At what point does higher BPS fail to give a tangible advantage

[Lohman446]

Its being discussed in another thread, that gaining more BPS over what we have now may be of little strategic value. I decided to start its own discussion because it has some possibility for discussion, and I get really confused when trying to discuss too many things in a single thread The idea came out first from Shartley - it was not mine After considering it I beleive we have passed the point, I see little strategic advantage in shooting over 10BPS - now I understand that snap shooting its better to put more out there, but how many more? At what point does 3 paintballs do as well as 4, or 4 as 5, etc. Theres an argument here about the mroe the better for breakage reasons... and its a valid argument but does that theory become of negligible value at some point?

I ask you this, is there a point where the benefits of another BPS are so minor as to have nearly no strategic value? Have we passed it already? I feel we have. Thoughts, discussion?

[MadPSIence]

after about 14bps I'd say it's just a retarded waste of paint.

[CKY_Alliance]

Me and a guy in the shop yesterday were talking about this (along with the ramping issues etc..) I think 15 bps is more than enough.The point of shooting fast is to pin people down and controll lanes and to just shoot people out.Well 15 bps is more than enough for this since i dotn think anyone is gonna run through a stream of paint goin at 15bps or even 10 for that matter so i dont see how shooting 30 bps is any more efficient than shooting 15 bps when 15 will accomplish the same thing and save you some paint/money.
Now i see how shooting 30 bps will give you more chances of a ball breaking but a constant stream of 10 to 15 will give you this same chance. when shooting 15bps and 30 (with ramping obviously) will prolly take about the same time.The more i think about it the less since shooting double the amount makes.30 bps wont accomplish anyting a 10-15 bps consitant stream wont achieve in my opinion.And anyone shooting 30 bps prolly isnt snap shooting there prolly shooting constantly when a person shotting 15 wcan do the same thing.

Ummm...my thoughts arent very organized hope you all comprehend what i am saying.

(o yea i used 15bps since that the new limit in some series)

[Evil Bob]

The BPS race becomes a detriment when you're spending more time reloading then you are shooting. Solders stuck reloading are not really contributing to combat. The more weapons you have pointed at the emeny, the better your chances of winning.

Take the M16 for example, it has a cyclic rate of 600-800 rounds per min, that's 10-13.3 rounds per second sustained fire. At that rate, it takes only 3 seconds to empty a 30 round magazine and 9 seconds to empty a 90 round drum magazine.

Logistics to a battle is important to determine how long you can realisticly "stay in the fight". Based upon that goal of sustained battle, the US military switched over from the full auto M16A1 to the 3 round burst M16A2 because they found that solders under heavy stress were blowing through too much ammo too quickly and being generally less effective with spray and pray firing. In fact the military today stresses using semi auto more then burst mode and would prefer that you put your rounds into your targets one at a time. Burst is usually reserved for room clearing where you wont necessarily have a clean sight picture and time is of the essence.

Another consideration was the fact that your average solder only carries so much ammo, usually 150-180 rounds of ammo on them loaded in magazines (7 or 8 magazines, 30 rounds per mag), the rest is usually in small boxes in bandoliers which take considerable time to load into the individual magazines, something you definitely dont want to be doing under fire. So todays solders are taught straight from basic training to conserve their ammo and fire only what they need to get the job done.

-Evil Bob

[MadPSIence]

let's acknowledge modern paintball players would receive an *** kicking if they had been the ones in vietnam :D

[68magOwner]

meh, practicing with PSP rampers, i can run through a lane of 15bps otb preety consistently, where as this is sometimes harder playing semi (espicially since alot of local players have adopted "breakout" mode while playing "semi" :rolleyes: ) so, in my opinion, bps all the way up to 50+ would be an advantage off the break (if you could almost ensure hitting the runner 100% of the time although rof like that would ruin the game, it could still hepl blow people away otb, but, besided off the break, anything over 15 really isnt needed.

[master_alexander]

from my point of view...

15+ bps is rediciolus, can tell that much of a difference...

if you shoot too fast, you depend on it and not skill, you are not a good player. so use a pump every once and a while, just for A "reality" check (so to speek).

but it might help to shoot fast if you need to shoot through a hole far away, you can see where you shots went and so on and so forth...

[Codekevin0403]

IMO i think it'd be pretty cool just to go on the field with pumps. Personally, i think it's more of an adrenaline rush then standing behind a bunker and shooting till you run out of paint. Which is kinda what paintball has become if you think about it. but i don't really care about bps, personally i truly don't even need over 8 bps, but if somebody wants to shoot 30bps down a lane so i can't run through it, eh, what am i gunna do about it. Anyways, it's just a faster way to run out of paint.

[68magOwner]

Anyways, it's just a faster way to run out of paint.


....people who shoot fast typicially develop some kind of rof control/paint conservation, its not just mindless hammering of a trigger (there are acceptions, people who just shoot and run their hoppers dry for no apparent reason at all)


anyway, i do shoot fast, as fast if not faster than most of the guys at all teh local fields, in fact, my entire team has very quick markers/fingers, and it is rare that even one of us will use more than 2 pods per game (most average 1 pod per game, but, whatever) if we need to shoot a lane/ shoot fast to hit someone, we do that, but we use high ROF very objectively, not just railing at someones bunekr hoping that they will stick there face out right into it. And as the team which uses the least paint on most occasions, we are ranked #1 in almost every league we are in right now. And yes, like you said, we all like to go play with pumps occasionally (i plan on rocking a phantom at this weekends practice) and i see where your comming thinking that high rof is typicially not needed, because we have practiced teams and done things such as cap our markers at a very low bps (~5 or so) and still done well, but, there is no arguing that high rof can be/is a huge asset in your over all game. As long as you dont let rof become a crutch for you, i see no problem wiht it.

[MedicDVG]

Ok... I did a little math (which is probably wrong) and I came up with the following.

Basically, I wanted to see if I could calculate the distance between paintballs at different ROF assuming the same FPS (in this case 300 fps.)

I came up with this:

50 BPS = 6 ft
30 BPS = 9 Ft
26 BPS = 11.4 Ft
24 BPS = 12.4 Ft
22 BPS = 13.5 Ft
20 BPS = 15 Ft
17 BPS = 17.5 Ft
12 BPS = 24.9 Ft
10 BPS = 30 Ft

Now what does this in actuality prove besides it being a very slow night at the stationshouse?? Well, for me it puts some slight perspective on what is physically happening in flight. Is it particularly usefull in this discussion? Hell I don't know -- I was impressed that I could remember basic algebra to come to these conclusions.

I guess for me, it defines what the "sporting chance" my opponant may have and the degree of skill I need to actually eliminate them.

I am not a huge fan of huge ROF anyway for purely economic reasons (I am poor), but I am certainly not a huge fan of just making every marker the fastest machinegun out there as well.

Well take the data for what you will.. I now have a headache and am in search of some Tylenol.
:shooting:

[Head knight of Ni]

The effectiveness is ever increasing as the ROF increases. How? Intimidation factor. Why do you think people love debounce or ramping they can scare noobs into a self defeatist attitude. No ones ever sold ugly slow markers well in the tourney scene either. As long as the "newest feature" can pad the players self esteem it will become popular and effective by association.

[RRfireblade]

I still find it odd that it is apparently unfathomable to 'some' that it's possible to use the advantage of a high ROF and be completely effective, accurate on target and not have an excessive waste paint.

The mentallity that so many people have that a high ROF must = spray and pray is amazing to me.

Here are the only questions I'd like to see answered:


Why am 'I' obsessed with how fast everyone else shoots? Especially when I think it's doesn't help there game?

Why am 'I' concerned with what people beside myself enjoy about the sport?

Why do 'I' care so much about the amount of $$ other people are willing to spend to enjoy themselves?

Why am 'I' bothered that there are people with different points of view than me?

Why do I feel the need to belittle others who 'I' feel aren't "doing it my way"?

Why do I need to seek out the approval of others to validate my own opinions?

That's enuff for now. ;)

[shartley]

I still find it odd that it is apparently unfathomable to 'some' that it's possible to use the advantage of a high ROF and be completely effective, accurate on target and not have an excessive waste paint.

The mentallity that so many people have that a high ROF must = spray and pray is amazing to me.

