Would you take the hit ?

whydave

Is this blind fire ??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G4diFG1D6o

[/QUOTE]

whydave

Lil Armour wrote: »

Common rule on most sites: eyes must be lookin down the sights /rifle.

Blindfiring:"firing with out aiming, firing with out looking etc.

I would say yeah because he isn't aiming down the gun he is shooting.if this was allowed I should be allowed use pitfalls and surveillance.

from another thread

se conman

Yes I would take the hit. For the effort he has made he deserves to get the hit IMHO, but I would make it my mission for the day to get him back.(within the rules of coarse)

andy_g

Technically it is looking down the sights as it has crosshair thus not blind fire.

Lemming

andy_g wrote: »

Technically it is looking down the sights as it has crosshair thus not blind fire.

But you lose all sense of peripheral awareness. Speaking from a marshall's point of view I would not be happy with that.

That's before we get near the reality that in a game based on honour & fun, this really is a kill-joy with a great big "I want to win at all costs" button stuck to it. It fits into the same argument as mounting a great big plexi-glass shield to your AEG so you can't "be hit". TBH, poor form and it removes something from the spirit of the game.

Darth Phoenix

Odd one but I was always under the imppression from a debrief from the sites I got to when it comes to blind firing " I use blind firing loosly for this topic here " that you need to make yourself a target to shoot a target, wouldn't that device be the same if someone was behind cover and next all you see is a pistol only around the corner, wouldn't that be class as blind firing..?




DP

CpcRc

One way I heard explaining how to not blindfire. Your face must be behind the aeg/gbb, etc. So a part of your body is a a definite target with line of sight for the enemy. Aiming down the aeg could be it to the side of your face. There are ways to aim your weapon if you are familiar with it and it's trajectory that would not put much of your body in view. With practice all you need is one eyeball. By making you put your face behind the weapon you are a bigger target and have more control over accuracy and should be less likely to shoot when you shouldn't

On one hand, this adds the challenge of hitting the weapon, a smaller target. But a lot of people don't call weapon hits anyway even if it's in site rules so I would be against it in that regard.

NakedDex

It depends on user attitude. If s/he is using it on semi only to enter rooms, sure. If they're on auto, emptying mags from behind a bush, then no.
People will take advantage of such things, and others will use them in the sprit of the game. It's the latter that I'd have nothing but praise for, and happily take the hit from.

Southern Dandy

Darth Phoenix wrote: »

Odd one but I was always under the imppression from a debrief from the sites I got to when it comes to blind firing " I use blind firing loosly for this topic here " that you need to make yourself a target to shoot a target, wouldn't that device be the same if someone was behind cover and next all you see is a pistol only around the corner, wouldn't that be class as blind firing..?




DP

But what if you can shoot from cover yet see your target. For instance I was told I was "blind firing" when I was shooting through a gap and could quite clearly see my target. The fella on the receiving end shouted "blind firing" and the marshall confirmed , but I folllowed the rules confused as I was.

I always assumed and my assumption was confirmed at a different site, that to put it bluntly you stick your pistol or aeg around the corner and are shooting "Blindly", whilst your body remains covered. Am I right or wrong?, always meant to ask this.

Lemming

NakedDex wrote: »

It depends on user attitude. If s/he is using it on semi only to enter rooms, sure. If they're on auto, emptying mags from behind a bush, then no.
People will take advantage of such things, and others will use them in the sprit of the game. It's the latter that I'd have nothing but praise for, and happily take the hit from.

Whilst I understand the sentiment, I disagree that the guy using it on semi is playing in the spirit of the game, because the tool fundamentally removes the spirit of the game in the first place.

Darth Phoenix said what I wanted to say about presenting yourself as a target in order to fire at a target, and this is important because it's all about fairness; the same fairness that says call your hits, etc. By using a corner-shot, you remove that fairness because you are now using technology to remove the challenge in getting around that corner, acquiring your target & firing before they do whilst denying them same.

Edit:
As for Southern Dandy's question of "what if you're behind cover", if you aren't blind firing well then you are still presenting yourself as a target in order to engage a target.

Lemming

Southern Dandy wrote: »

I always assumed and my assumption was confirmed at a different site, that to put it bluntly you stick your pistol or aeg around the corner and are shooting "Blindly", whilst your body remains covered. Am I right or wrong?, always meant to ask this.

