New CFOA and PSP rule

[manike]

I agree. There was talk a long time ago about banning a gun if it was found to have a mfg "approved" cheater board. I think that would be an interesting idea, but obviously not practical.

I'm curious as to who you think makes most of these cheater boards...

[thecavemankevin]

everyone that is complaining about haveing to get new boards that can ramp but not more than 15bps, as long as your board is cap-able at 15 in good old fashion semi then you don't "have" to get new boards.

just cap them at 15 and your good to go.

[PBX Ronin 23]

Agreed. So the answer is to make a new rule they can't enforce either? They can enforce the BPS but they still can't enforce the 'one pull one shot' hence...

Seems to me that if it was ever possible to set guidelines "firing rules" and enforce them, some standards will have to be created that will enable the scrutineers to just plug into a gun and check its settings. We all know that at this time this is both implausible from a business standpoint because the manufacturers themselves are always looking for some performance advantage for their products compared to their competitors.

Hence the PSP rule is someting I have been advocating on another board for quite some time.

It may be that my suggestion for the rule which the PSP has now made, was just a co-incidence, or the fact that Lane and Steve had read it and talked to me about it has a small factor also.

In some regards I totally agree with you. But just like anything else in life, a lot of it depends on the perspective of the those who have the most economic impact on the issue itself.

If you can't enforce a rule, then what is the point? This is one reason why I think the PSP rule is far more HONEST and a better rule.

I wish it didn't have to be, but at least it's a decent rule they can enforce and it will make a fair playing field. The CFOA rule is still a joke.

Anybody trying to continue to enforce a 'one pull one shot' rule is sorely kidding themselves in todays market. I wish them luck though. Once they find a way to do it, then we can go back to having no cap...

Ten four that Manike!

[ScatterPlot]

I wonder if a "per person" cap would help any. Like have variously set up test guns for people to rail on as much as they want, but have those boards standard. If the person goes way over their own personal cap (not like a 14 to 15 but like a 12-19) then they get pulled. That would be kinda hard though, considering adrenaline and all that mess.

[Shirow]

Ok, I know this is an oooooold thread. But it was such an interesting read. And some participants in this thread are industry designers, reporters, and manufacturers.

It was really interesting to see the volley back and forth between them.

Thanks for bumping it, I hadn't seen it before and it was quite interesting, considering the state of the game in 2006..

[eNder159]

nothing better to do with your time in the middle of the night aye?

rogue is just trying to revive a long quiet AGD forum ...for one i applaud him for trying to do what is best

honestly everybody should go back to revvy's that will be the only way to curb these ramping "cheaters"

[p8ntball72]

Wonder if Bill or Simon's views have changed at all?
Now that both seem to have moved up the ladder so to speak in the "Industry"

On a side note
is Dawn mills now a Smart Parts media representative? { http://www.68caliber.com/story041980.php }

[ScatterPlot]

Yeah, I remember the olde AO days. Kinda miss it, back when I was a newb. Don't play much anymore cause I gots no money, but it would be nice to talk more about it. I just come around casually now. High five for old times, RogueFactor!

[punkncat]

Sure thing.

I was doing some research, and came across this thread. Its reminiscent of the old AO days where a thread was informative and those who posted were those involved at some of the highest levels within the industry. Discussion was civil and there werent as many AO martyrs cryng out for attention or attempting to derail the thread.

Well said.

[Cold Steel]

ROF Cap revisited

Found it very interesting to go back and reread some of the thoughts and opinions from 2 years ago. I was particularly interested in what some of the more influential people in the industry had to say about the ROF cap the CFOA was adopting. Now that we can look back in hindsight, I still believe in the decision that was made and know that we made the right choice. The ROF cap has been easy to enforce through the use of PACT timers and parabolic microphones. The rules, along with the hardware, and the harsh penalties that were dished out to the offenders, have gone a long way towards leveling the field of play. The CFOA has seen its share of penalties and suspensions for those that tested the limits of the ROF rules. The only challenge to the rules these days are the few players who attempt to utilize a breakout mode on their cheater boards. These actions resulted in the use of the parabolic microphone to catch these breakout cheats.

