# Hardcore Combat - Hazelmere: Warning: violence and language



## len_ryuka (Dec 3, 2010)

deleted for publishing purposes


----------



## Draxia (Dec 3, 2010)

Your entire narrative is discombobulated. Slim it downm or nothing will make sense.


----------



## len_ryuka (Dec 3, 2010)

Draxia said:


> Your entire narrative is discombobulated. Slim it downm or nothing will make sense.


 
I appreciate your feedback, but you need to explain.

If you mean the formatting, I just copied and pasted from PDF. I fixed it by pasting from a word document this time.


----------



## Draxia (Dec 3, 2010)

Your narrative is nice. I like it. It's fabulous.

Especially "They unexpectedly heard radio chatter through his headset. It was the same calm voice, with a slight sarcastic tone,
“You didn’t need reinforcements.”"

But you need to pur yourself into it. What does this main character feel? What does this main character do? Remember, that a narrative should not be what happens, but what a particular person sees it as.

Tell us this. If it is discombobulated on purpose, then give us a reason. Tell us why. We so wish to understand.


----------



## len_ryuka (Dec 3, 2010)

Great! thank you, now I see what you mean by "discombobulated".

This particular passage is supposed to be the first 9 pages of a novel I'm working on. And it's the first external exposition of the character "Hazelmere". Later on the story is told from his view, and we'll see what he "feels". But so far I'm attempting to paint a monolithic view for the reader of this character from strictly a 3rd person perspective(McCarthy).

And if you got the impression that "Hazelmere" did not feel much during the battle, then I've got the message across.


----------



## Draxia (Dec 4, 2010)

Slow down. You have a main character that is interacting with an insurgent. Explore this idea. Explore the entirety of being in Afghanistan. I can understand both of your characters. Explore them. Just don't state them as is. Revel in your characters. Bring them forth.


----------



## len_ryuka (Dec 5, 2010)

Sounds good, I'll look into that scene.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Dec 5, 2010)

> he began side-stepping diagonally towards a large rock where the enemies took cover behind.


Where they were taking cover or that they took cover behind.


----------



## len_ryuka (Dec 5, 2010)

Olly Buckle said:


> Where they were taking cover or that they took cover behind.


 
fixed, "which the enemies took cover behind"

Thanks!


----------



## garza (Dec 5, 2010)

Overall very realistic, despite some usage problems and a pov problem. One minor technical point caught my eye near the start when you say most deaths occur in the first few minutes of an ambush. I've never been near a firefight in the desert, but in the jungle most deaths happen in the first few seconds. Kill quickly and fade away is a good rule. For a guerrilla force such as the Taliban an ambush loses its effectiveness if it turns into a lengthy firefight. I'm basing this on other wars, but I think the principle has proven sound in all sorts of situations. 

I've known several Hazelmeres. Walk easy and speak softly when you meet him. Do not look him in the eye. Accept that he is barking mad, but at least for a while he is on your side and will kill you only if it is absolutely convenient. He is useful and expendable. No officer will ever risk another soldier in an effort to rescue Hazelmere when he is wounded. He will die on the battlefield and no one will mourn him, no matter how brilliant his service has been. Every nation has camps where the next batch of Hazelmeres are trained.

A good piece. Straighten out the usage problems and keep pov consistent and it will be excellent.

edit - Just reminded of one of those usage problems. On the battlefield you are facing the enemy. There may be a squad of a dozen or a full division but they are the collectively the enemy, not enemies. So you have a rock behind which the enemy soldiers, or simply the enemy, took refuge.


----------



## Ceremony (Dec 6, 2010)

i liked this alot, especially the end where he says over the radio "You didn't need any reinforcements". But the image of Hazelmere in my mind changed a little bit. At first I pictured a terminator like character (not saying your idea is unoriginal and like the terminator) but the way he casually walked and killed all those terrorists like their lives were nothing and he was so good he didn't have to care about being shot. Then at the end where Hazelmere runs over to the tree trunk and lets out a war cry kind of threw me off a little bit. I lost the cool terminator imagine in my head and got like a sorta rambo vision which conflicted with the cool under fire Terminator i pictured earlier.

