43 replies to this topic

[Prince Valor]

Coop, on May 13 2010, 01:34 PM, said:

I'm a definite.

So you ended up throwing the match to play nerf huh?

[Coop]

Prince Valor, on May 13 2010, 05:44 PM, said:

Coop, on May 13 2010, 01:34 PM, said:

I'm a definite.

So you ended up throwing the match to play nerf huh?

No, haha. We just played an insanely strong team!

[Lynx]

Yay?!? All my guys are showing up=I have darts to make!

Lynx + 5

Travis Touchdown will also be participating.

ggk, I need your 2k/quadshot.

[Twitch]

Twitch +1. See ya tomorrow.

[chop]

Good luck today guys

[Mr BadWrench]

Thanks Valor! Good war, 2 locations + larping fail = lots of anger....


Still good war!!

Thank you to Valors GF for picking up darts while I video taped the Larping sword crossing gayness.


Pros

Watching Lunx shoot GGK point blank with his modded NF and knowing they were both not on my team.

Watching Valor shoot GGK with his SM5k.

Watching Coop shoot GGK in the same exact spot that valor shot him in the previous round.

Shooting GGK in the ankle under the playground platform. Have fun in Texas GGK Hope you enjoyed your last Ohio war!

Having a second location.

Cons

Hamp artillery.. I have enough trouble dodging direct fire, indirect fire really sucks...

Having to abandon Whetstone because of soccermoms and dads who could have cared less that we were there first only that we had "guns"...

Lunch took too long because we had to load everything and move to another park.

Larping Gayness.


Don

Edited by Mr BadWrench, 15 May 2010 - 05:51 PM.

[Coop]

Yeah, that was a fun war. I think we should avoid the Park of Roses when there are so much easier locations that we can use like that school playground. Parents and halflings get annoying in large numbers.

Highlights-
Lots of 45 degree angle kills (hehe)
Seeing all the main Central Ohio nerfers again
Stock blaster wars
I forgot your name... maybe one of the Matts? Awesome dodges all day, very annoying to have to fire 50 darts in a single duel!
Melee only game....NOT!


Yeah, I still can't hit a target within 70' but I can hit them beyond 100'? WTF!

I think I got 2.5 rounds on tape (.5 being the melee round). I'll have that edited and on YouTube within a week. I'll post the link here when it's up.

[chop]

I wanna see this larping gayness

[Coop]

chop, on May 15 2010, 08:39 PM, said:

I wanna see this larping gayness

I was going to time lapse the whole round. But, I may not for dramatic effect.

[Twitch]

I loved running around with the Titan. I've been inspired now, to undertake several projects focused on that blaster and that ammunition.




In other news, I've transferred the video from the camera to my computer. I'll start reviewing and editing later this week.

[TheAbused]

I don't think taking 5-10 minutes for a melee only game is really enough to get all bent out of shape for. If we had one that lasted 30-45 minutes, then that's a problem, but only because I'm not a huge fan of any round lasting more than 30 minutes.

I never really understood the whole anti-melee mentality in Nerf. I mean, we run around with toy blasters that shoot little foam darts. Is it really that much of a stretch to run around with foam toy swords? Hell, I wouldn't even mind if we all got a little dressed up for the occasion. Like, old suits from Goodwill or cardboard armor or cowboy hats. We could have a theme war. I'm not advocating a LARP, it's not my thing. Which is why if we all got suited up in camo pants and army boots and spray painted all our blasters gun-metal gray and planned military strike maneuvers and carried around walkie-talkies and crawled through the mud, I probably wouldn't bother to show up. Melee rage isn't LARP rage, it's poor sportsmanship rage.

Personally, including melee in normal Nerf games adds a new dimension of game-play. There's a guy/girl running around with a Marauder and a foam shield? No problem. Shoot him/her in the back. Shoot him/her in the foot. Make a rule that Titan missiles are unblock-able. Run faster than them. Shoot them before they get you.

I'm always wary of blanket bans on Nerf weapons. In Cincinnati, we used to have Nerf Wars every Friday night, with 45-80 people. At first, and for a long time, there were only really two rules: Have fun, and be safe. A close third would have been "use common sense." Then some people decide to abuse this flexibility and freedom, and Stephans were not an option anymore. Then some other people decided to be inconsiderate, and homemade melee weapons were not allowed. Then some people decided to use singled Titans/BBBBs at point blank ranges, and we weren't allowed to have single barrels. We had a change in group elected officers. Suddenly, in the interest of "safety" (and by "safety" I mean "poor sportsmanship"), we weren't allowed to have any homemade blasters of any kind. We couldn't have laser pointers, and then flashlights, then mirrors. We couldn't have any air powered blasters with less than 3 barrels, then less than 4, then no air blasters that didn't originally didn't shoot stock darts. Then we couldn't use any of the Ertl shotguns or paint splat pistols. We weren't allowed to have Longshots with brass breeches. It was quickly getting to the point where we were only going to be allowed to have stock Night Finders. All of this because the people in charge decided not that certain blasters were unsafe, but that certain blasters were unfair. If you're going to have a problem with a blaster's safety, then that's a valid concern, and I encourage that. If you're going to have a problem with a blaster being better than yours, or a game type you don't like because you die too quickly, or a player because they seem to get a hit on you too easily...

