Why I like full auto...

[hitech]

Originally posted by Orange Crush
Though I disagree with you, you at least present some seemingly valid concerns.

That's why I post here. I enjoy debating with people who do NOT share my opinion, even if they are wrong.

Thanks for keeping the discussion to the facts.

And yes, you had the idea of "bunkering" correct. And don't feel bad, I did not know what it was when I first read it here either. Most fields I have played at do not specifically disallow close range shooting. Close range shooting and medium rof full-auto in the wrong hands are a problem. Multiple accidental discharges are a problem.
The reason I use 5 bps for full auto is that most people with a little practice can achive that rof with "normal" trigger pulls. Even when "bunkering" someone. As you try to get much faster than that becomes much more difficult to do by simply pulling the trigger. Therefore that is approx. the max rof that is currently in use in most close range firefights. It hasn't been a big problem so far, so that it possibly okay.

[FatMan]

Originally posted by Jack & Coke

I think you completely missed the point. I was talking about real game playing conditions where movement and dynamics are involved.

With a HIGH ROF you are more likely to get multiple hits in the same location than a LOW ROF.

FA is not the problem here because it's effectiveness is DEPENDENT upon the ROF.

Do you really think FA @ 5 bps would yield more overshooting than today's hair trigger electro semi's @ 15bps?

SUMMARY regarding FA vs HIGH ROF for those too lazy to read ALL of my posts...

I'm not sure who has missed the point here ... I understand what you are saying, and yes, in fact ROF contributes to the degree of multiple impact (I was exagerating when I said it had "nothing" to do with it - certainly FA at 1bps is less dangerous than FA at 12bps).

But the point was why is FA generally banned - which is, of course because it is unsafe. You claimed that was a bogus reason, based your statement that ROF is the culprit, and that is not dependent on FA. I pointed out that was ONLY true if you limit the discussion to live game play (which you just confirmed) and I pointed out THAT is an invalid argument - reasons given above. Further I will argue that it is NOT even true during live game play - the likelyhood and degree of multiple impact is greater with a FA marker than a SA marker firing at the same rate of fire.

I've read all your posts - I understand what you are saying. What you are saying is not correct in the context of the discussion of the safety or lack thereof in using FA.

FatMan

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by FatMan
...the likelyhood and degree of multiple impact is greater with a FA marker than a SA marker firing at the same rate of fire....

???

I don't agree.

"At the same rate of fire", the same amount of balls are in the air flying towards your target... are you saying that SA ruins your aim that much?

Maybe if you're thinking non-electro triggers. However, electro SA allow for a very stable and accurate platform.

I wonder how many people can walk there electro triggers (SA) and still keep on target? I know I can. ...and at 10 bps, I would get the same results SA or FA (i.e. if I shot for 1/2 second, 5 balls in the air, flying at my target in a nice tight pattern).



What is "overshooting"? More than 3 shots breaking on your target... right? Then the real question should be:

"Are you able to control and limit yourself to 3 shots at any time?"

"If you sneak up behind someone, can you limit your shots to 3 max if you wanted to?"

If you can answer "yes" while shooting FA, then you are fine. No danger here.

ROF set to LOW (5-7 bps) = not likely to accidentally overshoot (more than 3 hits)

ROF set to HIGH (12-18+) = likely to accidentally overshoot (more than 3 hits)

[Evil Bob]

The difference most people are trying to explain here is not the ROF issue more then the actual effort and trigger manipulation that needs to happen that makes the difference. Someone cranking on a semi trigger repeatedly takes a conscious effort and lots of practice to keep up a good sustained rate of fire. Someone with an FA setup needs only hold the trigger down. In the hands of a new player where this is likely to be a major concern, the new player, through lack of experience, is more likely to mash the trigger once and spray then pull the trigger repeatedly and effectively. The "death grip" on the trigger is more of a reality in this type of situation.

-Evil Bob

[FatMan]

Originally posted by Jack & Coke
I don't agree.

I wonder how many people can walk there electro triggers (SA) and still keep on target? I know I can. ...and at 10 bps, I would get the same results SA or FA (i.e. if I shot for 1/2 second, 5 balls in the air, flying at my target in a nice tight pattern).

What is "overshooting"? More than 3 shots breaking on your target... right? Then the real question should be:

so noted. I would suggest you put that to the test - as is often the way on this forum - and prove that you always produce the same grouping with your SA as a FA - and then show that that translates to the rest of the paintball public. I don't think you understand what you are saying.

"overshooting" isn't the issue, and your definition of it is really rather lame. The issue is safety and the likelyhood of injuries.

I would go further to say I would much rather have a semi capable of 10bps than a FA limited to 5bps, and the semi would be safer. The ability to reach that rate requires a certain level of attention to the problem with the semi, with the FA all you do is bump the trigger.

But really, all of this discussion of academic. FA is unsafe - anyone who a seriously studied the problem knows that - it has been discussed here over and over with the same results. Clearly my FIRST impression was right - you aren't interested in knowing WHY it is - you really just want to justify your desire to use it anyway.

