WTS-Mike
New Member
Preachah Man
Former Owner of Wolverine Tactical Supply and general all around nice guy
Posts: 577
|
Post by WTS-Mike on Sept 28, 2002 0:25:33 GMT -5
same here on the full face for me......after my nose was almost perforated thru by a stock AEG at around 20'!!! It's a definite for me for the cqb games (hallenkampf)
|
|
derick
New Member
For a good time call - 867-5309
Posts: 566
|
Post by derick on Sept 30, 2002 0:54:22 GMT -5
This is how I see it, 400 fps shoul be the max for assault rifles/sub machine guns, pretty much anything you would be using for CQB. and I think that anything up to 500 fps would be fine for sniper rifles. I mean, if anyone gets close enough, they should have a side arm but if theyre a good sniper, that shouldnt even happen. I just dont want to be at m40 or somehing and be in so much pain that it isnt even fun anymore, I mean, I am not all about hurting someone, i just want them to know that theyre out. I mean, we are supposed to play by the honors system, if we dint trust the other players, then we dont have too much of an honors system. The only reason i really see the need for an upgraded gun is for long range/accuracy. Its not like you really use that too much in cb anyways right? Well i will see what you all think of that and go fro,m there, besides, i think some fields might have their own "RULES OF ENGAGEMENT" later be safe derick
|
|
|
Post by LargePrime on Sept 30, 2002 1:18:08 GMT -5
Has anyone considered actualy measuring energy insted of the FPS? Of course the given FPS are with .2's right? But many players have large variences in the energy of the BB as they start using heavier BB's. Sometimes as much as 15-40% increase.
|
|
derick
New Member
For a good time call - 867-5309
Posts: 566
|
Post by derick on Sept 30, 2002 12:10:16 GMT -5
I always measure my guns with .25s I DO that because that is what I mailny use because they are more accurate, sure cutting down a little on the fps but not really enough to make a difference. Yeah i have thought about measuring in the energy but i didnt thin that would fly considering it would be more confusing.Yeah i get what youre saying though example. Would you rather get shot with a gun shooting .45s at 350 fps. or a gun shooting 450 with .20s? Well, i would take the 450 fps because it creates less energy causing less of an impact. YEah i get it and I agree but i still think it will be too hard to measure that way. derick
|
|
|
Post by LargePrime on Sept 30, 2002 13:27:21 GMT -5
All you do is measure the FPS and use the formula
velocity * velocity* bb mass * .0000462
so if you are chronoed at 400FPS with .25's then it's
400 * 400 * .25's * .0000462 = 1.848 or 1.85 or 1.9
Once you know it's not that hard, right?
But you raise an interesting point. Are thoes FPS limits with .2's or anything we want?
|
|
Vitalis
New Member
I want to shoot somebody, airsoft style...
Posts: 320
|
Post by Vitalis on Sept 30, 2002 13:32:41 GMT -5
Those fps limits are all given that you are using .2 gram bbs.
Of course we would convert to joules for the sake of different weight bbs.
It is easier for people to grasp the idea of bb limits when given an fps rating. But yes, every can and will be converted to joules of energy.
Vitalis
|
|
|
Post by LargePrime on Sept 30, 2002 15:28:44 GMT -5
Having just read the sticky topic "Rules for Michigan Players" on I realize we are all well aware of energy limits.
A suggestion. Players should crono thier airsofts with the weight they are going to use, and then do the math. They should not switch to .2 and crono then switch back. Many airsofts will actualy change energy levels of the BB if you change the BB weight. Sometimes the energy level can change dramaticaly.
The title of the sticky thread might also be changed to "Michigan Airsoft Sanctioned Rules", as these aren't the rules for all michigan players. Of course this is semantics.
Could we actualy have the MiA Rules posted on a seprate web site (i.e. the MiA site) and not in a forum post?
|
|
|
Post by LargePrime on Sept 30, 2002 16:59:23 GMT -5
I have been reading fast trying to catch up. I wanted to ask a question. It is about the FPS limits.
To me the break points seem arbatrary. People just seem to like a piticular number. Probably because thats where their gun is upgraded to.
So heres my question. What if we ploted all the upgrades to look for a point where it makes sense to break from one category to the next? Perhaps i should explain. If we listed all the Expected FPS of all the possable combos of upgrades we might notice something like to get somewhere between 350 and 400 thier are only a very few combos. So we put the break between 350 and 400, say 375. Now i am just making up numbers here. We would also have to rely on some expert airsoft smiths for advice. And perhaps thier are enough upgrade combos to hit every 10 FPS between 300 and 500. But perhaps some experts could say 'this combo is rare, and this more common.' and so perhaps we could weigh that in determining our break points.
