AGD's military tech - will it make it to Rec play?

[cledford]

What I've been wondering for a while is whether AGD is going to ever port the military technology over the rec world. Seeing the FN 303 thread prompted me to post this.

For me, the best time in paintball was back when pumps ruled and SMG-60s walked the field along their side as a lesser species - yet harbinger of a future force to be reckoned with. (Evolution)

Anyhow, in those days, when the SMG-60 first came out it intimidated everyone when it walked on the field. When one opened up - people dove for cover instinctively – no matter where it was. It commanded respect and had an attitude that kicked butt! All this lasted about 2 months :( What people discovered (after the intimidation factor wore off and they actually did battle with the beast) was that the range with the .62 caliber paintballs flat out sucked. The .68 caliber balls the pumpers shucked greatly out-ranged the .62. That fact combined with the crappy accuracy produced by the 60's primitive design made it real difficult for a "Smig" guy to hit anything that wasn't standing perfectly out in the clear. Throw in with these facts that due to the smaller size of the .62 cal round hits were much more likely to bounce and you had a noisy, brazen looking marker that was great up close and useless in any other application. With this knowledge the pumpers gained the confidence to fight back and within weeks when a SMG would open up on the field, that guy better be moving because everyone was now on the hunt for the under-ranged, distinctive sounding gun. Never mind the fact that it was also way cool to be able to say "I was the guy who took out the 60."

Not being stupid the 60 guys knew their life expectancy in all but the most unique situations was now very limited. So what happened? A new form of tactic was born, one that teamed different types of guns (each with unique capabilities) into squads or tiger-teams. A 60 would go out with 1 or 2 pumper escorts and set up an ambush position. When the other team walked into the "kill zone" the SMG would light them. Now contrary to military doctrine, which dictates that in the event of an ambush you attack into the threat, human nature induces you run away. This manifested frequently in paintball back then - and was key to the SMG players demise before the new "team" concept arose. As soon as the pumpers retreated to a position outside the effective range of the 60 (which was still inside theirs) they would let the guy have it. Enter the new tactic - with the 1 or 2 pump escorts for the 60. They were able to continue to skirmish with the ambushees and provide cover and protection for the SMG at the same ranges as those who were attacked.

This concept also worked the same in squad tactics where (after people started working together using the best gun for the job) the 60 would be used for close quarters situations, where the pumps just weren’t effective. I'll never forget being in a "fort" situation one time (armed with my trusty Bushmaster pump) and was stitched with 6 rounds (those were the ones that broke - there were more) from a 60 in the time I could get off 1 shot! This was after a couple of pump guys worked just the 60 guy into the fort with surpressing fire. Anyhow my point is, when the guns were employed in a cooperative fashion that focused in their unique traits and supported the others weaknesses, paintball nirvana was created. This is the time I consider the renaissance of paintball.

My question is (assuming the military technology can be tuned to safe levels for rec play) will AGD produce a "game" version? AGD has stated that he thinks scenarios might be the wave of the future. Think about how many of those guys REALLY, REALLY want to be snipers. It could even be used in tourney games. Think about it, the back guys get super accurate, precision markers - which unfortunate are extremely slow and have a huge disadvantage in ammo capacity and you've developed a winning situation. 2 types of markers to stir the tactical situation and liven the game yet balance each other out and are superior to each other depending on the situation.

Who's interested?

-Calvin

p.s Sorry about the history lesson...

[AGD]

Well Calvin, how perceptive of you!

As a matter of fact we are going to be testing a light weight (3 gram) version of our spin stabilized projectile this week or next. They would be VERY expensive at about a buck a piece but have double the range and accuracy.

Now that I know something about scenario play it might be worth the price for guillie suit snipers to make that long range one shot one kill. We also have to test them against goggles and such so there are a lot of things that could kill the idea.

If it happens you will hear it here first.

AGD

[cledford]

Tom, I love you! I've been meaning to post the question for a long time now - when I saw the other thread I decided to skip Splinter Cell tonight and write up my tribute to the "golden days."

Thanks for the reply. I think it will kick butt!

-Calvin

[Hexis]

I for one really hope that doesn't make it into normal play. I see this as being a he-who-can-afford-the-most-expensive-ammo-wins type of deal. That doesn't sit well with me at all.

[BlackVCG]

Dangit Calvin, now you've made me want to start restoring my SMG-60 right now...

One of these days I'll get around to it. I want to get it done right and take it out in some rec-play and experience a glimpse of what it was like back in the "Golden Days."