Its a bad idea for paintball, and I hope it never becomes the norm.

FatMan

[Jack & Coke]

Again, with regards to "safety" if the ROF were LOW this so called "death grip" + full auto concern would be a non-issue.

With regards to "conscious effort", what difference does it make if I shoot 10 bps FA or SA? If you're on the receiving end of my volley, you still see 10 balls flying at you for every second I shoot - FA or SA.

Most of the arguements against FA in this thread are incorrectly based on "safety" issues, where in actuality they are based on "parity" issues. They actually are complaining about fairness.

If you say FA is unfair against SA, then I agree. It is easier dish out a 10-15 bps string of balls via FA, than via SA.

If you say FA is more prone to overshooting than SA, then I say at what ROF? At a LOW ROF there is no difference between FA and SA. At a HIGH ROF, then yes there is a difference.

Really concerned about safety (overshooting)? Start talking about the ROF.

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by FatMan
.."overshooting" isn't the issue, and your definition of it is really rather lame. The issue is safety and the likelyhood of injuries...

"lame" - Please exlpain.

"likelyhood of injuries" - What about superman dives and point blank bunkering exchanges?

Fatman, please keep it civil. It your inability to maintain a mature and intelligent debate is starting to show... and I have no interest in engaging in a FLAME WAR over differing opinions.

[Orange Crush]

This conversation is absolutely amazing! I don't, haven't, and probably never will use full auto, so I am not really an advocate. I really couldn't care less, but I really don't see the big "safety" issues with FA.

Bunkering-being bunkered by a noob or otherwise. The safety issue here isn't the FA capability, its being bunkered. I guess you guys are okay with taking a shot at that range, but I don't want to take a hit that close, whether it be one or ten. This should be a "dead to rights" elimination, with no shots fired. This is poor judgement on the part of the fields and the insurance companies. If bunkering is your major concern with full auto, I think you are attacking the wrong portion of the same problem. If you disagree, then lets play out this little scenario. You get your choice, take a single shot to the side of your neck under the ear from 18 inches or take a 20 round FA salvo from 50ft. I know what I'd take.

Accidental discharge-so far this seems to most valid concern to me, but again, I think blaming full auto is some kind of scape goat. I agree that in the event of a discharge a FA could stand the risk of multiple eye injuries instead of just one. However, I have to ask you this: Since when is losing just one eye ok? I mean for god sakes, its okay to lose one eye, but not two? Besides correct me if I am wrong, but haven't we already taken a measure to prevent accidental discharges, called a barrel plug? "Well yeah Nick, but that was before full auto, now they don't work. Besides, I'm only willing to risk one eye to play paintball.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that all the issues that have been brought up aren't problems with FA, but problems and risks that have been a part of paintball since the very beginning. Close range shots, shooting an already "out" player, accidental discharges in the staging areas.

You don't like full auto, fine, nobody said you have to, but don't make it out to be something bad, scary and dangerous just because you don't like it.

[ghideon]

When's the last time you saw some idiot unload on some 12 year old kid, till the kid dropped his weapon in the dirt and went fetal? And the idiot shooting him is a full grown adult who should know better? I saw this last time I went out to play.

While most of us posting here are quite capable of controlling a high ROF, there are some people out there who are not. And it is these people we have to worry about. Not only for ourselves, but also for the other people who are in our sport. It's not like we're gonna start a national paintball database of who's allowed to go F/A and who's not.

The scenario described above is so not good for a number of reasons. In order for our sport to grow, get more people, get cheaper, etc, we need fresh bodies, and we ain't gonna get em if we give keep shooting them after they've gone fetal. Add to that the safety issues. And full auto in the hands of the unwashed masses isn't a good idea.

I personally dislike the ROF on the current batch of high-end guns. If it were up to me, we'll all be running around the woods with pumps.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Orange Crush
You don't like full auto, fine, nobody said you have to, but don't make it out to be something bad, scary and dangerous just because you don't like it.

[Dubstar112]

I support F/A.

I personally, do not consider high end electros as a semi-automatic.

With the electro world, you dont have to physically pull the trigger, bump, shake, or blow on it is what it usually takes. I dont consider these semiauto because of the ability to bump the trigger several times on accident and shoot.

With a classic mag, spyder, or whatnot, shooting a hopper feels like a hopper was shot, with a high end electro you can make a hopper full seem worthless.

Thats how I feel, and i dont care what anyone else thinks..I however do plan to use f/a, and I do plan on using a high end electro next time i play. This may seem a little wierd, or contradictory, but thats my intentions.

[Orange Crush]

Originally posted by ghideon
When's the last time you saw some idiot unload on some 12 year old kid, till the kid dropped his weapon in the dirt and went fetal? And the idiot shooting him is a full grown adult who should know better? I saw this last time I went out to play.

