Was the Nations Cup series a success?

[Wadidiz]

While it's fresh in our minds, was it fun, was it entertaining, did it get the public a little more interested in PB, was it fun to play?

Despite the fact that it was a "side-show"?

...that it was a pain in the ass and expensive for the promoters?

...that it was in the evenings after tiresome days of playing 7-player and before more of the same?

...that we had 11 or 12 different judging crews?

I've got the impression from many people that despite a few glitches here and there that the Nations Cup series was a real crowd-pleaser, to use Nick Brockdorff's words.

I've had a lot of players express interest and enthusiasm for playing X Ball. I've had a lot of people say that X Ball gave players and others a chance to relax and enjoy something interesting and spectacular over a beer or two in the evenings. And that it went at least a little way towards promoting our sport to the public.

Let's hear some honest opinions and evaluations about this please.

Steve

 

[Mak D - Nexus Eclipse]

Originally posted by Wadidiz
Was the Nations Cup series a success?

Yip

Mak D

 

[Buddha 3]

Some points (I could probably come up with more, but I'm in a rush.....)

- How many people OUTSIDE paintball came to watch X-ball? As far as I've seen it was by far mostly paintballers watching paintball. Not really what it was meant for....
- It's a good idea to have hyped up games, but the same thing could be done with the important games, like the finals, or big Pro teams going head to head.
- It's too damn long to watch two games in a row! Perhaps shorten playing time a little.
- I've only really enjoyed watching one game. Germany versus England, because of the jeering that came with it, and because I got to insult the Germans around me, without them invading my country again (shhhh! don't mention the war just kidding guys)
- To me, X-ball was mostly the same breaks done 20 times in a row. Fun at first, but not that spectacular to watch after a while. I don't see X-ball taking us mainstream....it ain't something that will have the unwashed masses flocking.
- Would I like to play it? Hell yeah! Anything that will let me shoot my gun longer gets my vote!

So in conclusion, it seems like a great game to play, so as that I'd say it's done it's job, but not in so far as being the thing to attack the outside world with.

 

[Urban]

Originally posted by Buddha 3

- To me, X-ball was mostly the same breaks done 20 times in a row. Fun at first, but not that spectacular to watch after a while. I don't see X-ball taking us mainstream....it ain't something that will have the unwashed masses flocking.

My thoughts exactly..

I watched the USA-Denmark game on Friday night from the Bridge side. By the first hang I was thinking it was quite exciting... by the time the first half finished I went back the campsite... bored.

I'm sure it's very exciting to play but I'm not convinced that it's very exciting to watch after the first 10 minutes...

Urban

 

[manike]

I'm wondering, were the fields we saw in Europe 'exactly' the same size as they are in the states? Or were they compromised so that you could use them for the 7man also? Some of them almost seemed too large? with less 'play' potential. But I may be wrong.

For some reason the 'action' in Europe was never quite the same as I have seen in the USA. Now it may be down to the fields, but it may also be down to the attitude of the American ballers as compared to their European counterparts. There were also a hell of a lot less penalties over here than I have seen in the USA.

Field size and design is, in my opinion, vital to getting the right amount of action and enforcing different plays rather than just 'the same break' as some people have pointed out.

I think it was a success. But there needs to be more done to make it accessible to all and to enhance the whole feel of 'X-ball'. I'm not sure it was as successful as it could have been, and it has been in the USA, but it is still early days and I don't think there was the same level of 'commitment' to X-ball here as there has been in the USA for obvious reasons.

 

[Baca Loco]

Originally posted by Wadidiz
While it's fresh in our minds, was it fun, was it entertaining, did it get the public a little more interested in PB, was it fun to play?

Are you suggesting the NC was "put on" to be fun, entertaining and attract the public? (At great additional expense to the promoters--I thought I'd add that cus everybody always does)
Given your premise it seems to have been a mixed result at best with a fairly even split among players finding it exciting or boring and from reports I've heard seems like only Sweden may have had any real public presence.
Now if you'd like to discuss the real reasons the NC was put on . . .

Regardless, Steve, you personally should take a lot of pride in doing a difficult job for little thanks and lots of grief. And you should think long and hard before doing it again.

 

[Wadidiz]

Originally posted by manike
I'm wondering, were the fields we saw in Europe 'exactly' the same size as they are in the states? Or were they compromised so that you could use them for the 7man also? Some of them almost seemed too large? with less 'play' potential. But I may be wrong.

The field at Campaign was pretty close to being exactly standard NXL size. 125 ft. (38.9m) x 150 ft. (45.8m) are the correct NXL dimensions and at CC it was 39 x 46 m.

The fields at the other Millennium events were roughly 40 x 45m. At CC and DMA the fields were kept exactly the same for 7-player without any complaints that I heard.

Steve

 

[QuackingPlums]

I think it became apparent during the second half of the Russia vs Sweden match that Russia were doing anything BUT the same breakout every time - the number of times they threw in the towel so that they could try again, but with different tactics... that was exciting to watch I think. I was certainly standing up and yelling

 

[MrPink]

To be honest - The games I watched @ Toulouse seemed to be faster and more aggressive (esp. that big German guy's mad 50 run-thrus on the break - Wow! )
I don't know if it was the lay-down X that slowed the field, or just that teams had too much @ stake, but certainly the earlier round sticks out in my mind as being a better spectacle for spectators

 

[manike]

Originally posted by Wadidiz
The field at Campaign was pretty close to being exactly standard NXL size. 125 ft. (38.9m) x 150 ft. (45.8m) are the correct NXL dimensions and at CC it was 39 x 46 m.

The fields at the other Millennium events were roughly 40 x 45m. At CC and DMA the fields were kept exactly the same for 7-player without any complaints that I heard.

Steve

OK So I was wrong

I guess in General the Americans and Russians play with more style and innovation than most European teams. They are definitely better to watch.