Here are the only questions I'd like to see answered:


Why am 'I' obsessed with how fast everyone else shoots? Especially when I think it's doesn't help there game?

Why am 'I' concerned with what people beside myself enjoy about the sport?

Why do 'I' care so much about the amount of $$ other people are willing to spend to enjoy themselves?

Why am 'I' bothered that there are people with different points of view than me?

Why do I feel the need to belittle others who 'I' feel aren't "doing it my way"?

Why do I need to seek out the approval of others to validate my own opinions?

That's enuff for now. ;)
I think you are correct. However, to think that MOST players actually use the advantages of high ROFs while still showing the degree of accuracy and without dumping paint would be folly. It does not mean it can't be done, isn't being done, or that it shouldn't be done though.

You may want to check out this post if you have not already... It addresses these very same issues:
http://www.automags.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1900341&postcount=14

[RRfireblade]

:)
I think you are correct. However, to think that MOST players actually use the advantages of high ROFs while still showing the degree of accuracy and without dumping paint would be folly. It does not mean it can't be done, isn't being done, or that it shouldn't be done though.


Sure, it's also true that most players are young, have ALOT to learn about the game, are mesmerized by hype induced advertising and are playing in the woods w/ Spyders and tippmmans.

It's true, BTW, that 'most' golfers couldn't break a hundered if their life depended on it even after extrensive lessons and classes.

It's true that I couldn't catch a singing fish with a pole if I had a magic rod and was fishing in a Disney cartoon.(FYI, I'm a lousy fisherman incase I went to far on that last one ;))

But that doesn't prove the point. 'Most' players aren't very accurate regardless of ROF. Handing them a ramping DM5 isn't going to change that, niether is droppping the cap to 10bps.

It just seeem that the people who complain the most about a high ROF are the people who can't obtain it, therefore it 'must' be useless, a waste and serve no purpose.

That's simply not true and IMO with all other things being equal the abilty to reach a higher ROF will always be an advantage over a comparably lower ROF.

[CrimsonGhost]

Well put RR!!!! :cheers:

To my mind...the advantage for bps stops being worth it when the paint starts to run into itself midstream.(can't happen? ...WRONG ...look at the current fps variences in regs +/- 3-7 fps on a good reg.Not to mention paint variations and such)

The point of a higher bps is to fill the air with as much paint as humanly possible, thus rendering a particular area "unsafe" to pass through.

Take your marker and "aim" it at a point in space , now move it left or right and count "1" . Now, once you hit the "1" count stop moving the marker.
Note the distance your barrel has covered in that 1 count.
Most people its a fair amount of space between the start point and end point. Now, think of it on an airball field , makes the space between the 2 points seem even larger...esp. if you look at the "zone" between those 2 points and take that from the back of you field to the other side of the field. or from the back to the 50.


Now...put paint into the space you moved that barrel.
Use the calculations provided above and think of how much paint is filling said space.

Yes, I know it will be argued that anything past 12-15 bps is highly suspect with a true semi only board and average "meat" behind the trigger.

But if you can imagine the difference between say, 10 bps in the air in that space and say 20 bps or even higher I think you will see where the advantage of high rates of fire comes in.

Area denial.

Paint in the air = Possible eliminations ... the thinking of the more paint in the air = more chances of eliminations.
Yes, it only takes 1 well aimed , practiced shot to get an elimination.

If I can put you into your bunker for a longer period of time with the high bps It give myself or my team a moment to angle you out , or position to do more damage.
Not saying is cant be done with 1 shots...just saying ...keeping you in with a higher bps is ALOT easier.Isnt that the ultimate point of a tool?
You still need skill do make eliminations with the above scenario.

But ...if we want to use the combat sceanrio / military weapons thinking stated above...
Why aren't all of our troops issued sniper weapons and just taught to shoot that way?
Besides the $$$ issues and equipment issues ...
Right, victory by volume, area denial, and maximum exertion of force.
A Sniper is a surgical tool.
You dont use a scalpel in a sword fight.
You dont use a Claymore to do heart valve bypass (though that would be cool!!)

Different tools for different jobs.

I think thats the issue at hand....20 bps ramping has NO PLACE in rec play. Wrong tool for the wrong job.
Or ...think an m1a1 Abrams tank ...on a dove hunt.(ANOTHER COOL!!)
On the Tour scene ...different story.

:cheers:

[Creative Mayhem]

I think it will always help, but like RR said, can you actually use it? If you aren't accurate, then why?

I find the best use for high BPS would be off the break in a speedball/xball game, other than that, it's not a huge deal IMO

[shartley]

I don’t disagree with anything RR said (well, yes one thing but that comes later)… but I will point out that the more paint you put down field the less accurate you HAVE to be. And simply put, no amount of arguing against that, or showing that it does not HAVE to be will change that fact. [wink]

Yes, the average player is NOT accurate. But I can tell you that when you give a person a squirt gun to put out a fire, VS giving them a fire hose, which fire do you think will be put out faster and with the most ease? The same is with paintball.

Also I will point out that I doubt those against super high ROFs are against it simply because they “can’t” achieve them. How can anyone NOT achieve them with today’s markers? It takes virtually no skill to shoot fast now days so to say the reason folks don’t like it is because they can’t is actually rather silly. That goes along with the argument that goes “They just say that because they are jealous”… most of the time neither argument is true. Sometimes, yes. But most of the time, no. It does sound good though, doesn’t it? Ranks up there with “I know you are, but what am I?!?!?” ;)

:dance:
:cheers:

[ben-afficial]

c'mon guys, you know about hype. Faster just sounds better....Why have a car that can push 220mph if the fastest speed limit in america is 75mph. Bigger numbers just impress paople, there is no real reason to shoot of 15bps, it just sounds cool :dance:

[CrimsonGhost]

I don't know. I think watching a Pro Level back player, (Rich Telford, Ron Nelson etc) dumping paint ...in controled, HIGH rates of fire, not only takes skill but its damn near an art form.
Maxium violence in a controled well applied way.

Yes, I agree ...the AVERAGE person is not this way.
ROF in the hands of a unskilled player , its a crutch.
A WEAK crutch at that.
Or ...a weak tool :)

But, like I said before...put that same marker in the hands of a SKILLED player...different story.

But , I guess we are talking about the AVERAGE player...not the exceptionaly skilled ones.

:cheers:

[RRfireblade]

I don’t disagree with anything RR said (well, yes one thing but that comes later)… but I will point out that the more paint you put down field the less accurate you HAVE to be. And simply put, no amount of arguing against that, or showing that it does not HAVE to be will change that fact. [wink]

Yes, the average player is NOT accurate. But I can tell you that when you give a person a squirt gun to put out a fire, VS giving them a fire hose, which fire do you think will be put out faster and with the most ease? The same is with paintball.

Also I will point out that I doubt those against super high ROFs are against it simply because they “can’t” achieve them. How can anyone NOT achieve them with today’s markers? It takes virtually no skill to shoot fast now days so to say the reason folks don’t like it is because they can’t is actually rather silly. That goes along with the argument that goes “They just say that because they are jealous”… most of the time neither argument is true. Sometimes, yes. But most of the time, no. It does sound good though, doesn’t it? Ranks up there with “I know you are, but what am I?!?!?” ;)

:dance:
:cheers:


K,
I'm definately going to have to hear why you HAVE to be less accurate to put more paint down field.

The squirt gun VS Hose- Well....yeah of 'course...just another proof that more paint equals more eliminations.

And ROF- I'm talking about the 'ability' to reach a high ROF. For everyone else there is debounce and ramping, which BTW is why those features are in the high demand they are in today. ;)

Envy- First off, yeah IMO it is straight up envy and jealously 'most' (since we like that word today ;)) of the time even if it is often disguised as denile and distaste. If it was anything else but that then you wouldn't see so much open whining ESPECIALLY by players coming off the field after getting waxxed. If it raelly didn't make any differenece in a game and if those players were so 'inaccurate' the LBPS'er would come off the field victorious everytime and joking about the HBPS'ers.

Funny how you never hear, "this is no fun at all, that guy shot so slow I was out before I had a chance to do anything, I'm trading my DM5 in for a Mag." :D

Beside that tho, your right about one thing, I should have added...people who can't afford to spend as much money on paint. :D

[shartley]

K,
I'm definately going to have to hear why you HAVE to be less accurate to put more paint down field.
You are definitely going to be disappointed then because I never said that, nor argued in defense of that position.


