look who knows so much....
I myself have played in a scenario game where FA was allowed.
Registered User
look who knows so much....
I myself have played in a scenario game where FA was allowed.
I could tell you but then.
But it is not By ASTM Safety standards, of course those dont MATTER or people just dont care, and there in lies the future of PaintBall Safety and Us.Originally Posted by trains are bad
Registered User
....or maybe some people don't care because FA is not necessarily unsafe, just different, new and politically incorrect.
aka- The Day Wang
Well it wasn't a Wayne Dollack or MXS one, I can say that for certain...
Registered User
Hate to do this to ya Dayspring, but MXS has allowed FA but there was a 11bps limit.
Knowledge is power
Power corrupts
Study hard
Super Moderator
Nope, no cookie. There are 3 separate, partially related sources of unintended FA. 4.01 gets rid of the low battery FA condition, by not firing during a brown-out. I made a minor mistake involving how stuff is timed in 4.00 that I fixed in 4.01 - an unnatural delay that resulted in missed shots on very rare occassion. But really, 4.00 and 4.01 are virtually identical except that 4.01 will metaphorically get that very last bit of toothpaste out of the tube - none of you will notice, I did it for me - being a perfectionist at times.
What makes you think TK has the source code?
The software is not responsible for the FA, it's an EMI issue with the solenoid and HES sensor. 4.00 had 2 sources of FA that it did not cure (assuming solenoid wires are flipped correctly). 4.01 had 1 source of full auto. 4.20 has 0, but I've yet to confirm this with 100% certainty - it seems to have completely cured the problem so far, but I haven't tested a bunch of markers yet either.
Unfortunately, 4.20 will also not be supported by AGD or be publicly available even if it is found to be a solution after more testing.4.x was kinda dead a while ago, and I did 4.20 on my own - because it felt like unfinished business, and I was torqued that my software was unusable. Now in my mind... "It is done," and it won't torment me as that "unfinished" thing that I put hundreds of hours into.
I didn't understand the problem before, like I do now - which is partly why I didn't find a fix before. And believe it or not, this very thread is what got me thinking about the software again - and I thought of how to fix it while I was driving down the freeway.
Last edited by Miscue; 09-12-2004 at 08:29 PM.
Grubby Owner
Considering the fact that the chip is surface soldered to the board, this will not work.
You guys lost me
Thanks for the corrections Miscue.
Super Moderator
Sure thing. You asked in PM why there was a new revision, if AGD isn't going to support it. Well, first of all "I" worked on it independently of AGD knowledge or approval. As it stands, 4.01 cannot get released regardless. 4.20 (assuming it works completely) at least makes it a small possibility, versus 0% possibility.
TK is going to throw his shoe at me.
I could tell you but then.
Not necessarily unsafe. Maybe you are uninformed. 41 of your peers in and out of the industry says it is.[ASTM Standards] Want to take a guess on who some of those people are?
Different and new...... I dont think so. I started playing the year you were born 1985.
We were using SMGs full auto, legal field. Ever see one of those? Ever shoot one? Know why they were banned? Hardly new or different.
politically incorrect..........What do you mean? Its all about Safety
Its not people dont care because, Its just people dont care.
How did they control or monitor this???????????Hate to do this to ya Dayspring, but MXS has allowed FA but there was a 11bps limit.
It's a Jeep thing!
O.k. here is my 2 cents:
What does he care? If AGD is not going to continue developing software for the markers they sold at a cost of well over $1000+ then I think the "Source Code" should be on the net in a .zip file. And I think anyone who knows what they are doing with it should be able to make $$$ for maintaining it. O.k. now I am on my soapbox...
Please don't take me wrong I love AGD...
I am sure you have heard this before. But I bought one of the first RTs with the "Lifetime Warranty," at the time I was willing to pay the extra dollars for a great marker with a great warranty, from a great company. In the six years that I have owned it I have sent it in once for a sheered pin on the bolt and a tune-up. Since then they went to a 5-Star program that I thought was BS and now when I look on the net my marker serial number no longer is covered by my warranty at all.I imagine that some people were taking advantage of the warranty and that started to cost AGD. That's too bad, but it is a great product and if it is well taken care of it does not require factory support.
