TTAC3/EOTEC goes to "Realcap" only

[Quaff]

I hope there is room for an exception here and there. I have played TTAC a few times now and if you remember me Brian, you may remember that excessive fire is not my thing. But mags are expensive and I supply for a few of my less fortunate friends from time to time. Owning 3 AEG's is expensive enough without having to buy loads of mags for each weapon. Also there are no lowcaps for my newest gun which I bought with TTAC3 in mind, the STAR UMP. I would have no problem with being disciplined for breaking any rules, but I like playing at TTAC and cannot afford (and in the UMP's case, GET) lowcap mags for everything. I have a few mid-caps and a High-cap for my current AEG's, but having only played for less than a year, it is difficult to keep up.

[lt_poncho]

I find it totally interesting how all the R/S loadout types are all coming out of hiding. You'd think someone set off a strobe or paraflare or something....wtf guys there's no chopper coming....

Seriously, I think Rexter can agree - this is a conforting trend. It wasn't but a short time ago that there was so much adversity to this, for years.

[lt_poncho]

Originally Posted by Quaff

I hope there is room for an exception here and there. I have played TTAC a few times now and if you remember me Brian, you may remember that excessive fire is not my thing. But mags are expensive and I supply for a few of my less fortunate friends from time to time. Owning 3 AEG's is expensive enough without having to buy loads of mags for each weapon. Also there are no lowcaps for my newest gun which I bought with TTAC3 in mind, the STAR UMP. I would have no problem with being disciplined for breaking any rules, but I like playing at TTAC and cannot afford (and in the UMP's case, GET) lowcap mags for everything. I have a few mid-caps and a High-cap for my current AEG's, but having only played for less than a year, it is difficult to keep up.

There's always room for exception - it's the willingness to adapt and promote the concept is what the objective of the scope is. Eventually someone makes a 'low cap' for these mags - seems that STAR has responded to a market demand. It just takes time.

[Squire]

Originally Posted by Capt.erHead

Hey Brian,
I really like the idea that we have to use real mag capacity, but to INCREASE the realism why can't we have full auto as well?

Umm... I'm not sure about that. We've had a few games with full auto fire in them, and the results were not encouraging.

There was one game I can vividly remember where it was a "one man's alone in that building, and he can fire full auto." When we rushed the building, I, the sorry second in, was hit seven times before I could call "hit". With semi, you'd get hit maybe twice before you can call hit.

When you think that we play probably 30 runs of the scenario in a night, that's a lot of welts to count up when you get home. Add to that two or three times a week, and you're looking at a very interesting skin complexion.

[MadMax]

30 rounds in a mag is actually quite a lot for TTAC3. The arena is pretty small so you don't usually get into annoying standoffs where shooters just keep trying to pick away at each other. Action tends to be pretty fast and a skirmish is often resolved in minutes if one side manages to put together a cohesive rush. Even with cover fire, it's actually hard to run out two standard mags.

[666]

I've only used 49rd Glock mag there, never had to change mags during the game. Always had 10-15 if not more bb's left by the end of the round.

[ert]

Originally Posted by Capt.erHead

Hey Brian,
I really like the idea that we have to use real mag capacity, but to INCREASE the realism why can't we have full auto as well? Realistically, full auto for CQB is why the submachine gun was invented...ie 'trench broom.' Now that we can't hose people with hundreds of rounds it will lead to even more realistic firefights. I understand the 'pain factor' and 'danger factor' but pain is part of the game and I really dont think that with 30 rounds total it's that much more dangerous than semi only.

just my 2 cents...I really miss full auto when playing ttac3 :cry:

Full auto is rarely used for room clearing anymore. It's just too inaccurate and wasteful when one or two rounds in semi can do the job just as good. That's why the US has gone to burst round M16's... troops were depending on full auto way too much. Now I'm not saying it's never used... cause that would be an outright lie, but the majority of CQB/MOUT/FIBUA/whatever-you-want-to-call-it training now is done semi only.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by Capt.erHead

Hey Brian,
I really like the idea that we have to use real mag capacity, but to INCREASE the realism why can't we have full auto as well? Realistically, full auto for CQB is why the submachine gun was invented...ie 'trench broom.' Now that we can't hose people with hundreds of rounds it will lead to even more realistic firefights. I understand the 'pain factor' and 'danger factor' but pain is part of the game and I really dont think that with 30 rounds total it's that much more dangerous than semi only.

just my 2 cents...I really miss full auto when playing ttac3 :cry:

Actualy full auto fire is not standard doctrin for precision room clearing.
Semi automatic fire is much more controlable and results in less "fratricide"

The SMG was designed for high volume of fire at close range .. which I guess includes CQB but my experience indicates that semi auto is much more effective for engaging targets and being able to select targets.

Full auto is fun.. no argument there ... but in reality its use is effective only in certain situtations.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by lt_poncho

There's always room for exception - it's the willingness to adapt and promote the concept is what the objective of the scope is. Eventually someone makes a 'low cap' for these mags - seems that STAR has responded to a market demand. It just takes time.