The squirt gun VS Hose- Well....yeah of 'course...just another proof that more paint equals more eliminations.
But it does not prove more SKILL. ;) I never argued that more paint did not increase the chance of getting more eliminations, I argued that it took less skill to get them (for the average player on the average field) and that the amount of paint in the air did not equate to being a better player.

Sure, if all that mattered to folks was if they “WON” and not HOW they won, true “skill” does not matter. It would be like saying that tossing a grenade into a foxhole takes as much skill as it does to go in and take them out had to hand. Well, for some of us the game is about more than just the end result and we don’t subscribe to “by any means”.


And ROF- I'm talking about the 'ability' to reach a high ROF. For everyone else there is debounce and ramping, which BTW is why those features are in the high demand they are in today. ;)
… and because the industry caters to the lowest common denominator, not the highest. Make equipment that allows anyone to shoot fast and you make the lowest common denominator happy. After all, we live in a world that rewards the “easy way” and frowns on having to work at anything.


Envy- First off, yeah IMO it is straight up envy and jealously 'most' (since we like that word today ;)) of the time even if it is often disguised as denile and distaste. If it was anything else but that then you wouldn't see so much open whining ESPECIALLY by players coming off the field after getting waxxed. If it raelly didn't make any differenece in a game and if those players were so 'inaccurate' the LBPS'er would come off the field victorious everytime and joking about the HBPS'ers.
Actually you must hang around the wrong places. I have often heard players who shoot pumps and low BPS markers laugh at how they took out so many high ROF players. But those who complain about being “waxed” may have just been out-skilled, not just out BPSed. It is easier to blame it on the ROF though… but that does not mean that was WHY they lost.


Funny how you never hear, "this is no fun at all, that guy shot so slow I was out before I had a chance to do anything, I'm trading my DM5 in for a Mag." :D

Beside that tho, your right about one thing, I should have added...people who can't afford to spend as much money on paint. :D
And again, I can relay stories that do have folks dropping down to lower BPS markers for many reasons. I think some folks just stay in small circles and think what they see is ALL there is to paintball or how players are. I have to be careful of that myself though and gather as much information as I can before making any judgments or blanket statements…. The thing about blanket statements is that I have seen none that didn’t have moth holes throughout them. ;)

[SlartyBartFast]

50 BPS = 6.0 ft >> 0.02 s >> 90.0 fps >> 61.4 mph
30 BPS = 9.0 ft >> 0.03 s >> 60.0 fps >> 40.9 mph
26 BPS = 11.4 ft >> 0.04 s >> 47.4 fps >> 32.3 mph
24 BPS = 12.4 ft >> 0.05 s >> 43.5 fps >> 29.7 mph
22 BPS = 13.5 ft >> 0.05 s >> 40.0 fps >> 27.3 mph
20 BPS = 15.0 ft >> 0.06 s >> 36.0 fps >> 24.5 mph
17 BPS = 17.5 ft >> 0.06 s >> 30.9 fps >> 21.0 mph
12 BPS = 24.9 ft >> 0.09 s >> 21.7 fps >> 14.8 mph
10 BPS = 30.0 ft >> 0.11 s >> 18.0 fps >> 12.3 mph


Modified as follows

BPS
= Size of gap
>> length of time gap is open (calculated at 270fps)
>> minimum speed to get something 2ft wide through gap in fps (divide by 2 if you're really skinny)
>> minimum speed in miles per hour.

(all values rounded only after calculations were performed)

I think that considering these numbers puts the discussion in perspective.

So, go outside a clock how fast you can sprint. If you can sprint 12.3mph, and dumb luck lines you up properly, you can run through a 10bps stream of paint.


Here's the ego buster for those that claim mad skills running through lanes:
The reason you can get through a stream of paint is probably (a) the shooter has crap aim. (b) they aren't shooting that fast. or (c) paintballs are just so inaccurate you lucked out and the balls passed to either side of you.

(c) raises the only valid argument for wild ROF. The only "accuracy in paintball is accuracy by volume". But brings us back to the original question. How fast is fast enough?

I say that as a challenge a marker should be setup bolted to tripod in a netted cage shooting reballs in full auto with the balls recycled so that the marker can run non-stop.
Players could then attemt to run through the stream of paint at increasing BPS.

That would undoubtably bust a few egos (both those that brag about runing and those that brag about lanning) and would answer the question how fast is fast enough.

[RRfireblade]

You are definitely going to be disappointed then because I never said that, nor argued in defense of that position.


but I will point out that the more paint you put down field the less accurate you HAVE to be.


Sure, if all that mattered to folks was if they “WON” and not HOW they won, true “skill” does not matter

That fact that they won over on opponent implies more skill over that opponent especially if your going to argue ROF makes no difference.


and because the industry caters to the lowest common denominator, not the highest. Make equipment that allows anyone to shoot fast and you make the lowest common denominator happy. After all, we live in a world that rewards the “easy way” and frowns on having to work at anything.

Sure they do, no arguement there...it offers a clear advantge.


Actually you must hang around the wrong places. I have often heard players who shoot pumps and low BPS markers laugh at how they took out so many high ROF players. But those who complain about being “waxed” may have just been out-skilled, not just out BPSed. It is easier to blame it on the ROF though… but that does not mean that was WHY they lost.

Actually no, I hang out all over the place in a huge variety of formats from hardcore speedball, true recreational ball, scenerio play, woodsball (outlaw and otherwise) and pump play (exclusively stock class BTW) and the most common comment from players losing to better players is that they (the victors) shot too fast and it was no fun because they were pinned down all game.


And again, I can relay stories that do have folks dropping down to lower BPS markers for many reasons. I think some folks just stay in small circles and think what they see is ALL there is to paintball or how players are. I have to be careful of that myself though and gather as much information as I can before making any judgments or blanket statements…. The thing about blanket statements is that I have seen none that didn’t have moth holes throughout them.

So can I. It's usually because they want to save money or because they can't compete at that level and get frustrated. But...maybe my perspective is skewed, it could be. I happen to think I have a VERY broad range experience however...better than most maybe. I run a local retail store, I travel and play paintball all over the country.I work for a international paintball product manufacture for which I'm able to see local, national AND european trends daily,annually and not to mention mere phone and email contact with that whole market dozens of times a day.I develop product for arguably the largest PB conglomeration in the industry that allows me insight that most don't get to see.

But you are correct, my perceptions are 'only' my perceptions and is why I clear put "IMO" in most of my comments for clarification

And 'Blanket statements' and generalities are what the Forums are all about.If you want to talk specifics you just get together with those people and have a drink and some good conversation. :D

[shartley]

RR-

That fact that they won over on opponent implies more skill over that opponent especially if your going to argue ROF makes no difference.
First of all, I never said it made no difference. You have a habit of taking what I actually say and then implying that I said something more than what I actually did. Please stop doing that. I say what I say, nothing more, nothing less. ;)

What you sliced and diced and slapped back to back does not even come close to saying what you are implying it does.

As for the rest, no need in beating a dead horse… it will not make it get up and allow either of us to ride away. ;) It’s all good though….

SBF-
THANK YOU.

Perception is quite different than the truth.

But with that said, higher ROF’s allow the shooter to cover a larger area when doing a sweeping shot. It increases their chance of hitting a target when trying to cover a large area. For lanes though, or pin point targets, the numbers clearly show that ROF is not as important as some may think it is.

And I think that is what the heart of the discussion is really about (or should be but got lost). What is the maximum ROF that is needed before it becomes a matter of simply putting more balls in the air with little actual improved benefit. It is not a matter of if high ROFs are “good” or “bad”, but what IS the ROF that actually gives an REAL benefit to the player over something less than that ROF. And then what is realistic for the game concerning air, paint hauling, and safety.

From what I see, we have reached that, and then some… as I have stated time and again.

[SlartyBartFast]

But with that said, higher ROF’s allow the shooter to cover a larger area when doing a sweeping shot. It increases their chance of hitting a target when trying to cover a large area.

Which if you consider the firearms that cycle at the same rate as paintball markers are all used in situations and applications that invovle area targets and fast moving targets.