Next AGD comes out with the E-Mag and X-Mag, great markers. You can see videos all over the net of how awesome they are and how fast they shoot, and how they don't chop paint. But then there is a lawsuit [Read About it Here], which is total BS but what can AGD, I would have stopped making the Electro trigger as well to keep from being sued as well. However, I would still offer support for the ones I sold.
Now I know they will fix it if it breaks. And yes AGD is probably one of the best Customer Service companies, but they should continue to work on their software. As I see it, it was left at 3.2 with the attitude of "leave well enough alone!"
Last week I called AGD and asked about a future release of new software. I was told that as for now there is no plans and nothing in the works to fix 4.0 and 4.1. The Tech said it was recalled because it was programmed with Ramping Software built in. For those that may not know, ramping software allows a few extra shots to be fired when you get on the trigger fast. Then I asked for a few more specifics about the software options in 3.2. Basically in 3.2 the electronic features are pretty limited and with the exception of preventing a chopped ball electronically the rest do very little.
I can't help but feeling a little abandoned by AGD although I like their products.
----Steps of Box-----
Not True!!! I suppose it depends where you play and whom you play with. I know more people with full auto Angels then I know people with "single-shot" angels. They simply open the grip and change the setting depending on where they play, but the important thing is, THEY HAVE A CHOICE! AGD has robbed me of that choice...
Want to test 4.20 on my marker?
Well I agree the board is a bit tight, but I know it is possible to attach a few wires to the board somewhere, and remote a small plug-in module, that would house a swappable ROM chip, that could be programmed with the code.. LMFAO... God this sounds stupid since I have no idea what I am talking about exactly, but I have seen it done on an Playstation 2. "If there is a will there is a way!!!"
[QUOTE=Beemer]
Different and new...... I don’t think so. I started playing the year you were born 1985.
We were using SMGs full auto, legal field. Ever see one of those? Ever shoot one? Know why they were banned? Hardly new or different.
[QUOTE]
I played with the SMG-68, sucked when you lost your little five round clips!!!
My final words in this posting:
Miscue how did you get the code, did/do you work for AGD?
Pat
Registered User
Need some debugging help?Sure thing. You asked in PM why there was a new revision, if AGD isn't going to support it. Well, first of all "I" worked on it independently of AGD knowledge or approval. As it stands, 4.01 cannot get released regardless. 4.20 (assuming it works completely) at least makes it a small possibility, versus 0% possibility.
TK is going to throw his shoe at me.
(I'm sure you're tired of people asking. :/)
Lee
Super Moderator
How did I get the code? I wrote it, and I'm the only one that has it. TK asked me to write it, and it has some code from my original Q1.1 software that I wrote for myself - intended for personal use - being unsatisfied with 3.2. I wasn't going to wait for AGD to come up with something better, and I wanted good software for my EMag.
No way in hell will it be released, and it has zero to do with being possessive of it. Those who are capable of "maintaining" the software, can write their own to begin with - and do not need the software... or can use a different board altogether. And, I wrote the prototype in two days (and another software engineer on here did the same for himself with personal software, with very little help from me) - with this amount of time in mind, it would take you longer to figure out what I did than to start over... and this desire for released code makes no sense to me - only the incompetent would be interested in it - who should not have it.
Those who cannot write it on their own will not be able to make significant changes - and those changes that they can do can make it unsafe, exhibit random behavior, not function correctly, and/or damage components of the marker. And if someone gets hurt with faulty software that was the result of improper modifications of AGD software, AGD would care - and even more so when they have to go to court over liability issues. This software does not let you harmlessly play Tetris on your PC - it controls a device that shoots projectiles - and there are safety issues.
Everyone who wants to make "changes" to the code, so far has the same goals: Full Auto or Burst mode - but don't fully admit to it, or lightly mention it. If that's what you want, write it yourself. FA takes like a dozen instructions - burst mode is a bit more complicated. You would need to do the exact same thing within 4.x code anyway.
The tech you spoke to is misinformed - I'd like you to tell me who it was you talked to so he can be straightened out. It was recalled due to markers going FA at random due to an EMI issue.
It is not "ramping" software. "Ramping" software exhibits a FA cadence - because once you pass a certain threshold - it ramps up to a steady X bps and it doesn't really matter what your fingers are doing as long as they are maintaining the speed needed to be over that threshold. You can tell when people have ramped boards when they are shooting really fast and the rhythm is dead on. Anyone who has used 4.x can tell you that it does not do this.
