iBVLZdhT

1All of this is in response to this thread https://www.reddit.com/r/Nerf/comments/92gbgz/the_future_of_nerf/  I didn't reply to him there and I got bombarded with these walls of text.  HPA is legitimately a legal issue in california which is where I play 80% of the time.  Propulsion of any object by highly pressurized air is illegal on state owned park land and public schools (most of the venues we play at).  It's a gray area in other states as well.  I stated that, and this is the response I got.  he accused us of "having an agenda" because we warned people to look into the legal ramifications in their area.  Who really has an agenda here?
2
3torukmakto4Continuation.
4expand allcollapse all
5
6[–]from torukmakto4 sent 6 months ago
7
8The popularity of games with ["lower"] FPS caps should tell you that your opinion is in the minority ... In the bay area ...
9
10So, there are misconceptions here. I don't want to call them strawmen because I am not sure there is intent, but they sure appear to be made of straw, shaped like people, and getting attacked in lieu of the real argument.
11
12I do not "oppose FPS caps". I do not oppose the existence of multiple safety classes (including superstock, ultrastock and HV) and I am not advocating all events to switch to higher ones without reason.
13
14However, I oppose the misuse and careless (or malicious) design of velocity caps. Endwar is an example that grates on me - not because it is "not ultrastock", but because it is not even standard superstock that it rationally SHOULD be, instead it insists on a cap that is (tokenistically, not significantly) lower such that lots of shit gets banned which doesn't objectively need to for any of the purposes of running a superstock event such as safety and ready accessibility. 20fps doesn't matter.
15
16I also oppose the use of (velocity or otherwise, and there is a lot of the latter) restrictions for reasons that are largely not safety but are more competitively motivated. I get very angry when groups of players are willing to circumvent the game to improve their own competitive standing rather than either (A) do the work to IMPROVE their game or (B) accept their ranking as it honestly IS. Someone pushing for lower caps purely because it would block someone else from putting competitive pressure on them, makes them a coward. A coward and nothing else.
17
18It may seem harsh, but the problem is, there is no such thing as a neutral player, and thus there is no proper sympathetic response to demands that other players be forcibly gimped for one's own sake. Could this be a legitimate complaint that the difficulty/learning curve is too great and is discouraging? Yes. But it could also be a scumbag trying to cheat the system. And it is VERY fluid and debatable where the line lies. Furthermore, there IS a third, proper response aside from simply caving in to the complaint or not doing so: adapt some other aspect of the game to render it more welcoming to the newer player that does NOT involve doing so at the expense of other players or the fundamental depth of the game. i.e. People getting outranged? Make more cover. Better to add $10 or PVC and tarps to a game to solve that problem, than to subtract the (priceless) committed veteran player doing the outranging by banning or ruling against them, or to take a chunk out of the reality by creating rules that barricade off certain routes to advancement.
19
20Don't like the way another club is running their game? Wah. It's not you club. Go make your own event
21
22There is a significant pragmatic issue with that: The resources of the hobby are very finite. We have a limited number of people and playfields, and since nerf serves lots of players seeking a high-economy wargame, we have limited time and limited capital. This isn't cyberspace. We can't afford to have events ad infinitum and a different format of event/rules to suit everyone. For the first recourse to running into exclusion/bias in events to be "create your own, then" in reality just fragments the hobby even more. What we need is to make events as open and nonspecific to playstyles as possible. That means correctly designing rules and fields to not be blatantly in favor of any one subset of playstyles succeeding, but it also means respecting the validity of all of them even when it is inconvenient.
23
24"Wah"? The constant complaints about rules design being debated and ruleset merits being publically interrogated by members of the community sound very much like a "Don't talk about that!!" sentiment. No, don't try to control what is discussed; not cool. It is clearly an issue, clearly needs to be discussed and it is NOT wrong to do so.
25
26Stop trying to call people "wrong" because they want a different type of event than you.
27
28I understand where that comes from, but if the type of event that they want is one biased toward their own playstyle that uses regulatory force to block challenges to its superiority... well, they are wrong. That is pragmatically undesirable if we want to grow and improve nerf in addition to just selfish, entitled and salty.
29
30Running an event is not AT ALL like PLAYING an event.
31
32PLAYING an event is personal. You do not need any justification for a playstyle, and anyone who questions your right to play how you want is automatically in the wrong for questioning a matter of opinion and personal expression.