That's the obvious example; but basically the definition is: if you are unable to sight down your barrel at the target, you are blind firing. That includes firing through gaps in a wooden pallet fence (for example), whilst looking through another gap, etc.

If you can do both through that same gap, well then by all means fire away ... unless specifically instructed otherwise by marshalls, e.g. "don't use murder holes in buildings as they are out of play, etc."

CpcRc

Southern Dandy wrote: »

But what if you can shoot from cover yet see your target. For instance I was told I was "blind firing" when I was shooting through a gap and could quite clearly see my target. The fella on the receiving end shouted "blind firing" and the marshall confirmed , but I folllowed the rules confused as I was.

I always assumed and my assumption was confirmed at a different site, that to put it bluntly you stick your pistol or aeg around the corner and are shooting "Blindly", whilst your body remains covered. Am I right or wrong?, always meant to ask this.

Sometimes blindfiring will be called if you are firing through a crack or very small gap, you can easily hit others because your muzzle is near it but it's a hell of a lot harder for them to hit you, nearly impossible depending on their weapon's accuracy.
In that scenario you have a clearly unfair advantage and can screw up the entire flow of the battle and marshalls also have to try and ensure a good game by letting the battle flow.

Some people try to do this in corridors through door way cracks, etc. It can bring battle flow to a standstill and enemy players will complain because they don't get to play. You require a much lower skill level to prolong your presence in the area than they do.

An advantage worked for is better than an advantage abused. For everyone involved.

Lemming

CpcRc wrote: »

Some people try to do this in corridors through door way cracks, etc. It can bring battle flow to a standstill and enemy players will complain because they don't get to play. You require a much lower skill level to prolong your presence in the area than they do.

That being said; doorway cracks are a lot less "safe" than people think. I've nailed (and watched nailed) many, many an airsofter who thought they could either spot through one or try and fire through one.

An advantage worked for is better than an advantage abused. For everyone involved.

+1

Inari

To be perfectly honest, I find the thread title odd - a direct BB strike is a hit, regardless of whether you agree with the motives or methods of the shooter. For the most part that means friendly fire, dead men's revenge, or your personal feelings toward the shooter. So yes, of course I would take the hit from this considering that if it was allowed onto site (which I think it should be) then I have to play by the site rules; direct hit = hit; no debate whatsoever.

Besides, corner-shots exist in real life and I think this is rather ingenious. It is not an "I win" button any more than a grenade is. There is nothing stopping you from buying or building the same and using it. The lad IS aiming down the sight of his gun, albeit by camera, but he is still looking down the barrel. I have never heard of the "you must present yourself as a target to take a shot" rule, as it flies in the face of the concept of cover. I'm sure you have all encountered someone exploiting the wonders of geometry using angles where they retain a wider field of view than you, forcing you into sight before they are - it is next to impossible to hit them without you being hit first, and although it's frustrating that is them playing the game well.

The point of fairness is invalid because that intimates that using a gun that is more highly tuned should not be allowed because your BB's have superior reach; you can see your target down your sights, and they can see you...but they can't hit you because their gun doesn't have the same range as yours thus making you not a valid target. Is that allowed? Of course it is. People should not be chastised for tuning or teching their guns, as most (if not all) of these modifications come with significant disadvantages. In this case it is a cumbersome gun with little application and a narrow field of view, where you have greater reaction times to stimulus...in other words, move quickly and zig-zag :P

There are tactics to deal with this kind of device, as there are with people behind cover exploiting cracks/gaps (as they should) - you can stay where you are and get shot, and complain, or you can try approach from a different way, or use different equipment yourself to uproot the blighter. Grenades work fantastically well for things like this, not to mention movement - it will have a very narrow field of view which you can exploit.

The comparison to the riot shield or gun mounted shield is interesting, especially for myself considering I take quite a staunch state against riot shields...though I think that comes from my counter strike days. A full riot shield should have sufficient rules in place preventing it from becoming a game-changing device, such as dropping it when hit. A gun-mounted shield eliminates that possibility and is a different kettle of fish, though a lot of sites employ gun-hit rules where your primary goes down, or repeated calls of gun hit result in a hit for yourself.