[cledford]

Originally posted by Hexis
I for one really hope that doesn't make it into normal play. I see this as being a he-who-can-afford-the-most-expensive-ammo-wins type of deal. That doesn't sit well with me at all.

Please reread my post. I can understand your feelings but you are way off. The spin stabilized rounds are VERY pricy so no-one will be wasting them. (Back when paint was REALLY expensive it was like 2 bucks a tube of 10 rounds for comparison) Second, the markers (from what I understand) cycle at a slower speed then a standard, and they have a huge disadvantage in terms of ammo capacity.

One on one, especially at close ranges the spin shooter would be at a hugr disadvantage. (slower gun, less ammo, much more expensive rounds which preclude "pray and spray.") At a distance the standard player would be. (plenty of ammo, but can't get it to where it needs to be) It is like a game of rock, paper, sissors. The key wouldn't be who can shoot faster, or who can shoot further, it would be who can get who where how. Don't forget the real "goal" in most paintball games is to capture something - not "kill" people. If tactics wern't used the semi players would never get close enough to the spinners because of their accuracy, but the spinners could never attack a semi's flag station without getting mowed. The key would be using BOTH types of player to solve the exercise.

It would add a whole new level to the game.

-Calvin

[cledford]

Originally posted by BlackVCG
Dangit Calvin, now you've made me want to start restoring my SMG-60 right now...



I loved those guns - always wanted one. There were these 2 bothers were I played. They would come in a green van with SMG60 plates and each carried 2 60s when playing. It was awesome!

-Calvin

[davidb]

At first I skipped right over this thread, dismissing it as one of those silly questions that pop up on the boards from time to time (about every five minutes). Then I noticed who posted it...

The idea that this might actually occur is VERY intriguing. As stated before, it would add a whole new dimension to the game. Up to this point, the only thing you really perceive about the gun of the person shooting at you is how much paint he is throwing at you. Having to watch out for long-ranged guns would just make things so much more interesting.

I'm getting pictures in my head of spin-stabilized round shooting backup guns, maybe little one- or two-shot deals to go under your barrel... A whole plethora of little gadgets.

A few problems though... For one, the price... Yes, in a way it helps, but did you consider spending $3-5 at the chrony? Sure, we kinda do that already, but still, that's different. :D For another, a lot of people are going to start taking themselves way too seriously! ;)

But in all seriousness, if this comes through, this is something that could really change the whole way we play. Once the confusion caused by people seeing AGD ads touting a "huge increase in range" wears off, that is. :D People will be wanting to know when Smart Parts bought you out, that whole chestnut...

[SeeK]

With the spin stabilized round (SSR) you could make an adapter to fit the sight rail with a breach loading barrel and simple valve system. You could then have it on top of most guns.

[cledford]

I would like to see a magazine-fed spin stabilized marker. The ROF could be governed to a very low number - say 5 to 9bps. This marker would change paintball as we know it - and a huge level of realism to paintball.

The rounds may start out at $1 per - but they would fall if the marker took off. I'm not saying that they would fall anywhere the cost of a paintball, but I think it is likely they would get much cheaper.
As an aside - how about a double barreled electronic marker? Pull the trigger to shoot traditional, or flip a switch and pull the same trigger to shoot the spin barrel.

-Calvin

[Pstan]

Now this is good news!!

Finally.......FINALLY........somebody is headed in the right direction. And cost of projectiles? Well......considering you can easily shoot $10 to $15 in a game with current ammo options this may well wind up being cheaper.......lol.

3 shots = $3 = 3 kills (I refuse to use PC terminology)

or

500 shots = $10 = possibly no kills


Sounds like a deal to me!!......LOL.

[Hexis]

I still don't like the idea at all. I really don't like the idea of a two barrell setup. That removes all disadvantage of having the expensive ammo.

Just as I don't think semis should be in a pump game, or FA in a semi game. I don't think a fundimental shift in technology should be allowed in a game that a majority of a specific type of technology. If a pump player wants to join a semi game it's one thing. It's completly different if a semi player jumps in a pump game.

I think it's a mute point, as I highly suspect that they will not be safe for use. I don't think they will be safe for use with our current eye protection. I for one think that's a good thing.

[RamboPreacher]

Originally posted by AGD
Well Calvin, how perceptive of you!

As a matter of fact we are going to be testing a light weight (3 gram) version of our spin stabilized projectile this week or next. They would be VERY expensive at about a buck a piece but have double the range and accuracy.

