General

[Murph]

Well the fall of 06 sucked because they were using orange smoke canisters in an unfair manner. It is dangerous to breathe next to those things, and they threw them right on top of our defensive positions. That's how they were able to nail us so easily that year.

[Schmitti]

I know that one of the guys that came to castle with me the first time (Fall 06) was not happy at all that the game did not last longer

Same with my Dad.. which is why I'm not bringing him to Castle this year... more because he didn't like the style of play... he had fun, but I think he would have enjoyed Fort Worr more. He did have fun at PP last year as it was a more relaxed pace game in comparison to Castle. I walked away from Fall Castle 2006 with 2 cases of paint. Between Dad and I we only used a case (the game was very short because of the smoke etc, and I had multiple gun issues which kept me from really throwing paint).

E

[Harbinger[TG]]

I'll admit that I had no idea the main game was only 3hours when I got there last year. However, I didn't care about a short game if I wanted to play more I could have stayed on the field. Living so far away from EMR and my friends up north the weekend is as much about hanging out as it is playing. I look forward to seeing everyone next month.

[greenmtnphantom]

Originally Posted by Murph

Well the fall of 06 sucked because they were using orange smoke canisters in an unfair manner. It is dangerous to breathe next to those things, and they threw them right on top of our defensive positions. That's how they were able to nail us so easily that year.

I remeber that all to well and they did change the rules after that to correct that problem, I think the 4hr time limit might be another change to improve the game.

Stereotypicaly I think most defenders go into it thinking that they are just going to hold the castle as long as possible no matter what, Attackers want to WIN IMHO

I think this is an attempt to make everyone happy

[HP_Lovecraft]

Originally Posted by greenmtnphantom

most defenders go into it thinking that they are just going to hold the castle as long as possible no matter what, Attackers want to WIN IMHO

I agree with this view.

Many of us have been playing for 20+ years. Think about all the types of formats.

Usually we play "center flag", or "base flag" type games where BOTH sides have an offensive, and defensive role. The WINNER is very easy to quantify because BOTH teams have the exact same objectives. Both want the "flag", and to elliminate other players.

"Defensive games" are MUCH harder to quanity since the goals of each team is much different. This is an issue we ran into at AGNH. Does the team defending the castle win if the time runs out? What if more defenders are elliminated then attackers? What if the attackers have control of 1/2 the castle? Who wins?

Blue came up with a scheme to quantify a "win" in such a scenerio. Its complicated, and not perfect. It gets tweaked a bit every year. The latest changes make sense. Ultimetly, it doesnt really matter, since I just want to shoot lots of paint, then get drunk, and talk about the old days. Who wins is largely moot.

nick

[Chappy]

Originally Posted by HP_Lovecraft

Ultimetly, it doesnt really matter, since I just want to shoot lots of paint, then get drunk, and talk about the old days. Who wins is largely moot.

wOOt!
That'll be my new sig, thanks nick

I've played two castles now, one on O and one on D. They both ended too quickly for my taste. But I had a blast at both as well, and it didn't matter who won or lost. I would've taken a loss over a win at fall castle if it would've meant playing for another hour.

On the other hand I had just as much fun at spring castle playing open play after the castle games as I did playing castle. 50 on 50 in tippmanntown was a blast. So the idea that one would drive accross country(or wherever) and only play a 3 hour game is kind of a falicy to me. There's plenty of paintball to be played on castle weekend for anyone who wants to play, and plenty of socialization for those who want to relax. A few rules tweaks have very little impact on the overall experience, unless winning means that much to someone.

CASTLE!!

[HP_Lovecraft]

Originally Posted by Chappy

I've played two castles now, one on O and one on D. They both ended too quickly for my taste.

I know what you are saying.

Though from my perspective, throughout the 90s, I played all the Skirmish, and Coram big games. They were AWESOME... except.... 90% of the day was spent LOOKING for action. The fields were massive, and the other team could literally be anywhere, since you never knew who controlled any given base, at any given time.

It made for lots and lots of walking, waiting, looking. I loved that aspect, but as I get older, and very lazy, sometimes I want to know EXACTLY where the other team is. Thats Castle Conquest. I KNOW exactly where you will be on Saturday, and its about a 4 minute walk from my car.

That means I'm shooting a constant amount of paint almost the entire game. I'm not sure a longer game would be a better game in that situation. You might have problems with players burning out after so much constant playing.

On a lighter side-
I just checked my homebrew, and its pretty friggen good. So when the defenders loose, you have something to look forward to.

nick

[Dave Cameron]

Originally Posted by HP_Lovecraft

Though from my perspective, throughout the 90s, I played all the Skirmish, and Coram big games. They were AWESOME... except.... 90% of the day was spent LOOKING for action. The fields were massive, and the other team could literally be anywhere, since you never knew who controlled any given base, at any given time.

It made for lots and lots of walking, waiting, looking. I loved that aspect, but as I get older, and very lazy, sometimes I want to know EXACTLY where the other team is. Thats Castle Conquest. I KNOW exactly where you will be on Saturday, and its about a 4 minute walk from my car.

I really miss that kind of game. Seems like that kind of thing just doesn't happen anymore - even if fields have the real estate to do that kind of thing, they restrict you to small fields. I can't remember the last time I played a game where you couldn't see your opposition at the start (except for scenario games which quickly turn into a broad front). I love stalking through the woods, hunting while being hunted. Most people playing today never got to experience that style of play.

[HP_Lovecraft]

Originally Posted by Dave Cameron

I really miss that kind of game. Seems like that kind of thing just doesn't happen anymore.

I think Coram still uses the whole field? I don't know since I was banned 8 years ago (a story for another time).

It did create a very unique dynamic. You might show up with your team of 10 players, heading for Base "Alpha". Then suddenly you walk into a wall 200 enemy players, who may be engaging players in the opposite direction.

Absolute chaos follows. It was always fascinating to me to what the movement of so many players. It was like watching a school of fish moving in an unpredictable wave.

From a commercial standpoint, its a different situation. Paintball is a hard business to make a profit. Its a fact of life that fields are shrinking. Games are becoming quicker. etc, etc. The logistics behind using large fields for "normal sunday games" is too much for most places.

nick

[incynr8]

Coram still uses the whole field, you troublemaker!
That f'ing helicopter, if I ever do that again it's in total bark-o-flage