|
Post by EsbenF on Mar 15, 2004 10:25:30 GMT -5
Allright, and with that in mind I'll say:
I finished the layout for my kata - it's nothing fancy, but I think it's worth working with. It's basically a cleric vs. 4 opponents distributed geometrically in a trapetzoid shape.
Anyone got an e-mail I can send it to, if you want to see?
I worked it all over this morning, having not slept last night, I found myself at work in front of my machine at 5:30 AM, while I wasn't due in before 9:30 he he...
But that's a good thing, right? 'cause this way I actually got this one done. If anyone's got some webspace, I could upload it there - it's just 1 jpeg file (made in MS paint, as promised ;D), but lots of explaining text in the image.
Let me know!
Regarding the development plans, I have this idea... how about we each make up a kata, or the like... and then we just work with that, untill we agree that we have the best solution? After doing a few we should be fairly good at doing them near-perfect right away?
Oh and thanks for the info on the gun, by the way.
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 15, 2004 10:33:29 GMT -5
::bows::
i dont have any webspace to speak of. i think you can email JenGe and she will host it for you, pronto.
-otherwise yeah, you can email it to me just for the sake of letting me see it.
ill PM you my email address...
|
|
|
Post by EsbenF on Mar 15, 2004 11:00:29 GMT -5
a couple of answers for a couple of questions... For those situations i offer up a proposal that we swiftly execute the offender with brutal force... or at least just make fun of them until they cry ::wink:: How about trapping them, keeping them captive and forcing them to be our training dummies for our newly developed katas ?
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 15, 2004 11:32:50 GMT -5
sounds good to me.
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 15, 2004 11:57:02 GMT -5
i just looked over your formula here...
-it looks pretty good to me. the only thing i can think of that would be a little bit different would be the order of importance that (correct me if i am wrong) goes in simple 1,2,3,4 order, right? it seems to me that your 4th opponent on the sheet would be somewhat more of a threat than the third one since the 3rd is looking another direction and possibly wouldnt be alerted until the shooting already started. the 4th opponent is already aware of your position and is drawing a bead on you from behind.
-this doesnt really change the order or the movements that you have put down on the page, maybe just a mental note or trying to put that guy more in the forefront of your second series of attacks. ::shrugs:: maybe im just reading it wrong or nitpicking but i figured id add that.
|
|
|
Post by EsbenF on Mar 15, 2004 13:20:49 GMT -5
yeah, that one's open for interpretation... I chose to go with my way by arguing that the guy looking the other way is on the scene when I enter, which means that if he catches on he'll be able to fire at me before the guy arriving a second later. Also as I wrote, the guy coming up from behind might be slightly more inclined to aim properly before firing to make sure he hits me well, which again would give me a few more seconds to deal with him.
I'm going home to get some serious sleep now - I'll be back in tomorrow (from work). Till then.
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 15, 2004 13:41:33 GMT -5
good stuff
|
|
|
Post by Dj_Bliss on Mar 15, 2004 21:02:42 GMT -5
digitalkiller301_90@hotmail.com i would like to check it out
|
|
|
Post by Rymel on Mar 16, 2004 2:33:44 GMT -5
hey hey, i wasn't being hostile esben, i was just clarifying points. and the nobody reads thing was in regards to other comments about what styles gun kata was derived from. and it's no bad to dig up the old subjects, because you wouldn't know they were old otherwise. rather i commend you for doing your homework beforehand...thanks for agreeing though. no misunderstandings from here on out the technicalities issue was with other people, the jkd thing was for you. no harm intended, and understood what you meant. as for kung fu, an indian monk (i can't remember who) went to visit a chinese temple, and was shocked to see them all frail and weak. so he went and meditated (i think) and came up with a set of exercises meant to strengthen their bodies. it was only a few exercises, i think 12? anyway the monks became stronger and became fascinated with it, and elaborated. so i guess technically this is the invention of kung fu, but i see it more as an outcome, a birth of simple exercises and the urge to push the human body to its limits. as for gun-BASED martial arts, technically krav maga is the only one that's done real-world training, but only AGAINST one, not WITH one. so for what we're trying to do...there's nothing in the world like it. seals don't really disarm...rather they kill you before you know they're there that discussion about being merely proficient with all weapons...i thought we also agreed that while it's not necessary to know them all, just profiiency, specialized katas should exist should a practitioner choose them as their specialty? if not, i think that's what we were getting at...understood that you would only need to be proficient, i just think that specific katas need to exist. whether