MegaAfroMan

Oh shut up @ . You can't get mad at someone for not clicking advertisements. You further can't claim someone isn't supporting CoDz because they don't click ads. That's just like saying I don't feel bad for abused animals because I don't give in to those Sarah McLaughlin commercials. You like to claim I have an attitude, if his comment really made your blood boil, maybe you should consider that you have one too.

I have no problem with you. I have a problem with the misuse of language where it counts. Also, I proved you wrong twice, both situations in which you 'knew' I was wrong, then instead of admitting your error you instead belittle me or go after me in some way. It's okay to say 'I was wrong' or 'I don't know'. It's a simple lesson that I think many people, you included, need to learn. It's nothing against you personally. I'd be doing this is it was a new user, or if it was Alphasnake or Superhands posting. Wrong is wrong. Right is right.

Okay well the title is misleading, but after testing out a few claims in a short game, I noticed something. I bought Double Tap 2 without ever powering it. So I looked in theater and sure enough. When I revived my corpse after teleporting back from the bridge it automatically powered Double Tap 2. So don't worry about not powering up a perk or cell door, after you go to the bridge and come back, it'll have been turned on for you!

I couldn't get it to work this way. Do you play Offline, online? Solo, co-op?

To know something: You must believe it. You must have good reasons for it It must be true. You didn't know that it had to be the VW because it doesn't. I just played a game and got the spork by using the Acid Gat. I can post a video if there's doubt.

Just played a game. Couldn't get the audio cue on the bridge at round 8, confirming it must at least be past that round. I can put up a video if there is doubt.

But no one cares if it's irrelevant to you. The topic is about how to get the redeemer, not how would Eternal get the redeemer. Any statement backed up by reasons is by definition an arguement. A series of arguments is adebate.

I'll check it out. I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

Relevance is not relative (oddly enough). There is no "to me" something either is or isn't relevant. It's a property of a statment to another statement. It doesn't matter who poses it. Language in debate is very important, sorry I'm being such a stickler about this, but these kinds of things bother me. It would be acceptable to say it isn't important, or practical or is unnecessary for you. It is not acceptable to say it is irrelevant. Sorry again. I hope this clears up what I meant though.

It may be unnecessary, but it is relevant. The topic is the Hells Redeemer. Whether you can get it prior to round 10 is relavent. There is no possible way it isn't relevant. It may be unnecessary and impractical, but it is not irrelevant.

I'm pretty posiive I can confirm that going too early to the bridge will not work. I'll try it out later tonight.

After me and a buddy had our game end on Kino at round 43, we did some extensive testing on it. Ballistic knife shot can kill too, but it's very hard to pull off. Only the last standing player can recieve friendly fire. If there is more than one standing character then no one can recieve friendly fire.

Fun fact, you'll only kill the last standing teammate with the Bowie Knife or the Sicle. Otherwise it does nothing.

Oh also, I'm pretty sure the acid gat doesn't have to be pack-a-punched. I don't know if you meant it does or not, your wording kind of tripped me up a bit there. I'm pretty sure you can use either the acidgat or the vitrolic withering.

If someone else could test it, I'd like to hear, I'm pretty sure you can get the 30 kills ANYWHERE, and then you need to survive one whole round on any round past 10 in addition to what you've said.

This is all correct and well done, except I don't believe you get the spoon back after the bathtub step. I'm pretty positive you're stuck with the standard shiv until you complete the next steps to get the spork.

Have you gotten the redeemer using the above method? Because I'm pretty positive you're missing a few steps.

Not really what I was talking about, but I do get your point. Without any legitimate explanations of what's been really going on, the story isn't really a story anymore as more of it hinges on guesses based on guesses.

Didnt that get patched out?

Excuse me. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim, it is a common logic fallacy to shift the proof to the person who is questioning the claim, called "ad ignoratium" So no. You need to prove why something is valid, not expect others to tell you why it's invalid. Without accepting ad ignoratium as a fallacy, then this thread is pointless. Or else this would all be valid: Zombies was originally my idea, but I planted it in the minds of treyarch employees. Initially zombies were supposed to be zebras but then it was decided that that was silly and they changed it and forgot about it entirely. Der Riese actually has a section in the map which is unreachable by no clip, in the Xbox 360 edition of Black Ops which contains a binary code spelling out "Richtofen, Bitches!" You can't prove them wrong, so they must be admited.

Caddy was a bit bitter yes, but it's not directed at the staff as a whole, and to say that he has no right or reason to be so, is just silly. Also, I've seen Caddy's work, I've worked with him, albeit it breifly, in the past, and I trust that he knows what he's talking about, probably more than any of us. Other than yourself, I know practically no one on the staff has decent knowledge of forum software. And I don't know the extents of your knowledge enough to compare you two, but Caddy is very good at what he does. So don't dismiss what he is saying simply because it has a negative tone.

I don't see what the problem with discussing is. Or even complaining. As long as it isn't bashing or flaming. Saying "I don't like this" is a good thing to say. Just saying it 10 times is bad.

I hope that these don't have to stay for long, but I understand that isn't just as simple as choosing to get rid of them.

How much revenue do the ads bring in?

Gotcha. I have to say I dislike the ads, I think they look awful (white on black, I mean really), and CoDz just is one of the places I'm glad to go where I can not see ads. However I understand finances can be tight, so I'm not going to rage or bash. I would like to request that it be made public knowledge how much money CoDz has at any given time, from donations and/or advertising. Perhaps display this in the form of a progress bar where the end cap is the cost in hosting for a year or 6 months or whatever. Seeing where we are, and how much left we need could help encourage donors.