So yes, I would find the use of a gun mounted shield, grenade, M203, long-ranging gun, tight-angle & fire from cover irritating when used against me, though I would recognise that there are ways around it...just as there are with the cornershot.

Lemming

Inari wrote: »

...

I had a big post written, and reading through it; I cannot be @rsed descending to rebutting straw-man arguments. Suffiice to say; just because something exists in real life doesn't mean it's suitable for airsoft. After all, we all know that every single miltary/police tactic/tool works flawlessly when applied to airsoft ...

The following quote is apt: "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should".

Southern Dandy

Right I get your points Lemmimg and Cpcrc but it is called "Blind firing". Now I mean the clue is in the name, "blind". Pretty much means your firing at something you can not see nor care if you can, they can see your aeg peeping around but not you from a safety aspect and the "unfair" side of it that I completely agree, but if I am in cover and have a clear shot at my target through through a hole, how is that "blind firing"?.

I can physically see them, am not unloading a mag wildly whilst not having a notion what I am shooting at. I have a clear sight picture with 45degree view in front.

I am using my cover as an advantage, I doubt I can slow up an entire game unless every single time they come to the same spot in a single line formation, now keeping in mind I play in mainly outdoor sites so it is a big open area.

Now shooting through the inside gap of an open door at which to be fair you can not see much even though in theory it is the similar to my argument is unfair, you have maybe 15mm if not less of a gap.

Lemming

Southern Dandy wrote: »

Right I get your points Lemmimg and Cpcrc but it is called "Blind firing". Now I mean the clue is in the name, "blind". Pretty much means your firing at something you can not see nor care if you can, they can see your aeg peeping around but not you from a safety aspect and the "unfair" side of it that I completely agree, but if I am in cover and have a clear shot at my target through through a hole, how is that "blind firing"?.

From a marshals point of view, if you can sight down your barrel at a target using the same hole/gap/whatever that you are trying to fire through then I don't have a problem, assuming that no instructions have been given regards the use of holes or certain sorts of holes that may be found on a particular site (e.g. "murder holes" found on MoD FIBUA sites for example). You know exactly where your round is going and what is between your barrel and the target with a reasonable idea of what's going on around the path taken. If you can do what I have just written, then your target can also see you (if they're looking hard enough ... ) and they can also hit you however hard it may be to do.

Southern Dandy

Exactly what I thought and expected, I shot from a gap on a load of stacked tyres so gap of maybe 12" X 10", now not the biggest but I had a nice view, my target was perfectly visible and he seen me and could have easily taken me out with a well aimed burst, the irony also being he said I was blind firing only to be doing the exact same thing himself moments later.

People confuse me sometimes.....

tommyboy_71

A good player will conceal themselves to the extent that there is very little to be seen i.e. firing from under a fallen tree/Behind a barrier.
You cannot see, if any of them. You position yourself to render any return fire practically ineffective.

Remember, It is easier to shoot out through a small hole that it is to hit a target behind the small hole from range.

I would accept a hit from it. I would then make it my mission to hunt the mufferducker down and return the favour

CaptainCook

i think if someone spends that kind of cash on what is essentially a toy, they should be allowed use it, i have no problem with it.

$kilkenny

You dont hear the afghans complaining that its cheating, then again they cant say they werent hit

Inari

Here's a thought; are claymores and tornado grenades blind firing? You're not aiming down a barrel, and you don't have to be exposed to garnish a hit - is that cheating? No, it's not. It's using equipment to gain a marginal tactical advantage where the risk is minimised due to the spread and relatively low power of the BB's. I would put this device squarely in that bracket.

Lemming wrote:

if you can sight down your barrel at a target using the same hole/gap/whatever that you are trying to fire through then I don't have a problem

This device allows you to do just that, yet you seem to have a problem with it?

thermo

if the shots are aimed then i would have no problem with it, but if the user turns his gun into a tactical L and is blasting away around the corner without checking whats there, i would have a problem with that as it would be going away from the intended use of the original and would merely be a way of holding your gun around the corner to blind fire without the risk of getting shot in the hands.

Lemming

Inari wrote: »

Here's a thought; are claymores and tornado grenades blind firing? You're not aiming down a barrel, and you don't have to be exposed to garnish a hit - is that cheating? No, it's not. It's using equipment to gain a marginal tactical advantage where the risk is minimised due to the spread and relatively low power of the BB's. I would put this device squarely in that bracket.