After rereading some of this thread, the statement that struck me as the most ironic was the part about the NPPL being the only league that was trying to prevent marker cheats by utilizing a scrutineer and the infamous robot. I'm not trying to bash the NPPL, but here we are 2 years later, and its probably been that long since any NPPL player was stupid enough to get caught by the robot. The NPPL is also without any form of ROF cap. Having been to both PSP and NPPL events this season, I've seen and heard more fast guns at the NPPL events than at ROF capped (CFOA/PSP) events. There is no way those players shoot that fast without electronic assitance.

In my opinion, the cheater boards almost ruined tournament paintball. The unscrupulous manufacturers and players that produce and use these cheater boards are still doing all they can to obtain an advantage on the field. The cheats are still far ahead of those who would police them.

Players and teams are faced with 3 choices when trying to determine where to compete; 1) play wherever and play straight up, 2) play on a level playing field, or 3) play wherever and be prepared to fight fire with fire. The CFOA chose to level the playing field. The CFOA staff and officials will continue to remain vigilant in the policing of the ROF cap.

Larry Motes
CFOA

[pennywise]

Thanks for the insight Larry. It is awesome to hear from someone who truly cares about the integrity of the game and its players and is actually doing something about it.

[UTDragun]

CFOA is a great circuit and I hope to see tfoa again next year as well

[Lohman446]

Found it very interesting to go back and reread some of the thoughts and opinions from 2 years ago. I was particularly interested in what some of the more influential people in the industry had to say about the ROF cap the CFOA was adopting. Now that we can look back in hindsight, I still believe in the decision that was made and know that we made the right choice. The ROF cap has been easy to enforce through the use of PACT timers and parabolic microphones. The rules, along with the hardware, and the harsh penalties that were dished out to the offenders, have gone a long way towards leveling the field of play. The CFOA has seen its share of penalties and suspensions for those that tested the limits of the ROF rules. The only challenge to the rules these days are the few players who attempt to utilize a breakout mode on their cheater boards. These actions resulted in the use of the parabolic microphone to catch these breakout cheats.

After rereading some of this thread, the statement that struck me as the most ironic was the part about the NPPL being the only league that was trying to prevent marker cheats by utilizing a scrutineer and the infamous robot. I'm not trying to bash the NPPL, but here we are 2 years later, and its probably been that long since any NPPL player was stupid enough to get caught by the robot. The NPPL is also without any form of ROF cap. Having been to both PSP and NPPL events this season, I've seen and heard more fast guns at the NPPL events than at ROF capped (CFOA/PSP) events. There is no way those players shoot that fast without electronic assitance.

In my opinion, the cheater boards almost ruined tournament paintball. The unscrupulous manufacturers and players that produce and use these cheater boards are still doing all they can to obtain an advantage on the field. The cheats are still far ahead of those who would police them.

Players and teams are faced with 3 choices when trying to determine where to compete; 1) play wherever and play straight up, 2) play on a level playing field, or 3) play wherever and be prepared to fight fire with fire. The CFOA chose to level the playing field. The CFOA staff and officials will continue to remain vigilant in the policing of the ROF cap.

Larry Motes
CFOA

A) I'm a fan of ramping, I don't think trigger speed should be part of the skillset tested.

B) I realize PSP and CFOA are different.

I am going to disagree on the ease of enforcement though. I specifically asked for a PACT timer at a PSP event early in the day - the field I was playing on never saw one all day. Maybe the "big boys" get them, but we sure did not have any ROF enforcement.

[Steelrat]

Just a nice reminder of why I really don't play anymore.

[Cold Steel]

The biggest difference between the PSP and the CFOA concerning the ability to enforce a ROF cap is in personnel. The PSP puts on huge events all across the country. I don't have any facts to support this, but I would guess the PSP has virtually a new reffing crew for every event. The CFOA has a group of dedicated, paid refs who (for most part) ref every event. These guys travel with the league, wherever it may go. CFOA refs were utilized at MAO and will be utilized again at the World Cup. These guys are second to none when it comes to reffing.

Larry