As a tactical equipment designer, it's always struck me how much of an after-thought equipment is to most players. It's the ignored, ugly sister in the background compared to the shiny blaster thing that's in front of you.Often at wars, you hear people listing the specs of the blaster they've built, what mods have been done and the like. That makes sense since most regular players are also those who build their own blaster. There's a lot of craft pride there and wanting to chat about what interests you is normal. I am not that person. Some days, I could barely tell you what was in my blaster - just that it fires under the event limit I'm at. Indeed, I could relate the time while I was a Blastersmiths UK when a fellow blogger described our MkIV holster in a single line as an aside in a game report (para-phrased as: it gets the job done and does it well) and we took it to be the highest form of praise we'd ever received. It illustrated nicely the point that tactical gear isn't supposed to be flashy and interesting but to get the job done.
Now, the hobby as it stands is multi-faceted. It's made up of a lot of different sorts but in this early stage - and certainly around the pandemic - the ratio of players to modders and collectors is stacked to the latter over the former. We love this mutual collecting and using of what was, at one stage, a child's toy in a collective environment. To that end, there's going to be a lot more noise around blasters and the specs we put into them. However, at some point as a hobbyist moves more towards a player than a collector or modder that a shift has to occur. This is to explore how my own shift occured.
Ol' Venerable - My FDS painted Stryfe (Image from my old Tumblr blog) |
Well, technically, two shifts. The first is that field efficacy and reliability matter more than numbers. I couldn't tell you what numbers my Gryphon shoots (it's somewhere in the 140-160FPS ball park) and my Stryfe fires below 130FPS somewhere but what I can tell you is that I've not had a field failure on these two workhorses in years. My equipment might not be the flashiest or the most bleeding edge but it works. For me, this focus on reliablity and caginess around adopting the bleeding edge came from when we had very limited games. Too often in the N-strike era, you would try something at the edge and you'd spend most of your game time with it broken or otherwise malfunctioning. In those days, you might not have another game for 6 months or so. In turn, you made sure things were as reliable as possible before game day to get the most play time out of the day. That's not to say that we shouldn't try new things, it's to explain why I am willing to sacrifice performance for reliablity. Incidentally, I'm not the only one who thinks this way. I laughed when some Singaporean players were complaining about the barrel fit on the stock Caliburn being too loose (and were arguing the SAB was superior): Captain Slug had clearly made the choice to manage feed issues from a wide variety of darts. If it doesn't fire, you're not in the game.
Decade old photo anyone? I'm the loser on the right |
That leads me to my second shift. You've got your blaster firing reliably, now you need to keep it fed. At a training day I did back in 2018, I described it like this: Your blaster keeps you in the game, without it you cannot play the game. Remember that. Now, this throws up two very interesting observations. The first is that when I was first designing gear back in 2013, I focused on holsters before magazine pouches. Why? Because back in the day, I was playing 'kettle' indoor HvZ games that would last only a few minutes and magazines were expensive or not available. Well, apart from that time I bought 40 odd 18 mags for 50p a pop from Tesco using Clubcard points but we'll side step that for now. In that came environment, switching to a side arm while a downed primary was cleared was a better way to stay alive than having more darts. The rise of Nfstrike and other bulk 3rd party suppliers for darts and magazines coupled with a shift away from that format of HvZ to more PvP and LARP games saw me focus more on magazines than sidearms. Indeed, I've written extensively about side arms and PDBs and whether or not it's worth carrying them. The sorts of gear I design is always reflected in my own play and the stuff I sell is mostly spun out of that philosophy. The second is that the way you carry your gear is what can keep your blaster fed. Different blasters have different hunger levels but they all must be fed. I carry a lot of front mounted magazines for a good depth of sustain while other players will carry fewer magazines and top off using scavenged darts or those sourced from a looser dump pouch.
Yes, those are Elite darts but a) it was 2013 and b) they were 50p/pack |
Now, I think my shift was driven to a more extreme than many players in this area by the Green Cloaks events I played 2014-17. When you're in a forest in the middle of nowhere, no safe zone and your engagements are 3-4 hours in length, it gives you an entirely different set of criteria. The emergence of Nerf PvP 'Long Game' formats outside the LARP spectrum have sustained that drive for a more ranger-like self sufficiency and longer sustain in equipment. It hasn't changed the underlying philosophy of keeping the blaster fed with magazine pouches and loose darts but it has added an extra layer of extended carriage to last me over several hours of play.
2019 Era Equipment Pulled from Instagram (And I still can't take a photo!) |
I would argue that the configuration of tactical equipment is the more important component of being an effective player in the field. I remember being at a GC event when I sustained a failure in my Rapidstrike. I broke my own rule of not using super reliable equipment for events and it came back to bite me as the solenoid burned through the LiPo I had on hand. Battery flat, I was a useless blob of kit on the field. I picked up a Stryfe from another player and got straight back into the fight, providing close fire support for the cutlery users as they pressed the battle line forward. Despite the change in blaster, I was at the same efficacy level as with the Rapidstrike. I could not have replicated that with tactical gear. It would have taken me a great deal longer to settle and optimise the equipment to remain at the same standard as before. This is why the adage of "gear is as individual as the player" gets thrown around a lot. We're all different shapes and sizes as phyiscal players so one size will not fit all.
At the end of the day, of course, the important thing is that we have fun. Fettling with tactical gear has become as much an obsession for me as fettling with blasters is for other players. I foresee that as more and more "off the shelf" blaster solutions come into their own, we will see a wider rise in tactical gear exploration. People will have a blaster they're not bothered with changing and will start to seek out ways to carry more mags. Demand creates supply as market niches open or widen. This excites me. I am a one person operation who has a very set play style and tactical doctrine who designs for that set of circumstances but, as a certain Nerf Viking constantly reminds me, it's not the only way to play. With more people exploring this aspect of the hobby, I hope to see what rolls out. I've had design input on a lot of gear that's gone all over the globe in the last decade so I hope to see what things look like from a different design angle. Indeed, if you've read this far and you're an aspiring gear design then feel free to reach out and say 'Hi!'. I love talking shop and I'd love to see what you've come up with.