Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 10/29/2012 6:00:05 PM EDT
Along with a new website. Content is pretty sparse right now. So hang with us on the website hopefully it'll but up and running with more content soon.

FDCC 10-28-12 Results

I know the match ran a little wonky this time. We're going to try it again one more time but use squads still and see if it works better next time. We'll hash out the details and it'll be less confusing by the time you get there next month. That being said we will basically need 10 RO's to make it work properly.

How do people here feel about exponential scoring? Basically what they use at CFDCC where you're penalties on target are multiplied by 1.5 IE if I go down 3 that adds 4.5 seconds to my time. However if I go down 12 that would add 18 seconds to my time. Now this number would be per stage and not per the whole match.

How would people here feel about Classifications Similar to that of IDPA or USPSA
IDPA has Novice, Marksman, Sharp Shooter, Expert, Master
USPSA has D, C, B, A, Master, Grand Master.
Would people like the ability to break down the scores this way along with an overall results? Or do you feel it's an unnecessary addition to FDCC
Would you like to see things broken down into divisions? IE optics, Iron Sights, etc.? Or do people think that takes away from the fun, Friendly atmosphere we've fostered at FDCC

More planning has come about for the Anniversary shoot and I'm pretty excited about it. Hopefully it'll be bigger than last time. I think we will have a lot of things for people to do even if they aren't planning to shoot the match.

Link Posted: 10/29/2012 6:14:00 PM EDT
I like the idea of exponential scoring. Divisions would also be a neat idea!

Thanks for putting so much time and effort into these matches, I had a blast yesterday.
Link Posted: 10/29/2012 6:41:13 PM EDT
I think the exponential scoring would just make things more complicated. At the last match, different stages had different penalties for hits outside the A zone. If anything, the scoring needs to be made more simplistic (most multigun has two hits anywhere or 1 a zone hit).

If you wanted to move away from total time, do it by stage points. who ever has the fastest time receives 100 points, everyone elses score is based off how they do compared to the person that won that stage so if the winner shot the stage in 100 seconds, they would receive the full 100 points, if the second fastest time was 98 seconds, they would receive 98 points.

As far as the Anniversary shoot goes, is there anyway to shoot from the 2nd floor of the cement block kill house onto the long range area???
Link Posted: 10/29/2012 6:51:29 PM EDT
We don't really want to be USPSA.

Negative on shooting from the house. We will most likely have a quasi Home defense course set up inside with UTM's hosted by Telluric Group. We have a pretty awesome idea for the long range as well.
Link Posted: 10/29/2012 7:49:48 PM EDT
"How would people here feel about Classifications Similar to that of IDPA or USPSA "

No thanks. I'd rather it be kept simple.
Link Posted: 10/30/2012 3:58:20 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Omega-cog:
We don't really want to be USPSA.

what im saying is, dont try and reinvent the wheel, there are other tried and true methods out there. the cfdcc method would just add more confusion and wouldnt have that big of an affect on scores. you need a scoring method that is consistent between stages and matches. people will learn that over time and more people will be able to ro & score consistently so that the whole thing runs smoother.

The anniversary shoot should be a lot of fun and Im looking forward to that long range stage
Link Posted: 10/30/2012 4:50:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/30/2012 4:50:52 AM EDT by Verity]
Personally, I like the way the match is run currently. Each stage is different and potentially scored differently, but I think that keeps it from getting too formulaic and boring. As long as each stage is run consistently and scored consistently, I like the variability.
Link Posted: 11/1/2012 6:31:55 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/2/2012 2:48:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/2/2012 2:50:21 AM EDT by ayan]
Originally Posted By Omega-cog:
Video from the Match
I don't like the idea of divisions but I do like the idea of having a standard 'qualifier' stage that was set up and run the same way every time. One might get a 'marksman' or 'expert' (for example) kind of score on the stage but the purpose isn't to give you a title that you could carry around with you. It would be to help gauge if your shooting is getting better and maybe help people talk about it easier ("hey man –– I shot expert on the qualifier. I heard Martin only got sharp shooter.").

I think the CFDCC scoring worked out pretty well when it comes to weeding out people who shot really fast at the cost of accuracy. With rifles, it is easy to get a reasonable score by running as fast as you can and shooting mostly 3s and even Mikes. If I was still running it, the only tweak I would add would be to weigh each stage equally so that a long range stage, for example, wouldn't blow out an entire match.
Top Top