Welcome To P8ntballer.com
The Home Of European Paintball
Sign Up & Join In

Proposal for a summit about keeping markers legal

Wadidiz

EnHaNcE tHa TrAnCe
Jul 9, 2002
1,619
0
0
73
Stockholm, EU
Visit site
I see your point Simon and understand it. I suppose the key word is CLEARLY. I didn't have as much time as I would have liked in Paris but I made a definite, deliberate attempt to watch some of the players shooting on the tape closest to me and I was standing only a couple of meters away from them. Sure, I observed shots coming out a fraction of a second after trigger activation but that didn't phase me.

But I would have reacted to a marker that kept firing a shot or two after about a half or a full second. I'm not saying I would instantly pull that player but it would cause me to follow that player and to continue to observe and if it clearly was in violation of the rules, that player would get penalized.

But I agree, we have to be extremely careful about subjective observations just like we would about penalizing a player for wiping or maliciously bonus balling. It has to be CRYSTAL CLEAR. But just like in the case of witnessing wiping (the penalties could destroy in one stroke a team's chances) we don't have to be able to prove empirically what took place, we just have to sure of what we saw.

Steve
 

DonLKSAB

Member
Jun 2, 2002
40
0
16
Sweden
www.evil-zone.com
It WOULD be so much easier if we could all play full auto and cap the ROF at something like 10, and then have someone (Simon ? ) manufacture a matchbox size device to strap to the barrel, that measured shots per second, and gave off an alarm when you surpassed the 10 BPS.... it would be cheap and easy to manufacture.
Well full auto is not allowed everywere.
So lets try something similar.
Cap the ROF to something good between 10 and 15.
Get the matchbox BPS counters.
Then we keep todays rules about triggerbounce.
If you have your gun caped to 10 and still gets bounce or extra shots you have a problem.
And it would be easyer for the refs to see the extra shot.

Mats at Racegun have a small fantastic device.
Its the size of a computer CD player and have lots of features.
BPS is one of them. Its some kind of balistic crono.
And it has lots of unwanted features and seems a bit old :)
So a new box with only the features we want should not be big today. Or we simply connect a telescope microphone and have a ref in a tower mesuaring the ROF from a distance.

I dont think the paint sellers would like this but in the long run we would get more players and the chanse for a leagal banning of the sport gets smaller.
It would make the entry to tournament paintball cheaper both in paint but also in equipment. You dont need a top end marker sins almost any electro out there can do 10 or 15 BPS.

The next thing people will think about are manual guns.
Its not that common with non electros that bounces.
And if they do they can be caugth in the test.

/DonLKSAB
 

Steve Hancock

Free man!
Aug 7, 2003
1,489
0
0
43
Birmingham (UK)
students.bugs.bham.ac.uk
Originally posted by manike human perception sucks.
Have you ever studied it depth? It is a highly flexible and adaptive system/set of systems. The reason it might not be as effective at making individual specific judgments is that it can't limit it's self to just one measurement. And technically you would still be using the perceptual system if you were viewing a measuring device.
 

DK1

New Member
Jun 3, 2003
18
0
0
Visit site
member for a year, first post here :)

hate to ressurect a thread, but I got to thinking about this thing today...

I think one problem is that there isn't one professional league that everyone can look to. There's no organizing body to lead the way. However, I think one thing that could be looked into is standardized code for each gun. It would take banning some things, and standardizing some parts... but here we go...

I think each manufacturer should have to sumbit one board design for each marker they wish to be eligable for the tournament series. IE. you have one board layout for intimidators, one for matrices, one for shockers, one for impulses, etc... And one set of standardized code for each gun.

Ban aftermarket boards. period. No team boards, no team settings. Everyone has to submit what they use, and every marker in the tournament of that make must have the exact same board. I'm sorry for aftermarket makers, but this would force companies to put in quality stock components, and eliminate the variability in "custom" software and boards. Abuse it, you lose it.

Each company only gets one board for each significantly different marker, thus, it wouldn't matter what kind of matrix you had, they only get ONE board, and one set of code.

Let the code be verified, and shown to be legal.

Also, make every company make it so that their boards can be flashed easily on location at the start of each game. Standardize the programming ports. I honestly don't feel that this should be too hard to accomplish. You can use a palm (available for the same price as a regular chrono), and the manufacturer supplied link program. One palm per field (maybe another for backup) should be adequate. It would be able to easily hold all the software required for tons of different markers.