See for yourself: http://homepage.mac.com/zvetter/.Mov...%20Testing.mov
(Right Click->Save As)
Last edited by Miscue; 09-13-2004 at 07:16 PM.
Super Moderator
There are no bugs - the software has been flawless for quite some time. The hardware has been the problem. If you can make a very small, cheap, and effective degausser - then you'll have my attention.Need some debugging help?
(I'm sure you're tired of people asking. :/)
Lee
Last edited by Miscue; 09-13-2004 at 05:28 PM.
player, not a hater
MISCUE! YOU'RE MY HERO!!!!!
[*IMG]http://girlbeater.boybeater.org/aosig.gif[/IMG]
Image dimensions too large- Tato
player, not a hater
demmit. now the secret's out.
Registered User
First off, let me say i don't own an e/x-mag. I am just more or less curious.
Miscue, you wrote 4.0 software? Completely independent of AGD? I mean you don't work for AGD? How did people get the 4.0 software? Was it distributed with a batch of e/x mags? Do you flash markers to 4.2?
What are all the differences in the software? 1.2, 3.2, 4.1? Or whatever they may be...
I was also under the impression that ramping software would add balls after a certain bps was reach. For example, once you hit 15 it would add +1, or +2. When you hit 17 it would add it to 19, 18 to 20. Thus never keeping a steady bps. I see "ramps 3 bps.." all the time, esp on DM4s. That is how I came to that assumption. It would add 3bps after a certain bps was reached. It seems it would be "ideal" to add it +1 for every 2 over 15. Example: you hit 15, it adds 1, 17 it adds 2, 19 it adds 3. Would be difficult to find such things. Of course programming this would be hard, no?
Just curious, I am not looking to get my e-mag flashed to 4.2, as I don't own one. Just wanted to get some clarity.
Super Moderator
No, Tom asked me to make it. I started Q1.x right after AGD announced 3.0 and its features. I think it took me just a couple days to match 3.0's core features, and I put in some extra stuff like a BPS meter, and then I sent TK a copy of it - this led up to the AGD 4.x thing.
I didn't fill him in on 4.20 until I had it done and had some promising (but not yet definitive) results. I don't think he knew I was still thinking about it. Heck, I thought I was done with it at 4.01 and would leave it to die. And, that could very well be the case with 4.20 as well - unfortunately - even if I could eventually verify that it does fix the problems... not 100% sure on that yet... waiting for the odd-ball EMag that spoils it like last time.
Mostly AGD people have it, and a few markers were flashed at a California meet - and that's how I discovered the FA issues - the marker I was testing did not have these problems so I never ran into them beforehand.
The description of ramping that you're talking about, is pretty much how I think of it as well. Basically, it's "Turbo" or "Hyper" mode with a different name as disquise - since "Turbo" is specifically not allowed. But what makes it different from traditional turbo mode is that it can shoot at a variable speed, depending on what is being maintained on the trigger. I don't know if boards labeled as "Ramping" actually do what you described - could be something else, like outright turbo mode or some slight variation. The reason I think this is... the markers I've observed at the tournies - they basically shoot as though they are a steady full-auto as long as fingers are wiggled quick enough. They really take off - machine guns.
No, it's not particularly difficult to implement.
1.x was the original stuff for the EMag. 2.x eventually had ACE code for XMag. 3.x had rudimentary shot buffering. 4.x corrects 3.x's shortcomings - it's the result of a paintballer who owns the marker and knows what he wants in an electro, versus programmers who don't have those insights and are limited to what a client requests - and no extra.
Last edited by Miscue; 09-14-2004 at 02:36 AM.
You guys lost me
Having used 4.0 and 4.01 for over 6 months I feel qualified to make some comments on how it feels and what it does. The board on my SFL is a european model My debounce is stuck at 10 so there is no issue of the debounce influencing my results.
Like Miscue said, the board does not ramp (i.e start adding shots after you hit X BPS) The shot buffering however IS what really helps out. If you spend some time and experiment with the board capped at different ROF's you can find how the shot buffering actually works.
With 4.0x’s shot buffering you will get a perfect steady ROF as long as you can pull that many shots per second. If I set the ROF at 12bps (which most of us could walk) you would get a perfect uninterrupted stream of 12bps till you backed off. I myself find that about 18bps is the most I can reach with any consistency. I can hit pockets where I get a 10-20 rounds of 18bps but then I slow down and I get the inconsistent tap, taptap tap...tap of unassisted walking.
