Loving the changes. Too bad you put the cap rivet in the wrong spot for the knee belt. It's supposed to sit in the top corner, not in the middle.
Anyways, you're ready for approval. Good job trooper.
You can take the shins apart and put them back the other way around. I'm no expert on AM building techniques since it's so different than normal armour, but there's a tutorial on the issue somewhere on the forum. Should be a pinned thread.
Thanks. it was as I thought. You'll need to change the way your calves close, so that the opening is face inwards instead of outwards. This was recently noted in the CRL
This is a basic level requirement, so obviously this needs to be addressed before I can continue with the review.
Well, I wear TM, not FX but I've had great success with doing the same thing. And it should be the way to do it unless you do screen accurate, which is basically the same thing but with a twist.
I would appreciate it if I got to speak for myself.
Anyways. The photo's are terrible, sorry to say. But I think I've seen enough for EIB approval, and with a few hours of work you could make it beyond that.
Good work trooper!
I agree on the biceps and forearms. Way too big for you. Remember to trim them in the back, where there is no raised edge.
With that said, I think this is an easy approval. Good job trooper.
In the long run it's absolutely worth going for quality, IE in this case CFO from Mark. If you don't, the risk is you'll be beating yourself for not doing so, and spending more money upgrading and replacing things you already had of lesser quality.
I'm in it for the wonkyness. If everything was perfect from the start it'd be too easy to replicate.
I like the challenge. I may not have gone to the extreme with my personal armour of current, but rest assured that it is in the pipeline..
No it will be more expensive than that unfortunately. But we will run multiple detachment forums on the same server, which all hopefully will help to pay the fee.
I'm not the one making all the decisions either. I can't make up arbitrary requirements when something isn't specified even if it might be incorrect compared to screen used. But I'll try to add this to my mental list of possible future requirements.
While it is a nice catch of you Sven, and something I would not mind seeing as a future requirement, it's nothing that I'll be taking into consideration this time.