Talk:Rising Storm 2: Vietnam

Beta "Review"

So, long story short, I was one of the 1.6 Beta testers for this game. And boy oh boy, is this game fun. -SeptemberJack (talk) 21:12, 30 May 2017 (EDT)

We need screenshots soon or the page looks like it will get nuked. --Mazryonh (talk) 22:05, 30 May 2017 (EDT)

Don't worry, I'm getting them right now and will post them soon. --MJ79 (talk) 22:08, 30 May 2017 (EDT)

Okay, I think that's all the shots I've posted for now, and it looks almost complete! You're gonna need to fill in for the rest of the weapons.

BTW credits to PC Gaming Videos (XSmasher4ya) for the video where I made the screen rips: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fetrCc-FeM--MJ79 (talk) 01:01, 31 May 2017 (EDT)

Appreciate that, but I think the page should eventually get proper in-game captures rather than from a Youtube video. I would get more but I can only run the game on rather meager settings.--AgentGumby (talk) 18:13, 21 June 2017 (EDT)

I know that game screenshots with guns in different poses but same background count for the wiki, but they're still boring to look at. We need someone who has the full game to make some screenshots with more variety, preferably in action.--Mazryonh (talk) 18:02, 22 June 2017 (EDT)

Frankly, did the Soviets supply shotguns to the Vietcong? It seems to me that this is far-fetched. Some older shotgun such as M1897 would be much more appropriate. --Slon95 (talk) 18:16, 3 June 2019 (EDT)

They technically addressed that minor issue in a recent update, where the IZh-58 was repainted black and just dubbed the "SxS shotgun". Even if they hadn't, it's implied to be a farmer's personal hunting weapon given it's to classes like Scout. --PaperCake 18:29, 3 June 2019 (EST)

M14

I've read somewhere that the standard issue M14 had it's fire selector removed when issued out and only if you were selected to be an automatic rifleman would you actually have a select fire M14. --AdAstra2009 (talk) 16:56, 31 May 2017 (EDT)

I believe the selector was locked in semi for most people, I can't see how you remove it without messing up the gun somehow.--Mandolin (talk) 19:24, 31 May 2017 (EDT)

I looked it up and you are correct --AdAstra2009 (talk) 21:57, 31 May 2017 (EDT)

Stoner 63

During the war, some troops were issued with the Stoner 63, especially in LMG variant. Since the Vietnamese soldiers have access to the DP-28, it would be actually good to side the Stoner with, don't you think? --James Dalcan (talk) 14:15, 02 June 2017 (GMT)

If I recall correctly, Stoner 63's were only given to Navy SEAL's in Vietnam, not regular old Army or Marines.--Aidoru (talk) 12:30, 2 June 2017 (EDT)

Tripwire just added the Stoner 63A in KF2, so one would hope it comes to this game. They did have the MKb-42(H) in Red Orchestra 2, as well.--AgentGumby (talk) 16:25, 2 June 2017 (EDT)

I know the Navy use of Stoner got the most press, but I thought the Marines got a few as well?--Mandolin (talk) 17:11, 2 June 2017 (EDT)

Bushranger Update

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg7ZkKilkE0 http://steamcommunity.com/games/418460/announcements/detail/1470851782085432955

As the title implies, this FREE DLC pack is going to add the Aussie forces as a playable faction into the game. New weapons include the L1A1 battle rifle and L2A1 light support weapon, the F1 and Owen submachine guns and the Browning Hi-Power pistol, and lots of cosmetic stuff are in as well. Now that's how DLC should be. --MJ79 (talk) 10:24, 29 November 2017 (EST)

Awesome stuff! Apparently, the US will also get the XM177E1, and 3 new maps are getting added. Frankly, I'm hoping that the L1A1 will get some of its field-expedient modifications as options, such as the "matchstick" full-auto conversion, and the short-barreled variant, affectionately termed the "Bitch Gun". Well, we'll see. You can always count on Tripwire to do some interesting things. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 16:32, 29 November 2017 (EST)

I hope that they continue with this faction dsl and do: ARVN/CIDG with older us weapons garlands, m1/2 carbine, bar etc Viet Song with older French and maybe Japanese weapons Special forces/macv sog with stoner 63, hush puppy, Swedish k, AKs for us troops,xm148 and didn't the seals use some h&k g3s or hk33s in Vietnam. --Insertjjs (talk) 21:39, 29 November 2017 (EST)

