[spqr-king]

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

[unfated33]

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

This is probably a more thought out response than you were expecting, and I'll qualify that my joke about mechs was in no way meant to diminish "competitive paintball". I think you're meaning airball there and dismissing UWL, but that's okay.

The problem with airball right now is a subset of the problem with paintball that we all dance around but don't address specifically. The current common projectile is a total failure for accuracy and cost per kill. Some players address this problem by getting equipment that facilitates them shooting faster and faster or shooting up to a common standard, say 12.5 bps, with greater ease. With the idea of laning, airball competitively is based off the idea of embracing the huge waste of paint to increase kills by volume but with the cost of...well, cost (price). If you think about how people enter the sport, how we measure individual success in competition, and creating a returning, sustainable player base, the current setup of competitive airball markets itself poorly and drives players away as much as draws them in. A game doesn't have to have players shooting hundreds if not thousands of shots in a match to be competitive, but more often than not competitive airball not only practices this behavior but embraces it.

Some players have tried other avenues than paint overspray - the first strike round seems to be the most current, successful attempt. In addition, the advantage of playing in the woods is often that attributes like patience, silent movement or movement not detected by the eye, and hiding are far more rewarded than on the airball field. Instead of fiving 500-1000 shots per airball game, a player could get an equal number of kills by flanking behind his opponents and barrel tagging them as he passed. Not only can this be a different but equally satisfying style of play, but it's less likely to deter new players from embracing the game.

I'm saying all of this in way of an explanation and not an answer to the problem - I don't know how you could transition competitive airball from its current incarnation to anything resembling a more accurate, lower ROF game without turning off a lot of the people that enjoy it. In a way, transforming it like that would be the same thing as making it go away altogether. It's costly, it's flawed, it pushes casual players away, but it's the devil we know right now. That leads to plenty of people bagging on its failures until such time as someone comes up with a milestone change in competitive paintball.

[asthmaticrhino]

unfated33, on 12 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

This is probably a more thought out response than you were expecting, and I'll qualify that my joke about mechs was in no way meant to diminish "competitive paintball". I think you're meaning airball there and dismissing UWL, but that's okay.

The problem with airball right now is a subset of the problem with paintball that we all dance around but don't address specifically. The current common projectile is a total failure for accuracy and cost per kill. Some players address this problem by getting equipment that facilitates them shooting faster and faster or shooting up to a common standard, say 12.5 bps, with greater ease. With the idea of laning, airball competitively is based off the idea of embracing the huge waste of paint to increase kills by volume but with the cost of...well, cost (price). If you think about how people enter the sport, how we measure individual success in competition, and creating a returning, sustainable player base, the current setup of competitive airball markets itself poorly and drives players away as much as draws them in. A game doesn't have to have players shooting hundreds if not thousands of shots in a match to be competitive, but more often than not competitive airball not only practices this behavior but embraces it.

Some players have tried other avenues than paint overspray - the first strike round seems to be the most current, successful attempt. In addition, the advantage of playing in the woods is often that attributes like patience, silent movement or movement not detected by the eye, and hiding are far more rewarded than on the airball field. Instead of fiving 500-1000 shots per airball game, a player could get an equal number of kills by flanking behind his opponents and barrel tagging them as he passed. Not only can this be a different but equally satisfying style of play, but it's less likely to deter new players from embracing the game.

I'm saying all of this in way of an explanation and not an answer to the problem - I don't know how you could transition competitive airball from its current incarnation to anything resembling a more accurate, lower ROF game without turning off a lot of the people that enjoy it. In a way, transforming it like that would be the same thing as making it go away altogether. It's costly, it's flawed, it pushes casual players away, but it's the devil we know right now. That leads to plenty of people bagging on its failures until such time as someone comes up with a milestone change in competitive paintball.

Pump tournies! Honestly I've been trying to get started in beginner 3 man for a while, but it really doesn't make much sense unless I have more money. I would love to see mech tournaments for the younuns, or even just hopperball tournies.
As for the general future of paintball, I see more companies venturing into gyroscopic spin, like the alien sweep bolt, or maybe integrating an apex style system into the breach area, if the projectile doesn't change. Other than that, companies will make markers more efficient, put more powerful processors in the boards, figure out more black magic like the reg behind the bolt or sts style gub. I see macroless guns becoming more common, or maybe someone engineers a gun with internal fittings. Other than that

[spqr-king]

unfated33, on 12 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

This is probably a more thought out response than you were expecting, and I'll qualify that my joke about mechs was in no way meant to diminish "competitive paintball". I think you're meaning airball there and dismissing UWL, but that's okay.

The problem with airball right now is a subset of the problem with paintball that we all dance around but don't address specifically. The current common projectile is a total failure for accuracy and cost per kill. Some players address this problem by getting equipment that facilitates them shooting faster and faster or shooting up to a common standard, say 12.5 bps, with greater ease. With the idea of laning, airball competitively is based off the idea of embracing the huge waste of paint to increase kills by volume but with the cost of...well, cost (price). If you think about how people enter the sport, how we measure individual success in competition, and creating a returning, sustainable player base, the current setup of competitive airball markets itself poorly and drives players away as much as draws them in. A game doesn't have to have players shooting hundreds if not thousands of shots in a match to be competitive, but more often than not competitive airball not only practices this behavior but embraces it.

