[wdkrobsmith]

Hello all,
I have a Simple question in regards to walking tanks. If in a scenario where mechs don't exsist and a player in a walking tank is playing the role of a regular tank, should walking tanks be able to jump out of the way of an oncoming rocket? Thanks for your input.

[BlackAngelSS]

that is a pretty retarded question. (sorry) .What is this the matrix where you can dodge bullets too? Nerfs travel around 200 fps out of a decent launcher. How could you dodge that?

[wdkrobsmith]

Well that was a retarded answer, (sorry).It was happening at battle of the bulge last weekend. As soon as the walking tank heard a law fire he would jump to one side or the other,(think more like a stooge dodging a pie less like Neo dodging bullets). He was staying far enough behind his front line where it would take a nerf 3-4 seconds to reach him. Then again I think I chrono'd at 170, so shame on me.

[Haz-Mat]

When a walking tank is a single person small tank they can. I seen it happen. Plus Viper rules of 140fps at a distance they have time to jump out of the way when they expect it. I laugh when I saw it happen.

[Boom Master]

I've run a backpack based walking tank / Mech Warrior for years and you can't dodge a close range shot. BUT at a distance >30 yards and especially where I have cover such as a building corner, tree trunk, bunker, etc. I can certainly minimize my frontal profile to an incoming Nerf by ducking (I prefer to call it a "momentary tactical retreat").

I played speedball with my tank marker vs. a 6 shot, 1 RPS autoloading, hand held RPG. I was ducking in and out of cover around the corner of the building trying to kill him and he would fire from 25 yards everytime I peeked out. He had a 12" wide x 30" high target and I caught him in the open. All he could do was squat and fire while his squad poured paint on me to distract and block my vision. He and I had 4 exhanges before it was settled. I won only because one of his shots was on the way when I ducked out and the Nerf hit the building and THEN me. So he paused and I had time to tag him. The ref made the right call but for all practical purposes HE had the advantage... He had been shooting me successfully all day long.

Think back about your game with the walking tank. Take comfort that he felt he HAD to stay behind his lines. You changed the WAY he played. More defensive than Offensive. That is the way you neutralize the tactical effectiveness of armor. If they can go anywhere they want on the field, you can bet there is 20 infantry following right behind. They can take and hold anything and sure as heck disrupt any mission your team might be on. You don't have to kill a tank to neutralize its effectiveness. Just keep the pressure on so they have to shift to defensive tactics. You can't win points playing defense...

[GRIMREAPER45AUTO]

Originally Posted by Haz-Mat

When a walking tank is a single person small tank they can. I seen it happen. Plus Viper rules of 140fps at a distance they have time to jump out of the way when they expect it. I laugh when I saw it happen.

Yeah viper's new 140 fps sucks my shots would fall at 50-70 feet yet a paintball gun has the range of 100-150 feet viper needs to re think the fps maybe 170-190 fps

[Cromagnum Tankerman]

Although this subject of a tank whether walking or mechanized to have the ability to move quickly out of a rockets path. I'll be honest and say that I have thought of such notions before. When I see I rocket coming at my tank from a long distance I have often wondered can I do some kind of quick maneuver so it will miss. Sometimes I think I would have the time. Then I begin to think about what the safety of my crew, my tank ref, and players that could be nearby. My tank crew and even myself being juggled around inside the tank while doing some crazy move. I could possibly lose control of my tank. Plus most times you dont really know the location of your tank ref even though they are nearby somewhere. So my opinion is be a man and take the rocket and go back and insert and try again. Trying to dodge something in a meaningless game is not worth injuring anyone. If it was a real rocket then I would suggest dodging it whatever the consequences.

My hopes are right now that the Mayan calendar will cycle for the 5th time. The Earth wont change its gravitational force by reversing poles. And whatever coverage on the History channels about the end of the world by 12/21 wont come true. If nothing happens my new hope is the end of the world crap on TV and at the movies will end for a while.

I wish everyone to have a joyous holiday season and happy new years.

Treaddz

[dorsai]

Back in WW II they used to aim for the tracks. Hit one and
the tank was stuck. With walking tanks aim for the walker's
shoes. That'll slow him down.