Now that I know something about scenario play it might be worth the price for guillie suit snipers to make that long range one shot one kill. We also have to test them against goggles and such so there are a lot of things that could kill the idea.

If it happens you will hear it here first.

AGD way nice. wonder if they would work in my AGA's :D

[Gunga]

Originally posted by cledford
Anyhow, in those days, when the SMG-60 first came out...What people discovered (after the intimidation factor wore off and they actually did battle with the beast) was that the range with the .62 caliber paintballs flat out sucked. The .68 caliber balls the pumpers shucked greatly out-ranged the .62.


Originally posted by AGD
As a matter of fact we are going to be testing a light weight (3 gram) version of our spin stabilized projectile this week or next.

Now if only us SMG-60 owners could talk TK into making some .62 cal 'super paintballs'... :D

Bet that'd get BlackVCG working on his -60. :) Mine already works!! :D

[Ultimator]

Cool idea, but it's not going to be for everybody. [/obvious]

Playing in games like that just don't appeal to me. If this really gets big enough I think there would be a split in paintball. The scenario people and the speedball people.

[Hexis]

There is an environmental concern. The current paintballs dissolve in rain. The Plastic ones would pollute.

[RamboPreacher]

Originally posted by Gunga




Now if only us SMG-60 owners could talk TK into making some .62 cal 'super paintballs'... :D

Bet that'd get BlackVCG working on his -60. :) Mine already works!! :D :D guess that is what I was hinting at with my AGA's (they use .62 also).

[cledford]

Originally posted by Hexis

Just as I don't think semis should be in a pump game, or FA in a semi game. I don't think a fundimental shift in technology should be allowed in a game that a majority of a specific type of technology. If a pump player wants to join a semi game it's one thing. It's completly different if a semi player jumps in a pump game.

I think it's a mute point, as I highly suspect that they will not be safe for use. I don't think they will be safe for use with our current eye protection. I for one think that's a good thing.

With all due respect, opinions like this are very limiting to our sport. First, paintball WAS like this in the past - just because it wasn't when you started/currently doesn't mean it shouldn't/couldn't go back. Right now there is no way for pump players to compete with semi players - because the guns shoot the same distance and with the same amount of accuracy. A pump/SSR would be more then capable in the walk-on games of the future.

Regarding the eye protection. New eye protection should/could be made. For the longest time "eye protection" in our sport was UVEX shop goggles. Things evolved and now we've got what we got, but that doesn't mean they're perfect or that the sport should "just stop evolving" because you're comfortable with where it's at.

I'm not trying to flame, you are intitled to your feelings - I just don't understand why moving forward (actually backwards in a sense - since it was all done before) is such a big deal. Do you really enjoy having to carry 700+ rounds per game to get an average of 3 eliminations? What’s wrong with adding a "thinking" element back to the game? Right now it is run, take a bunker, hose paint, maybe get an elimination, run take another bunker.... It could be much more.

-Calvin

[Hexis]

I think there has to be a balance. If you allow someone to buy a significant technological advantage, then insert themselves into a game, you give the guy with the most money the advantage. That does not sit well with me. SSRs sure move the technology forward. However, I don’t see it as moving in a good direction. If we wanted uber realism we could play airsoft.

I suspect folks would not be very happy with having to buy new eye protection so someone who can afford $1 a shot can shoot them from a long distance outside their effective range. Sure we went through some eye protection upgrades, but the first set of Scotts I got many years ago (upgrading from shop style) are still quite valid eye protection.

I also think that something this accurate in normal use would significantly stagnate the game. People in big games already latch on to some random tree in the middle of the field and stay there. You give folks a paintball that can travel over a lot longer distance and it’s going to slow things down.

I wouldn’t mind going back to pump games with PGPs and other similar guns. Those were fun active games. You could see someone clearly, and have no chance of actually putting paint on him or her. Those were tons of fun. I also had a lot of fun with carefully balanced mixed type games. 5v5, 2 PGPs, 2 SL68IIs, and a Pro Light/Am. You had two fast movers, so middle guys, and one heavy gunner.

And quite honestly you have no idea how I like to play paintball. Please avoid any assumptions based on my playing style and preferences.

I am entitled to my opinion, as are you. We don’t have to agree, and you are not going to talk me out of how I feel. I think SSRs in recreational usage would be a bad thing for paintball.

[ogre55]

Hexis:

Neither I, nor I am sure, anyone else on these boards has any problem with the way you play, however, your posts make it somewhat obvious that your reasons have more to do with how this would effect "your" game, rather than how this would effect "our" game. This possible technology could add a new dimension to the sport.

