Arash, It's better than CoH1.
Its gotten better but I wouldn't go that far. |
What is unskillful in CoD compared to CS? They are both basically the same thing minus killstreaks perks and weapon customization. |
The problem is and always has been... team games.
SU85, Snipers, KV8, Clown Cars, Tiger Ace (pre nerf), Skill Plane, T70, etc have at some point been major problems with the game. And guess what, they all broke the game hard in 1v1 4v4 and everywhere in between (with the exception of T70 since light armor has less shock value outside of 1v1). So quit acting like you're some high speed badass by discrediting team games. |
Worse for me too. I noticed there is more effects like physics and destruction including limb amputations, the stuff we were complaining about how the game was downgraded in multiplayer between beta and release. Looks like they added all the bells and whistles back in at the expense of performance.
To Relic: Why is there no option to disable or decrease particle effects. I don't need super grainy fog to enjoy the game, make it optional because it ruins the experience for people that don't have $350 GPUs. |
Strategy is a plan.
Micro is an execution of this plan.
This thread is weird.
Not really. Tactics is a execution of the plan, which is stuff like flanking and positioning. Micro is stuff like dodging a grenade, getting in cover, getting that fast countersnipe, etc. None of those things have anything to do with strategy, its just clicking and keyboard smashing. |
I think you may be wandering into murky waters.....
A mercenary is a hired gun who fights for money as his reward,irrespective of the cause. On that, I hope we can agree?
So,were the Mexicans mercenaries, who fought for the US in Fallujah, in the hopes of surviving and obtaining US citizenship and/or a sponsored college education?
Tough one. If they were looking to become citizens I would say no they are not, since they've shown some strong favortism for that country if their goal is to be a part of it.
Is the French Foreign Legion a band of mercenaries?
Not very familiar with the FFL so not going to comment on that one.
Are Commonwealth troops mercenaries, who are attached to UK regiments?
No
Were UK SAS troopers mercenaries, who were attached to the Australian SAS in order to to fight in Vietnam, when the British Army did not deploy there?
Allied countries, plus SAS is part of the military. So definitely a no.
Are private contractors from USA or UK mercenaries, if they leave the army and then go back to fight alongside their former comrades?
If they are fighting alongside former comrades then they are still working for their government, so no.
I would say they were all mercenaries, but it is not clear cut
And I don't think I said this earlier but the reasons for going private after being discharged doesn't need to be purely for more money. Even if it paid similar to being in the military, it would still be appealing to some people since it would allow them to continue doing what they know (and possibly enjoy doing) but with more personal freedoms since they aren't property of the state anymore. |
Still going in circles, you can join the military for the money. Even if you take your oath very seriously and are loyal to your country, not very many people would have taken the contract if it was a non paying job. If this entire time you have been defining a mercenary as "A person primarily concerned with material reward at the expense of ethics" which is the very vague usage of the word and can be applied to someone of any profession, then technically you could be right, if you honestly believe no security contractors have any ethics. But according to usage which refers specifically to hired guns, you're wrong. |
I cannot help you if you continue to argue that private contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan cannot be considered mercenaries despite the simmilarities presented to you. I am assuming it has to do with your combined "patriotism" and misconnotation of the meaning of the word mercenary.
P.S. those private contractors are not contractually bound to solely work for the US government. There is just not any other western government fighting wars to that extent ....
There is no misconnotation on my end, I can't help it that definitionof mercenary and your perception of one are two different things. Blackwater might not be bound to only do the USAs bidding, but they still don't represent anyone else so they are not mercs. Even if they were hired by an ally government like UK or Israel they still wouldn't be mercenaries since they are still fighting for the same side. |
An oath is not a litmus test for mercenary status, sorry.
PS: Mercenary- a soldier who is paid by a foreign country to fight in its army : a soldier who will fight for any group or country that hires him
|
The private contractors constitute of roughly 75% of military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most of these contractors are probably ex US military indeed, however, their main objective is a financial one differing from that of the US government, making them mercenaries. The US government being their main employer does not change this. The continuity of these mercenaries and the US weapon industry relies on ongoing wars/conflicts, which does not benefit the US as a whole.
But only ~20% of those contractors are private security, meaning the majority of them are hardly "military" personnel. Mercenary means you are for hire by anyone. You're just going in circles calling them mercenaries, because even if they are only motivated by the money, by that broad interpretation anyone who joins the US military for the benefits (G.I. bill for example) would be also be a mercenary, which is clearly not the case.
The United States is effectively the only country with a military-industrial-complex, given the size and thereby influence of the weapons industry together with the way the US political system allows this. I am surprised that despite your "higher awareness" you would still consider the incentives of these private contractors to be aligned with the incentives of the US government and/or your own.
PMCs are a part of the military-industrial-complex, but Eisenhower was mainly referring to arms manufacturers and not private security. Also just because I know what the MIC is doesn't necessarily mean I think every modern conflict is a cash grab. |