Grenades and the like are not remotely comparable. For any reason whatsoever. Attempting to bring them in as an argument to then de-construct is another straw-man argument Inari.

Lemming

thermo wrote: »

if the shots are aimed then i would have no problem with it, but if the user turns his gun into a tactical L and is blasting away around the corner without checking whats there, i would have a problem with that as it would be going away from the intended use of the original and would merely be a way of holding your gun around the corner to blind fire without the risk of getting shot in the hands.

Well, that's kind of the point of the corner-shot though, no? The succinctly described "tactical L".

thermo

Lemming wrote: »

Well, that's kind of the point of the corner-shot though, no? The succinctly described "tactical L".

in real life where your not too concerned about the "bad guys" so yeah, airsoft is a little different where you have rules to ensure player safety.
i always thought that the blind fire rule was there not because it was unfair as no target was presented to the opposition but because it stopped people sticking the muzzle around the corner and going full auto into someones face at 2 inches..... is this not the case??

Lemming

thermo wrote: »

in real life where your not too concerned about the "bad guys" so yeah, airsoft is a little different where you have rules to ensure player safety.
i always thought that the blind fire rule was there not because it was unfair as no target was presented to the opposition but because it stopped people sticking the muzzle around the corner and going full auto into someones face at 2 inches..... is this not the case??

As I said earlier, but nobody bothered to notice; what works in real-life does not always translate well to airsoft, be it tactics or technology in this case.

In real life, the corner shot would be used to acquire a target without creating a give-away silhouette. There is no part of an arm, shoulder, hand, or head to see, so the tell-tale signs are - in theory - that much harder to spot. In real life, it was designed to be a great big "I win" button because there is a real need to minimise ones own casualties.

In airsoft, there are two core aspects I take issue with.

1. Safety
   • Lack of peripheral vision & awareness
   • The reality of behaviour that the corner-shot can facilitate.
2. The change in a basic fundamental principle of what is a game, not real-life. By removing the requirement for line of sight (booby-traps & throw-able grenades not withstanding), one side of the equation is denied any sort of "fair deal" in what is ostensibly meant to be a game. Otherwise called "fun". Not real-life where there is no second lives, only a hole in the ground and "fair" need not apply.

Point number 1 (Safety):

Lack of peripheral vision & awareness

The limited, narrow view afforded by the corner-shot camera combined with the disconnected reality of the shooter since they are tucked around a corner concentrating on a screen whilst holding an extension connected to their AEG means very much reduced awareness of what's going on between the shooter's barrel & the intended target. Unlike a sniper-scope (should someone try to use that example) where one can just open their other eye, the shooter can't do that as they are solely reliant on what's going on directly in front of the camera.

On top of that, there is also the risk of the camera returning an impaired image to the shooter due to malfunction, lens smear, or just poor environmental or lighting conditions rendering the view badly. Or in the most extreme case, failure just as the shooter pulls the trigger. All of which see the shooter being reliant on a failing piece of technology to see what's in front of the barrel because they cannot do so themselves by opening their eyes. Of the above, I would see lens smear or poor conditions causing the most problems. In any case, if you can't see what's between your barrel & target, you shouldn't be firing.

The reality of behaviour facilitated

To put this in perspective; the corner-shot allows a user to park an airsoft gun capable of full-auto fire around a corner in a "tactical L" position. This is on top of what sort of environment the corner-shot was designed for; namely urban & perhaps limited CQB use. Urban airsoft is fast, CQB even faster.

So how do people see the above scenario playing out? Assume you're at a milsim event at an urban site. There will come a point borne either out of frustration, lack of concentration/awareness due to fatigue, or "because I can" where you will start to find the corner-shot being used for full-auto spray & pray by users trying to grapple with a narrow view, disconnected sense of "point & shoot", fast moving targets, and possibly growing fatigue affecting their concentration & awareness.

I say the above as someone who has been to more milsim, film-sim, & historical events than I can care to remember at this point. I say the above as someone who has marshalled numerous milsim events on MoD urban sites, and as someone who has been staff, directing players at milsim events on MoD urban sites. Aside from the "because I can" brigade, most of the above use I wouldn't consider stemming from any sense of malice; simply borne out of players running out of steam and losing concentration as they try to keep up a frantic pace whilst usually also failing to look after their own bodies.