33
34RUNNING a game is a public affair. Rules directly impact the ability of OTHERS to enjoy the game. They can also have the effect of interfering with the above. Rules can certainly have their merit called into question and debated.
35
36Not everyone likes being smacked by 200 FPS darts from across the field when the best thing they can bring to the field is a stock Apollo.
37
38Uhhh... Welcome to wargaming? It's an adversarial relationship between enemy players, of course no one likes getting shot, of course there is competitive pressure.
39
40Of course there is inequity, because if there is no opportunity for meaningful distinguishment, there is also not any DEPTH to the game.
41
42Something is also to be said about entitlement when encountering someone who believes they should come into a field full of people who have considerable experience, time and effort invested in the game and straight-up have 100% of any specific parameter that they do. If you think you can buy a $15 blaster, do zero work, learn zero, have zero blastersmithing or shooting skills, and have all the effective range I do, you're mistaken, and you ought to learn a harsh lesson.
43
44That said: You can compete EASILY with a stock Apollo. You might not be able to brute-force duel everyone on the field that day, but even many experienced players at TBNC use nothing more than a stock Artemis to be serious threats and do serious work.
45
46Your "playstyle" encourages people to invest a ton of time, money, or both in order to counter you, and that's not fun for everyone.
47
48This is a fallacy, because in an open game there is no one specific counterstrategy to anything, and regards skill sets/distinguishments as above, it isn't necessarily a matter of "I have something, so YOU need to get the same thing now, too".
49
50Otherwise, if you don't want to face competitive pressure/don't find it a fun challenge that others are going to be trying their best to tag you, it's best you don't play. That is the line at which it goes from welcoming varied player preferences to undermining the nature of the hobby and potentially making it not fun to those who are here to challenge each other (not to be actors in a scripted interaction which is what lots of modern hvz feels like).
51
52Quoting "playstyle" as if to imply it is not a "real" playstyle clearly says you have bias about it or are regarding it as invalid. Well, dammit, it is valid whether you like it or not.
53
54(I've watched some of your recent game play footage and you move less than I do because you like to just out range everyone)
55
56If that is the NCFNC clip: I was at work (I work nights) throwing freight for 8 hours, then slept for 1, then drove for 4 to get to that event. I was not thinking straight at all, I was sore, tired, hungry and generally a zombie. Forgive the camping in the back taking long range shots. I didn't have the energy to move more or the reflexes to avoid/dodge getting tagged close up, but at least I was finding a way to be at least somewhat useful to my team in that state.
57
58My guess is because you know him in person, you're better able to discern his tone. To the average person online, he typically comes off with a very condescending tone. I know Bob O Bob in person, so I understand his tone 90% of the time is half jovial, half grumpy old man. Most of the time if he's poking fun at you, it's in a friendly way, but most people see it as him just being a jerk. It's something I've personally struggled with a lot and still have an issue with, but I at least acknowledge it's an issue and try to change.
59
60This is definitely the case.
61
62permalinkdeletereportblock usermark unreadreply
63[–]to torukmakto4 sent 6 months ago
64
65That's a huge wall of text that I don't really have the focus to read right now. I read the first bit about Endwar, and we'll have to agree to disagree. I've talked to a lot of people who genuinely have a fear of charging anything over 100 FPS because of the pain. The 130fps was a compromise between the 150 the superstock community likes and the 100 FPS a lot of the north east HvZ clubs run. It's about improving zombie moral more than anything else.
66
67permalink
68torukmakto4Response to remarks in the old mod nom thread.
69expand allcollapse all
70
71[–]from torukmakto4 sent 6 months ago
72
73I want to keep things civil, and I also want to secure some loose ends here, particularly as related to the playstyle subject. I do not like how things were left. I'm not sure if this is reciprocating an argument or attempting to clarify given that I suspect as much misunderstanding as anything else, probably a bit of both. No particular order, possible disjointedness.
74
75"Play however you want as long as I can shoot you from across the field and you have no way of reaching me unless you git gud." That's how this reads. Maybe that's why the downvotes?
76
77Very loaded language. I think you are overstating both the importance of equipment in competitive standing of players, and the competitive inequity itself, which is a normal condition to see happening at any given moment in a game. Without anyone ever being outmatched, there is no drive for anyone to improve. In other words: It isn't realistic or usual that within a given safety class (particularly a "pro stock" one of some sort) that new players face such a discouragingly steep learning curve even using a terrible blaster. They may have to face superior ballistics as well as skills, but the only way to fail at climbing the curve is to fail at learning anything and/or the most obvious sorts of innovation and adaptation. If you lack those abilities and are that easily discouraged that you need everything micromanaged and spoon-fed, you will never get anywhere in a combat game at all.
