Ramping at the PA...

[Frackture]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ramping at the PA...

Originally posted by Sick Psyko
even if people are sitting and blazing 15bps an inch away from your head there are still ways to counter it...quick snap shooting for example! now it is more important than ever to try and read that paint

of course you can snap shoot but re read my post where I made the point of a moving game being a more attractive game and I'm afraid the sight of seeing people sitting behind bunkers blazing at 15bps and others snap shooting in response is not where we want to go is it?

Countering this problem from a tactical point of view is not the issue but it is a huge problem if in the act of countering it you make the game less aggressive and therefore less attractive.

 

[JackRegan]

i think the rules say ramp when at least 5bps after 3 semi shots, so theres nothing stopping you starting at 8/10 whatever, as long as it does'nt go over 15 bps when it starts ..

as for the testing box, i saw it at the p.a and before .. it measures the time between shots in ms, so you run a string off and it records each one, you scroll through the timings .. i 'think' it was anything below 65ms is less than 15bps .. i cant see how its not accurate unless cheat modes come into it, cant see how it could be used on field, but i'm sure that will be dealt with when the new radars arrive ..

 

[Collier]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ramping at the PA...

Originally posted by Frackture
I think I can understand why you might say that but if you look at the theory behind the respective paint cones (offensive and defensive) with the offensive firing cone being inherently less accurate because of a mobile and unsteady firing base, then if you increase the amount of paint involved, surely the defensive advantage becomes more apparent?

I might be wrong but I am interested to hear other people's opinions on the matter, even yours Mr Collier

I think field design helps with this as well, a lot has been said about the PA regarding Ramping but not alot in relation to the fact that along with ramping they've also introduced a 35 bunker minimum per field.
Personally I found it easier to move whilst keeping a player pinned, am very interested to hear others experiances as well.
Did you play or spectate?

 

[Robeenio]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ramping at the PA...

Originally posted by Frackture
of course you can snap shoot but re read my post where I made the point of a moving game being a more attractive game and I'm afraid the sight of seeing people sitting behind bunkers blazing at 15bps and others snap shooting in response is not where we want to go is it?

Countering this problem from a tactical point of view is not the issue but it is a huge problem if in the act of countering it you make the game less aggressive and therefore less attractive.

yeah but what i'm trying to get at is that one you have snapped the guy you can then think about progressing!

paul beat me to it but the way in which the fields are laid out is second to none! i really love the field designs they are imaginative and encourage aggressive play. its easier to move now than ever...you just need to do it faster!

 

[Beaker]

Re: Re: Ramping at the PA...

Originally posted by Hatts
wow... what was intended as a light hearted comment seems to have really boiled someone's blood... I didn't come up with the phrase... just something I heard that I thought was kind of amusing... sheesh... and I get accused of being up tight... If this guy eats coal I bet he can crap diamonds....

I'll concede there were teething problems the same as any rational person will understand there is when trying anything new... but hell, someone has to try it first or we'll never know if it works... and no one is being forced to do anything they don't want to...

So far the majority of people I have spoken with personally liked what happened on Sunday and the people who have offered rational and supportive comments on how we can improve things we listen to and we're working bloody hard to keep improving things.

Insane rantings in a public forum from a disturbed individual don't really help matters and actually cloud the truth of what really happened... but everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Interestingly, the majority of feed back I've had from players reckoned that because it made the "running and gunning" thing easier they were more inclined to move than sit back... and as paint consumtion didn't actually increase as dramatically as some people predicted I guess there wasn't any more sitting back and dumping box after box of paint downfield than there has been previously.

I must admit I still don't get why some people feel the need to attack the PA so vehemently... no we're not perfect but alot of people are working very hard and these things do take time.... it would take a damn site less time if more people got actively involved...

...and if you really hate it so much why not just get on and do something else? Really? Put your energies into something productive instead of spending your days trying to pull down what someone else is doing? You know you could actually surprise yourself and do something good.

Arrogant? Me? hardly... but sometimes decisions have to be made and I get to be the one who makes them for the PA. It sucks. I hate dissapointing people but "omlettes and eggs" and I always did say that some of things the PA was going to do were going to be painful.