you choose to know them is another issue. and you wouldn't have to make them per se, there's bound to be SOMEONE that feels that they should work on katas for x class of weapons... the yin-yang stance i can tell was just added as a flourish, but i can see that being used as the finishing position. i'm sure some of you with martial arts experience or knowledge know what i mean when people finish forms, position their hands or chamber them, push out/down and exhale...i was thinking something similar for that. doesn't have to be used though. the knife thing i find necessary should the unspeakable situation occur where you are unarmed and/or only have a knife available, or can only procure that. even once you've acquired a firearm, unless it's larger than a handgun i don't think you should toss the knife in favor of the new weapon. rather i think you should use it to enhance your offensive/defensive capabilities in that situation since it would most probably be a dangerous one. this suggested form is not for going INTO battle with it (unless that's what you want), it's for preparing for the worst. nothing wrong with ditching the blade once you can acquire a second pistol though the infinity looks like a good choice. but i like the closed top slide of the cougar. good candidate for anti-knife techniques, or melee. i too look at the little digital demo in the movie, but too much of it seems superfluous to me, or the stances don't seem quite right, unless there's something i'm missing there. nothing a little tweaking can't fix though. and the movie's utilizing artistic license to assume that demo was made using 'hundreds of recorded gunfights', and thus having their statistical information (how do you GET that anyway? stand there and watch someone get surrounded? then say "now, get out of that!"?). we on the other hand have no such info, so that area should be ignored entirely in more favor of instinct and projected trajectories. because we'll never, ever have access to that kind of information. unless we can find a buddy in FBI forensics...but yea, instinct should become common sense to the practitioner, in essence creating on the spot 'statistical probabilities' based on previous experience and acting accordingly. sounds a lot like what they used those recorded gunfights for, eh? also, i don't think the cleric ever really does go for the head...just seems inefficient to target something so small... i agree that to stay alive, you need to take out a percentage of your total adversaries within the first few shots, but 'taking out' is subjective. even with all the efficiency derived from training, there may not be the opportunity to perform kill shots right away. this is where maximum damage plays a role, and is also subjective. maximum pain should also be taken into account if a kill shot is not available (although at the range and preferred calibers, it SHOULD be kill shots majority of the time). after taking down all threats, should the initial targets still be alive...feel free to open fire on the floored sucker i still think the gun requires a standard issue followed by a guideline. guideline being calibers, acceptable advantage/disadvantage tradeoffs, situational exceptions, etc...but that's just an idea. it does take into account what you've said though. for example the 5-7's shortened clip is acceptable given it's sweet caliber ;D i don't think any amount of compensation will ever eliminate recoil from any kata. it has to be accounted for, so why take it away when it can be utilized? it's when you move into advanced techniques should recoil be taken way more seriously. i like your ideas though, but i feel recoil cannot be compensated into nonexistance in early kata. if it's that much of an issue though you can train via blanks and take each part of the form in steps with it after you've learned it in full without firing, y'know? it's all about the training, we just have to figure out how to go about it... hmm...i don't see anything wrong with refining ideas, because from those refined ideas we can create something larger. i came up with an idea to work more structured in a fashion...why not work with 3D poser programs to portray what we're all trying to say? there's poser, but that's too expensive and complicated. i mentioned this to trustkill...there's a korean program that people use to choreograph the dances from korean music videos and various other things, as well as including the songs...the program has multiple camera angles, floating motion and changing angles, and you can create the files yourself. it's called d-player, i'll have to look into if we can do anything tangible with it though. if anything we can do single person kata but no multi-adversary examples, which is still good. honestly though our first kata effort aside from our own individual ventures should be assembling and modifying the movie's kata into something tangible and WORKABLE. the movie's kata seems to work pretty well but has parts that need to be ironed out or just plain changed, so why not direct our first group effort to that? as for a paper from me...i'm terrible at writing papers...i'm better in conversation. maybe we should set up a chat room day or something. concepts and ideals we can work out together, although i'd do that in its own thread. there's