[BlackAngelSS]

Originally Posted by GRIMREAPER45AUTO

Yeah viper's new 140 fps sucks my shots would fall at 50-70 feet yet a paintball gun has the range of 100-150 feet viper needs to re think the fps maybe 170-190 fps

140 fps is really lame. the chrono for nerfs has been historically 230 fps. are we beacoming so weak that we have to lower the fps on a peice of foam? My jcs shoots about 160 fps and i consider it total junk and only use it as a last resort. Ill never play in a game with a 140 fps limit. i played a viper game last fall and had a good time.i actuall was handhald a/t most of the weekend. i dont recall a gay 140 fps limit.

[BlackAngelSS]

200 fps is perfect for a nerf. they dont hit too hard and fly pretty decent at that speed

Actually now that i think of it depending on the scenario-- In WW2 games 140 fps or 160 ect would be fine for handheld a/t nerf launchers.Tanks should be @ 200 . this would even things up slightly and be far more realistic
you ust cant have a decent tank battle when the rounds fall 100 feet in front of your barrel

[BlackAngelSS]

Originally Posted by wdkrobsmith

Well that was a retarded answer, (sorry).It was happening at battle of the bulge last weekend. As soon as the walking tank heard a law fire he would jump to one side or the other,(think more like a stooge dodging a pie less like Neo dodging bullets). He was staying far enough behind his front line where it would take a nerf 3-4 seconds to reach him. Then again I think I chrono'd at 170, so shame on me.

I didnt take into account a kindergarten nerf fps of 140

[GRIMREAPER45AUTO]

From what I understand the tanks were complaining that they were getting taken out way too easy so he lowered it to 140 fps I complained after game and suggested he go up 170-190 fps to make it fair I flat out refused to go after the tanks after my 3rd attempt and getting shot out before I could get in range

[Haz-Mat]

I remember the very first game he put it in place it was Feb 2011 he change it from 230fps to 140fps. I believe I was one of the first one to play it. It took a few shoots to get used to it. That's when I started looking into making the nerf more accurate by spiraling the barrel.

http://www.viperpaintball.com/showth...ghlight=140fps

[ps7ctr31]

I asked this same question a while back.

At BOTB, I seem to recall an Allied LAW using another player as a shield. They both ran up at me with the LAW user hiding behind the other player. So if the argument is that dodging is not realistic, then I have to laugh.

From the thread I linked to above.

Originally Posted by ps7ctr31

Can walking tanks (and robots and mechs) dodge rockets?

Yes, I know they can as I have done it. But the real question is should it be allowed? The argument has been made that dodging rockets is not "realistic" as real tanks can't dodge real rockets. My arguments for dodging are:

• What in paintball is realistic?
• If a real tank crew saw artillery setting up and firing on their position, would the tank sit still and let the artillery shells fall as they may?
• How can a ref tell the difference between a dodge and normal evasive maneuvers?
• Players can dodge paintballs. They don't just stand still when they hear someone firing at them. With real bullets you wouldn't even hear the sound, you would just be dead.
• I made a considerable investment in time and money to design and build a walking tank that is lightweight and maneuverable with the intent of bring a fun and exciting new dimension to scenario paintball.
• If I call my tank a "mech" instead would dodging be ok?

I am all for keeping the game fair but I don't want some rule that arbitrarily limits what I can do and is impossible to enforce. There are much easier and fairer ways to balance the game between tanks, launchers, and regular players. Some example rules that have been in place for years are:

• Limit the number of tanks or launchers that can be on the field at one time.
• Limit the amount of ammo that tanks or launchers can carry.
• Restrict tanks from certain parts of the field.
• Change the number of rocket or grenade hits it takes to disable or eliminate a tank.
• Restrict tanks to special missions during designated times.
• Mark off fill boxes on the tank so paintballs can eliminate tanks.
• Allow rockets to take out buildings and bunkers.

These rules can all be worked out between the field, scenario organizer, tanks, and launcher owners before game day to ensure fair and balanced teams. My offer still stands to tape a quarter to my tank so First Strike hits can eliminate it.

To the launcher owners (many of you I count as teammates and friends) I say get off your lazy butts and practice. I am not going to stand still just because you can't hit the broad side of the barn. And remember that if the rules against tanks are so strict that it isn't worth me bringing my tank, you won't have anything to shoot at. You can just leave your shiny new launchers at home.

[ps7ctr31]

Originally Posted by dorsai

With walking tanks aim for the walker's
shoes. That'll slow him down.

Feel free to waste the paint and Nerfs.