Why not say he looked determined or give Hazelmere some emotion when he was approaching the taliban's positions. Also he throws his AK-47u down when there was another taliban left. Why do this? for lighter weight so he can run faster? I think you should say that then.

But as far as McCarthy's relationship with Hazelmere i like it. I like the way you say it makes him feel insignificant when Hazelmere starts kicking some ass. But at the same time I hate to say this but I'm just being honest, Hazelmere didn't seem that cool to me. My image of him was that he was... confusing. 

The action scenes where you explain the taliban clutching whatever artery gave me a nice taste to fighting and the horrors of war. I liked that scene where you said he strangled himself to stop himself from bleeding. That hit me like "Oh my god" and i love feeling emotion while i read.

But all in all it was good, i just feel like you should work on Hazelmere's image a little bit.


----------



## len_ryuka (Dec 7, 2010)

Garza:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------



garza said:


> Overall very realistic, despite some usage problems and a pov problem. One minor technical point caught my eye near the start when you say most deaths occur in the first few minutes of an ambush.



Actually I think this was referred as "there were two killed in the first few minutes". But yea, like you said first few seconds are the deadliest since they get the first shots and better positions to begin with. After a few minutes the "ambushed" group can either find space to retreat or begin to get a better position.


> and keep pov consistent and it will be excellent.


I wondered about this for a while. I could do it straight McCarthy POV, but he can never get in the position of being able to see the detailed violence of Hazelmere(only Hazelmere can), so I changed POV using the three stars( ***) when I'd like to show that. :-k

I was talking to Lisa Robertson last day(A canadian published author that happened to be visiting my university), and she particularly liked that POV change. So I'll have to think about this further.

Also thanks for pointing the "enemies" usage problem out. I never noticed that, but now that you mention it, you are very correct. I appreciate it. Fixed.


Ceremony
---------------------------------------------------------------



Ceremony said:


> At first I pictured a terminator like character (not saying your idea is unoriginal and like the terminator) but the way he casually walked and killed all those terrorists like their lives were nothing and he was so good he didn't have to care about being shot. Then at the end where Hazelmere runs over to the tree trunk and lets out a war cry kind of threw me off a little bit. I lost the cool terminator imagine in my head and got like a sorta rambo vision which conflicted with the cool under fire Terminator i pictured earlier.



I think this part parallels a lot with your MacMillan character doesn't it ? You get one image and then bam! They somehow do something seemingly out of character. This "screaming" thing was actually taken from real life, this "chill" guy that did this, he called it "wargasm"(yeah, I know). You get so hard pumped with adrenaline during fast-paced combat that you just feel the need to somehow exert your extreme overflow of energy(so much that your body just starts shaking uncontrollably). Some might call it the "Rush", but as far as I know there's no term to describe it. The closest thing I can think of is when you're extremely happy and your body just starts dancing (Remember the time that girl said yes to the prom?). Now replace the "happy" with "adrenaline pumped" and "dancing" with "killing people while screaming" and you get the picture. It was to end the chapter by giving Hazelmere a more human quality(even though it's not a good one) because emotionless terminator isn't really what I'm going for haha.



> Why not say he looked determined or give Hazelmere some emotion when he was approaching the taliban's positions.



You are right, somebody else pointed this out as well, I think I will have to add that.



> Also he throws his AK-47u down when there was another taliban left. Why do this? for lighter weight so he can run faster? I think you should say that then.



I don't like spoonfeeding the reader with tactics, but essentially yes, mobility. Video Game players like to refer to it as more "speed" but essentially it's more about not having your gun bumping into your body all the time(AKS74U is a very small and light gun, aka Baby AK), which makes it extremely difficult to run with. He also likes to act like a monkey and jump on things alot haha.



