Airsoft Ohio Forums  
  #1  
Old 11-14-2007, 09:32 AM
nextmayor's Avatar
nextmayor nextmayor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cuyahoga Counnty (Cleveland), Ohio
Posts: 954
nextmayor is a Specialistnextmayor is a Specialist
Send a message via ICQ to nextmayor Send a message via Yahoo to nextmayor
iTrader: (2)
FPS Limits based on Weapon Classes.

This thread is an out growth of A6's "Are snipers valid? have they been replaced?" thread.

In that thread I posted an idea of limiting FPS based on weapon classes. Below is what I posted and contains a simplified version of my idea to start the discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nextmayor
In a perfect world, I'd like to see FPS limits set by weapon classes (pistols, subguns, carbines, rifles, support weapons, and sniper rifles). Something that would give a player the advantage if he chooses to carry a full size battle rifle over a subgun. While I haven't ever really thought this idea out, it would go something like this.

Pistols and subguns: Under 300 FPS
Carbines: 300 - 350 FPS
Rifles: 350 - 400 FPS
Support Weapons: 350 - 400 FPS
Semi Auto Sniper Rifles: 400 - 475 FPS
Bolt Action Sniper Rifles: 475 - 550 FPS

I think you could also make an argument to give a heavy support weapon (M2) a higher FPS base on the caliber. Under a plan like this, we could begin to see weapons classes that kind of simulate their true real steel characteristics. I know what I've posted above is over simplified and may have some holes in it, but I think it demonstrates the idea I am trying to make.

We've finally gotten to a point where no one considers a MP5K with a drum mag a support weapon any more, but we've still got subguns performing at the same level as a full size battle rifle. The argument against an MP5K with drum mag is about the same as saying that a 400 FPS MP5K is just as effective as an 400 FPS M14. In the real world there would be very little in common in the performance department.

With a FPS schedule like posted above, we'd begin to see the benefit for carrying a large heavy weapon, which would, IMO, give a little more relavance to the sniper role.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oscar
I wonder how many people would be willing to adopt those rules.
While I completely agree with you, similar arguments were made about eliminating high caps and limiting support weapons to real support weapon replicas. Based on this thread, seems like this idea has SOME support, it just now needs to be implemented. In other posts, some members have mentioned how we all consider ourselves to be into MilSim, but few really step up to the plate and do what is really needed. We just need to give a rule like this a chance in order to see if it improves MilSim game play.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I actually agree with you, but with one caveat: If we do this, the rules need to apply across the board...
Not too sure I agree with you on this one. Right now, a lot of the larger games here in Ohio and even the more popular regional and national games do not have a standard rule set. FPS limits, MED's, and other game related rules vary between event and event. Personally, I'd love to see a national rule set / standard for FPS and MED's but we all know that's just not going to happen. If a player doesn't like the specific rules at an event, just don't attend. Additionally, I know a lot of players boost their FPS to the 400 FPS limit, but I also know a lot of players that don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
...with a somewhat fixed mathematical ratio for how it is applied. (If that makes sense).
No idea at all on what you mean by a "fixed mathematical ratio"? To keep the rules as simplied, the FPS limits could be set by weapon class (pistol, subgun, carbine, rifle, light support weapon, heavy support weapon, semi auto sniper, bolt sniper) or by the caliber / chambering of the weapon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I still feel SAWs are given an unfair advantage over AEGs. In real life, most modern SAWs share the calibre of many of the rifles carried alongside them (M4/SAW, L85/Minimi, AK74/RPK74, FAMAS/Minimi, the list goes on), and as such, would have the same basic range as said weapons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locutus
I have always felt that support weapons should be limited to 350 or 400 fps, for several reasons, one, as other have stated above, it gives an advantage to snipers. What advantage does a single or semi shot sniper at 500fps have over a support weapon at 450fps? 50fps doesn't equate to much more range under real world conditions. Another reason, as Loki pointed out, they already have an advantage over rifles due to their capacity, so why would get to go full auto when a rifle shooting at the same velocity can't?

