Page 13 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 236

Thread: Living Legends 8 bans First Strike Rounds

  1. #121
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    Yeah, although the range at which you get that "close" type impact that breaks skin is going to be further out.

    Given that new players are already trepidatious about pain, as a field owner I'd probably want to keep FSRs (like tourney players) away from rentals and new players.

  2. #122
    Insider Pump Scout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin Rapids, WI, USA
    Posts
    868
    I wonder how the serious FSR guys would feel about an FSR only game.

  3. #123
    Insider TierOneJeff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by Pump Scout View Post
    I wonder how the serious FSR guys would feel about an FSR only game.
    Ironically, I see a lot of FSR at the magfed games I run, and I have fielded complaints about too many FSR by some players. Maybe a case of 'good for the goose, not for the gander'?

    Though there are a lot of people on the magfed FB groups that cry out for more FSR/shaped rounds and that if they were more affordable they would use them exclusively.
    If there is another group of people outside of paintballers who will jump on a bandwagon faster than the speed of light - I have yet to meet them.

  4. #124
    Insider HipboyScott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Montville, CT
    Posts
    134
    I am totally cool with the idea of FSR-only but I wouldn't want to be forced into only using them in FSR-ONLY games, unless as mentioned, the rounds were down to $0.10 or so.

    It would make a very different game regardless, but the costs would be increasingly annoying as the arms race would push people towards things like full-auto first-strike more often.

    As-is, money and common sense/logic is what usually makes it so that the people choose FSR for precision and roundball for suppression. Or when they are playing up tight to the enemy where the FSR confer zero ballistic gains. And that's fine, because there are many many times when using the rounds is just unwarranted: and so I'd prefer a game that stays mixed. Personally I find that trying to shoot both through the same gun is usually a matter of compromising the accuracy/speed of the paintballs when you do shoot them, but I will often have a roundball shooter on hand if I'm going to go running around.
    Last edited by HipboyScott; 05-26-2015 at 11:07 PM.

  5. #125
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Northern, VA
    Posts
    359
    Supports Inception Designs
    Quote Originally Posted by PBSteve View Post


    Definitely made me stop and think for a second.

    The hit on top isn't particularly unique, that kind of thing is seen in regular paintball hits all the time. The streak is really interesting, though. It makes me think the fins and the additional material where they meet the capsule portion is providing additional lateral strength to the round, meaning glancing shots are less likely to break or even deform, and the nature of the round makes it less likely to tumble on impact. That seems like it would explain the sliding pattern.
    That would be a key difference in terminal performance. But, here's the question: How do we evaluate shaped projectile products in a consistent manner for this sort of thing? Is the damage in such a case, a significant difference in health risks?

    Quote Originally Posted by PBSteve View Post
    Yeah, although the range at which you get that "close" type impact that breaks skin is going to be further out.

    Given that new players are already trepidatious about pain, as a field owner I'd probably want to keep FSRs (like tourney players) away from rentals and new players.
    That's exactly the case- the same types of hits, just further out and the vast majority of them will not be worse than the worse of a paintball hit, Bare skin excepting (on a related note, for a long time I've thought the shirtless guys are close to being, if not actually, dumb).

    As a First Strike Only shooter for the last several years, I'd be fine with that as a policy if it was applied to double finger electros and, response triggers (they are both work arounds to "semi-auto only" rules that most rental players are stuck with by default), no matter the experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pump Scout View Post
    I wonder how the serious FSR guys would feel about an FSR only game.
    As one of those guys- if it was all 'sniper' rifles, I'd be fine with it but, it'd slow the game down.

    Quote Originally Posted by TierOneJeff View Post
    Ironically, I see a lot of FSR at the magfed games I run, and I have fielded complaints about too many FSR by some players. Maybe a case of 'good for the goose, not for the gander'?

    Though there are a lot of people on the magfed FB groups that cry out for more FSR/shaped rounds and that if they were more affordable they would use them exclusively.
    This is exactly what I don't want to see. If the majority of players adopt FS rounds, the game will simply revert to the currently limited tactics over a longer range. By limited tactics, I mean those currently favored in today's walk on playing environment. Today's playing environment is almost universally on smaller fields, with bunkers (or similarly protective structures) every 15-20ft in every direction, clear lines of sight, and the games are shorter. The individual tactics one can effectively use with regular paint, on these fields are limited to:

    Snapshooting
    Closing in and working angles
    Suppression (to include laning)
    Accuracy by Volume

    The tactics that I've always perfered or sought are:
    Accurate shots from concealment, at ranges that allow for accurate fire, while far enough to reduce the likelihood of detection. In short, sniping, or in a more generic situation- marksmanship.

    I've tried repeatedly to get this capability, rifled barrels (I never saw the Autococker/Sniper or longer barrel myths plausible), the flatline barrel (which increased range but, no impact on accuracy), and later the apex barrel (with more of the same). Watched the "Paintball Sniper" concept come and go and I was starting to settle into the traditional tactics and was getting bored with the game when the First Strike came out.

  6. #126
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Northern, VA
    Posts
    359
    Supports Inception Designs
    FYI, I' ve joined the ASTM and have gotten the welcome email from Mike Lukas. I'm currently checking out the interface.

  7. #127
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    Quote Originally Posted by UV Halo View Post
    How do we evaluate shaped projectile products in a consistent manner for this sort of thing? Is the damage in such a case, a significant difference in health risks?
    The thing I worry about isn't so much a general increase in risk of injury, but an increase in the absolute number of severe of injuries.

    I actually have similar qualms about barrels that apply spin to the paintball - the issue there being that they store a non-trivial amount of energy in the rotational inertia of the round, and would therefore actually carry more energy at 300 fps than a standard paintball from a standard barrel. I imagine that rotation is slower to dissipate than the translational velocity as well. And as anyone who's had a hole blown in their shirt from a flatline barrel, that energy is transferred on impact.

    That said, I still like shooting my apex :P
    Last edited by PBSteve; 06-02-2015 at 08:28 PM.
    Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  8. #128
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    http://www.techpb.com/forum/topic/31...ventures-blog/

    Finally found it.

    Energy due to rotation: E = 1/2 I w^2

    I = 2/5 M R^2 (assuming the fill is rotating with the ball, which I don't think is an unreasonable approximation)
    = .4 * .003 kg * (7.46e-5) m^2

    12000 rpms -> ~1250 rad/s

    E = 1/2 I w^2 = .2 * .003 kg * (7.46e-5) m^2 * 1250^2 = .07 J

    Hrm, guess it's not as big as I remember, thought it was a few joules. LMK if I plugged the numbers wrong.
    Last edited by PBSteve; 06-02-2015 at 09:04 PM.
    Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  9. #129
    http://www.joomag.com/magazine/mag-f...34675119?short

    Some testing of FS vs Valken paint, Page 54.

  10. #130
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    Very surprising they're similar at 55 inches.
    Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts

    I work for the company building the Paragon

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •