cantab wrote:Worst sin: Unreliability. Being a bit short on range or output might cost me a fight, but having the trigger stick open on the battlefield WILL cost me the fight.
Second worst: Too expensive. I don't normally want to be paying more than £20 for a blaster. If I can get it for under a tenner, I'll be a lot less fussed about flaws, and if it's less than a fiver then as long as it's not completely dire I'll be happy.
Third worst: Leaks.
Otherwise, if the power is good (considering the size), then I can usually tolerate other faults; while I'll criticise them, I don't think they make the blaster bad.
While this may be true for the Super Soaker brand water blasters, I still think the Water Warriors brand blasters still have capacity and performance rated higher than style. While there are a few Water Warriors blasters that have limited capacity, I'd say none of the performance and/or Ultimate lines have forsaken capacity. Any capacity reduction in the current models are due to manufacturing cost increases.wetmonkey442 wrote:The biggest problem for me is capacity. Manufacturers have moved towards a design mentality that emphasizes style at the expense of capacity rather than the earlier styles which worked around the natural shapes of the water blaster.
SEAL wrote:If you ain't bloody and muddy by the end of the day, you went to a Nerf war.
I beg to differ on a few points.cantab wrote:The Aquapacks were never quite as good as they could have been really. The smaller shoulder-strap one only held 1.5l, which isn't much. The larger backpack one, not so widely available (but it was supplied with the Overload blaster) held 3l, OK but not huge. The blasters they fed were for the most part fairly small; I found the backpack and hose an unwanted encumbrance with them.
Exactly. Unless you are only using your flood nozzle on the FF or AB you really don't need a 3L backpack or whatever. I like to think of capacity in terms of burst shots per tank, not overall oz. This is something that I am currently writing an article on, however it won't be out until October.Naugh wrote:I beg to differ on a few points.cantab wrote:The Aquapacks were never quite as good as they could have been really. The smaller shoulder-strap one only held 1.5l, which isn't much. The larger backpack one, not so widely available (but it was supplied with the Overload blaster) held 3l, OK but not huge. The blasters they fed were for the most part fairly small; I found the backpack and hose an unwanted encumbrance with them.
While the backpack the Max Infusion Overload, isn't large, I feel it should be seen in relation to the soakers that you are attaching it too. An FF may be great, but it is certainly no CPS 3000. A main advantage of the FF is that it grants the user high mobility and that the main nozzle conserves water automatically. Therefore, a large backpack would, in my opnion, prove to be counterprcoductive.
Also, during my water wars, when I wear the Max Infusion Overload backpack, I certainly feel no encumbrance. I am not a body builder at 5" 6' and about 105 lbs, but the backpack poses no problem. It also doesn't limit mobility (i.e. you can move your arms freely and stuff). Perhaps I feel this way because I'm short and slim enough to still wear the backpack comfortably?
SEAL wrote:If you ain't bloody and muddy by the end of the day, you went to a Nerf war.
DX wrote:In the neanderthal days of K-modding, people would lop off the whole PRV
Beware the PurpleWell, not that much soakage.
DX wrote:In the neanderthal days of K-modding, people would lop off the whole PRV
Beware the PurpleWell, not that much soakage.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 45 guests
