Plasma Grenade vs. Frag Grenade vs. Pulse Grenade FAQs

#51DrkVrtxPosted 11/20/2012 12:23:02 AM
Thank you for all your hard work, TC.
#52SterlingFox(Topic Creator)Posted 11/20/2012 12:25:34 AM
Duwstai posted...
None of those numbers proved that the Carbine didnt have a set rate of fire, which is why I kept asking you for the data that supposedly proves it.


None of what you've posted proved that the carbine did have a set rate of fire, which is why I kept asking you for the data that supposedly proved it.

I'm asking you to prove it so that I can make adjustments, so this is my question; Can you or can you not prove that it has a set rate of fire?

A yes or no answer would be perfect.
---
Underwater Spartans:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Djp5dtz02eQ&feature=plcp
#53187mikePosted 11/20/2012 12:25:46 AM
tag
---
The word "gullible" is not in the dictionary. Don't believe me? Check it out for yourself!
#54Topdog75Posted 11/20/2012 12:28:34 AM
XImperialDragon posted...
From: Topdog75
XImperialDragon posted...
So... does anyone want to talk about grenades in relation to the Explosives upgrade?

I'll admit right now I'm lazy, if that helps. lol

No this topic is about the carbine now, go discuss grenades in the dmr topic.
---
"Marcus needs to go home and put on the rest of his damn beard." -SmokingGhost on Gears of War


Done. lol.

I didn't believe you so I went and checked... not gonna lie I laughed pretty hard :)
---
"Marcus needs to go home and put on the rest of his damn beard." -SmokingGhost on Gears of War
#55Strakadh_OFPosted 11/20/2012 12:32:54 AM
I just read your DMR v Carbine FAQ.

You state that it takes 4 seconds to empty the "clip"(Its a magazine, my Mauser takes clips) of both.

Then near the end of your post you say it fires as fast as you can pull the trigger(no numbers).

Meaning that you can empty the magazine as fast as you can pull the trigger on all 18 shots.

So if the Carbine fires as fast as you can pull the trigger and it empties in 4 seconds you are telling me the fastest firing humanly possible was used to test the ROF.

So please tell me where exactly did you find the most quick fingered human being on the planet? That in itself would make a great story.




Or would you like to go ahead and fix the contradictions found in your own FAQ?
---
GT: The Trill Texan
#56Kage-No_KazePosted 11/20/2012 12:32:54 AM
If you want numbers it's about 4 shots per second.
#57DuwstaiPosted 11/20/2012 12:34:07 AM
From: SterlingFox | #052
Duwstai posted...
None of those numbers proved that the Carbine didnt have a set rate of fire, which is why I kept asking you for the data that supposedly proves it.


None of what you've posted proved that the carbine did have a set rate of fire, which is why I kept asking you for the data that supposedly proved it.

I'm asking you to prove it so that I can make adjustments, so this is my question; Can you or can you not prove that it has a set rate of fire?

A yes or no answer would be perfect.

What do you want me to do? Make a video of me pulling the trigger in front of the screen, then play it in slow mo so you can see Im pressing the trigger faster than the gun fires on screen?

Im not doing all that work for something so damn obvious. You have nothing to support your claim, because its false. And Im not going through all the damn work to prove that the sky is blue when you can just look up.

Everyone in this topic, just go use the Carbine. Pull the trigger as fast as you can and you will immediately see (within one emptied mag), that it didnt shoot nearly as fast as you pulled the trigger, because there is a fire rate cap.

Then they can all come back and let us know what results they get. Youre already heavily outnumbered. Once more people come in with the obvious, hopefully you will just accept it without making someone go through a ton of work for no reason, since it is up to the person making the initial claim to provide proof if they want to be taken seriously.

If someone came and told you there was a tea pot circling mars exactly 3,000 miles outside its atmosphere.. that they did calculations that proved it but accidentally lost them.. do you think anyone would go thorugh all the work to disprove it? Hell no. You want someone to do the work to smash an absurd claim with no proof? No one is going to.

So again, people, just go fire the Carbine. It will take two seconds and you will realize there is a rate of fire cap. Im leaving this in the hands of the people.
---
balls
#58SterlingFox(Topic Creator)Posted 11/20/2012 12:35:51 AM
Duwstai posted...
post


So your answer is no? You cannot show me proof?
---
Underwater Spartans:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Djp5dtz02eQ&feature=plcp
#59Strakadh_OFPosted 11/20/2012 12:38:23 AM
Duwstai posted...
From: SterlingFox | #052
Duwstai posted...
None of those numbers proved that the Carbine didnt have a set rate of fire, which is why I kept asking you for the data that supposedly proves it.


None of what you've posted proved that the carbine did have a set rate of fire, which is why I kept asking you for the data that supposedly proved it.

I'm asking you to prove it so that I can make adjustments, so this is my question; Can you or can you not prove that it has a set rate of fire?

A yes or no answer would be perfect.

What do you want me to do? Make a video of me pulling the trigger in front of the screen, then play it in slow mo so you can see Im pressing the trigger faster than the gun fires on screen?

Im not doing all that work for something so damn obvious. You have nothing to support your claim, because its false. And Im not going through all the damn work to prove that the sky is blue when you can just look up.

Everyone in this topic, just go use the Carbine. Pull the trigger as fast as you can and you will immediately see (within one emptied mag), that it didnt shoot nearly as fast as you pulled the trigger, because there is a fire rate cap.

Then they can all come back and let us know what results they get. Youre already heavily outnumbered. Once more people come in with the obvious, hopefully you will just accept it without making someone go through a ton of work for no reason, since it is up to the person making the initial claim to provide proof if they want to be taken seriously.

If someone came and told you there was a tea pot circling mars exactly 3,000 miles outside its atmosphere.. that they did calculations that proved it but accidentally lost them.. do you think anyone would go thorugh all the work to disprove it? Hell no. You want someone to do the work to smash an absurd claim with no proof? No one is going to.

So again, people, just go fire the Carbine. It will take two seconds and you will realize there is a rate of fire cap. Im leaving this in the hands of the people.


What data do you have to show that no one would go through the work of disproving the orbiting teapot theory?

Show me numbers, Im not going to say which ones.
---
GT: The Trill Texan
#60DuwstaiPosted 11/20/2012 12:38:52 AM
From: SterlingFox | #058
Duwstai posted...
post


So your answer is no? You cannot show me proof?

You show me proof for the initial claim, and I will show you proof to refute it.
---
balls