Scenario and Ramping: My opinion

[Sittin_duk]

Originally Posted by Deebo

Nobody really answered my question/statement on how not all electronic guns can ramp at different speeds. I don't know much about ramping, except it makes scenarios worse, but what types of guns can you actually set the rate of fire? I watched my buddy switch his ion over to ramp, and all it was was a circuit board and you shorted out the connection you wanted to play with. What speed does that ramp up to? I guess you can get different boards though...

On most electronic guns you can set the rate of fire. Some examples..

Egos-mine can go 25 bps
Protos-I've seen them reach 30
Dyes-Also seen reach 30

I believe that the ion ramps up to 17 bps.

But the thing is, usually, the people that own the electronic guns won't set their ramping up to anything above 15 bps, which is what the rule is for PSP and most other speedball tournaments.

Does that answer your question?

[Aerion]

Originally Posted by HomE SkiLLeT

So now speedball and woodsball aren't even associated as the same sport? Is that how divided you need to make the war of speedball/woodsball?
I'd say they are totally different games, with different tactics, but in general your objective is the same, eliminate the other team. They are both the same sport- PAINTBALL

This sounds a lot like nit-picking to me. However...

Baseball and slow-pitch softball are two very different sports with a common heritage but some big differences in equipment and rules. Generally speaking, slow-pitch softball is intended to be a safer and more casual game. Likewise are woodsball and speedball. I don't see a conflict here, do you?

[HomE SkiLLeT]

Stock ions can ramp to 17 bps, but with different board they can be set higher. (The BH in mine goes up to 20)

Most people use PSP ramping, but there are so many different modes that come with aftermarket boards it's hard to explain them all.

[p8ntballweird]

All you guys need to kno about ramping, is if you hear "OMFG mode".. make sure you're on that guys team.

[Aerion]

As for the argument that you can't put the genie back into the bottle...

There are hundreds of examples of instances where technology has reached a point where it becomes dangerous or harmful and rules have been made to limit the technology. Below are a few examples that popped into my head without giving it a whole lot of thought. I'm sure we can all think of many more examples.

Golf: There are rules in competition and on many courses that limit the materials that golf balls and or golf clubs can be made of because the technology exists to vastly increase the range most players can hit the ball. Course sizes can't effectively scale to adapt to the technology to keep golf challenging.

Baseball/Softball: Titanium bats are almost universally banned from most leagues because they hit so much farther than other bats and could make home runs the rule rather than the exception. Many leagues now require restricted flight balls to be used. Professional baseball still requires wooden bats to be used to prevent that level of baseball from becoming a home run derby.

Automobiles: The technology exists to have affordable cars that can travel 150mph or more. Yet we still have speed limits to prevent loss of life.

Digital Technology: Computers and other digital technology has reached the point where there is almost no digital format that can't be flawlessly duplicated or stolen. As a result, new laws have been written to limit digital tecnology to help prevent theft of intellectual property. All kinds of rules have been implemented in schools and workplaces to prevent such technology from being abused or misused.

Steriods: Here's a technology that is almost universally banned in any recognized sporting competition.

Cloning: The technology to clone a human being is nearly there. All kinds of reasonable people are asking questions about how this technology should be used or not used.

Nuclear Weapons: This weapon technology is so devistating that many, treaties have been made to limit their creation or use. Imagine if people took the same attitude about nukes that some have taken about ramping technology.


Just because a new technology is available doesn't mean it's an improvement. The corrillary is that just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD do it.

[ace007]

Originally Posted by shadow23

Everyone should try the SPPL 15bps no matter how you get there and everyone expects to get shot a few times and dosen't cry about it and it's freakin awesome

My opinion exactly!

I hope this doesn't get me in trouble with my captain, but what I'd like to DISCUSS here is not the ramping vs no ramping, but some important tangent issues.

1st: Why was this such a big issue at this event? One person noted early on in a post, that they thought it was because there was such a debate about it BEFORE the event. I think that's correct. This was perhaps elvated by over-shooting being defined rather narrowly. But that raises some other questions. Do the "anti-ramping" people hate ramping so bad that they have an agenda? An agenda would be blaming anything plausible on ramping being allowed or claiming over-shooting a little too quickly. Another words, there wasn't any way a true anti-ramping person was going to say after the game, "Well ramping turned out to not be a problem". It sure seems that way.

I can tell you this, I have never seen such a wailing at any other event I've been to. In fact, all the wailing I've seen combined wouldn't add up to what I saw at this one event(I kid you not). That raises a red flag for me; it should for you too. For example:

Recently, Carolina Riot & Shadow Company played at Cammand Decissions in N.C. on a very hot day. I'd say there was probably double the people at that event compared to the Triggertyme event. In any regards, there was more of everything there, people, fast guns, kids, & females. Very little complaining of overshooting was heard. I heard none about ramping. Now we had other problems that I won't get in to, but those were different things than what everyone's been complaining about from the Triggertyme event. Now why is that????!!!! There has to be a reason, whether is is the agenda reason, or somehow a couple of people were over-shooting, but never got identified, or were there a larger number of speedballers at this event than at most events, who perhaps have an unrealistic definition of over-shooting, or whatever.

2nd: Where are you getting your defintion of over-shooting? I understand what it is from watching speedball on T.V. Now out in the woods, this is how I do things, you tell me where I'm wrong, if I am. My gun (probaby yours too), will shoot a paintball that will bust further than I can see. Oh, I can tell I'm getting close, but I can't see the balls actually burst on the person, so I'm counting on their honesty. This is where speedball & woodsball are very different. Now I keep shooting till the person calls themselves out or I decide to move in closer (etc). But staying back, I might very well land more than 3 shots on a person. It depends more on THEM than on me. For example, did they call themsevles out quickly or instictively (as I do) move quickly out of harms way after the first hit to assess the 1st hit(Did it bust? Was it splatter?). I don't see how you can define 3 hit as overshooting. Maybe 3 hits from 30 feet away (close shots).