also the issue of our own tardiness...trustkill gets sidetracked by work a lot, enemies is on tour, and i lose cable periodically for random periods of time (don't ask..). we'll work something out, i know we will. hey trustkill, think jen would make you, me, wolf and enemies mods for the gun kata forum? eh? eh? *dons mighty boot of fury* esben, i got the pic from trust, hope you don't mind...i have to agree with trust, 4 is definitely THE most dangerous opponent here, because you don't even know he's there. and if you do...why are you letting him close you in? even if he's sneaking up behind you he's probably getting ready to fire, aim or not. and if he sees you preparing to fire on his buddies, it's all over for you, cleric with your back to him. spray is pretty hard to dodge, stastistically. this is inviting risk because the 3rd doesn't have any idea what's going on, and in this example he's rated more dangerous than 4, which..just seems to me that you wouldn't know he's there at all. and if you fired on 1 and 2 i'd have to think 4 would open fire immediately, screw the aim. especially if he's got an automatic weapon. i do like the example though, i'm just worried about my HEAD if i lowered myself into phoenix with two people drawing a bead on me, especially 4 if he's already begun firing after 1 and 2 have been dispatched, and my head's where my torso was...harder target to hit, but way more vital ^_^; i also wouldn't call this a kata, rather an application of a part of one, or just an application of theory, not even a part of a kata. just parts of parts? if that makes any sense. movie-wise, gun kata wasn't even like traditional kata/forms, there were no hypothetical situations the form was imitating retaliation for, rather it was just the repetition of various moves that would constitute the clerics instinctual reactions. at least that's what i got from the demonstration that went on during the cg demo. maybe after that comes the forms we're thinking of, but i dunno. maybe it's just simpler than what we're all thinking of, and rote mastery is just of each particular countermove to their enemy's moves, culminating in a single fluid motion in every situation seemingly practiced as one solid form...or maybe not. who knows. i also realize that i could've read your example entirely wrong and 4 ran onto the scene after the firefight started...but you said he's already begun aiming at you before you've even started aiming, so that's where i worked from. you seem to kinda rely too much on shock value and the chance that they're not 'ready', and that can be fatal. just an observation, don't take it the wrong way again please :\ MAN i need to update more often between posts...these uberposts are getting ridiculous >.<
|
|
|
Post by EsbenF on Mar 16, 2004 6:34:37 GMT -5
Regarding your critics of the stuff I made - the last guy does arrive there after I've begun firing, he's there about 1 second after I am, and I do by god in heaven hope that I'm firing away at that point of time, because the two people looking in my direction sure as hell would be The only way I can justify waiting with the dealing with him is that he arrives after I do, which means that he'll have the same delay in beginning firing as I did when I arrived. If he'd been there before or just spun around the corner as I entered the scene, the execution of this would have been very different. Rymel & TrustKill, if you would both please notice the LOS of the #3 guy, he should notice me as I get closer, since I am within his visual range - he's not looking the complete opposite direction, just about 90 degrees away from my position, meaning that he's not focused on my direction, but another, but also meaning that he'll notice me as I get closer, and take up more of his view to that side. This means that he'll notice me while I get ready to fire at the first 2... That's how I dreamt up the situation anyways. I would really like to make something in 3d - it would make so much more sense to me and the people viewing it. I don't know much about 3d graphics though - all I've ever done is a little bit in Bryce 3, which I still believe I have the CDs lying around for somewhere, but that application doesn't come with built-in models of humans, you'll have to make them yourself, and believe me, you don't want to see me making a "human" in that application ;D I did manage a few decent landscape images and other random stuff, but I REFUSE to do anything that elaborate in that application again, since it took me days to make 1 image. If there's another option, I don't mind spending a little cash on it. I'm still looking for those airsoft models, but I've come to realise something... I think they're not allowed over here (Ireland). Being as the police aren't even allowed sidearms (they just have a 'stick' ), I can't see how they can justify giving the public airsoft guns, since those would render the police useless (if you shoot them in the face with one of those things, that would seriously harm them at a distance, before they could close in to 'clubber' you he he). That means that I might be a while off before I can get any real serious practice in - which really doesn't matter, come to think of it. One idea of how to record that data... Virtual Reality ? If we're like 3-10 people... it'd be