And the last reason. At some point, it was decided that full-auto would only be allowed up to 400fps for safety sake. This is a common restriction, held by many airsoft orgs all over the country, I have seen someone get lit up on FA at point blank range more times than I can count, and many times the results were not pretty. What logical argument could be presented that explains why it is unsafe for a rifle to fire FA at 400+ FPS, but it is safe for a support weapon to fire at 400+ FPS?
I agree completely and that is why TAC's events keep support weapons at 400 FPS. The volume of fire is enough of an advantage. Additionally, we feel MED's are difficult, if not impossible to enforce, so we put support weapons at 400 FPS with no MED.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DemonicUnicorn2
I like nextmayor's suggestion of FPS limits for each weapon class but you could take it a step further and limit the BB weights as well. Then a SAW gunner would have less power and be less accurate due to only being able to use .25's (humor me) while a sniper could use .3's or higher. Heavier BB makes the hit more "feelable" and at closer ranges that isn't necessary.
To too sure I agree with the use of different weight bb's to replicate different calibers. In general, a weapon that shoots 400 FPS w/ .2g BB's has the same impact energy as a weapon that shoots 360 FPS w/ .25g BB's. IMO the key is the FPS limit and not the BB weight. So getting shot by a 400 FPS (w/ .2g BB's) using .2g BB's or .25g BB's should feel roughly the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A6
I'm all for enforcing fps limits on "classes" of weapon. Unfortunately you can already imagine all the people out there that will raise a fuss. Many of the same type that are trying ot convert their subgun, or carbine into a support weapon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavrick
However, for implimenting a fps limit per class is a great idea, truely wonderful. But the majority of players have already upgraded/configured their weapons for the currently accepted FPS limits. Airsoft in general just wouldn't be able to handle it. Too many ppl are used to how things are to implement such a change.
Those same people probably made a fuss about eliminating high caps and limiting support weapons too. People don't like change, but if we keep boasting about MilSim, let's keep advancing the sport / hobby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red
Why go to an event when my MP5 is pushing 360 and not be allowed to play when i can go this other event where they dont care.
While I can't speak for all event organizers, Team TAC's philosophy has been to establish the rules the the team would like to use and then to put on an event that we would like to go to. While getting big numbers at an event is AWESOME, it's not the reason to put on an event. I've been to some very small events and even some skirmishes that have been better that some huge events. As I said above, if a player doesn't like an events rule set, just don't attend. I know that sounds kind of hard and elitest, but it's how I select events. If there are rules or scenarios I don't like, I just don't go to the event.

TAC also had this conversation (rules chasing players away from our events), but in regard to eliminating high caps. The first year we allowed any type of mag, but limited the number of bb's to 600. The second year we only allowed players to carry (1) High Cap and (1) Standard mag or 600 rounds in standards. Then for the third year, we just said no high caps, but players could carry as many standard mags as they wanted. For the first 2 years, we always let players know that the mag rule would change next year. It took us a while to fully implement, but our events are now high cap free.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red
Lets suppose that all event organizers accept a system similar to what you suggest, that awesome. But, who are we to force players to spend more just to make their rifle eligible to play again...
A lot of event organizers were forced to do this when high caps fell out of fashion and events started mandating low, standard, and mid capacity mags. I went from having something like 8 mags (2 high caps and 6 Mid Caps) to having close to 33 mags for my AEG's (no I don't actually carry that many). So by requiring players to use "standard" mags we forced players to spend a lot more money equiping themselves with standard mags vs. just a couple of high caps.
__________________
Later,
nextmayor

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-14-2007, 10:01 AM
Oscar's Avatar
Oscar Oscar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Delaware, OH
Posts: 366
Blog Entries: 1
Oscar is a Private First Class
iTrader: (0)
I look at it this way Nextmayor: If you build it they will come. As popular as the Safari Strike series its, it shows that players are willing to go the extra mile to attend a good milsim event. In my opinion the worries about some players not liking the new changes is a moot point. Players that don't like the rules of SS aren't going to attend anyway.

I'm all for pushing the envelope as far as it can go. If it doesn't work we can backtrack and try something different. Milsim is here to stay and there are plenty of teams that want to see it move forward.

I'll be pushing for new ideas when planning for BA3 gets into motion. I want to see improvements in the way milsim games are organized. There are still things I don't like about milsim events. I think we've been stuck in a rut for a long time with cookie-cutter scenarios. It's time to expand on roles and add some meat to milsim's bones.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-14-2007, 10:33 AM
Disposable Soldier's Avatar
Disposable Soldier Disposable Soldier is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 360
Disposable Soldier is a CorporalDisposable Soldier is a CorporalDisposable Soldier is a Corporal
iTrader: (8)
Well, what about for the first year that you take this step, make it something like this (just an example): Bob has an M16. He doesn't want to have to upgrade it to shoot 350-400. So, for the first year that takes this into consideration, how about making the rule something like, M16s can shoot no more than X amount of FPS, but don't have to have an FPS in a certain class. Then, next year, make it so that the M16s have to shoot in a certain class, such as between 350-400 FPS. (Those FPS numbers and the M16 rifle were only examples, if I wasn't accurate with the readings that wasn't my point, but do you get it? ) Would that be a better way to go about starting this out? Sorta like the hi-cap situation you mentioned Nextmayor. . .
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-14-2007, 11:31 AM
nextmayor's Avatar
nextmayor nextmayor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cuyahoga Counnty (Cleveland), Ohio
Posts: 954
nextmayor is a Specialistnextmayor is a Specialist
Send a message via ICQ to nextmayor Send a message via Yahoo to nextmayor
iTrader: (2)
The FPS limit that I've usually seen have been maximum limits. I'd seen no need to mandate that player upgrade their AEG's to the level's listed above. If they want to run with a stock AEG that's up to them. The limits would be just that the maximum limits for that class of weapon.
__________________
Later,
nextmayor

