*Magfed is a limited paint playstyle, so the "Action" is naturally restricted by how many mags you can physically carry on the field at one time. This amount of paint is also affected by playstyle (Bolt-Action Sniper, all the way to BoxMags) Field dimensions have to be based around FSR distances so 150yds. x 80yds. would be the standard minimum size.*
Round capacity should be limited to 100rds. That generally equals to a loadout of 5x20rd magazines (EMF). However it will also allow a loadout of 3x30rd mags (T15), 1x30rd + 3x19rd (T15), or 4x18rd + 2x11rd (M17). Other combos can work as long as it adds up to 100rds. I don't think roundball Box-mags should be allowed in the standardized gameplay. FSR should be the only paint allowed so that will disqualify the current Box-mags. My goal would be that the rule would force manufactures to develop a reliable FSR Box-mag which would help progress and develop the sport. While I agree with you that those field dimensions would showcase the capability of FSR, it is too big and would make the gameplay too slow. I think an 80yds x 50yds is a good compromise for showcasing FSR, push the action in gameplay, and be size conscience to fields that have limited space. I think this discussion and hopefully application is all positive.
I feel it depends on the players playstyle. Most folks that run fsr play the tactical sit and wait and move slow, unless the field is smaller and forces movement. We have have a field at my field that's about 80 yards by 20 yards with a elbow of about 20 yards. And it's usually us magfed guys that end up pushing up the field and dominating it, speedballers hate playing that map because they think it's a waste of paint 😂.
In this particular case by standardizing a format including field size we would be dictating the playstyle. Its like baseball, at one point the parks were bigger so teams played "small ball" but when people started seeing homeruns and wanted more of it, they improved the ball and moved the fences in closer. What we're trying to do is showcase Magfeds highlights - FSR performance, realism, magazine reloads, and team tactics.
@@magfedranchpaintball that's not how most magfed players play tho. Because they limit themselves to MFOG/MFOE so they never have a real challenge presented to them that you can only get in open class play, or most guys don't have the experience or training to keep their "gameplays" as realistic as possible in terms of manipulations and mechanics. Aggressive playstyles, truly trained/experience players are a niche within this niche. Most magfed guys are casual magfedders and full time speedballers 😂 or they only play occasionally (like a few times a year) and have no consistency (like playing weekly) to relate into true skill level. Most guys don't see a benefit to tacticool movement and gear, they just wanna play when they can and sling paint. Now, if you follow my channel, you know I agree with the tactical approach/playstyle but balance that with both aggression, smart movement and teamwork, but needless to say, only milsim minded players think this way. And milsim players are a small category in our niche, majority magfed guys are occasionals and casuals.
@@2crakd I'm hoping this format will give them an avenue and also a goal to play Magfed more. A structured, competitive gameplay will give them something to train for and build that experience. Also, dictating a format in which they have to use team tactics to be successful will naturally push them to train together more and build their loadouts for not only to win but also to be competitive. Competition in a fair environment is the key because if you go and play and you feel as if you don't have a shot at winning you're going to be less likely to participate.
@@magfedranchpaintball I agree 💯... I see a few organizers already hosting competitive tactical magfed, and I'd like to see it rise up and start taking over the scene like speedball has done tbh.
Let’s talk game style, are we playing a “big game”, tactical scenario, tournament, bunkers, structures, hypeball field, etc.? once we have narrowed that down we can make an accurate assessment of what is acceptable size wise. Next, how many players are we injecting into said game style. Team tactical can be small, teams of 5 or less obviously don’t need much space, first strikes or not. Scenarios, you’ll need more space, much like an entire field (large). simply b/c you’ll have 25+ per side. Tournament again falls into team tactical and can be played on a single field at a paintball field. Player roles, within this standardization, if they are snipers, medics, heavy gunners etc they fall within the game play rules and should be monitored but can be used on any size. Just b/c a marker with fsr is capable of such accuracy doesn’t necessarily mean the shooter is. This is where skill meets the field. Ultimately, the field size depends on what game style is being played.
It should be a "small game" 80yds x 50yds, tournament format, tactical scenario with COD type structures like cars, building type structures, urban CQB style field layout. Team size of 5 is ideal but 4-6 range is reasonable. Roles I think will naturally progress through the gameplay. and of course which team is more successful. If Snipers are more successful than teams will setup there loadouts accordingly. Same thing with their markers and associated equipment. What works and what wins is what's going to get used. My hope is that manufactures will see the results and adjust/produce products as necessary.
@@magfedranchpaintball What i think youre getting at is league/tournament play. This style would undoubtedly require standardization in terms of field/map size. IMO, this is separate from regular or rec play, in that players will have to submit to such a style of play. In most cases these "semi-auto cats" need to be incentivized in order to be herded, and even that is a feat on its own. This new standardization has to be done on a national level as to create the demand for it. Magfed-ers will have to find themselves dedicated to such leagues and tournaments to keep the structure in it. Be it weekly, monthly, or whatever the schedule is. We would essentially be parsing out an already thinned and segregated group (not racially segregated). Yes, "I" am for this, I would love to see this come to fruition, it will take the community though, a community of dedicated players to run the league. This CAN BE done!
