indoor game fps

[Mr. inked]

if you can afford to buy all your gear..guns,vest,mags(sometimes cost more then the fucking gun) and allt he other crap if you can afford to buy that i think you can afford a freaken spring....they are not that expensive....

[DavidoftheDoell]

Some people like myself are not comfortable telling the host that they don't like the way things are done and will simply not go. Some of you recommended this behavior but it doesn't give the host a chance to accommodate, if they are even willing to. You've gotten this community's view maybe you should hand out surveys after games and have an online one to make sure you're not losing players because of high fps.

[fantastix]

Originally Posted by DavidoftheDoell

Some people like myself are not comfortable telling the host that they don't like the way things are done and will simply not go. Some of you recommended this behavior but it doesn't give the host a chance to accommodate, if they are even willing to. You've gotten this community's view maybe you should hand out surveys after games and have an online one to make sure you're not losing players because of high fps.

Actually the reason I "took over" is because the sudden enforcement of the strict 350fps rule drove away a large amount of our player base. I'm hesitant to post in detail, but the opposition has been very very vocal from a small number of people. The people who immediately returned after the implementation of the current rules outnumbers the players complaining by several times, and my current problem is a matter of the field not supporting as many players as we have been getting.

I find all the players are becoming more of a safety concern then the fps rating because of the volume of fire (even on semi auto) that can be focused on people in the open.

Edit: I am working with the field hosts to modify the layout to allow for increased player count.

[tygr701]

Originally Posted by Cliffradical

I've played and ref'd enough indoor CQB games to know that wearing anything less than full-skin coverage and full face protection is stupid. Partially because you just end up hurting yourself by having your arms shredded, and partially because you can't trust anyone to play safely, especially when they're new.
New or inexperienced players will, on average, nearly exclusively use full-auto and aim for 'headshots' because 'headshots are cool'. Some people of all relative skill levels also get scared and/ or frustrated and tend to retaliate in an uncontrolled over-aggressive manner when they're butthurt by losing.

Requiring full face protection and strongly encouraging long sleeves and padded gloves topped off with a 350fps limit isn't about accounting for what safe, positive players can handle, it's about limiting the amount of damage a moron or overwhelmed newbie can do.

I've played high-limit CQB with no cage against guys whome I've trusted and I was just fine. I would not, however, walk into an arena with people I didn't know and had not played with before without suiting right up and knowing all guns had passed a crono.

Agree 100%. The FPS limits are in place for a reason. Hosts with experience know what the acceptable limits are. If people can't be bothered to downgrade their springs then they can play elsewhere. People get too caught up in having a high FPS in their guns. IMO there isn't much need to be shooting over 350 for CQB and 400 for outdoor games. A 50 fps increase wont make a huge difference in effective range anyways there is other ways of going about that. There is no need to give people massive welts/bleeding shots. Other players will appreciate you not possibly injuring them or their equipment.