[dorsai]

I have a better idea, don't waste any money on paint, or the entry fee.
When I learn that the fool who created an event is going to allow walking
tanks, I'll just look for somewhere else to play. If enough of us do that
maybe, just maybe the promoter and the field owner who hired him will
get the message. Tanks have treads, or at the least 4 wheels and a
motor to power them, not sneakers.

Sorry if I'm raining on your cardboard box,. If we're talking about a
'Mech Warrior event, then maybe I can see the sense, but only then.

[ps7ctr31]

Can't tell if smack talk, sour grapes, or fear of getting owned by a walking cardboard box.

[dorsai]

Sorry for not making my position on this more clear. I'm not
in favor of walking tanks, nor of anyone who allows them to be
used in their events. I'm one of those old fashioned guys, who
feels that if you can't afford to build something that looks and
functions like a tank, or wheeled armored vehicle you shouldn't
be allowed to walk around in an armored cardboard box. Same
applies to anyone who carrys a stick with a propeller affixed to it,
trailing a rope and pretending to be a helicopter.

Believe me, it's nothing personal, I feel the same about any of
the other contrived ideas some promoters tend to use to control
the game flow during their events.

[Tusken Raider]

Originally Posted by dorsai

Sorry for not making my position on this more clear. I'm not
in favor of walking tanks, nor of anyone who allows them to be
used in their events. I'm one of those old fashioned guys, who
feels that if you can't afford to build something that looks and
functions like a tank, or wheeled armored vehicle you shouldn't
be allowed to walk around in an armored cardboard box. Same
applies to anyone who carrys a stick with a propeller affixed to it,
trailing a rope and pretending to be a helicopter.

Believe me, it's nothing personal, I feel the same about any of
the other contrived ideas some promoters tend to use to control
the game flow during their events.

I am in total agreement. The lets use a rope to simulate a helicopter has been used in airsoft and paintball with detrimental effect. No way should a walking talking cardboard box be used as a tank.

I personally love hosing four guys walking with a ref that says no you cant shoot them they are in an APC/helicopter/c130, etc. I have seen the response, the players plus the ref get hosed by other players.

[Boom Master]

Believe me, it's nothing personal, I feel the same about any of
the other contrived ideas some promoters tend to use to control
the game flow during their events.

How many times have we caught the promoter of D Day doing just that? That's why I stopped going to D Day.... That was years ago and history as far as I'm concerned but he was actually manipulating the game outcome. Not just the flow whatever that is defined as.

Some example rules that have been in place for years are:

•Limit the number of tanks or launchers that can be on the field at one time.
•Limit the amount of ammo that tanks or launchers can carry.
•Restrict tanks from certain parts of the field.
•Change the number of rocket or grenade hits it takes to disable or eliminate a tank.
•Restrict tanks to special missions during designated times.
•Mark off fill boxes on the tank so paintballs can eliminate tanks.
•Allow rockets to take out buildings and bunkers.

I would differ to agree they have been "in place" Some fields have adopted some of them and the players responses to it vary considerably just like here with opinions of walking tanks, helicopters, and Vipers 140 fps rule.

Vipers intent for the 140 fps rule was so the infantry can help defend their tanks. The anti tank guy will be well within range of infantry and tank paintballs. I played ONE of his games with my RPG and the infantry did not run with the tank. Incoming paintballs would eliminate mechanized infantry easily. They cannot advance using the tank for cover. So any incoming fire simply eliminates the infantry or sends them running for cover and leaving the tank vunerable. A four man anti tank team can open up and engage any infantry essentially stripping coverage off the tank. A four man team can certain distract the eyes and guns in a tank in the wrong direction giving the RPG player the couple of seconds needed to get off a well aimed shot. I will give Viper credit for addressing the problem but I think it is fundamentally flawed for the reasons mentioned above. It does not give tanks infantry protection. It does limit long range tank kills.

I hunt tanks and I can still neutralize a tank with an anti tank squad of 4. I also run a walking tank and it looks more like a "TANK" - Star Wars "ATST" than the Tanks on the picture threads and those attending D Day. More typically, their tanks are a vehicle boxed in with plywood with a turret and gunports. Mine has that and is frankly MORE Dangerous than a motorized tank. Ask the players and tankers of the not defunct Tour of Duty. It was never outplayed by a motorized tank as defined as the number of kills I got on their tank vs the number they got on mine. Closests was the Ranger Tank out of Chicago. 1 kill vs 1 kill and then they broke down on Saturday and left the game.