Now if I set the ROF to something that is near impossible to reach like say 22, 24bps then I might get little 2 shot bursts that hit that ROF but you wont see it sustained unless you are in hybrid mode which helps a little
Inspired by this thread I will have a 4.0 shot buffering demo later this week but for now you can see the demo in a limited fashion in my old video below (its 29MB and in QuickTime format so cry me a river).
http://homepage.mac.com/zvetter/.Mov...%20Testing.mov
Registered User
wow, thank you. That video reminded me of why i dont post on pbn. Sweet mag btw.
It's a Jeep thing!
So official sounding!
Lawsuits, probably not!
The electronics cannot make the marker do something that it mechanically is not capable of doing. Example, the worse program in the world cannot make the Air Tank explode. It cannot make the bolt start shooting bullets instead of paintballs. It cannot adjust the pressure released on the ball so that the ball is shooting 1000 fps. Yes you could damage your electronics, yes you could mechanically mess up the on/off, bolt action, and trigger assembly, these are hardly lawsuits. The only real danger you face external to the marker is full auto.
If it happens off the field, you should have a barrel sock or plug anyways. If not the lawsuit may be against you! If it were to happen on a field, well I sure as hell would make the best of it and go for a few kills.
By the way my job is shooting projectiles! The best safety - my trigger finger!
Super Moderator
The worst it can do is misfire and injure someone - shoot an eye or both out.So official sounding!
Lawsuits, probably not!
The electronics cannot make the marker do something that it mechanically is not capable of doing. Example, the worse program in the world cannot make the Air Tank explode. It cannot make the bolt start shooting bullets instead of paintballs. It cannot adjust the pressure released on the ball so that the ball is shooting 1000 fps. Yes you could damage your electronics, yes you could mechanically mess up the on/off, bolt action, and trigger assembly, these are hardly lawsuits. The only real danger you face external to the marker is full auto.
If it happens off the field, you should have a barrel sock or plug anyways. If not the lawsuit may be against you! If it were to happen on a field, well I sure as hell would make the best of it and go for a few kills.
By the way my job is shooting projectiles! The best safety - my trigger finger!
You bet it can result in a lawsuit. It's happened before. And even if it's determined that you're not at fault, it can cost hundreds of thousands to defend against the suit. It's a very real problem that has occurred before at great expense. And then there's the burden of knowing something you made hurt someone - even if it wasn't your fault it's hard not to blame yourself... and that's something you have to live with.
aka- The Day Wang
Well I'll put it to you this way.
Kid shoots his eye out. Parents sue Tom because it was his gun. (Not mentioning the fact that the kid did something stupid.) Tom procedes to sue Danny Tippmann because there was a Tippmann air tank attached and Tom's gun couldn't do anything if it wasn't for the tank. (true story, told by Tom himself.)
So lawsuits are a more real thing than you might be lead to believe. Also, your best safety may be your trigger finger, but do you trust everybody elses? I doubt it...
Registered User
Eadtf: Please take a little bit of advice from someone in the software industry.
Most programmers do not like sharing their code. We react quite like if someone had asked to see our wife naked - the answer is (usually) a resounding no and we get a bit offended. Miscue probably isn't going to give you his code and probably won't show any of it to anyone other than TK himself and the techs that would understand such code. I can't say I blame him, there are a few very good reasons why he shouldn't give it to anyone.
However, don't get discouraged. You can get what you want out of the e/x-mag. Find someone with:
1) Knowledge of embedded systems. You'll probably want them to have a degree or a few year's experience so that you know they'll produce something worthwhile.
2) Money. Programmers (the actual hardware itself) arn't free. I know AGD built some pins into the board for programming purposes - figure out if they're using serial or parallel programming mode and design an interface to fit.
3) Time. Miscue wrote 4.0 in "a couple of" days, he said. I don't doubt that fact, but I'm betting he has production level experience with embedded systems and probably has prior experience with the emag board or the chip used on it. Assuming you hit a few roadblocks and have to go digging for info or experimenting with things, I think you could have a semi stable codebase ready in a week or two.
At the end of all this, you'll be able to flash your gun to say whatever at boot, have multiple firing modes, and do whatever your little heart desires.