The fastest handheld weapons designed for infantry seem to be around 850-900 RPM. Which is.....




Wait for it......













15BPS. :D

If you can't cover an area against infantry or hit a running person at 15BPS, the solution is clear. You need to practice your shooting skills. :p

If people can run through your lane and your shooting upwards of 10BPS, time to slow down and concentrate on keeping the marker steady instead of shooting wildly. :rofl:

[shartley]

Which if you consider the firearms that cycle at the same rate as paintball markers are all used in situations and applications that invovle area targets and fast moving targets.

The fastest handheld weapons designed for infantry seem to be around 850-900 RPM. Which is.....




Wait for it......













15BPS. :D

If you can't cover an area against infantry or hit a running person at 15BPS, the solution is clear. You need to practice your shooting skills. :p

If people can run through your lane and your shooting upwards of 10BPS, time to slow down and concentrate on keeping the marker steady instead of shooting wildly. :rofl:
BINGO!

Again, thank you.

[Lohman446]

50 BPS = 6.0 ft >> 0.02 s >> 90.0 fps >> 61.4 mph
30 BPS = 9.0 ft >> 0.03 s >> 60.0 fps >> 40.9 mph
26 BPS = 11.4 ft >> 0.04 s >> 47.4 fps >> 32.3 mph
24 BPS = 12.4 ft >> 0.05 s >> 43.5 fps >> 29.7 mph
22 BPS = 13.5 ft >> 0.05 s >> 40.0 fps >> 27.3 mph
20 BPS = 15.0 ft >> 0.06 s >> 36.0 fps >> 24.5 mph
17 BPS = 17.5 ft >> 0.06 s >> 30.9 fps >> 21.0 mph
12 BPS = 24.9 ft >> 0.09 s >> 21.7 fps >> 14.8 mph
10 BPS = 30.0 ft >> 0.11 s >> 18.0 fps >> 12.3 mph

How fast can someone move? 21 MPH is likely much faster than any player can move, so (unless bounces) I would say that anything over 17BPS - maybe even 12.. I think I have to agree with above that the magic number 15 may be well considered is making up for a lack of skill in other areas (accuracy). Thats higher than I would haev expected. Am I nuts?

PS: thanks for the table.. need to put that in my AO :ninja: reference book

[SlartyBartFast]

How fast can someone move? 21 MPH is likely much faster than any player can move, so (unless bounces) I would say that anything over 17BPS - maybe even 12.. I think I have to agree with above that the magic number 15 may be well considered is making up for a lack of skill in other areas (accuracy). Thats higher than I would haev expected. Am I nuts?

Maybe you are. :p

according to here
http://www.soccerconditioning.net/research.htm

most "sprinting" is 11-17mph (85% of Vmax).
So they seem to define MAX running speed as 12-20mph.

How fit are your players?

That puts 12bps as good enough to get all but the very best when they are doing NOTHING but running. They still have to be VERY lucky and have their run timed correctly with the paint.

[CrimsonGhost]

Ok, But here is the problem with the FIREARMS comp.

How fast is a Tour paintballer shooting? Uusualy around the 300 fps range. Yes, faster than any human...no matter how smacked out of their minds...can move.

How fast is a Rifle (real) shooting? Ah yes, Super sonic speeds. Thus making the delay from pulling the trigger to watching said round hit target NEARLY instant.

If we shot at SUPER SONIC speeds I would argue that , yes...the need for 15bps+ markers is non existant.

But whatever...There are at LEAST 2 different schools of thought on this subject....but I dont see it changing any time soon.

Still, fun to actualy have a GOOD discussion again without the "Yopur and idiot" "Your a poop head" stuff ....YET:)

:cheers:

[SlartyBartFast]

Ok, But here is the problem with the FIREARMS comp.

Very true.

But also, you don't want to give your opponent a sporting chance with real firearms either. ;)

[CrimsonGhost]

Lol, then again ...I don't want to give anyone a sporting chance period. :rofl:

But your right...pending death takes alot of the "sport" out of it:)

:cheers:

[RRfireblade]

RR-

First of all, I never said it made no difference. You have a habit of taking what I actually say and then implying that I said something more than what I actually did.


Oh come on, you do that better than anyone else. I learned from the master. ;)


Thank goodness for the quote button. :ninja:


Oh, and on the other...

Comparing Firearms to Paintball is beyond rediculous.

[hitech]

Well, it seems I have a different take on the question. The answer is, it depends on the situation. Generally speaking I want the fastest ROF I can get without having to concentrate on firing. However, there are times when I fire SLOW, on purpose. Trying to get someone to poke their head out. Trying to keep someone from ducking back in before I hit them. Just a few of the reasons for shooting slow. That said, I would prefer to snap shoot at 50 bps (provided I could avoid barrel jump ;) ). Having the ability to shoot faster than your opponent without having to concentrate on firing that fast is a definite advantage, even though you don't necessarily want to use it every time.

All that said, I would still rather play with everyone just pulling the trigger...

[SlartyBartFast]

Comparing Firearms to Paintball is beyond rediculous.

I can't say that I don't agree with you.

But ignore the comparison to firearms and your forced to confront the actual question and give an answer.

If you stop interpreting everything Shartley says as a personal attack and a call to limit ROF to a rediculously low number and he does the same and doesn't interpret your posts as calls for 50BPS+, what do you define as the sport of paintball and at what point does it deviate? How fast a ROF is too fast?

I'd say screw looking for when ROF stops being an added advantage and perhaps focus on when ROF and fire enhancement make the game boring.

If you're in the industry I'd say you're the last person who should be listened to. After all, every one in the industry these days has a vested interest in seeing the use of consumables go up.

Personally, I'd say that the 13BPS set by the industry so long ago and ignored and the 15BPS that is now the limit in various tournament formats is plenty fast enough.

True semi with no ramping would also be far more sporting. The advantage would be with those that could hit the maximum while maintaining control. Why should those that can't hit the maximum or those that can hit it but with no control be elevated to master status for no effort?

With everyone competing on equal technological footing, what's to be gained for the sport if a higher ROF is allowed?

[shartley]

Oh come on, you do that better than anyone else. I learned from the master. ;)

Um…. Thanks? ;) But I have to point out that I don’t take what someone else says and try to infer they are saying something they are not. I take what they say and point out exactly what it is they said…. The problem is that most people don’t say what they mean, or ARE implying. So when I point out that what they actually SAID, it is often not what they WANTED to say, or intended to say. There is a difference. ;)

But yes, I think most rational minds can agree (for even different reasons) that 15 BPS is about the most realistic top end needed for paintball. And I think that most would agree (when being honest) that the average player does not even hit those speeds in any sustained manner, even with ramping and other “shot enhancement” features (minus FA and Burst Modes). And I will go even further and suggest that most rational people would agree that the current technology in the sport surpasses what is needed to reach the maximum truly affective ROF for the game given its requirements, safety issues, propellant source issues, and paint hauling limitations.

What I would like to see is better efficiency in markers. Consistency is pretty much taken care of in my opinion if folks take the time to do it. But can folks imagine the benefits to be had if they could shoot twice as much paint per given fill?

And then we need to tackle the paint quality issue… in a manner that would not drive up prices. Paint is not terribly priced as it is now IMHO, and I could even live with slightly higher prices if the quality was MUCH better. (Folks please don’t confuse what FIELD PAINT costs with what paint really costs… different issues.)

All in all though, I am pretty happy with things in paintball concerning equipment and capabilities… even when factored in with the occasional bad paint and other things. Now player attitudes on the other hand….. But that could be a thread of its own, but a dangerous thread at that…. ;)

[PumpPlayer]

Well, I have just one thing to add to each side of the argument.

Clearly, the purpose of designing the equipment is to place paint on another player. Now be honest here: The exact method is immaterial so long as you can get paint on target, right? If the marker fires, you CAN win with it, correct? In that light, the only point of higher ROF is to be more effective at putting paint on a player. Not necessarily MORE paint, but being more effective at getting at least one there.

So: if you're an opponent of high ROF, you say it's not necessary to shoot that fast. You would be correct. It's not necessary to shoot more than... oh, 1 ball every 5 seconds. Pumpers can obviously relate to that.