3rd: How can you define several players hitting one opposition player, more or less simultanteously, as over-shooting? 1st, isn't that what teams are supposed to do ? 2nd, isn't paintball supposed to minick real life as much as possible? In real life combat, a team wouldn't say, ok Frank, you try to take this guy while we watch. No, they would work together to elminate the threat. Basically, the statement was made about team over-shooting, and it was kinda took as fact. Well, I'm challenging that--I want to hear the reasons for thinking that way.

At the risk of patting myself on the back, I think I have rasied some intelligent questions & I would appreciate some intelligent feeback.

Thanks

[Sittin_duk]

Aerion...you do realize, that you just compared ramping to a nuclear bomb..ramping is not the end of the world, I promise. You look at the downsides of technology...you say there are hundreds of examples where technology "isn't better". I see the millions if not billions of technologies that are better, ramping included.

Ace..good points all around, you mainly said what I'd like to have said...I'm just too lazy to type it all out. Good post...

[Aerion]

Originally Posted by Sittin_duk

Aerion...you do realize, that you just compared ramping to a nuclear bomb..ramping is not the end of the world, I promise.

I didn't compare ramping to a nuclear bomb. That's the kind of unfair and divisive response that makes political dialog so venomous these days. It's also an obvious strawman.

I simply provided examples of technological advances that are generally recognized as doing more harm than good and have had rules to limit their use - such as steroids and nuclear weapons.

Originally Posted by Sittin_duk

You look at the downsides of technology...you say there are hundreds of examples where technology "isn't better". I see the millions if not billions of technologies that are better, ramping included.

Again you bring up an irrelevant strawmen rather than directly address the points of my discussion - leading me to believe that you have no logical counter-argument.

EDIT:

Instead of throwing up strawmen, you guys might try logical and reasonable counter-arguments. You could start by coming up with logical reasons why ramping somehow is good for woodsball or otherwise promotes or improves the sport. Thus far, all I've heard is that:

1> Those who believe ramping is bad are wimps or cry-babys and should give up the sport.
2> The technology is here to stay so if you don't like it refer to number one above.

[xhomicidal_freakx]

Originally Posted by ace007

My opinion exactly!

I hope this doesn't get me in trouble with my captain, but what I'd like to DISCUSS here is not the ramping vs no ramping, but some important tangent issues.

1st: Why was this such a big issue at this event? One person noted early on in a post, that they thought it was because there was such a debate about it BEFORE the event. I think that's correct. This was perhaps elvated by over-shooting being defined rather narrowly. But that raises some other questions. Do the "anti-ramping" people hate ramping so bad that they have an agenda? An agenda would be blaming anything plausible on ramping being allowed or claiming over-shooting a little too quickly. Another words, there wasn't any way a true anti-ramping person was going to say after the game, "Well ramping turned out to not be a problem". It sure seems that way.

I can tell you this, I have never seen such a wailing at any other event I've been to. In fact, all the wailing I've seen combined wouldn't add up to what I saw at this one event(I kid you not). That raises a red flag for me; it should for you too. For example:

Recently, Carolina Riot & Shadow Company played at Cammand Decissions in N.C. on a very hot day. I'd say there was probably double the people at that event compared to the Triggertyme event. In any regards, there was more of everything there, people, fast guns, kids, & females. Very little complaining of overshooting was heard. I heard none about ramping. Now we had other problems that I won't get in to, but those were different things than what everyone's been complaining about from the Triggertyme event. Now why is that????!!!! There has to be a reason, whether is is the agenda reason, or somehow a couple of people were over-shooting, but never got identified, or were there a larger number of speedballers at this event than at most events, who perhaps have an unrealistic definition of over-shooting, or whatever.

2nd: Where are you getting your defintion of over-shooting? I understand what it is from watching speedball on T.V. Now out in the woods, this is how I do things, you tell me where I'm wrong, if I am. My gun (probaby yours too), will shoot a paintball that will bust further than I can see. Oh, I can tell I'm getting close, but I can't see the balls actually burst on the person, so I'm counting on their honesty. This is where speedball & woodsball are very different. Now I keep shooting till the person calls themselves out or I decide to move in closer (etc). But staying back, I might very well land more than 3 shots on a person. It depends more on THEM than on me. For example, did they call themsevles out quickly or instictively (as I do) move quickly out of harms way after the first hit to assess the 1st hit(Did it bust? Was it splatter?). I don't see how you can define 3 hit as overshooting. Maybe 3 hits from 30 feet away (close shots).

3rd: How can you define several players hitting one opposition player, more or less simultanteously, as over-shooting? 1st, isn't that what teams are supposed to do ? 2nd, isn't paintball supposed to minick real life as much as possible? In real life combat, a team wouldn't say, ok Frank, you try to take this guy while we watch. No, they would work together to elminate the threat. Basically, the statement was made about team over-shooting, and it was kinda took as fact. Well, I'm challenging that--I want to hear the reasons for thinking that way.

At the risk of patting myself on the back, I think I have rasied some intelligent questions & I would appreciate some intelligent feeback.

Thanks

Here...Here you took the words right out of my mouth...

[elvis]

ramping is like this .What i am going to say is finale.........ramping is good if ur behind the trigger......ramping is bad if ur being shot at!! hahahaha lololol