Some players have tried other avenues than paint overspray - the first strike round seems to be the most current, successful attempt. In addition, the advantage of playing in the woods is often that attributes like patience, silent movement or movement not detected by the eye, and hiding are far more rewarded than on the airball field. Instead of fiving 500-1000 shots per airball game, a player could get an equal number of kills by flanking behind his opponents and barrel tagging them as he passed. Not only can this be a different but equally satisfying style of play, but it's less likely to deter new players from embracing the game.

I'm saying all of this in way of an explanation and not an answer to the problem - I don't know how you could transition competitive airball from its current incarnation to anything resembling a more accurate, lower ROF game without turning off a lot of the people that enjoy it. In a way, transforming it like that would be the same thing as making it go away altogether. It's costly, it's flawed, it pushes casual players away, but it's the devil we know right now. That leads to plenty of people bagging on its failures until such time as someone comes up with a milestone change in competitive paintball.

Thats simply not the way sports work... just because your shooting more does not make you less skilled in any way just a more entertaining sport to watch? Its an even scale just like racing. Just because cars go 160 mph rather then 100 like they did years ago does that make it require less skill? No you just even the field by making all the cars the same? You cant watch woodsball you just cant... Speedball, Airball same difference. The idea that they are not skilled in tactics, verbal skills and gun play is frankly ridiculous. I in no way see air ball/speedball as "flawed" in anyway? A lower rate of fire is just not as entertaining or competitive.

[TCambs]

I have to agree with king ,although anything can be improved upon, the problem is not the sport itself it is how the sport is displayed to the public. Things that should be targeted are how to make a viewer understand what is going on in the game and see key points of game matches, and the image of paintball itself. Paintball is still in its infancy as a competitive sport IMO compared to others and I see the future of paintball as becoming a very unique and entertaining sport to watch if people take advantage of technology and the unique style of the sport. Paintball needs to advertise itself as a sport instead of just a recreational activity.

[unfated33]

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 08:01 PM, said:

unfated33, on 12 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

This is probably a more thought out response than you were expecting, and I'll qualify that my joke about mechs was in no way meant to diminish "competitive paintball". I think you're meaning airball there and dismissing UWL, but that's okay.

The problem with airball right now is a subset of the problem with paintball that we all dance around but don't address specifically. The current common projectile is a total failure for accuracy and cost per kill. Some players address this problem by getting equipment that facilitates them shooting faster and faster or shooting up to a common standard, say 12.5 bps, with greater ease. With the idea of laning, airball competitively is based off the idea of embracing the huge waste of paint to increase kills by volume but with the cost of...well, cost (price). If you think about how people enter the sport, how we measure individual success in competition, and creating a returning, sustainable player base, the current setup of competitive airball markets itself poorly and drives players away as much as draws them in. A game doesn't have to have players shooting hundreds if not thousands of shots in a match to be competitive, but more often than not competitive airball not only practices this behavior but embraces it.

Some players have tried other avenues than paint overspray - the first strike round seems to be the most current, successful attempt. In addition, the advantage of playing in the woods is often that attributes like patience, silent movement or movement not detected by the eye, and hiding are far more rewarded than on the airball field. Instead of fiving 500-1000 shots per airball game, a player could get an equal number of kills by flanking behind his opponents and barrel tagging them as he passed. Not only can this be a different but equally satisfying style of play, but it's less likely to deter new players from embracing the game.

I'm saying all of this in way of an explanation and not an answer to the problem - I don't know how you could transition competitive airball from its current incarnation to anything resembling a more accurate, lower ROF game without turning off a lot of the people that enjoy it. In a way, transforming it like that would be the same thing as making it go away altogether. It's costly, it's flawed, it pushes casual players away, but it's the devil we know right now. That leads to plenty of people bagging on its failures until such time as someone comes up with a milestone change in competitive paintball.

Thats simply not the way sports work... just because your shooting more does not make you less skilled in any way just a more entertaining sport to watch? Its an even scale just like racing. Just because cars go 160 mph rather then 100 like they did years ago does that make it require less skill? No you just even the field by making all the cars the same? You cant watch woodsball you just cant... Speedball, Airball same difference. The idea that they are not skilled in tactics, verbal skills and gun play is frankly ridiculous. I in no way see air ball/speedball as "flawed" in anyway? A lower rate of fire is just not as entertaining or competitive.

Read what I wrote again. I think your counter complaints would be legitimate arguments except for the fact that they don't address what I was talking about.

[spqr-king]

unfated33, on 12 February 2013 - 08:19 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 08:01 PM, said:

unfated33, on 12 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

This is probably a more thought out response than you were expecting, and I'll qualify that my joke about mechs was in no way meant to diminish "competitive paintball". I think you're meaning airball there and dismissing UWL, but that's okay.

