Jump to content


Photo

Do optical sights help players place single shots more accurately?


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 28 March 2012 - 02:33 PM

Okay, here's the deal- I don't know why I didn't think of this before.

I've been using dot sights in paintball ever since I started playing paintball (1989). Every marker I've owned has had one. Over my years of experience I've seen the shift in the market away from them and now, a slight creep back towards them as more companies get into the woodsball/mil-sim markets. In this time, I've developed a perception:

In the vast majority of 50-75ft range shootouts I've experienced (where each of us only see our gun/head), my opponents were not as able to accurately place their shots as I could with my sights. In these engagements, I fequently see the start of their stream inaccurate (missing by a 1-3ft in any direction) and then walking the rest of their string in.


Now, this preception does come with some acceptance of limitations:
  • Sights are dialed in to a specific range and windage, situations outside of that require 'on the fly' compensation (often referred to as 'Kentucky Windage' in the firearm community)
  • Due to the highly parabolic arc of paintballs the majority of optics cannot adjust enough for range.
  • Due to the inaccuracy of paintballs (they spread exponentially vice linearly), there is a distance of diminishing benefit
  • You have to take the time to use them
I've also heard plenty of statements like:

"Sights are useless / I shoot just fine down the side of the market"



Can we develop a test to determine whether or not sights help or, if sighting down the side of the barrel is just as good?

How would we conduct such a test?

I've got some ideas:
  • A specific distance to test- we're not gauging the skill one has in 'kentucky windage'. This distance should be a point where the chance to hit isn't significantly skewed by the inaccuracy of paintballs.
  • The test should be based on a single shot (to eliminate walking of the paint to the target).
  • The target should be a reflection of paintball spread (to reduce the chance of a paintball induced miss).
  • The ideal marker would be one that is conducive to sighting down the barrel but can accept a sight.
  • There should consist of multiple shooters who don't know what the test is and they should be offered a hit reward.

What do you all think?

#2 Teek

Teek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York

Posted 28 March 2012 - 06:31 PM

Okay, here's the deal- I don't know why I didn't think of this before.

I've been using dot sights in paintball ever since I started playing paintball (1989). Every marker I've owned has had one. Over my years of experience I've seen the shift in the market away from them and now, a slight creep back towards them as more companies get into the woodsball/mil-sim markets. In this time, I've developed a perception:

In the vast majority of 50-75ft range shootouts I've experienced (where each of us only see our gun/head), my opponents were not as able to accurately place their shots as I could with my sights. In these engagements, I fequently see the start of their stream inaccurate (missing by a 1-3ft in any direction) and then walking the rest of their string in.


Now, this preception does come with some acceptance of limitations:
  • Sights are dialed in to a specific range and windage, situations outside of that require 'on the fly' compensation (often referred to as 'Kentucky Windage' in the firearm community)
  • Due to the highly parabolic arc of paintballs the majority of optics cannot adjust enough for range.
  • Due to the inaccuracy of paintballs (they spread exponentially vice linearly), there is a distance of diminishing benefit
  • You have to take the time to use them
I've also heard plenty of statements like:

"Sights are useless / I shoot just fine down the side of the market"



Can we develop a test to determine whether or not sights help or, if sighting down the side of the barrel is just as good?

How would we conduct such a test?

I've got some ideas:
  • A specific distance to test- we're not gauging the skill one has in 'kentucky windage'. This distance should be a point where the chance to hit isn't significantly skewed by the inaccuracy of paintballs.
  • The test should be based on a single shot (to eliminate walking of the paint to the target).
  • The target should be a reflection of paintball spread (to reduce the chance of a paintball induced miss).
  • The ideal marker would be one that is conducive to sighting down the barrel but can accept a sight.
  • There should consist of multiple shooters who don't know what the test is and they should be offered a hit reward.

What do you all think?


I like the idea, though honestly I think we could consider this a much of a test on whether or not our natural sense of marker aiming (zen aiming, as it's been called) compares to mechanical sighting as it is for testing the effectiveness of scopes and sights.

A few more ideas:
1. introduce an element of surprise to it. Either with someone turning around to shoot, or with pop up targets, or targets at varying distances. Maybe even try to set up a kind of course that a tester needs to go through and actively go after targets, which would kind of lead into my second idea

2. Introduce a time element. Accuracy isn't the only thing that's important here, but also the time to acquire and act on a target, because odds are if he's given enough time, he could probably line up a shot well enough even without a sight. If you're working on a point system for targets, maybe including the time to take a shot would also fit into this scheme.

and

3. Maybe test barrel length here. Just an interesting aside, I have often heard from people that longer barrels can make you more accurate. no, I'm not talking about the people who still think barrels affect the flight of the ball all that much, but rather I've hear some people state that a longer barrel is easier to line up, and therefore helps with long range shooting. Of course, I've never seen anything besides anecdotal evidence to back this idea up.


One other thing, is it just me, or does anyone else remember brainstorming about an experiment kind of like this, not too long ago. Trying to figure out if I'm just going a little crazy or not.


Rest in Peace, Borg.

#3 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 28 March 2012 - 07:34 PM

My comments in blue

I like the idea, though honestly I think we could consider this a much of a test on whether or not our natural sense of marker aiming (zen aiming, as it's been called) compares to mechanical sighting as it is for testing the effectiveness of scopes and sights.
If "natural sense of marker aiming" = the type of deliberate aiming used with a speedball marker (vice snapsshooting, which I consider to be a factor of how well a marker points) we're talking about the same thing.

I'm excluding mechanical sights (i.e. those built in on many mil-sim / tactical markers) from this test because they simply aren't set for the trajectory of paintballs. I'm envisioning the basic dot sight (I should've pointed that out earlier, thanks).


A few more ideas:
1. introduce an element of surprise to it. Either with someone turning around to shoot, or with pop up targets, or targets at varying distances. Maybe even try to set up a kind of course that a tester needs to go through and actively go after targets, which would kind of lead into my second idea

This begins to place emphasis on one's ability to dynamically align the point of aim and fire. For example, some people if they spin and shoot, they may actually miss the target simply because they pulled the trigger while they were still twisting.

2. Introduce a time element. Accuracy isn't the only thing that's important here, but also the time to acquire and act on a target, because odds are if he's given enough time, he could probably line up a shot well enough even without a sight. If you're working on a point system for targets, maybe including the time to take a shot would also fit into this scheme.

This starts to emphasis one's speed/reaction time, I'm specifically going after whether or not lining up with a red dot sight is no better than having no sights at all.
and

3. Maybe test barrel length here. Just an interesting aside, I have often heard from people that longer barrels can make you more accurate. no, I'm not talking about the people who still think barrels affect the flight of the ball all that much, but rather I've hear some people state that a longer barrel is easier to line up, and therefore helps with long range shooting. Of course, I've never seen anything besides anecdotal evidence to back this idea up.

