The downfall of paintball?

[Dante's Inferno]

Been playing speedball for 5 years now. Still play every weekend at the very least. Always buy a case of Midnights for Sat. Open Play ($45). I'm doing fine, and so are my friends. I see no reason why this cannot continue. I work, I put money away, I play paintball, and it's working very nicely for me.

[Archie]

I drop a bill every time my son and I play, easy. Just be thankful you only have to pay for one persons paint, not two!

[vonort]

Ok enough about Paint being so expensive. Paint is CHEAP now. Learn how to shoot and hit your target. You won't have to use a full case to play a days worth. When I started in the game it cost .25 PER BALL!!! What is it now.. .04 If they are price gougers.. My local shop sells Worr paint and Marbalizers for $45 and $55 a case. So that is between 2 1/2 cents to and 3 cents a ball. For decent quality, fresh paint. I usally buy a case that will last me at least 3 outings if not 4. Depends on how much target shooting I do in the back yard. This game has never been LESS Expensive to play. You whiners need to get a grip.. Learn some shooting skills or quit.. Not that hard of a choice.

[SlartyBartFast]

Ok enough about Paint being so expensive.

Too true. It's not paintball that's too expensive, it's particular playing styles that are too expensive.

[punkncat]

I can get a great day of play at my local field for 75$. That includes field fee, all day HPA , and one case of the premium paint (usually Anarchy).
Thats pretty darn cheap for as much paintball as you can stand in one afternoon. Its EASY to spend that much going to the movie theater with the kids. Go out to dinner at a nice restaraunt. There are worse ways to easily spend that kinda money....

Most of the people I played with when I started no longer play. But I think it had more to do with finding time to play , rather than the expense of playing. We had a renegade field in one of our buddies back yards. He lived within 5 miles of a bunch of us so it was really easy to get together any time. After that got closed down a few of the guys just weren't willing to find the time to drive to a field to play often and fell out of the habit , so to speak.

[DiRTyBuNNy]

I'm going back to stock class...something I rushed through 10 years ago to get to playing semi auto...and now i want to just have fun..no stress...

[slade]

I can get a great day of play at my local field for 75$. That includes field fee, all day HPA , and one case of the premium paint (usually Anarchy).

how did everyone get so lucky? for me that would be... $105. and thats for a case of big ball instead of premium (my field doesnt give you a choice... except on wednesday nights).

[ilikePB]

Back when tournaments consisted of 15 player teams, getting a team together was a major hurdle. The skill set required at tournaments was high and less-able team organizers were naturally selected out of the mix. This selection process resulted in limiting the number of real teams at any one time to between 20 and 30.

What did the 'industry' do? It cut team size; those teams that could never find a 13th, 14th, 15th player now didn't have to worry about it, cause all they needed was 10. That wasn't enough, so they went to 7, then to 5 and finally to 3 (grandma and the grandkids can now enter a team into national tournaments...)

This dumbing down of team size (many more less-able teams can enter events, reducing overall competition levels and allowing less-able teams to win or place well) is compounded by statistical issues: a single elimination of a player on a 15 player team represents only 6.6% of that team's strength; 10% of a ten man team's, 14% of a 7 player's, 20% of a five players and 33% of a three player team's.

Now let's consider 'luck'. We all know that 'the breaks' contribute to the outcome of every single game; misfires, broken balls, bounces, ref calls, etc. If based only on the pecentage of a team's strength represented by a single player, we can see that ANY eliminations from 'luck' have a much greater impact on a team the smaller the team size is.

While that's a pretty obvious fact, what isn't so obvious is what it really means: luck - not skill - plays a far larger role (more than two times as much) in today's tournaments than it used to...

So yes, things did use to be much better when it comes to skill. No surprise - even the illiterate can get patents these days.....

I disagree with the more luck less skill because with more people you have more chances of getting hit with random paintballs because there are 15 instead of 5 players shooting your direction. That increases luck for big teams against big teams of an individual player getting hit, rather than in a 5 vs 5 game. It's all equal to me because of this. Imo it's actually harder to play 3 vs 3 than 7 vs 7(or 5 vs 5 etc.). To me 3 vs 3 is a lot more focused on individual performance rather than team so that makes it a little different too. I hope that made sense.

