Ah, the level of depravity we sink to.
I created a form a while back that was for posting weapons and reviewing them and all that jazz. It was only for members who hae permission to post articles, but now its up for all. Its simply on the main page. It doesn't work right yet. You can post stuff to it, but it may get deleted. Soon we'll be able to actually view and edit them.
The idea is to gather insight from all members with a standardized form. There are scores that will be averaged together and anyone can edit the documentation of them, assuming you are a member of the site.
If you have any questions or criticisms, please let me know. If you think the form is improperly set up, tell me, but don't expect fast change as I am working on making it not whine when someone does something unexpected.
All that needs to be said is this: FIRE = BAD |
What became of this? I would like more info please.
"They drew first blood not me..." (Stallone in Rambo: First Blood)
It ... didn't work out well and I took it down.
I'm sure I have some of the code sitting around somewhere, but we should take another look at the criteria.
I think I used the following criteria:
Damage
Weight
Ammo Availability
Durability
Splash Damage
Range
Skill Needed
....
That's not exactly what I had ... but it was similar. I think these are important criteria, but does anyone think otherwise or are there any criteria to add to the list?
All that needs to be said is this: FIRE = BAD
Ease of carry
Ease of Upkeep
"They drew first blood not me..." (Stallone in Rambo: First Blood)
I think Ease of Upkeep works just as well with Durability, unless you disagree.
All that needs to be said is this: FIRE = BAD
I still think it would be extremely hard to do. Especially with firearms. There are so many factors it makes my head hurt. I'm really close to trying to become an evil dictator so I can get my hands on a couple million "testing supplies" so I can figure out "Stopping power" and all that jive on my own. Too much of one guy saying the other guy is wrong about something and third (and so forth) guy saying they're both wrong on something.
I guess it is just a matter of opinion. However, by definition:
du·ra·ble
du·ra·ble [drəb'l]
adj
able to last: lasting for a long time, especially without sustaining damage or wear
durable materials
a durable peace
[14th century. Via French < Latin durabilis < durare "last, harden"]
-du·ra·bil·i·ty [drə bíllətee], , n
-du·ra·ble·ness [drəb'lnəss], , n
-du·ra·bly [drəblee], , adv
While Upkeep would mean:
up·keep
up·keep [úp kp]
n
1. maintenance: the maintenance of somebody or something in proper condition or operation
2. cost: the financial cost of providing maintenance for somebody or something
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Most of our weapons will receive damage from use and require proper upkeep to ensure their further durability. That is just my opinion though.
"They drew first blood not me..." (Stallone in Rambo: First Blood)
Have you seen this YouTube series on shooting things: Stopping Power Info. It may help in your search and with this particular study for this site.
"They drew first blood not me..." (Stallone in Rambo: First Blood)
I'd break a weapon's "dependability" (there's probably a better word, but I can't think of one now) down into three categories:
1) Upkeep - how easy it is to disassemble clean, and reassemble a weapon.
2) Durability - how much punishment a weapon can take before it needs to be cleaned or repaired.
3) Reliability - how effectively a clean weapon's action works in practice.
Melee weapons: Because there's nothing more satisfying than bashing in a zed cranium with your new best friend, Mr Crowbar™. (Product demonstration brought to you by nick47)
I have to agree with you there Moskau.
"They drew first blood not me..." (Stallone in Rambo: First Blood)