I assume that these SSRs would be bullet shaped. This would preclude the gravity fed system we use to load circular balls. You would either need some sort of manual loading, or you would need to use a magazine. Either way one would be precluded from having more than 20-50 shots, before needing to reload , taking the above assumptions into consideration. (Anyone who mentioned belt feeds is getting WAY too ahead of themselves)

This type of marker would be very disadvantaged in a
speedball game, especcially when you have have fields that an average marker chronoed at 290-300 can traverse.

Finally, you lament the possibility of people being able to ourspend everyone else in order to win. Is that not what many people do today? One pays $1000+ for a high end electro, rather than $200 for a Tipmann in order to get a faster firing mechanism. They spend money on more firepower. They spend money to win.

This technology would add an interesting aspect to woodsball games on large expansive fields as well as to Scenerio/Big games. However, I don't see it making much of dent in speedball.

Ogre

[manike]

Originally posted by Hexis
I think there has to be a balance. If you allow someone to buy a significant technological advantage, then insert themselves into a game, you give the guy with the most money the advantage. That does not sit well with me. SSRs sure move the technology forward. However, I don’t see it as moving in a good direction.

I suspect folks would not be very happy with having to buy new eye protection so someone who can afford $1 a shot can shoot them from a long distance outside their effective range. Sure we went through some eye protection upgrades, but the first set of Scotts I got many years ago (upgrading from shop style) are still quite valid eye protection.

I remember people making exactly the same points and arguements back in the day when semi's first became available :D

...

[Vendetta]

However, I don't see it making much of dent in speedball.

You would be surprised how effect a sweet shooting pump can be in a speedball field;)

[cledford]

Originally posted by Hexis
Those were tons of fun. I also had a lot of fun with carefully balanced mixed type games. 5v5, 2 PGPs, 2 SL68IIs, and a Pro Light/Am. You had two fast movers, so middle guys, and one heavy gunner.


I like this idea. Why couldn't there be new balanced games? 2 pumps, 2 semis, one "spinner." That would be cool! Honestly, It would be fine to limit the number of spinners in a game to balance things out. Regarding "camping out" behind trees - like you, I see this a lot now. It is very frustrating because the nature of the "game" (95% of the time) is to capture a flag station. "Camping out" reduces a players likely hood of getting eliminated and increases their chance of eliminating others - but it will never "win" the game. It bugs me when people on my team do this. It is a lot more prevalent today then back in the old days.

It sounds like you started playing a while back (I had "***"umed you were a more recent player) If you used to play with PGPs you'll remember games with time limits of an hour or more (vs. 10 minutes today) on fields measured in acres (vs. feet or yards today) in which multiple squads tried to accomplish an objective (vs. a loose collection of individuals today out to just spray paint and rack up kills). I'd like to see more of a return to the older style of play. Honestly, I play speedball more - but usually end up shooting a case in about 1.5 hours for an average of about 2-3 kills per game. Back in the old days I'd shoot maybe 200 shots all day and walk away with 7-8 kills per game. I think that the current style of play is designed to do one thing, sell lot's of paint. Hell, if it got any more "refined" we'd just line up in racks 15 yards apart and open up on each other. I'm just trying to breath new life (or old depending on how you look at it) into the sport.

Again, I wasn't trying to flame you. I will disagree with you on these forums all day long. If you (in the general sense - meaning anyone) post here it is my opinion that you are opening yourself up for someone to try to convince you of something. The same goes in reverse - I assume when posting that others are going to let me know how they feel.

-Calvin

[Ultimator]

Originally posted by ogre55
This technology would add an interesting aspect to woodsball games on large expansive fields as well as to Scenerio/Big games. However, I don't see it making much of dent in speedball.AGREED! People who like woodsball and/or scenario/big games would really have a use for this. On the other hand it just doesn't sound like it would appeal to me, or most of the active speedball community. That's all I'll say until I get a chance to try it firsthand.

So if you don't like it because your game is speedball ... what are you worried about?

[cledford]

Originally posted by manike


I remember people making exactly the same points and arguements back in the day when semi's first became available :D

...

Very true. Also when constant air first came out.

-Calvin

[cledford]

Originally posted by Ultimator
AGREED! People who like woodsball and/or scenario/big games would really have a use for this. On the other hand it just doesn't sound like it would appeal to me, or most of the active speedball community. That's all I'll say until I get a chance to try it firsthand.

