quoted statement from Chris Torchia. We don't need to make up backstories, that's what they're going with.

 

"Primitive," whatever the hell you mean by that (I assume you mean poor), areas of the world are often highly militarized. Chernarus is no exception.

 

They've stated they're not interested in putting in anti-materiel rifles, fairly early on.

 

Again, your actual issue appears to be with the availability of ammo... not which weapons are in the game.

 

I realize it's a fictional area, but all the signs are written in Cyrillic, so where would that place Chernarus? The environment is primitive, take that for what you will. Look at the houses. Look at the cars. They're primitive.

 

As far as militarization, such a place would more than likely be militarized by the Chernarussian forces, not the UN. They can claim whatever backstory they wish for DayZ as they're the development team, but the ARMA games don't exactly have great storylines. Like, at all.

 

I'm fine with any weapon they want to implement into the game as long as it fits the setting, and you're right, my beef is primarily about the ridiculous amounts of ammo laying about (which won't change much, guaranteed -- all it'll take will be a few ranting threads on the forums when they decide to reduce the amounts) but while we're on the subject of the M4, I think its involvement other than maybe half a dozen functional units scattered about is pretty ridiculous. And that's going with their "last stand" portrayal of NWAF.

 

Finding pristine ACOG scopes in "Chernarussian" hangars and ATCs is an entirely different matter, haha.

[Katana67 2907]

I realize it's a fictional area, but all the signs are written in Cyrillic, so where would that place Chernarus? The environment is primitive, take that for what you will. Look at the houses. Look at the cars. They're primitive.

 

As far as militarization, such a place would more than likely be militarized by the Chernarussian forces, not the UN. They can claim whatever backstory they wish for DayZ as they're the development team, but the ARMA games don't exactly have great storylines. Like, at all.

 

I'm fine with any weapon they want to implement into the game as long as it fits the setting, and you're right, my beef is primarily about the ridiculous amounts of ammo laying about (which won't change much, guaranteed -- all it'll take will be a few ranting threads on the forums when they decide to reduce the amounts) but while we're on the subject of the M4, I think its involvement other than maybe half a dozen functional units scattered about is pretty ridiculous. And that's going with their "last stand" portrayal of NWAF.

 

Finding pristine ACOG scopes in "Chernarussian" hangars and ATCs is an entirely different matter, haha.

 

It would place Chernarus bordering Russia, as per the Armaverse. But it isn't Russia. The fact that it's fictional isn't irrelevant, it's massively significant.

 

Look at Kosovo. NATO/UN intervention (similar to that of ARMA II) and there's an international peacekeeping mission there, ten years later.

 

And your understanding of "what fits the setting" seems to be based in reality, which isn't the case in a fictional medium. The developers dictate what "fits." Your last example, with regards to the ACOG, is a perfect example of this. Not only are ACOGs pretty dern widespread these days, being purchased by civilians as well as global militaries, the fiction of Chernarus explains their presence. Now, you can argue that a hangar is not an appropriate place for an optic to spawn. But it being "Chernarussian" is irrelevant, when the presence of "Western" optics is explained.

 

AR-15s are pretty ubiquitous. Not sure why their use is somehow out of order from any point of view (both a fictional and "realistic" point of view). And a half dozen "units" could be a massive force. Not sure I get a "last stand" vibe from NWAF, it's just an abandoned FOB.

 

Gonna have to agree to disagree I suppose. Not a personal indictment of you, but I am getting insanely tired of defending something that is so readily explained now.

[gibonez 3633]

This.

I loved my CZ550 in the mod. Ammo was pretty rare for me and made every shot count. Loved that gun more than anything. Loved the sights, loved the zeroing, loved the look.

Wish they would bring it back.

 

Hopefully there is a wide array of hunting rifles in different calibers this time around so you can get that cz550 feel with multiple rifles.

[Grimey Rick 3417]

It would place Chernarus bordering Russia, as per the Armaverse. But it isn't Russia. The fact that it's fictional isn't irrelevant, it's massively significant.

 

Look at Kosovo. NATO/UN intervention (similar to that of ARMA II) and there's an international peacekeeping mission there, ten years later.

 

And your understanding of "what fits the setting" seems to be based in reality, which isn't the case in a fictional medium. The developers dictate what "fits." Your last example, with regards to the ACOG, is a perfect example of this. Not only are ACOGs pretty dern widespread these days, being purchased by civilians as well as global militaries, the fiction of Chernarus explains their presence. Now, you can argue that a hangar is not an appropriate place for an optic to spawn. But it being "Chernarussian" is irrelevant, when the presence of "Western" optics is explained.