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-14-2007, 12:09 PM
Lu's Avatar
Lu Lu is offline
Certified Elitist
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 430
Lu is a Private First Class
Send a message via AIM to Lu
iTrader: (1)
I have always wanted to see something like this put in place. Personally I run stock AEGs no matter what, but I do agree that setting formal FPS would make the game more realistic but more importantly, enjoyable. I'd embrace it 100% if it ever came up to being put in place.
__________________
Lu
08th Expeditionary Unit
www.08eu.com
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-14-2007, 12:50 PM
Locutus's Avatar
Locutus Locutus is offline
Airsoft Ohio Founder
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Williamsburg, OH
Posts: 4,091
Blog Entries: 1
Locutus is a SpecialistLocutus is a SpecialistLocutus is a Specialist
Send a message via AIM to Locutus
iTrader: (1)
I think this is a great idea.
__________________



Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-14-2007, 01:24 PM
Wraith's Avatar
Wraith Wraith is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Underworld
Posts: 537
Blog Entries: 2
Wraith is a Private First Class
Send a message via ICQ to Wraith
iTrader: (0)
I don't know, I agree with keeping the support weapons at 400fps. A 249 uses the same ammo as an m16 and therefore shouldn't get any more advantage in that area. However when you start talking m4s, mp5s, uzis, or what not you already have a limitation set by the barrel length. Not in muzzle velocity, but in effectiverange. Yes my m4 that shoots 377fps may be able to put a bb downrange 200 feet, but accuracy declines rapidly after around 125-150'. And an MP5 with the much shorter barrel is the same way. How effective is a pistol shooting 300fps when put up against an m16 shooting 300fps? The m16 will be able to hit its target much farther away than a pistol could. Not saying you could hit a target at range with a pistol, it will just take a lot more rounds.
I think (IMO) that changing the velocity limits on a support weapon is a great idea, but leave the other rifles alone. It goes back to an m16 and an m249 firing the same round. The m16 doesn't fire a smaller caliber round nor does it use less powder than a 249 round. They are both 5.56mm. And if you drop the support weapons to 400 fps, and then drop fps limits on the other rifles, haven't you in effect given the advantage of muzzle velocity right back to the 249 or other support weapons?
__________________
Live by chance, love by choice, kill by profession.
(Aviation ordinanceman's creed.)

Man will occasionally stumble across the truth, but most of the time he will get back up and continue.
-Winston Churchill-
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-14-2007, 01:30 PM
ALB247's Avatar
ALB247 ALB247 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 31
ALB247 is a Private
iTrader: (0)
As Loki put it, people will want to manipulate this for their own advantage.

Even though I'll probably get flamed for this statement: I'd like to see players who excel over others simply because they're a better shot with their rifle than get beat by kids whose parents just shelled out $1k for some ridiculous AEG or SAW.

Basically, these limits would make the game alot more realistic and enjoyable, since players would need to then rely even more heavily on teamwork, communication, and pure skill rather than "How much do you have put into your AEG?"

Honestly, even though I doubt anyone would want to put the money up for this, I'd like to see an event (if there is one, I apologize, I'm still a newbie) where all the guns are provided and just plain stock. Heh, can't imagine the costs for that though, but hey, you have to admit it would put a whole new touch of realism on mil-sims.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-14-2007, 01:42 PM
Mavrick Mavrick is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 963
Blog Entries: 3
Mavrick is a SpecialistMavrick is a SpecialistMavrick is a Specialist
iTrader: (6)
Well Mayor, My posts were just on behalf of other members out there. I dont use high caps and my rifles are already within the proposed FPS limits you've come up with. Seeing as how it wont affect my equipment load out at all, i say go for it.
__________________
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-14-2007, 03:11 PM
hkrazy's Avatar
hkrazy hkrazy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Mount Vernon, OH
Posts: 582
Blog Entries: 2
hkrazy is a Private
iTrader: (3)
The only thing that would drive me crazy about that, well and does with the current rule set is the caliber of the rifle. A G36, m16 or Sig is allowed to shoot 400, but a G3 or M14 has to shoot 400 as well? For all of you M16 users, do you know how big 7.62 mags are, yet have the same capacity if not less of your Mag midcaps? People probably wont like this idea much, but I feel that 7.62 weapons such as M14s, G3s, Fals, M60s, ect should get an at least a 25 feet per second extension without restricting meds by more than ten feet of the normal.