> But as far as McCarthy's relationship with Hazelmere i like it. I like the way you say it makes him feel insignificant when Hazelmere starts kicking some ass. But at the same time I hate to say this but I'm just being honest, Hazelmere didn't seem that cool to me. My image of him was that he was... confusing.



No offence taken, everybody's entitled to their own opinion. He should be confusing to a certain degree though, how would anybody know what a murderous teenage mercenary in Afghanistan feel like haha.



> The action scenes where you explain the taliban clutching whatever artery gave me a nice taste to fighting and the horrors of war. I liked that scene where you said he strangled himself to stop himself from bleeding. That hit me like "Oh my god" and i love feeling emotion while i read.
> 
> But all in all it was good, i just feel like you should work on Hazelmere's image a little bit.



Thanks man, I appreciate you giving me feedback. Let me know if you post more of your own stuff!


----------



## len_ryuka (Dec 10, 2010)

edited


----------



## Sync (Dec 18, 2010)

Hello

You asked if I would look at this piece for you, so here I am. 

Please remember that my thoughts and suggestions are just based on what I've gathered through the years...that does not mean it is foolproof or mean there is reason for you to change a thing. Any suggestions of rewording, should be first set aside and then looked at over time before any/if any changes should be made.

on we go....

To me, there are differences in writing, you can write like the masses, or you can stand out in a crowd. This is often done by simple wording. Making your scenes 'glow' off the page, so the characters will be remembered as well as the story long after the last page is turned. 



> *The patrol unit was a size of nine,* each of them with their own desert  camouflage gear and maple leaf patch on the side of their arm. All but  one were equipped with the C-7 standard issue assault rifle. The odd man  carried an outdated AK assault rifle and wore only Khaki T-Shirt and  pants. The eight other Canadian troops did not previously recognize the odd  man. They were introduced to him a few hours earlier at the camp.  The Colonel merely provided them with his name and agency, which even  then told little.




The bolded line is awkwardly worded.

that they are canadian, is enough without the leaf, most uniforms I've worn have them unless in a place where it wasnt' allowed.

the strike outs are where i believe you went a bit too much into 'telly' and redundancies and TELL can be many things, but here you are over-telling the scene.

***



> Albert Hazelmere
> Agency: Privately Contracted
> Past Experiences: Recce



I'm normally against these things. you are telling me things you could show me better, but another reason is because you mention his name, but then go right to the Lt. pov.

Some of the things I point at are carried through the story, so I will mention them once.



> Lieutenant McCarthy did not trust this man, provided that he could even  “qualify” being called a man. “Hazelmere” looked no older than eighteen,  standing about five foot nine. He had thick, wavy brown hair, tanned  skin, and his slim facial features mostly told that he was of European  descent.



...did not trust *this* man...  - present tense in a past tense story is a no-no.

the other thing that grabbed my eyes right away, and I not long ago changed it in my writing because of that same fact is those "qualify' / "Hazelmere"  quotes around the names. there is no need for them as it is easily understood, and draws the eyes too much to that one word rather than the words of description around it.



> However, his elegantly burnished pair of piercing evergreen eyes gave him an unnaturally attractive look.



in my whole life I have never described a man's or woman's eyes as elegantly burnished...

what I'm saying is this. Too many writers fall back on the old stand-by of eyes, like they are the windows to the soul, when they are just eyes, no matter what colour, it isn't important enough for one solider to mention about another...unless for some reason they were standing face to face and attraction follows. So, ease back on the descriptions, those 'piercing green/startling blue/souless black eyes do little and in a way diminish the character drawn. Write beyond the norm.



> “Recce” was a rarely used slang term for “Recon”, and McCarthy felt that  the provided information was extremely inadequate. “Recce” could be  referred to any valid recon unit of any nation’s army. He also could not  work out why the Defense Ministry would hire this young man to do such a  job instead of others, let alone question its legality and morals.



Defense Ministry ?   - a bit high up - the recce/ recon thing is un-needed. it does little to the story but drag on. I'd lose this whole part.