However, you must admit that ROF is an advantage. Moreover, the higher ROF the higher the advantage. Obviously from a pump to a semi there's a large jump, yes? From a spyder blowback to, say... the Ion. There's a large jump in 'advantage' there as well, yes? Toss in a ramping board and bump it up to say 25 bps. Is there added advantage? Of course. Now, the advantage jump between 1 and 10 is huge. Between 10 and 20 might be a lot smaller. 20 to 30 might be smaller still, but it is still an advantage. The answer to "where does it end?" is, "Whatever you as a player are willing to pay for - both in paint cost, marker cost and everything else as a package." Obviously, many people are willing to pay for it.

Opponents to high ROF should not say things like, "It gives no advantage." because they would be incorrect. Rather, you have a much more convincing point in saying that the higher ROFs provide the potential for a higher 'rate of pain' to other players. High ROF is a HUGE responsibility - clearly, a lot of people out there are not ready for that responsibility. This could be construed as a large problem (and it is!) however, that is not the point of this discussion.

Clearly higher the ROF, the higher the advantage. Always, no matter what. You as a player have to find your own balance between cost/equipment and skill. And whatever you're using - whether it does 1 bps or 30 - blatant overshooting is just being ignorant. No excuse. A good ref should have your rear.



Some food for thought: The largest detriment to a paintball's accuracy and effectiveness is air resistance. It both slows the ball and causes it to veer off-course. Does higher ROF result in a 'slipstream' effect? Does higher ROF actually extend range, accuracy and improve velocity at target? Obviously, the distance between balls in the air must be small. Would a double-barreled (over/under would be best here) or at least double-breeched marker take the biggest advantage of this? Can we fire three paintballs extremely quickly so that, in the air, one ball 'slipstreams' another, passes overtop of it as the first drops (it was fired earlier) and thus extending range, greatly improving accuracy and dramatically increasing the velocity as measured at the target? If it is possible, I predict that we will see high ROF guns give way to markers capable of giving 3-5 ball super quick "bursts" that will outrange, outshoot and beat the accuracy of anything we've seen before.

Actually, scratch that. I crunched some numbers and found that for there to be room for one ball to pass another in the air both fired at the same trajectory at the same speed just isn't going to happen no matter how much air resistance there is. It takes approximately 0.072 seconds for the ball to drop one inch. Even assuming the second had no drop at all, you'd need a ROF no greater than 14 bps. In order to create a reliable 'slipstream' - if it would really work - the burst would have to be fired at a controlled, slightly increasing angle. Otherwise the balls would run into each other. You would need a perfectly compensated barrel so that gas discharge would result in a finely-controlled upward arc of the barrel tip. Even if this was possible, it would only work correctly at a single velocity. Which, of course, would fluctuate based on humidity level, temperature and air density alone.

But it was a neat idea :)

[shartley]

I can't say that I don't agree with you.

But ignore the comparison to firearms and your forced to confront the actual question and give an answer.

If you stop interpreting everything Shartley says as a personal attack and a call to limit ROF to a rediculously low number and he does the same and doesn't interpret your posts as calls for 50BPS+, what do you define as the sport of paintball and at what point does it deviate? How fast a ROF is too fast?
I never took him as saying that. I did however take his posts as saying that I was saying something I simply was not. ;)


I'd say screw looking for when ROF stops being an added advantage and perhaps focus on when ROF and fire enhancement make the game boring.
I agree to a point. But I tend to be a “middle ground” man myself. I think both should be considered.


If you're in the industry I'd say you're the last person who should be listened to. After all, every one in the industry these days has a vested interest in seeing the use of consumables go up.
Hey now! ;)

Seriously though, not everyone in the industry cares about how much paint is shot. There are plenty of us out there that make the same amount of money if 1 ball is shot in a game or 10,000. We care that our products get sold, yes, but that has little to do with ROF issues or simple consumables.


Personally, I'd say that the 13BPS set by the industry so long ago and ignored and the 15BPS that is now the limit in various tournament formats is plenty fast enough.

True semi with no ramping would also be far more sporting. The advantage would be with those that could hit the maximum while maintaining control. Why should those that can't hit the maximum or those that can hit it but with no control be elevated to master status for no effort?
I agree whole heartedly.


With everyone competing on equal technological footing, what's to be gained for the sport if a higher ROF is allowed?
For the sport? Nothing. But the paintball manufacturers gain, as well as the marker manufacturers (and loader manufacturers) because they can boast how fast their markers/loaders shoot/feed… whether needed or not, or safe or not.. And that is where we are at this very moment IMHO.

[brikar]

You guys are making my head hurt... :confused:

[shartley]

Some food for thought: The largest detriment to a paintball's accuracy and effectiveness is air resistance. It both slows the ball and causes it to veer off-course. Does higher ROF result in a 'slipstream' effect? Does higher ROF actually extend range, accuracy and improve velocity at target? Obviously, the distance between balls in the air must be small. Would a double-barreled (over/under would be best here) or at least double-breeched marker take the biggest advantage of this? Can we fire three paintballs extremely quickly so that, in the air, one ball 'slipstreams' another, passes overtop of it as the first drops (it was fired earlier) and thus extending range, greatly improving accuracy and dramatically increasing the velocity as measured at the target? If it is possible, I predict that we will see high ROF guns give way to markers capable of giving 3-5 ball super quick "bursts" that will outrange, outshoot and beat the accuracy of anything we've seen before.
The simple answer is…. No. It is nice seeing people stretch their brains though.

[hitech]

Very high speed two shot bursts where the 2nd ball would draft close behind the first ball for greater accuracy. The first ball would disrupt the air column and leave behind a turbulent wake. The turbulence would disrupt the laminar flow that leads to vortex shedding on the 2nd ball. Disrupt the vortex and improve the accuracy.




There is some historical, anecdotal evidence for fast firing rates to produce tighter groups. In the early 90's Paintball Consumer Reports International clamped a minimag in a vise with an auto response trigger and fired full speed at a target.

The results stated that the configuration was the most accurate they had ever tested. This is just a commentary without any verification but I thought it was interesting.

I personally think there might be a chance that a drafting paintball might stay in line better. (thats why I always shoot fast :))



:cheers:

[RRfireblade]

I can't say that I don't agree with you.

But ignore the comparison to firearms and your forced to confront the actual question and give an answer.

If you stop interpreting everything Shartley says as a personal attack and a call to limit ROF to a rediculously low number and he does the same and doesn't interpret your posts as calls for 50BPS+, what do you define as the sport of paintball and at what point does it deviate? How fast a ROF is too fast?

I'd say screw looking for when ROF stops being an added advantage and perhaps focus on when ROF and fire enhancement make the game boring.

If you're in the industry I'd say you're the last person who should be listened to. After all, every one in the industry these days has a vested interest in seeing the use of consumables go up.

Personally, I'd say that the 13BPS set by the industry so long ago and ignored and the 15BPS that is now the limit in various tournament formats is plenty fast enough.

True semi with no ramping would also be far more sporting. The advantage would be with those that could hit the maximum while maintaining control. Why should those that can't hit the maximum or those that can hit it but with no control be elevated to master status for no effort?

With everyone competing on equal technological footing, what's to be gained for the sport if a higher ROF is allowed?


Well I don't even know what we're discussing anymore. ;)

I think my earlier posts were quite clear.

IMO...again... all other things being equal, the higher the ROF the better and if we're talking about legal semi auto, then no I don't think there is a limit to when that fails to be a benefit.Full auto and Ramp? I'm dead against in any form.

And FYI, I have no connection to the paint "ball" manufacturing industry. :)

[PumpPlayer]

See above edit. You're right, of course it wouldn't work. It just popped into my head and figured I'd mention it.

Only way it could possibly work is if air desity, paint diameter and velocity could all be taken into account for and processed, add to that a precise control on the angle of the barrel plus slight variations in muzzle velocity and spin (controlled, now) and some way to monitor and process all this... quicker than the time required between each ball... which for a reliable slipstream would be close to about 1/1000th of a second. Not to mention the cost of development and size of the required processor...

And then go figure that the human hand wouldn't be steady enough to hold it anyhow, so you'd need a processor capable of accounting for that as well.