And yes, lets not turn this into another ban hicaps thread; Its mostly the people off the forums that have them anyway.
__________________

Lulz and Rolls
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-14-2007, 03:17 PM
Oscar's Avatar
Oscar Oscar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Delaware, OH
Posts: 366
Blog Entries: 1
Oscar is a Private First Class
iTrader: (0)
For realism the FPS limitations make sense. I remember back in 2004, when all of my AEG's were stock. My rifle, carbine, etc. What I found was other players were out-distancing me. Within a year I upgraded all of my AEG's to shoot 400fps, but I made a mistake because I realized I would have to have a lower FPS AEG for CQB. Instead of downgrade my existing AEG's I bought new ones and kept them stock. My point is, I think most players have learned this lesson along the way and have their weapons in the proper FPS range. Having an official rule-set would get everyone else in line and even the playing field. Definitely lower the SAW fps limit.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-14-2007, 03:50 PM
Darkstar's Avatar
Darkstar Darkstar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,188
Darkstar is a SpecialistDarkstar is a Specialist
Send a message via AIM to Darkstar
iTrader: (1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locutus View Post
I think this is a great idea.
Well, what goes around comes around. This is exactly the same idea I proposed several years ago when teams were upgrading their support weapons to the 450 fps range. I'll agree with Wraith in the following manner: Support weapons should only be allowed to shoot within the confines of their respected ammo class. Support weapons' advantage lay in their ammo capacity, not in their velocity, and as Wrait points out, an M149 does not shoot 5.56mm bullets at a higher velocity than an M16 or an M4.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
....However when you start talking m4s, mp5s, uzis, or what not you already have a limitation set by the barrel length. Not in muzzle velocity, but in effectiverange. Yes my m4 that shoots 377fps may be able to put a bb downrange 200 feet, but accuracy declines rapidly after around 125-150'. And an MP5 with the much shorter barrel is the same way. How effective is a pistol shooting 300fps when put up against an m16 shooting 300fps? The m16 will be able to hit its target much farther away than a pistol could. Not saying you could hit a target at range with a pistol, it will just take a lot more rounds.

First, barrel lenght has less to do with accuracy than you may think. Due to hopup in airsoft guns, BB's roll along the top of the barrel until they exit. I've done tests with a variety of different AEG's and have found little true correlation between the effective accuract of an MP5K, and M4A1 and a PSG-1. In the tests I conducted, the stock Marui MP5K fired just as accurately if not slightly more accurately than a stock Marui M4A1. And while I don't have scientific evidence to explain why, that's what happened.

I believe the general consensus would agree that a longer barrel = better accuracy, but that is not always the case with airsoft guns. Accuracy can differ greatly from gun to gun, a barrel lenght indeed is a major factor, but in some cases, guns saw a reduction of accuracy when a longer barrel was installed. Of course I could go on to explain more contributing factors, but I'm getting off topic.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
I think (IMO) that changing the velocity limits on a support weapon is a great idea, but leave the other rifles alone. It goes back to an m16 and an m249 firing the same round. The m16 doesn't fire a smaller caliber round nor does it use less powder than a 249 round. They are both 5.56mm. And if you drop the support weapons to 400 fps, and then drop fps limits on the other rifles, haven't you in effect given the advantage of muzzle velocity right back to the 249 or other support weapons?
My only comment to this subject is this. M16's, M4's and M249's should all shoot at the same velocity in airsoft. Period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALB247 View Post
Even though I'll probably get flamed for this statement: I'd like to see players who excel over others simply because they're a better shot with their rifle than get beat by kids whose parents just shelled out $1k for some ridiculous AEG or SAW.

Basically, these limits would make the game alot more realistic and enjoyable, since players would need to then rely even more heavily on teamwork, communication, and pure skill rather than "How much do you have put into your AEG?"
Yea, that's a pretty pessemistic argument, and it's not really in line with what we're trying to accomplish. Throwing buckets of money into a gun doesn't make a person a more honest player or a better shot, so by your example, people who are already good shots will be even better shots when they decide to upgrade their gun.

I'm not sure why you bothered going on to contradict yourself in your next paragraph, because you're saying the opposite of your previous one. Weapon class Milsim is something that will base airsoft gun performance as close to real-world gun performance as possible, within the limitations of airsoft guns.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkrazy View Post
The only thing that would drive me crazy about that, well and does with the current rule set is the caliber of the rifle. A G36, m16 or Sig is allowed to shoot 400, but a G3 or M14 has to shoot 400 as well? For all of you M16 users, do you know how big 7.62 mags are, yet have the same capacity if not less of your Mag midcaps? People probably wont like this idea much, but I feel that 7.62 weapons such as M14s, G3s, Fals, M60s, ect should get an at least a 25 feet per second extension without restricting meds by more than ten feet of the normal.

And yes, lets not turn this into another ban hicaps thread; Its mostly the people off the forums that have them anyway.
Hi-caps are good for what they are meant for: getting people into airsoft cheaply. Milsim on the other hand has different requirements. Hi-caps and milsim are not a good mix, so I don't personally have a problem with expelling hicaps from milsim rules altogether. Midcaps allow people to carry a bit more ammo without the expense of having to only purchase low or standard capacity magazines. Setting specific magazine rules for milsim will tend to add about $100 dollars on average to your magazine loadout. That's not really too bad in the grand scheme of things.

As far as hicaps are concerned, I've always run my non-milsim games with magazine restrictions too. I've always implemented a 600 round capacity restriction (since AK's have 600 round hicaps). Basically, players are allowed to use any magazines they wish as long as their total capacity does not exceed 600 rounds. High caps do have their place, but I don't personally believe that Milsim events is one of them.

In closing, I proposed establishing upper velocity limits for Ammunitions Classis (AC) several years ago, and it was met with harsh criticism. But now than more and more people are involved with airsoft, and people looking for more balanced play, AC restrictions will likely be something more feasable.

AC should be a set of guidelines and maximum airsoft muzzle velocties which are entirely dependent on the real world performance of a specific gun's real steel counterpart, and the ammo it fires. It basically breaks down very easily, though a bit of research needs to be done to correctly establish these classes.

I believe the best way to accomplish this would be to look at specific ammo velocities and establish an average for each one. 9mm, .45cal, .223(5.56mm), 5.7mm, 7.62, and so on. Create ammo category classes that each gun will fit into based on the ammunition it fires in the real world, and base the airsoft velocties on those classes. It really wouldn't be tough to do, and would probably only take a few days to research velocities and such, create the categories, and go from there.

I believe this is the best solution for evening out the playing field and making guns operate more realistically in airsoft.

Who wants to be in charge??? LoL

Darkstar out.
__________________
Im a complete loser.
Hobbies include:
-Stalking playgrounds
-Wearing fishnets
-Autoerrotic asphyxiation
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-14-2007, 04:12 PM
nextmayor's Avatar
nextmayor nextmayor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cuyahoga Counnty (Cleveland), Ohio
Posts: 954
nextmayor is a Specialistnextmayor is a Specialist
Send a message via ICQ to nextmayor Send a message via Yahoo to nextmayor
iTrader: (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkrazy View Post
The only thing that would drive me crazy about that, well and does with the current rule set is the caliber of the rifle. A G36, m16 or Sig is allowed to shoot 400, but a G3 or M14 has to shoot 400 as well?
Part of the problem is creating a rule that is simple enough for everyone to understand and for everyone to enforce. As you can see by my post above, I suggested you could also set the FPS limits by caliber / chambering.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nextmayor View Post
To keep the rules as simplied, the FPS limits could be set by weapon class (pistol, subgun, carbine, rifle, light support weapon, heavy support weapon, semi auto sniper, bolt sniper) or by the caliber / chambering of the weapon.
However, like I said the rule needs to be simple and easy to understand. While most airsoft players have an interest in real steel and understand the differences between different cartridges, not all airsoft players have that knowlege. That is why I suggested the weapon classes. I think even the newest member can understand the differences between a pistol, subgun, carbine, rifle, support weapon, and sniper rifle.

Personally, I'd be all for FPS limits based on what the replica is chambered for. However that still leads to some confusion with weapons like the P90 which is subgun size, but the 5.7mm round that it fires is ALMOST as effective as a 5.56mm, despite the P90's small size. In the end, I just feel that the rule needs to be as simple as possible. Again airsoft is a game and because of that we need to make some sacrifices for the sake of improved game play.
__________________
Later,
nextmayor

Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-14-2007, 04:20 PM
Darkstar's Avatar
Darkstar Darkstar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,188
Darkstar is a SpecialistDarkstar is a Specialist
Send a message via AIM to Darkstar
iTrader: (1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nextmayor View Post
However that still leads to some confusion with weapons like the P90 which is subgun size, but the 5.7mm round that it fires is ALMOST as effective as a 5.56mm, despite the P90's small size. In the end, I just feel that the rule needs to be as simple as possible. Again airsoft is a game and because of that we need to make some sacrifices for the sake of improved game play.
Yes, I thought of the P90 and Five-Seven pistol myself. Pretty soon everyone will have P90's instead of M4's! LoL. Anyway, that was why I proposed the Ammo Class (AC) structure. People just need to look at what kind of ammo their guns shoots in the real world, translate that to an airsoft gun chart, and you're done.

Also, Carbines typically shoot the same ammo and about the same velocity as their full-length counterpart, so we can drop the carbine category right there.

Darkstar out.
__________________
Im a complete loser.
Hobbies include:
-Stalking playgrounds
-Wearing fishnets
-Autoerrotic asphyxiation
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-14-2007, 04:31 PM
sticks's Avatar
sticks sticks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: columbus
Posts: 129
Blog Entries: 1
sticks is a Private
iTrader: (2)
Carbines: 300 - 350 FPS


I like the idea of the weapon class fps limit. but one thing to reconsider is the carbine. carbines use the same type of ammo that their big brothers use (M16 and M4 both use 5.56) so why would we give them a smaller fps.

[QUOTE=hkrazy;144636]The only thing that would drive me crazy about that, well and does with the current rule set is the caliber of the rifle. A G36, m16 or Sig is allowed to shoot 400, but a G3 or M14 has to shoot 400 as well? For all of you M16 users, do you know how big 7.62 mags are, yet have the same capacity if not less of your Mag midcaps? People probably wont like this idea much, but I feel that 7.62 weapons such as M14s, G3s, Fals, M60s, ect should get an at least a 25 feet per second extension without restricting meds by more than ten feet of the normal.

And yes, lets not turn this into another ban hicaps thread; Its mostly the people off the forums that have them anyway.[QUOTE=hkrazy;144636]

I think the 5.56 round has a higher FPS than the 7.62. But the 7.62 hits harder (if i remember correctly). I think if you are going to limit guns on their real steal calibers then you will have to make classes, such as rifle (5.56, 7.62, 5.45 etc etc). and SMG (9mm, 45, etc etc).

personally i wont play in a game where i have to bring my FPS down just because my M4 uses a 5.56 and the 7.62 rifles only use 400 FPS
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-14-2007, 04:36 PM
Duo Chan's Avatar
Duo Chan Duo Chan is offline
The Sniper
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Youngstown
Posts: 540
Blog Entries: 1
Duo Chan is a Private First Class
Send a message via AIM to Duo Chan Send a message via MSN to Duo Chan Send a message via Yahoo to Duo Chan
iTrader: (2)
Though I won't deny that the idea would be interesting to try in an event or two, I've got to ask one simple question: Don't you guys think you're taking this too far?

This is like D&D meets airsoft. It's going to get to the point where every player has to buy four, thousand page core rulebooks, and read them each three times, just to play the sport once. Yes, I'm all for realism, but what are the limits of a physical game? At this point in time, I don't see that big of a problem with what we got. I'm a sniper, and when sniping I never have an issue with being outmatched by a support weapon. There's been countless times that I snipe an enemy, and then watch his support gunner friends rounds fall well short of me.

Yes, an M16 vs. a SAW would be a different outcome as they're firing with the same power, but isn't this also true on the real field of battle? It's a fight of strategic know-how, not range or power.

Now there's the issue of MP5's and relevant submachine guns. Yes, in real steel they fire a smaller round, with less range and less accuracy, but this isn't real steel, these are RC motor powered pneumatic pumps. Who are we to tell John Doe who's only gun (and favorite style gun in the world) is an MP5, that he has to be at a total disadvantage just because of the gun he owns/likes the looks of? In all honesty, the shorter barrel length DOES make a big enough difference to call it a day. No even you Darkstar, can admit to believing that an MP5k will have the same range/accuracy with it's stock barrel, as it would with my 430mm VSR-10 barrel. Even with a hop-up, it is still the law of physics that the longer the barrel, the more stable the rounds trajectory. Even if it rolls along the top of the barrel, this is still a stabilizing factor. Not to mention, the true effect of backspin doesn't even take full effect until it leaves the barrel. But, I'm getting quite off topic...

In conclusion, realism is great, but no one will ever feasibly recreate real world combat in airsoft. If you want your M16 to shoot further then the bad guys 9mm, then join the army... If you want to play a game, lets play airsoft already.

/disclaimer

This post was not meant to upset or anger any one. It is simply my opinion inputed into a very nice debate.
__________________
Member of the 08th Expeditionary Unit.

http://google.com
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-14-2007, 04:45 PM
Locutus's Avatar
Locutus Locutus is offline
Airsoft Ohio Founder
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Williamsburg, OH
Posts: 4,091
Blog Entries: 1
Locutus is a SpecialistLocutus is a SpecialistLocutus is a Specialist
Send a message via AIM to Locutus
iTrader: (1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duo Chan View Post
Who are we to tell John Doe who's only gun (and favorite style gun in the world) is an MP5, that he has to be at a total disadvantage just because of the gun he owns/likes the looks of?
As with every play style rule you might find on AO (or elsewhere), it is up to the event organizers to decide which rules they wish to implement. If an event organizer wishes to use rules such as those proposed here, he has every right to do so. If the players do not agree, they will not attend the event.

