I doth protest. On the Football boot thing, what about the Adidas Predator Boots with the plasticky teeth thingies. Physics state this gives more spin on the ball. As deployed by Becks to awsome effect against Greece.
Bad Company and Naughty Dogs
- Thread starter TJ Lambini
- Start date
D
duffistuta
Guest
But aren't BC's Spyder's electros? And don't Cockers go down as often as Impys anyway?
Surely Company would do better simply because, with the best will in the world, the Spyder is a less accurate gun as the shooting platform is less stable due to its kick? Although having not shot a BC Spyder someone may tell me I'm wrong here...
And if the Dogs had electro Cockers then, like Stongl says, they've got more paint in the air than with their standard guns.
Surely Company would do better simply because, with the best will in the world, the Spyder is a less accurate gun as the shooting platform is less stable due to its kick? Although having not shot a BC Spyder someone may tell me I'm wrong here...
And if the Dogs had electro Cockers then, like Stongl says, they've got more paint in the air than with their standard guns.
Yes, Baca had a BC Spyder and remarkably it differed not one important iota from any other Classic or LCD AMG Spyder (different barrel, different reg). And yes, IMHO, that is and was a detriment to the team's efforts.
And there is a distinction to be made between electric triggers and electropneumatic marker operations. The AMG has an electric trigger which offers an electrically managed sear release instead of a mechanically actuated sear release but otherwise is not substantially different in it's operating process from other Spyders. And the AMG with its longer body and throw does have a significant kick that forces the tip down as the marker fires.
hello???
Do I have a point here and in the other thread, or am I talking rubbish, as no-one seems to want to comment on what I've written?!
Do I have a point here and in the other thread, or am I talking rubbish, as no-one seems to want to comment on what I've written?!
I had the 'pleasure' of using a BC Spyder at the World Cup. They joked with me that is was 'just a Spyder' but I was intrigued.
Anyone who knows me knows I'm into technology and fancy bits of kit
They do have quite a bit of kick which can throw you off, especially when compared to my level 10 C&C X-mag, but they are fast, point well, and shoot pretty darn good considering they were straight out of the box apparently. I was impressed to say the least!
You can shoot it pretty fast for sweet spotting.
Holding it firmly at the firing range I was quite happily hitting what I was aiming it at. Not quite as accurate and I put that down to them not being quite as consistant as my gun, but still no slouch.
Still wouldn't by choice use one over my other fancy bits of kit, but heck if I was sponsored to use one and fly around the world doing so I wouldn't argue in the slightest.
I don't think they are that disadvantaged by using them. Maybe slightly but it's how a player interacts with their marker that is important. The best marker won't be worth squat if the player can't hit the opposition with it.
Some players when picking up an electro version of a gun, say the cocker, suddenly get carried away with shooting fast, and lose the ability to aim accurately.
Lots of paint is important at certain times (break etc), but accuracy wins out overall if you ask me. So people with manual cockers shooting accurately will be competitive against people with electro cockers just spraying and preying. Now Fast guns that people shoot accurately are where it's at
manike
Yo dicky, you mean this point?
>>>But I make the point that with equal amount of talent, in my opinion, the team/player with the more technologically advanced marker will be more successful. Their success could be put down to them having more talent than their opponents.Thats not to say that the marker makes the player but that it can go a very long way in maximising an already existing skill/ talent.
?
That IS what everyone's arguing about dude...and I think most people seem to be agreeing with ya. See, Manike just did in his last line - just he had to go round tha houses and visit his Aunt May b4 getting there...
>>>But I make the point that with equal amount of talent, in my opinion, the team/player with the more technologically advanced marker will be more successful. Their success could be put down to them having more talent than their opponents.Thats not to say that the marker makes the player but that it can go a very long way in maximising an already existing skill/ talent.
?
That IS what everyone's arguing about dude...and I think most people seem to be agreeing with ya. See, Manike just did in his last line - just he had to go round tha houses and visit his Aunt May b4 getting there...
Firepower does win games, if you fire your marker fast (12bps+), both hands and at a consistant rate you have an immediate advantage over your opponents for obvious reasons.
The spyder that BC use can fire fast enough, i dont see how their at a disadvantage by using it.
Besides, the point to remember here is that winning a paintball game involves many factors, some being more significant than others. The marker used, if it can fire over 12bps aint really an issue, in contrast to factors like team work and individual skill anyway.....IMHO
Tj's original question more or less asks - at the highest level, can the marker used 'tip' the balance in favor of a team using a 'better' marker.
I believe this is only true up to a certain point, if both teams can fire fast and i mean FAST. I dosnt matter whether its a bushmaster or a spyder being used, its the bps that counts.
The spyder that BC use can fire fast enough, i dont see how their at a disadvantage by using it.
Besides, the point to remember here is that winning a paintball game involves many factors, some being more significant than others. The marker used, if it can fire over 12bps aint really an issue, in contrast to factors like team work and individual skill anyway.....IMHO
Tj's original question more or less asks - at the highest level, can the marker used 'tip' the balance in favor of a team using a 'better' marker.
I believe this is only true up to a certain point, if both teams can fire fast and i mean FAST. I dosnt matter whether its a bushmaster or a spyder being used, its the bps that counts.
In commenting on their win at the 2002 IAO, Brimstone Smoke said they had to change their style of play to compensate for the lower range and accuracy of the Spyder (compared to the Matrixes and Cockers they normally shoot) and shoot more paint. (PGI, issue 163, pg 105 )
I heard the Dogs are moving to Eblade Cockers next year. It seems to me that they wouldn't be going electro if they didn't see a benefit to it.
So yes, it seems that between equally skillfull teams, technology can be a deciding factor. Thus we have:
(team skill) x (technology) >= (opposing team skill) x (technology)
)I heard the Dogs are moving to Eblade Cockers next year. It seems to me that they wouldn't be going electro if they didn't see a benefit to it.
So yes, it seems that between equally skillfull teams, technology can be a deciding factor. Thus we have:
(team skill) x (technology) >= (opposing team skill) x (technology)
Shamu: good point well made...
Ok, I'm not going to start getting into equations here (if K is a constant, effecting to team/personal skill etc...), but would it be fair to say, on the flip-side, that if technology levels are equal, than winning will come down to skill? Of course it will So therefore (prepared to be grilled), how can anyone expect to win without anything less than the best equipment?
Matski: your post ignores the fact that I'm assuming all other factors are equal.
Ok, I'm not going to start getting into equations here (if K is a constant, effecting to team/personal skill etc...), but would it be fair to say, on the flip-side, that if technology levels are equal, than winning will come down to skill? Of course it will
So therefore (prepared to be grilled), how can anyone expect to win without anything less than the best equipment?Matski: your post ignores the fact that I'm assuming all other factors are equal.