On my editing of weapons entries for this page

Hey I'm rather new to this place and as such I'm not entirely sure this is the place to take something like this up so if it's an inappropriate place I will be happy to move this discussion wherever I'm directed. Nevertheless I have found the way this page is written in many instances isn't in accordance with the Rules, Standards and Principles in particular with:

No page vandalism

Vandalism of pages will get you banned - no warning ahead of time. This means putting in obviously false or inflammatory information, removing the contents of an entire page or section or putting in gibberish or spam or threats or vulgar inappropriate content. Some members may put in semi-ridiculous comments like 'This gun rocks!' or 'This is my favorite gun'. Actions like these won't result in a ban, unless the person continues after multiple warnings. Those types of comments are best left in the discussion pages which accompany every page on the site.

As well as:

No sarcastic or insulting Commentary

Due to IMFDB's increasing role as a site of movie trivia research, we are clamping down on commentary which may appear sarcastic, insulting or denigrating. Criticizing an actor's firing stance or snickering at them 'flinching' during blank fire is becoming increasingly frowned upon by IMFDB. Pointing out how ridiculous a scene is due to mythical firearm ballistics, or lack of reloading, or lack of technical advisers can be done, but only in a non-insulting manner and only if it is relevant to increasing the public knowledge of the weapon and its proper usage. If one has to point out a flaw or mistake, please try to do it as scholarly and neutrally as possible. Using the old 'management axiom' "Praise in public, Criticize in Private", we can move any casual discussions to the 'Discussions Pages', that is what they are there for. Looking for movie still frames where an actor blinks or flinches (just to ridicule) is not necessary and brings down the professionalism of the site.

Some examples of how I feel these rules are being broken are as follows:

"Reloading the gun and giving Charlie the finger."

"The M3's sights are crude, but effective. Effective enough to get a good shot at this poor bastard's head anyways."

"Aiming the Owen SMG, everything's upside down in Australia, even the sights are on the wrong side."

"Affixing the bayonet on the F1 because you can."

"A spooked Aussie does a quick brass check, showcasing that his gun is loaded and the game has water effects that do coat both characters and weapons in water."

"Moments later, he opens fire on an unfortunate MAT-49-wielding VC. The shotgun is actually being aimed here : it's a bit off-centre to reflect the lack of a buttstock to properly brace the gun."

"Sighting up a particularly threatening wooden target, slightly harder as the steel repair bands block the front sight."

I hope I don't need to mention any more smarmy and unnecessary comments about the firearms in the game. I have attempted to alter some of these instances but they are being undone by -PaperCake

I will be clear I am not accusing of -PaperCake vandalism but I feel the way this page has been authored it does not seem to pass the scrutiny that the rules outline.

Eh. Vandalism is pushing it. I will say I was being incredibly rude to you by shutting down your edits and immediately undoing them, that was a bad knee jerk reaction to seeing the page edited and I do apologize. That being said, the professionalism bit is really vague nowadays. Most games like this have a light hearted tone, just read the H3VR page and that's what I was trying to do here by breaking up the same generic text blocks with something a little less painful to read. I can say you did do some good work trimming the fat on some of the more longwinded descriptions I put down, but my main issue was just the deletion of whole comments in-general. --PaperCake 00:34, 9 October 2019 (EST)

I would like to remind you I said I am not accusing you of vandalism but it appears to me the rule touches upon a bit more than just vandalism and as such the rule isn't particularly well named. I do realize that the game might have a light hearted tone but it appears to me especially with these two parts of the second above mentioned rule:

"we are clamping down on commentary which may appear sarcastic, insulting or denigrating."

As well as:

If one has to point out a flaw or mistake, please try to do it as scholarly and neutrally as possible.

These two parts of the rule as well as the fact that this is an encyclopedia molded in the image of Wikipedia and the like that indeed "generic text blocks" as you put it are what these two additions aim to enforce. I am simply trying to come across as matter-of-fact and for lack of a better term robotic as possible, exactly as you would see on a Wikipedia page. I do agree with you however I don't think a screenshot should necessarily be left completely blank, I certainly would prefer that they at least had some type of caption, I was mostly intending to go through what seemed inappropriate first and then I had planned to go through to fill in where I left blanks. DevaKitty (talk) 00:50, 9 October 2019 (EDT)

Reminder noted. Matter-of-fact isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I find the longer a page gets the more mind numbing they become. Again, apologies for stepping on your fingers last night, by all means go through the page and I'll amend it so we balance each other out on this issue. --PaperCake 13:35, 9 October 2019 (EST)