Should Indirect fire weapons be allowed?

[S&Wshooter]

I agree with MPM. Damn kids and their poorly made pages....

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by S&Wshooter

I agree with MPM. Damn kids and their poorly made pages....

I think the YOUNGEST imfdb member ever to introduce themselves in the last three years was SEVEN (7), the next youngest was Ten (10). The vast majority of new members are 14-15. You see a trend here? With the exception of a few minors who are experienced with and knowledgeable about firearms (e.g. GM45's father is a gunsmith and GM45 back at age 15 knew MORE about small arms than most adults), the vast majority of the new membership own no firearms, cannot legally purchase firearms on their own and have zero experience with firearms, but yet create pages and edit tons of information on other pages that is wildly inaccurate.

Digression:
Actually as an adult, I'm alittle perturbed that so many kids have access to and regularly view R-rated movies. I knew a 12 year old who had Pulp Fiction memorized and there are some vile scenes in that otherwise excellent film.

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Sorry, ANYWAY, back to the original discussion!


What do you guys think about limiting it to any weapon used at the Platoon level?

I hesitate to say brigade level, then you get self propelled guns, howitzers, UAV launched missiles, etc.

[AdAstra2009]

If the weapon does not have a dismounted variation and is only a vehicle/aircraft armament it should be disqualified.
This would disqualify All self propelled howitzers, AGM-114 Hellfire, M242 Bushmaster.

It would also disqualify everything from the topic post of this thread:

"aerial bombs, cruise missiles, air burst munitions, Battle ship main guns"



Like you suggested I also think it would be appropriate for Platoon level to be a deciding factor with whatever case by case exceptions that may come up.

[AdAstra2009]

I would also like to add that if we are undecisive on deleting videogames that we should at the very least get rid of all the User-made videogame mods. I mean it's stupid, no different than out policy of not allowing films that are not on IMDB and are made by a bunch of kids....which most of the time what user-made videogame mods are.

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by AdAstra2009

I would also like to add that if we are undecisive on deleting videogames that we should at the very least get rid of all the User-made videogame mods. I mean it's stupid, no different than out policy of not allowing films that are not on IMDB and are made by a bunch of kids....which most of the time what user-made videogame mods are.

I don't care one way or another about the MODS, but Bunni originally DID allow Mods for popular and commercially available game titles, so they are allowed. I don't question Imperious Leader. It's his sandbox and I just play in it. I will push for enactment of stuff that has not been explicitly addressed, but anything that Bunni has already clearly given the thumbs up or thumbs down, I don't question.

[AdAstra2009]

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Bunni originally DID allow Mods for popular and commercially available game titles, so they are allowed. I don't question Imperious Leader. It's his sandbox and I just play in it. I will push for enactment of stuff that has not been explicitly addressed, but anything that Bunni has already clearly given the thumbs up or thumbs down, I don't question.

darn, alrighty then.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by AdAstra2009

I mean it's stupid, no different than out policy of not allowing films that are not on IMDB and are made by a bunch of kids....which most of the time what user-made videogame mods are.

Which is why we're explicit about the mods must be done by professional or semi-professional groups to warrant inclusion.

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

What do you guys think about limiting it to any weapon used at the Platoon level?

I hesitate to say brigade level, then you get self propelled guns, howitzers, UAV launched missiles, etc.

Definitely not brigade level. Anything that's too big to be carried on and/or fired from a Humvee (or equivalent vehicle) shouldn't get its own page.

As for the 20mm rotary cannon (such as the M61, which Steve mentioned), I am at least OK with them if you guys have those in the industry and have converted them to blank-fire. What I don't want, however, is for people to include those weapons if they appear on a CGI render of a fighter aircraft that appears in the movie/TV show, and were not physically present on the movie set during filming.

[Phoenixent]

Originally Posted by MT2008

As for the 20mm rotary cannon (such as the M61, which Steve mentioned), I am at least OK with them if you guys have those in the industry and have converted them to blank-fire. What I don't want, however, is for people to include those weapons if they appear on a CGI render of a fighter aircraft that appears in the movie/TV show, and were not physically present on the movie set during filming.

That would cut down on the how many films are listed for sure. The M61's in the armory have been out less than a dozen times. But I believe that some films made overseas (Israel) used a plane at the bore site range for on camera shot of the weapon firing.

[Phoenixent]

Originally Posted by MT2008

Definitely not brigade level. Anything that's too big to be carried on and/or fired from a Humvee (or equivalent vehicle) shouldn't get its own page.

There are or was an armory that had blank fire 37mm, 75mm and 105mm howitzers in their inventory and since the breach block was the registered part with ATF, armorers went out on location with those also. I towed a 37mm on a trailer behind my Expedition for a film shoot. The looks I got on the freeway were the funniest thing.