78
79I also think you are ascribing value or validity judgements to sources or methodologies of player distinguishment which lead to those competitive inequities, and that specifically you are biased strongly against those which involve equipment in any way, as opposed to (for instance) those which involve athletics, or those which involve strategy. This is understandable, because it is a popular sentiment originating in common sports that overtly strive to be a test of athleticism and strategy alone and NOT a test of anything else, but it is a completely arbitrary one to apply to nerf, which is NOT a sport of such narrow scope. The hobby does not exist to appeal to one skill set or a few skill sets, one of its primary merits is being a nearly completely open-ended challenge with very real and entirely non-contrived (mostly physics and the state of technology, aside from safety exceptions) limitations, and appealing to ALL skill sets that could possibly help one tag the enemy. The blastersmithing facet of it is equally valid as any other skill set that proves to have utility. Some distinguishments are physical, some are athletic, and some are highly specialized knowledge and are thus closer to unobtanium/unreachable than anything in the equipment space that gets bashed as a "toxic stratification" and yet is not usually regarded as reasonable to demand these be levelled by force.
80
81Also, game balance and accessibility do not mandate that any single skill or means of distinguishment be accessible to others, let alone levelled by force. Rather, specializations and strengths of players can be unique and valued, instead of becoming a jealousy culture where someone having a clear specialty/distinguishment (even very strongly and to significant competitive advantage) results in all others feeling pressured to possess the same one as well, salty that they do not, or willing to advocate tearing down all others to their level by banning it if they cannot have it. That is a foreign idea to me. It doesn't have any place in the game as I know it and knew it all the way back to 2010 HvZ.
82
83There are people locally who specialize in using socks. This is a highly skill-based field just as much as building something like a T19, and it is also a field that I personally see as just as opaque and fundamentally alien as an advanced blaster might seem to them. These sock players can be just as effective overall as me and there are situations where they are a far better adapted and better performing player than I am. I have no hope of touching how good they are with socks or getting into their niche. I also don't have any interest/find that fun. I respect these players for what they can do. Conversely, I have my jobs I am the right tool for. However, there is zero animosity between me and the sock scouts given neither of us will ever have what the other does or be nearly as good at each other's jobs. That doesn't intersect that way. Instead, when on the same team we collaborate, and when enemies we nail each other right in the sore spots of our skill sets and approaches.
84
85(Looking to HvZ. If a real apocalypse hit, we wouldn't have any more of this "appealing to TPTB to fix/smite/lock up teh unfair guy" thing. It would hit hard and fast that there are no TPTB/gods in reality, and there is also not really any such deal as "unfair" in reality nor anyone to make your case of "unfairness" to, and that only collaborating and pooling the skills of multiple "unfair guys" in multiple fields results in survival. See, this is the HvZ core, and why I detest heavyhanded administration that doesn't support every last possible bit of player agency, and that which caters to those "appealing to the gods" about the "unfair guys"; it is antithetical to HvZ itself. HvZ is a game of getting all the unfair-guys of various sorts on the same team working together, each doing what they do best and finding a greater purpose to serve with that talent, united by the need to react to the threat of zombies; or united by BRAINS, once dead.)
86
87So, blasters are obvious. They are complex machines with nearly every engineering concern, that also figure "rather prominently" in the hobby (as in, they are its driver entirely), thus they are a huge canvas for players to work with in applying (multiple actually) skill sets and approaches to the game. Do you see now why it makes me so incredibly angry when "equipment" is written off as an invalid, or less-than-equal (versus say athletics), vehicle for advancing/distinguishing oneself as a player? What is the reason for accepting a double-standard such that it is not remotely accepted to demand restrictions to block athletes and strategists from leveraging those strengths and yet it is even on the table to suggest that advantage obtained via a blaster is somehow less "fair" or "deserved", or that it should be subject to restriction to suppress such distinguishment?
88
89I read this entire comment as you being entitled to be honest.
90
91From a viewpoint such as mine that is free from the bias that "equipment advantage is dirty advantage" and is arbitrarily less valid than any other distinguishment, this is absolutely egregious. Not because you attack specifically my approach to the game as less valid (I'm no stranger to receiving trashtalk in competitive settings, which is more or less what that is) but rather because of the philosophical aspect of it that you are here accusing me of being arbitrarily intolerant to other ideas in the hobby and yet are being arbitrarily intolerant of a playstyle and making arbitrary and stark value judgements of it. "Entitled", how dare you.
