Bolt actions and high fps, discuss..

this isnt a tanaka attack. its a question of,would you run your bolt action at sub 350 to get an more authentic game feel. and the concensus seems to be, allied, mostly yes, axis mostly no. go figure..........my new enfield chronoed at 408-413 and after using it once, i am prepared to down grade it to the power of a thompson.

That word again.........."authentic". Since when is it "authentic" that a No 4 only has the same range as a Thompson? This one can be argued till the cows come home - and no side to it is either right, or wrong!

i totally agree, its a personel thing, and after using a high powered rifle that cramped my style a bit coz i had to hang back not to hurt people, its about what you get out of a game. i dont want to hurt people, i DO want to feel like a rifleman, and if that means having to hide behind a tree and franticly re-load a rifle mag while a guy with an mp40 strafes me, so be it..... much more exhilerating than laying in the ferns miles away .

I prefer the exhileration of laying in the ferns, miles away! But that's just my style of play, which is why I won't downgrade either my Enfield nor my Mosin Nagant. I can judge 25m, plus I know that my sidearm is fully capable of 40m hits as well, so, if someone looks like he's homing in on me, he gets a double tap from my Luger, rather than 500fps from my rifle. If someone should blunder onto me, I'll just call "hit" and walk, rather than risk injuring them. Simples.

Fair play to anyone who's after the rifleman experience to run at 350fps or less but here's one allied player who won't be doing it.

Barry I think made one of the best points in the thread with this comment above. Rifles in the attack would have bayonets. Once you are inside the MED you are close to the enemy. The tactics of the armies would be then to close with the enemy and kill them. We already have knife kills in the rules this is just a variation of it. If you are overun by some horrible Scotsman waving his tackle or a Landser charges in and takes you in the rear take the hit.
In defence looking at what the troops tried to do to break up assaults gives us the solution to what to do when your attacker is inside your MED. Use grenades thrown in front of your position and take cover.

Ah, now you are talking authenticity John! Heh, Barrie makes goods points with a twinkle in his eye, which is nice.

Fair play to anyone who's after the rifleman experience to run at 350fps or less but here's one allied player who won't be doing it.

Ditto.

I'm quite happy to offset the 'inaccuracy' of carrying a sidearm, to compensate for the chance to outclass/outrange smg's. Plus, i like my M10, so even with a sub-350 rifle, i'd probably keep it on me.

I'm confused as to what has happened here, or what the discussion is even about now.

I remember an opinion being expressed, and a 'wouldn't it be cool if' but it has become a right and wrong type thing. oh well.

On the rifles close/bayonets jazz - I stumbled on a German in the ferns near the end of the day where I was distinctly too close to be shot with his rifle. due to how he was holding his rifle and I was holding mine I thought 'no way' so I put my hands up in surrender and he nodded in a 'right ho, bugger of to dead man place' way. I thought that was fair enough, and if he had lunged at me with an imaginary bayonet I would have gone 'argh' and fallen over. I thought that was OK -and thank you to the German by the way , sportingly nice of you.

Authenticity? yeah I agree with Yith there. It is more authentic to be able to close with rifles than to out-range SMGs, and it would add to the 'feel' for me. Yes a rifle should out-range an SMG, but they should also fire a lot further no? I would rather have a rifle that I could use close and be out-ranged by my opponents'/allies' rifles then the reverse (also pistols were not issued to US riflemen, as that was asked at some point).
But isn't the point that is choice, and in honesty I didn't know there was that much of a choice before (OK I did know it was possible, but felt that it was somehow expected that someone with a bolt action rifle be more powerful etc etc. My mistake perhaps but this discussion is/was at least opening this up to be talked about I thought).

Well, according to Yith apparently this all sprung from one of my briefing threads for Ariel - where I asked players to consider how they might use their rifles and whether high fps was going to be beneficial or not to the action, given the terrain and event style. Yith is right to make the point that a high fps isn't the be-all and end-all and that indeed lower fps is just as useful - and indeed just as much fun At Ariel the mix worked very well - but it might not be the case at other venues/time of year/weather conditions/game style etc etc.

this isnt a tanaka attack. its a question of,would you run your bolt action at sub 350 to get an more authentic game feel. and the concensus seems to be, allied, mostly yes, axis mostly no. go figure..........my new enfield chronoed at 408-413 and after using it once, i am prepared to down grade it to the power of a thompson.

In a simple answer no, but thats is due to what Andy answered. Would I buy something that could be? of course if there was an appropriate ie equally looking the part and very reliable, alternative for games that required that, then yes I personally would. Doesn't mean we'd get rid of the tanaka, or indeed using things such as the MP40, or Thompson or pistols though as they all have a time and place where they can be used.

Hey everyone - group hug - how did this end up as a big argument.

I think the original post was just a friendly suggestion that people might like to try using lower fps rifles so that they don't have to swap to a pistol.

I for one am going to give it a try mostly because I can't hit jack beyond about 30m anyway. I don't expect anyone else to follow suit, if they're happy shooting me from miles away that's fine too.

Plus, just for the record and I know it wasn't meant but people might get the wrong idea - Anne's M14/Garand isn't "high powered", in fact it's sub 300fps.

Yith is right to make the point that a high fps isn't the be-all and end-all and that indeed lower fps is just as useful - and indeed just as much fun At Ariel the mix worked very well - but it might not be the case at other venues/time of year/weather conditions/game style etc etc.

This is very true too, I think open sites like Taffy's where we played Huskey absolutely demanded the longer range (I got some flukey 50m+ hits there too).

So I agree with everyone!

Ah Barrie, you mistake a debate for an big argument. Rational thought - make a proposal and argue your case. Like wot you do.

I for one am going to give it a try mostly because I can't hit jack beyond about 30m anyway.

A perfectly rational and valid reason!

Anne's M14/Garand isn't "high powered"

Did I mis-type? I'm the only person who mentioned Anne I think and I'm sure I said low powered.

Edit for subsequent posting:
We are all agreeing for the status quo I think!

Whoops you didn't mis-type, I was skim reading.

Crikey 5 pages of talking around the houses
I go both ways ( ) and have a Tanaka and a 40+fps springn rifle (covered in Fablon - it is so shabby chic).

I like a pistol but had it in my pocket so unless I get it out - I am a rifleman.

However..... safety first for me! If I am closer than 30m I will not shoot a high powered rifle at anyone*. It is only a game. I don't care who wins or loses and I like to keep friends.
MED is important, fps is a choice but more importantly discipline and safety. I have been lacerated by a Thompson at ten feet and had blood squirting everywhere... no MED there just a bad call (people stop shooting me in the nose, I know it is a large target but still!)

BBs lose energy logarithmically over distance. Heavier BBs at any initial FPS carry energy further. Think before you shoot and be happy

Can we STOP ARGUING NOW PLEASE

* I usually grenade that close as it is more satisfying

I go both ways ( ) and have a Tanaka and a 40+fps springn rifle (covered in Fablon - it is so shabby chic).

40fps man you've been gipped

I like a pistol but had it in my pocket so unless I get it out -

Ah you left that to the men in skirts this weekend then

(people stop shooting me in the nose, I know it is a large target but still!)

Che says that all the time, actually he's been quite lucky recently, but there was a point where every game someone managed to get him bang on the schnozz

there was a point where every game someone managed to get him bang on the schnozz

I think it's someone's secret fetish, i've been shot bang on the nose in three seperate games now!

arguing, yes, its an intellectual process designed to establish a propersition. falling out, never.

there was a point where every game someone managed to get him bang on the schnozz

I think it's someone's secret fetish, i've been shot bang on the nose in three seperate games now!

I think che has survived 3 games without a schnozz shot, maybes the nose hitting fetishist has progessed onto new targets ie you strange huh you must have had the three Che's lacked. Must be a player that swings both ways (well sides ).

Heh... looks like we've got away from arguments which is good. Sorry for not posting for the last few hours, but I've been looking after Brendan.

Anyway, unlike Heide, my play style is much more close up and personal. I don't really like long range fire fights so the ability to keep the rifle in action close up is key to the accuracy I like to have in my impression as that's how I prefer to play. I remember Gucci telling me ages ago that I got too close to the enemy when sniping (still outside the MED of course) and that's probably why I didn't play that well as a sniper. Oh I get my fair share of kills, but I'm no expert by any means.

I did have a holster for my pea green webbing ready on Sunday, but when the idea spawned by Chommers comment came in it was an easy option to lose that and the pistol when I downgraded my rifle. As a result I got chance to use the rifle a whole lot more during the event, had a more accurate load out for what I was portraying and came out very happy indeed from the day.

Now I don't want to put anyone down for using a side-arm, for safety's sake I'd actually prefer all players to carry a side-arm if using a high powered rifle. To me it's not really an option to not do so and some sites even ban snipers from not carrying one, though they are quite unique in doing do.

I feel like I should apologise again for bringing up the unfortunate incident on Sunday. I felt that I was being flamed and responded by bringing something into that argument that shouldn't have been mentioned. I have thought of a more suitable response in hindsight, but looking at the way the discussion has moved on I see no reason to bring it up. Again my deepest apologies for seeing the red mist.

Brendan is obviously a good influence

lol... I'd already thought all that out whilst driving like mad when I realised I was late to start babysitting whilst Rachel went out. I was supposed to be home at 18:30, left at 18:15 with a 25 minute drive to do. I was just 3 minutes late and Rachel didn't notice. I hope I didn't get caught by any speed cameras!

Brendan has been very good tonight though, we've watched "Empire Strikes Back" together (he loves the "stompers") and sorted through my Lord of the Rings models.

Don't get me wrong Yith, I can be as up close and personal as the next bloke, perhaps even more, if called upon to do so (like on sunday in Steves' sneaky squad) but, if using a rifle, I like to have that extra bit of distance between myself and my targets. At 70 metres plus, I'll happily take on a squad of 5, safe in the knowledge I'll drop at least 3 of them before they get an inkling of where I may be and that gives me the time to relocate without being spotted. I can only get that kind of range and accuracy with a more powerful weapon capable of handling heavier ammo consistently. That kind of "arms length" shooting just ain't possible at 350fps with .25's unfortunately.