VERY expensive to aquire the correct equipment though But that's the only way I can see we'd be able to get the information accurate enough to build statistics on evading bullets on. That or a VERY VERY VERY good camera recording a gunfight, good enough that you can freeze the image at a given time and see the bullet... as far as I know there's no camera that good in the world yet, but I might be wrong. The most realistical way would be that we draw up some 3d image of the situation we want to assess, and then we each draw on it 'where would I return fire if I was this guy' on the image (for each of the antagonists), and then base the motions on that. And a note to Rymel: I'm not taking anything 'the wrong way' - I can take constructive criticism. Your last post just seemed to be sorta angry/irritated at some of the things I mentioned, well a lot of the things I mentioned... Anyways it doesn't really matter, I don't take stuff like that heavily.
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 16, 2004 10:01:20 GMT -5
hmmm... mods of the gun kata forum ehh? thats a bit tempting in the least... i suppose i could run it by her. all she can say is "no". -as for the illustration... i tried to incorporate LOS into what i was thinking when i looked at it. perhaps i should go over it again. regardless of that, the only way to really see which scenario would be best would be to create the scene that you drew up on your drawing and then go through it numerous times, testing different orders of firing upon people. -thats where the development of gun kata gets really tedious and time consuming. we cant just draw up scenarios and expect them to work (i know you guys already know this) and it will be really hard to coordinate since we all live so far apart. i think the closest people are rymel and enemies (who seems to be on tour hiatus once again). you guys both live around NY, right? you two might have better luck in the actual physical testing than the rest of us.... -as for anything else... at this point i dont really think any idea is a bad idea (unless it comes from someone i dont like. a position i try to make pretty rare ::grins: after we get enough "stuff" we can compile it and then do some elimination if need be. -as for the use of 3D stuff for illustration... rymel and i discussed this a little bit yesterday and it seems a little shaky to me. maybe when we get definate sets produced or something, but it seems like a forgone conclusion at this point. the drawings work fine for me in illustrating things really. id like to "3-d'ize" the stuff and maybe even put it to motion capture but that seems to be a looonnng ways off.
|
|
|
Post by Dj_Bliss on Mar 16, 2004 10:21:13 GMT -5
thx for the e-mail esben good stuff
|
|
|
Post by Rymel on Mar 16, 2004 12:54:37 GMT -5
i think you guys need to discover the wonders of PRIVATE MESSAGING.
|
|
|
Post by Rymel on Mar 16, 2004 13:24:47 GMT -5
esben - yea, i come off angry sometimes...most of the time i'm not. really ;D now with all the bad mojo out of the way...hi! i seem to have overlooked the line of sight part...i chalk that up to being really tired when i made that really long post...but since 4's coming IN aiming i still consider him more dangerous, but now it's a bit of a toss-up between the two. my reasoning is because you're probably gonna take a second to walk into your scene (which i'm assuming he shows up AFTER you get in), and execution of the first kills would probably consume the better part of a second, maybe comin up total 1.5 seconds if you include the time to drop down into phoenix stance to eliminite 3 and 4. by then given he's not TOTALLY incompetant...he probly would have begun return fire before the second stance. maybe our minds just think differently in combat situations? our 3D work, should there be any should stay between us. why should moochers get our hard-earned beta work? when it's finished we'll work it out, but if you're not contributing to the project i don't think you should get it. y'know? it's fair and invites more progress. in regards to d-player, it's a dance-choreography-oriented program, so there's already a few included 3D models (although they're all anime-y and chibi), and more available. so what if it's a cute little anime girl...so long as she can do the kata right visually just consider it eye candy..i'm sure you'd get sick of seeing a hard-ass guy doing it over and over again in regards to airsofts...can you legally obtain fake rubber replicas? the odd-colored training ones? they're like 13 bucks US, maybe you can use those. i don't like the idea of virtual reality because they eliminates human error and improvisation in favor of precoded ai routines (humanlike behavior is VERY hard to code). there's also the issue of not having such equipment. paintball works, so does laser tag. forensics usually involve figuring out where and how x person fired, and the trajectory of the bullet(s). as i said we don't have access to that kind of info, but we do have good ideas of which ways bullets go when they come out of the gun...i hope...so the whole "i'd do this when the guys do this" method of evaluation would probably work pretty well. i think me and enemies will try to work something out if he actually gets some free time. we'll have to see. we wanted to though.