Now of course i should be taking my own advice and using Joules and stating stuff about .2g bb's, but i didn't.
Has any one suggested that the FPS breakpoints should be along the lines of where we all have invested our money?
|
|
Vitalis
New Member
I want to shoot somebody, airsoft style...
Posts: 320
|
Post by Vitalis on Sept 30, 2002 18:12:20 GMT -5
I am not fond of the break at the money idea because some people will throw any money they can at the SPS (Small Penis Syndrome) ;D In an effort to sport the fastest shooting super gun (why else would anyone upgrade an AEG to 600fps?) they will dump all kinds of testosterone cash into it.
We are trying to find a common ground between safety, pain, and what is feasable.
The numbers that I am suggesting are hardly arbitrary numbers. I am trying to balance assault rifles to have good range, good fps, and good power with something greater like Support Weapons, that should still be in the playability balance of fps, range, and power, but still higher than the common rifle.
Personally, as I said above, I think these limits need to raise.
-Vitalis
|
|
|
Post by LargePrime on Sept 30, 2002 22:48:38 GMT -5
Exackly.
I didn't envision a system to reward Testosterone Driven Buying (TDB). I thought to suggest a system that allowed people to do common upgrades to get them where they want to be. A mass production kind of thing.
I would love to see a system that totaly screwed TDB. Like a FPS rating that rewarded stock guns and made it difficult for upgraded guns to compete. Like how about this
0 - 300 FPS no minimum 301 - 400 40 foot minimum 401 - 500 80 foot minimum 501 - 600 120 foot minimum
Now where do we want our guns to fit?
But my first suggestion was geared more to preserving the investment of the most players.
|
|
Vitalis
New Member
I want to shoot somebody, airsoft style...
Posts: 320
|
Post by Vitalis on Sept 30, 2002 23:51:16 GMT -5
I understand wanting to screw TDB, but, and this is a big but... In making rules, we need to balance what both sides of the issue want if they are represented by an equal majority of players.
Myself, I think I am a middle grounder when it comes to FPS and upgrades... I think the 150% spring is the ultimate when it comes to assault rifles. M120 or M130 for squad guns. BIG springs for sniper rifles.
Also...
You have to remember that most hand guns are seriously outshooting AEG rifles in stock form. AEG prolly comes in around 270 to 300 fps... A stock GBB shoots around 330 to 350.
So now you have a case of the handguns outpowering battle rifles...
Does not make sense to me.
I still say that arm's length, lets call it five feet, should be 1 fps to 400 fps based on .20 BBs
Squad Weapons can shoot up to 440 (this will allow the M130 spring) but have a 20 to 25 foot engagement limit. No more than that though.
Up to 500 or 550, bolt action snipers only. Fifty foot engagement limit.
And a squad gun should and will be called out specifically in the rules. A freaking M16 or M4 with a beta C mag is NOT a squad weapon. Squad weapons would be M60, M249, RPK, HK 21... That type of thing.
JMO though...
-Vitalis
|
|
|
Post by Viking on Oct 1, 2002 0:21:11 GMT -5
Vitalis I like the idea of classifying each gun and limiting upgrades to its classification. However this would only confuse and annoy people.
Johnny buys an M4A1 and upgrades it with an M120 (170%).
According to the rules (if this is how they were written) being an M4A1 this is assaults weapon not a support weapon. However having an M120 would place him under support weapon rules.
We cannot go around telling people because the model gun they have bought they can only have the following upgrades. However, it would be nice to see all assault weapons around the same fps, all support weapons around the same fps and all sniper weapons around the same fps it isn’t our right to say because you have an Mp5 you are restricted up to a 150%.
However, these rules were created as a guideline for MiA and if MiA wants to all paddle the same boat I think this type of restrictions will add a lot to airsoft in general and better yet airsoft in MI.
Pretty much all we have heard was that our rules are AO rules. AO rules are a fine example to follow, they are proven and were created by memorable veterans. However, the rebel side of me thinks to self, this isn’t Ohio, this is Michigan. I would like to see something that set us apart from our neighbors to the south… apart from the airsoft community in general.
By adding restrictions to weapons in category like Assault, Support, and Marksmen, or what ever, we add a few things to the game, mainly a more realistic battlefield. This would make it impossible for highly modified MP5s to outshoot/over power sniper rifles. By doing so the strategy in our games will be more sensitive and constructive. Actually deploying snipers for the long-range kill instead of getting the super upgraded AUG gunner (remembers the evil LK AUG *shutters *)to take the shot.