So if you don't like it because your game is speedball ... what are you worried about?
Why wouldn't work for speedball? Again the idea here is to add a tactical level to the game. Therefore it would require some rethinking - but if everyone is willing to try something a little more advanced then the "overwhelming force" tactic that prevails then something cool could evolve. Think about it - back players - some with semis to shoot lanes/observe, others with the super accurate markers to try to eliminate "hotspots." There is no requirement that you "must" have a "spinner" playing - and without one you'd have a team heavy on offense. Replace on or two guys and now you've got a guy who can help work the front-guys/semis into position without having to expose themselves.

Right now, once one team acquires a numerical superiority the game is all but predetermined. With a single long range guy and a single "frontman" there'd be much more of a chance for the outmanned team. At the very least the front/semi could protect the back from almost near certain elimination, or the back could protect the lone front and possibly work him into a position where he might actually be able to do something against the odds. There would at least be more options then try to postpone the inevitable as long as possible.

-Calvin

[ogre55]

The reason I think that "spinners" as you call them (and I like the term) would not have much of an application in speedball is that their advantages (accuracy over longer ranges and flatter trajectorys) would be minimized on a speedball field where there is nowhere to hide and where the smaller size of the field allows most markers to reach either side of the field with little difficulty.

Obviously, skill can eliminate that disadvantage, just like a highly skilled player can hold his/her own in with a stock class marker in a speedball game.

However, playing woodsball (which I also do) would be just so much more fun with a rig like this. It would require a whole new pack of skills (or a dusting off of some old ones) in order to become profecient with this type of play.

Ogre

[ogre55]

Hey Tom:

Can you give us an idea of just what these projectiles (they may not be balls) will look like?

Ogre

[FalconGuy016]

Look at the gun at the FN website, they show you what they use (what the rounds look like), probably will be similar


Man, I was JUST thinking of this the other day! And I come in here and its actually being tested!! Wow :) I woudn't be a sniper in the woods because I would be bored to death, but there are those few situations where you just need that long long range accurate round, and I think I can put one of those launchers on my gun :) Man, what fun would that be

[cledford]

Check this out:

http://www.fnhusa.com/contents/ll_303.htm

Here is a pic of the "washable training round." There are some cool accessories, like tactical vests and under barrel systems.

-Calvin

[ogre55]

Thanks Calvin:

I guess they are loaded via the drum magazine. One of the prior posts stated a concern that these rounds are made of plastic, and made stated an ecological concern. These look like paintballs with plastic fins attached. Either way, if these projectiles are plasic, in whole or in part, those concerns are well founded. Unless AGD has figured out a way to produce an all gelatin paintball that actually has fins also made of gelatin. It would explain the $1/ball pricetag.

One questions that I have is why there are two effective ranges mentioned depending on whether you are using the item for military of civilian uses. (Cops vs. soldiers) There is only one maximum velocity listed, so I assume the military versions are not simply meant to shoot the ball at a faster velocity.

The more answers one gets, the more questions one has.

Ogre

[nippinout]

I'm confused on the materials.

Seems like a paintball-use round would be greatly different.

The forward payload is like your everyday shotgun payload. The body is stated to be made of polystyrene. It looks like some plastic, not like a styrofoam.

I don't know about using this stuff if it can't degrade easily. Airsofters can purchase biodegradeable bb's, so perhaps the shell is enviro safe? But what aboot the 'ouch' factor?

I know this will be a scaled down version of the police version, but those police ones put dents in a metal door. OUCH!

This is certainly intriguing! Who wouldn't want a fin stabilized round on a bolt action pump.

And a laser and scope that would actually help hitting a target!!!

[Temo Vryce]

Ok how many people here are old enough in Paintball years to remember an old product called "Sniper Balls"? Come on I know I'm not the only one.

[Orange Crush]

Originally posted by Hexis
If you allow someone to buy a significant technological advantage, then insert themselves into a game, you give the guy with the most money the advantage.

Where have you been playing?! Every game I go to is already like this and it has been the case with paintball from the very beginning. Some people can just afford the expensive equipment. If all guns were equal would you pay $1000+ dollars for an Angel or Emag setup when you could just by a Spyder flash?!

Temo Vryce I remember sniper balls. Great idea, but before its time. People are willing to pay a lot more for equipment now, so maybe now is the time for more expensive, more accurate projectiles to make a second try.