|
|
|
Post by Dj_Bliss on Mar 16, 2004 20:43:24 GMT -5
hey rymel...whats the big deal about givin him my e-mail??? How about u PRIVATE MESSAGE me and complain then
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 16, 2004 21:15:11 GMT -5
oh come on, guys... its all in good fun. rymel is just poking at you a little.... -i think the point he was trying to make for in the future was to take care of that stuff privately because we had a pretty big problem with that in the past with people bogging down progress asking questions and stuff. sometimes, well... most times w/ questions that have already been covered. -my two cents would be to read everything we have gone over in the previous thread (its around here somewhere). other than that, we're pretty much open to anything from anyone. this is not an exclusive club or anything, just dont slow down rymel when he's on a roll ::chuckles:: EDIT: for the ease of newcomers or anyone looking for some heavy reading... i am posting the link to the previous SERIOUS gun kata development thread. be prepared, for the road is long an treacherous... hehehe. equilibrium.proboards17.com/index.cgi?board=gunkata&action=display&thread=1076177054
|
|
|
Post by Dj_Bliss on Mar 16, 2004 21:24:16 GMT -5
ok...but sarcasm is not the best way to tell ppl to do somthin
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 16, 2004 21:31:20 GMT -5
which is why i just PM'ed JenGe to post the previous gun kata thread link either at the top of the whole gun kata page or at the top of this thread. hopefully that will help both anyone who is just starting to visit these threads out as well as save our sanity from having to repeat ourselves to everyone.
-i understand where you are coming from, kungfudj, and know that your comments dont go unappreciated. in rymels defense (a little bit) not too long ago there was a really frustrating time with people not reading back and causing a ruckus. thus, the way we dealt with it was through sarcasm. the remnants of such ugly days still rear their heads. for an example, check out the "what weapons were used in the movie?" thread to see me smack some guest around a little. hehe. anyway... i hope i can clear the air a little.
|
|
|
Post by Dj_Bliss on Mar 16, 2004 23:56:35 GMT -5
its all cool trust kill...i for some reason get easily aggrivated when ppl use sarcasm to tell me what to do... but im cool with it...thx
|
|
|
Post by Rymel on Mar 17, 2004 0:17:46 GMT -5
sarcasm is your friend...learn to use it wisely, and you will never be harmed by it
|
|
|
Post by Dj_Bliss on Mar 17, 2004 0:42:41 GMT -5
its funny coz i use sarcasm a lot but get mad when ppl use it against me ...
|
|
|
Post by EsbenF on Mar 17, 2004 5:58:03 GMT -5
Now, the best way to deal with 2 antagonists, demographically distributed as being in the age group of 18-25, male, and residents of a country with a population larger than 15 million, who are attacking you from seemingly random directions on a discussion forum... Your first priority is to evade their attacks, while still leaving an opening for a counter-attack, if you want any hope of emerging from the battle victorious. This could be done quite cleverly, by using the traditional sarcasmic self-criticism, which actually projects the things you say about yourself, onto the opponent(s). Should you choose to use this option, you might also want to watch out for the classic 'dumbification of own remarks-repartee', which would effectively render your attack harmless, by making you sound like a complete moron....