This actually brings up a very good point. My first response thought was 'be sure to use a barrel of sufficient length' but, I'm beginning to think that maybe folks will say "I can aim down the barrel with my (insert random marker) but, not this (insert test marker).

All three of these points are worth looking into. Assuming that sights actually help, I could also envision follow up tests (assuming that the dot sights help here):
At what ranges (near and far) does it make no difference between sights and no sights?
Can folks more quickly aim and fire accurately with sights?

There could also be follow up tests if the sights did not help (i.e. what barrel length performs best for aiming).



One other thing, is it just me, or does anyone else remember brainstorming about an experiment kind of like this, not too long ago. Trying to figure out if I'm just going a little crazy or not.


No dedicated topic that I'm aware of. I couldn't speak to sub-topic discussions

#4 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 29 March 2012 - 04:39 AM

It was the philosophy of spread thread I believe.
Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#5 FreeEnterprise

FreeEnterprise

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 745 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 29 March 2012 - 10:47 AM

I used one for years, core red dot. I learned from that how MY gun shoots with my Apex. And I often shoot out players with the first shot, while when they shoot at me, I can usually duck behind a tree as they shoot their first shot then adjust and by then I am gone...I definitely think it helped me with my one shot accuracy. And often when playing revolutionary war, I wish I still had it on my gun (probably will put it back on, as it is SO much easier to just put that dot on your target). I took it off as it was hit at least 5 times in games, and the housing is cracked. I had mine dialed in to the pole in my front yard (70 feet) as long as I had good paint, it was awesome. I could just aim up a little for 100 foot shots. I took it off right after I got my Apex 2... But, I had great paint at our last event and I missed some guys playing revolutionary war, so my skills have suffered and I will put it back on before I play again.

#6 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,121 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 29 March 2012 - 12:32 PM

i think its easy to say conclusively that a single shot, long time exposure shot, at a given range that is sighted for, will ALWAYS be better with a sight/optics.

i think the fundamental issue is that kind of shot's importance changes depending on your field, style of play, position, and format.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#7 FreeEnterprise

FreeEnterprise

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 745 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 29 March 2012 - 12:44 PM

^ yeah...

I used mine for revolutionary war, but that was about it... In the woods, when playing, I rarely had time to mess with it. I did use it a few times when playing as a sniper, but typical run and gun paintball... I found it just wasn't needed, as you are often "snap" shooting within a fraction of a second, and you don't have time to look down your sight, and find the dot, and line it up, ect. You just point and fire for the majority of shots.


But, if you are taking only ONE shot, in a game (sniper or rev war, or other sneaky tactics) Then it makes sense.

#8 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 29 March 2012 - 01:34 PM

i think its easy to say conclusively that a single shot, long time exposure shot, at a given range that is sighted for, will ALWAYS be better with a sight/optics.


I agree- however, there's no data to back it up.

i think the fundamental issue is that kind of shot's importance changes depending on your field, style of play, position, and format.


Well, this is where things get interesting. If someone has a good foundation as to where they are sighted in, then it comes down to how effectively (in terms of accuracy and speed) an individual can be at applying the proper hold over/under and windage. This allows for a greater flexibility in use but, it won't help in all situations. For example, if you find yourself needing to snapshoot, that's developed in muscular memory (just how accurate can that be? I dunno) As for myself, I line my sights up behind my bunker, then lean out to shoot while placing the dot over my target. In my case its not perfect, as I'm moving as I'm shooting but, I feel it helps (again, no data).

#9 Teek

Teek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York

Posted 29 March 2012 - 02:23 PM

If "natural sense of marker aiming" = the type of deliberate aiming used with a speedball marker (vice snapsshooting, which I consider to be a factor of how well a marker points) we're talking about the same thing.

I'm excluding mechanical sights (i.e. those built in on many mil-sim / tactical markers) from this test because they simply aren't set for the trajectory of paintballs. I'm envisioning the basic dot sight (I should've pointed that out earlier, thanks).

Pretty much what I meant.
----------
This begins to place emphasis on one's ability to dynamically align the point of aim and fire. For example, some people if they spin and shoot, they may actually miss the target simply because they pulled the trigger while they were still twisting.

----------
This starts to emphasis one's speed/reaction time, I'm specifically going after whether or not lining up with a red dot sight is no better than having no sights at all.
and

For both of these, I was assuming that testers would use both sights and regular paintball aiming, and that hopefully we could remove things like personal reaction time from both. Though I think a standard "Go out on a range and shoot" test would probably be the core of this experiment, I think it would be helpful if we included varying tests, to measure the impact of sights in other areas.

------------
This actually brings up a very good point. My first response thought was 'be sure to use a barrel of sufficient length' but, I'm beginning to think that maybe folks will say "I can aim down the barrel with my (insert random marker) but, not this (insert test marker).

I actually hadn't thought of this, and it's a good point. Personal preference can be a very... unusual and unpredictable factor.

All three of these points are worth looking into. Assuming that sights actually help, I could also envision follow up tests (assuming that the dot sights help here):
At what ranges (near and far) does it make no difference between sights and no sights?
Can folks more quickly aim and fire accurately with sights?

I've also thought about how a sight could affect approximation of paint spread, by providing a center point representing true aim (assuming the sight has been set up properly.) I don't think we could get hard evidence on its effect, but maybe a tester questionnaire could provide insight on whether or not that helps a players judgement.

There could also be follow up tests if the sights did not help (i.e. what barrel length performs best for aiming).

It's at times like this that I wish I could find a bore laser sight in .68 cal. Yeah, it'd be totally irrelevant for paintball 99% of the time, but I think we could get some interesting uses out of it on something like this.


I think that if there were ever to be a true paintball scope, it should include both a center dot and a larger outer ring that would approximate the spread of paint. Of course, that's easier said than done, given that paint spreads seem to vary between brands (given recent test results) but I think even if one were to establish an average across all paint, and then use that, you would still see some encouraging results from being able to gauge the general accuracy and effectiveness of your fire. That is, if this is even remotely possible.

And DRG is right, I think we had a discussion a lot like this in the philosophy of spread thread.

My comments in green, btw.
Rest in Peace, Borg.

#10 JGARRIGUES0001

JGARRIGUES0001

    idk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florence, Ky

Posted 29 March 2012 - 03:23 PM

No... I will always be able to stick the end cap of my marker on the tip of my nose and look down my barrel and shoot just as accurately (when I say accuracy I'm referring only to the human factor) if not more accurately than I could with any sort of site. I have done a lot of fooling around with this sort of thing and paintballs aren't precise enough to use a site. You don't need pure accuracy when you're pointing your marker you just have to point your barrel at the right spot and shoot a lot of paint to make up for a shitty projectile. Even in Civil War it's incredibly easy to point your marker at somebody, the deciding factor (for me anyway) is always whether or not the paintball actually stays on course.