> His gear was unusual for a mercenary. He carried a Soviet manufactured  AKS74U compact assault rifle that was often used by the Talibans, whose  majority of the weaponry carried its legacy since the former Soviet  invasion of Afghanistan in the 70s and 80s. Most Contractors McCarthy  had seen in Afghanistan carried American made M4 assault rifles, often  outfitted with advanced holographic optics, lasers, and flashlights.  However, Hazelmere’s rifle had no accessories of the sort - no optics  other than the standard iron sights. The rifle itself was covered with  numerous deep scratches and rust spots which evidenced years of heavy  usage – so much that the rifle itself looked two folds older than its  user. He wore absolutely no armour of any kind, instead he replaced the  weight of a body armour with a simple bandoleer sling. It wrapped around  diagonally to his slim shoulder with fifteen 30 round magazines  attached. Sixteen including the one already attached to his rifle. 480  rounds easily doubled the amount carried by a regular infantry on a  patrol mission. McCarthy could not comprehend why he carried this much  ammunition. There was no situation in which all of them were going to be  consumed on the short patrol mission they were on.



as a reader, do you think I need to know about rust/scratches on a rifle? Does it show the man's character or just that the Lt was staring too long/talking too much about a rifle and armour? A solider is a solider, equipment is equipment. to me, this was all too much and could be trimmed way down to more about the observee's character rather than standard(and it is standard for a mercenary) equipment.



> The sun burned brilliantly upon the unit while inducing atrocious amount  of heat into their skin. *They gradually made progress in the near empty  desert. There were some objects in the scene, mostly large dried rocks  and abandoned shacks, but for the most part the view remained flat. *They  light stepped towards the northern border of Kabul tracing the A76  highway where they would then *revert* back to camp and report the  progress in addition to any findings. *This *wasn’t the first time  McCarthy’s unit had performed the task, but it *still* kept him alert.  Just a week ago, another squad from the Artillery Regiment was ambushed  in the same area. Two of the eight men from the squad were killed within  the first few minutes of the engagement. Two others were wounded and  barely returned to camp with the support of reinforcements and transport  helicopters.



You are over-telling the scenes, swamping the story with data that takes away from the importance of what you wanted to say. 

revert - ? awkwardly worded. the other bolded section needs rewording. 



> McCarthy kept an eye on “Hazelmere” during the patrol. His unit  separated into two smaller squads of four, each mainly eyeing east and  west respectively. The men spaced a few feet away from each other and  frequently repositioned themselves to decrease enemy advantage in the  event of an ambush. “Hazelmere”, however, walked alone on the bare open  desert roughly two hundred feet away to the west of the unit. He  strolled around the sand with relative ease while the other troops  struggled to keep the sand off their boots with every step. The  difference in terrain familiarity was plainly evident.



over-tell

on a recce/recon, why would you be yelling, especially if you were wary of an ambush. Think what you are saying/drawing. what makes sense to you sometimes not to the reader, so its something to consider changing.



> Private Mossman suddenly screamed under the deafening heat. The other  men of the unit instantly hugged the sand dust ground and crawled behind  the nearest object they could find. Multiple rifle rounds began  shredding everything in their way. Lifeless trees exploded into  countless splinters, pieces of rock transformed into deadly ricochets.  Only the loudest and most desperate yelling could be heard under the  gunfire.



the first sentence -  he suddenly screamed under the deafening heat??  what does that mean?

sand dust ground ? 

the last line could be reworded/removed.



> A different voice spoke over the radio. This one sounded unnaturally composed, and spoke with a slight sarcastic tone.



sarcastic?

****

Okay as for the story. this guy seems a bit too much to be believable. I am not saying there aren't haywire guys out there, but haywire guys get people killed, and so things tend to happen to them. Most mercenaries are very good at their jobs, they wouldn't be mercenaries long if they weren't, so his actions seemed unlikely to me. 

of course if this is based on a true character, well i guess there are exceptions to the rule. personally he'd find a bullet from me to him.