[vonort]

Quick question for you, have you ever played a 15 man tourny? Most 15 man tournies did not have 15 guys shooting at 1 person. Most of the time you broke up into 3 - 5 man teams. so it really came down too 5 on 5 on your tape side or 5 on 5 in the middle. It was your squad vs. their squad. not your 15 vs their 15. So yes Luck does play a bigger part in todays game than it did in tournies of old. I've been in both.

[ilikePB]

Well, then it was like three 5 vs 5 games at the same time, and I didn't mean that all 15 were shooting at one person I was just saying that on the break there would be more paint in the air with 15 people hence a higher chance of being hit. I've never been in, nor seen a 15 man tournament, they must be very old school. Don't get so damn defensive, I was just stating my opinion, that's why I said that I disagreed, not that you were wrong.

[Barjack420]

greedy? howabout poor

field fees here in KY are $15 bux at best. plus Ive got to drive at least an hour and change to play at a decent field. Most of which barely get enough regular play to cover their costs. So they have to drive their prices up to make up for it. Can you say $550 for a stock impulse? yeah that sucks.

the only way to drive your costs down is to get onto a sponsored or semi sponsored team. Then some paint and equipment costs are covered. but to get to that point youve got to spend $100 bux a day just to compete, otherwise you might not be considered cool enough to play with the real ballers.

no matter what its an expensive sport, akin to snowboarding, golf or.....skydiving. If you want the rush, you gotta pay

[Jeffy-CanCon]

Well, then it was like three 5 vs 5 games at the same time, and I didn't mean that all 15 were shooting at one person I was just saying that on the break there would be more paint in the air with 15 people hence a higher chance of being hit. I've never been in, nor seen a 15 man tournament, they must be very old school. Don't get so damn defensive, I was just stating my opinion, that's why I said that I disagreed, not that you were wrong.

I didn't play tourneys in the 15-on-15 days, but from what I recall from the magazine articles, you often couldn't see the other team off the break. The fields were quite large. Plus, the players were using pump-guns, or very early model semi-autos. Not a very high ROF.

[Archie]

I didn't play tourneys in the 15-on-15 days, but from what I recall from the magazine articles, you often couldn't see the other team off the break. The fields were quite large. Plus, the players were using pump-guns, or very early model semi-autos. Not a very high ROF.

OH, Those were the days. When you either had a 6 bps Mag or cocker, or went slow off the break with your pump. Man I miss that. My local field has a few rounds a day of what they call hopper ball. Meaning you can only bring one hoppers worth of paint on the field, thats the way to play it.

[ilikePB]

I didn't play tourneys in the 15-on-15 days, but from what I recall from the magazine articles, you often couldn't see the other team off the break. The fields were quite large. Plus, the players were using pump-guns, or very early model semi-autos. Not a very high ROF.

Well in that case it sounds boring. It just sounds like playing woods. No matter how much skill it requires if it's slow paced and boring I wouldn't wanna play compared to airball and xball.

[vonort]

ilikepb sorry if I sounded abrubt. I'm too use to being on forums like Pbnation where the average 10 year old thinks they know everything about PB. The old tournys that were 15 man were usally played on large feilds. Usally about 20 - 30 acres. If you don't like woods then you wouldnt have liked 15 man toruneys. You did not see people on the break. The excitement in the 15 man tourney was the thinking part of the game. Once contact was made the fire fights were quite intense. But the strategy that was involved in out flanking and gaining the upper hand was the real fun. And once you had your side secured or eliminated making the decision on going for the flag.. or flanking the middle squad of the other team. Yeah the game was a bit slower. But IMHO A lot more fun. I prefer woods over any other PB. As you might have guessed by now. I play them all. Play in a local X-ball league as a sub about every other month. Very intense. Sorry about the abrubtivness of my first post. its' all good as long as its PB.