the hmg is kinda fine. i prefer this one to the 2.24 which was practically a laser that killed everything
There's a lot in empires that is not getting attention and/or is ill thought out. This is one of those instances. Hell, I'm all for a mortar deploy...but this was thrown out ages ago.
The hmg user should be the most likely to win a gunfight when already proning and overwatching an area FROM medium to long range. Of course with the so much mentioned "deploy" penalty. At the recent version the heavy machine gun has too low damage 30 comparing to the assault rifle which has 35. How to come that the hmg (usually) fires the similar round to ar, but with greater power (and accuracy when deployed correctly. But I mean ACCURATE enough for full automatic or rapid burst fire to LONG range, which is the real power of it.) does LESS damage than the ar?
Well, you derailed it, not my fault. We aren't mass producing anything for this war, there's no rationing. In WWII, even if you had money...what could you buy? It was all rationed, and most luxury items couldn't be found. Mass amounts of jobs were created. Unemployement..what unemployment? Think of everything being made - thousands of planes, ships, guns, ammunition, food being sent overseas...blanets, uniforms...etc. In the current conflict...we're using stuff we already have, while new military programs are being cut (no more F-22s for example.) Plainly, that was a world war. This is a regional conflict of small scale.
clearly you (or well actually halliburton, bechtel corp and thelike) do not profit from invading irak, you do it all for humanitarian purpose, right ... ... believe whatever your republican propaganda tells you. its so funny you tell people how small minded they are - but well i guess its easiest for people to critices those flaws they are cursed with themselfs the most ... but i almost dare to bet that in the next you just will tell me how absolute complete nonsens i wrote and thats totaly not understandable by any means. well ofc i cannot bet anymore since i just wrote that, but im damn sure i would have won ... anyway, im not going to argue this any further either, since im just telling absolute complete nonsense that clearly has no basis at all. i pull that all out of my thumb (omg i soo hope thats the right phrase)
Wait, I answer Alucard's question on why the conflict in the middle east won't revive the US or even global economy in the way WWII did...and you reply with this? This has nothing to do with Alucard's question or my post. Go away troll.
nothing can save capitalism, its doomed by design. but this war slows its decay, so infact your economy profits - a lot actually. the only ones that dont profit are the people, but capitalism isnt designed for them anyway ... its only good for a small rich caste.
....Uhh....I do work. I get paid. I got my name put on a patent, my work paid me for that. I went to school and worked hard, got a good job. I my good job gives me health care that costs me nothing, so I keep working hard to keep it....strikes me as capitalism working quite well for me. And I'm far from rich. Also, Capitalism and the ideals it is based on date to before the 16th century. I think it's worked out pretty well. Again, you're clueless. This war has nothing to do with it, if anything this war is hurting the economy. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/01/weekinreview/01glanz.html?_r=1 Old, but still true. Edit: Dear admin: spawn this into it's own thread please. Or just delete the posts not on topic. My apologies for contributing; the HMG question is a valid one and doesn't need this stuff in here. Another edit: I fail. I fell for the troll and fed it some. Flashe, your post STILL has nothing to do with my answer to Alucard.
I hope you're not serious... A rifle...has a rifled barrel; it spins the bullet, and that angular velocity makes it more accurate - ever spin a bicycle wheel and try to turn it? Making the barrel ifinitly long won't help any, but the correct length will keep the velocity of the bullet up, which can be done as a longer barrel allows the gas to expand and push the bullet longer. Long story stort, the innacuracy on a MG comes from the recoil for the most part - not from the gun itself.
Recoil is part of the gun itself. Also shoot with one bullet at a distance of 800 meters. Then do same with a rifle that has shorter barrel then your MG of choice. You'll see the difference.
Well yes ... a sufficiently long barrel would ensure near perfect accuracy. Imagine a barrel acctually touching the target. Hard to miss with that one. :D
the new kalashnikov machinegun has recoil suppressors and is "advertised" to be near perfect accurate because of it they say the only real problem is bullet drop but that does not matter for 99% of the ranges its being used