The PA as an organisation always has and always will continue to develop in a direction that it feels will move paintball into the realms of an established sport with a strong, stable structure and that means moving away from the wobbly framework it's been clinging to for 20 years. If you consider that arrogant then yes, I guess it is.

Hatts,

Thats a LOT of words with no real substance on the details. It's non-emotional detail a lot of people want to hear.

Care to address the specific points Olli and others have made?

Was there a failure in chrono protocol? Were people able to get on field with guns firing over the limit? If so, how on earth was this allowed to happen? A 280fps limit that isn't enforced is a hell of a lot more dangerous than a 300fps that is.

Is the device you are using to measure ROF effective or not? Some of the people posting on here have plainly stated that guns firing over the 15bps limit were not detected- is this true? Why the hell do you only have one device for the entire event? If the PA are standing behind this rule surely they need to be able to effectively enforce it.

How do you respond to the criticisms re marshalling? Surely for a major event with new rules in place the Marshalls should be experienced, full of zip and fully aware of the rules they're supposed to be enforcing?

 

[Frackture]

Re: Re: Ramping at the PA...

Originally posted by Hatts
Arrogant? Me? hardly...

I think, and I don't know you I have just read a lot of what you have written, those three words above just about sum you up but in the most ironic of ways........

The PA as an organisation always has and always will continue to develop in a direction that it feels will move paintball into the realms of an established sport with a strong, stable structure and that means moving away from the wobbly framework it's been clinging to for 20 years. If you consider that arrogant then yes, I guess it is.

As for this little attempt at disarming, it's very much the rhetoric of a politician in stating what seems to be an ethical and moral case that in itself is seemingly benign and has legitimacy, but what lurks beneath is the arrogance and self appointed importance of the messenger.
What masquerades as 'direction' in tihs case is merely the self-indulgence of somebody full of their own presumed importance, an importance that is so misplaced it is hard to believe.

 

[Buddha 3]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ramping at the PA...

Originally posted by Frackture
the bottom line is this, a moving game is a more attractive game and anything that deters movement should be resisted and an increased volume of defensive paint will deter movement.

I am in full and total agreement with that, but what I would like to know is whether or not increased volumes of offensive paint will negate (some of) the increases in defensive paint. As I have yet to see/play a ramping game, I can only guess. Perhaps you have more experience in this field than I do, but I'd very much like to find out for myself.

Gotta say that these are far better arguments than the usual "I hate it when noobs shoot as fast as I do" that many people throw around.

 

[Buddha 3]

Bhudda

Originally posted by Mike (Exodus)
>I don't think the PA is putting a gun to your head and forcing >you to use that mode....

I know that - We didn't use any ramping at the last round.

>Besides, if you can set your gun to ramp at a certain BPS, you >can also set it to start ramping when you hit 8/9/10/whatever >BPS.

From what I understand, according to the rules, you can't pick at what point its starts ramping.

Why are the ramping advocates so stroppy about everybody else not being mad keen on ramping?

I'm not a ramping advocate, but I'm not against it either.

If the rules state that ramping can start at, for instance 5BPS, and you are not allowed to deviate from this rule with a higher BPS (ie start ramping at 8 or 9 BPS), then in my opinion the rule is stupid.

 

[Buddha 3]

Re: Re: Ramping at the PA...

Originally posted by Hatts
Insane rantings in a public forum from a disturbed individual

Less of the name calling please. That goes for everybody.

 

[Frackture]

Re: Re: Re: Ramping at the PA...

Originally posted by Buddha 3
Less of the name calling please. That goes for everybody.

Hey Budha, do you tihnk he was referring to me when he used the words 'disturbed individual' ?

I would have thought my use of grammar and construction would have negated the description of 'insane rantings' and I would have also thought that calling me those names, just because I disagreed with what he stands for smacks of arrogance in itself, that very accusation he was defending, he couldn't be that stupid could he as to react the very way he was in denial of?

Nooo, it's just too funny