Project Reality Forums

Here is an idea that might need some massaging.

I believe civies are needed in the insurgency maps. However after playing in them for awhile, I think the problem with the shoot dont shoot issues still remain. And I dont think that a civie acting like a hostile or running with hostiles should get some sort of immunity. Frankly, in real life, if you can articulate and justify why you fired upon a civilian you might be okay. In this game, there really is no way to model that....or is there? (more on that in a moment).

From the perspective of a soldier in combat, if a civie is seen acting in a manner that assists the enemy, doing something that compromises the soldiers lives, is actively attacking or running with terrorists and just plain working in concert with them, then maybe you can justify why you fired on them.

Here is a solution however, I dont know if it is possible. What if the civie role remained as is BUT and here is the key, there were identical STATIC civie models...not bots...that popped up around the map or were placed there at random during game start? The static models would be identical to the playable model except they would NOT move from where they started. If they could be animated, they could be shown looking around or randomly turning in place and or using binocs.

Since these models wouldnt be acting aggresively, they couldnt be arrested for weapon cache info but they could be arrested and removed from play at that location. Meanwhile, real collaborating civies could if needed move to a location and stand still, pretending to be a static hoping that no Brit saw them move. They could remain in place and gather intel all day long.

Maybe a civie static could only be removed from play by a Brit IF the medic bag was used on it for about 10 seconds thereby symbolizing the rendering of assistance or getting it out of harms way. The trick would be is, is that an enemy civie standing still with a knife that can attack the medic or a static civie? It poses a new challenge.

The Brits could also have a less lethal riot gun to stun enemy civies AND terorists both to arrest them for information. I mean, why cant you arrest terrorist for cache info as well. The less lethal gun would have two modes of fire, slug (beanbag) and shot (rubber pellets).

So with this model, any civie moving and thus assisting the enemy could be shot with little or no penalty to the brit. The enemy civie could have a handgun and or a knife, field dressings, and binocs. With staic civies popping up all over the map or in specific areas, the user civie could try to move from place to place pretending to be a static OR killing a static in order to assume its place on the battlemap to confuse the Brits.

Ok thats an idea but. Why make a new thread when 1 on this very same topic has already been made?

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr-suggestions-feedback/35967-more-civi-kill-punish.html

JohnDoeGamer wrote:Here is an idea that might need some massaging.

I believe civies are needed in the insurgency maps. However after playing in them for awhile, I think the problem with the shoot dont shoot issues still remain. And I dont think that a civie acting like a hostile or running with hostiles should get some sort of immunity. Frankly, in real life, if you can articulate and justify why you fired upon a civilian you might be okay. In this game, there really is no way to model that....or is there? (more on that in a moment).

I believe they are needed as well. I also agree that there are justifiable reasons for having fired on them too, as in directly aiding the insurgents.

JohnDoeGamer wrote:From the perspective of a soldier in combat, if a civie is seen acting in a manner that assists the enemy, doing something that compromises the soldiers lives, is actively attacking or running with terrorists and just plain working in concert with them, then maybe you can justify why you fired on them.

Absolutely. I think you should be able to kill them with impunity if they are actively holding a rock, holding binoculars, holding grappling hook, on the grappling hook, or driving.
But if they are running around with the bandages out....they are just a civilian....they could be carrying bandages to the brits for all you know. I would make it so you would only be punished if they are shot with the bandage in hand. Before anyone becomes a wise ***....yes people can switch before they are shot. That is a realife problem too. A civie who may appear to help you during the day, maybe giving away your troop numbers and movements at night.

JohnDoeGamer wrote:Here is a solution however, I dont know if it is possible. What if the civie role remained as is BUT and here is the key, there were identical STATIC civie models...not bots...that popped up around the map or were placed there at random during game start? The static models would be identical to the playable model except they would NOT move from where they started. If they could be animated, they could be shown looking around or randomly turning in place and or using binocs.

Im sorry.....it still sounds like a "bot" situation to me. I dont want game code wasted on "bots" or "animated" "static civie models".

JohnDoeGamer wrote:Since these models wouldnt be acting aggresively, they couldnt be arrested for weapon cache info but they could be arrested and removed from play at that location. Meanwhile, real collaborating civies could if needed move to a location and stand still, pretending to be a static hoping that no Brit saw them move. They could remain in place and gather intel all day long.

What about if you knife a civie....they die....but respawn immediately in a "holding area" where they can't leave for 5 minutes.....unless.....they ELECT to give up intel?
If they dont want to give info to the Brits....they can stay in the holding area until release and thus be out of play for 5 minutes. But if they want to continue playing....they can decide to give up a cache location for their freedom. Of course they will be released in proximity of a Brit base at that time. They surely would be wanting to act in a "civie manner" lest they be killed. (civies could not be arrested within a certain radius of the holding area to protect against smacktards spamming arrests and ruining the game for folks who were just freed.)

JohnDoeGamer wrote:Maybe a civie static could only be removed from play by a Brit IF the medic bag was used on it for about 10 seconds thereby symbolizing the rendering of assistance or getting it out of harms way. The trick would be is, is that an enemy civie standing still with a knife that can attack the medic or a static civie? It poses a new challenge.

This would mean only the meds could make an arrest. Anyone should be able to do this. Not knowing what civie was what could also be accomplished as I have posted before by placing civies on both teams and removal of tags.

JohnDoeGamer wrote:The Brits could also have a less lethal riot gun to stun enemy civies AND terorists both to arrest them for information. I mean, why cant you arrest terrorist for cache info as well. The less lethal gun would have two modes of fire, slug (beanbag) and shot (rubber pellets).

This has also been suggested before. The current method of arrest is adequate, but I would instead suggest the addition of the CS launcher that is already present in the vanilla BF2 SF expansion pack. This would render both civie and insurgent blurry-eyed and hacking, unable to spot targets or effectively use weapons....and easier to arrest if in close proximity.

JohnDoeGamer wrote:So with this model, any civie moving and thus assisting the enemy could be shot with little or no penalty to the brit. The enemy civie could have a handgun and or a knife, field dressings, and binocs. With staic civies popping up all over the map or in specific areas, the user civie could try to move from place to place pretending to be a static OR killing a static in order to assume its place on the battlemap to confuse the Brits.

I think it could be possible if these "static civies" were deployed randomly like caches. I just think it would involve more unnecessary code and they would be "bot" like and unrealistic. If I wanted to play against a static and unintelligent model or bot.....I would play vanila BF2 single player.