;D
|
|
|
Post by EsbenF on Mar 17, 2004 6:09:01 GMT -5
Sorry, had to do a little sarcasm kata Anyways, going back on track... I think we're getting stuck a bit here, nothing much is happening over the last few days. Which is why I'd suggest a liiiitle more organised way of working on this. Personally I have absolute confidence in my and your minds in this work, and would like to re-iterate my suggestion of selecting somewhere to actually begin from... Being as none of you other guys seemed to be *insanely* interested in working up a sort of game-plan for the beginning of this thing, I'm going to try and work out something myself, which you guys can then look at and make corrections to... or discard completely, on the ground that I'm a complete and utter idiot... that'll be up to you I'll post this later on today, I might stay after work to complete it, if I don't get enough time during work to do it (which is a likely scenario).
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 17, 2004 9:16:22 GMT -5
insane? who you callin' insane?
|
|
|
Post by EsbenF on Mar 17, 2004 9:29:39 GMT -5
I think we need to watch out, or this thread will be lobbed into the big 'Nethers Pub' basket by JenGe, under the rule of Brawling Oh and I'm calling myself insane, usually... or just strange... ..... do you have a problem with that?
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 17, 2004 9:34:12 GMT -5
nope, no problem with that. anyway ummm.... gun-kata.
|
|
|
Post by EsbenF on Mar 17, 2004 15:10:42 GMT -5
Firstly we need to know what we're going to end up with...
The first choice we're faced with as far as I can see, is selecting a simple form or a very complicated form. The simple form, which I suggest we create regardless, is simply one position of returning fire at an opponent, for each possible geometrical position he might take up in relation to you, which would keep you clear of the predictable line of return fire he would produce. This could then be elaborated to compensate for even more opponents return fire, and targeting multiple opponents after we produce the first set. For this I suggest producing 10 or 12 basic stances, which would effectively deal with 1 opponent, and evade his return fire. Then proceeding with firing against 1 enemy, and evading 2 enemies fire, for ALL combinations of all geometrical positions of enemies. Then proceeding to firing against 2 enemies, while dodging fire of the same 2... etc. etc.
How do you like that for a game plan ? Or would that be the wrong way to go about it ? Please do comment.
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 17, 2004 15:24:37 GMT -5
(i may be reading into this wrong)
so you propose a basic set of 10 or 12 movements from which we would elaborate all the rest. at least for starters. i think that is doable.
-perhaps a set starting position and finish position? one that would place the user in an appropriate position from which to enter any of the other stances. i think that needs to be done too, but obviously after we have the other 12 movements to work with...
ill have more when i think of anything
|
|
|
Post by EsbenF on Mar 18, 2004 11:07:49 GMT -5
I didn't have time to write the very complicated form yesterday, and I'm afraid I forgot what it was in the meantime sorry about that, but I'm sure it'll come back to me - I will post as soon as I remember *damns self and self's short time memory*. I think limiting ourselves to 12 antagonists needs to be done... at least initially - otherwise it'd be way too extensive. Anyways, who the hell ever figures anyone'll be able to take out more than 12 other guys in a firefight, regardless of training and mastery... the only thing that'd make you able to do that is "iddqd" ;D I think a set starting position(s), and 'transition-motions/poses' are a necessity, and we should definately look at those as well. But I think we need to work out the 12 basic moved first, and then pick a good starting stance, or a few good starting stances that'd allow you to quickly apply any of the 12 basic stances. So... Tomorrow I'll draw up a chart, displaying all the 12 positions, and from then on we can start the work, I guess! I propose everyone coming up with 1/2/3 stances for each position, and then we discuss them with each other. This is beginning to look like something! -we're actually getting somewhere :-) brilliant! ... wonder if I'll ever make a post without editing it afterwards
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Mar 18, 2004 11:26:59 GMT -5
okay, so everyone is taking 3 positions?
-positions about what though? like... are you wanting us to reserve positions for different numbers of opponents?
-if so, ill take 3, 4, and 5 opponents to try and work with. if not, then i guess i need to be talked to like a 5 year old because im missing something, hehe.
|
|