Re: Scale, Speed, and Rules (was: New Member - Michigan)

[Steve Edwards <sedwards-at-awger.net>]

Frank Pittelli wrote:

> More importantly, when a paintball hits a tank, you not only see the 
> hit, but you hear it and feel it.  The shooter and shootee both get a 
> shot of adrenaline and all your senses work overtime to figure out how 
> to make/avoid the next hit.  (You get even more of a burst of 
> adrenaline when the paintball goes whizzing past your ear ;-)


Oh, I know that feeling *REAL WELL* ...

I'm reminded of a game of paintball some years ago... we were defending 
a "village" and one of the judges was standing in the wrong place, and 
took a paintball *in the ear* broadside. He tried to blow his whistle to 
stop the game, but dropped like a sack of potatoes. And people ask me 
why I always had neoprene wrapped around my head...

Glad to hear you guys don't go in for the 
"back-and-forth-behind-the-hill" dance that is physically impossible for 
any full-size vehicle weighing over 500lbs.

> It's interesting to note that you only included WW-II tanks in your 
> example.  Try formulating such an approach for 100 years of vehicles 
> ranging from pre-WW-I to Desert Storm.  Clearly, any rule based on 
> scale specs would result in nothing but M1A1s on the field, since it 
> is faster, stronger and more powerful than any other tank ever built.  
> Most scale clubs limit themselves to a relatively short time period in 
> history to reduce such problems, and we'd rather have lots of 
> different vehicles on the battlefield so that everyone can build their 
> favorite.


I was thinking more along the lines of a heavy / medium / or light 
classification, with all vehicles of that class (regardless of era) 
sharing the same limitations, so that a WWI male (old, slow, heavy gun) 
could have a shot at surviving against a BFV (new, fast, light gun).  To 
paraphrase an age-old engineering axiom, "Armor, armament, or speed -- 
pick two."  Sure, an M1A1 has all three (in spades) but, for the sake of 
being nice to your fellow tankers, you'd have to give one of them up.

> Also, scoring hits only at certain ranges according to scale gun specs 
> simply won't work on a competitive battlefield.  It's difficult enough 
> to get a group of grown men to agree that a paintball actually hit a 
> vehicle in some circumstances (it bounced, it splattered on the 
> ground, that was already there, etc.)  We follow the lead of the human 
> paintball game ... it there's paint, you're hit ... doesn't matter how 
> it got there or from whom.


Mostly the same issues in the human paintball game... but made stranger 
because different fields have different rules. Some fields disallow 
shots to the head or marker while others don't. Splatter (ball strikes 
tree first and then spits paint on you) and bounces (ball hits you but 
doesn't break) don't count. And I always preferred to bring my own ball: 
black shell with white or green paint. You can't see the black shell 
very well in flight, but it makes a really nice flash when it hits.

Hmm.. there's an interesting question. Do barrel hits count? (I may have 
to rethink that 70 calibre gun)  I'll assume that track / suspension and 
cupola hits do count... but that hits on "detail" (like Ma Deuce on top 
of a Sherman or a sighting periscope) wouldn't?

It's just that, in thinking about it (but not actually having been out 
with you guys and done it), it would seem that a Tiger shooting a 
Sherman in the face should score a hit, whereas a Sherman shooting a 
Tiger in the face should have his head examined.

> Simple rules make fun games.


... and ya'll make the rules, I'm just here to have fun.  :-)

    - Steve "preparing to be picked off by Steve, Will, and John" Edwards


P.S.      CHECK IT!  CHECK IT!  CHECK IT!  <-- paintball joke