But if somebody wants to use a site there's nothing wrong with that, it won't put them at a disadvantage when it comes to quickly acquiring a target. What it will do is give you something other than a vertical feed neck which will give you an advantage in profile coming out of your bunker on one side and a disadvantage in profile coming out of the other side of your bunker. You're hopper will either stick way out or will be tucked behind the bunker.

Back to the point though... if you have two people (and lets just say they're equally talented when it comes to snap shooting and shooting their marker in general) with two different ways of pointing their marker - one has some sort of site and the other simply puts his back cap to his nose and looks down his barrel - and neither has an advantage/disadvantage when it comes to their profile I don't think either one will have any advantage. The one with the site won't keep the guy without a site pinned in his bunker any more than he'll be pinned in his own bunker.

Pointing your marker with the back cap "on" your nose isn't really something that comes naturally to people (it didn't for me, going from scenario/mil-sim markers to a speedball marker was a huge adjustment for me) so initially it may seem that having a feedneck off to the side and some sort of site may seem like the better option. But give the pointing with your nose option a chance and some practice neither one has an advantage when it comes to putting paint on target. Though for some people I guess they never will be able to "point with their nose." I'm a good player and when I bought my first speedball marker I played awfully for 3-4 recball games in a row and it was embarrassing. But after my first scenario with it (2 days of nothing but practicing with my speedball setup and pointing with my nose) I really started to get the hang of it and saw the benefits like a smaller profile and being able to switch hands.

Edited by JGARRIGUES0001, 29 March 2012 - 03:28 PM.


#11 Danny D

Danny D

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 29 March 2012 - 05:02 PM

If someone intimately knows their marker and how conditions affect paintball trajectory, they can be more accurate then someone else using a sight. That same person can also learn to use a sight proficiently. It all really depends on the familiarity of the system of aim. But I do agree that sights provide a quicker learning curve. One that is attainable without much practice, and that can provide the same first shot accuracy as aiming down the barrel quicker.

This we can test for. Give someone 2 markers that they are NOT familiar with (one with sight one without), tell them how to use the particular sight, or aiming device. Let them play a game or two with said marker, then have a course set up with 2-3 targets, and 3 shots given per target. This will give data on quickness and effectiveness of compensation as well as first shot accuracy. Data collected will be distance from center.

The results will shed light on learning curves of each aiming device.

Unfortunately I do not think one can dicern that one method is more accurate than the other. Proficiency and accuracy with or without a sight is a result of experience and familiarity. Both of which would take a long time to collect data for. I play with some players that play 2-3 times a week and know their markers and trajectories so intimately they can put their first balls on target everytime. This is the pump crowd I play with.

I cant afford to play that much so I rely on a ghost sight for my phantom, or a 1.5x scope or red dot to aid in aim sometimes.

P.S. Scopes, when in low magnification like 1.5 or 2x shotgun scopes work great to sight in at all ranges. Get ones with mildot or other graduations to aid in drop or windage.

#12 rntlee

rntlee

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 402 posts

Posted 29 March 2012 - 05:37 PM

I've played with a red dot and without...I'm pretty good at aiming instinctively, but for an unhurried single shot you can't beat a red dot.

Edit: There was only one time I remember that I wished that i had my red dot with me. At the Wasaga player appreciation day a couple of years ago. They had set up a "zombie" game (you had to face-mask a zombie to "kill" him). I was a human and was attending the game with my sons and a friend of theirs who was with his dad, who was playing for the first time. I was shooting from a concealed position and had the drop on several "zombies" who were about 75' away. I knew I could hit them at that range, but was only going to get a shot at a few of them and a facemask at 75' isn't a big target. I shot three shots at the first one to stand up and immediately saw him drop to his knees. I had hit him twice in the throat. :( and to make matters worse, it was the dad we were with. What are the odds? There were a few hundred players there. Not a great first experience for the dad! (he still plays btw)
I think I could have hit his mask more easily with my sight...but who knows.

Edited by rntlee, 29 March 2012 - 05:55 PM.


#13 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 30 March 2012 - 04:12 AM

I have done a lot of fooling around with this sort of thing and paintballs aren't precise enough to use a site. You don't need pure accuracy when you're pointing your marker you just have to point your barrel at the right spot and shoot a lot of paint to make up for a shitty projectile. Even in Civil War it's incredibly easy to point your marker at somebody, the deciding factor (for me anyway) is always whether or not the paintball actually stays on course.


Well all I can say is, that's a load.
Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#14 Troy

Troy

    What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma City

Posted 30 March 2012 - 07:47 AM

So here is one, obvious, problem. Ideally, you should perform two tests, the ability to hit a target, and shot spread. The first is easy, but the for the second... not so much. The problem lies in the fact that since someone that is shooting a paintball marker really doesn't have an absolute point of reference, they will tend to compensate for misses by walking their shots to the target naturally. While you might argue that this would, simply, show the strengths of a dot site verses an unaided shooter, it really doesn't measure the repeatability of the unaided setup. It would test the repeatability of a dot site, and the ability for an unaided shooter to walk their shots on to a target.

If you could figure out some way to disguise the shot hit locations from the shooters (maybe reballs and carbon paper?), that would go a long way in testing the repeatability of a given setup... and it would be something that I would very much so like to see.
\m/

#15 rntlee

rntlee

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 402 posts

Posted 30 March 2012 - 09:55 AM

Well, you could simply make each shooter load one paintball at a time. Then there's no continuity.

#16 UV Halo

UV Halo

    Bringing the Big Guns to LLVI

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 30 March 2012 - 10:11 AM

No... I will always be able to stick the end cap of my marker on the tip of my nose and look down my barrel and shoot just as accurately (when I say accuracy I'm referring only to the human factor) if not more accurately than I could with any sort of site. I have done a lot of fooling around with this sort of thing and paintballs aren't precise enough to use a site.


It's good to see a differing viewpoint here. Thanks! Does this skill transfer from marker to marker or, person to person? Do you have any ideas of how we can prove this?

I've also thought about how a sight could affect approximation of paint spread, by providing a center point representing true aim (assuming the sight has been set up properly.) I don't think we could get hard evidence on its effect, but maybe a tester questionnaire could provide insight on whether or not that helps a players judgement.

It's at times like this that I wish I could find a bore laser sight in .68 cal. Yeah, it'd be totally irrelevant for paintball 99% of the time, but I think we could get some interesting uses out of it on something like this.