AGD Trained Monkey
I agree with some of the programmers here. If you really want it, program it yourself. The project itself could be more interesting than the end result. Warpig has an article on how to play with BASIC stamps and get them working with paintball markers. Start by trying to understand Bill's code, then delve into pbasic and learn how to make it do what you want. This code is easier to understand than assembly languages. PBasic is a little more cryptic than C, Pascal, VB, Java and most scripting languages so don't expect to write code that makes sense overnight. I've got a Basic stamp sitting on my desk right now, and believe me making that first led blink on and off is a lot more exciting than the first hello world program many people write in their intro programming classes. Besides the programming itself, there is the battle to get the electronics and mechanics to do what your program is asking. Just because you can tell the solenoid to fire doesn't mean it will trip the sear. I think Miscue has had to really observe how his marker reacts to each revision of his code. Without that observation, having his code would offer you little insight into why he made the decisions he did, and how it affected the operation of the marker. Thus modifying the code would leave you open to making many of the mistakes he had already solved through his own development process.
Registered User
I liked your analogy.I assume you're wanting to degauss the HES? That would require a pretty large curren't even though the target is small won't it?
Lee
Super Moderator
Nope, not the HES.I liked your analogy.
Lee
Super Moderator
Yeah, the actual code took little time - when I said 2 days I meant about 48 hours, including debugging and testing... most of the bang-head-on-wall stuff I had taken care of in Q1.x. Everything up to AGD 4.x inclusively represents at least a couple hundred hours of time, including maintenance, field testing, and such. It's only like 750 instructions I think - and a lot of it is necessary background stuff, like the menu system, display driver, etc. 95%+ of my time was not spent on actual coding - a lot of testing and experimenting... trying different things, of course making some changes here and there. I put way more time doing robustness checks rather than coding - trying to break the software with every conceivable situation... making sure that it is indeed logically flawless and effectively deals with external problems.
Yeah, there are nuances that you would not think of, until you actually ran into these problems as you're working on it. The snags I ran into, I had no way of anticipating (it wasn't because I had program errors) - some of them took a good amount of time to figure out and fix... like stuff stored in the EEPROM magically disappearing at random because the chip is quirky - that was a fun one. Turned out to be EEPROM reads (not writes) under certain conditions would write garbage to the EEPROM... go figure. Heck, that last sentence represents hours worth of work and frustration, and lots of caffeine, to even figure that out - let alone fix it.
The problem reproduces itself on very rare occassion (and not on every marker = I had to thoroughly test multiple markers) and I had to drain the battery just right... recharge the battery, drain it... etc... to put it under the right conditions. I came up with an obscure solution to the obscure problem that happens at random once in a blue moon on some markers, a coded solution that is entirely unrecognizable to anyone but me - unless you understand why and when it happens, and how to avoid it... requiring hours of screwing with it much like I did. So, you guys just want me to just hand over the code eh?
It is related with a lack of hardware-based brown-out protection, and the chip operating incorrectly under low-voltage conditions (there's another $100 tip for ya). This is one of several oddities I ran into... and was not the worst of them. Anyone complain about 3.2's EEPROM storage and stuff like the shot counter and various settings getting screwed up? Now compare that to people complaining about 4.x EEPROM storage. Tee hee. There's a reason for that.
Your last two sentences are on the money - not everyone understands this, and it's hard to communicate that idea in a way that someone can swallow - so they don't think you're just trying to be evasive. In a way it requires a leap of faith, and the acceptance that I know what's going on - having very good reasons and the insight to not hand my work over... which I can't do anyway because it's not really mine anymore.
Last edited by Miscue; 09-14-2004 at 04:46 PM.
Super Moderator
I'm in agreement with you. The source code is also not mine to give, even if I wanted to - which I don't for numerous reasons - primarily because it would get in the hands of incompetent or non-programmers, and good programmers do not need it to begin with... no good can come of it. To make significant changes, would require large portions of 4.x to be thrown out - might as well start over - it is not particularly modular code where you can simply cut and paste w/o breaking something else. Whatever I make is property of AGD - I do not own it, and thus cannot distribute it.
Last edited by Miscue; 09-14-2004 at 01:15 PM.
Registered User
So, would you flash someone mag to 4.2 for a fee? If you would rather not answer this thats fine. Just curious how some of these people have the 4.0 stuff...
if this was answered previously forgive me
Posting Permissions
