Paintball

[RealtorTommy]

These questions are:

Should Pros from other areas of paintball that don't play scenario have command postions?

Should "marketing teams" play at scenarios if they do not intend to do missions?



I will post my comments later......

[Harbinger[TG]]

I have no problem with the marketing teams, they do what is expected of them. Not every team needs to be mission based. And some marketing teams actually do missions, command games, and everything else.

I do have huge problems with the tourney guys given command positions and the keys to the kingdom just because they are popular in tourney play.

I also have huge problems because the industry continues to neglect those people that have been here from the beginning. Instead of cross marketing and bridging a gap that most don't want closed, they force this crap down our throats.

[greenmtnphantom]

First I woudl like to thank you for asking these questions.

Now I don't have as much experiance in organized paintball as most people here but I'm going to throw in my two cents here anyway

1. I feel that any command position should be earned, I understand or at least I think I understand why it happens that people with well known names (in some circles) get command positions outside of there normal style of play. I think that this is risky for the producer of the field you are trying to accomplish something by puting that person in that spot and I feel that you are doing so at the risk of alienating others.

2. If the scenario is "just for fun" and is allowing renters, walk ons, etc to play then I see no problem with marketing teams. If the door is open to anyone that wants to register then it's open and it's the XO's job to recognize the marketing teams and teh teams that are there just for the hell of it and use them accordingly. NOW if it's a competitive, invitation or league type thing I feel that anyone not there for the win should not be there unless they are willing to at least try and do what the XO asks of them.

[RealtorTommy]

My grip with a team that doesn't plan on doing missions is that there is not a level playing field. It's not team against team....It's not supporting your team on a mission, keeping a base ect....It's a firefight team only and this could make for a bad day...How does one marketing team evenly disrupt the game?

[Harbinger[TG]]

Originally Posted by greenmtnphantom

First I woudl like to thank you for asking these questions.

Now I don't have as much experiance in organized paintball as most people here but I'm going to throw in my two cents here anyway

1. I feel that any command position should be earned, I understand or at least I think I understand why it happens that people with well known names (in some circles) get command positions outside of there normal style of play. I think that this is risky for the producer of the field you are trying to accomplish something by puting that person in that spot and I feel that you are doing so at the risk of alienating others.

2. If the scenario is "just for fun" and is allowing renters, walk ons, etc to play then I see no problem with marketing teams. If the door is open to anyone that wants to register then it's open and it's the XO's job to recognize the marketing teams and teh teams that are there just for the hell of it and use them accordingly. NOW if it's a competitive, invitation or league type thing I feel that anyone not there for the win should not be there unless they are willing to at least try and do what the XO asks of them.

However, even that leads to issues that happen a lot. It ends up in stacked sides. When one side has predominately hard core players and the other side has walk-ons and "marketing" teams. The weaker side usually gets their *** handed to them. Now couple that with a famous guy with no experience commanding and it just gets worse.

The main issue with all of this cross marketing is the alienation of the people that built scenario and have played it from the beginning. We are the ones putting all of the effort to play the game as it should be played, so why should we have to hand over all the sponsorship and accolades to some tourney guy?

[greenmtnphantom]

Use them to gain realistate, yes they say they don't missions but they do pick places and go shoot them up so if a smart XO can have a system to move the front line with a "blast the place" marketing team that could be effective, another strategy could be to use them as a diversion find out were they are going, they will find a firefight get a mission team around the team they are engaugeing to either take an objective or help inflict losses

HARB- I'm a little confused as to what you mean, I was trying to discribe two different types of Scenario games not the same one. I was trying to discribe a hardcore scenario setting vs one that is more relaxed

But I do agree with you about the cross marketing alienating people

[RealtorTommy]

Wouldn't be simpler to just play the game as it is intended?

You say gain real estate......what if your on the losing end?......and they don't give an opportunity to use them as you mission takes you elsewhere.....

[Harbinger[TG]]

Originally Posted by greenmtnphantom

HARB- I'm a little confused as to what you mean, I was trying to discribe two different types of Scenario games not the same one. I was trying to discribe a hardcore scenario setting vs one that is more relaxed

But I do agree with you about the cross marketing alienating people

In both instances you get hardcore players that care about winning. I have seen many a games be lost after the dinner break because 80% of one side did not return. Now I have been guilty of taking night play off the last 2 years but I earned that right.

The problem is the new found need for 2 different Scenario games. Historically command has always been able to work around the general level of non serious people and teams. However, now that all this cross marketing **** has started, it is becoming increasingly difficult to run the game as it should be.

[greenmtnphantom]

Tommy - I'm not sure I follow what you are saying. I've only been invloved in one Scenario game (I don't count Castle) so like I said not speaking from a lot of experience but I think if a game is advertised as open to anyone then anyone who wants to be there should have a chance to be there. The scenario game I played in over 1/2 the players were renters, so maybe I just don't understand the problem that this could cause for a really competitive scenario team.

Harb - Ok, due to my afor mentioned lack of experiance here I haven't seen that happen

[Harbinger[TG]]

Originally Posted by greenmtnphantom

I'm not sure I follow what you are saying. I've only been invloved in one Scenario game (I don't count Castle) so like I said not speaking from a lot of experience but I think if a game is advertised as open to anyone then anyone who wants to be there should have a chance to be there. The scenario game I played in over 1/2 the players were renters, so maybe I just don't understand the problem that this could cause for a really competitive scenario team.

I am not saying they can't be there. I am saying they should not be given any kind of command, nor should we allow all this cross marketing to bring in tons of players that do not want to play the game properly.