The problem with airball right now is a subset of the problem with paintball that we all dance around but don't address specifically. The current common projectile is a total failure for accuracy and cost per kill. Some players address this problem by getting equipment that facilitates them shooting faster and faster or shooting up to a common standard, say 12.5 bps, with greater ease. With the idea of laning, airball competitively is based off the idea of embracing the huge waste of paint to increase kills by volume but with the cost of...well, cost (price). If you think about how people enter the sport, how we measure individual success in competition, and creating a returning, sustainable player base, the current setup of competitive airball markets itself poorly and drives players away as much as draws them in. A game doesn't have to have players shooting hundreds if not thousands of shots in a match to be competitive, but more often than not competitive airball not only practices this behavior but embraces it.

Some players have tried other avenues than paint overspray - the first strike round seems to be the most current, successful attempt. In addition, the advantage of playing in the woods is often that attributes like patience, silent movement or movement not detected by the eye, and hiding are far more rewarded than on the airball field. Instead of fiving 500-1000 shots per airball game, a player could get an equal number of kills by flanking behind his opponents and barrel tagging them as he passed. Not only can this be a different but equally satisfying style of play, but it's less likely to deter new players from embracing the game.

I'm saying all of this in way of an explanation and not an answer to the problem - I don't know how you could transition competitive airball from its current incarnation to anything resembling a more accurate, lower ROF game without turning off a lot of the people that enjoy it. In a way, transforming it like that would be the same thing as making it go away altogether. It's costly, it's flawed, it pushes casual players away, but it's the devil we know right now. That leads to plenty of people bagging on its failures until such time as someone comes up with a milestone change in competitive paintball.

Thats simply not the way sports work... just because your shooting more does not make you less skilled in any way just a more entertaining sport to watch? Its an even scale just like racing. Just because cars go 160 mph rather then 100 like they did years ago does that make it require less skill? No you just even the field by making all the cars the same? You cant watch woodsball you just cant... Speedball, Airball same difference. The idea that they are not skilled in tactics, verbal skills and gun play is frankly ridiculous. I in no way see air ball/speedball as "flawed" in anyway? A lower rate of fire is just not as entertaining or competitive.

Read what I wrote again. I think your counter complaints would be legitimate arguments except for the fact that they don't address what I was talking about.

95% of your post was about accuracy and rate of fire... Cost was covered but all sports are expensive so... If you could sum up your three paragraphs it would be much appreciated just like bulleted points would do lol

[Exile308]

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

Look I will be honest I am finding I like some of the competitive games playing them. But let me say this bunker to bunker games are a bad way to introduce new people to the game. The shots hurt more at ranges you get hit in some of those games. That can turn off new people. Those style games use much more paint which makes it more expensive to play another turn off for a new player. Honestly right now I think cost effects people when getting into a new hobbies in ways it hasn't in the past.


It isn't that competitive paintball it is bad it is just that is all TV shows show. We watch pro football but we also see people play football in there yards with the kids. The same with most other sports. People don't get to see that with paintball they see what they see on TV. The best way in my opinion to get them paintball to grow is to take people to the field. It needs to be a grass roots thing.

The question is at this point is how do you get people to try something new when they don't really know what it is all about? Would advertising work? Sure I think local fields should do that. Does it need TV shows I don't think so.

[spqr-king]

Exile308, on 12 February 2013 - 11:17 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

Look I will be honest I am finding I like some of the competitive games playing them. But let me say this bunker to bunker games are a bad way to introduce new people to the game. The shots hurt more at ranges you get hit in some of those games. That can turn off new people. Those style games use much more paint which makes it more expensive to play another turn off for a new player. Honestly right now I think cost effects people when getting into a new hobbies in ways it hasn't in the past.


It isn't that competitive paintball it is bad it is just that is all TV shows show. We watch pro football but we also see people play football in there yards with the kids. The same with most other sports. People don't get to see that with paintball they see what they see on TV. The best way in my opinion to get them paintball to grow is to take people to the field. It needs to be a grass roots thing.

The question is at this point is how do you get people to try something new when they don't really know what it is all about? Would advertising work? Sure I think local fields should do that. Does it need TV shows I don't think so.

In a reletive way its not that expensive though? Its a sport. All sports cost a ton of money to play competitively? Like I said racing is the perfect example. Tons of people watch racing, it cost a ton of money to compete in and like paintball they have an even playing field. People literally sit at a Nascar track watching cars bank for HOURS... at least paintball tourneys have a trade show kind of feel as well.... I just dont get it man.. but it looks like im on the losing side of this argument. I dont want to see paintball blow up and become like other sports just maybe more kids involved and x-games status?

[Orange Chicken]

X games status is all im waiting for honestly.

[Exile308]

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

Exile308, on 12 February 2013 - 11:17 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

Look I will be honest I am finding I like some of the competitive games playing them. But let me say this bunker to bunker games are a bad way to introduce new people to the game. The shots hurt more at ranges you get hit in some of those games. That can turn off new people. Those style games use much more paint which makes it more expensive to play another turn off for a new player. Honestly right now I think cost effects people when getting into a new hobbies in ways it hasn't in the past.