92
93It is not entitlement to expect that any skill, knowledge, hardware or other resource at one's disposal should be usable to generate competitive advantage in the game of nerf. This is not entitlement. Entitlement implies a demand of some artificial concession. No concession is being demanded in this situation. "Not banning something" is not a concession, it is a perfectly reasonable expectation as long as the "something" is not physically unsafe. The advantage granted by improving one's equipment concretely exists. It is not arbitrary. What declares its existence is (as with all other player distinguishments) the absolute merit of a player's solutions to the game's problems, and in the case of a blaster, mostly just the laws of physics.
94
95If anyone in the situation is said to be acting entitled or selfish, it is those demanding the restrictions, who don't respect that reality, and believe that they have the grounds to demand moderators to intervene and kneecap other players for them to give them an easier time.
96
97It may be a difficult truth at times, but it is the truth.
98
99I get involved in gamemastering/rules design debates primarily because I care about the hobby and its future. Particularly, it hurts me when people seem to go out of their way to demonize the very aspects that were responsible for getting me involved in HvZ (at the time)/nerf in such a way that had I run into a front of that attitude as a noob just meeting the sport for the first time and not having been "bootstrapped" yet, I would have been exceedingly discouraged from continued involvement with the community. Thankfully, it was not that way here and at that time, and the hobby presented me an inviting open road forward and upward; but if I had run into what it is today with people complaining constantly about "tryhards", salty zombies who use a matter of 10 fps as an excuse to not play games, and people opining all over the place that everyone who rises above the field by their own effort and thinking is an "entitled asshole" who ought to be hammered down by the gods, I might have just walked away, because honestly it is a toxic culture.
100
101permalinkdeletereportblock usermark unreadreply
102matthewbreggThread got locked, but I already wrote a reply, hope you don't mind
103expand allcollapse all
104
105[–]from matthewbregg sent 6 months ago
106
107Limiting yourself to one type of game play sounds boring
108
109I don't think that logically follows, higher FPS blasters does not limit one self to only one game type.
110
111That's great that you think it warrants coming home with bruises
112
113Most of the bruises I get come from non dart sources, but my point was more bruising tends to happen at even 130 FPS games, and I think we both agree that you lose a lot by going only stock only.
114
115For me when the game gets to that point, it's just a less good version of paintball, so I'd rather play paintball.
116
117I also disagree with that, I've admittedly only played paintball once, but it was quite a different game. Projectiles that can be picked up and reused, much different firing speeds and projectiles that can actually be dodged for starters. Not to mention it's a lot safer to wear costumes at a Nerf war than a paintball war.
118
119If there's rules that prevent me from running X blaster, I grab a different one and find a way to have fun.
120
121To a certain point yes, this can be beneficial even, I do enjoy the occasional pistol or single shot only round, and we do have them.
122
123But at the same time it also can be very restrictive and unfun when a game repeatedly bans all your favorite blasters.
124
125There's a lot of different ways to Nerf, and it repeatedly feels like Toruk is shouting at anyone who does it differently than him.
126
127It's always seemed to be less that, and more him wanting to play his own way, and not care about how others play.
128
129It's no reason to try and push people to adapt to your way if they're more than happy with their way is all I'm saying.
130
131It's a reason to voice how you want to play, especially when it's this fun to put effort into making these cool blasters, and really want to use them. There's already a slim amount of places to play ultrastock, people have to be vocal to get more games going, and show that their is a player base. With the ultra* flywheel series, and Caliburn, it's becoming easier and easier for people to get an ultrastock blaster.
132
133I also wouldn't really consider myself a hardcore player. I like running around a lot, firing hot, but I'm generally not very competitive. The running around a lot tends to result in some scrapes and bruises at times, but overall is still pretty casual, as evidenced by me wearing a Spiderman suit for the first day of Endwar, which sadly is not the ideal competitive meta.
134
135Blaster modding included fits into that casual atmosphere. Higher FPS and heavily modded != hardcore player. One example, someone made an hand pumped, air powered maverick. Heavily modded, but not really a hard core competitive blaster.