I'll admit I wasn't a huge fan of the Core game. I prefer to shoot at people, not at stationary targets. But I do enjoy switching it up and trying something new. Did I complain? Yeah, probably a bit. Was I an asshole about it? I don't think so. I hope I wasn't. If I was at any point Saturday, I'm sorry, and I'm not going to make any excuses. But I hope I can make that up to any one I offended.

Is Nerf solely about marksmanship, firepower, stealth, and camouflage? Is Nerf about complaining about sn!ers, lame deaths, and melee? I thought Nerf Wars were about fun.

For a number of years I've had a personal rule: when I stop having fun, I leave. I had to exercise that a lot in the past, but not so much recently. It's been nice leaving a Nerf War because it got too dark, or because I was tired.

Edited by TheAbused, 16 May 2010 - 06:27 PM.

[Lynx]

Meh, melee as in swords is cool, but only in normal nerf. I did swat a titan rocket. That was hilarious, to me at least. Shields, however, can easily get ridiculous. Have you seen the Roman tortoise? That's why. The restrictions placed on them to make them playable is not worth using them in the first place.

Nerf is just a different version of tag, and if touching any part of a gun/body counts as a hit, why shouldn't hitting a shield count? And we already have a shield: Manta Ray.

Lots of cool parts of the day, and quite a few shitty ones.

Cons:

A few communications breakdowns, such as:
-1. How many lives you have in that stock ffa. 3 took forever like I thought it would, and I only heard the part when people said two lives.
-2. What the fuck we were going to do with those kids.
-3. Whether or not sword blocking allowed in stock rounds.

Having to move locations.

Melee round with a giant phallic 10 foot pole which I wouldn't touch with my giant 10 foot phallus.

General lack of effort by some people in dart sweeps, me included. I am sweeping each of those areas this week...

In the last 5 rounds, my 3k failed to the point of unpumpability.

Pros:

My 3k was win.

A bunch of really lame people coming together to play an organized game of tag, and the follies which ensued:

Me gunning down JJGibbs, a Mike, and Travis Touchdown with my 3k by myself during DtC.

The Effeminate win team I was on the whole day.

Some really fun shoot outs with HAMers.

Changing to the better C-ville locale.

Edited by Lynx, 16 May 2010 - 11:00 PM.

[TheAbused]

Lynx, on May 16 2010, 08:59 PM, said:

Shields, however, can easily get ridiculous. Have you seen the Roman tortoise? That's why. The restrictions placed on them to make them playable is not worth using them in the first place.

A Phalanx? I'm not an expert in military history, but I do recall a few weaknesses in the phalanx tactic. Everyone clumped together makes a mighty attractive target. A target that can't move very fast. Or see too particularly well. Any terrain rougher than, oh, say a field held the potential of breaking up the phalanx.

But I understand the potential for abuse, and I will agree that it could get ridiculous. Then again, sometimes ridiculous can be fun. I think simply allowing a Titan missile to destroy any shield and shield user would be a quick and easy way of balancing that. We don't have to be so dogmatic about Nerf.

Lynx, on May 16 2010, 08:59 PM, said:

Nerf is just a different version of tag, and if touching any part of a gun/body counts as a hit, why shouldn't hitting a shield count? And we already have a shield: Manta Ray.

If we're going to compare Nerf to tag, then melee should be entirely acceptable in any and all Nerf games! You have my support, sir!

Lynx, on May 16 2010, 08:59 PM, said:

Cons:

Melee round with a giant phallic 10 foot pole which I wouldn't touch with my giant 10 foot phallus.

This is a perfect example of letting a measly 10 minutes contribute to the potential ruin of one's day.

[Lynx]

TheAbused, on May 17 2010, 05:57 PM, said:

Lynx, on May 16 2010, 08:59 PM, said:

Shields, however, can easily get ridiculous. Have you seen the Roman tortoise? That's why. The restrictions placed on them to make them playable is not worth using them in the first place.

