The (NPL) National Paintball League

There is an announcement about the NPL in the News section at PBN. There is also the NPL website here. First order of business is to suggest perhaps a less generic name for the league as it turns out lots of nations have national paintball leagues. Just an observation. Second, I want to separate the NPL vision into two parts; the game format and league structure.
Let's begin with the game format. While I'm not a fan of swapping offense and defense I will limit my concerns to problems not opinions. The principle one being uncapped semi-auto marker operation. A serious league cannot validate a mode of operation that cannot be regulated. And since the only way the defense can score a point requires elimination of the flag carrier in his/her end zone the rules also encourage illegal modes of operation. (And if refs start penalizing teams and players for things they think but can't prove happened it opens the league to unnecessary conflict and controversy.) Also, no where is the league's field set of props outlined by numbers or type. And, as with other forms of competitive paintball this will directly impact the nature of the game as it plays out as will the layout(s) used. (Though one might assume a NPPL style bunker set given the field dimensions although that would prove problematic from a game play perspective.) The other thing of note is the apparent requirement to provide scoreboards, time clocks and scorekeepers able to keep track of all the game records as matches are played. One assumes these are built in costs that a local field operator must commit to before the league even gets off the ground in his "region." If there was a simplified way to run a match it would make it more attractive for fields to opt in and give it a try.

As mentioned in passing in a previous post I think a rigid adherence to the structure as currently outlined is counterproductive. While there needs to be some sense of how all the pieces fit together as the league grows the important part, especially in this formative stage, is that it grow period. And as with any developing venture there will be growing pains and as more people and regions become involved there will be more and more diverse opinions about what ought to come next regardless of what's written down already. If the outline of the future league structure is taken as a set of guidelines instead of set in concrete the league becomes flexible enough to deal with issues as they arise. That said there are numerous incongruities and conflicts in the current details. The following is just a sample, not a comprehensive review. (And if it seems confusing I'm responding to the Rule Book and Players Guide so you're only getting half the "conversation".) For example, "regions" are defined essentially as local fields which is okay but confusing. Not okay is that local field owners are also team owners and regional directors. (Each region is supposed to comprise of 6 teams--unless it's eleven--but don't ask me how that works 'cus it isn't explained anywhere--and the field owner also owns those teams and essentially runs his little corner of the NPL too.) Regional directer--yes. Team owner--no. In part because only the Regional Director can approve trades but since that same person is all the team owners he's "approving" decisions he instigated in the first place. That's not oversight, that's nonsense. Get more local people actively involved who have an interest in the outcomes and success of individual teams. The rankings "system" given is a mess and if a region actually operated the combine completely unnecessary. The combine demonstrates talent and the teams draft eligible players. Some outside source of artificial ranking is completely unnecessary particularly given the NPL's definition for pro and semi-pro players. But seriously while sounding cool the combine and draft are a no go. (Only authorized NPL professionals will be allowed to be involved in testing and evaluations? And just who will be an authorized NPL professional and what is the criteria the league will use to determine that status? Really?) Best of all just jettison the combine (drug testing?) and the draft and the rankings because, according to the NPL, they are all Amateur players. Some teams will be better than others. So what? The Regional Director controls who plays and who doesn't and can provide competitive balance. Meanwhile not so good teams will have a reason to work to get better and recruit new players, etc. There's more but this is enough for now.
Finally there is a sanctioned NPL paintball. Why? If the idea is competitive balance that's fine. If it's part of a funding scheme for the NPL then less so but understandable. (Minimum event day purchases.) But then how is the league funded? It isn't actually outlined anywhere though there are hints in the section on registering players in which pros, semi-pros are apparently expected to pay a pro and registration fee while Ams only pay a registration fee. Otherwise how will the league afford its commitments to the regional teams once the playoffs begin? Did anybody crunch the numbers? Where will the national championships be held? Lots of partially formulated structures, short on some of the details that will matter to the players and teams.

The simple fact is if the league has any chance to succeed it needs to focus on getting local fields participating and making it as simple and easy for local players to get involved. Bottom line, the game may appeal to lots of players but it's going to have a hard time getting off the ground with all the extra unnecessary baggage its lugging around.