I think that if there were ever to be a true paintball scope, it should include both a center dot and a larger outer ring that would approximate the spread of paint. Of course, that's easier said than done, given that paint spreads seem to vary between brands (given recent test results) but I think even if one were to establish an average across all paint, and then use that, you would still see some encouraging results from being able to gauge the general accuracy and effectiveness of your fire. That is, if this is even remotely possible.

And DRG is right, I think we had a discussion a lot like this in the philosophy of spread thread.

My comments in green, btw.


Actually there are two challenges to aligning a site to the barrel (i.e. using a bore-sighter). Paintball Drop and, Paintball Spread.

In regards to drop, when the paintball is fired, it drops 10" in 20 yards. So, bore-sighting would only be helpful at a bit more than 10yards.

challenge of representing spread is that paintballs do not spread linearly, they spread exponentially, meaning they deviate more and more, the further they get from the shooter. The resulting plots, if viewed from the sky, would look like a bell, rather than a cone. This is shown in the ranged accuracy test data. Therefore one ring in a sight, would not work as it could only represent the spread at one distance. I've had ideas on how this could be represented but, we'd have to find an optical sight manufacturer to do it for us and, I've since lost interest due to FS rounds.

That being said, only in specifically tuned firearms and optics does one get a setup where the dot covers the spread of the projectiles 100% of the time (not accounting for wind). That's why they make dots of varying size. This doesn't make a dot useless if your spread is larger than your dot. You simply align it to the center of your groups. In paintball, this same concept can be applied- align the dot to the center of the group.

So here is one, obvious, problem. Ideally, you should perform two tests, the ability to hit a target, and shot spread. The first is easy, but the for the second... not so much. The problem lies in the fact that since someone that is shooting a paintball marker really doesn't have an absolute point of reference, they will tend to compensate for misses by walking their shots to the target naturally. While you might argue that this would, simply, show the strengths of a dot site verses an unaided shooter, it really doesn't measure the repeatability of the unaided setup. It would test the repeatability of a dot site, and the ability for an unaided shooter to walk their shots on to a target.

If you could figure out some way to disguise the shot hit locations from the shooters (maybe reballs and carbon paper?), that would go a long way in testing the repeatability of a given setup... and it would be something that I would very much so like to see.


To determine the repeatability of the shots, you can have the shooter shoot at multiple targets from the same distance.

I think the 'walking the shots to the target' would be a subsequent test. It can be more complicated than just walking the shots in to the target. For example, consider how many shots per second? The greater the span of time between shots, it may be more difficult for either setup to adjust and maintain their point of reference.

I didn't highlight any examples of single shot scenarios that I imagine that the ability to aim makes a difference:

Small Targets- like heads, feet, pod packs (usually just the profile) poking out of a bunker, when at distances shorter than 75ft. If your first shot misses, your opponent may pull those targets back behind the bunker.

Large targets- Catching folks from behind or the side (torsos and heads from distances greater than 75ft). If you fire a string at the first guy, there's a higher chance his buddies will hear you and react. By firing a single shot, you reduce the chance of a reaction.

#17 JGARRIGUES0001

JGARRIGUES0001

    idk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florence, Ky

Posted 30 March 2012 - 02:01 PM

I have done a lot of fooling around with this sort of thing and paintballs aren't precise enough to use a site. You don't need pure accuracy when you're pointing your marker you just have to point your barrel at the right spot and shoot a lot of paint to make up for a shitty projectile. Even in Civil War it's incredibly easy to point your marker at somebody, the deciding factor (for me anyway) is always whether or not the paintball actually stays on course.


Well all I can say is, that's a load.


is it? is it a load? i give an honest opinion of the subject and you say it's a load? that's hilarious because i know a lot of people who would agree with me so fucking grow up and quit trolling.


No... I will always be able to stick the end cap of my marker on the tip of my nose and look down my barrel and shoot just as accurately (when I say accuracy I'm referring only to the human factor) if not more accurately than I could with any sort of site. I have done a lot of fooling around with this sort of thing and paintballs aren't precise enough to use a site.


It's good to see a differing viewpoint here. Thanks! Does this skill transfer from marker to marker or, person to person? Do you have any ideas of how we can prove this?

I've also thought about how a sight could affect approximation of paint spread, by providing a center point representing true aim (assuming the sight has been set up properly.) I don't think we could get hard evidence on its effect, but maybe a tester questionnaire could provide insight on whether or not that helps a players judgement.

It's at times like this that I wish I could find a bore laser sight in .68 cal. Yeah, it'd be totally irrelevant for paintball 99% of the time, but I think we could get some interesting uses out of it on something like this.

I think that if there were ever to be a true paintball scope, it should include both a center dot and a larger outer ring that would approximate the spread of paint. Of course, that's easier said than done, given that paint spreads seem to vary between brands (given recent test results) but I think even if one were to establish an average across all paint, and then use that, you would still see some encouraging results from being able to gauge the general accuracy and effectiveness of your fire. That is, if this is even remotely possible.

And DRG is right, I think we had a discussion a lot like this in the philosophy of spread thread.

My comments in green, btw.


Actually there are two challenges to aligning a site to the barrel (i.e. using a bore-sighter). Paintball Drop and, Paintball Spread.

In regards to drop, when the paintball is fired, it drops 10" in 20 yards. So, bore-sighting would only be helpful at a bit more than 10yards.

challenge of representing spread is that paintballs do not spread linearly, they spread exponentially, meaning they deviate more and more, the further they get from the shooter. The resulting plots, if viewed from the sky, would look like a bell, rather than a cone. This is shown in the ranged accuracy test data. Therefore one ring in a sight, would not work as it could only represent the spread at one distance. I've had ideas on how this could be represented but, we'd have to find an optical sight manufacturer to do it for us and, I've since lost interest due to FS rounds.

That being said, only in specifically tuned firearms and optics does one get a setup where the dot covers the spread of the projectiles 100% of the time (not accounting for wind). That's why they make dots of varying size. This doesn't make a dot useless if your spread is larger than your dot. You simply align it to the center of your groups. In paintball, this same concept can be applied- align the dot to the center of the group.

So here is one, obvious, problem. Ideally, you should perform two tests, the ability to hit a target, and shot spread. The first is easy, but the for the second... not so much. The problem lies in the fact that since someone that is shooting a paintball marker really doesn't have an absolute point of reference, they will tend to compensate for misses by walking their shots to the target naturally. While you might argue that this would, simply, show the strengths of a dot site verses an unaided shooter, it really doesn't measure the repeatability of the unaided setup. It would test the repeatability of a dot site, and the ability for an unaided shooter to walk their shots on to a target.

If you could figure out some way to disguise the shot hit locations from the shooters (maybe reballs and carbon paper?), that would go a long way in testing the repeatability of a given setup... and it would be something that I would very much so like to see.


