UFO: Aftershock web site expands...

[FullAuto]

Also excellent because it doesn't interfere with the usage of your firearm, which is pretty vital.

 

You can get 20-round magazines for the MP5 but 15/30 are the standard. Still, at least it will be a little lighter.

[Slaughter]

Speaking of light. The MP5 (standard) is about 2.2 KG (4.5 pounds) I seem to remember (I had one in the army). With a full magazine it's a little more. A Desert Eagle is about 2 KG...that's one HEAVY gun!

[FullAuto]

Hey, you can get one that weighs about 1.5kg. And if you run out of rounds you can always beat them to death with it. Freaking Desert Eagles.

[Kret]

They're probably leaving out weapons so the comunity can add them via modding tools, maybe.

[Pete]

It's more likely that either the technology has been lost (under biomass) or that to have every gun ever made is overkill (literally ).

[Gungadin]

They're probably leaving out weapons so the comunity can add them via modding tools, maybe.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Exactly. You want to fight aliens with rocks and clubs, you mod them into the game. Me, I'm happy as long as I got me kalashnikovs and shotguns.

Good writeup on the history and effect of bayonets by Fullauto and Igonggr. I just read a Flashman story involving the battles of Isandlwana and Rourke's Drift, and I did get the impression that the Brits managed to beat the Zulus at Rourke's Drift using not only superior firepower (the zulus had zero) but also at close-quarters. It does indeed speak well of both the usefulness of the bayonet and the fighting spirit of the British colonial trooper.

 

The 30 round MP5 seems to be an error. In all other games, it has a 30 round clip. Perhaps it's a distant-future economy model?

 

I hope the deployable autocannon posts will be back. I really enjoyed those. You sight a few hostiles, your heavy gunner starts setting up his gun nest while the rest of the guys hold off the enemies, the heavy gunner then blows anything in his line of sight away.

 

Happy memories of Aftermath...

[Gungadin]

Off topic, but what exactly do you use a Desert Eagle for? When was the last time you got attacked by somebody so badass you needed a handheld bazooka to fend off? Does it have some special position in the Israeli military or is it just for people with a big gun fetich?

[Pete]

I think it's more the fact that it's name is legendary. It strikes fear into the hearts of all who have seen what it can do. Quite frankly, it is because it is a small (but heavy) cannon that it gets so much/awe/fear/respect...

 

...and I'm not even interested in guns!

[FullAuto]

Off topic, but what exactly do you use a Desert Eagle for? When was the last time you got attacked by somebody so badass you needed a handheld bazooka to fend off? Does it have some special position in the Israeli military or is it just for people with a big gun fetich?

 

It's an excellent self-defence weapon. It's large, so not very concealable, meaning you go out wearing it and people think "Jesus Christ". All the calibres (.357/.44/.50) are pretty big, so any hits you get will definitely count. But the small mag size and heavy recoil... *shakes head*

 

It does indeed speak well of both the usefulness of the bayonet and the fighting spirit of the British colonial trooper.

 

Not only that but the many, many hours of bayonet drill. At Rorke's Drift there were more casualties from the Zulu snipers than assegais (thrown or not). It really was a bit of an amazing victory, considering even a conservative estimate of the Zulu forces puts them at 3,000 and the Brits at a total of 155. I can only think of the Battle of Thermopylae where the odds were worse (300 vs 100,000), and that doesn't really count because the majority of the Persians never got to fight thanks to the environment. The were forced to come at the Greeks a few thousand at a time, like gentlemen.

[Accounting Troll]

Didn't the Persians win that one? They would have managed a quicker victory if they had sent in their archers to begin with.

 

Incidentally, the Boertrekkers ended up in territory that the Zulus considered to be theirs. There was a war that ended in a decisive victory for the Boers, who had been heavily outnumbered. Zulu shields and assegais proved to be no match for European firearms in a war fought before they clashed with the British.

 

The fact that at Rorkes Drift the British lost more soldiers from snipers than assegais supports my argument that the bayonet was a relatively unimportant weapon. The numerical advantage of the Zulu division would have given them victory if it had come down to hand to hand combat. This is how they won at Isandwana - they managed to close in and engage in close combat against the fewer British.

 

The Zulu nation was geared up for war in the same way as classical Sparta. They had an organised regiment system and the training and discipline of their soldiers was the match of the British. The Boer and British victories against the Zulus were simply down to the fact that they had rifles and the Zulus didn't (at least until Isandwana).