***

so this does need a touch or two. Try not to over tell outside the scene you are writing, when you drift too far it cheapens the characters actions and the scenery around.

Best luck with this piece

Sync


----------



## shadows (Dec 19, 2010)

Hi Len

  Ouch!  I hope I don’t kick anyone with my critiques.  I try to be polite and constructive.  I’ve had enough of the put-down reviews to know how much they hurt.


You say this is the first nine pages of the novel you are writing.  The start is very important.  It needs to hook the reader in, make them want to keep turning the pages.  To much of an info dump at the beginning is a turn off.  It is better if you can to drip information bit by bit instead of so much in the first couple of paragraphs.  I want to get to know the characters, I don't really care what sort of rifles they carry or who has used it in the past.


You often over-explain things which is less interesting for the reader but then, I don't like to be spoon-fed description as I like to put my own imagination into a story.



 




 Your story starts here:




> The sun burned brilliantly upon the unit while inducing atrocious amount of heat into their skin. They gradually made progress in the near empty desert. There were some objects in the scene, mostly large dried rocks and abandoned shacks, but for the most part the view remained flat. They light stepped towards the northern border of Kabul tracing the A76 highway where they would then revert back to camp and report the progress in addition to any findings. This wasn’t the first time McCarthy’s unit had performed the task, but it still kept him alert. Just a week ago, another squad from the Artillery Regiment was ambushed in the same area. Two of the eight men from the squad were killed within the first few minutes of the engagement. Two others were wounded and barely returned to camp with the support of reinforcements and transport helicopters.


 

 Looking at the first sentence - you say the sun burned brilliantly on the unit while inducing an atrociaous amount of heat into their skin.


 This could be simplified to say 


 As the unit made gradual progress in the near empty desert, the sun induced burning heat into their skin




> “Hey kiddy!” McCarthy heard Corporal Davis yell in the near empty desert, facing towards Hazelmere’s direction. “Shouldn’t you be home sucking on your mommy’s nipples!?”


 

 This I like.  It shows well Hazelmere's youth and  works better than the tell in the early paragraphs.  Dialogue is good  for showing






> He looked as he was if begging mercilessly at the insurgent to kill him. The insurgent did not reciprocate. At that moment, McCarthy realized this man was absolutely mad. The scene of him yelling at his enemy in the empty desert is hauntingly bizarre, and the mercenary proceeded to practice nothing less than brutal violence.



Your strength is dialogue but in description you have a tendency to overuse adjectives and adverbs, which weakens the words.


----------



## shadows (Dec 19, 2010)

sorry, had to break off as I seem to be having a problem with editing in the box.  Muat be because it's late.

you also change tense in the middle



> Hazelmere stepped straight past the rock, and instantly saw three insurgents crouching behind it. The insurgent closest to Hazelmere noticed him and began raising his rifle.
> 
> Dohn!
> 
> ...



You must have done a lot of research for this.  Good luck with it and thanks for the read.


----------



## garza (Dec 19, 2010)

Sync - Hazelmere exists. He is useful and expendable. Sometimes he is shot by someone on his own side, as you suggest, but usually he dosen't live long enough for that to happen. I've watched him work, I've seen him die, and I've seen the next Hazelmere take his place. Hazelmere is not the cool professional you are thinking of. He is programmed madness.

If all the suggestions made for editing this piece were followed, there would be nothing left.


----------



## Sync (Dec 19, 2010)

urgh, teach me to reply to a request to critique.

I was asked to come in and give a critique on this piece, had I known that it would then be critiqued by others, I wouldn't have came in.

Sorry Len, if my thoughts were too much. As I said/say/will always say. they are just my thoughts, not meant to say 'you MUST change.

lesson learnt


----------



## shadows (Dec 20, 2010)

Garza


> If all the suggestions made for editing this piece were followed, there would be nothing left.