A Phalanx? I'm not an expert in military history, but I do recall a few weaknesses in the phalanx tactic. Everyone clumped together makes a mighty attractive target. A target that can't move very fast. Or see too particularly well. Any terrain rougher than, oh, say a field held the potential of breaking up the phalanx.

Not a phalanx, which was extremely versatile in its day, but a tortoise.

If you aren't an expert in military history, google that shit. And it can move fairly fast. If you want to play that shit, do larp. A theme war is larp. A theme round is called a different game type. If you want to pass out identical shields and have *a* shield round, sure.



But I understand the potential for abuse, and I will agree that it could get ridiculous. Then again, sometimes ridiculous can be fun. I think simply allowing a Titan missile to destroy any shield and shield user would be a quick and easy way of balancing that. We don't have to be so dogmatic about Nerf.

Ridiculous is having all of your team with titans. What if one team doesn't have a titan? Since you are changing rules for different types, what about arrows? How do you know 2-3 arrows hit if its a full blast from a big salvo? Again, the addition of such rules outside nerf weaponry only leads to more craziness.

Lynx, on May 16 2010, 08:59 PM, said:

Cons:

Melee round with a giant phallic 10 foot pole which I wouldn't touch with my giant 10 foot phallus.

This is a perfect example of letting a measly 10 minutes contribute to the potential ruin of one's day.

English please?

[TheAbused]

Lynx, on May 17 2010, 05:09 PM, said:

Not a phalanx, which was extremely versatile in its day, but a tortoise.

If you aren't an expert in military history, google that shit. And it can move fairly fast. If you want to play that shit, do larp. A theme war is larp. A theme round is called a different game type. If you want to pass out identical shields and have *a* shield round, sure.

My mistake. A phalanx is not a tortoise. But I'm pretty sure a couple of those weaknesses still apply. The clumped, visually impaired, slow moving target one. In a historical sense, extremely effective. Those soldiers were well trained in hand to hand combat, and were extremely dangerous to engage. But I bet a rocket launcher would take them out. Your average group of Nerfers all huddled together behind shields? Slow, clumped, blind. I see no reason not to simply introduce a Nerf rocket.

My point: Shields don't have to be a game breaker.

My argument is: we should try new tactics every once in a while and see what works, what doesn't, what is fun, what isn't.

Your argument seems to be: Nerfers cannot be expected to cope with new things, or play fair.

Your argument also implies that any round of melee only is LARP. Sort of. Actually, you seem to have conflicting arguments there. "A theme round is called a different game type." So, melee only should be ok. Its just a different game type.

So, what if I have a problem with pistol rounds? Pistol round? PISTOL ROUND?!?! I didn't bring no wimpy little pistol to a war! I'm not wearing a vest coat and a top hat! We're not doing that wussy gentleman's duel malarkey!

LARPing is a lot more than using a specific type of weapon in simulated combat.

My point: Theme =/= LARP.

Lynx, on May 17 2010, 05:09 PM, said:

Ridiculous is having all of your team with titans. What if one team doesn't have a titan? Since you are changing rules for different types, what about arrows? How do you know 2-3 arrows hit if its a full blast from a big salvo? Again, the addition of such rules outside nerf weaponry only leads to more craziness.

This is a slippery slope. What if one team only has BBBBs, and the other team only has Nite Finders? What if one team only has brass breech Longshots, and the other team only has Atom Blasters? What if one team consists entirely of overweight middle-aged men, and the other team is the varsity high school track team? I would imagine the people showing up and organizing such an event would have enough common sense to sort this kind of thing out.

My point: We're already ridiculous. We're playing with toy blasters.

Lynx, on May 17 2010, 05:09 PM, said:

TheAbused, on May 17 2010, 05:57 PM, said:

Lynx, on May 16 2010, 08:59 PM, said:

Cons:
Melee round with a giant phallic 10 foot pole which I wouldn't touch with my giant 10 foot phallus.

This is a perfect example of letting a measly 10 minutes contribute to the potential ruin of one's day.

English please?

My apologies. I was not clear enough. I could have more completely expressed my thought this way:
Your above statement (the one suggesting my close friend has penis inferiority complex because he chose to craft and use a rather long melee weapon) is an example of a person or persons (you, but NOT ONLY you) allowing a small portion of the day (10-15 minutes, the same amount of time we usually milled around between games) to place them in a sour mood (where they whine, complain, moan, or throw a tantrum) and to further regard the day as a bit of a loss.

I could have also implied that were being rather rude.

I'm not trying to get into a fight with you. I'm trying to explain that melee weapons and shields can be a perfectly reasonable Nerf tactic. You seem to be trying to bring me down a notch.

Edited by TheAbused, 17 May 2010 - 08:28 PM.