It isn't that competitive paintball it is bad it is just that is all TV shows show. We watch pro football but we also see people play football in there yards with the kids. The same with most other sports. People don't get to see that with paintball they see what they see on TV. The best way in my opinion to get them paintball to grow is to take people to the field. It needs to be a grass roots thing.

The question is at this point is how do you get people to try something new when they don't really know what it is all about? Would advertising work? Sure I think local fields should do that. Does it need TV shows I don't think so.

In a reletive way its not that expensive though? Its a sport. All sports cost a ton of money to play competitively? Like I said racing is the perfect example. Tons of people watch racing, it cost a ton of money to compete in and like paintball they have an even playing field. People literally sit at a Nascar track watching cars bank for HOURS... at least paintball tourneys have a trade show kind of feel as well.... I just dont get it man.. but it looks like im on the losing side of this argument. I dont want to see paintball blow up and become like other sports just maybe more kids involved and x-games status?

Yea it is expensive. I can play football for the cost of a football. People do it all day every day. In paintball you can rent or buy your equipment but either way you have to buy paint it runs out and you have to buy more. Your example shows what I mean. Yes tons of people watch NASCAR. But all of them have been in a car or driven a car. They have some personal way to relate to it. Paintball people don't have that personal atachment to it unless they go play.

I am not against paintball tourneys I just don't see how the styles of paintball played are going to give anyone an atachment to it from watching it. You say you want more kids involved great. Do you hoenstly thing bunker to bunker style games are the best way to get most kids to want to keep playing or do you think they would enjoy some sort of senerio that makes them go "this is like call of duty"? I bet if you are honest you are going to say of course they would like the second better. Like it or not all sports compete with video games these days.

I love the game. I love that my daughter loves playing. I think the best thing I can do for the sport is let her invite some of her friends.

[unfated33]

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 08:01 PM, said:

unfated33, on 12 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

This is probably a more thought out response than you were expecting, and I'll qualify that my joke about mechs was in no way meant to diminish "competitive paintball". I think you're meaning airball there and dismissing UWL, but that's okay.

The problem with airball right now is a subset of the problem with paintball that we all dance around but don't address specifically. The current common projectile is a total failure for accuracy and cost per kill. Some players address this problem by getting equipment that facilitates them shooting faster and faster or shooting up to a common standard, say 12.5 bps, with greater ease. With the idea of laning, airball competitively is based off the idea of embracing the huge waste of paint to increase kills by volume but with the cost of...well, cost (price). If you think about how people enter the sport, how we measure individual success in competition, and creating a returning, sustainable player base, the current setup of competitive airball markets itself poorly and drives players away as much as draws them in. A game doesn't have to have players shooting hundreds if not thousands of shots in a match to be competitive, but more often than not competitive airball not only practices this behavior but embraces it.

Some players have tried other avenues than paint overspray - the first strike round seems to be the most current, successful attempt. In addition, the advantage of playing in the woods is often that attributes like patience, silent movement or movement not detected by the eye, and hiding are far more rewarded than on the airball field. Instead of fiving 500-1000 shots per airball game, a player could get an equal number of kills by flanking behind his opponents and barrel tagging them as he passed. Not only can this be a different but equally satisfying style of play, but it's less likely to deter new players from embracing the game.

I'm saying all of this in way of an explanation and not an answer to the problem - I don't know how you could transition competitive airball from its current incarnation to anything resembling a more accurate, lower ROF game without turning off a lot of the people that enjoy it. In a way, transforming it like that would be the same thing as making it go away altogether. It's costly, it's flawed, it pushes casual players away, but it's the devil we know right now. That leads to plenty of people bagging on its failures until such time as someone comes up with a milestone change in competitive paintball.

Thats simply not the way sports work... just because your shooting more does not make you less skilled in any way just a more entertaining sport to watch? Its an even scale just like racing. Just because cars go 160 mph rather then 100 like they did years ago does that make it require less skill? No you just even the field by making all the cars the same? You cant watch woodsball you just cant... Speedball, Airball same difference. The idea that they are not skilled in tactics, verbal skills and gun play is frankly ridiculous. I in no way see air ball/speedball as "flawed" in anyway? A lower rate of fire is just not as entertaining or competitive.

In numbered points:
1. Paint wasted because it's inaccurate makes the sport expensive at all levels, from casual play to tournament play. Of course, this scales up tremendously in cost. However, to be clear, the flaw isn't the competition but the paint. The competition is the natural evolution of living with the flaw.
1a. Instead of increasing accuracy, players generally increase volume. This directly leads to why paint is wasted.
2. Airball and Woodsball require some overlapping skills and both require skilled players to be successful. A skilled woodsball player has the chance to make more kills with less paint. Paint consumption does not appear to be much of a consideration for the average skilled airball player.
3. I don't think it's watchability has anything to do with its future. It will continue to be unwatchable in most formats short of live streaming helmet and gun cams in addition to drones/runners.
4. A lower rate of fire is not "competitive" in the current playing style dictated by the technology, but being competitive or not isn't really the point. It may never be entertaining, but outside entertainment is not the future of paintball success. The sport needs to have easy entry - that means lower costs, safer games for new players, and less paint. People are never going to show up to play paintball because they see it on TV. They are going to show up because you've brought them there, shown them a good time, and made it a place to have fun safely.