It would define the classes, to say, in our games. There would actually be snipers, assaulters, and support units. But again, for such rules to be written there would have to be a huge showing of support for such a change in our games. I am sure some of our power hungry super monkeys out here wouldn’t like it if they had to take their evil M150s out of their AUGs and what not. But then again, if the majority shows interest in such a change then maybe it should be written. I for one play airsoft because its more realistic then PB and anything else out there (aside from maybe simulations) and I think some kind of rule like what Vitalis started to explain and I rambled on about would even add more to the realism.
-V I K I N G SEMTEX Operative[/color]
|
|
|
Post by frostee on Oct 1, 2002 6:09:44 GMT -5
Interesting ideas. Could someone take the time to write out the concepts fully so that everyone can review it here and post their questions and concerns?
Edit: Since we are pondering classifications let me throw this thought into the mix. Since true support weapons (like the M60) are seldom, if ever, seen in our circles we might want to consider generalizing support weapons a bit more by considering Hi Cap mags as part of the support weapons package. Example- someone has an M4 with a C mag. Maybe that should fall under the support category. That would allow for spreading out the weapons a little more and might bring a little more realism into the game, since the classification for an assault weapon would require use of the standard capacity magazine. Just a thought.
Hopefully Viking or Vitalis, or both, will post the concept of classifications in full so slow brains like mine can get a grip on it. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Minky on Oct 1, 2002 7:37:43 GMT -5
I have to say, I'm really glad to see some discussion going on in here again lately! I also really like the new direction we seem to be moving in. I'm interested in the "upgrade restriction based on gun type" idea that Vitalis and Viking have been examining. A few thoughts off the top of my head though: 1) Vitalis, I think you're overestimating the power of most GBB pistols. I would say a more realistic average for pistols (from budget KWCs on up to WA guns) would be more like 300-330 if not a little lower. I can feel the LargePrime in me coming out, thinking that perhaps we could make an effort to chrono and record all the gas pistols present on game days, in order to try and get a realistic average for our players. We'd need to record temperature, gas type, BB weight, as well as gun model. That's not really what the main issue is now though, so I'll just keep that idea on the back burner till later. 2) How many different "levels" of guns do we want, and what will be fair to the people that have already upgraded? Do we want a simple distinction between SMG/Battle rifle, SAW, and Sniper? Doing it this way would mean that pretty much every Tokyo Marui AEG will fall under SMG/Rifle, so all TM guns could be upgraded similarly. Do we want to further classify within the TM line and make distinctions between SMGs and long rifles? We could try and base limits on internal barrel length, but then you run into the issue of certain upgrades performing differently in short and long guns, and alienating people who have already upgraded their short guns. Also where does the TM PSG-1 fit in? It's an AEG, but is semi only, so does it fall under the limits applied to bolt action spring rifles? What about Classic Army, Airsoft Elite, and ICS guns that come pre-upgraded from the factory? Scariest of all, what about n00bs who see the $25 400 FPS upgrade when they order and get it installed in their "Sniper" MP5s? Ok that last one is only scary to me, since all n00bs frighten me. ;D I'm sure I'm forgetting some of the points I wanted to bring up, but I better stop rambling...for now.
|
|
derick
New Member
For a good time call - 867-5309
Posts: 566
|
Post by derick on Oct 1, 2002 12:29:21 GMT -5
OK. Here is what i see
1. WE hould not measure with FPS< but JOULES for more accuracy
2. We should consider any gun a support weapon if it meets the c mag qualifications and the power/energy rating. WE hsould do thi because "johnny" wants to be a supprot gunner but doesnt have he money to buy an m60 or m249 so he makes his m4 into a support weapon. Clearly understandable
3. The "knife"/ take the hit rule always in effect so that noone gets shot with a high powered gun pointe blank
4., assault weapons should consist of anything up to 400 fps using .2s or what ever the energy value is in joules. The engagement limit should be a safe distance, no closer than like 5 ft as to where the knife rule would be in effect.
5 Squad assult weapons shold be anywhere from 0 to 450 fps using .2s and they must have a cmag, not HIGH CAPS. They should have Very large capacities of bbs. Engagement limit should be around en feeet or further cinsidering that is considered the SUPPORT and not the first to go in.
6. SNipers shoul be anywhere from 0 to 600 fps using .2s and they should be semi auto or bolt action Engagement limits shoiould be 30 feet. A side arm would then be used for close combat.
|
|