What he said...

I don't want this rule to exclude anyone from participating.. everyone has limitations that they must work around.

It is the idea is that people will not rely on unrealistic ammo capacities to acheive advantage.

[Manaconda]

Remember the object at TTAC3 is to improve your skills. With real steal load outs you realy have to have the shot before you can take it.

[Quaff]

Great! Thanks for the clarification. I will of course do my best to get the proper equipment, I just didnt want to be excluded for not having it right away. I am hoping to see you this friday in fact, unless plans go horribly awry see you then.

[Capt.erHead]

Hey Brian and peeps who replied,

I read everyone's points and I'd like to elaborate on them and my own...

Originally Posted by ert

Full auto is rarely used for room clearing anymore. It's just too inaccurate and wasteful when one or two rounds in semi can do the job just as good. That's why the US has gone to burst round M16's... troops were depending on full auto way too much. Now I'm not saying it's never used... cause that would be an outright lie, but the majority of CQB/MOUT/FIBUA/whatever-you-want-to-call-it training now is done semi only.

Originally Posted by Squire

Umm... I'm not sure about that. We've had a few games with full auto fire in them, and the results were not encouraging.

There was one game I can vividly remember where it was a "one man's alone in that building, and he can fire full auto." When we rushed the building, I, the sorry second in, was hit seven times before I could call "hit". With semi, you'd get hit maybe twice before you can call hit.

When you think that we play probably 30 runs of the scenario in a night, that's a lot of welts to count up when you get home. Add to that two or three times a week, and you're looking at a very interesting skin complexion.

Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle

Actualy full auto fire is not standard doctrin for precision room clearing.
Semi automatic fire is much more controlable and results in less "fratricide"

The SMG was designed for high volume of fire at close range .. which I guess includes CQB but my experience indicates that semi auto is much more effective for engaging targets and being able to select targets.

Full auto is fun.. no argument there ... but in reality its use is effective only in certain situtations.

The reason M16A2's are burst and semi only is for a number of reasons but one of them is NOT because it's ineffective as a CQB weapon. One of the main reasons is your average dumb grunt has a little problem with squeezing and holding the trigger when feeling threatened. Cause we arent dumb american grunts (I HOPE) we should be given the option of full auto when the situation requires it.

If someone is shot 7 times with auto in extremely close quarters its the shooters fault whether or not they were using semi or auto. A 7 shot burst is ridiculous if you are few feet away...although I have shot people maybe 10 times at 20 feet with semi before they 'felt' the shot and gave up...so maybe it could be both parties fault...if everyone would immediately raise their hands when they feel the smallest hit Im sure that the problem would go away.

All of the premiere counter terrorist/SWAT teams (GIGN, JTF2, SEALS, SAS, FBI HRT, ETF, LAPD ETC.) main arsenals are full auto capable weapons. They might have rear guard positions with semi only assault rifles but they are the exception not the rule. Rifles have more penetration (risk of injury to bystanders or team members) and are also harder to control in full automatic fire. SMG's however are by definition full auto capable and fire a pistol round that has low penetraion and relatively low damage but high controllability in fully automatic firing. OK so 'precision' training doesnt use it you say...Im personally unaware of that, I would love to read some books on the subject and with your extensive fighting knowledge Brian Im sure you have. Could you please point me in the right direction? I do know one thing about the training of one tactical team first hand...Toronto's ETF. I have seen them train and they train with full auto. They use controlled bursts. With only 30 rounds in a magazine you would be wise to use semi for most shots or better yet you could CONTROL all your bursts in full auto. Why not have the option in airsoft if fully automatic firing is true in real life and realism is desired? The limited ammo negates the main problem with full auto in airsoft; spraying...

I could be dead wrong but in terms of REALISM maybe SMG's and machine pistols should be allowed to have full auto at TTAC3 and long arms (shotguns, assault rifles) should be semi only. I dont want to start a flame war I just wanted to start an open, respectful and informed discussion. I have had an excellent time when I have played at your field Brian and I would like to play there again so please don't ban me 'cause of a little disagreement :wink:

[lt_poncho]

Last I checked when SEALS doing IAD's in training the objective was to put as many rounds downstream as possible. Full auto has an use - if used effectively. Thing is they have to change mags after 30 rounds.

Airsoft barrels just don't heat up and melt....no matter how long your battery can last.

[MadMax]

I think some particapants in this thread are forgetting that this thread is an announcement, not a debate.

Brian runs his field as he sees fit. If you would like to see a change in arena policy, the best forum to discuss it with him is at his facility. You'd also have a better handle of what to ask for once you've played the place.

[Mantelope]

Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle

I won't have much choice .. as I just got 30 AK starmags

Aha, the reason behind the rules, revealed! Brian's just being a jerk and making you all have the same limitations as him so he doesn't lose. =P