In a dedicated CQB environment, the pace is even faster and the use of a corner-shot would be more a liability than asset.

All of the above - whilst not necessarily a direct "red line" greatly adds to the risk of blind-firing or otherwise negligent play, and sits very uneasily with me as both a marshal & as a player.


Point number 2 (Fundamental change in the game):

I'll break this in two parts; the first is the fundamental change. The second is the fall-out from that at any given skirmish.

To aim at a target requires line of sight. That means you are, to quote another boards user on the military forum, on a "two-way range" i.e. the target can aim back at you. Given the general range of airsoft guns, regardless of how difficult or how highly the odds may be stacked against one side due to cover/concealment/who-spots-who-first, there is always the chance of getting that successful return shot.

The corner-shot breaks that fundamental. So what? Well, airsoft is a game. Not real life. It's meant to be about everyone having fun at the end of the day, not "winning" or padding out imaginary COD-kill stats that only you can see floating in front of your eyes.

And now we come to the second part: the fall-out from the above. I'll ask what people think a game with any number of corner-shots would be like. I doubt it would be a particularly "fun" game at any rate, either for corner-shot users or non-corner-shot users alike. "Boring" would be the exact word I would use first.

The corner shot will serve little except lead to frustration, arguments, and accusations of cheating, non-hit taking, blind firing, etc. because this is the behaviour that players will perceive - real or not. It will do nothing to engender fair play, or enjoyment of the game by all concerned.

The only use I can see of a corner-shot is if scripted as a set-piece into a milsim event & tightly controlled.



Edit: Oh, and before another straw-man round of "but what about grenades"; grenades are one-shot deals. Even reloadable ones need to be retrieved first. The other guy may even get to cover before the grenade goes off meaning you need to be quick around that corner to follow up. Further, with some types of grenades, or some events, you will encounter restrictions on how you are permitted to use them e.g. no throw/post only, no throwing through/out windows above ground-level, etc.

Not even remotely comparable to sitting around a corner with an AEG and magazine after magazine.

tommyboy_71

There is more than one way to skin a cat.

As you said Lemming, they have limited vision around the corner. This also means that they cannot see all movements being made against them. They will also have to reload. if they do, they are not looking around the corner as they would have to withdraw the corner-shot to reload. This will be a slightly longer affair than a regular AEG. Someone can get the drop on them.

Exploit these weakness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is that not what the game is about? Using the old grey matter to outwit your opponent.

They have brought a game changer, you need to counter this.

G3-Nut

Well would you lads take a hit if a guy placed a mirror behind his gun and used that to shoot around corners and over mounds ?

Two things to say,

1 - Any site that allows such a device is simply degrading the sport.

2 - And if anyone makes one of these, dont bother waste your BBs on me because I wont take the hit, I would openly notify you and the marshall that I wont take a hit from a device like that. If that leads tome being removedfrom the site then so be it as I would never have returned anyway.

Southern Dandy

Was thinking bout this the last day.

Well if you take a hit to your weapon where I played before you drop it and go to your secondary. Soooo hit their corner shot and bam, his advantage is over. While the individual is looking through his little LCD he has a very limited field of view especially in an openish environment, he has his sight on one target while the opposing player who is not in view takes him out. Changes the dynamic of a game, but you now have a new tactic to add to your list of how to deal with corner shots. Not exactly particle physics I know but..

The corner shot is exploiting as much of an advantage imo as an LMG or Box mag. Because 4000 rounds with your trigger held provides you with a significant tactical advantage. You then have to exploit their weekness', heavy weapon, slower target etc.

whydave

This issue is on other site (here)

Nuke1973

whydave wrote: »

This issue is on other site (here)

Have to think I'd take the hit and point out after to a marshall and the player that I personally didn't think it's in the ethos of airsoft but if the site rules it in play then go with it.

