Equal Ground

[quickkill]

I was reading discussion about night vision and tank and something occured to me. This isn't a big game or a scenario, this is competitive play that pits teams against eachother. If you look at any seriously organized sport, there are strict rules about gear not being able to give someone too much of an advantage. It comes down to team strategy and personal skill. Gun rules, so far, enforce this equal ground idea. However, when one team has a tank or has gen-3 night vision, it really upsets the equipment balance. Yes, they're cool toys, but that's what scenarios are for. Keep this competition simple, basic and undiluted. Forget tanks and night vision, and let this be about pure skill.

[Chief Rut]

I agree. This league should be about the skill and how well each team works together and communicates. I like night time play but I think it should be a low light situation without NVG. Unless both teams envolved in the challenge have the equipment.

[ktran]

good point

[HitMan.]

I agree. This league should be about the skill and how well each team works together and communicates. I like night time play but I think it should be a low light situation without NVG. Unless both teams envolved in the challenge have the equipment.

Seems like a good idea...

[NoodlesTheGreat]

I agree as well.  I don't think there's a need for tanks or NVG's at all in this league.  If there is going to be night-time play I also feel there should definitely be a lowlighting situation.

[Snake Eyes 88 USMC]

Would not things like NVG's be considered indegenoius gear to any Tactical Unit?

One of the mainstay phylospohies of Strategy and Tactics is to use every advantage available to your disposal against your foe.

You don't see the SWAT team say "Well the Meth dealers don't have any MP5's in thier house..so leave yours at the station boys"
Or the U.S. Military say "Aw crap I just found out the enemy doesn't have any BlackHawks...guess we'll just have to leave ours in the hanger bay for this war"

Now a Tank isn't something that every small unit travels around with and can be understandably limited.
Maybe something for special missions that each team w/a tank must register for seperately or have limited missions that would even call for tanks.

NVG's I just can't see forcing someone to leave in thier gear bag, I mean if I can afford to put a Launcher on my weapon do I have to leave it at home becouse the other team didn't have one?

Keep exotic weapons limited, but gear that would be common to any Tactical unit or small unit operations should be a big 10-4!
That should also include Guerrilla Warfare as well...Inventiveness.

[HitMan.]

SNAKE YOU HIT THE JACK POT !!!!!  Its all Tactical Playing. Thats why we say we are different then speedball and scenario. 

[Tolgak]

The problem with allowing NVGs is that many people cannot afford them. For the price of one Gen-3 system, you can buy every piece of gear I have almost 4 times. With the allowance of such an expensive product, it gives aid to the people who have more money, taking away some of the stress on skill. I know you are trying to go for SWAT / SF style of combat but when a significant advantage relies on who makes the most money, it takes away from the skill you are trying to stress as part of a game.

[woodwalker]

snake what you're talking about is more scenario than i see this being. quicks point is right, the competition part of this is what sets it apart from any other "league" type this in woodsball. night vision is awesome, but its truely expensive, not just, eh, i dont really feel like spending that money. its not like this an nfl or even nppl type league where everyone can afford everything, teams who will be playing will be alot of beginners who just will not be able to have night vision available to them. now, if the league develops hugely down the stretch and gets to the point where teams can easily afford it, then it can be added, but for now i'd start with equal footing.

[TheJoker]

I think that with the NVGs they should be allowed if both teams for the game have the ability to use the same or similar stuff.  If one chooses to use NVGs while the other decides not to use it, that's their perogrative.  Now if one team chooses to use NVGs and the other team can't afford them, then I don't think NVGs should be allowed.  And tanks I'm unsure about.  When it comes to the paintball guns, it's up to the players to decide what they use.  In real world situations, you don't decide what type of guns your opponents will have so you have to be more cautious because of that.  So there shouldn't be restrictions about the guns.  No certain brands or certain required types or anything like that.  While I do agree with making the guns non-flashy and such, I'm just talking about not allowing people to use a certain gun because it would give them an unfair advantage.  I use a Model 98 (Not a Custom) with a 50 round hopper because I want too.  Some one thinks they can beat me with some fancy gun that can shoot 15+ balls per second, then let them. 

The Joker

[Snake Eyes 88 USMC]

snake what you're talking about is more scenario than i see this being.

Scenario is the furthest thing from my mind.
I am simply saying in that if this is to be as real as it gets and this is to be following a SWAT or Military format in a Mil-Sim way then the tools that are indegenois to them should be allowed.
For the Record I own Night Vision but have only pulled them twice in PB I bought them a few years for night-stalking animails pre- Bow Season.
Weather I use them or not it doesn't bother me to know the other does.

They don't lend any "GOD" sort of mode to you just becouse you have them, it still boils down to skill and there is a counter tactic to everything.

[DevilDogsCommander]

I think NVGs and other equipment that can give one side a advantage over another should be negotiated by the team captains before the games.  Some teams like the challenge of playing a foe with overwhelming advantages.  In this case, my team practices night without NVGs, a skilled team that can communicate in the dark without having to see eachother clearly can compete with a team that has NVGs.  I beleive it should be up to the team captains in a meeting or something held before the game to discuss "unfair" advantages some would call them.

[TheJoker]

Letting the two teams get together and decide would be a good course of action since neither could say later that they lost because the other team had an unfair advantage because they had decided to let the other team use NVGs/tanks.

Option for doing this:

1.  Both teams meet to talk.

2.  The teams share their specs on what level of NVGs they'll be using and how many.  If they're meeting to talk about tanks, then they should tell what type of tank(s) they would like to use, how mobile it is, how many guns it has, etc.

3.  Both teams come to a decision then it's game on.

This would allow both teams to play on equal footing.  If team A has NVGs and team B doesn't and team B say's they don't mind team A using three 1st gen NVGs then team B is saying they like a challenge.  If team B loses it's because they got schooled and they can't claim an unfair advantage working for team A since team B allowed them to use three 1st gen NVGs.

The Joker

[SK1]

I agree with you TheJoker. It is a tacital league and they should not be banned. Unlike the US military and SWAT teams we pay for our gear, so it should boil down to the existing gear kit of the team.

[Ddraiglais]

There is no way I could afford NVGs. That being said, I don't think they should be banned. Part of tactics is to adapt and overcome. I've seen that in plenty of you guys' signatures. That's part of the fun. If you were to beat a team that was using NVGs, think of how much more satisfying it would be.

Another note, is how many night games would there be? I would imagine that most games would be played during the day.

When you start eliminating things, where do you stop? Do you ban grenades? How about certain markers? What about M203 grenade launchers, e-grips, barrels that cost over $100...?

If people are still unconfortable with NVGs, then maybe the team using them could get a point penalty for using them. It's the team that has the NVGs choice. They can have the advantage at a price. Maybe you could make them play a man or two down?

On the subject of tanks, I am not sold one way or the other. They would be fun, but I am not sure if they have a place in small unit tactics. I don't know exactly how you could tie tanks into a game that was limited to twenty players.