Unfortunatley I have seen this type of scenario many, many times before. And way more often than not, it happens at the hand of an experienced player. In fact, I find myself more concerned with the a-hole experienced players on the field that overshoot on purpose than I am about the noob that might do it on accident.

Originally posted by ghideon
While most of us posting here are quite capable of controlling a high ROF, there are some people out there who are not. And it is these people we have to worry about. Not only for ourselves, but also for the other people who are in our sport. It's not like we're gonna start a national paintball database of who's allowed to go F/A and who's not.

This arguement still holds no water with me. On the presumption that the normally safe and acceptable FA becomes dangerous in the hands of idiots like the man described in your scenario, then too does the whole sport of paintball become a risk. Anyone that puts anyone at risk with a FA marker, runs that risk with any marker in their hands. You can't ban FA because of the incompetence of a small portion of the players anymore than you can ban paintball all together.

I mean its okay to overshoot or bunker someone as long as you didn't do it with a full auto right?! Maybe fields should start excercising some responsibility on their own and banning the players that do not excercise good playing practices. Maybe a ref should stand at the edge of the field and not let people off until they have barrel plugs in (instead of randomly catching people), ensure the markers are on safe. Maybe we should make sure all hoppers are removed and markers cleared of paint before leaving the field. Ultimatley that would be the best practice for safety sake. I mean you guys cry safety, but really, do you think that we as a sport are actually doing everything we can to promote safety. Would emptying hoppers after each game be a pain in the ***?! Yes! Would it be a good safety practice?! You betcha!! Then again I raise the velocity issue. You chrony on, but it is so easy, even if I have to use an allen key, 1/4 turn up, then back down a 1/4 turn. Someone calls hotshot, but its already been turned back down. How many guns are actually capable of shooting over 400fps?! Why?!?! 300fps is the highest acceptable speed (atleast anywhere that I have played or heard of) So why does the gun even need to be able to be turned up that high?! Why isn't anyone crying about that?! I mean I could go on about things that could be done to make paintball much much safer than it is now.

Originally posted by Shartley

Honestly, I don't feel like any real safetly issues have been presented, atleast none that didn't already exist before FA.

Originally posted by Shartley
My point in this is that THAT is total BS. Sorry. Just because similar things can happen with semi-auto does NOT mean that the ability to do it with EASE (and no practice, or even by pure accident) in FA does not mean it is not a valid safety issue. It is the ease, as well as accidental issues that make it more of a safety issue.

Now this concerns me a little. Apparently we are more concerned with the accidents that noobs may make with their FA than we are by the same, but deliberate acts of experienced players. Noobs will make mistakes and learn from them, eventually, they'll become experienced and controlled as well, except those select few that turn into the experienced asses that do all things you are concerned with on purpose, instead of on accident.

Originally posted by Shartley
You can like FA and admit it poses a higher safety risk.. which it DOES.

Maybe just a tiny bit more, I'll admit, but not enough to ban it and label as "so dangerous".

Originally posted by Shartley

And those that think FA poses a far superior risk, obviously didn't understand the risks involved in paintball in the first place.

In closing (I think I am done beating this dead horse) I want to remind you guys of this: I don't have full auto, I don't use it, never will, won't miss it if you guys manage to ban it. I really don't care one way or the other, I just think your safety concerns with FA are ill-intended, unresearched, unsubstantiated and faddish. Sorry, that's how I feel about.

[TheMagGuy]

allright, I have a different opinion on this one. I do not think that full auto should be allowed on most fields. I play at a field that does not allow full auto or anything else (but semi.) But think about it, how would you like to get hit by some guy shooting an angel at 20bps. Having 10 balls break on you is sure to drive some new players away from paintball and the sport would become less popular. What I do think though is that fields should allow 3 round bursts. Why? It would eliminate people wiping paint. I hate when some guy wont admit that he is out when I am sure that I hit him. The same guy is less likely to wipe three shots than just one. If people continue to lie and not admit it when they are out, then we should definatly be able to shoot bursts, but allowing full auto is overkill.

[Trench_Riader]

What I do think though is that fields should allow 3 round bursts

Most places that ban f/a do the same with burst fire for the same misguided reasons.

IMHO three round burst is not all that effective anyway. On real firearms, one of the main effects of TRB (aside from conservation of ammo) is assuring a greater chance of multi hits. On such guns, the burst is fired at a very high rate of fire (faster than most f/a's). However on most paintball guns, the rate of fire of TRB is the same as f/a. This pretty much defeats the purpose of TRB.

Anything to add to that?

"Trench Raider"
RMOG AO BEOG

[shartley]

Originally posted by Orange Crush
And those that think FA poses a far superior risk, obviously didn't understand the risks involved in paintball in the first place.

In closing (I think I am done beating this dead horse) I want to remind you guys of this: I don't have full auto, I don't use it, never will, won't miss it if you guys manage to ban it. I really don't care one way or the other, I just think your safety concerns with FA are ill-intended, unresearched, unsubstantiated and faddish. Sorry, that's how I feel about.