I think civies should only be able to be killed if they are acting "un-civie"...like spotting, throwing rocks, deploying and using grapples, etc.
And if they are killed acting as a civie...the shooter alone should be punished with negative score and a weapons malfunction that lasts for two minutes unless they can pick up another kit from a dead body or a rally.
This would make people be sure of their fire.
I also liked my new idea of placing knifed civies in a holding area, and forcing them to make the choice of waiting a certain amount of time before release, or giving up info for freedom.

RCMoonPie wrote:What about if you knife a civie....they die....but respawn immediately in a "holding area" where they can't leave for 5 minutes.....unless.....they ELECT to give up intel?
If they dont want to give info to the Brits....they can stay in the holding area until release and thus be out of play for 5 minutes. But if they want to continue playing....they can decide to give up a cache location for their freedom. Of course they will be released in proximity of a Brit base at that time. They surely would be wanting to act in a "civie manner" lest they be killed. (civies could not be arrested within a certain radius of the holding area to protect against smacktards spamming arrests and ruining the game for folks who were just freed.)

Who would want to sit around for 5 minutes when they could just disconnect and join another server in half the time?

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:Who would want to sit around for 5 minutes when they could just disconnect and join another server in half the time?

Thats your choice....do you do the same after waiting to spawn after killing 3 or more so civies?
There arent to many servers running Insurgency...if you want to jump out of a server and risk not getting back in because it is full.....be my guest.
It was just a suggestion that I feel has merit. The time doesnt have to be 5 minutes...but enough to make you not want to get caught. Besides.....you have the choice....wait it out....or divulge intel.

I knew you of all people would be here ready to argue about it.

LtSoucy wrote:Ok thats an idea but. Why make a new thread when 1 on this very same topic has already been made?

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr-suggestions-feedback/35967-more-civi-kill-punish.html

...take a wild guess ... it's obvious he wanted his post to get noticed instead of lost in your 10 page and evergrowing topic

I also love how you thought it was necessary to link the "hottest" thread in the suggestions subforum, as if it was missed by JohnDoeGamer.

Sorry for being obnoxious but I'm in a bad mood. Some f***** stole an a10 I had been waiting to spawn for 15 or 20 minutes. He spawned into the main base about the same time the a10 did, while I was patiently waiting the whole time, and he TKs me as I was running to it. Then when he gets the plane; I ask for an admin but perhaps HBD Gaming didn't have one. Thought maybe I could have some revenge and light AT him but he managed to take off before the second one got reloaded. Pissed at having my plane stolen right before my eyes with no response from the "gods", I called him a "fellow African American" and got myself banned.
[/rant]

RCMoonPie wrote:Thats your choice....do you do the same after waiting to spawn after killing 3 or more so civies?
There arent to many servers running Insurgency...if you want to jump out of a server and risk not getting back in because it is full.....be my guest.
It was just a suggestion that I feel has merit. The time doesnt have to be 5 minutes...but enough to make you not want to get caught. Besides.....you have the choice....wait it out....or divulge intel.

I knew you of all people would be here ready to argue about it.

And everybody knows pubbies are just going to divulge intel.

Tef wrote:And everybody knows pubbies are just going to divulge intel.

Not necessarily.
Right now everyone knows that "pubbies" just flat out shoot civies with impunity.

Do you want to just argue and complain too, or do you have a better and more creative suggestion?

RCMoonPie wrote:Thats your choice....do you do the same after waiting to spawn after killing 3 or more so civies?
There arent to many servers running Insurgency...if you want to jump out of a server and risk not getting back in because it is full.....be my guest.
It was just a suggestion that I feel has merit. The time doesnt have to be 5 minutes...but enough to make you not want to get caught. Besides.....you have the choice....wait it out....or divulge intel.

I knew you of all people would be here ready to argue about it.

There is a big difference between waiting 30 seconds and stopping the spawn raping and slowing down the fast paced natural of VBF2 and doing absolutely nothing for 5, count that, 5 MINUTES.

And that is exactly the same as the suggestion made by people to have a "surrunder button" if their team is losing. Who would surrender rather than playing the game out? Who would wait around and give the team information when they could just disconect and go to another server or just reconnect?

RCMoonPie wrote:Not necessarily.
Right now everyone knows that "pubbies" just flat out shoot civies with impunity.

Do you want to just argue and complain too, or do you have a better and more creative suggestion?

These are sure "creative suggestions", but they are not practical. There is a fine line between realism and fun and being practical.

RCMoonPie wrote:Not necessarily.
Right now everyone knows that "pubbies" just flat out shoot civies with impunity.

Why do you think that is?

It might have something to do with looking the same as the rest of the insurgents.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:There is a big difference between waiting 30 seconds and stopping the spawn raping and slowing down the fast paced natural of VBF2 and doing absolutely nothing for 5, count that, 5 MINUTES.

You need to retype this sentence with a little more attention to structure....I have only a slight idea of what you are trying to say.
If you are complaining about the 5 minute wait of my original post...It was already addressed. It was a suggestion and could be adjusted. As for pace and slowing down any action....it would only slow down pace and action for that small percent of folks who play as a civie. But even they can avoid that by avoiding capture. AND....if captured....they have a choice....retain intel and wait....or divulge intel and gain freedom.
Those that are team-players and play for the win will sit it out. Those that don't care about a team win and dont care about losing caches....will give out intel and sacrifice a cache. Its a very real dynamic that could benefit overall team game-play. Placing the benefit of the whole...above self and personal need. It possibly could even be rewarded.It wouldnt even effect other classes....therefore not effecting pace.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:And that is exactly the same as the suggestion made by people to have a "surrunder button" if their team is losing. Who would surrender rather than playing the game out? Who would wait around and give the team information when they could just disconect and go to another server or just reconnect?

It is not the same as a "surrender button" in any way. I think the game should be played to finish regardless of how one sided it is.
Please don't put those words in my mouth, and I advise you to address those folks in their respective threads.
As for the reason for not disconnecting and rejoining.....I addressed that already in this thread as well. Please READ.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:These are sure "creative suggestions", but they are not practical. There is a fine line between realism and fun and being practical.

