2006/2007 University Paintball League

[Steve Hancock]

How?

I've already listed a number of ways
- give them better experience and improve the playing more.
- its widely acknowledged that a match format is more fun to play.
- it will mean they get their non-playing time in big enough chunks that they can do something with it, like watching other matches.

That wasn't my point. In rec ball you would npt be happy with a non player coaching, in tourney i don't feel it is any different having a spotter doing the back mans job for them.

Your point was very clear. You were saying that you feel that having coaching in tourney is wrong, and you supported this by saying that it is against the rules in recball. In other words a comparision between recball and tourney ball, I disagree that it is a valid comparison. You might have re-phrased it but it is still a comparison between two different games.

I have not experience playing a coaching game & i don't think the majority of people playing the tourney will.

I don't see how that is relevant, most of the players at the championship this year didn't have experience of tourney paintball. Should we therefore not have done it? Was I wrong to introduce them to something new?

Saying that it is used in established more proleagues is not a reason to do it.

Yes it is, it means we will be getting better experience. It means the experienced student paintballers who don't currently take part in uni paintball will have a reason to do so. That is two reasons, not none.

 

[Ginja]

i still think we need a vote. It should be done by the comitee of each club and tbh your comment about inexperiance at the end of the day the comitees run each of these clubs so im sure their decision would be the best.

Also you seem to be getting ahead of yourself, trying to make this uni paintball into some super cool profesional thing in which players will get picked up and taken to america to play for pro teams....then become gods! I think we need to think small and remember not every uni is as experianced as you, atm we only have a few uni's we need to encourage more uni's by making this league just paintball. What im saying is why go into all these funky rules, why not just play?

Maybe the best way would be to make 2 divisions, leave the experianced teams to mince about with coaching and any other stuff whilst the new inexperianced teams can just play each other and get a grasp. Once they understand the basic rules and movement around sup'air then they can move onto coaching and such.

 

[Steve Hancock]

i still think we need a vote. It should be done by the comitee of each club and tbh your comment about inexperiance at the end of the day the comitees run each of these clubs so im sure their decision would be the best.

Ahhh, I thought you meant a whole club vote. i.e. All the recballers being asked how they though a format they had never seen should be played.

Also you seem to be getting ahead of yourself, trying to make this uni paintball into some super cool profesional thing in which players will get picked up and taken to america to play for pro teams....then become gods!

I'm not expecting that to happen imediately, it will take a few years at least before having played in the Uni league is seen as suitable experience to be picke up by top teams. But there is no reason it can't eventually happen. I'm not expecting it this year, and I don't think that playing a match format will be as challenging as you seem to be saying. It will be well with all the clubs abilities to compete. Yes, the new clubs aren't going to be winning all the time. But that is true of whatever format we use. If anything thisone will give them more of a chance to learn.

I think we need to think small and remember not every uni is as experianced as you..

Why do you think birmingham is as experienced as it is? Because I've pushed them. We haven't been playing that long. Of our players at the championship, Edd and I have been playing for 2 years, Si and Ran had been playing for 1 year and it was the other 5 players' first year. The things I'm proposing are really not beyond any of the universities' potential. I know it might seem daunting, but you'll get on fine.

atm we only have a few uni's...

As of this afternoon there are 17 university paintball clubs: aberdeen, aberystwyth, birmingham, bristol, coventry, east anglia, gloucestershire, hull, imperial, keele, kent, portsmouth, southampton, teesside, warwick, west of england, and york. Plus brighton, de-montfort, loughborough, and robert gordon's are looking to either start or restart.

...we need to encourage more uni's by making this league just paintball. What im saying is why go into all these funky rules, why not just play?

Maybe the best way would be to make 2 divisions, leave the experianced teams to mince about with coaching and any other stuff whilst the new inexperianced teams can just play each other and get a grasp. Once they understand the basic rules and movement around sup'air then they can move onto coaching and such.

I agree that we need to cater for both introducing the new clubs, as well as developing the existing clubs. The idea is for the championship to be the introductory chance to get a grasp of competitive paintball, and the league to be for developing them one they have been introduced.

 

[Emo~kid]

jesus, obviously all of the other rule changes people have mentioned (hoppers, size of gas tanks, semi, ramping etc), all take a way some sort of skill, or change the way in which you play the thing is coaching eliminates almost all of the skill and teamwork from the game completely.

most of the skill in winning comes from being able to sneak up on, and take out an opposing player without then seeing you, because they are concentrating on one of your team on the opther side of the field

if the second you move someone shouts your location to the opposition it completely wastes all the effort you've put in to timing and carrying out your move.

edit: jsut want to clarify on that, i'm happy enough for people to be shouting encouragement from the spectator area, say if it was side on instead of end on like last time.

I just really hate it when you have 1 or 2 players from one of the other teams alongside the field, literally right next to the players telling them exactly when to move and where everyone is

whatever the decision on this is, if i hear someone coaching against our team they are getting shot in the face

They are two different games. Its like comparing a kick around in the park, with premiership football

They are different but in either you would be pissed if someone who wasn't playing ran on to the pitch and scored a goal for the opposition.