To determine the repeatability of the shots, you can have the shooter shoot at multiple targets from the same distance.

I think the 'walking the shots to the target' would be a subsequent test. It can be more complicated than just walking the shots in to the target. For example, consider how many shots per second? The greater the span of time between shots, it may be more difficult for either setup to adjust and maintain their point of reference.

I didn't highlight any examples of single shot scenarios that I imagine that the ability to aim makes a difference:

Small Targets- like heads, feet, pod packs (usually just the profile) poking out of a bunker, when at distances shorter than 75ft. If your first shot misses, your opponent may pull those targets back behind the bunker.

Large targets- Catching folks from behind or the side (torsos and heads from distances greater than 75ft). If you fire a string at the first guy, there's a higher chance his buddies will hear you and react. By firing a single shot, you reduce the chance of a reaction.



i don't really know, that's just my personal opinion on the matter.

#18 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 30 March 2012 - 09:06 PM


I have done a lot of fooling around with this sort of thing and paintballs aren't precise enough to use a site. You don't need pure accuracy when you're pointing your marker you just have to point your barrel at the right spot and shoot a lot of paint to make up for a shitty projectile. Even in Civil War it's incredibly easy to point your marker at somebody, the deciding factor (for me anyway) is always whether or not the paintball actually stays on course.


Well all I can say is, that's a load.


is it? is it a load? i give an honest opinion of the subject and you say it's a load? that's hilarious because i know a lot of people who would agree with me so fucking grow up and quit trolling.


Pointing out that you are wrong doesn't make someone a troll. You didn't post an opinion, you posted a declaration that paintballs aren't precise enough to deliberately be used to hit a target, and that shooting a "lot of paint" is required to hit targets regardless of skill. I honestly don't see how anyone who has played the game for an appreciable amount of time can say this. There are entire styles of play based around NOT shooting a lot of paint.

Every projectile has some spread, the question is spread vs. target size to determine how much, if any, effect randomness in projectile flight can affect your attempt to hit a target.

Edited by drg, 30 March 2012 - 09:06 PM.

Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#19 JGARRIGUES0001

JGARRIGUES0001

    idk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florence, Ky

Posted 30 March 2012 - 09:35 PM

a declaration? no i didn't, i wasn't claiming anybody wrong i was merely giving my own POV. and you come in and say that what i said was a load... that seemed a bit like a personal attack. take what i wrote how you want to i dont fucking care but don't say it's a load... that's fucking trolling


you can use a red dot all you want, or even a crossbow scope with the multiple levels sited in at different distances but you still won't be able to put more (more is the key word here) paintballs where you want to than me "pointing with my nose" because my method of aiming for a "general area" (pointing with your nose is not a precise way of aiming it's something you get good at in time when you get the feel for it) will do just as good as you using a precision instrument with a shitty projectile.
my whole argument was that paintballs curve so having a precision instrument for aiming is pointless... all it does is aid people who aren't any good at "pointing with their nose" in acquiring their target. maybe a site that gives a really broad "picture/aim point" (like how video games have the 4 dots that spread apart further when firing full auto to show a lack of accuracy). go ahead and put a site on your marker... ill be laughing when you get your target all lined up in your sites and fucking miss because the paintball curved. paintballs are inferior projectiles and your last sentence... is basically saying that we're arguing the same point that you have to make up for your projectiles weaknesses. you tie in what you said about the size of your target and making up for it according to what kind of shot grouping you get (shitty with paintballs) and you get what i said... accuracy in volume when it comes to paintball
and one other thing: pump players struggle to get me out man... not a skill thing at all im not saying im the shit by any means there are a lot of players who roll me over easy. but the fact is, is that i roll pump players like it's nothing... they shoot 5 bps and have to pump between each shot while i can maintain my aim while shooting 15 bps... ur argument about styles of play is null and void in this subject of using a site... there's no correlation with that. pump players don't even use a site they "point with their nose." the whole thing about pump is the challenge and feeling you get when you do snap shoot somebody with a high end that was rolling their trigger. playing pump isn't about how much more accurate you can be dude it's playing smarter and getting better with your shots... even pump players will tell you they're at a disadvantage when it comes to shit like 1v1 snap shooting when they no longer have the element of surprise.
/rant
ps... just don't say what i said was a load of bull... imo that is trolling i didn't attack anybody's opinion i merely stated what i think of the subject

Edited by JGARRIGUES0001, 30 March 2012 - 09:58 PM.


#20 Danny D

Danny D

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 30 March 2012 - 11:11 PM

a declaration? no i didn't, i wasn't claiming anybody wrong i was merely giving my own POV. and you come in and say that what i said was a load... that seemed a bit like a personal attack. take what i wrote how you want to i dont fucking care but don't say it's a load... that's fucking trolling


you can use a red dot all you want, or even a crossbow scope with the multiple levels sited in at different distances but you still won't be able to put more (more is the key word here) paintballs where you want to than me "pointing with my nose" because my method of aiming for a "general area" (pointing with your nose is not a precise way of aiming it's something you get good at in time when you get the feel for it) will do just as good as you using a precision instrument with a shitty projectile.
my whole argument was that paintballs curve so having a precision instrument for aiming is pointless... all it does is aid people who aren't any good at "pointing with their nose" in acquiring their target. maybe a site that gives a really broad "picture/aim point" (like how video games have the 4 dots that spread apart further when firing full auto to show a lack of accuracy). go ahead and put a site on your marker... ill be laughing when you get your target all lined up in your sites and fucking miss because the paintball curved. paintballs are inferior projectiles and your last sentence... is basically saying that we're arguing the same point that you have to make up for your projectiles weaknesses. you tie in what you said about the size of your target and making up for it according to what kind of shot grouping you get (shitty with paintballs) and you get what i said... accuracy in volume when it comes to paintball
and one other thing: pump players struggle to get me out man... not a skill thing at all im not saying im the shit by any means there are a lot of players who roll me over easy. but the fact is, is that i roll pump players like it's nothing... they shoot 5 bps and have to pump between each shot while i can maintain my aim while shooting 15 bps... ur argument about styles of play is null and void in this subject of using a site... there's no correlation with that. pump players don't even use a site they "point with their nose." the whole thing about pump is the challenge and feeling you get when you do snap shoot somebody with a high end that was rolling their trigger. playing pump isn't about how much more accurate you can be dude it's playing smarter and getting better with your shots... even pump players will tell you they're at a disadvantage when it comes to shit like 1v1 snap shooting when they no longer have the element of surprise.
/rant
ps... just don't say what i said was a load of bull... imo that is trolling i didn't attack anybody's opinion i merely stated what i think of the subject


If you read my statement regarding pump players you would see that I was supporting your point. So please read more carefully next time. It is not "Null and void". You even said in your rant "pump play is about getting better with your shots", so pump play does have its merits in this discussion (again as per my post you need to have proper experience and proficiency using the marker). I am not saying all pump players are the same. I certainly am not one of those. But exceptional pump players who practice a lot are prime examples. Or I can extend it to speedball players that do not need to "walk it in".