I only give my perspective.  It is up to Len to agree or disagree and edit as she sees right but I'm sure any editor would be far more ruthless


----------



## len_ryuka (Dec 20, 2010)

shadows said:


> It is up to Len to agree or disagree and edit as *she* sees right but I'm sure any editor would be far more ruthless


 
I'm actually a "he" haha.

This is very interesting because the people who say that "Hazelmere" is not believable are _exclusively_ people with no military/firefight experience. On the other hand, people who say that he is realistic are people who have military experience. Naturally you would think that this would be the other way around, but I've made it clear in my piece that "Hazelmere" utilizes tried and true tactics like suppressive fire and flanking. They're extremely basic tactics, but it's difficult for people with no prior military experience to understand the true extent of psychological effect it has on the enemy residing on the blasting end of the barrel. Only when you've burrowed yourself behind cover as shrapnels are exploding centimeters beside you, will you truly understand how much of an understatement "suppressive fire" is. And that sort of leads into the validity of the character "Hazelmere"(and the extent of his skills), and I believe that is what Garza is saying. You won't believe what kind of people there are in this world until you've seen them.

As far as criticism goes, I do take into account about 50% of it, but they are mostly grammar, phrasing, tense, adverbs, and stuff like that. Conceptual wise I have to disagree with some(but I still do consider them, and picture in my mind how it would go if it was written that way). For instance:



shadows said:


> You say this is the first nine pages of the novel you are writing.  The start is very important.  It needs to hook the reader in, make them want to keep turning the pages.  To much of an info dump at the beginning is a turn off.  It is better if you can to drip information bit by bit instead of so much in the first couple of paragraphs.  I want to get to know the characters,



I completely disagree with this statement, and it's not because it's not true, it's because I don't feel that it applies in this particular situation. It's nine pages long when it's viewed on Microsoft Office, and the "info dump" before the segment where shadow says "Your story starts here" is actually exactly 1 out 9 pages. So personally I believe a person's patience can run a little longer than that. And even then I am describing the visual aspects in the first page(dedicated to Hazelmere and the physical setting in terms of where they are at).

I believe that visual "info dump" in the first page will give me the ability to focus strictly on action in the next 8 pages. Because combat is not someplace where you can always stop for a second and notice the setting. By having most of the visuals drawn out in the beginning, I do not have to slow down the pace of the combat in order to describe the physical attribute of the picture. The reader already has the world and the character drawn out physically, and now all I have to do is choreograph them. This way, the reader is also making less baseless assumptions in terms of visuals(what does this guy look like? where is he going? etc), which is not a good thing to have when action is involved.



> I don't really care what sort of rifles they carry or who has used it in the past.



This is actually an important point that gets more attention later on(and in the motives behind Hazelmere), which is why I pointed out that it's a "novel" rather than a "short story" but of course I wouldn't blame anybody for finding it unnecessary for a short reading.


To reply to Sync's criticisms:

I've incorporated some of your criticisms because I thought they were good, but here are some which I disagree that may be cleared up after some explaining:



> in my whole life I have never described a man's or woman's eyes as elegantly burnished...



I do agree, but I'm not going to use the "eyes" as the way you think most would. The reasons why I've portrayed his eyes, was to make him look "effeminate"(an ironic twist that plays out periodically in the novel). He's supposed to be classified into the "little girl/little kid" category within the minds of other soldiers. It's got nothing to do with his "soul" or anything, the usage of his "eyes" is strictly visuals and plot related. I did, however, delete the "piercing" as you've suggested, that was terrible on my part.



> as a reader, do you think I need to know about rust/scratches on a rifle? Does it show the man's character or just that the Lt was staring too long/talking too much about a rifle and armour? A solider is a solider, equipment is equipment. to me, this was all too much and could be trimmed way down to more about the observee's character rather than standard(and it is standard for a mercenary) equipment.



I have the same response to this as I've said for Shadow. It's for a plot purpose later on. And his equipments are actually irregular/nonstandard for a mercenary. In fact they are so irregular that only the Taliban uses them.