136
137There's a lot of different ways to Nerf
138
139There are a lot of different ways to Nerf, and higher FPS is compatible with most of them, and opens up some more ways to play. Springers become a viable force in the meta again (without being artificially imposed by a rule like no electrics), at least until short dart flywheel blasters catch up to 200 FPS.
140
141Although for Endwar, the argument seems to be much more 150 than 200, which is a much smaller difference. Bruising is going to happen at both velocities. It's also true that raising FPS isn't completely without flaws. Those who get bruised from darts will probably get some more, and those who put in the time to mod their blasters will get a (deserved IMO) advantage that stock players will need to use skill to overcome (but as mentioned earlier, it's not that big a difference from what I've seen at the games I've played). But that seem fairly minor compared to the benefits.
142
143My opinion on this is less strong, I play and enjoy 130 FPS cap games, although I do not enjoy stock blasters and stock blaster wars, just haven't had fun at them. However, USF with it's high cap HvZ was extremely fun, and I'd love to see more of that around. And the only way that happens is if people push for it.
144
145I also want to say this has been a fairly good and respectable argument so far, and hope you view it the same way. With the thread locked, not sure if it's worth continuing at this point.
146
147permalinkdeletereportblock usermark unreadreply
148[–]to matthewbregg sent 6 months ago
149
150Raising the FPS does limit playstyles. When we play at ultrastock Adrianna who normally rushes and bunkers people can't do that without getting pretty nasty woulds from people shooting 200+ FPS. She has to wear a full facemask to those events because EVERY time she has had a busted lip, one time we thought she was going to need stitches. She has a genuine fear of bunkering people at those events because some of the blasters are downright scary. Not everyone enjoys that type of play where there's certain players who just can't be bunkered unless you want to risk going home with nasty bruises. I think we just play a different kind of game out here. We have a TON of fun @150fps. I've played at the SENC and Washington where they are basically unregulated, and people play way more static and snipe from long range. If you rush someone you catch a 200 FPS dart in the face. I'm sorry, but we're going to need to agree to disagree here that while high FPS caps may not "prevent" a certain play style, it definitely discourages it, and MANY people do not want to play games with those kinds of projectiles. BAUS has been going for almost a year now and they still have low numbers despite having a really well run club and well run events. The FPS drives people away. People show up with normal superstock blasters, play a couple rounds and leave. They can't get within 100 feet of Thahn, Kyle or myself without getting tagged. The only people who get tags on me are caliburn users pushing 220 FPS with halflengths. The few people with 130-140 fps blasters just end up respawning the whole time and then don't come back the next month. Maybe it works where you're at, but it doesn't work here.
151
152permalink
153[–]from matthewbregg sent 6 months ago
154
155without getting pretty nasty woulds from people shooting 200+ FPS
156
157I will agree that past 200 FPS you do start getting rapidly diminishing returns, that's actually where the NCFNC limit is, although we tend to be a bit lenient on it as we have a few caliburn users going a bit over, and there hasn't been that big of an issue.
158
159Also, we are talking about soft tip darts still, right?
160
161I do wonder how different our fields are, and how big a roll that plays, the NFCNC field has lots of trees strewn throughout, and is on the small side.
162
163I think we just play a different kind of game out here. We have a TON of fun @150fps
164
165I don't disagree with that, I've even seen torukmakto4 agree that 150 FPS has it's place in HvZ.
166
167The main argument I saw from him was for a 150 FPS cap for events like Endwar and such.
168
169If you rush someone you catch a 200 FPS dart in the face. I'm sorry, but we're going to need to agree to disagree here that while high FPS caps may not "prevent" a certain play style, it definitely discourages it, and MANY people do not want to play games with those kinds of projectiles.
170
171The Caliburn or two we have has chronoed more in the 210 range than 220, and has to use soft short lengths, which I assume is the same in these clubs.
172
173It also might be that a lot of the ultrastock blasters we have are more in the 170-190 range firing waffles/accufakes.
174
175The only people who get tags on me are caliburn users pushing 220 FPS with halflengths. The few people with 130-140 fps blasters just end up respawning the whole time and then don't come back the next month. Maybe it works where you're at, but it doesn't work here
176
177Certainly a different experience here, but it is a valid experience/point.
178
179If you rush someone you catch a 200 FPS dart in the face.
180
181Not sure if you meant this literally, but while they do happen, we generally try to avoid face shots.
182
183We do seem to have very different experiences with high FPS, especially regarding injuries. The Caliburns firing short darts have left bruises, but I haven't seen them split skin in the club. Maybe we just don't have enough, as our games are also on the small side of 10-20 people max.