[XxJellyFilledxX]

The future lies not in the x games, espn, creating a different game from paintball. It lies in the people, continue to help new players that do come. Wprd gets out that its a blast to play at the field people will come.

This post has been edited by XxJellyFilledxX: 13 February 2013 - 11:25 AM

[spqr-king]

Exile308, on 13 February 2013 - 12:14 AM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

Exile308, on 12 February 2013 - 11:17 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

Look I will be honest I am finding I like some of the competitive games playing them. But let me say this bunker to bunker games are a bad way to introduce new people to the game. The shots hurt more at ranges you get hit in some of those games. That can turn off new people. Those style games use much more paint which makes it more expensive to play another turn off for a new player. Honestly right now I think cost effects people when getting into a new hobbies in ways it hasn't in the past.


It isn't that competitive paintball it is bad it is just that is all TV shows show. We watch pro football but we also see people play football in there yards with the kids. The same with most other sports. People don't get to see that with paintball they see what they see on TV. The best way in my opinion to get them paintball to grow is to take people to the field. It needs to be a grass roots thing.

The question is at this point is how do you get people to try something new when they don't really know what it is all about? Would advertising work? Sure I think local fields should do that. Does it need TV shows I don't think so.

In a reletive way its not that expensive though? Its a sport. All sports cost a ton of money to play competitively? Like I said racing is the perfect example. Tons of people watch racing, it cost a ton of money to compete in and like paintball they have an even playing field. People literally sit at a Nascar track watching cars bank for HOURS... at least paintball tourneys have a trade show kind of feel as well.... I just dont get it man.. but it looks like im on the losing side of this argument. I dont want to see paintball blow up and become like other sports just maybe more kids involved and x-games status?

Yea it is expensive. I can play football for the cost of a football. People do it all day every day. In paintball you can rent or buy your equipment but either way you have to buy paint it runs out and you have to buy more. Your example shows what I mean. Yes tons of people watch NASCAR. But all of them have been in a car or driven a car. They have some personal way to relate to it. Paintball people don't have that personal atachment to it unless they go play.

I am not against paintball tourneys I just don't see how the styles of paintball played are going to give anyone an atachment to it from watching it. You say you want more kids involved great. Do you hoenstly thing bunker to bunker style games are the best way to get most kids to want to keep playing or do you think they would enjoy some sort of senerio that makes them go "this is like call of duty"? I bet if you are honest you are going to say of course they would like the second better. Like it or not all sports compete with video games these days.

I love the game. I love that my daughter loves playing. I think the best thing I can do for the sport is let her invite some of her friends.

You cant play COMPETITIVE football for the cost of a football... You need pads, helmets, jerseys, a bus to go to different locals, a coaching staff, a medical staff, and a ton of other personnel and other costs... If your talking about going in your back yard and throwing a football im pretty sure you would do that for a smaller period of time then a case of paint will last the average person... The reason I use Nascar as an example is because just like paintball there are multiple facets to get to the top unlike football where you go from high school to college to pros. In racing and paintball you can go from a number of places. A ton of people have shot a gun at some point in time be it Nerf, water, paintball or an actual gun paintball is relatable it doesnt belong in the main stream on ESPNs main channel but maybe another outlet. Also until a video game can immerse you like real life there is a market for paintball...

[spqr-king]

unfated33, on 13 February 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 08:01 PM, said:

unfated33, on 12 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

This is probably a more thought out response than you were expecting, and I'll qualify that my joke about mechs was in no way meant to diminish "competitive paintball". I think you're meaning airball there and dismissing UWL, but that's okay.

The problem with airball right now is a subset of the problem with paintball that we all dance around but don't address specifically. The current common projectile is a total failure for accuracy and cost per kill. Some players address this problem by getting equipment that facilitates them shooting faster and faster or shooting up to a common standard, say 12.5 bps, with greater ease. With the idea of laning, airball competitively is based off the idea of embracing the huge waste of paint to increase kills by volume but with the cost of...well, cost (price). If you think about how people enter the sport, how we measure individual success in competition, and creating a returning, sustainable player base, the current setup of competitive airball markets itself poorly and drives players away as much as draws them in. A game doesn't have to have players shooting hundreds if not thousands of shots in a match to be competitive, but more often than not competitive airball not only practices this behavior but embraces it.

Some players have tried other avenues than paint overspray - the first strike round seems to be the most current, successful attempt. In addition, the advantage of playing in the woods is often that attributes like patience, silent movement or movement not detected by the eye, and hiding are far more rewarded than on the airball field. Instead of fiving 500-1000 shots per airball game, a player could get an equal number of kills by flanking behind his opponents and barrel tagging them as he passed. Not only can this be a different but equally satisfying style of play, but it's less likely to deter new players from embracing the game.