 

AR-15s are pretty ubiquitous. Not sure why their use is somehow out of order from any point of view (both a fictional and "realistic" point of view). And a half dozen "units" could be a massive force. Not sure I get a "last stand" vibe from NWAF, it's just an abandoned FOB.

 

Gonna have to agree to disagree I suppose. Not a personal indictment of you, but I am getting insanely tired of defending something that is so readily explained now.

 

I'm not quite sure why I typed ACOG; I meant to refer to the M68 and RV1 optics that are currently in-game for the M4A1 (until recently with the inception of the crossbow). It amuses me greatly when I see so many attachments for it laying about. I understand that we're still in development here, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the direction in which the game is going. I read at one point when I first started playing that NWAF was sort of a "last stand" against the infected. I clung to that as it was really the only way for me to accept how many M4A1s and attachments for it were spread around Chernarus. On top of that, the Tactical Shirts with the backwards American flags weren't exactly easy to swallow either.

 

Oh well. At the end of the day, I don't really care. I would just really rather see DayZ stick to the "holy shit we're in a rural area with little-to-no weaponry or supplies and there are undead dudes attacking us at every turn". I feel that the introduction of more elaborate means of defense will only keep those interested in deathmatch-style play playing. I'm one of those people who really don't want to see helicopters, AS50s, tanks and whatever else included in DayZ just because they can be implemented rather easily due to the game being built on the RV engine.

 

I'd rather stick to the basics as that fundamental paranoia-driven angst is what makes this style of game the most fun. Making decisions based on what little ammunition or supplies you have is, to me, the entire essence of DayZ. At least, that's what the trailer that first got me into the game screamed at me. If I want to go tear people up with an M4 at an airfield (or wherever), I'll just go play one of the zillion other games there are for that.

 

Meh. :T

[Chaingunfighter 917]

This game would be leaps and bounds better with just civilian weaponry and barely any ammunition. So yeah, remove the M4.

The only difference the M4A1 has from a civilian AR-15 is that it has select-fire, which is hardly ever utilized, most troops are trained to use their M4s semi-automatic unless they're in a very close range or fire in bursts. Guns like the Mosin-Nagant & SKS are military weapons across many nations, but can be purchased and owned by civilians. Should we get rid of them. What about the Amphibia S, FNX-45 and CR75? They're based on an internally suppressed Ruger MK2, brand-new 2012 .45 handgun, and a prototype CZ-75 SHADOW variant, all meant for military/police use. And should they drop all work on the MP5K, AKM, and SVD in order to work on civilian guns?

 

 

I'm not quite sure why I typed ACOG; I meant to refer to the M68 and RV1 optics that are currently in-game for the M4A1 (until recently with the inception of the crossbow). It amuses me greatly when I see so many attachments for it laying about. I understand that we're still in development here, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the direction in which the game is going. I read at one point when I first started playing that NWAF was sort of a "last stand" against the infected. I clung to that as it was really the only way for me to accept how many M4A1s and attachments for it were spread around Chernarus. On top of that, the Tactical Shirts with the backwards American flags weren't exactly easy to swallow either.

 

Oh well. At the end of the day, I don't really care. I would just really rather see DayZ stick to the "holy shit we're in a rural area with little-to-no weaponry or supplies and there are undead dudes attacking us at every turn". I feel that the introduction of more elaborate means of defense will only keep those interested in deathmatch-style play playing. I'm one of those people who really don't want to see helicopters, AS50s, tanks and whatever else included in DayZ just because they can be implemented rather easily due to the game being built on the RV engine.

 

I'd rather stick to the basics as that fundamental paranoia-driven angst is what makes this style of game the most fun. Making decisions based on what little ammunition or supplies you have is, to me, the entire essence of DayZ. At least, that's what the trailer that first got me into the game screamed at me. If I want to go tear people up with an M4 at an airfield (or wherever), I'll just go play one of the zillion other games there are for that.

 

Meh. :T

 

The problem with your concept of not having anything advanced in the game, at all, is that it really gives nothing for people to strive for. Sure, the end-game could very well be; "get a sustainable amount of food, ammunition, and other necessary supplies so that I'm not in 100% danger 100% of the time", but that would drive away a lot of people, because essentially it would make the end-game simply going around with an ample amount of gear. The only difference between then and now is that it would take a lot longer to do so and people would just be a little more careful while PvPing.

 

Things like helicopters add something for you to strive for. Granted, they should be very difficult to go for and should be hard to maintain and should constantly be at risk of being destroyed, but the advantage of having one would be something to strive for.