It is very practical....and for all the reasons already stated.
It would be practical because it would add another degree of realism in the fact that there is detainment after the arrest instead of a 30 second spawn wait....and it could be fun. If you dont like the detainment....dont play as a civie. My advice....if you are a civie....dont get caught. Plain and simple.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:Why do you think that is?

It might have something to do with looking the same as the rest of the insurgents.

No I disagree. There is a difference. Its a visible difference and a difference in game play. Besides.....this shouldn't be an issue for you as you claim (in other threads) that the majority of Basrah is CQB...meaning that your enemy is close and within site....
What is your excuse for not being able to tell the difference in a civie with no weapon....and the only other insurgent with white shirt...but instead also wears a face cover and carries a weapon?
Very obvious at close range in CQB wouldnt you say?

But even for those with the longer range argument....if you are not sure of your target.....dont fire. Besides....if an person is far enough out of range that you cant tell if he is an insurgent or a civie....he is most likely far enough out of range to be accurate with his own insurgent iron sights.
That fact is debateable.(and I'm sure it will be) But it is close to in-game "reality".
There will be instances where insurgents will have recovered Brit weapons for increased accuracy at longer ranges....but this being the case.....you know for sure it wasnt a civie.

There really is no excuse...for not wanting to identify your target before firing.
The excuse, has been in the past that the civies in game....dont act like civies would IRL.
Please explain to me this....if you cant tell whether or not a player is an insurgent or a civie at a distance.....Why are you firing at them in the first place?

Saying they look the same at a distance is not an excuse.

The way to tell the difference....is that an insurgent is carrying a weapon.....and if the weapon isnt visible due to draw distance....you can still tell due to posturing.
The civie will not be animated to take the rifle off-hand stance.....the civie will not take the squating firing stance....and the civie wont look like he is supporting a rifle in the prone position.
You may argue that you cant tell the difference when the suspect is running.

Heres the answer.....dont fire until you are sure.

Seriously folks....this is a real world answer to a question about a game that is based on real world scenarios....this should be easy.

Those that argue the point.....are upset because they are penalized for not being able to just fire away at anything that moves in the game.....and who dont practice a bit of self-control. Play to win.....dont shoot yourself in the foot(figuratively) by allowing that negative score.
Strive to be accurate in your target acquisition. Take pride in your work and act like a professional soldier or Marine would....at least to the best of your ability in this game.

As I stated in another thread.....it is an issue of discipline......and the lack thereof.

We play PR because we expect more of our gaming experience.
With this, we should expect a higher caliber of player.
Being sure of your target is a very basic request.

LtSoucy wrote:Ok thats an idea but. Why make a new thread when 1 on this very same topic has already been made?

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr-suggestions-feedback/35967-more-civi-kill-punish.html

Like it was said by someone else, I didnt want to add something to 10 page topic, which I had already posted in about more punish time, with an idea on a new approach...not necessarily linked to punish time. Besides, cmon, are you the forum police? I mean, who cares if I break out a suggestion with debate on another idea anyways.This is a new idea and frankly one that I like and fixes the problem.

RCMoonPie wrote:You need to retype this sentence with a little more attention to structure....I have only a slight idea of what you are trying to say.
If you are complaining about the 5 minute wait of my original post...It was already addressed. It was a suggestion and could be adjusted. As for pace and slowing down any action....it would only slow down pace and action for that small percent of folks who play as a civie. But even they can avoid that by avoiding capture. AND....if captured....they have a choice....retain intel and wait....or divulge intel and gain freedom.
Those that are team-players and play for the win will sit it out. Those that don't care about a team win and dont care about losing caches....will give out intel and sacrifice a cache. Its a very real dynamic that could benefit overall team game-play. Placing the benefit of the whole...above self and personal need. It possibly could even be rewarded.It wouldnt even effect other classes....therefore not effecting pace.

What I wrote was easily understandable, its just that your suggestion doesn't make any practical sense. If a class is going to suffer that severe of consequences, than why would they play it in the first place? Why divulage information when you could just disconnect and reconnect or join another server?

It is not the same as a "surrender button" in any way. I think the game should be played to finish regardless of how one sided it is.
Please don't put those words in my mouth, and I advise you to address those folks in their respective threads.
As for the reason for not disconnecting and rejoining.....I addressed that already in this thread as well. Please READ.

You said, "That's your choice" which amounts to a "take it or leave it" attitude which is not one PR should have. How is forcing a player to give intel or sit around and do nothing "practical" for gameplay? Its just another way to turn players off of the civi class.

Not many people are going to kill 3 civis in a row before dying either unless they are in an apc, so it isn't a good example.

I knew you of all people would be here ready to argue about it.


It is very practical....and for all the reasons already stated.
It would be practical because it would add another degree of realism in the fact that there is detainment after the arrest instead of a 30 second spawn wait....and it could be fun. If you dont like the detainment....dont play as a civie. My advice....if you are a civie....dont get caught. Plain and simple.

If it was practical, than why aren't any DEVs here or anyone else supporting this idea or jumping on it besides yourself?

No I disagree. There is a difference. Its a visible difference and a difference in game play. Besides.....this shouldn't be an issue for you as you claim (in other threads) that the majority of Basrah is CQB...meaning that your enemy is close and within site....
What is your excuse for not being able to tell the difference in a civie with no weapon....and the only other insurgent with white shirt...but instead also wears a face cover and carries a weapon?
Very obvious at close range in CQB wouldnt you say?

If it was "so obvious" to tell the difference, than why are there more civi tks now than when they had green shirts?

But even for those with the longer range argument....if you are not sure of your target.....dont fire. Besides....if an person is far enough out of range that you cant tell if he is an insurgent or a civie....he is most likely far enough out of range to be accurate with his own insurgent iron sights.
That fact is debateable.(and I'm sure it will be) But it is close to in-game "reality".
There will be instances where insurgents will have recovered Brit weapons for increased accuracy at longer ranges....but this being the case.....you know for sure it wasnt a civie.[/Quote]

The "civis" ingame are not like their realistic counterpart which is the whole point. This isn't an occupation and they are playing like it is one, so the civis ingame are not like real life civilians, they are somewhere inbetween or in a class of their own.

There really is no excuse...for not wanting to identify your target before firing.
The excuse, has been in the past that the civies in game....dont act like civies would IRL.
Please explain to me this....if you cant tell whether or not a player is an insurgent or a civie at a distance.....Why are you firing at them in the first place?