I don't agree that recball and tourneyball are that different, both are essentially a group of people running around trying to shoot another group of people without getting shot themselves, whilst also attempting to capture a flagf from point A and taking it to point B, the only real difference is the field you play on and that doesnt make it a different game, granted there are some different rules but it's still all paintball

 

[AUPaintSoc]

jesus, obviously all of the other rule changes people have mentioned (hoppers, size of gas tanks, semi, ramping etc), all take a way some sort of skill, or change the way in which you play the thing is coaching eliminates almost all of the skill and teamwork from the game completely.

most of the skill in winning comes from being able to sneak up on, and take out an opposing player without then seeing you, because they are concentrating on one of your team on the opther side of the field

if the second you move someone shouts your location to the opposition it completely wastes all the effort you've put in to timing and carrying out your move.

I think this is what most of the 'anti-coachers' are saying, and it seems like a sound argument. Obviously players will need to learn new skills to cope with this, but when it comes down to it this argument is very valid.
I think you tore Wrath13's argument apart without really considering it. He was saying that just because its in the rules doesnt mean it cant be considered cheating. And he's correct! Whatever you want to say about 12grams, 10-shot tubes etc, they dont compare to coaching!!!
Its easy to tear down someones argument using sarcasm and humour, but when it comes down to it he wasnt saying that there should be no noise from the spectators, indeed he encouraged spectator participation! Theres a big difference from a crowd of 50 people cheering and clapping, and one specific voice you've been trained to recognise (as I'm sure you know).

whatever the decision on this is, if i hear someone coaching against our team they are getting shot in the face

Hehe, I love this point. What team do you play for?

 

[Emo~kid]

Hehe, I love this point. What team do you play for?

I'm with the UEA (****ing pikeys)

I can see what you're saying about learning to cope with changes to rules but as far as i can see learning to cope with the kind of coaching we had at the previous tournament would be comparable with learning to cope with being suddenly struck deaf, blind, dumb and quadraplegic

 

[AUPaintSoc]

Oh Steve, I understand your previous posts, as we spoke about on the phone, dont think Im automatically against everything you're proposing, I just like people to know that theres a possibility of changing and adapting things. I dont want (as I know you dont either) people thinking that it isnt possible for their opinions to be heard.

Now as I understand it, the league will be run in a match format. In your opinion (which again Im sure you know I respect) this is the 'future of paintball'. Not neccessarily X-ball, but certainly a match format. To be honest from the literature available I would tend to agree with you. I wont say anything like 'I think this is whats going to happen in the future' because the truth is Im not in a position to judge, but if thats what the main UK and European high-end leagues are running then I think it would be smart of us to follow suit. It would be a unique selling point for us as well, UK Masters/PA level (ish ) but in an X-ball variant match format.

I still think there will be many many issues with running an event like this, but a lot of the comments and problems brought up here will be unfounded.

• Admin will not be any more difficult, indeed from a ref's point of view it will be far easier on the day!
• There will be the same amount of sitting around, but compressed into 4 hour bursts. Now this could be a pro or a con. 4 hours is a long time to get a burger, talk tactics and prep your gear. I guess we're hoping teams will watch all the matches too? I know I would.
• There could be an issue with the quick turn-arounds (3 mins between games?). You proposed (and I agreed with this) that, for example, teams could volunteer to 'pot-bitch' etc for other teams who dont have a big enough roster. I think we can maintain a friendly atmosphere as well as keeping things professional and credible.
• Paint consumption? Will it go up? Well logically if every gun is firing at 15bps rather than bursts of 10-12 it will do, in turn with everyone firing faster does that mean games will be shorter? And so maybe paint consumption will be about the same either way (ramping or semi). Anyway, the entry price is cheap enough to afford an extra box of paint between 2.
• Coaching. I dont think you will ever get a unanimous vote on this (as we saw from our chat today!). Whatever you see it as its always going to be contentious. Some teams may grow to love it, some teams may always hate it. I think maybe we should try it, see what we think. A lot of the opinions here are from people who havent actually experienced 'proper' coached games, and so maybe we might change our mind after playing? Who knows. I presume the league will be flexible enough to adapt part way through the season. Just out of interest, who's played in a properly coached series of games before? I know Steve and Ed have (who are both pro-coaching), anyone else?
• Management. Im glad the new inter-Uni forum will be running soon. I still have major issues over the way its going to be run. For example why should Keele (no offence boys, I know you've been playing for ages) have more of a say than Aberdeen? This still hasnt been answered really. Questions like who's handling money, whos overall in charge, who do we speak to in each Club to discuss issues, whos in charge on the days of the event etc etc etc. These things need to be arranged, or if they have been already then they need to be made public.

Dammit Im sure theres more, I hate it when you start typing and then forget what youre wanting to say!

Ah well, I hope we can these issues discussed rather than going round in circles going over the same topics.