Hitech, thanks for the old quote. I'm surprised you remembered about that one! I'd never read it before, but Tk's probably thought this through a little more than I have, to be sure! But anyhow, it's not like it's really a big secret... aircraft, racecars and a multitude of other machines use it to their advantage every day. And I suppose if it could be controlled, it would certainly work for paintballs as well. It's just the whole problem of a lack of control with projectile motion... Radio-guided paintballs. Now that's what we need.

So yeah, whatever.

[SlartyBartFast]

Well, it seems I have a different take on the question.
...
Generally speaking I want the fastest ROF I can get without having to concentrate on firing.
...
Having the ability to shoot faster than your opponent without having to concentrate on firing that fast is a definite advantage, even though you don't necessarily want to use it every time.

All that said, I would still rather play with everyone just pulling the trigger...

Poor Lohman... He tries hard but his questions keep getting ignored and the thread keeps digressing.

The question is at which point higher BPS stops being an advantage.

The question of whether you should be able to acheive the advantage of firing as fast as possible without concentrating by means of practice and training or by mechanical or electronic enhancement is quite another question.

The argument Shartley and RRfirblade are having seems to be a tangent on which they both agree but don't see eye-to-eye.

I think a good number of people would rather play with people "just pulling the trigger", but unfrotunately until we have single marker class events, the big tournaments had to give up and give in to the cheaters for lack of enforcement ability.

If two players had perfectly equal skills but one could fire faster than the other whenever they needed to (whether naturally or unnaturally), it's undenyable that the faster shooter has an advantage if we're talking about 5-6Bps vs. 18-20BPS.

But at what difference is the advantage negligable? Pretty difficult to say. If I can keep your head down at 6BPs and I'm a superb shot and able to hit a running player at a hundred yards with a snap-shot, well BPS is irrelevant to me. If you are a crappy aim and I don't scare easily, BPS might mean everything to you.

There's a lot of variables and conditions.....

[shartley]

Originally Posted by AGD
Very high speed two shot bursts where the 2nd ball would draft close behind the first ball for greater accuracy. The first ball would disrupt the air column and leave behind a turbulent wake. The turbulence would disrupt the laminar flow that leads to vortex shedding on the 2nd ball. Disrupt the vortex and improve the accuracy.

:cheers:
You may toast that, but I want to see proof other than what Tom posted. I don’t buy it as a practical application.

I will also point out that the second ball would be NO more accurate than the first ball. So you would indeed get two balls traveling in the same path, and potentially hitting the target at that same point. But would every double shot hit the same place? I doubt it. So in essence you are left with the same accuracy we have now (given you could even GET the balls to follow each other being that they are not even shaped exactly the same, nor weigh the same, and have liquid fills) except that two balls would be hitting the target in stead of 1…. OR one would drop and the other would travel slightly farther. But again, did it really change things enough to bother?

I say, no. ;)

[PumpPlayer]

^^^ Well, not necessarily ^^^

The idea behind 'slipstreaming' the balls would be to not only decrease air resistance, thus giving you a better chance of breaking a ball at long range, but to also ensure that the second ball goes where you point the marker instead of 'hooking'. If it hooks, it's due to out-of-roundness or else a spin on the balls. Given the same ammount of spin, the ball with less air resistance will hook less.

Sure, I understand this is like saying a paintball gun will be more accurate in Denver than Miami, but that's (theoretically, anyhow) true as well.

Of course we still need to aim. Even with 30 bps you have to aim. If we didn't have to aim, would it still be fun?

[hitech]

You may toast that, but I want to see proof other than what Tom posted. I don’t buy it as a practical application.


A little testy today, huh?

BTW, there have been tests done that show that placing something in front of a sphere will cause turbulence, disrupt the laminar flow and stop vortexes from forming. There are mathematical formulas that determine the "sideways" force on an object from this vortex shedding. So, while no one has tested "drafting" paintballs, the theory is sound.

[shartley]

^^^ Well, not necessarily ^^^

The idea behind 'slipstreaming' the balls would be to not only decrease air resistance, thus giving you a better chance of breaking a ball at long range, but to also ensure that the second ball goes where you point the marker instead of 'hooking'. If it hooks, it's due to out-of-roundness or else a spin on the balls. Given the same ammount of spin, the ball with less air resistance will hook less.

Sure, I understand this is like saying a paintball gun will be more accurate in Denver than Miami, but that's (theoretically, anyhow) true as well.

Of course we still need to aim. Even with 30 bps you have to aim. If we didn't have to aim, would it still be fun?
Okay, so now you are talking about making sure the balls break more consistently as opposed to accuracy? Because think about it. If you can get ONE ball to hit where you aim it, why would you need to “slipstream” the next one to also hit where you aimed? ;) Snipers don’t slipstream their bullets to gain more distance nor accuracy… the key is to make sure your projectile goes where you aim it, and slipstreaming does not accomplish that since the FIRST ball is what dictates where both are going, right? ;) (Of course we toss out the imbalanced balls argument, just to make the discussion last more than one round. ;) )

[shartley]

A little testy today, huh?

BTW, there have been tests done that show that placing something in front of a sphere will cause turbulence, disrupt the laminar flow and stop vortexes from forming. There are mathematical formulas that determine the "sideways" force on an object from this vortex shedding. So, while no one has tested "drafting" paintballs, the theory is sound.
LOL Please don’t misunderstand me.. I am not testy. I am “testing”. There is a difference. ;)

And I will point out that many theories are sound until put into practical application.

With that said, have you seen the tests done with underwater projectiles? Now THAT stuff is cool!

[Lohman446]

As to "slipstreaming" the ball...

Isn't there an issue in this? I mean, if the front ball is breaking resistance, the second ball having had the same force applied a split second behind it - won't the first one slow down from more resistance and "wobbling" due to vortex shedding and have the second ball "ram" into it from behind, causing issues with both.

[PumpPlayer]

Oh, don't get me wrong... I agree that (at this stage of the game at least) trying to accomplish a TRUE "drafting" shot is pretty much impossible. Clearly, higher ROF might (depending upon the test) result in greater overall accuracy, but it could easily be attributed to other factors as well (especially with an RT given the fact that recharging pressure, when fired quickly, CAN be more consistent, creating better "accuracy". Depending upon how you set it up, of course.) But at the present time, TRUE "drafting" isn't exactly possible.

Is it really worth researching and developing? Financially no. Of course not. I wouldn't invest in that no matter how much 'disposable' money I had.

Neat idea, though, is all. And if it could be accomplished by a double-barreled marker... that would ne neat as well.


Now, of course your sniper rifle doesn't need to slipstream bullets. But it has reliable axial spin to break down the boundary layer instead (plus a more efficient projectile shape plus the gyroscopic stability provided by the axial spin... not to mention the MUCH shorter time to target resulting in less vertical drop and less sensitivity to wind variations... less than a paintball, anyhow, not that it's imune to distance or windage obviously but that's not what we're talking about). The sniper rifle uses axial spin to accomplish the same thing - we're just trying to break down the boundary layer of fluid friction to decrease drag. And yes, obviously if you can hit the target with the first ball, you don't need a second (assuming it breaks) or third, or 30th for that matter. However, suppose the first ball hooks. The second, with less air resistance will hook less. That's all. Improved accuracy, however slight it may be. Also, they're more inclined to break on target, given their slightly higher velocity. And suppose it adds 3 feet of range... *shrugs* it's still 3 feet, though.

Is it necessary? No - how could it be? But perhaps a slight advantage may be garnered from designing something like this.

Lohman - you would need to fire the balls at a slightly increasing angle of the barrel tip. This would ensure that the higher-velocity second ball would pass over the top of the slower first ball rather than simply running into it.

TAW - It's just Newton's first law (object in motion...). If the first ball hooks, the second will no longer have its nice little pocket of turbulent air to ride in. Yes, it will be inclined to follow the first ball (ever get passed on the highway by a truck? It 'sucks' your little car in behind it slightly.). However, the point is that it will be less severe of a hook than the first ball. Much of an advantage? No. It is, however, a product of higher ROF and an eventual 'benefit' assuming ROF continues to increase.

[hitech]

Yes, the lead paintball would wander. However, the turbulent wake it leaves behind would be larger in diameter than the paintball itself. Depending, it would be large enough to cover the area it wanders. This would allow the following paintball to continue on it's path and still benefit from the lack of vortex formation. And no, I don't think the following paintball would catch the lead one.