Edited May 17, 2014 by Chaingunfighter

[Grimey Rick 3417]

The only difference the M4A1 has from a civilian AR-15 is that it has select-fire, which is hardly ever utilized, most troops are trained to use their M4s semi-automatic unless they're in a very close range or fire in bursts. Guns like the Mosin-Nagant & SKS are military weapons across many nations, but can be purchased and owned by civilians. Should we get rid of them. What about the Amphibia S, FNX-45 and CR75? They're based on an internally suppressed Ruger MK2, brand-new 2012 .45 handgun, and a prototype CZ-75 SHADOW variant, all meant for military/police use. And should they drop all work on the MP5K, AKM, and SVD in order to work on civilian guns?

 

 

 

The problem with your concept of not having anything advanced in the game, at all, is that it really gives nothing for people to strive for. Sure, the end-game could very well be; "get a sustainable amount of food, ammunition, and other necessary supplies so that I'm not in 100% danger 100% of the time", but that would drive away a lot of people, because essentially it would make the end-game simply going around with an ample amount of gear. The only difference between then and now is that it would take a lot longer to do so and people would just be a little more careful while PvPing.

 

Things like helicopters add something for you to strive for. Granted, they should be very difficult to go for and should be hard to maintain and should constantly be at risk of being destroyed, but the advantage of having one would be something to strive for.

 

American-made firearms can certainly make an appearance here and there in appropriate numbers. Going with the theory that there was a definitive UN presence due to the spreading infection I can tolerate there being some types of foreign firearms, but finding an M4A1 in a school, and then a police station half a kilometre apart doesn't quite sit right. Of course, people would be holed up in various parts of the map after raiding the UN tents. Some of these people may have died, leaving their firearms behind, but I don't imagine someone would've raided the tents and then ran back to Berezino to hole up in a school. Why would you run into one of the biggest cities in the game after an outbreak? (;

 

I'm more of a fan of what they could make the game in terms of surviving the environment. People are too focused on the guns, in my opinion. Literally every second or third thread discussed here and on reddit pertains to guns, their attachments, their ammunition, their dispersion, etc. That's fine, guns need to be discussed, but I feel with this train of thought development is going to turn the standalone into a mirror of the mod with better graphics.

 

I personally would be fine using .22 rifles and melee weapons trying to survive hordes of zombies and focusing on just finding supplies and viable shelter. I don't imagine DayZ will ever really encompass what I want it to be, which is just a very simple yet terrifying zombie survival experience. Instead, it'll probably just take after its big brother and we'll be vying against one another for parts to helicopters so we can race back and forth between airfields to stockpile hordes of firearms and various other equipment for our PVP endeavors.

 

EDIT: Because spelling.

Edited May 17, 2014 by Grimey Rick

[Chaingunfighter 917]

American-made firearms can certainly make an appearance here and there in appropriate numbers. Going with the theory that there was a definitive UN presence due to the spreading infection I can tolerate there being some types of foreign firearms, but finding an M4A1 in a school, and then a police station half a kilometre apart doesn't quite sit right. Of course, people would be holed up in various parts of the map after raiding the UN tents. Some of these people may have died, leaving their firearms behind, but I don't imagine someone would've raided the tents and then ran back to Berezino to hole up in a school. Why would you run into one of the biggest cities in the game after an outbreak? (;

 

I'm more of a fan of what they could make the game in terms of surviving the environment. People are too focused on the guns, in my opinion. Literally every second or third thread discussed here and on reddit pertains to guns, their attachments, their ammunition, their dispersion, etc. That's fine, guns need to be discussed, but I feel with this train of thought development is going to turn the standalone into a mirror of the mod with better graphics.

 

I personally would be fine using .22 rifles and melee weapons trying to survive hordes of zombies and focusing on just finding supplies and viable shelter. I don't imagine DayZ will ever really encompass what I want it to be, which is just a very simple yet terrifying zombie survival experience. Instead, it'll probably just take after its big brother and we'll be vying against one another for parts to helicopters so we can race back and forth between airfields to stockpile hordes of firearms and various other equipment for our PVP endeavors.

 

EDIT: Because spelling.

Actually, if one had something like an M4A1, it would be right to assume they had enough firepower to make it somewhere with a lot of zombies and hold their own. Said person of course completely underestimated, ran into a school, and got cornered and then eaten.

Obviously I don't think the M4A1 should spawn in schools or anywhere but bases. However, I don't think it's wrong to assume the Chernarussian military could've used M4A1s themselves, in addition to their AK-74s and everything else.