 

[Steve Hancock]

jesus, obviously all of the other rule changes people have mentioned (hoppers, size of gas tanks, semi, ramping etc), all take a way some sort of skill, or change the way in which you play the thing is coaching eliminates almost all of the skill and teamwork from the game completely.

Funnily enough back when these were introduced people said that they would completely remove all the skill from paintball too. But like you pointed out they didn't. Similarly coaching and ramping have not removed "all the skill".

Whatever you want to say about 12grams, 10-shot tubes etc, they dont compare to coaching!!!

Back then people felt just as strongly about 12grams and hoppers. And it seemed like just as sound an argument then as well. Its only because we are used to them that they don't seem to compare.

...the thing is coaching eliminates almost all of the skill and teamwork from the game completely.

I completely disagree. Stealth is a part of the game, but since we left the woods it has become a much smaller part. No where near "almost all of the skill and teamwork from the game".

...most of the skill in winning comes from being able to sneak up on, and take out an opposing player without then seeing you, because they are concentrating on one of your team on the opther side of the field

Again, completely disagree. Stealth is only a small part of the game, at least since we left the woods.

if the second you move someone shouts your location to the opposition it completely wastes all the effort you've put in to timing and carrying out your move.

Really? That's not my experience, I've successfully pulled off plenty of those kind of moves in games with coaching. What are you basing that statement on? You seem to be stating a lot conjecture as if it's fact.

whatever the decision on this is, if i hear someone coaching against our team they are getting shot in the face

So regardless of what everyone decides, you are going to take matters into you own hands? Makes you sound like a bit of a cock in my opinion. Exactly the kind of attitude we don't want. I really hope you were trying to be funny. Otherwise I'd be really disappointed, because you guys seemed like a nice bunch at the championship.

I think you tore Wrath13's argument apart without really considering it.

I'm sorry if it seemed like i was tearing his post apart, I don't mean to be-little anyone's ideas. In order to avoid spending the whole day on the forums I was trying to address the points succinctly. That may have been why it appeared I had not considered them. I did think about what he was saying. And i still disagree.

He was saying that just because its in the rules doesnt mean it cant be considered cheating.

Cheating by definition is something that is against the rules.

And he's correct! Whatever you want to say about 12grams, 10-shot tubes etc, they dont compare to coaching!!!

See above regarding people's reaction back when these were first introduced.

Its easy to tear down someones argument using sarcasm and humour,

I'm sure it is, but I was using reason and experience.

but when it comes down to it he wasnt saying that there should be no noise from the spectators, indeed he encouraged spectator participation! Theres a big difference from a crowd of 50 people cheering and clapping, and one specific voice you've been trained to recognise (as I'm sure you know).

This seems to be a point that needs some clarification.

As I have mentioned, the coaching at the Championships was not as I had originally planned it. I had originally planned to have the field side on to the safe area, and limit coaching to from behind the netting. However due to the field being the other way round that would have made it unfair to which ever team had the far end. So we allowed people to come out onto the sideline (wearing masks obviously) and coach from there. Now while anyone could have come out, because it meant putting a mask on people didn't bother. As a result there were fewer people.

For the league I am suggesting that we only allow coaching from behind the netting, not having a special area where coaches can shout from. They would be in with all the other spectators.

Now some people have drawn a distinction between people shouting encouragement and people shouting information. I don't see how we can allow one and ban the other. It would be impossible to enforce. You would need to have refs listening to the crowds for the whole game rather than concentrating on the game, and even then it would be far to easy to use codes etc and get round it. If we are going to allow people to shout from behind the netting they should be allowed to shout anything. Its just impractical to limit what they can shout.

So how does that sound?

With coaching you're taking away a huge element of self-reliance.

I think you are over estimating the effect coaches can have. I suppose that could be in part due to the way it ended up being at the Championships. But it hasn't generally been a problem in my experience. It players do become robotic, then they don't play as well. They soon learn to keep a little of their autonomy. In practise, muggings are too quick to be prevented by coaches.

You then have the question, if a team wins, is it because they're a good team, or they have a good coach? Surely its better to win knowing that it was because we were better players?

Having a good coach has always been part of being a good team. It isn't a problem in the NXL, nor regular sports like football. No one sees having a good manager as unrelated to how good a football team is.

 

[AUPaintSoc]

And Mark, it seemed like a good arguement then, just like it might now. And back then people felt just as strongly about 12grams and hoppers. Its only because we are used to them that they don't seem to compare.

Need I bring Missy into this again Mr Hancock

Yeah point taken, but equally you do know that they are far different matters. At least with evolving equipment and hardware you still have rely on yourself and your own personal skills. With coaching you're taking away a huge element of self-reliance. Which nobody could argue is a good thing surely? Or are you going to try? You then have the question, if a team wins, is it because they're a good team, or they have a good coach? Surely its better to win knowing that it was because we were better players?

You agree with my other points though?

 

[Steve Hancock]

You agree with my other points though?

Was still replying