[Coop]

I think melee weapons do add another part of the game that makes it interesting. I'm in favor of having them in normal rounds. I do think there should be a limit on what is legal for melee though, that huge pole seemed a bit lengthy (though I didn't see it in a normal round). I don't use swords because I'm slow and I like to actually shoot people, but I don't think there should be a ban on it until it becomes a safety problem (which I don't see happening because the guys that made their own melee gear seemed very conscious of safety while designing them).

I'm 100% against shields though, except for the Crossfire shield and Manta Ray because they're small and actually Nerf. I think having people run around 3'x5' shields and swords would not only be unfair, but highly annoying. That is just asking for welts if people are trying to get within melee range while approaching +bows and such.

I know I did bitch a bit about the melee round and I'm sorry if I was rude. I think having a single melee-only round is fine. I only bitched because we tried to have the melee round while other people were breaking or dart sweeping so it didn't waste time (for the people that didn't want to play swords). It just seemed like the people about to play the melee round were delaying quite a bit making it difficult to get it over with to go back to the normal rounds.

Also, for team picking: I think we should pick new teams every time we change game variants. I know I think of people (with certain blasters) differently from round to round because some blasters are better for different games.

[TheAbused]

Coop, on May 17 2010, 08:15 PM, said:

I'm 100% against shields though, except for the Crossfire shield and Manta Ray because they're small and actually Nerf. I think having people run around 3'x5' shields and swords would not only be unfair, but highly annoying. That is just asking for welts if people are trying to get within melee range while approaching +bows and such.

Our rule shields were something like:
- store bought with no significant modification (paint and some structural reinforcement were permitted)
- no bigger than one square foot area coverage
- you can only carry a shield if you carry a soft store bought melee
- abuse the privilege, and no one gets shields

The problem is ill-defined here. Shields and melee aren't the problem. Welts and bruises and cuts are the problems. Not just with close ranges due to melee and shields... I've been hit pretty hard from normal, everyday rushes.

In Cincinnati (after a time), we usually wouldn't allow anything that could leave welts. We played inside a laser tag arena, so those kind of ranges were unnecessary. If you had something that could send a dart 20-50 feet, you were pretty much set.

Personally, whenever I was carrying a high powered blaster (plugged, single barreled BBBB... usually with 8 darts in the barrel, but often with one), I wouldn't shoot anyone within 30 or 40 feet of me. I had a secondary pistol for that. Other people carried secondary melees.

There's two ways to avoid receiving and giving welts. One: simply ban anything that can leave a welt, of which I'm not a huge fan, because it punished fair and considerate players. Two: require every person who carries a high powered blaster to carry a low powered secondary to use in close ranges. If you become a problem, you aren't allowed to use that blaster.

I'm reminded of a common saying way back when we played on a college campus: "If you want to play with toy guns that can leave welts, go play paintball."

[Coop]

TheAbused, on May 17 2010, 11:45 PM, said:

There's two ways to avoid receiving and giving welts. One: simply ban anything that can leave a welt, of which I'm not a huge fan, because it punished fair and considerate players. Two: require every person who carries a high powered blaster to carry a low powered secondary to use in close ranges. If you become a problem, you aren't allowed to use that blaster.

I agree that welts are no fun, but to make any type of rule forcing someone to switch to their secondary or not be allowed to use their primary at all would defeat the purpose of modifying these blasters to perform well. I believe we (pretty much last year's Central Ohio nerfers vs. UC nerfers) just have a different perspective on the game and it's causing issues because the two play styles don't mesh well together. I enjoy longer range (50-100') engagements, it's fun for me. It gives a better chance of dodging than a slower dart at a closer range. I also don't like to come home with welts, but feeling a tag is a huge part of the game that I actually enjoy (to a certain point of course). If someone wants to try and run up and tag me with their sword, I say go for it. If I end up leaving a welt on them because my range is about 70', well sorry but I honestly think that is a good deterrent for rushing.

I've never really had a problem with close range welt-giving. Of course, I have now been labeled as a "camper" because of my habit to stay in the back of the field so I guess that makes sense. But it seems so easy to just stay back if welts aren't for you. I don't see the problem with that.

[TheAbused]

Coop, on May 18 2010, 07:27 AM, said:

I believe we (pretty much last year's Central Ohio nerfers vs. UC nerfers) just have a different perspective on the game and it's causing issues because the two play styles don't mesh well together.

Yeah, I've noticed this, too. Honestly, I could talk about this (and lots of other things mentioned in this thread) for days, but I don't think this is the right Forum for it.

I'll be quiet now.

Edited by TheAbused, 18 May 2010 - 05:33 PM.