I'm saying all of this in way of an explanation and not an answer to the problem - I don't know how you could transition competitive airball from its current incarnation to anything resembling a more accurate, lower ROF game without turning off a lot of the people that enjoy it. In a way, transforming it like that would be the same thing as making it go away altogether. It's costly, it's flawed, it pushes casual players away, but it's the devil we know right now. That leads to plenty of people bagging on its failures until such time as someone comes up with a milestone change in competitive paintball.

Thats simply not the way sports work... just because your shooting more does not make you less skilled in any way just a more entertaining sport to watch? Its an even scale just like racing. Just because cars go 160 mph rather then 100 like they did years ago does that make it require less skill? No you just even the field by making all the cars the same? You cant watch woodsball you just cant... Speedball, Airball same difference. The idea that they are not skilled in tactics, verbal skills and gun play is frankly ridiculous. I in no way see air ball/speedball as "flawed" in anyway? A lower rate of fire is just not as entertaining or competitive.

In numbered points:
1. Paint wasted because it's inaccurate makes the sport expensive at all levels, from casual play to tournament play. Of course, this scales up tremendously in cost. However, to be clear, the flaw isn't the competition but the paint. The competition is the natural evolution of living with the flaw.
1a. Instead of increasing accuracy, players generally increase volume. This directly leads to why paint is wasted.
2. Airball and Woodsball require some overlapping skills and both require skilled players to be successful. A skilled woodsball player has the chance to make more kills with less paint. Paint consumption does not appear to be much of a consideration for the average skilled airball player.
3. I don't think it's watchability has anything to do with its future. It will continue to be unwatchable in most formats short of live streaming helmet and gun cams in addition to drones/runners.
4. A lower rate of fire is not "competitive" in the current playing style dictated by the technology, but being competitive or not isn't really the point. It may never be entertaining, but outside entertainment is not the future of paintball success. The sport needs to have easy entry - that means lower costs, safer games for new players, and less paint. People are never going to show up to play paintball because they see it on TV. They are going to show up because you've brought them there, shown them a good time, and made it a place to have fun safely.

1) Its not inaccurate its suppressive fire... It keeps the players in their bunker like in real combat... Yes the price goes up but like I said all PROFESSIONAL SPORTS are expensive some more then others...
2) Woodball will never be competitive paintball. You cant watch it. It wont happen thats one of the reasons Air Ball got so popular. Im almost positive if you took professional players and threw them in the woods they would do more damage then a "professional" woodball player.
3) Why do you think youtube paintball channels are so popular? Its not because people dont want to watch the sport thats for sure... Media has a lot to do with how a sport spreads into the main stream its been YEARS since paintball was on a channel anyone actually has... who knows it could be a different now but im sure no one wants to chance their money on that.
4) You have to have competition to progress. If there was no competitive format people would stop at woodsball and either love it or get bored and quit.

We can have both formats. The issue is while woodsball is the "ideal" paintball situation for the populace paintball wont grow past where we are now. Because people want to compete. You want to be better then the next man look at organized sports. Sure I love going out and throwing the football around with the boys having a good time but I would much rather go out and crush a rival team who have worked all season to beat us. Competition breeds a better sport, better players and a more cohesive environment because competition is one thing we can all relate to. Woodball is just not competitive on a large scale. Sure there is the UWL but you cant watch it... At all... Not on TV. Not at the field. Its fun to take part in but thats where we are now.

[Filmer_jake]

I love playing airball way more than woodsball and here is why:

Airball:

• IMO is a lot of fun to play
• It is more competitive (more sport-like)
• I REALLY enjoy the fast playing style. Having to be fast.
• It is played more like a sport in the sense that there are formations, certain techniques, just the quickness, the way its played, every part of it.
• I love the smaller field size
• I love having to try and be faster than someone
• I love the adrenaline rush it gives me, something that woodsball doesnt quite do for me anymore
• I like the shorter games, I get to play more in a day than I would with woods ball

Why I don't like woodsball:

• It's slow
• The people that play it generally shoot as much paint as they would in any game, just walking to the field. Obviously they arent worried about spending money by shooting trees.
• The people that play woodsball are generally either really into it, or camp back and dont do anything
• The amount of paint wasted, just sitting in one spot on the giant field shooting at someone else either just out of range or where both people are pinned down
• People generally judge the type of player by the gear you have and are either scared, or flock to you to be on your team

Now I guess lots of the reasons are about the people that play. People that play airball where I am from generally are chill and layed back and just enjoy being with each other, in woodsball it seems, to me, like everyone is so hyped up and just everything is so crazy and just the things they say and it drives me nuts lol

Now I do enjoy playing 'woosball' fields that are a lot smaller and quicker. That would be more leaning twards recball I guess, but I just enjoy the faster, smaller gameplay, where people actually know whats going on.

Please, no one take offense to this, I am just saying that where I am from, generally the people that play woodsball just annoy me, and the people that play airball are a lot more chill and more my personality I guess.

[spqr-king]

Cost for a high school football team...

Cost of the college football team at my school...


Cost of a professional football team...