And a shotgun scope works very well. Shotguns are not accurate projectiles. They spread, arguably more than a paintball at 300 feet (assuming cylinder bore (can someone confirm this?). Therefore a shotgun scope would work well for paintball. And it does. The low magnification and high feild of view allows for you to track and aim shots at all distances paintballs can achieve. Ive used one from time to time, although I do not like how it resticts your FOV keeping you blind to other players.

Also paintballs shoot around 15moa, while a typical red dot is 5 moa. So 3 red dot widths- not unreasonable. Sub 1 moa is difficult to achieve consistently with firearms except with target shooters with target rifles and diopter sights/scopes.

#21 JGARRIGUES0001

JGARRIGUES0001

    idk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florence, Ky

Posted 31 March 2012 - 12:09 AM


a declaration? no i didn't, i wasn't claiming anybody wrong i was merely giving my own POV. and you come in and say that what i said was a load... that seemed a bit like a personal attack. take what i wrote how you want to i dont fucking care but don't say it's a load... that's fucking trolling


you can use a red dot all you want, or even a crossbow scope with the multiple levels sited in at different distances but you still won't be able to put more (more is the key word here) paintballs where you want to than me "pointing with my nose" because my method of aiming for a "general area" (pointing with your nose is not a precise way of aiming it's something you get good at in time when you get the feel for it) will do just as good as you using a precision instrument with a shitty projectile.
my whole argument was that paintballs curve so having a precision instrument for aiming is pointless... all it does is aid people who aren't any good at "pointing with their nose" in acquiring their target. maybe a site that gives a really broad "picture/aim point" (like how video games have the 4 dots that spread apart further when firing full auto to show a lack of accuracy). go ahead and put a site on your marker... ill be laughing when you get your target all lined up in your sites and fucking miss because the paintball curved. paintballs are inferior projectiles and your last sentence... is basically saying that we're arguing the same point that you have to make up for your projectiles weaknesses. you tie in what you said about the size of your target and making up for it according to what kind of shot grouping you get (shitty with paintballs) and you get what i said... accuracy in volume when it comes to paintball
and one other thing: pump players struggle to get me out man... not a skill thing at all im not saying im the shit by any means there are a lot of players who roll me over easy. but the fact is, is that i roll pump players like it's nothing... they shoot 5 bps and have to pump between each shot while i can maintain my aim while shooting 15 bps... ur argument about styles of play is null and void in this subject of using a site... there's no correlation with that. pump players don't even use a site they "point with their nose." the whole thing about pump is the challenge and feeling you get when you do snap shoot somebody with a high end that was rolling their trigger. playing pump isn't about how much more accurate you can be dude it's playing smarter and getting better with your shots... even pump players will tell you they're at a disadvantage when it comes to shit like 1v1 snap shooting when they no longer have the element of surprise.
/rant
ps... just don't say what i said was a load of bull... imo that is trolling i didn't attack anybody's opinion i merely stated what i think of the subject


If you read my statement regarding pump players you would see that I was supporting your point. So please read more carefully next time. It is not "Null and void". You even said in your rant "pump play is about getting better with your shots", so pump play does have its merits in this discussion (again as per my post you need to have proper experience and proficiency using the marker). I am not saying all pump players are the same. I certainly am not one of those. But exceptional pump players who practice a lot are prime examples. Or I can extend it to speedball players that do not need to "walk it in".

And a shotgun scope works very well. Shotguns are not accurate projectiles. They spread, arguably more than a paintball at 300 feet (assuming cylinder bore (can someone confirm this?). Therefore a shotgun scope would work well for paintball. And it does. The low magnification and high feild of view allows for you to track and aim shots at all distances paintballs can achieve. Ive used one from time to time, although I do not like how it resticts your FOV keeping you blind to other players.

Also paintballs shoot around 15moa, while a typical red dot is 5 moa. So 3 red dot widths- not unreasonable. Sub 1 moa is difficult to achieve consistently with firearms except with target shooters with target rifles and diopter sights/scopes.


Yeah I wasn't referring to whatever you said about pump playing, idek what you said. That other guy just pissed me off so I went on a rant. How does a shotgun scope account for the drop in a paintball over distance? imo there's just no point for ME (keyword, i used to like having a bit of a site but i've found it to be pointless if you get good at "pointing with your nose") to use a site. To each his own though. Who am I to say it isn't a better option for somebody else. I've been on the other side of this argument quite a few times while somebody else said what I'm saying but I still liked using sites. No judgement or claiming to have "the answer(s)" from me, just stating my opinion.

#22 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 31 March 2012 - 07:47 AM

It is in fact a load that the only way to deliberately hit another player is with volume fire. Again I don't see how anyone who plays this game for any length of time can come to that conclusion.

P.s. If pump players are shooting 5 bps at you they either aren't really trying to take you out or they aren't very good.
Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#23 JGARRIGUES0001

JGARRIGUES0001

    idk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florence, Ky

Posted 31 March 2012 - 11:03 AM

It is in fact a load that the only way to deliberately hit another player is with volume fire. Again I don't see how anyone who plays this game for any length of time can come to that conclusion.

P.s. If pump players are shooting 5 bps at you they either aren't really trying to take you out or they aren't very good.


volume isn't a set term man.. if all i see is a pod pack and i shoot one ball, miss. shoot another, miss. shoot one more, hit; from lets say... 20-30 yards then that is pretty good with a marker that shoots inferior projectiles. And seeing as how I could hit that 10/10 with a .22 rifle, 30/30 rifle, .357 Ruger, or a .308 and I wouldn't have to use 3 shots to account for misses i could hit it with one... that is what i mean by volume of fire. 3 shots (with good paint as apposed to 5-10 if your shooting crappy paint) in that situation would be "volume." I dont tear into easy shoots with 10 bps, i shoot 1 or 2.

Another situation for using "volume" of fire, if a guy is in bushes. One ball will break and merely spray him. So depending on the bush and how thick it is I'll shoot more VOLUME in order to get one through.

I honestly can't believe that you even play if you don't understand the whole accuracy by volume thing... volume doesn't mean any specific number. It's like saying I'll shoot him a "few" times. Could be once if it's an easy shot, could be twice if it's got a variable that makes you think "I'll shoot another jic." I could keep going... If you don't understand what I'm trying to say and wanna disagree... then I'm done here cuz after this my POV couldn't be much clearer.