> on a recce/recon, why would you be yelling, especially if you were wary of an ambush. Think what you are saying/drawing. what makes sense to you sometimes not to the reader, so its something to consider changing.



I like to say that it's the emotion talking. It's definitely irrational for a soldier to scream during a recon mission, but here's the situation:
1: It's a near empty desert (where as suggested, ambushes regularly happen from hundreds of meters away usually out of naked sight.)
2: The heat is getting to your system while carrying 50 lbs of equipment.
3: There's a Contractor on your unit for unexplained reasons.
4: The contractor, to some extent, looks like a little girl.
5: The contractor seems like a good punch bag to relieve some mental stress onto.

These are the best explanations I can give to you in response to the great criticisms you guys have given me(of course, to the parts which I disagree with). Don't get me wrong, I've actually incorporated a number of aspects that were pointed out to me by both Shadow and Sync, they were mostly language issues that needed tightening up. Thanks for taking your time guys.


----------



## shadows (Dec 20, 2010)

Hi Len

Thank you for your explanation, it makes your reasoning clearer.



> By having most of the visuals drawn out in the beginning, I do not have  to slow down the pace of the combat in order to describe the physical  attribute of the picture. The reader already has the world and the  character drawn out physically, and now all I have to do is choreograph  them.



I have a lousy memory so would probably forget all the visuals drawn at the beginning plus I'd no doubt skim read them.   But I am a person who hates reading Charles Dickens because his stories are so bogged down with description.


----------



## Sync (Dec 20, 2010)

> This is very interesting because the people who say that "Hazelmere" is not believable are _exclusively_  people with no military/firefight experience. On the other hand, people  who say that he is realistic are people who have military experience



hmmm, I have 20 years military service. Too me, he sounded a bit like G.I. Joe or some Hollywood action figure, standing up in enemy fire blazing lead, not an enemy could hit him standing in the open. 

The eyes - to me eyes are used too often, that was my point, like they are suppose to be the gateway to everything about the character. they are just eyes to me.

Thanks for explaining the why's and why nots. 

Best luck with this piece, Len 

Sync


----------



## len_ryuka (Dec 20, 2010)

Sync said:


> hmmm, I have 20 years military service. Too me, he sounded a bit like G.I. Joe or some Hollywood action figure, standing up in enemy fire blazing lead, not an enemy could hit him standing in the open.
> Sync


 
it wasn't that they couldn't hit him, it was that they couldn't shoot at him at all being suppressed from his accurate bursts. Sync, you were CF military?, then you would know the term Covering Fire correct?(and you know the whole purpose of it). Usually you're squad-mates are the ones who give you covering fire so you could run from position to position safely. Hazelmere is using a slightly more advanced technique of "Firing on the move". which is exactly what it sounds like, giving yourself covering fire while you're moving in the open(so you don't get shot). This alludes to the reason why he is carrying so much ammo, because as a loner, he doesn't rely on others to give him any covering fire(and like Garza said, nobody cares if he dies).

The most recent Medal of Honor recipient Giunta came under an L-shaped ambush, and his squad was immediately suppressed down. He and one of his buddy "suppressed back" with a few frag grenades, then moved out into the open with some suppressive fire. For reference:

Salvatore Giunta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And I hope that fills most of the "realism" void. I'm so tired haha, no more writing until holidays are over. Happy holidays guys.


----------



## Sync (Dec 20, 2010)

I was on loan to a few countries' forces, but also served in the CF.

You have a great holiday, Len


----------



## Guy Faukes (Dec 20, 2010)

garza said:


> Sync - Hazelmere exists. He is useful and expendable. Sometimes he is shot by someone on his own side, as you suggest, but usually he dosen't live long enough for that to happen. I've watched him work, I've seen him die, and I've seen the next Hazelmere take his place. Hazelmere is not the cool professional you are thinking of. He is programmed madness.


 So, he's a rather reckless character that breaks the "shoot then duck into cover" dance on both sides? 
Is Hazelmere a spontaneous character that just occurs within a unit or is it mentality part of training?


----------