That is easier said than done. I have no problem identifying the difference because I am used to this game, but to the average player who is not a hardcore player with 5 guys running around in white in a village or urban area, it is hard to tell who is who intime.

Saying they look the same at a distance is not an excuse.

It is not an excuse, it is the truth.

There have been countless threads on the topic and a lot of people agree that weapons do not render at distances all the time and civis and insurgents look very similar at those ranges, especially when laying down. You seem to be denying what everyone has acknowledged.

The way to tell the difference....is that an insurgent is carrying a weapon.....and if the weapon isnt visible due to draw distance....you can still tell due to posturing.

No, they can look very similar when they are at long ranges and as I said, 5-10 guys in white running around look very similar when you get a slight glance of them.


The civie will not be animated to take the rifle off-hand stance.....the civie will not take the squating firing stance....and the civie wont look like he is supporting a rifle in the prone position.
You may argue that you cant tell the difference when the suspect is running.

Heres the answer.....dont fire until you are sure.

Seriously folks....this is a real world answer to a question about a game that is based on real world scenarios....this should be easy.


As I stated in another thread.....it is an issue of discipline......and the lack thereof.

You keep talking about discipline, but this is not a real army or military and the consequences or situation is not even the same as it is ingame.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:What I wrote was easily understandable, its just that your suggestion doesn't make any practical sense. If a class is going to suffer that severe of consequences, than why would they play it in the first place? Why divulage information when you could just disconnect and reconnect or join another server?

No....it just made sense to you. I dont know if english is your first language or not. No big deal. It was just not understandable. I think others would agree.
As for practicality, tell me why you think it is inpractical instead of just saying it is over and over like a spoiled juvenile.
You dont listen to yourself.....why is practical to "disconnect and reconnect or join another server"? If something like that were imposed, why would you cheesedick around it? Why not reap what you sew?
If you cant do it in a game....you probably dont have that integrity in real life either I suppose. Anyway...like I have stated already...in my suggestion....if you dont want to do the time....dont get captured.
I know this is just a game....but it is based on situational reality. Wouldnt getting caught by an opposing force carry with it a "severe consequence"? Would it not be possible to have to face the choice of divulging intel in a real world situation such as this?
Why dont you take the time to answer these questions instead of being argumentative?

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:You said, "That's your choice" which amounts to a "take it or leave it" attitude which is not one PR should have. How is forcing a player to give intel or sit around and do nothing "practical" for gameplay? Its just another way to turn players off of the civi class.

Not many people are going to kill 3 civis in a row before dying either unless they are in an apc, so it isn't a good example.

For someone who whines about being taken out of context....you certainly have no qualms about doing it yourself. My "thats your choice" statement in no way means "take it or leave it".

It was in reference to you saying...
"Who would want to sit around for 5 minutes when they could just disconnect and join another server in half the time?"
To which I responded...
"Thats your choice....do you do the same after waiting to spawn after killing 3 or more so civies?"
Meaning that people just dont just dive out of a server for being penalized for their bad play. I have had a 3 minute wait time and it took forever to request a kit....but I waited it out and played my game that I had earned. Like I said.....insurgency server are few and far between. If you want to take a chance, and be a cheesedick, and bail out of a server because you earned yourself some penalties.....be my guest.
THAT is the definition of poor gaming and poor sportsmanship.
Since you know so much about the "attitude that PR should have"...why dont you elaborate?
Once again.....also elaborate on how it would be impractical, to first have civies to up their game so as to take better care not to get captured....and second how it is impractical to place before them a choice based on a real situation....Give up intel and go free....or retain info and wait out your sentence.
Dont just be the argumentative juvenile again...EXPLAIN why it is impractical.
Also....I said nothing about shooting 3 civies in a row. Nor did I mention any APC's. You could kill whatever number of people and a couple of them in there could accidently be civies....you are still forced to wait a long time as punishment....is it okay to bail out of the server and reconnect....well I guess it is if you play the game like a cheesedick.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:If it was practical, than why aren't any DEVs here or anyone else supporting this idea or jumping on it besides yourself?

I dont know. Silence doesnt mean there is agreement or disagreement.
Thats would be like me coducting a poll over the phone, and asking people whether or not we should have a spanish president in the US.
What if 33% says yes....and 33% says no....but the remaining 33% says "NO HABLA"....does this mean I can derive whatever I want from the silent ones?
This thread started late in the evening....its a weekend....maybe there arent enough people even viewing the thread....I dont know.
But I havnt exactly seen them beating down the door to support your arguments either.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:If it was "so obvious" to tell the difference, than why are there more civi tks now than when they had green shirts?

"Civie TK's"...as in teamkills? I was unaware this was an issue.
But if you just meant civie kills....there are probably more now.....since the rules/punishment regarding civie kills dont have any teeth any more for the offending shooters thats why. I guarantee that if folks started getting points taken away, coupled with the weapons malfuction suggestion, along with the current increased spawn time, and kit request wait time....the numbers would lower. But let me guess....you have an argument for that too I suppose.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:But even for those with the longer range argument....if you are not sure of your target.....dont fire. Besides....if an person is far enough out of range that you cant tell if he is an insurgent or a civie....he is most likely far enough out of range to be accurate with his own insurgent iron sights.
That fact is debateable.(and I'm sure it will be) But it is close to in-game "reality".
There will be instances where insurgents will have recovered Brit weapons for increased accuracy at longer ranges....but this being the case.....you know for sure it wasnt a civie.

The "civis" ingame are not like their realistic counterpart which is the whole point. This isn't an occupation and they are playing like it is one, so the civis ingame are not like real life civilians, they are somewhere inbetween or in a class of their own. [/Quote]
Okay....if this is your "whole point"....why the f do you argue about every other little thing?
You just argue about how they dont act the same....and yet you offer no constructive suggestions to remedy anything.
You just critisize those who do.
How much time have you spent with ciliians of an occupied country to be able to make that assessment?
Lets hear your great suggestion.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:That is easier said than done. I have no problem identifying the difference because I am used to this game, but to the average player who is not a hardcore player with 5 guys running around in white in a village or urban area, it is hard to tell who is who intime.

No....I disagree....and for this reason. Like I said before...
The way to tell the difference....is that an insurgent is carrying a weapon.....and if the weapon isnt visible due to draw distance....you can still tell due to posturing.

The civie will not be animated to take the rifle off-hand stance.....the civie will not take the squating firing stance....and the civie wont look like he is supporting a rifle in the prone position.
***edit....they wont even appear this way since they were never animated to hold a weapon.