Still, I would agree that there is a legitmate issue for the tanks to complain about the quantity and quality of anti tank weapons at a given game. They paid a LOT more $Money$ to attend and build a tank than the RPGs players. They have a right to expect to have fun playing too and not spending all weekend in the Insertion Zone.

I would disagree with Dorsi. Why make it harder and more expensive to field a tank? The OBVIOUS solution to the surplus of RPGs on the field is MORE TANKS! That would be a LOT more FUN for everybody... Since money is the major limiting factor for tanks, A battle ready $500 walking tank fits into many more budgets.

I will likely disagree with any rule that restricts the sport for any reason other than safety.. Limiting ammo, number of RPGs, etc. makes players unhappy that want to use them. All those methods suggested above have been attempts to address the issue and from the player feedback, they have not found a good solution.

Basically, the solution is to make it harder to kill a tank. Then everybody gets to play with their toys as much as they can. You draw more players, money to the game.

Multiple hits is great if you can find a way to COUNT the hits. Not only the attackers but the guys inside the tank need to know. No one has come up with a good way to do that other than one hit disables the tank for X minutes and the second one is a kill.

Decades ago, we had to kill tanks with a 20 balls in a styrofoam cup. 3-5 breaks on a tank was a kill. Impossible over 10 yards away. Then Nerfs were just beginning to be accepted as a tank round the tankers complained loudly that it was too easy to kill a tank. Well, it was a LOT easier for sure. A lot more hiding places within 30 yards of the tank road for the tank defenders to look at. Anyway, one solution was to put Nerf targets on the sides of the tanks and we had to mark those targets with a Nerf tipped in marking gooh. We anti tankers were already skilled at getting within 10 yards of the tank road so we just continued on killing tanks with Nerfs. And our effective range was increased a bit using a new Nerf and practice.

I would really like a Producer like viper to try the Nerf targets. 18"x18" on the sides, 12" x 12" on the front, and 24"x24" on the rear. Right now a hit anywhere on a tank is a kill. That is GREAT if you are trying to kill a tank. The bigger it is, the easier it is to kill. We've played with that rule for well over a decade now and the concensus is simply that it is no longer working.

[dorsai]

How many times have we caught the promoter of D Day doing just that? That's why I stopped going to D Day.... That was years ago and history as far as I'm concerned but he was actually manipulating the game outcome. Not just the flow whatever that is defined as.

How long ago was the last time you took part at D-Day? I'm
asking because I can attest to the fact that they've never had
a hand in how the event plays out since I got directly involved
and that was back in 2007. Each year since then it's been up
to both sides to figure out what their plan of action was going
to be, then based on what the other side did we'd make any
necesary adjustments. In fact this past June we overwhelmed
the Germans so badly that the staff halted the event early.
Call it good luck, well thought out planning or whatever you like,
but there certainly weren't any checks put on either side.

Since then they've said they're going to start issuing added
missions, probably based on how the event is running, to help
keep things under control. So far everyone who has had the
chance to check this out seems to think it's long overdue, so
I ask again, when was the last time you played there?

As for the rest of your response I can't speak to what Viper
does at his events, but when it comes to D-day this last year
there were something like 25-30 motorized vehicles between
both sides. I don't keep track but that sounds like a heck of
a lot more tanks than you're apt to encounter anywhere else.
In order to help neutralize all that armor and still give those
guys who build and bring them a fighting chance D-Day dropped
the use of Nerfs years ago. For as long as I can recall you
have had to score a hit on a target afixed to the vehicles, which
varies in size depending on which side of the tank your facing.
You do that using a special colored pellet which is fired from a
launcher which looks like either a Allied or German anti-tank
shoulder launcher. Again, I'd say that with close to 30 vehicles
somoene must be doing it right, otherwise they wouldn't be
there.

Targets. 18"x18" on the sides, 12" x 12" on the front, and 24"x24" on the rear

Heck, even an old half blind guy like me
can hit targets that big. If you've got a plane at D-Day all
the gunners have to shoot at is a 2" X 2" target on any side.
Tanks run with larger targets, but they're not anywhere as
large as you've suggested.

Remember, WW II, which is what D-Day is all about, was a
time when you were lucky if you could knock a track off of a
German Tank. British Piats and the old US Bazookas weren't
anything like today's AT-4s, etc. when it came to knockout
power and yet neither we or the Germans seem to have much
trouble with getting enough people to sign up to carry tubes.

Sincerely,