And the pump players being any good? Idk. Not trying to take me out... lol the last one I ran into was trying his little heart out until i put him in his bunker with with something called semi auto and bunkered his ass. Please don't argue that pump players aren't at a disadvantage, if you do I'm done here.

#24 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,590 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 31 March 2012 - 03:47 PM

alright children - keep the personal stuff out of it. Personal attacks will get you a warn, repeated attacks will get you a vacation from the forums.

#25 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 31 March 2012 - 08:44 PM

I honestly can't believe that you even play if you don't understand the whole accuracy by volume thing... volume doesn't mean any specific number. It's like saying I'll shoot him a "few" times. Could be once if it's an easy shot, could be twice if it's got a variable that makes you think "I'll shoot another jic." I could keep going... If you don't understand what I'm trying to say and wanna disagree... then I'm done here cuz after this my POV couldn't be much clearer.


Well you said this:

You don't need pure accuracy when you're pointing your marker you just have to point your barrel at the right spot and shoot a lot of paint to make up for a shitty projectile.


A number "volume" can't mean for sure is one (1), and it's pretty debatable whether 2 counts as volume, though it almost certainly doesn't count as "a lot of paint." Yet plenty of players play ball by ball and have a high level of success doing it.

As a pump player this mindset you describe doesn't enter my mind at all, every ball I shoot is shot with the intention of it going exactly where I want it to (within its expected spread). I almost never think of shooting multiple balls at once at a static target for the purpose of hitting it, mostly because it actually reduces my chances of hitting it. But I can tell you that single snaps make a player way harder to hit than a player that hangs out and shoots a string -- this is because of time of exposure, which gives me more time to line up a shot. That proves to me on an ongoing basis that accuracy is in fact very dependent on the shooter. Just because you THINK you are on target doesn't mean you are.

I absolutely believe pump players have little to no disadvantage in 1v1 snap battles, especially no ROF-based disadvantage. That is pretty much an even field, a good pumper should never be at a disadvantage in a straight up snap battle and quite possibly an advantage.

When players try to rip with their semis as they are coming, you can hear exactly what they are doing even if you're totally looking a different direction. Biggest problem is guys like that have a tendency to keep coming after they are shot. Regardless, this is not a question of accuracy, actually the opposite, if you are shooting to suppress, volume is not helping you hit the target. If deliberate accuracy were not possible, why would you need to bunker him, you should be able to win every gunbattle with a pump straight up, right? Or from another angle, do you need to shoot more than one ball to *hit* a player you are bunkering?

I can't possibly be the only one with a take on this, what do the rest of you think? Bryce, CP, don't you guys play pump? Obviously this is not specific to pump but pump really drives the point home. I'm wondering if JGARRIGUES0001's location is affecting his opinion any, maybe he just doesn't run into many skilled pump players? If a pump player shoots strings in a snap battle ... he is not a good pump player.

Edited by drg, 31 March 2012 - 09:00 PM.

Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#26 JGARRIGUES0001

JGARRIGUES0001

    idk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florence, Ky

Posted 31 March 2012 - 10:25 PM

I honestly can't believe that you even play if you don't understand the whole accuracy by volume thing... volume doesn't mean any specific number. It's like saying I'll shoot him a "few" times. Could be once if it's an easy shot, could be twice if it's got a variable that makes you think "I'll shoot another jic." I could keep going... If you don't understand what I'm trying to say and wanna disagree... then I'm done here cuz after this my POV couldn't be much clearer.


Well you said this:

You don't need pure accuracy when you're pointing your marker you just have to point your barrel at the right spot and shoot a lot of paint to make up for a shitty projectile.


should have said PRECISION sorry

that was just bad grammar and not taking any time to get to my point. which is that sometimes a few more balls (volume) must be shot to make for a shitty projectile that didn't hit.

A number "volume" can't mean for sure is one (1), and it's pretty debatable whether 2 counts as volume, though it almost certainly doesn't count as "a lot of paint." Yet plenty of players play ball by ball and have a high level of success doing it.

i play ball by ball (maybe at a faster pace... i watch the balls in flight and make a decision whether or not to shoot more), but when those first few shots miss i shoot more until i hit the target or the ball breaks or whatever the situation dictates.

As a pump player this mindset you describe doesn't enter my mind at all, every ball I shoot is shot with the intention of it going exactly where I want it to (within its expected spread). I almost never think of shooting multiple balls at once at a static target for the purpose of hitting it, mostly because it actually reduces my chances of hitting it. But I can tell you that single snaps make a player way harder to hit than a player that hangs out and shoots a string -- this is because of time of exposure, which gives me more time to line up a shot. That proves to me on an ongoing basis that accuracy is in fact very dependent on the shooter. Just because you THINK you are on target doesn't mean you are.

i hope so...

at once? you can't you play pump :dodgy:

shooting more projectiles at your target "reduces" your chances of hitting it??? dafuq???

i agree with being hard to hit because of exposure but i can do that with a gun that ramps. snap shooting is always a 50/50 game of chance but having a pump puts an advantage in the hands of the guy with ramping/semi. more important than that is individual strategy/style or whatever you wanna call it.

I absolutely believe pump players have little to no disadvantage in 1v1 snap battles, especially no ROF-based disadvantage. That is pretty much an even field, a good pumper should never be at a disadvantage in a straight up snap battle and quite possibly an advantage.

... im flabergasted. if i put my marker (Geo 2.1) in your hands and you played the same way you would with a pump you've done nothing but gained an ability to shoot faster. how can you say you have the advantage while playing with a pump? you have to pump your marker every time and i don't. that is a disadvantage, from there it's in the hands of the players style, habits, skills, yada yada yada

When players try to rip with their semis as they are coming, you can hear exactly what they are doing even if you're totally looking a different direction. Biggest problem is guys like that have a tendency to keep coming after they are shot. Regardless, this is not a question of accuracy, actually the opposite, if you are shooting to suppress, volume is not helping you hit the target. If deliberate accuracy were not possible, why would you need to bunker him, you should be able to win every gunbattle with a pump straight up, right? Or from another angle, do you need to shoot more than one ball to *hit* a player you are bunkering?

A.wtf are you talking about? B. because if intentional accuracy wasn't possible... THAT MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE!!! it is possible... im saying precision and accuracy with paintballs isn't possible the projectiles suck! therefore, why have a precision instrument for a projectile that isn't even precise!? C. idk what C is because idk what you're even trying to say

when i run to your bunker to bunker you im not shooting unless you only have one place to stick your head out. im not even saying deliberate accuracy isn't possible you're putting words into my mouth. im saying paintballs aren't accurate enough to use a precision instrument for aiming. volume, displaced randomly around the sides of a bunker is suppressive. if im shooting to suppress im not using volume to hit the target im using it to confuse and put them in their bunker so i can gain some sort of advantage and possibly get lucky and hit him if they stick their head out.