You may argue that you cant tell the difference when the suspect is running.

Heres the answer.....dont fire until you are sure.

Seriously folks....this is a real world answer to a question about a game that is based on real world scenarios....this should be easy.

As I stated in another thread.....it is an issue of discipline......and the lack thereof.

It doesnt matter if you are a "hardcore" player or if it is your first day in PR...you can tell by the posture of the in-game animation...whether or not someone is holding a weapon by their stance even if you dont see the drawn weapon.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:It is not an excuse, it is the truth.

I agree....they look similar....so why fire if you are unsure?
You fail to address this question in either thread.
Why are you, or anyone for that matter, above having to make sure your target is actually an acceptable insurgent target.
Like I asked earlier...why would you not want to be sure of your target?
Why take the chance of shooting the civie? Why not hold your fire until you ARE sure?
Answer the questions please.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:There have been countless threads on the topic and a lot of people agree that weapons do not render at distances all the time and civis and insurgents look very similar at those ranges, especially when laying down. You seem to be denying what everyone has acknowledged.

No....IT IS SO BLATANTLY OBVIOUS YOU ARE NOT READING MY POSTS.
I have acknowleged this multiple times!
You can tell who is who....even at distance....without seeing a weapon most of the time. Ill say it again....observe your target....does he take the position of holding a rifle or other shoulder fired weapon? If so....he is an insurgent. Civies will never take this posture as they dont have a weapons kit. A civie will never appear to have this posture.
Now.....having explained all this AGAIN.....please tell me why you feel you HAVE to fire your weapon at adistance at a target you are unsure of?
Please explain.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:You keep talking about discipline, but this is not a real army or military and the consequences or situation is not even the same as it is ingame.

I agree.
And I am glad.
I love how you and a few others love playing these "reality" mods....and yet you piss and moan over "wait times" for being captured, or penalties for shooting civies.
Because the consequenses IRL for these infractions can be jail-time, an international incident, or even death.
Who would you whine to about fairness then?
I understand it is just a game....but if you dont have discipline enough to be patient until you can verify your targets identity in a game....what integrity DO you have when the stakes ARE higher.
What sort of level do you measure yourself by?
Yeah....its just a game.....but it speaks volumes about some of you.

When I respond to you.....I adress your questions and quotes to the fullest. I dont just make arguments "because".
Lets see if you can do the same.

RCMoonPie wrote:No....it just made sense to you. I dont know if english is your first language or not. No big deal. It was just not understandable. I think others would agree.
As for practicality, tell me why you think it is inpractical instead of just saying it is over and over like a spoiled juvenile.
You dont listen to yourself.....why is practical to "disconnect and reconnect or join another server"? If something like that were imposed, why would you cheesedick around it? Why not reap what you sew?
If you cant do it in a game....you probably dont have that integrity in real life either I suppose. Anyway...like I have stated already...in my suggestion....if you dont want to do the time....dont get captured.
I know this is just a game....but it is based on situational reality. Wouldnt getting caught by an opposing force carry with it a "severe consequence"? Would it not be possible to have to face the choice of divulging intel in a real world situation such as this?
Why dont you take the time to answer these questions instead of being argumentative?

The whole problem with your argument though, is after the first time people get captured, they would not want that to happen again.

Do you even know one of the main reasons why people play the civilian class? Because there are no consequences for it while they can impose a heavy consequence on the enemy. They can be "dicks" without getting in trouble for it and helping their team out by throwing themselves onto enemy grenades, in front of enemy fire, or in front of enemy vehicles. The reason why people are being less and less motivated to pick the civilian class is because it is so easy to be killed as a civilian since they look so much alike. Now that the civis are facing that as a consequence, you see less and less people playing as them.

Not to mention that having a "jail" would be hardcoded as it is and would be a waste of time for the DEVS.

For someone who whines about being taken out of context....you certainly have no qualms about doing it yourself. My "thats your choice" statement in no way means "take it or leave it".

It was in reference to you saying...
"Who would want to sit around for 5 minutes when they could just disconnect and join another server in half the time?"
To which I responded...
"Thats your choice....do you do the same after waiting to spawn after killing 3 or more so civies?"
Meaning that people just dont just dive out of a server for being penalized for their bad play. I have had a 3 minute wait time and it took forever to request a kit....but I waited it out and played my game that I had earned. Like I said.....insurgency server are few and far between. If you want to take a chance, and be a cheesedick, and bail out of a server because you earned yourself some penalties.....be my guest.
THAT is the definition of poor gaming and poor sportsmanship.
Since you know so much about the "attitude that PR should have"...why dont you elaborate?
Once again.....also elaborate on how it would be impractical, to first have civies to up their game so as to take better care not to get captured....and second how it is impractical to place before them a choice based on a real situation....Give up intel and go free....or retain info and wait out your sentence.
Dont just be the argumentative juvenile again...EXPLAIN why it is impractical.
Also....I said nothing about shooting 3 civies in a row. Nor did I mention any APC's. You could kill whatever number of people and a couple of them in there could accidently be civies....you are still forced to wait a long time as punishment....is it okay to bail out of the server and reconnect....well I guess it is if you play the game like a cheesedick.

I already explained why it is not practical but you keep failing to read or acknowledge it.

With your "jail or give information suggestion", you are saying that they would be inprisoned for 5 minutes or else they could just give up the information in return for being released. So why would they want to give up information when they could just disconnect from the server and not face the penalty or give up the information? And unless you are in a tank or apc or vehicles, you are not likely to kill 3 civis ina row for a 5 minute respawn time. The longest respawn time I have witnessed is maybe 1:30-2:00 minutes max, so that isn't a good argument.

I dont know. Silence doesnt mean there is agreement or disagreement.
Thats would be like me coducting a poll over the phone, and asking people whether or not we should have a spanish president in the US.
What if 33% says yes....and 33% says no....but the remaining 33% says "NO HABLA"....does this mean I can derive whatever I want from the silent ones?
This thread started late in the evening....its a weekend....maybe there arent enough people even viewing the thread....I dont know.
But I havnt exactly seen them beating down the door to support your arguments either.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr ... nts-2.html

"Civie TK's"...as in teamkills? I was unaware this was an issue.
But if you just meant civie kills....there are probably more now.....since the rules/punishment regarding civie kills dont have any teeth any more for the offending shooters thats why. I guarantee that if folks started getting points taken away, coupled with the weapons malfuction suggestion, along with the current increased spawn time, and kit request wait time....the numbers would lower. But let me guess....you have an argument for that too I suppose.