The player walks up at the start of the game, gives their markers particular timings to the ref, who reflashes their board on the spot to the preapproved software. They then chrono, and we now KNOW that they don't have cheater boards in the gun.

I would also ban adjustable debounce. No question. We did fine without it for years, it stands to reason that we will do just fine without it now. The players have abused and misused it, so they now lose the right to use it. Each marker would have a "organization" approved standard debounce setting... and I'd make it high.

Standardize the trigger switches in all markers that use microswitches. Opticals will be a different matter, but from my experience it's not the opticals that are having so much switch bounce.

I personally would ban magentically returned triggers. I just find them WAY to easy to sweetspot, regardless of how they are set.

The vernier dials on the new angels would have to go, as well as any external trigger modification that didn't require tools. The locking system is too easy to cheat with. Same goes for max-flow tanks for that matter...

Buttons on your gun = teh banned. You now get TWO switches. An on/off, and one for the eye. Trigger programming = banz0red. I know it stinks, but if you want legal, this is how it's got to be. Switches would be inspected to verify that they are not a 3 point switch also.

I know this seems like a lot of heavy rules, but I only see it's main application being for Am division and up. At that point, if you want to compete, you will have to sacrifice some of the novelty and bells and whistles for the integrity of the game. I also think that if you at least institute this at a high level, lower levels will start to comply as well. Players won't be able to cheat their way to the top, because they know their crutch will be kicked out from under them when they get there.


There's more to it, but I really think that this could be done. It'd be a slight pain to set up, but after this you wouldn't need any fancy detection stuff... you'd know exactly what was on the field. BTW, I'd probably also make a freaking robot to measure pull weight and length so that when the ref is inspecting and reflashing the gun, if they thought the trigger violated the rules it could be verified quickly...

Ian
 

Wadidiz

EnHaNcE tHa TrAnCe
Jul 9, 2002
1,619
0
0
73
Stockholm, EU
Visit site
DK1,

I suppose we have to hear back from some of the more technical posters such as Evil.one, Jack Wood and Manike to get some more informed opinions about the feasibility of these suggestions. Perhaps this is the way to do it. If it is then it is unfortunate that PB requires F1 type technical scrutiny without the gigantic financial base that F1 has.

Paintball has gone from a relatively technically simple sport to one which demands lots of technology and money, which is unfortunate because that development could stall its growth.

Too bad we can't come up with simpler, less expensive and less manpower-intensive ways to keep our sport safe and fair.

I'm still holding out for the really elegant solution.

Steve
 

DonLKSAB

Member
Jun 2, 2002
40
0
16
Sweden
www.evil-zone.com
DK1.

Its far to easy to "hide" a cheat on a board.
You could have one software that will shop up in tests and that will be updateble by the refs and one that you actualy use when playing.
Everyone that can make cheatboards today can make a board run on dual softwares.

I dont think that standards will help here.
We need something you can check on and of field.
Without connecting something to the gun.

/DonLKSAB
 

Lucky.One

New Member
Dec 1, 2003
81
0
0
suckago
www.lucky-paintball.com
Again, had the agreement stuck to 13bps limit when electros were 'budding' things would have been easier. But as the others have pointed out, what you are asking now is unreasonable. And at the end of the day people will still have to be checked as you simply made it a little harder for folks to cheat.

I know the minimum trigger pull is a nice idea, bad to implement.
Same with lbs of pull. Not easy for events OR field owners. As a rule of thumb what is accepted at the top circuits filters down to local events and even walk on play.

How far you go really determines on what you are really trying to eliminate. The queing of dirty switch 'shots'? Turbo? well no one really does that anymore, they do the first. OR as originally discussed when the higher rates of fire came out was it greatly increased the chance of a double blinding. ASTM still cannot agree, unless a miracle happens this week, to finally eliminate full auto for good. If ROF is going to be controlled, its going to have to come from a Circuit. It is going to have to be very simple to comply. I highly doubt either circuit here is willing to take that next step. As far as the robots etc, I would bet all of pgi's revenue this year that only 10% of markers used in a us event are truly absolutely legal in the purest sense of the word. And those kids are shooting a mechanical gun and getting made fun of.