Competitive sports are not cheap plain and simple. Paintball has a repetitive cost that some sports dont have as well as a lack of funding for any teams of any type. If it was televised and sponsored I bet you once you got to D3 you would have much lower costs. The main issue is paintball is not other sports. There is almost no other sport you can relate it to directly but in the general scheme of things its not that bad. Its only bad because you as an individual have to pay rather then a school, team or professional body... If we had more support from sponsors, school and if paintball was generally more acceptable we may be able to acquire that funding... or maybe paintball should just stay the way it is now which I am also alright with...

[Filmer_jake]

spqr-king, on 13 February 2013 - 12:02 PM, said:

unfated33, on 13 February 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 08:01 PM, said:

unfated33, on 12 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

This is probably a more thought out response than you were expecting, and I'll qualify that my joke about mechs was in no way meant to diminish "competitive paintball". I think you're meaning airball there and dismissing UWL, but that's okay.

The problem with airball right now is a subset of the problem with paintball that we all dance around but don't address specifically. The current common projectile is a total failure for accuracy and cost per kill. Some players address this problem by getting equipment that facilitates them shooting faster and faster or shooting up to a common standard, say 12.5 bps, with greater ease. With the idea of laning, airball competitively is based off the idea of embracing the huge waste of paint to increase kills by volume but with the cost of...well, cost (price). If you think about how people enter the sport, how we measure individual success in competition, and creating a returning, sustainable player base, the current setup of competitive airball markets itself poorly and drives players away as much as draws them in. A game doesn't have to have players shooting hundreds if not thousands of shots in a match to be competitive, but more often than not competitive airball not only practices this behavior but embraces it.

Some players have tried other avenues than paint overspray - the first strike round seems to be the most current, successful attempt. In addition, the advantage of playing in the woods is often that attributes like patience, silent movement or movement not detected by the eye, and hiding are far more rewarded than on the airball field. Instead of fiving 500-1000 shots per airball game, a player could get an equal number of kills by flanking behind his opponents and barrel tagging them as he passed. Not only can this be a different but equally satisfying style of play, but it's less likely to deter new players from embracing the game.

I'm saying all of this in way of an explanation and not an answer to the problem - I don't know how you could transition competitive airball from its current incarnation to anything resembling a more accurate, lower ROF game without turning off a lot of the people that enjoy it. In a way, transforming it like that would be the same thing as making it go away altogether. It's costly, it's flawed, it pushes casual players away, but it's the devil we know right now. That leads to plenty of people bagging on its failures until such time as someone comes up with a milestone change in competitive paintball.

Thats simply not the way sports work... just because your shooting more does not make you less skilled in any way just a more entertaining sport to watch? Its an even scale just like racing. Just because cars go 160 mph rather then 100 like they did years ago does that make it require less skill? No you just even the field by making all the cars the same? You cant watch woodsball you just cant... Speedball, Airball same difference. The idea that they are not skilled in tactics, verbal skills and gun play is frankly ridiculous. I in no way see air ball/speedball as "flawed" in anyway? A lower rate of fire is just not as entertaining or competitive.

In numbered points:
1. Paint wasted because it's inaccurate makes the sport expensive at all levels, from casual play to tournament play. Of course, this scales up tremendously in cost. However, to be clear, the flaw isn't the competition but the paint. The competition is the natural evolution of living with the flaw.
1a. Instead of increasing accuracy, players generally increase volume. This directly leads to why paint is wasted.
2. Airball and Woodsball require some overlapping skills and both require skilled players to be successful. A skilled woodsball player has the chance to make more kills with less paint. Paint consumption does not appear to be much of a consideration for the average skilled airball player.
3. I don't think it's watchability has anything to do with its future. It will continue to be unwatchable in most formats short of live streaming helmet and gun cams in addition to drones/runners.
4. A lower rate of fire is not "competitive" in the current playing style dictated by the technology, but being competitive or not isn't really the point. It may never be entertaining, but outside entertainment is not the future of paintball success. The sport needs to have easy entry - that means lower costs, safer games for new players, and less paint. People are never going to show up to play paintball because they see it on TV. They are going to show up because you've brought them there, shown them a good time, and made it a place to have fun safely.

1) Its not inaccurate its suppressive fire... It keeps the players in their bunker like in real combat... Yes the price goes up but like I said all PROFESSIONAL SPORTS are expensive some more then others...
2) Woodball will never be competitive paintball. You cant watch it. It wont happen thats one of the reasons Air Ball got so popular. Im almost positive if you took professional players and threw them in the woods they would do more damage then a "professional" woodball player.
3) Why do you think youtube paintball channels are so popular? Its not because people dont want to watch the sport thats for sure... Media has a lot to do with how a sport spreads into the main stream its been YEARS since paintball was on a channel anyone actually has... who knows it could be a different now but im sure no one wants to chance their money on that.
4) You have to have competition to progress. If there was no competitive format people would stop at woodsball and either love it or get bored and quit.

We can have both formats. The issue is while woodsball is the "ideal" paintball situation for the populace paintball wont grow past where we are now. Because people want to compete. You want to be better then the next man look at organized sports. Sure I love going out and throwing the football around with the boys having a good time but I would much rather go out and crush a rival team who have worked all season to beat us. Competition breeds a better sport, better players and a more cohesive environment because competition is one thing we can all relate to. Woodball is just not competitive on a large scale. Sure there is the UWL but you cant watch it... At all... Not on TV. Not at the field. Its fun to take part in but thats where we are now.