When there is any doubt or question then take the hit.

jayod30

The fact that its been used by military and law enforcement in 15 countries including US and Britain, I don't see how any Marshall could properly justify not allowing it

Rooky1

jayod30 wrote: »

The fact that its been used by military and law enforcement in 15 countries including US and Britain, I don't see how any Marshall could properly justify not allowing it

Your next purchase Jay?:-)

Lemming

jayod30 wrote: »

The fact that its been used by military and law enforcement in 15 countries including US and Britain, I don't see how any Marshall could properly justify not allowing it

For the same reasons someone wanting to use a giant BB "Nuke" wouldn't be allowed to use it; it brings nothing to the game other than to fuel someone's self-imagined COD-kill stats.

And again; for the umpteenth time ... just because something works in the real world for the military or police doesn't mean it will translate well to airsoft. I mean; every military skill works flawlessly in the world of airsoft, right? Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

Nuke1973

jayod30 wrote: »

The fact that its been used by military and law enforcement in 15 countries including US and Britain, I don't see how any Marshall could properly justify not allowing it

So are tasers, should we allow them ?

jayod30

Nuke1973 wrote: »

So are tasers, should we allow them ?

What an earth are you on about. A corner shot can be used as an Airsoft rifle. Can a tazer. Don't be an a** looking for an argument

jayod30

Rooky1 wrote: »

Your next purchase Jay?:-)

Maybe not Carl, I might get tazered in response!!!

Lemming

jayod30 wrote: »

What an earth are you on about. A corner shot can be used as an Airsoft rifle. Can a tazer. Don't be an a** looking for an argument

Your rationale is "it exists therefore we should be allowed use it". He just used your own rationale.

How about riot shields with pistol slots. That way the fielder can shoot with impunity. Those are real too.

Nuke1973

jayod30 wrote: »

What an earth are you on about. A corner shot can be used as an Airsoft rifle. Can a tazer. Don't be an a** looking for an argument

Yes, a taser is also mountable on a picatinny rail EDIT:(sorry, read you post above as 'a corner shot can be used on an airsoft rifle' and not 'as').

Your argument is that corner shots are used by military and police in a lot of countries. Plenty of things are used by military and police but should not be used in airsoft. I just provided an example

If a marshal decided corner shots were legal I would take the hit(as stated above) but in my opinion this amounts to blind firing and should not be part of airsoft.

Your opinion differs, which is fine, but you'd rather play the man than the ball. I won't bother engaging in a discussion with someone who stoops to petty personal insults when confronted with an opinion different to theirs.

This is all that is wrong with the airsoft forums on boards in my opinion but that's a whole other subject best left to a different day.

andy_g

Can we start using artillery?

Lemming

andy_g wrote: »

Can we start using artillery?

*cough* two stage pyro

NakedDex

^^^ I was going to say that; there have been many forays into airsoft personal arty, like light mortars, and AT of various descriptions. All used in real life, but not in airsoft. It's the same argument: why can't we use them? The main reason is that 90% of people who play airsoft couldn't be trusted with half the kit that is intrinsically safe, nevermind something with potentially hazardous results.

I said it earlier in the thread; I'd actually like to see that cornershot style device used, and I'd happily take a hit from it, but only if used correctly. There are far too many people who'd sit happily behind a wall and virtual-blind-fire until they ran out of targets, or ammo. Those are the people I'd have issues with. There are, however, a few who would use it as intended (lets be honest, it has a very limited amount of usefulness), and I would have no issue with them sidling into a game with one.

The light mortars and AT style devices are all banned for the same reason. There'll always be someone, usually the very person who's been hyped up on Red Bull and an eight hour CoD session, who'll run into a room and point-blank someone with a grenade launcher. They're the reason we can't have things that fire palpable projectiles, like slug grenades, wire-guided missiles (sfx style, we're not talking MILAN's here...), or even over-arm thrown grenades.

When we can leave a game, regularly, without having at least one issue with how someone behaved or acted, we can evolve into arguing on behalf of game-changers like the cornershot (which you can achieve with a prism mirror on you sight a lot cheaper, by the way...). Until then I think it's fair to say there's more than enough choice in the spectrum of airsoft products to keep one amused and playing for some decades to come.

Wolfruin

when i airsoft at the hive i tend to use a few tricks ie a personal alarm system worked into a door my trusty telescope and even planing to to get laser trip alarms but i can see that item pissing off to many people it can get very heated the very reason i didnt make myself a riot shield, while all my tricks are aimed at confusing or slowing down my opponents that item is going a tad far