Paintball

[blackrain]

I'm not reading this whole thing,but what I'm gathering so far is this:

Scenario is going in the crapper.
Once again sposership is ruining the fun.
This is what happens when people are forced down your throats.
This is what happens when a small group wants to say "Hey we should have tournies".
Or The "We are on a much higher level then everyone else, cause we are pretend GI Joes"

This is why I stay away from all the big things going on in paintball. The attitudes,the sponsered teams. The "let's not have fun and just shoot people". The "we tell you what to do cause we are in charge" people.

The problem with paintball,is that when something becomes fun again, it has to be ruined. Meaning have tournies,sponsered teams, etc,it just goes to crap.

Now before someone starts to cry about my post, not all teams are bad and some are nice people,but the other 99% attitudes,I don't prefer.
Later,
Blackrain

[10-shot kid]

Blackrain: totally off, same with anyone who thinks my original post was about that at all. Scenario is changing because the average skill level on the field is higher and that has NOTHING to do with sponserships. Gah.

Zulu: I don't know how to put this anymore bluntly, Facefull Jungle is the best magazine that covers our side of the coin. It has more pages dedicated to articles than other "woodsball" mags and it doesn't pull punches. IE their article on how much last ION sucked while other mags such as splat called it "game of the year."

That said the most recent article by the hunter very clearly said Blues Crew doesn't belong in scenario games along with some other team. I've been told that I don't belong at certain games before. It's a "diss" that stings quite a bit more than any other one I've ever personally gotten. So while I give props to facefull Jungle for actually taking a stand and not writing absolute drivel like other mags I'll disagree with their articles when they are wrong when they individually pick out friends of mine in that manner.

[custar]

Originally Posted by Marauder_Pilot

That's why I like D-Day so much. There's loads of room for every sort of player to get their respective scenario thing on, and they're not putting in the pro-of-the-day in the top spot.

100% agreement. I do, however, have reservations against robot and superman costumes on the field in a scenario event unless appropriate for that scenario.

custar

[Harbinger[TG]]

Originally Posted by 10-shot kid

Blackrain: totally off, same with anyone who thinks my original post was about that at all. Scenario is changing because the average skill level on the field is higher and that has NOTHING to do with sponserships. Gah.

Zulu: I don't know how to put this anymore bluntly, Facefull Jungle is the best magazine that covers our side of the coin. It has more pages dedicated to articles than other "woodsball" mags and it doesn't pull punches. IE their article on how much last ION sucked while other mags such as splat called it "game of the year."

That said the most recent article by the hunter very clearly said Blues Crew doesn't belong in scenario games along with some other team. I've been told that I don't belong at certain games before. It's a "diss" that stings quite a bit more than any other one I've ever personally gotten. So while I give props to facefull Jungle for actually taking a stand and not writing absolute drivel like other mags I'll disagree with their articles when they are wrong when they individually pick out friends of mine in that manner.

I agree. We need to get scans of this article.

[Timaaaaaaay]

For a first post this is a doozy. As a strictly recreational player, and by that i mean i play for fun. i own a fast gun, i wear cleats, i play in a t-shirt, whatever color is clean. I personally love scenario games for their little bit of everything aspect that they provide. As has been stated before by others, it is those who prevent me from having a good time that do not belong. this includes people who are there just to win.

As a player who was never afforded the option of of getting kickbacks from the industry, perhaps i am unable to comment on the pressures that they put upon a scenario player to make the bottom line and win. This will tend to bring to the surface all those things that are considered to be in bad taste and bad sportsmanship. If this has caused a problem, then for shame, the promoters, generals and other players know who is tallented and who gets the job done. Sometimes thanks don't come in the form of a patch or a spot in some crummy paintball rag (and lets face it, production on paintball magazines though improved is still pretty shoddy), but in the form of a free case of paint, a bottle of jack daniels and a smile on the faces of everyone there. So who does belong on the field?

The short answer is anyone who pays their registration and doesn't belong to the previously stated category of those who will ruin my fun. i prefer running and gunning, but i also love the silly tomfoolery that is a scenario game. if my general is some famous tournament player who just won some championship in the nppl or psp or event he millennium, i will wish him luck and do what i can to help him, not pack up and go home. such an action is just unsportsmanlike, placing you squarely into the catagory of those who dont belong there. for those of you who don't like the run and gunners because they are better then you at paintball, then get better at paintball. if you want to play a role, then just realize that i will shoot you because i know you are in a costume and therefore important.

The point of lack of actual roleplaying, pick a better event coordinater if you are having issues with enough people in costumes. if you make the good games popular, the popular games will be good.