From a milsim aspect, In "real life" if you choose to go to war with an MP5, just because you think it looks cool, you would be at a disadvantage.
__________________



Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-14-2007, 04:45 PM
Oddjob
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
FPS should be based on age. 10 fps x each year of age. You 14 year olds get 140 fps. I get 420 fps. That is fair because I'm older and slower.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-14-2007, 04:52 PM
Darkstar's Avatar
Darkstar Darkstar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,188
Darkstar is a SpecialistDarkstar is a Specialist
Send a message via AIM to Darkstar
iTrader: (1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duo Chan View Post
Don't you guys think you're taking this too far?
I don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duo Chan View Post
This is like D&D meets airsoft. It's going to get to the point where every player has to buy four, thousand page core rulebooks, and read them each three times, just to play the sport once. Yes, I'm all for realism, but what are the limits of a physical game? At this point in time, I don't see that big of a problem with what we got. I'm a sniper, and when sniping I never have an issue with being outmatched by a support weapon. There's been countless times that I snipe an enemy, and then watch his support gunner friends rounds fall well short of me.
Hmmm, D&D with guns!! SHADOWRUN!!!! Okay, anyway, I think you're missing the point. This is a discussion as to how to effectively balance airsoft play by restricting airsoft guns for Milsim events to classes which are based on the real world performance of their real steel counterpart.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duo Chan View Post
... but isn't this also true on the real field of battle? It's a fight of strategic know-how, not range or power.
On the real battlefield, strategy, range AND power can win a battle. We walked right into Iraq because we outranged, and flew and out gunned the Iraqi's. We used cruise missles to strike targets from hundreds of miles away. Not sure what you're thinking there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duo Chan View Post
No even you Darkstar, can admit to believing that an MP5k will have the same range/accuracy with it's stock barrel, as it would with my 430mm VSR-10 barrel. Even with a hop-up, it is still the law of physics that the longer the barrel, the more stable the rounds trajectory.
Actually, yes I can.

You see, range, or the distance a BB will travel once it has left the barrel of a gun, is the same regardless of barrel length. Even if we took away hopup, range would still be the same for that configuration. If an MP5K shoots 300fps stock, and then you install a 430mm barrel, and it still shoots 300fps, the BB will go the same distance. Range, BB distance, whatever you want to call it, is a factor of the BB's energy as it leaves the barrel. The piston/cylinder/spring assembly provides the power to push the BB and generate evergy. The maximum range of a gun will not change regardless of the length of the barrel you install. Actually, longer barrels have been known in some cases to reduce maximum range because they also increase friction on the BB. Yes, you may effect accuracy to some degree, but your max range won't change. It's simple physics.

Darkstar out.
__________________
Im a complete loser.
Hobbies include:
-Stalking playgrounds
-Wearing fishnets
-Autoerrotic asphyxiation
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-14-2007, 05:23 PM
Phil's Avatar
Phil Phil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Johnstown, Ohio
Posts: 1,553
Blog Entries: 1
Phil is a Private First Class
Send a message via AIM to Phil
iTrader: (26)
I feel, really out of place here, because I'm not a huge milsim-er, but i suppose my opinion still counts.
Though the layout that Nextmayor posted at the beginning of the thread sounded good then, the points brought up by HKrazy and Darkstar seem to catch my attention a little bit better. I feel that IF we were to create these limits based on ammo class, that it would be a better option in the end. Not because I don't like the weapons class Idea, but more because this would essentially simulate the range/power differences found in the different bullet calibers found in the real world. Sadly, based on the fact that the .308 (7.62) is used in several [battle] rifles, as well as a majority of the sniper rifles used on the fields today (eg. m700, m24, SR25 etc.) This fact alone would knock snipers of the field due to the fact that they would be matched up (rangewise) with some [battle] rifles and the occasional m60, unless they were wielding a rifle using a bigger round than that of any other rifle being fielded that day, which is highly unlikely, unless someone on the forums has a VFC Barret hiding around their house, or if they were given their own rule set, which is highly likely, but would violate the purpose of setting up the Ammo classes in the first place.
On the other hand, the idea of Weapons classing is also a good idea because it would be very accommodating to snipers and those who use full length rifles because they would be allowed to utilize their allowed range far better than they would in any normal circumstance of play as it stands now, because it would create that 20-50 foot gap between them and the guy he's aiming at's effective range.
So as you now know how in feel, I'd like to state that Duo Chan is a weenie for making fun of me and my D&D core rule books.
EDIT: Wow, three posts happened while I was typing this message.
DOUBLE EDIT: words marked in brackets[word] were edited due to loki's correction.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Head View Post
Airsoft is awesome...if I could eat it I would.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texx View Post
Phil is damned perfect. And beautiful. In that manly beautiful sort of way. Count yourself lucky he cared enough to share his wisdom....his beautiful, beautiful wisdom...