Now, if we could get the airflow to couple... ;)

[shartley]

And if frogs had glass rears…… ;)

[SlartyBartFast]

Well, I have just one thing to add to each side of the argument.

Nobody knows what this discussion is about anymore. :rofl:




In that light, the only point of higher ROF is to be more effective at putting paint on a player. Not necessarily MORE paint, but being more effective at getting at least one there.

Good point.


However, you must admit that ROF is an advantage. Moreover, the higher ROF the higher the advantage. Obviously from a pump to a semi there's a large jump, yes? From a spyder blowback to, say... the Ion. There's a large jump in 'advantage' there as well, yes? Toss in a ramping board and bump it up to say 25 bps. Is there added advantage? Of course.

That's where you lose it. If I'm hiding because of a 15BPS barrage, it doesn't matter if you put 200BPS into the bunker. You still aren't going to mark me.

And even if the probability of marking me increased by .1% is it worthwhile?



Opponents to high ROF should not say things like, "It gives no advantage." because they would be incorrect.

Except you're far more incorrect by putting words into peoples mouths and making them say things they have never said. At least not in this thread.


Clearly higher the ROF, the higher the advantage. Always, no matter what.

But you're ignoring the question asked and the issue of diminishing returns. Is 21BPS a DEFINITE advantage over 20BPS? 30 over 25? If it is tell us how. If it isn't try to moderate your ideas to less absolute terms.


You as a player have to find your own balance between cost/equipment and skill. And whatever you're using - whether it does 1 bps or 30 - blatant overshooting is just being ignorant. No excuse. A good ref should have your rear.

Two things: Firstly, it isn't just up to you the player. There is industry influence, the effect on player retention, and the effect on new players to consider. I know of several people who stopped playing, newbies who'll never play again, and a field that went out of business because any walkons were hosed by members with virtually unlimited paint.

Second, I agree on the requirement for enforced rules for basic concepts. So many questions boil down to lack of solidly enforced rules and adequate penalties.


Wow, I'm falling behind....

And the thread is going further off-topic. :rofl:

[shartley]

Wow, I'm falling behind....

And the thread is going further off-topic. :rofl:
Then jump in behind me… I will create a slipstream for you to keep up in and stay on target! :dance:

[PumpPlayer]

SBF - ouch. But many good points, of course.

Your standpoint, if I may use your words of "diminishing returns" is that 21bps is not enough of an advantage over 20 bps to make it worthwhile.

While I personally agree wholeheartedly with that statement (I personally think < 4 bps is just dandy), there are some who would not. Given the fact that at least ONE person is willing to pay the price for the higher ROF, it's 'worth it' at least in their eyes. It is still, however slight, some advantage to have the ability to shoot faster.

Lastly, you are correct that higher ROF presents a greater responsibility to those who make use of it. Clearly in your example, certain people abused that power and many more were forced to pay the price for it. I'm not going to quote "Spiderman" here with the whole 'responsibility' thing - but it's true. I agree completely that it needs to be treated with respect but I also think that it CAN be respected and used for good purposes.

Shartley - That one had me ROFL to be sure. Nice one! :rofl:

[Lohman446]

Your standpoint, if I may use your words of "diminishing returns" is that 21bps is not enough of an advantage over 20 bps to make it worthwhile.


But the question was never of NO advantage (I was careful on the wording) but of negligible advantage as SBF has pointed out. I would say that extra .1% chance of hitting me is negligible. Perhaps you would disagree, but I am sure you would agree there is a point at which the greater chance is so near to intangible as to be negligible.

[PumpPlayer]

^^^ Absolutely ^^^

No argument at all. We're probably on the same page here but might not realize it. Of course the additional advantage is negligible. But all I mean to say is that to someone (certainly not me!), it may be worth it. (at least in their mind)

I'm reminded of an advertizement for Kiwi shoe polish: "Increase your chances of dating a supermodel from 0 to 0.0001. Look sharp."

[shartley]

^^^ Absolutely ^^^

No argument at all. We're probably on the same page here but might not realize it. Of course the additional advantage is negligible. But all I mean to say is that to someone (certainly not me!), it may be worth it. (at least in their mind)

I'm reminded of an advertizement for Kiwi shoe polish: "Increase your chances of dating a supermodel from 0 to 0.0001. Look sharp."
I think you hit the nail on the head that time. Paintball has almost always been driven by the “perceived” benefit of X or Y, not its actual benefit or in many cases LACK of. If a player THINKS he or she is shooting faster, they ARE… whether they are or not. It a player THINKS they are shooting more accurately, they ARE…. whether they are or not. If a player THINKS they are shooting farther, they ARE…. whether they are or not. ;)

You have been taking Paintball Marketing classes again haven’t you!!!!!

;)

[SlartyBartFast]

Then jump in behind me… I will create a slipstream for you to keep up in and stay on target! :dance:

Actually, the slipstreaming paintball idea would work. Under very extreme and probably impossible to obtain circumstances.

Read the hundreds of posts in the painball spin physics thread.....

I've found video of vortex shedding being eliminated on the FIRST cylinder when there is something following. So the following ball would actually increase the accuract of the first one.

But, two cylinders too far apart increases the shedding on the second.

On a completely different note: Nothing is more increadible than drafting behind a city bus on a bicycle, not pedalling and travelling over 60kph. Not sure if the feeling of elation is due to speed or diesel fumes though. :p

[hitech]

I'd put my money on TK's paintball physics knowledge, no offence. ;)

Now back to the regularly scheduled program...

There is a big difference between 5 and 10 bps, a little less so between 10 and 15, and a little less again between 15 and 20. I think the added advantage between 15 and 20 is "worth it", but it's hard to tell. I've never been able to sustain (or reach for that matter) 20 bps in a game. The closest I have come was firing my hyperframe at 20 bps fullauto, And that was, obviously, not in a game. ;) So, I have no idea where it becomes not worth it.

[68magOwner]

Maybe you are. :p

according to here
http://www.soccerconditioning.net/research.htm

most "sprinting" is 11-17mph (85% of Vmax).
So they seem to define MAX running speed as 12-20mph.

How fit are your players?

That puts 12bps as good enough to get all but the very best when they are doing NOTHING but running. They still have to be VERY lucky and have their run timed correctly with the paint.

have heard the good ol "cant run thorough more than 13bps" stuff before, and all your math is great, but, the fact of the matter is, go take a marker, on 13bps, full auto, and see if you cant run through a lane that it is shooting, id be willing to bet that most people could. I for one dont care waht calculations say i can and cant do, because on the field, it happens.

[SlartyBartFast]

have heard the good ol "cant run thorough more than 13bps" stuff before, and all your math is great, but, the fact of the matter is, go take a marker, on 13bps, full auto, and see if you cant run through a lane that it is shooting, id be willing to bet that most people could. I for one dont care waht calculations say i can and cant do, because on the field, it happens.

But as I pointed out. "On the field" it isn't a full auto marker firing from a stable shooting platform.

If you make it it's more down to the inadequacies of the shooter.

[Lohman446]

have heard the good ol "cant run thorough more than 13bps" stuff before, and all your math is great, but, the fact of the matter is, go take a marker, on 13bps, full auto, and see if you cant run through a lane that it is shooting, id be willing to bet that most people could. I for one dont care waht calculations say i can and cant do, because on the field, it happens.

The good old "my perception is better than mathematical calculations" argument. I bet you can guess which one I place more faith in. :D

[shartley]

I'd put my money on TK's paintball physics knowledge, no offence. ;)

No offence taken here. We simply view were we would put money on differently…

Keep in mind as well that theoretical conversations and “tests” concerning these types of things don’t amount to anything unless you can do something practical with them. And I don't see THAT happening.... so I will put my money on what I know. It is a far safer bet. ;)


The good old "my perception is better than mathematical calculations" argument. I bet you can guess which one I place more faith in. :D
But of course! That goes along with what I was saying about shoot speeds, accuracy, distance, and everything else involved with paintball. :D

[hitech]

have heard the good ol "cant run thorough more than 13bps" stuff before, and all your math is great, but, the fact of the matter is, go take a marker, on 13bps, full auto, and see if you cant run through a lane that it is shooting, id be willing to bet that most people could. I for one dont care waht calculations say i can and cant do, because on the field, it happens.