[FullAuto]

Didn't the Persians win that one? They would have managed a quicker victory if they had sent in their archers to begin with.

 

Tactically, yes. But it was a huge strategic loss.

 

The fact that at Rorkes Drift the British lost more soldiers from snipers than assegais supports my argument that the bayonet was a relatively unimportant weapon. The numerical advantage of the Zulu division would have given them victory if it had come down to hand to hand combat. This is how they won at Isandwana - they managed to close in and engage in close combat against the fewer British.

 

No, because without the bayonet the Brits would not have been able to defend the walls effectively. Clubbing someone with a rifle butt is not as effective as shooting him and then skewering his friend through the groin. It did come down to hand to hand combat, several times, and each time the Brits repelled the Zulus with next to no casualties. Without the bayonet, they would have been overrun, because their rifles (Martini-Henry's) though fine pieces of equipment, were only single shot. You had to have something to fall back on between shots. Hence, the bayonet.

Isandlwana had nothing to do with the bayonet. It had to do with 20,000 Zulus catching approximately 2,000 Brits encamped without anything in the way of defensive positions. The odds won the day there. Even then, the British killed something like 1,500 to 2,000 Zulus, and the majority of the battle was close combat.

But they failed to at Rorkes Drift, because of a number of factors. One of which was the bayonet.

 

The Zulu nation was geared up for war in the same way as classical Sparta. They had an organised regiment system and the training and discipline of their soldiers was the match of the British. The Boer and British victories against the Zulus were simply down to the fact that they had rifles and the Zulus didn't (at least until Isandwana).

 

The training and discipline of their soldiers was nowhere near that of the British. Which is why their shooting was so poor. Their organisation was excellent, though. The Zulus did have rifles, they had at least 10,000 of them at Isandlwana. Winning is hardly ever down to the technology at hand. Why do you think the West spent nearly half a century shitting in their pants at the prospect of an invasion of Europe by the USSR? Soviet technology was inferior, but there was a lot more of them.

 

The combination of rifles, discipline, a defensive positon (not a very good one, I might add), bayonets and sheer grit saw the British through. Zulu discipline was far from exemplary, typified by the fact that the attack on Rorke's Drift should never have happened in the first place. Cetewayo ordered that no British positions were to be attacked. But he was ignored.

 

Basically, it turned out to be a textbook example of how to defend using a small force of well-trained professionals versus what was the equivalent of a large, ill-trained militia.

[Kret]

Ok, how did you guys manage to turn a topic taling about the AS homepage into a history lesson?

[FullAuto]

Pure skill?

[lgonggr]

Someone has to educate the kids today. All they do is play games

[Blehm 98]

i would like to point out that a desert eagle is designed for when you need the firepower of a .50 caliber bullet but don't have time to pull out your 8 foot tall machine gun, or your 40 lb sniper rifle. It is useful for when you need to put down someone in close combat very fast, without time to get larger guns or shoot them 2, 3, 4, 5 times before they go down

[Slaughter]

You can see the beauty at this site

[Accounting Troll]

I want to know where the Zulus got all those thousands of rifles from. The British and the Boers both had good reason to to want the Zulus to have lots of rifles.

[Gungadin]

About the Desert Eagle: Sure, being able to shoot attackers is nice and all, but do you really NEED a gun that big for anything other than making yourself feel manly?

 

Same thing with the lift of the assault weapons ban. I don't really see why anyone would NEED a fully automatic firearm for anything other than turf wars and feeling like Rambo.

[FullAuto]

I want to know where the Zulus got all those thousands of rifles from. The British and the Boers both had good reason to to want the Zulus to have lots of rifles.

 

I think you meant "good reason NOT to want the Zulus to have lots of rifles". The short answer is, unsrupulous traders and raiding.

 

About the Desert Eagle: Sure, being able to shoot attackers is nice and all, but do you really NEED a gun that big for anything other than making yourself feel manly?

 

Same thing with the lift of the assault weapons ban. I don't really see why anyone would NEED a fully automatic firearm for anything other than turf wars and feeling like Rambo

 

DE's aren't really much good for military operations, it's true. They're too big, heavy, the recoil is savage and the magazine capacity too small. No unit with any brains uses magnum calibre guns. As for the assault weapons ban, it was bloody stupid to begin with, as there's no such thing as an 'assault weapon', it's a stupid label applied to a wide variety of firearms by people who have little knowledge about guns but are frightened of them.