184
185We do seem to agree on 150 FPS being quite nice, and disagree mainly on the 200 FPS and up area.
186
187Most of my experience is with stuff that's at most 210 FPS, and really more in the 170-200 FPS range. With that, and cover, we haven't had the problems you've described, and have moved to an ultrastock club pretty seamlessly, without leaving those who just have super stock equipment behind.
188
189However, from your experience, I am forced to concede that it might just be a good experience with the Florida player base, and not work everywhere. From what you experienced, I can understand not wanting ultrastock. I also think our games are more different than we are realizing. I still hold that there is nothing wrong with advocating and pushing for ultrastock, and that's mostly what I've seen torukmakto4 doing, just like there is nothing wrong with sharing that experience to counter said advocating.
190
191I think we agree on 150 FPS being cool and more beneficial than bad?
192
193I do wonder if something like a 190/180 FPS cap would be a good midpoint for avoiding your experience with ultrastock, while still allowing higher FPS, but am worried that'd be catering too closely to the current flywheel users, as that's pretty much a cap made for ultracages, T19, and the like.
194
195permalinkdeletereportblock usermark unreadreply
196[–]to matthewbregg sent 6 months ago
197
198I think there's like 12 Caliburns in the BAUS club now? Most of them are skirting the 225 limit. Addy's shoots 200 with worker half lengths and a scar barrel. She can hit a person sized target in one shot 8/10 times at 100 feet. It's kind of crazy how good those things shoot when optimized. I disagree and think 150 is too much for HvZ. You're not going to convince me otherwise. Zombie morale at large events is a huge problem and bum rushing into 150fps rapidstrikes sucks. We play in all kinds of different fields from schools to parks. We supplement weak cover areas with deployable cover. There's around 80 pieces of deployable cover between all the bay area clubs. Most players in the bay area have been playing for years together so it's pretty tight knit. When people started first getting caliburns, prophecies, and Eclipse, there was an outcry for ultrastock, so the club was made. First game it was a miserable 50 degrees with constant light rain all day and 35 people showed. That's the most they ever had. Many of those people never came back. They've tried moving the event around to please more people, changing rules (not that there's anything wrong with them, their rulesets and game types are all really fun). There's just not enough hardcore players in the bay area. They want to run stryfes, rival, pistols, etc. They want to bring their kids. They don't want to show up to their day job with a bruise on their forehead. and Yes, we're talking soft darts only at BAUS. Some of the other bay area clubs allowed FVJs up until about 6 months ago or so, but they've all banned them.
199
200permalink
201[–]from matthewbregg sent 6 months ago
202
203You're not going to convince me otherwise.
204
205I think we are going to have to agree to disagree, most of the problems you mentioned for ultrastock aren't nearly as bad with 150 FPS, and we are both allowed to have and express are viewpoint.
206
207Zombie morale at large events is a huge problem and bum rushing into 150fps rapidstrikes sucks.
208
209I agree, but is it really that different from bum rushing into 130 FPS rapidstrikes? Then again, this is probably fruitless as I've think we've both made up our minds, but I'm expressing my view none the less.
210
211Most of them are skirting the 225 limit.
212
213That is higher than what we run at.
214
215Addy's shoots 200 with worker half lengths and a scar barrel. She can hit a person sized target in one shot 8/10 times at 100 feet,
216
217That's impressive, more accurate than the Caliburn users at our club I'd say.
218
219In terms of turn out, NCFNC has always been a small club, but if anything it's been slowly growing, including when it turned to ultrastock.
220
221There's around 80 pieces of deployable cover between all the bay area clubs.
222
223Certainly more organized than us, we just play in a small forest and often don't deploy additional cover.
224
225Obviously, we're having very different experiences.
226
227They don't want to show up to their day job with a bruise on their forehead.
228
229I do think the increased amount of Caliburns and slightly higher FPS limit might account for the increased bruising, but it's generally not something I'm concerned with.
230
231I'm also noting we've sort of shifted from the original meta-argument to outright arguing about ultrastock, and velocity limits.
232
233I acknowledge your points about ultra stock not working out where you play, it's worked here with our smaller group very well, but who knows what factors differ.
234
235We disagree on HvZ velocity, but I think we can both agree that it's fine to to actually have this argument, and to bring it up, for both this point and the above.
236
237permalinkdeletereportblock usermark unreadreply