The zombies definitely need to be made a threat, but I don't think they should ever be the main threat. If someone had escaped from a human trafficking sect in the middle of the African Savannah, their main concern would probably be the crime lords hunting them down, not necessarily the various predators such as lions. That being said, I don't what zombies to just be an afterthought. I'd actually like it so that getting into a big gunfight in Elektro would be very problematic for the survivors who would be getting poured down upon by zombies (assuming it hadn't been cleared out.)

 

And yeah, that's probably what it will end up being for the big groups who eventually reach the end-game, but the whole point of DayZ is the build-up to the endgame. I'm fine with it being difficult and time-consuming to get to that point, but it would be the same end-game with you. People would just kill eachother with .22s and melee weapons instead of using m4a1s and whatever other guns they add, with the occasional vehicle/technical and possible helicopter/plane to support them.

Edited May 17, 2014 by Chaingunfighter

[nikom7 19]

It's not a silencer it is a suppressor 

Silencers and suppressors are the same, silencer is just an unofficial term

Edited May 17, 2014 by Nikom7

[nexventor 429]

Silencers and suppressors are the same, silencer is just an unofficial term

 

And both are a place holder lol

Edited May 18, 2014 by NexVentor

[ZomboWTF 527]

This.

I loved my CZ550 in the mod. Ammo was pretty rare for me and made every shot count. Loved that gun more than anything. Loved the sights, loved the zeroing, loved the look.

Wish they would bring it back.

 

I guess the CZ550 from the mod is just like the Mosin is right now,

with some drawbacks as to finding ammo for it like it's been the currency in Chernarus and the precision being a bit less

 

Everything else is just as the CZ was, 5 rounds, 7.62x51mm (though the CZ technically had another calibre, it was just a M24 reskin in Arma 2)

instant knock-out capability and a very good look, plus the decency to have a low rate of fire (f*ck the DMR)

[mr. rabbit 6]

spent many years in the military actually using weapons and getting shot at for my country 

years before you were born. qualified with 42 different weapons how many have qualified in,

as for silencers making a weapon subsonic without subsonic ammo, thats pure tripe.

So why dont you go try things instead of just reading about it on the internet.

So because I voice an opinion base on experience and fact you assume I know nothing about it?

Riiiight. Then you would know that subsonic 5.56 is comparable to standard .22lr in terms of energy.

If it sounds like a poser, it is a poser.

 

 

the plastic bottle works for one shot....its a tactic taught in SEER training and it works son :)

For someone who's served you sure can't get the terminology or names spelled correct.

 

 

both ammunitions come in subsonic and regular. there are .45 apc  and .22 that make booms 

 

 

"At present, the Defense Department does not have subsonic bullets "classified for use in the calibers provided by any DoD service." That doesn't mean special operations forces never use them. Commandos have used subsonic bullets since World War II, though these are mainly effective in smaller guns like the .22 and 9 mm caliber pistols. Subsonic bullets and fairly large-caliber war rifles, on the other hand, don't mix very well."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/20/tech/innovation/subsonic-bullets-wired/

So by the statment quoted from that article and your claims of experience are you claiming to be or have been in SOF?

inb4 Your reply "Someone who talks like they read it on a webpage."

I'm sure you're gonna waste everyone's time with that to shake off the attention you're getting for spewing manure on this board.

Edited May 20, 2014 by mr. rabbit

[Karmicdebt 46]

Riiiight. Then you would know that subsonic 5.56 is comparable to standard .22lr in terms of energy.

If it sounds like a poser, it is a poser.

 

 

For someone who's served you sure can't get the terminology or names spelled correct.

 

 

So by the statment quoted from that article and your claims of experience are you claiming to be or have been in SOF?

inb4 Your reply "Someone who talks like they read it on a webpage."

I'm sure you're gonna waste everyone's time with that to shake off the attention you're getting for spewing manure on this board.

I posted that link because its  from a vetted source not some chart from an unknown author.

oh yeah everyone knows a soldier cant spell wrong or use improper grammar/terms.

lol no not a sof was an inf medic in the 82nd for years, thats the only claim Ive made other than

having qualified with alot of weapons. its (S)urvival (E)vasion (E)scape (R )esistance training numbnuts,

So any other complaints son?

Edited May 20, 2014 by Karmicdebt

[Magaz97 41]

Isnt it strange that despite being told that the moniker 'Son' is perceived as derogatory, he continues to use it.

 

I think it is fantastic that a medic has been trained to use 42 different weapons though. :)