Last edited by Phil; 11-18-2007 at 12:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-14-2007, 05:37 PM
Son of Liberty's Avatar
Son of Liberty Son of Liberty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: CinciNasty
Posts: 1,895
Blog Entries: 13
Son of Liberty is a Private First Class
Send a message via AIM to Son of Liberty Send a message via Yahoo to Son of Liberty
iTrader: (12)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locutus View Post
From a milsim aspect, In "real life" if you choose to go to war with an MP5, just because you think it looks cool, you would be at a disadvantage.
But then again this isn't Real life. We shoot 6mm's of plastic out of Electric powered guns with unrealistic Magazine capacities usually. When we get shot we have Respawn. 400 FPS and under for AEGs is cool, no Hi-Caps is cool. But this is totally unfair to most newer players who usually tend to use Mp5s. Let's not make up some silly rules that will make even more players deter from airsoft. Yet I think this is another thing to keep noobs out and veterans in. Just my 2 Cents.

Also, since it's MILSIM I want my M4 to shoot 2,970 FPS just like the real thing.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Teddy View Post
It's true, i mean we are all thinking it. SoL is a sexy man beast. I'd hit that.
Warning: My vagina is big enough to swallow your self-esteem. Read my comments with caution.

Last edited by Son of Liberty; 11-14-2007 at 05:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-14-2007, 05:43 PM
Cut Throat's Avatar
Cut Throat Cut Throat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 1,015
Blog Entries: 1
Cut Throat is a Private
iTrader: (20)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddjob View Post
FPS should be based on age. 10 fps x each year of age. You 14 year olds get 140 fps. I get 420 fps. That is fair because I'm older and slower.
finally I get to bring back my mini to the games, lol
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-14-2007, 05:50 PM
Phil's Avatar
Phil Phil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Johnstown, Ohio
Posts: 1,553
Blog Entries: 1
Phil is a Private First Class
Send a message via AIM to Phil
iTrader: (26)
I would also like to state that this might be one of those things that looks great on paper, but goes absolutely terribly once it's implemented.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Head View Post
Airsoft is awesome...if I could eat it I would.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texx View Post
Phil is damned perfect. And beautiful. In that manly beautiful sort of way. Count yourself lucky he cared enough to share his wisdom....his beautiful, beautiful wisdom...
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-14-2007, 06:11 PM
Darkstar's Avatar
Darkstar Darkstar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,188
Darkstar is a SpecialistDarkstar is a Specialist
Send a message via AIM to Darkstar
iTrader: (1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Liberty View Post
Let's not make up some silly rules that will make even more players deter from airsoft. Yet I think this is another thing to keep noobs out and veterans in. Just my 2 Cents.
It won't really do anything to keep new players out of the game at all. By establishing velocity limits for airsoft, new players won't be ineligible from playing milsim if their guns are under the maximum limit for their ammo class. The class that they participate will only have a maximum velocity, not a minimum one. If the upper velocity for rifles is set to 400, then anyone can use any rifle of that class as long as it does not exceed 400 FPS. Maybe that makes better sense?

I think the goal is to consolidate current milsim rules in order to give everyone a fair advantage. Having things like M249's shooting 450 or marksmans rifles that are shooting the same doesn't make a whole lot of sense in the grand scheme of milsim, other than to give a select few a tactical advantage in airsoft games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil View Post
I would also like to state that this might be one of those things that looks great on paper, but goes absolutely terribly once it's implemented.
It's just one possible solution to offer people, and it's simple to implement and police. As with anything, people will argue changes, but this system is fair and allows for greater balance and will allow people to take better advantage of their airsoft guns.

Darkstar out.
__________________
Im a complete loser.
Hobbies include:
-Stalking playgrounds
-Wearing fishnets
-Autoerrotic asphyxiation
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-14-2007, 06:16 PM
Son of Liberty's Avatar
Son of Liberty Son of Liberty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: CinciNasty
Posts: 1,895
Blog Entries: 13
Son of Liberty is a Private First Class
Send a message via AIM to Son of Liberty Send a message via Yahoo to Son of Liberty
iTrader: (12)
But then again, this is Airsoft.

In response to the post below mine:

Oscar, I do realize that some people enjoy super strict MILSIM, but then again this is a game, meant to be enjoyed. How far do we push the rules until it all becomes silly and unenjoyable?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Teddy View Post
It's true, i mean we are all thinking it. SoL is a sexy man beast. I'd hit that.
Warning: My vagina is big enough to swallow your self-esteem. Read my comments with caution.

Last edited by Son of Liberty; 11-14-2007 at 06:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:43 PM.


Airsoft Guns, Tactical Gear, Military Gear, Ohio Airsoft Retailer

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2005 - 2009 Airsoft Ohio