[Harbinger[TG]]

Originally Posted by Timaaaaaaay

For a first post this is a doozy. As a strictly recreational player, and by that i mean i play for fun. i own a fast gun, i wear cleats, i play in a t-shirt, whatever color is clean. I personally love scenario games for their little bit of everything aspect that they provide. As has been stated before by others, it is those who prevent me from having a good time that do not belong. this includes people who are there just to win.

As a player who was never afforded the option of of getting kickbacks from the industry, perhaps i am unable to comment on the pressures that they put upon a scenario player to make the bottom line and win. This will tend to bring to the surface all those things that are considered to be in bad taste and bad sportsmanship. If this has caused a problem, then for shame, the promoters, generals and other players know who is tallented and who gets the job done. Sometimes thanks don't come in the form of a patch or a spot in some crummy paintball rag (and lets face it, production on paintball magazines though improved is still pretty shoddy), but in the form of a free case of paint, a bottle of jack daniels and a smile on the faces of everyone there. So who does belong on the field?

The short answer is anyone who pays their registration and doesn't belong to the previously stated category of those who will ruin my fun. i prefer running and gunning, but i also love the silly tomfoolery that is a scenario game. if my general is some famous tournament player who just won some championship in the nppl or psp or event he millennium, i will wish him luck and do what i can to help him, not pack up and go home. such an action is just unsportsmanlike, placing you squarely into the catagory of those who dont belong there. for those of you who don't like the run and gunners because they are better then you at paintball, then get better at paintball. if you want to play a role, then just realize that i will shoot you because i know you are in a costume and therefore important.

The point of lack of actual roleplaying, pick a better event coordinater if you are having issues with enough people in costumes. if you make the good games popular, the popular games will be good.

Why should some semi famous tourney guy be general instead of the 1000s of deserving scenario players that have been busting their asses for a decade? Sportsmanship!! That is funny seeing as how we have won that award several times.

[iq666]

I will preface my post by stating that I read the article article a few months back when it was published, and have since recycled my copy of the mag. I do not have the article in front of me for reference, so I am writing this based on the impression the article left with me.

I must say I don't remember the author saying Blue's Crew, or any other team, didn't belong at a game. I remember "The Hunter" stating that players should realize that roleplaying and missions can matter as much or more than simply shooting out your opponents. I remember the point of the article was to state that true scenario games give players the OPPORTUNITY to get involved deeply in story lines and complex missions, and can appeal to a wider audience, because they offer something for everyone; competition, storylines, missions, all in a big target-rich environment. I don't remember him saying that missions were the ONLY way to have fun, or the only purpose for playing.

As far as I am concerned, if you show up to shoot out all comers, and could care less about retreiving the "golden goose egg" supposedly left on Hamburger Hill by Himmler's 4,366th Crossdressing Panzergeist Brigade, that's fine too. I'll go get the egg, you shoot anyone you see, and we will both have a splendid time!

[zulu]

Originally Posted by 10-shot kid

Zulu: I don't know how to put this anymore bluntly, Facefull Jungle is the best magazine that covers our side of the coin. It has more pages dedicated to articles than other "woodsball" mags and it doesn't pull punches. IE their article on how much last ION sucked while other mags such as splat called it "game of the year."

That said the most recent article by the hunter very clearly said Blues Crew doesn't belong in scenario games along with some other team. I've been told that I don't belong at certain games before. It's a "diss" that stings quite a bit more than any other one I've ever personally gotten. So while I give props to facefull Jungle for actually taking a stand and not writing absolute drivel like other mags I'll disagree with their articles when they are wrong when they individually pick out friends of mine in that manner.

Thanks. We put our heart and soul into the mag and the editors trust us enough with their vision to let us do our thing and write about what we know (heck, I learn something new all the time as well)....scenario/woods/rec/milsim ball.

On your second paragraph, I'll have to go back to the article when I get the chance.

FTR, whether I agree or disagree with your posts I ALWAYS enjoy reading them. They're insightful, often amusing, and contain well thought out arguments/thesis.

[Duzzy]

Originally Posted by Harbinger[TG]

Why should some semi famous tourney guy be general instead of the 1000s of deserving scenario players that have been busting their asses for a decade? Sportsmanship!! That is funny seeing as how we have won that award several times.

You know, I can honestly see your point. But I I also think that on some levels it is bad taste. Why? Mostly because you're not giving someone a chance based on their background. [If you want to make a statement then that is your right and I don't care one way or another.]

