Tommikka

I can see where you're coming from but it's also the prerogative of anyone who isn't in-game to make it  clear, whether that's by a hand in the air, dead rags or shouts of "dead man walking". Not doing these tells me the player is a legitimate target

Tell that to the conspiracy nutters 🤪

I’m with you on ‘dead man walking’
As long as you aren’t actually cheating (hand up to walk through as a dead player then shooting), and in line with event rules then it’s valid
(I also encourage those willing to risk it in my game rules)
 
If in doubt challenge / shoot.
If it’s a problem then adopt clear systems such as dead rags
 
 
(but this is another thread diversion with an often argued topic)
It doesn’t, and is now deceased, following the great lightning strike fire of Ironsight 
Our turret was an event prop/objective, not for players to turn up and use but for players to try and pass or defeat
 
It did have a variety of disablement systems - for safety purposes as a kill switch system, and player activated controls to ‘kill’ it

 
As seen on TV, and an upcoming card game
 
Solaco RIP
 
 
 

The ‘intelligence’ of AI are highly exaggerated
It has its uses, but many more limitations 

I’m with you on ‘dead man walking’
As long as you aren’t actually cheating (hand up to walk through as a dead player then shooting), and in line with event rules then it’s valid
(I also encourage those willing to risk it in my game rules)
 
If in doubt challenge / shoot.
If it’s a problem then adopt clear systems such as dead rags
 
 
(but this is another thread diversion with an often argued topic)
It doesn’t, and is now deceased, following the great lightning strike fire of Ironsight 
Our turret was an event prop/objective, not for players to turn up and use but for players to try and pass or defeat
 
It did have a variety of disablement systems - for safety purposes as a kill switch system, and player activated controls to ‘kill’ it

 
As seen on TV, and an upcoming card game
 
Solaco RIP
 
 
 

The ‘intelligence’ of AI are highly exaggerated
It has its uses, but many more limitations 

I'm not sure. The post was made at the start of the easter holiday and we all know how the number of stupid posts always goes up when the schools are out

I’m with you on ‘dead man walking’
As long as you aren’t actually cheating (hand up to walk through as a dead player then shooting), and in line with event rules then it’s valid
(I also encourage those willing to risk it in my game rules)
 
If in doubt challenge / shoot.
If it’s a problem then adopt clear systems such as dead rags
 
 
(but this is another thread diversion with an often argued topic)
It doesn’t, and is now deceased, following the great lightning strike fire of Ironsight 
Our turret was an event prop/objective, not for players to turn up and use but for players to try and pass or defeat
 
It did have a variety of disablement systems - for safety purposes as a kill switch system, and player activated controls to ‘kill’ it

 
As seen on TV, and an upcoming card game
 
Solaco RIP
 
 
 

The ‘intelligence’ of AI are highly exaggerated
It has its uses, but many more limitations 

The origin of the word camouflage comes from the French to disguise.
 
This still envelopes the military use, which is more than just hiding something to be unseen - it’s actually more about disguising what you do see as opposed to not being seen - especially to be seen but not noticed.
WW1 dazzle camouflage is a perfect illustration that camouflage isn’t about avoiding being seen but to disguise what you see and delay/prevent your opposition from being able to quickly identify what has been seen and to delay the understanding of its size, distance, direction, speed etc
 
A ghillie might hit the sweet spot of being invisible, but being harder to notice, identify and understand the body shape is a success for the ghillied player.
The enemy of the ghillie is movement, and equally the enemy of the player in jeans & hoody is movement 
We notice movement, then we interpret whether that thing that just moved is a threat or not.  That buys time for the quiet player
 
 

There is …..
 
These are intended to avoid facial recognition on CCTV etc, and are therefore also a form of camouflage.
 
When we had our automated sentry gun, it would always prefer to aim at my head during testing, setting up etc.
When browsing the the AIs reference pictures we observed two things:
 
1) The torso presented the largest and most obvious target, but images captured in the tracking sequences were sometimes inconsistent, our conclusion was that though MTP/multicam is lighter in contrast to the UKs woodland, the disruptive pattern broke up the human shape and though movement was clearly visible prediction of where that movement was going became inconsistent.  The head was a more consistent shape, and the human body tries to keep the head steady when moving, making tracking and prediction more accurate
 
2) We realised that the AI still had its initial reference images from the first test runs with a football, heads are close enough to a ball shape and moved in similar trajectories (less the bouncing)
 
With two or three targets the system could predict and switch back and forth between where each of the heads would be by the time the barrel switched back
 
On a camouflage perspective for players, we might see a player but we still need to recognise, assess the threat and predict where it will be.
A moving target is easier to see, but we have to guess where to shoot 
A stationary target may not be so obvious, is easy to point at once identified, but not an immediate threat unless their barrel is pointed at us 
 
As well as ghillies waiting for an opportunity, the sneaky players who quietly but blatently stroll behind your lines may be ‘camouflaging’ with non aggressive actions

That's another hotly debated topic as some people consider it cheating. Personally, if I see someone walking nonchalantly and their hand isn't in the air, they're getting a shot to the plate carrier. One of my friends is really good at doing this, walking nonchalantly with his rifle in hand past the enemy team and then shooting them in the back, and it's something we do at Vietnam filmsims as well, but with a hidden pistol tucked into the trousers and no rifle in hand.
 
"No VC, civilian, civilian!" *blam blam blam*

That’s not the fort, it’s Bennys farmhouse 
 

 

 

 
(One of our guys was doing a job, and when he was loading up the waste to scrap they mentioned getting rid of their playhouse - just in time for event planning)

Sod ghillie suit, get yourself one of these.
 
 

it's actually not too far from an actual pill box, if you remove the upper floor so you can stand up inside, put down a chair or two, it will be a chill spot

Thats not a kiddies slide its an Emergency Rapid Egress System .😔

The origin of the word camouflage comes from the French to disguise.
 
This still envelopes the military use, which is more than just hiding something to be unseen - it’s actually more about disguising what you do see as opposed to not being seen - especially to be seen but not noticed.
WW1 dazzle camouflage is a perfect illustration that camouflage isn’t about avoiding being seen but to disguise what you see and delay/prevent your opposition from being able to quickly identify what has been seen and to delay the understanding of its size, distance, direction, speed etc
 
A ghillie might hit the sweet spot of being invisible, but being harder to notice, identify and understand the body shape is a success for the ghillied player.
The enemy of the ghillie is movement, and equally the enemy of the player in jeans & hoody is movement 
We notice movement, then we interpret whether that thing that just moved is a threat or not.  That buys time for the quiet player
 
 

The origin of the word camouflage comes from the French to disguise.
 
This still envelopes the military use, which is more than just hiding something to be unseen - it’s actually more about disguising what you do see as opposed to not being seen - especially to be seen but not noticed.
WW1 dazzle camouflage is a perfect illustration that camouflage isn’t about avoiding being seen but to disguise what you see and delay/prevent your opposition from being able to quickly identify what has been seen and to delay the understanding of its size, distance, direction, speed etc
 
A ghillie might hit the sweet spot of being invisible, but being harder to notice, identify and understand the body shape is a success for the ghillied player.
The enemy of the ghillie is movement, and equally the enemy of the player in jeans & hoody is movement 
We notice movement, then we interpret whether that thing that just moved is a threat or not.  That buys time for the quiet player
 
 

The origin of the word camouflage comes from the French to disguise.
 
This still envelopes the military use, which is more than just hiding something to be unseen - it’s actually more about disguising what you do see as opposed to not being seen - especially to be seen but not noticed.
WW1 dazzle camouflage is a perfect illustration that camouflage isn’t about avoiding being seen but to disguise what you see and delay/prevent your opposition from being able to quickly identify what has been seen and to delay the understanding of its size, distance, direction, speed etc
 
A ghillie might hit the sweet spot of being invisible, but being harder to notice, identify and understand the body shape is a success for the ghillied player.
The enemy of the ghillie is movement, and equally the enemy of the player in jeans & hoody is movement 
We notice movement, then we interpret whether that thing that just moved is a threat or not.  That buys time for the quiet player
 
 

The origin of the word camouflage comes from the French to disguise.
 
This still envelopes the military use, which is more than just hiding something to be unseen - it’s actually more about disguising what you do see as opposed to not being seen - especially to be seen but not noticed.
WW1 dazzle camouflage is a perfect illustration that camouflage isn’t about avoiding being seen but to disguise what you see and delay/prevent your opposition from being able to quickly identify what has been seen and to delay the understanding of its size, distance, direction, speed etc
 
A ghillie might hit the sweet spot of being invisible, but being harder to notice, identify and understand the body shape is a success for the ghillied player.
The enemy of the ghillie is movement, and equally the enemy of the player in jeans & hoody is movement 
We notice movement, then we interpret whether that thing that just moved is a threat or not.  That buys time for the quiet player
 
 

The origin of the word camouflage comes from the French to disguise.
 
This still envelopes the military use, which is more than just hiding something to be unseen - it’s actually more about disguising what you do see as opposed to not being seen - especially to be seen but not noticed.
WW1 dazzle camouflage is a perfect illustration that camouflage isn’t about avoiding being seen but to disguise what you see and delay/prevent your opposition from being able to quickly identify what has been seen and to delay the understanding of its size, distance, direction, speed etc
 
A ghillie might hit the sweet spot of being invisible, but being harder to notice, identify and understand the body shape is a success for the ghillied player.
The enemy of the ghillie is movement, and equally the enemy of the player in jeans & hoody is movement 
We notice movement, then we interpret whether that thing that just moved is a threat or not.  That buys time for the quiet player
 
 

Lots of interesting points and counter points being made here.
 
Personally I'm not a fan of telling people you can't wear x,y or z (unless it's a matter of player safety) as we've all paid to be there and nobody likes to be told how to play, but I can understand why sites would do it. If a game is grinding to a halt because one team can't get more than 10 yards from respawn before being hit then to me the site should be taking steps to change the game either by rearranging teams or by moving players back, eg by deploying smoke to simulate gas. Yes this can be frustrating if you're the one being moved but it's just as annoying being stuck in respawn and is likely to make people give up which then only snowballs and makes the game worse. Unfortunately this would require site staff to actually do some work which, as we all know, can be a rare thing 

Ah imagine before too long all Airsoft fields across the nation quiet and peaceful. Not because nobody goes Airsofting anymore, no, because everyone is a secret squirrel sniper and hiding in a bush or a tree in their KMCS. 
 
Make sure to bring a flask 😀

It would entirely depend on the circumstances.
 
Discrimination is covered by the Equality Act, and applies to protected characteristics which include disability.
 
If they were banned for being disabled then that would be discrimination 
If banned for their actions as an individual then that would not be discrimination 
But if banned as an individual, for their actions which are a result of their ability then that may or may not be discrimination - and can come down to what is reasonable.
 

It would entirely depend on the circumstances.
 
Discrimination is covered by the Equality Act, and applies to protected characteristics which include disability.
 
If they were banned for being disabled then that would be discrimination 
If banned for their actions as an individual then that would not be discrimination 
But if banned as an individual, for their actions which are a result of their ability then that may or may not be discrimination - and can come down to what is reasonable.
 

If the player was acting aggressively or dangerously then give them the boot as the site had a duty of care towards all players, if their behaviour had the site not acted and the person's actions led to someone getting hurt then the site would've been in serious trouble.
 
As the site is happy to cater for those with disabilities it sounds to me like the banned player is trying to use their disabilities as an excuse to act like a cunt.

Anyone can sue on any grounds but the question is whether there's a case.
 
The fact that the site you play at has games specially for ND players and that there is a precedent of such players playing among NT players on normal game days would be a compelling argument that the banned player was banned because of their actions, not their condition.

The line is drawn at the site's duty to make "reasonable adjustments" under Equality Act.
 
To sue for discrimination the claimant will have to convince the court that there was a >51% probability that "failure of reasonable adjustment" had occurred, but because you cannot reasonably adjust the site rules to allow any aggressive behaviour to happen and compromise safety of others, it is pretty much impossible that such a claim would succeed.
 
It is not discrimination to not adjust the site rules for a disabled person if they are being a safety risk to themselves or others as it is going to "fundamentally alter the nature of the service".