I don't know what the weapon malfuction suggestion you are talking about is, but that is hardcoded anyway and if it was even possible in the first place, it would of been added to the game long time ago. It doesn't matter who you are either, if you kill a civi, you will have a long respawn time, even if you are an insurgent. We don't need any longer respawn times.

The "civis" ingame are not like their realistic counterpart which is the whole point. This isn't an occupation and they are playing like it is one, so the civis ingame are not like real life civilians, they are somewhere inbetween or in a class of their own.
Okay....if this is your "whole point"....why the f do you argue about every other little thing?
You just argue about how they dont act the same....and yet you offer no constructive suggestions to remedy anything.
You just critisize those who do.
How much time have you spent with ciliians of an occupied country to be able to make that assessment?
Lets hear your great suggestion.

You have already heard my suggestions. The civi class needs to be returned to its original color or at least a color that is noticably different than the insurgent class. Something also needs to be done about making the civi class more realistic while at the sametime, not just upping times for everything as a solution.

My main argument is though that these suggestions by the community are just getting more and more complicated and they usually have nothing constructive to add to the game besides more and more complicated rules for the sake of "realism." It's a good thing most are hardcoded though. Just because something is realistic, doesn't mean it would work right or be fun ingame, and this game is still about fun after all.

No....I disagree....and for this reason. Like I said before...
The way to tell the difference....is that an insurgent is carrying a weapon.....and if the weapon isnt visible due to draw distance....you can still tell due to posturing.

The civie will not be animated to take the rifle off-hand stance.....the civie will not take the squating firing stance....and the civie wont look like he is supporting a rifle in the prone position.
***edit....they wont even appear this way since they were never animated to hold a weapon.

You may argue that you cant tell the difference when the suspect is running.

Heres the answer.....dont fire until you are sure.

Seriously folks....this is a real world answer to a question about a game that is based on real world scenarios....this should be easy.

As I stated in another thread.....it is an issue of discipline......and the lack thereof.

It doesnt matter if you are a "hardcore" player or if it is your first day in PR...you can tell by the posture of the in-game animation...whether or not someone is holding a weapon by their stance even if you dont see the drawn weapon.

I am not the only one having the problem of telling the difference at extreme long ranges along with others. Posturing means nothing either if they are laying down. I have seen an insurgent look like a civi laying down on the ground. And please, I have acknowledged why it is a problem, but you have yet to address the problem of civis in CQB. Read the thread.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr ... gents.html

I agree....they look similar....so why fire if you are unsure?
You fail to address this question in either thread.
Why are you, or anyone for that matter, above having to make sure your target is actually an acceptable insurgent target.
Like I asked earlier...why would you not want to be sure of your target?
Why take the chance of shooting the civie? Why not hold your fire until you ARE sure?
Answer the questions please.


No....IT IS SO BLATANTLY OBVIOUS YOU ARE NOT READING MY POSTS.
I have acknowleged this multiple times!
You can tell who is who....even at distance....without seeing a weapon most of the time. Ill say it again....observe your target....does he take the position of holding a rifle or other shoulder fired weapon? If so....he is an insurgent. Civies will never take this posture as they dont have a weapons kit. A civie will never appear to have this posture.
Now.....having explained all this AGAIN.....please tell me why you feel you HAVE to fire your weapon at adistance at a target you are unsure of?
Please explain.

I never said I would FIRE my weapon at a distance unless I identified. If you actually read what I said, I agree that most people should identify their targets at long range, but the problem comes in with whether or not their weapon would actually render or not. I have had "WTF" moments along with others were we swore it was a civi at long range, but it was really an insurgent. I did not fire, but you get the point.

The real victims of the civi change though are apcs and tanks who in real life, would shell an area they are about to attack before infantry would move in. Before, if they saw guys in green walking round a village from long range, they would be more careful and I have seen these ingame, but now, it is just open season on them. IF you want to talk about realistic, it is very realistic for invading or attacking forces to shell or artillery an area heavily before moving in. Not only does having every insurgent and civi wearing white prevent this, it also isn't realistic because as we saw with Operation Phantom Fury in Fallujah, civilians were told to get out before the attack, and if they didn't, their lives were in their own hands. There are a bunch of complaints here which you are failing to acknowledge.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr ... gents.html

I agree.
And I am glad.
I love how you and a few others love playing these "reality" mods....and yet you piss and moan over "wait times" for being captured, or penalties for shooting civies.
Because the consequenses IRL for these infractions can be jail-time, an international incident, or even death.
Who would you whine to about fairness then?
I understand it is just a game....but if you dont have discipline enough to be patient until you can verify your targets identity in a game....what integrity DO you have when the stakes ARE higher.
What sort of level do you measure yourself by?
Yeah....its just a game.....but it speaks volumes about some of you.

I have never "pissed and moaned" over wait times, just the wait times and suggestions you are making. I was originally one of the guys for longer cap times on flags and requiring there to be at least two people to cap, so I am definately for realistic aspects and have no problem with "waiting" at all or walking long distances. The problem I have, is with suggestions that do nothing beneficial to gameplay and turn the player off of the class. There are not many people like myself who like walking instead of taking vehicles plain and simple, and there wouldn't be a lot of people who would like to sit around in a cell for 2-5 minutes doing nothing. Several classes were pretty much nerfed already as a result of realistic changes such as the medic class and civi class. I believe a lot of the changes to and affecting these classes were necessary, but doing anything further that makes them more complicated would just turn more people off.

When I respond to you.....I adress your questions and quotes to the fullest. I dont just make arguments "because".
Lets see if you can do the same.

Dude, I am addressing your arguments and discredting them because your suggestions are just too complicated and would add nothing valuable to the game plain and simple. The game doesn't need any more complicated ideas to seperate the hardcore base from the players who just want to pick up and play.

Seriously guys, if you just want to piss all over each other's posts, do it via PM. No one wants to read your ****.


As far as the OP goes, it wouldn't change much. Assuming civi statics could be put in, it would still mean that any person shaped object that is moving in Al Basrah gets shot. No change from the way it currently is.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:The whole problem with your argument though, is after the first time people get captured, they would not want that to happen again.