But a better statement might be to give the guy a shot. If he looks like he needs help offer. Show him what you think scenario play is about. If he turns out to be a complete jerk then I would say feel free to walk from that scenario, or any future scenarios he's at. Your voice will actually be louder, and say more, if you can e-mail his sponsors and say, "Hey, I went to a scenario and was treated poorly by so-and-so," or if you can say [as you ask for a refund], "You know, so-and-so isn't treating his players well and I'm not having fun;" than if you just simply walk away without giving him a chance.

If you walk without giving him the benefit of the doubt what can you say?

"Well, I don't think he deserved the position so I left."
"I just don't want to play under a tourney player."
etc.

There are thousands of deserving people in every walk of life, most of whom will never get anywhere near where they deserve to be. It's unfortunate, but it's life. Nothing personal is intended, just some thought to chew on. And I realize that I may be skipping some of the heart of the issue, but I wanted to focus on this one.

[Harbinger[TG]]

Originally Posted by Duzzy

You know, I can honestly see your point. But I I also think that on some levels it is bad taste. Why? Mostly because you're not giving someone a chance based on their background. [If you want to make a statement then that is your right and I don't care one way or another.]

But a better statement might be to give the guy a shot. If he looks like he needs help offer. Show him what you think scenario play is about. If he turns out to be a complete jerk then I would say feel free to walk from that scenario, or any future scenarios he's at. Your voice will actually be louder, and say more, if you can e-mail his sponsors and say, "Hey, I went to a scenario and was treated poorly by so-and-so," or if you can say [as you ask for a refund], "You know, so-and-so isn't treating his players well and I'm not having fun;" than if you just simply walk away without giving him a chance.

If you walk without giving him the benefit of the doubt what can you say?

"Well, I don't think he deserved the position so I left."
"I just don't want to play under a tourney player."
etc.

There are thousands of deserving people in every walk of life, most of whom will never get anywhere near where they deserve to be. It's unfortunate, but it's life. Nothing personal is intended, just some thought to chew on. And I realize that I may be skipping some of the heart of the issue, but I wanted to focus on this one.

I have already voiced my opinion to the people I know. The fields and promoters using the tourney guys are smaller, newer, and less experienced. Not only do I find it in poor taste, but I also find it rather idiotic. Why should someone with NO experience be commanding? It is all about money.

I know more scenario people than most and nearly all of them feel the same way. Go to Specops or peanut butter and read similar threads, you will find that the core of the major scenario teams do not want this.

In anything, would you rather follow someone with experience in the field, or someone with experience in a totally different field? Be it real combat, the corporate world, sports, politics, whatever.

I have no issues with them playing the game and I would have no issues with them commanding if they EARNED IT. I will say that again, if they earned it.

I have played for and command some of the best. I have also played for some of the inexperienced, which usually ends up in us getting our asses kicked. We have busted our asses for nearly a decade for everyone. However, we are not going to kill ourselves and have our fun ruined because some greedy promoter wants to bring an entire section of players that DO NOT know how things are done.

This is just one issue regarding the dumbing down and bastardization of scenarios. All the newer games featuring tourney commanders and stuff are dumbed down because they do not know the game. So instead of bringing them up like everyone else, they are given everything on the silver platter.

This leads to a lower level of Scenario aspects including, but not limited to: role playing, missions, tactics, commanding...

So again, I will say I will welcome most to play the game, but I will not stand by and watch them ruin what others have worked so hard for.

A lot of teams have been doing this for over a decade. Where are their awards and sponsors? (not that any of them really want sponsors because we feel those are also detracting from the game).

I don't see any of the original main top-notch scenario Producers stooping to this marketing scheme. If you truly want to draw that crowd, I am pretty sure just having the supercool pro people there will actually do more. That way you can market to the agglets without alienating and pissing off the players that built this sport. Most of us built this sport on honor and sportsmanship, not wiping and cheater boards.

Ask Wayne Dollack, Viper, Ben T. and the others who they want commanding their games, I will bet money it is not some tourney guy. If you want to have a BIG GAME, which IS NOT a scenario with them fine. But far to many of us are not happy with the current state of affairs.

So this division is going to get worse. You will have the players that know what is going and then you will have all the new style dumbed down people that don't really know what a scenario is.

Ask around, I saw this coming almost 2 years ago. We have been voicing our opinions since then. But since the only thing these new people want is money, they aren't listening. So we will have 2-3 sects of alleged scenario games played across the country where more than half won't be anything like a scenario should be.

This will then lead to major issues as those that want real scenarios are forced to play with those that have no damn clue what is going on.

So again, why not just market the game that will have pros there to play and not command?