I can't possibly be the only one with a take on this, what do the rest of you think? Bryce, CP, don't you guys play pump? Obviously this is not specific to pump but pump really drives the point home. I'm wondering if JGARRIGUES0001's location is affecting his opinion any, maybe he just doesn't run into many skilled pump players? If a pump player shoots strings in a snap battle ... he is not a good pump player.


my location??? i've already been to 3 scenarios out of state this year. ive been to every year, and will be going to 2 or 3 of the top 5 biggest games in north america, it's not location or the lack of skill man ive come across plenty of pumps, not to say i beat every one or anything. the pump players weren't shooting strings... he was constantly in and out of his bunker and shooting my general viscinity while i had no problem staying out/exposed (but changing where im sticking out of my bunker) and keeping him down with fire. it lasted like 5 minutes where he wasn't staying out long enough or being predictable enough to snap shoot him and he didn't get me out so i fuckin bunkered him, i picked the right time when it was a stand still and nobody was shooting anymore and bunkered his ass.


i literally have no idea what you're trying to say anymore, and i don't fucking care.

for the original poster: IMO (cannot stress this enough) sites are useless when it comes to regular paintballs, first strike being an exception. paintballs are fairly accurate if you buy good quality paint, but they are not precise... i don't think there's any argument with that... you're not going to be ball on ball with nice tight little groupings from a distance. so why use a precision instrument for aiming!? maybe a "not so precise" instrument... something that shows you'll hit a 3x3 foot square from 20-30 yards or something... but i can do that just as well by "pointing with my nose."

drg: i'm done debating this and im done with this entire topic

Edited by JGARRIGUES0001, 31 March 2012 - 10:34 PM.


#27 JGARRIGUES0001

JGARRIGUES0001

    idk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florence, Ky

Posted 31 March 2012 - 10:47 PM

alright children - keep the personal stuff out of it. Personal attacks will get you a warn, repeated attacks will get you a vacation from the forums.


he started it :mellow:

#28 drg

drg

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 852 posts


Posted 01 April 2012 - 02:40 AM

at once? you can't you play pump :dodgy:

shooting more projectiles at your target "reduces" your chances of hitting it??? dafuq???

i agree with being hard to hit because of exposure but i can do that with a gun that ramps. snap shooting is always a 50/50 game of chance but having a pump puts an advantage in the hands of the guy with ramping/semi. more important than that is individual strategy/style or whatever you wanna call it.


At once meaning in the same string of shots, maybe you could delineate it by saying, in a single snap. Trying to operate a pump quickly enough to shoot multiple balls while snapping will reduce your accuracy, as your pump arm will tend to compromise your aim. The semi advantage is minimal to none in a snap battle. That is the area of the game where pump and semi are almost on equal footing which is why good pump players are excellent snapshooters and are very good at controlling their opposing player.

BTW snapping is not inherently a game of chance, it is perhaps the epitome of paintball skill. There is a chance element, if you happen to guess right and have a ball in the air when the guy pops out, but that's WAY less than a 50-50 chance. That's a relatively rare occurrence.

... im flabergasted. if i put my marker (Geo 2.1) in your hands and you played the same way you would with a pump you've done nothing but gained an ability to shoot faster. how can you say you have the advantage while playing with a pump? you have to pump your marker every time and i don't. that is a disadvantage, from there it's in the hands of the players style, habits, skills, yada yada yada


Right, when you snap vs a good player, the ability to shoot multiple balls is not much of an advantage accuracywise, as you are either going to hit him with the first shot or not at all. As for how you gain an advantage when snapping with pump, you downsize your loader. When you encounter semi players on the field, they almost always have larger and heavier hoppers than you, which makes them snap slower and gives you a larger target to hit.

A.wtf are you talking about? B. because if intentional accuracy wasn't possible... THAT MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE!!! it is possible... im saying precision and accuracy with paintballs isn't possible the projectiles suck! therefore, why have a precision instrument for a projectile that isn't even precise!? C. idk what C is because idk what you're even trying to say


Precision and accuracy are open-ended concepts without a specific figure attached to them. Obviously every projectile, weapon and shooter has SOME level of precision and accuracy. So on its face that is an invalid statement. The case you are trying to make is that paintballs are generally so imprecise so as to be unable to ever be effectively wielded in single-shot scenarios, which is absolutely not true. Even you yourself admit there are situations when it is true.

when i run to your bunker to bunker you im not shooting unless you only have one place to stick your head out. im not even saying deliberate accuracy isn't possible you're putting words into my mouth. im saying paintballs aren't accurate enough to use a precision instrument for aiming. volume, displaced randomly around the sides of a bunker is suppressive. if im shooting to suppress im not using volume to hit the target im using it to confuse and put them in their bunker so i can gain some sort of advantage and possibly get lucky and hit him if they stick their head out.


Well if you don't shoot, you have no inherent advantage over a pump player in the same situation. In fact you cancel out your advantage by attempting the bunker, as it will ensure that the pump player has an easier time hitting you. Couple that with the tendency of pump players to be more aware of what's going on in the game because they aren't shooting the whole time and it's pretty common to get picked on a bunker move by a pump player. But I guess this is a digression, this has nothing to do with your original claim.

my location??? i've already been to 3 scenarios out of state this year. ive been to every year, and will be going to 2 or 3 of the top 5 biggest games in north america, it's not location or the lack of skill man ive come across plenty of pumps, not to say i beat every one or anything. the pump players weren't shooting strings... he was constantly in and out of his bunker and shooting my general viscinity while i had no problem staying out/exposed (but changing where im sticking out of my bunker) and keeping him down with fire. it lasted like 5 minutes where he wasn't staying out long enough or being predictable enough to snap shoot him and he didn't get me out so i fuckin bunkered him, i picked the right time when it was a stand still and nobody was shooting anymore and bunkered his ass.


I think that explains it right there, you are basing your opinion on big game experiences. Speedball against good pumpers should disabuse you from the idea that paintballs are somehow terribly imprecise and that you constantly need to shoot a lot of balls to hit things.

Edited by drg, 01 April 2012 - 02:44 AM.

Keep your pump hand strong!
PUMPPB.COM TIGHTSTICK - Custom LAPCO 1-piece underbore barrel! SALE!
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos

#29 invictus

invictus

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 06 April 2012 - 07:36 PM

*way too much to read for me, but i used a laser on my spyder mr4, and it was near dead on up to 20 feet. At a longer distance, i would estimate how much higher i would have to point the laser, with some shots spreading out.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users