Exactly....hence.....make a better effort (if playing as a civie) to not get captured a 2nd time. Stay away from the Brits = Avoiding capture.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:Do you even know one of the main reasons why people play the civilian class? Because there are no consequences for it while they can impose a heavy consequence on the enemy. They can be "dicks" without getting in trouble for it and helping their team out by throwing themselves onto enemy grenades, in front of enemy fire, or in front of enemy vehicles.

No....that is how a small persentage of people MAY play who dont understand the class.
I think you are mistaken. Very few people play the class to be "dicks" as you put it. Throwing yourself on a grenade doesnt help in the slightest since you cant "block" a grenade in PR. People are killed by a blast radius. Standing in front of enemy fire only gets you killed....you cant "block" bullets either. Why would anyone throw themself in front of a vehicle....once again it just succeeds in making you as a civie....dead. Running over civies is one of the ways to kill a civie in PR with impunity. This is a moot point.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:The reason why people are being less and less motivated to pick the civilian class is because it is so easy to be killed as a civilian since they look so much alike. Now that the civis are facing that as a consequence, you see less and less people playing as them.

You are both right AND wrong on this argument.
The reason people dont play as civies anymore is because the punishment for killing one at the moment, doesn't hurt the killer as much....meaning if you play as a civie.....you will spend most of your time DEAD. And since the punishment doesnt have any teeth.....people are less likely to hold fire to make sure of their target. They would rather say "phuck it" and just pull the trigger...because the only thing they currently risk is a longer spawn time and having to wait a little longer to select a kit from the QM when and if they get killed.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: Not to mention that having a "jail" would be hardcoded as it is and would be a waste of time for the DEVS.

I havnt seen where any DEV has weighed in on this yet to even know but....
and I could be wrong but it would be a matter of designation...where a class would spawn after death, if killed by the op-for.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: I already explained why it is not practical but you keep failing to read or acknowledge it.

With your "jail or give information suggestion", you are saying that they would be inprisoned for 5 minutes or else they could just give up the information in return for being released.

I already addressed this too....now for the third time....I said already that 5 minutes was just a suggestion....it could be tweaked and shortened....it just needs to be long enough to reinforce the gravity of letting the enemy capture you.
Maybe it isnt a rendered in game "jail" or "holding area" so much as you are waiting to respawn. While you are waiting to decide on your respawn you have the choice to wait your time....or you have the choice to spawn immediately which "sets you free" and gives up the intel. Intel isnt always a map or something on paper....it can be info hidden in someones mind. It is a very realistic and practical method to integrate into the game. I'll explain why in closing.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: So why would they want to give up information when they could just disconnect from the server and not face the penalty or give up the information?

Like I said already....the wait time could be tweaked. Set it at 3 or 4 minutes....unless you have a smoking fast connection or machine it may take you longer to reload. Besides....what if the server is full? What if you rejoin and are placed on the other team? It doesnt benefit you as a player in anyway to just dump out and rejoin. You are missing the point....any way you put it...if you wait your penalty time....if you surrender intell....if you cheese-**** out of the server....you are still doing all of those things as a result of your inability to avoid capture.
Conclusion.....dont get caught

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:And unless you are in a tank or apc or vehicles, you are not likely to kill 3 civis ina row for a 5 minute respawn time. The longest respawn time I have witnessed is maybe 1:30-2:00 minutes max, so that isn't a good argument.

I agree with what you are saying here and I understand. It happened to me just today while gunning for my driver in a Scimitar. LOL it easier to do.
But I also spent sometime as a civie....I was killed time and time again by the same Brit marksman in the same position. I deliberately did this to prove this point. Its not always the APC or tank.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr ... nts-2.html

I guess this post was meant to be a blanket staement about civies looking like insurgents. I dont dispute this fact. I do however take issue with why does it matter? Here is a quote from a PR-CON explaining why!!! [quote=""'[R-CON"]Cheeseman;590956']Ok in .6 you people were belligerent as to why the civilians looked so stupid and why they didn't resemble the guys on the insurgent side. Now that they look similar to insurgents you people are once again complaining. In reality you can't always distinguish between an armed individual and an innocent bystander in the heat of battle. That's why it's your responsibility to check before you pull the trigger. Don't just aim and shot, this isn't Counter Strike or Call of Duty 4, you're given weapons, but if you’ve chosen PR then you have also chosen teamwork and reality as your platform so it's your responsibility to have a shy trigger for the sake of your team and the person on the other end of the gun. [/quote]
This post explains why they look the way they do....and it also supports what I have said all along from the get-go.....be sure of your target!



[quote="00SoldierofFortune00""]I don't know what the weapon malfuction suggestion you are talking about is, but that is hardcoded anyway and if it was even possible in the first place, it would of been added to the game long time ago. It doesn't matter who you are either, if you kill a civi, you will have a long respawn time, even if you are an insurgent. We don't need any longer respawn times. [/quote]
My suggestion was this....if you kill a civie.....regardless of accidental or purposeful....you suffer a dose of "murphy's law of combat" or "bad kharma"....and fall victim to a weapons malfunction or jam.
For example....I kill a civie....my weapon all of sudden doesnt work. When I pull the trigger, all I hear is an audible click. The only way to fix this on the battlefield is by "immediate action" i.e. clearing the weapon. This can easily be simulated by making the kit useless for 1.5 to 2 minutes. Making the civie killer vulnerable now to the enemy, and useless to his team. The only way to overcome this jam is to wait out the malfunction to simulate breaking open the barrel and performing "immediate action" or to pick up a kit from another fallen player.
This penalty is immediate....its practical....it doesnt punish his team's score (other than the fact that he isnt contributing to it.)and it forces the player to check his fire.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:You have already heard my suggestions. The civi class needs to be returned to its original color or at least a color that is noticably different than the insurgent class. Something also needs to be done about making the civi class more realistic while at the sametime, not just upping times for everything as a solution.

The color change wont solve anything....people will still shoot civies if they were wearing bright pink....the current punishment for doing so has no teeth and doesnt inconvenience the trigger-spammer enough to make him realistically check his fire.
The ultimate ideal solution would be "random" colors for the insurgents.
IRL....civies would all be wearing different clothes.
The current situation only requires you to be weary of a white shirt....most folks cant even do that right.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: My main argument is though that these suggestions by the community are just getting more and more complicated and they usually have nothing constructive to add to the game besides more and more complicated rules for the sake of "realism." It's a good thing most are hardcoded though. Just because something is realistic, doesn't mean it would work right or be fun ingame, and this game is still about fun after all.

