- Active Posts:
- 38 (0.01 per day)
- Most Active In:
- General Paintball Discussions (5 posts)
- 05-September 05
- Profile Views:
- Last Active:
- Jul 20 2009 03:14 AM
- Member Title:
- MAZ I am
- 26 years old
- April 16, 1987
- Brigade Name:
Topics I've Started
25 February 2008 - 03:29 AMI was just wondering what the effects would be and if it would even be smart to duracoat a bow. The bow that I own is a PSE Coyote.
I have the AirowGun Paintball Attachment on it.
I was planning on getting both duracoated but I am not sure since the bow obviously bends when I draw the string, and I want to know if the Duracoat will bend with the bow..or flake.
21 January 2008 - 11:11 PMI've seen a lot and read a lot of the "new position" suggestions on these forums for a while now. I'm sure that all of you have already seen the majority of them, engineers, medics, special ops, what have you.
Now what I am suggesting Spec Ops make as another 'official position' is this:
Arguments for it's inclusion:
1) - It's already in use. Every single time there is a big game, you are going to have your generals commanding different sides. There is no reason to reinvent this position, as it has already been invented. All there needs to be done is recognizing it.
2) - It doesn't require any super expensive, super specialized gear. All you need is a crap-load of radios. Which most paintball players already have, anyways.
3) - All that is required is a game with lots of players. Obviously there should be a minimum number of how many players you are commanding, for what you are doing to be considered 'General Worthy'. I'll leave that decision up to spec ops, but suggestions in this topic are welcome.
Arguments against it with my response:
1) - There is already a commander position, and therefore there is no need for a general position to be created.
Response: Although I agree that there is already a commander position, you could apply the same argument to the Hammer Position, citing the Broadsword. Also, I'm sure that commanding a team of 4-10 as most commanders do, and commanding a team that consists of 50+ players, is a very different experience. I mean, if you're a general, you're probably not even in the field shooting paint at other people, chances of you actually get an elimination are small, instead you are focusing on organizing all the various teams under your command and keeping track of what the enemy is doing, and might be doing. On the other hand commanders are in there with their team, focusing on a specific objective, and the only enemies they have to worry about are those that are near to them, or the ones they are currently engaging.
2) - Marketability. I think this one, above all, is the most logical argument against it, or for it. Is the position marketable? Spec Ops, like or not, is a Business, and for a business to succeed, it needs to make money. Can Spec Ops make money off of the 'General Position'?
I'd say that if they make the position requirements realistically low enough, it's possible. Somewhere around 25-40+ players under your command, for it to count. Hell, maybe they could make it different levels, for let us say for an "Elite General" they would have had to be in a game where they commanded 100+ players. Or something like that, but for a beginner, they would only have to have commanded 25-30 players.
That's all I can think of for now.
Main Discussion Points:
-Is it a good position to even consider?
-What should be the minimum amount of players under one's command for them to be considered a General for a game?
-What are other ways to make the General Position more marketable? (How can Spec Ops make money off the position?)
13 December 2007 - 02:17 PMIs it possible to make a Tac-9 longbow? Personally I think this would be an excellent gun to have. The Tac9 is crazy accurate, and I think the longbow kit would be a nice addition.
MrAlexZander hasn't added any friends yet.