I for one would love something like this. Like the starter of the thread, some of my most memorable days in paintball were when the ratio of semi-autos to pumps was like 1 in 10. It made for a great game. As a semi player you wielded more firepower, but at the same time became a primary target....hence requiring the protection of your team. It was great. Especially as wood ball goes, I can't imagine how it wouldn't make the game more fun.

[Evil Bob]

I remember the sniper ball, it was a plastic tail fin glued to a standard paintball, you muzzle loaded the rounds with a stick. I saw a few in action, they flew fairly straight but didn't have any noticible range advantages.

The "light" version of the 303 round will be geared toward "safty" as opposed to being "non leathal" as the 303 is, which is designed to not kill but to do enough damage to put someone down.

I for one would not like being hit with a 303 round at all, especially on any exposed skin or even the back of my head. I will wait to see how the light version looks and performs before making any judgement on the matter.

-Evil Bob

[joeyjoe367]

I don't know about you, but I *LIKE* the Idea of making paintball into a more realistic "Combat" Running onto the field with 5 30 rnd magazines into a more-accurate SSR rounds sounds like great fun. I'd kinda like to get an AT-10 or AT-85 for this reason, however I'd most likely not be able to compete with 200 rnd hoppers and 150 rnd tubes.

I agree that paintball today, specifically woodsball, has basically become a version of speedball where it's just harder to find a bunker. 90% of the time when I'm shot out playing woodsball is because I can't find a good bunker to sit behind. I'm sure I'd play a lot better in speedball (Have yet to play real airball) because of the fact that I don't have to spend time out in the open trying to find a good bunker.

Going to play "speedball" and playing "paintball/woodsball" may become differant with the Spinning Round. I'd welcome the idea.

[Pstan]

I dont normally see many "new ideas" that intrigue me, but this does. I think it would do alot for rec players and could, as Cledford has stated, even be implemented into other types of games.


The argument that it's wrong because it would be expensive, or everybody couldnt buy one, is just silly in my book. Most players cant afford a $1500 gun...........but I dont see the game dying off because they cant.


And lastly, I'm for it cause it would be seriously fun to watch obnoxious people get plunked in head from 75 yards and possibly start crying. Man........that would be hilarious!!

[raehl]

Is a buncha people on a forum primarily devoted to things like E-MAGS and WARP FEEDS whining that some new technology will "make the guy with the most money win" or "ruin the sport".


Uhm, hello?


- Chris

[EnderWigginPballin]

something like this would be very cool.... but completely stupid in practice.

skilled players can already hide on a good woodsball field and ambush other players, giving them long range would make the game harder, but most wouldn't use it.

[Hexis]

raehl I do not have an emag or warpfeed. Please refrain from personal attacks, which calling anyone a whiner certainly is.

Everyone seams to feel that paintball was more fun when...

A possible theory to consider: Perhaps the constant upgrades are slowly squeezing the fun out of the game.

I see the current technology as somewhat out of control. Cyclic rates do not need to be in the 20 cps range IMHO. I also think that full auto stuff is unreasonable in the current game.

There may be a difference in markers that increase their cost. However, the performance delta is nowhere near the price delta. A Tippmann user can shoot just as well as an XMag user. Sure the XMag will be able to spit out paint in mass quantities. It also looks a lot nicer. But when you get down to it, they shoot the same paint. They have roughly the same range. There is not a huge difference in there performance. The Xmag at about 10x the cost, does not perform 10 times better.

Now, if you take a significantly different piece of ammunition, and a different way of firing it, I think it ends up creating almost a totally different game.

[Orange Crush]

Originally posted by Hexis
There may be a difference in markers that increase their cost. However, the performance delta is nowhere near the price delta. A Tippmann user can shoot just as well as an XMag user. Sure the XMag will be able to spit out paint in mass quantities. It also looks a lot nicer. But when you get down to it, they shoot the same paint. They have roughly the same range. There is not a huge difference in there performance. The Xmag at about 10x the cost, does not perform 10 times better.

I agree that usually guns that cost 3,5,10 times as much do not normally perform 3,5, or 10 times better. That's why I still run CO2, I don't feel the cost of nitro is equal enough to the performance gain. But I think you are missing the fact that the guy who can afford a $1500 dollar gun, can also afford to carry 3 cases of paint onto the field with him. So tell me again how money doesn't equal an advantage?!

[Timmee]

Hmm, assuming that they can be made to be safe, if these could be ready for Shatnerball, it could be an interesting game. I know I wouldn't mind carrying 5-10 rounds of SSR to be loaded into my marker one at a time for that long range sniper shot (depending on the final retail cost and quantity sold per retail unit).