I agree with you on this as well.....just because something exists in reality does not mean it has to appear in game.
But this IS PR. It is a mod based on reality.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: I am not the only one having the problem of telling the difference at extreme long ranges along with others. Posturing means nothing either if they are laying down. I have seen an insurgent look like a civi laying down on the ground. And please, I have acknowledged why it is a problem, but you have yet to address the problem of civis in CQB. Read the thread.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr ... gents.html

I did read this thread....once again....I will refer you to the quote I made earlier....IT IS A QUOTE FROM THE VERY THREAD YOU REFERENCED....
[quote=""'[R-CON"]Cheeseman;590956']Ok in .6 you people were belligerent as to why the civilians looked so stupid and why they didn't resemble the guys on the insurgent side. Now that they look similar to insurgents you people are once again complaining. In reality you can't always distinguish between an armed individual and an innocent bystander in the heat of battle. That's why it's your responsibility to check before you pull the trigger. Don't just aim and shot, this isn't Counter Strike or Call of Duty 4, you're given weapons, but if you’ve chosen PR then you have also chosen teamwork and reality as your platform so it's your responsibility to have a shy trigger for the sake of your team and the person on the other end of the gun. [/quote]
"In reality you can't always distinguish between an armed individual and an innocent bystander in the heat of battle. Thats why it is your responsibility to check before you pull the trigger"."

....And that was from an R-CON!



[quote="00SoldierofFortune00""]I never said I would FIRE my weapon at a distance unless I identified. If you actually read what I said, I agree that most people should identify their targets at long range, but the problem comes in with whether or not their weapon would actually render or not. I have had "WTF" moments along with others were we swore it was a civi at long range, but it was really an insurgent. I did not fire, but you get the point. [/quote]
Yes I do.....and as the game is now.....after your mistake was made.....you were most likely like....
"Oh well.....I shot a civie".

When it should be....
"Ah phuck......I shot a damn civie!

Im sorry....that is how it should be....but it isnt.....and thats why people just shoot whatever....there are no teeth to enforce that you DO NOT pull the trigger to kill another human being (player) unless you are sure of your target.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:The real victims of the civi change though are apcs and tanks who in real life, would shell an area they are about to attack before infantry would move in. Before, if they saw guys in green walking round a village from long range, they would be more careful and I have seen these ingame, but now, it is just open season on them. IF you want to talk about realistic, it is very realistic for invading or attacking forces to shell or artillery an area heavily before moving in. Not only does having every insurgent and civi wearing white prevent this, it also isn't realistic because as we saw with Operation Phantom Fury in Fallujah, civilians were told to get out before the attack, and if they didn't, their lives were in their own hands. There are a bunch of complaints here which you are failing to acknowledge.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr ... gents.html

I do acknowlege them....but in this same tired thread...there are just as many in support of what I am saying I have already quoted the R-CON from that thread....here are two more....

ReaperMAC wrote:Same thing happens in real life too. Sometimes soldiers can't pick out hostiles because they blend in to the civilian population. I think it's fine, way better than the bright green shirts.

Rachio wrote:just like clypp said can't tell till they shoot at you. and there aint enough penalty for killing a civi my team shoots civis without any regrets and I dont see any loss for killing em which sucks

This thread is just as much in support of what I am saying as it is yours!
Bottom line.....you should have to check your fire and you should be held responsible for not doing so.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: I have never "pissed and moaned" over wait times, just the wait times and suggestions you are making.

This should be a moot point since this is almost the fifth time....5 minutes was only a suggestion.....the time could be tweaked.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: I was originally one of the guys for longer cap times on flags and requiring there to be at least two people to cap, so I am definately for realistic aspects and have no problem with "waiting" at all or walking long distances. The problem I have, is with suggestions that do nothing beneficial to gameplay and turn the player off of the class. There are not many people like myself who like walking instead of taking vehicles plain and simple, and there wouldn't be a lot of people who would like to sit around in a cell for 2-5 minutes doing nothing.

This IS a realistic aspect, and it would actually increase the amount of people playing the civie class as they would become more important to keep them alive to gain intel.....than to just shoot them.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:Several classes were pretty much nerfed already as a result of realistic changes such as the medic class and civi class. I believe a lot of the changes to and affecting these classes were necessary, but doing anything further that makes them more complicated would just turn more people off.

I disagree.....I think the changes made for .07 (sorry devs) made the civie less important to overall game-play....insugency maps last forever when more civies are shot by folks not checking their fire....than are being captured.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: Dude, I am addressing your arguments and discredting them because your suggestions are just too complicated and would add nothing valuable to the game plain and simple. The game doesn't need any more complicated ideas to seperate the hardcore base from the players who just want to pick up and play.

You are addressing only SOME of my arguments....and you arent "discrediting" my arguments by merely disagreeing with them.
And on top of all of that....you referenced a thread three times that had just as many posts supporting my views, as yours!
My ideas arent complicated.....but I guess they could seem that way to the simple minded.

Please tell me someone else is reading this book and understands where I am coming from.

Is it just me?

Ghost1800 wrote:This is like watching a slugging match between two brick walls...

You are right....I express my sympathy and apologies to those who have "suffered" thru this.
Your patiece was tested....and it is appreciated.

Look....I am not concedeing...because I do believe in my ideas.
I just think they are well-stated for all to see at this point and I have no disire to allow this to go on.

I'll let "what's his face" continue to rant and whine about it if he wants.

RCMoonPie wrote:You are right....I express my sympathy and apologies to those who have "suffered" thru this.
Your patiece was tested....and it is appreciated.

Look....I am not concedeing...because I do believe in my ideas.
I just think they are well-stated for all to see at this point and I have no disire to allow this to go on.

I'll let "what's his face" continue to rant and whine about it if he wants.

Actually, I agree, we need to agree to disagree, but saying "what's his face" is pretty immature and is not called for.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:Actually, I agree, we need to agree to disagree, but saying "what's his face" is pretty immature and is not called for.

Not sure how you took this as an insult...."what's his face" is common slang used when you cant remember someones name.

I typed the post in a hurry while leaving work yesterday evening....couldnt remember your name at the time....and didnt take the time to back-track.

You shouldnt be so sensitive.