Were have you played and seen people run through a 13 bps FULLAUTO stream of paintballs?

[minimag03]

I thought about making the thread along time ago. However, I answered my own question. The more paint you put somewhere the more likly you are to hit it. Today people cheat, but it is harder to wipe 3 hits than one.

[Jotsy]

my opinion on the matter, let ppl build markers as fast as they want (as long as it stays legal).

nobody needs 500bhp cars (other than real racers in real races), but they're out there, and ppl still buy em. they're like carbon fibre tennis rackets or titanium golf clubs...

do ppl need em? no.
does it improve your game? maybe, maybe not.
do ppl still buy em? yep.
have they stopped researching ways to make em better? nope

if they build it, someone will buy it

[Evil Bob]

World class male olympic sprinters peak at around 30 mph, guys like Ben Johnson (steroids and all) and other record holders hit around that number pretty regularly.

The soccer chart is a good one as those guys are not doing a single sprint then chilling out for an hour or two like the above Ben Johnson example, so they peak out lower simply because they're not stopping, much like a highly mobile paintball game.

Even with a top speed of 30 mph, you're not going to outrun a paintball traveling at 200mph if the guy shooting the lane is doing his job and placing the stream of paint in your path for you to run through, you're getting hit... a 30 foot gap moving at 200 mph is the size of a shoe box when you're trying to put your slow 20 mph body through it.

Angling is also important, if you can catch the stream of paint at a right angle, you stand a better chance of getting through that gap then you do when the stream is at an oblique angle to your path of travel. That was always something to keep in mind when walking the field and picking out the lanes to shoot on the breakout.

-Evil Bob

[SlartyBartFast]

The comparison with real firearms is absolutely correct!

Your chance of running through a fullauto stream of paintballs is just unlikely as running through a stream of fullauto machine gun fire at the same rps.

Why?

Well, it's obvious. No matter how fast the projectiles are travelling, the same number of projectiles are going through a given space in a second.

The faster the projectiles travel, the larger the gap between them, but as the speed is greater , the larger gap is open for the same amount of time.

I made my table in Excel and plugged in 300fps and all the way up to 100,000fps and the gap timing is the same.

50 BPS = 6.0 ft >> 0.02 s >> 100.0 fps 68.2 mph
30 BPS = 10.0 ft >> 0.03 s >> 60.0 fps 40.9 mph
26 BPS = 11.5 ft >> 0.04 s >> 52.0 fps 35.5 mph
24 BPS = 12.5 ft >> 0.04 s >> 48.0 fps 32.7 mph
22 BPS = 13.6 ft >> 0.05 s >> 44.0 fps 30.0 mph
20 BPS = 15.0 ft >> 0.05 s >> 40.0 fps 27.3 mph
17 BPS = 17.6 ft >> 0.06 s >> 34.0 fps 23.2 mph
12 BPS = 25.0 ft >> 0.08 s >> 24.0 fps 16.4 mph
10 BPS = 30.0 ft >> 0.10 s >> 20.0 fps 13.6 mph



Velocity = 20000
50 BPS = 400.0 ft >> 0.02 s >> 100.0 fps 68.2 mph
30 BPS = 666.7 ft >> 0.03 s >> 60.0 fps 40.9 mph
26 BPS = 769.2 ft >> 0.04 s >> 52.0 fps 35.5 mph
24 BPS = 833.3 ft >> 0.04 s >> 48.0 fps 32.7 mph
22 BPS = 909.1 ft >> 0.05 s >> 44.0 fps 30.0 mph
20 BPS = 1000.0 ft >> 0.05 s >> 40.0 fps 27.3 mph
17 BPS = 1176.5 ft >> 0.06 s >> 34.0 fps 23.2 mph
12 BPS = 1666.7 ft >> 0.08 s >> 24.0 fps 16.4 mph
10 BPS = 2000.0 ft >> 0.10 s >> 20.0 fps 13.6 mph

Velocity = 100000
50 BPS = 2000.0 ft >> 0.02 s >> 100.0 fps 68.2 mph
30 BPS = 3333.3 ft >> 0.03 s >> 60.0 fps 40.9 mph
26 BPS = 3846.2 ft >> 0.04 s >> 52.0 fps 35.5 mph
24 BPS = 4166.7 ft >> 0.04 s >> 48.0 fps 32.7 mph
22 BPS = 4545.5 ft >> 0.05 s >> 44.0 fps 30.0 mph
20 BPS = 5000.0 ft >> 0.05 s >> 40.0 fps 27.3 mph
17 BPS = 5882.4 ft >> 0.06 s >> 34.0 fps 23.2 mph
12 BPS = 8333.3 ft >> 0.08 s >> 24.0 fps 16.4 mph
10 BPS = 10000.0 ft >> 0.10 s >> 20.0 fps 13.6 mph

The only difference would be the erratic nature of paintballs versus the low probability of bounces with live ammunition. :rofl:

[shartley]

SBF-
Again, thanks. I was wondering if anyone would get to that. ;)

[RRfireblade]

The only difference would be the erratic nature of paintballs versus the low probability of bounces with live ammunition. :rofl:


That and the fact that paintballs drop off in velocity at a hugely greater rate, and are effected by wind and other fields conditions by a hugely greater rate, and increase in erratic flight tendences with distance ata far greater rate, and are fired from a far less consistant device and....

Oh , and with a single shot of any of my 308's, I could pick off olympic sprinters running at full tilt @ 100yrds range all day long. :D

[SlartyBartFast]

That and the fact that paintballs drop off in velocity at a hugely greater rate

Which is irrelevant. Because nothing changes in the gap timing if the velocity drops to 1fps.

Although by that time it is VERY easy to see the balls and actively dodge them. :D

But that all points to VELOCITY being a huge advantage at hitting moving targets.

The BPS argument calling for higher and higher rates of fire seems to fall on it's face very shortly after 15bps.

[SlartyBartFast]

Oh , and with a single shot of any of my 308's, I could pick off olympic sprinters running at full tilt @ 100yrds range all day long. :D

Because once you can snap shoot a stationary target, there's little added skill in hitting a moving target. :p

It requires REAL skill to hit moving targets with slower projectiles. :rofl:

[RRfireblade]

Because once you can snap shoot a stationary target, there's little added skill in hitting a moving target. :p

It requires REAL skill to hit moving targets with slower projectiles. :rofl:


It's all about precision, not the speed of the projectile. ;)

[Lohman446]

The BPS argument calling for higher and higher rates of fire seems to fall on it's face very shortly after 15bps.

Thank you, thats the point I was trying to get at - it may not be technology that ever limits speed but an observation such as this.

[RRfireblade]

The BPS argument calling for higher and higher rates of fire seems to fall on it's face very shortly after 15bps.

Only when you factor out accuracy of projectile, typical bounce factor and lost breakage do to range and drop in velocity.

[SlartyBartFast]

Only when you factor out accuracy of projectile, typical bounce factor and lost breakage do to range and drop in velocity.

Bounce single shots off moving targets, and THEN you can argue you need big ROF on target to get the elimination.

I'm rusty these days, but I ALWAYS hit moving targets in the woods with a Splatmaster. Ever since I've played "modern" paintball I seem to have lost those shooting skills.

At least this thread has focussed the TRUE need for high ROF. Nothing little to do with the break, hardly anything to do with laning.

It's the number of shots you can get off in a burst at a moving target.

Problem is, I'm not sure many paintball players even have a clue about hitting moving targets while snap shooting.

[RRfireblade]

Bounce single shots off moving targets, and THEN you can argue you need big ROF on target to get the elimination.


Problem is, I'm not sure many paintball players even have a clue about hitting moving targets while snap shooting.


Play some true SC Pump for a few days and they'll know all about it. :D

Nothing worse than picking off someone on the move with your one shot only to watch it bounce off thier pack or harness. :eek:

[Lohman446]

Play some true SC Pump for a few days and they'll know all about it. :D

Nothing worse than picking off someone on the move with your one shot only to watch it bounce off thier pack or harness. :eek:


I did that once in an open class tournament playing stock - made a awesome move into the snake, unseen, crawled it and "picked" there back player, watched the ball fly straight upwards off his pack... :mad: