Rogerborg

Pretty good. Just stay together at the safety brief, and in a corner (front left, front right, back left, back right), as they sometimes split left-to-right, and sometimes back-to-front just to mix it up. If you do get split, just ask to swap with someone on the other team before you get taped up.

I'm in on the 17th, but unfortunately my backup-backup-AEG's air seal isn't (air sealed) and my CYMA shotty is misfeeding, so I may not be throwing spares around like some tan-clad Santa Claus.

If you're chronoing an automatic gun at 370fps with 0.2g BBs and your hop on, then it's very likely that what you're using isn't an airsoft gun, by the legal definition. Because why? Because the definition is based on the maximum energy that it is capable of producing at the muzzle, with anything that will fit down the barrel, including a steel BB. The reason for that should hopefully be obvious: the intent is to prohibit guns that could be used for harm, not just to ensure that a gun isn't being used for it at any given time. Don't take my word for it, read the legislation: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/3/section/125/enacted And yes, I do think that means that HPA guns are on very thin ice. I hope that's not put to the test.

I agree with him doing that, for the reasons given. However, I also think the marine should have been invited to leave the site, because it's just folk playing a game. Best if the issue never comes up, really.

Airsoft A-10 vs tank?

All M4s look exactly like a DE M83.

Do they know you? Are they a secret society? As a one-off event for non-airsofters with ca$h monie$, yes. As an advert for getting new people into airsoft, it sets a poor precedent. Still, most advertising is good advertising. I like that airsoft sites operate on a shoestring. I do not want to see corporate sponsorship, or professional players. That's pretty much the opposite of what I want. I'd like to, but what have you said so far that's borne fruit? This is not trolling (much, by my standards), but a genuine invitation to elaborate on your how plans are panning out.

I don't know Mr Beast. Of course it could. It could also be the bestest advertising evar. I don't know which it's likely to be, because I don't know Mr Beast. Nonce sequitur.

There are degrees of shattering. The whole point of this thread is that a problem was occurring at a site where problems had not been occurring. They're not mutually exclusive. I get your passion for eschewing responsibility for other people's safety. That's OK, you have to do you, but this thread is for the benefit of people otherwise minded.

And again, there's splitting cleanly in two, and there's, etc. But why repeat ourselves? Eye damage or otherwise, it's clearly a very unpleasant experience. And something else I'll mention from watching it happen to a chap: the first thing he did, having got shards of plastic in his eye, was to lift his mask and rub his eyes. Shouldn't have, but it's a reflex reaction.

There's splitting cleanly in two, and there's breaking into shards small enough to go through mesh, regularly enough for it to be reported multiple times on one day. Bear in mind that we're talking about a site that's been using rental masks and ASG Blasters for years without the repeated issues that occurred on Sunday. It seems that something has changed, and I'd suspect the Blasters, especially as they seem to have past form for it. I mention this for the benefit of those who use them as well as those being hit by them, since nobody wins if we get eye injuries. Me too. I don't believe that mesh should be used, and especially that it shouldn't be issued to rentals who should enjoy a stronger duty of care. However, I can understand why it is, since it's cheap, doesn't fog, and can be worn over glasses. Maybe ayes, maybe noes. What I would be fairly confident of is that if push comes to shove and someone is injured due to site BBs shattering on site mesh, that the site will be held liable (ignore any liability waiver you may have signed, they have no legal force), and their insurers will be ordered to pay out. Courts tend to view personal injury claims against deep pockets favourably. Whether the insurer then pursues the site owner to recover their loss is another question. It'll depend on what they've been told and what they think that they can show. Even where insurers are explicitly allowed by law to recover losses due to hooky declarations, my understanding is that it's rarely done. If this sounds like I'm disagreeing with you, I'm not at all. I fully agree that sites should think very carefully about the savings of using mesh versus the low risk but potentially very high cost of it going wrong.

Knowing that people do wear mesh (and I wish they wouldn't but they do), would you be happy shooting at them with BBs that you know are particularly prone to shattering? I particularly feel for the rental that got sharded through his site issued mask by what might have been a site issued BB. Not a great experience. I was just after lending my spare glasses and lower face mask to another rental player who who'd been issued some god awful skull-face mask with small eye holes that he could barely see through.

This isn't definitive, but we had a lot of reports of shattering BBs today going through mesh today. The initial suspicion was that someone had brought a bad batch of Mystery BBs, but then it started getting reported on both sides. The reason that I suspect it might have been Blasters is that I saw a hire player getting sharded by shots from a marshal squad who might have have been using Blasters, as it's the only brand that the site provides, in 0.2g and 0.25g. Maybe not, I didn't have the opportunity to check. But it was getting reported so often that I do have to suspect the site BBs. No aspersions on them, they've used Blasters for years without issues, and they were taking it seriously. Please sing out if you hear anything similar, and I'll update this if suspicion falls on another brand .