I completely agree with you. Pro sports are incredibly expensive.

Also, in all reality, adding to what you said, what do you think people like to watch more: HK Army's videos of speedball that are at most 5 minutes long, or mike's videos of running around in the woods for 15 minutes? Now this is nothing against mike, I am just saying that the HK army videos are more interesting to watch because there is more action. Of course some of Mike's videos are interesting, but lots of times watching someone walk around in the woods isnt what I enjoy most.

[spqr-king]

I also think Woodsball is a GREAT Segway to speedball. With the lower rates of fire younger players feel more at home in the woods then on the field but you need something competitive to progress to and UWL doesnt count because people want to be seen, watched and cheered for. Competitors want to be in the spotlight and while UWL is cool and all there is no way to do that...

[unfated33]

spqr-king, on 13 February 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

Exile308, on 13 February 2013 - 12:14 AM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 11:36 PM, said:

Exile308, on 12 February 2013 - 11:17 PM, said:

spqr-king, on 12 February 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Why all the hate on competitive paintball? Sure it has its downsides but I would hate to see it go away? If the only option I had was to go play army guy every weekend I doubt I would be playing still...

Look I will be honest I am finding I like some of the competitive games playing them. But let me say this bunker to bunker games are a bad way to introduce new people to the game. The shots hurt more at ranges you get hit in some of those games. That can turn off new people. Those style games use much more paint which makes it more expensive to play another turn off for a new player. Honestly right now I think cost effects people when getting into a new hobbies in ways it hasn't in the past.


It isn't that competitive paintball it is bad it is just that is all TV shows show. We watch pro football but we also see people play football in there yards with the kids. The same with most other sports. People don't get to see that with paintball they see what they see on TV. The best way in my opinion to get them paintball to grow is to take people to the field. It needs to be a grass roots thing.

The question is at this point is how do you get people to try something new when they don't really know what it is all about? Would advertising work? Sure I think local fields should do that. Does it need TV shows I don't think so.

In a reletive way its not that expensive though? Its a sport. All sports cost a ton of money to play competitively? Like I said racing is the perfect example. Tons of people watch racing, it cost a ton of money to compete in and like paintball they have an even playing field. People literally sit at a Nascar track watching cars bank for HOURS... at least paintball tourneys have a trade show kind of feel as well.... I just dont get it man.. but it looks like im on the losing side of this argument. I dont want to see paintball blow up and become like other sports just maybe more kids involved and x-games status?

Yea it is expensive. I can play football for the cost of a football. People do it all day every day. In paintball you can rent or buy your equipment but either way you have to buy paint it runs out and you have to buy more. Your example shows what I mean. Yes tons of people watch NASCAR. But all of them have been in a car or driven a car. They have some personal way to relate to it. Paintball people don't have that personal atachment to it unless they go play.

I am not against paintball tourneys I just don't see how the styles of paintball played are going to give anyone an atachment to it from watching it. You say you want more kids involved great. Do you hoenstly thing bunker to bunker style games are the best way to get most kids to want to keep playing or do you think they would enjoy some sort of senerio that makes them go "this is like call of duty"? I bet if you are honest you are going to say of course they would like the second better. Like it or not all sports compete with video games these days.

I love the game. I love that my daughter loves playing. I think the best thing I can do for the sport is let her invite some of her friends.

You cant play COMPETITIVE football for the cost of a football... You need pads, helmets, jerseys, a bus to go to different locals, a coaching staff, a medical staff, and a ton of other personnel and other costs... If your talking about going in your back yard and throwing a football im pretty sure you would do that for a smaller period of time then a case of paint will last the average person... The reason I use Nascar as an example is because just like paintball there are multiple facets to get to the top unlike football where you go from high school to college to pros. In racing and paintball you can go from a number of places. A ton of people have shot a gun at some point in time be it Nerf, water, paintball or an actual gun paintball is relatable it doesnt belong in the main stream on ESPNs main channel but maybe another outlet. Also until a video game can immerse you like real life there is a market for paintball...

I think you've got the right idea, but your perspective is skewed. The topic was the future of paintball and you asked why everyone is bagging on competitive paintball. The answer is because it's expensive. In comparison to other competitive sports, it would appear the cost to entry is comparatively lower - however, the ease of entry into other competitive sports is higher. You still have throttling of players at a competitive level, but then for a different reason.

If the topic was "what's the future of football", you'd have a post of a parent and child throwing a football in the backyard every weekend. It's timeless and its cost is the price of a football. Millions of kids do that, and not even .1% end up in competitive football. It's not bagging on competition to say it's not the future, but it simply isn't anything more than a small subset of the game. Despite not being on tv in any form last year, paintball had its best year post-recession and was the fastest growing search term on google for 2012 and the #1 search term on googlemaps in 2012. People are playing, who cares what anyone is watching on videos and tv?