UWL: Scenario/Tourney Hybrid?

The UWL (Ultimate Woodsball League) is into its second year and this coming weekend there will be an event in Ft. Myers, Florida. [Not so fast. The event date has moved to the weekend of March 27th.] Tom Cole was generous enough to offer me (and teammates) an opportunity to play in the Florida game but unfortunately it is on a previously scheduled practice weekend. If you are unfamiliar with the format check out their website. The UWL is working some of the same territory as the SPPL. While over at the new and improved Big Bullet you can find info for a more traditional form of 10-man tournament woodsball with the NPL.

I confess I don't have a huge interest in traditional tournament woodsball--been there, done that, enjoyed it (mostly) at the time--though it would probably better suit what few worn out and tired skills I have left; slow, sneaky & experienced. But I do kinda like the sound of the UWL game. There's strategy, tactics, complexity and the opportunity to utilise the whole laundry list of paintball skills even if there is an emphasis (perhaps) on a more traditional skill set. Anyway, I wanted to mention the available opportunities in order to encourage anyone who thinks it could be fun to give it a try. With the trend in major league tourney ball to younger and faster it would be great to see a more diverse player base have competitive paintball options. Maybe one answer to where paintball is today--and where it will be tomorrow--is more choices, not just a change in primary industry attention.

I also wanted to pose a question or three, too. Is the UWL's target player normally a scenario player or an Old Skool tourney guy? Or, the likely answer, both? But even so is this a formula for growing competitive paintball? I'm not sure. On one hand the concept is planting seeds that might grow and spread. On the other it's drawing its target participant from a different niche with a nostalgia tour of sorts. It's called Old Skool for a reason. Don't get me wrong. I still like the game concept. I'm not a snob about different forms of competitive paintball. I'm glad it's out there and available--I'm just wondering if the current top down approach will ever produce anything more than a modestly attended handful of events. Of course it could be I'm dumping too many expectations on something that wasn't ever intended to be more than what it is. But maybe I'm not. Read this at the UWL website.

If the majority of the players are crossovers from scenario is that growth? Does it really serve to reestablish competitive paintball in a woodsball environment? Again, I'm not sure. It may very well prove to be aspirational but that's a pretty big leap. It seems to me if you want to build to a national level competitive woodsball series you also need to begin looking at where the growth will come from and how it will happen. Back in the day future major league 10-man team players started locally playing 3-man and 5-man. Just like most modern tourney players do. If competitive woodsball is ever going to grow and be a viable option don't potential (future) players need a place to start? Maybe something as simple as encouraging UWL host fields to offer introductory tourney woodsball events along with the big show when it comes to town?

Back To The Future?

The Big Bullet has been running a series of teases / announcements regarding a new pump woodsball league that is in the works. While I begrudge no man (or woman) the brand of paintball they want to play--with the exception of the wackiest of the wacko fringe Rambo wannabes. (Oh, how I miss the days when the magazine would get those big bold misspelled letters written in crayon.) I'm wondering if there is a real market for tourney woodsball and from which branches of paintball they will come. Will they be mostly Old Skoolers? Or dissatisfied scenario guys or disenchanted competition ballers?

I'm also curious what this conception of tourney woodsball is gonna look like. There's already the SPPL out there which is more of a scenario lite hybrid and UWL which (at least sounds like) tends more toward the tourney end of the spectrum but I don't really know how it plays out. And now the National Pump League wants to go further back into the past. Kinda.

Another thing I wonder is if the lessons learned in the tourney game in recent years can be undone in a woodsball environment, particularly in a pump game. How will the skill set priorities change? Will they change? And then there are some of the "problems" that were endemic in the woods. Chief among them unbalanced (unfair) fields and the virtual impossibility of reffing as it's come to be understood and largely accepted in the competition realm.

What about current technology? Sure, they can return the game to low tech, low paint but there's lots of peripheral technology out there that could influence games. Stuff like walkie-talkie phones, companies that can provide yours or others GPS coordinates via your phone, tiny radios, Bluetooth, text messaging and who knows what all else.

Aight, enough with the pessimistic vibe. I guess my point is that you can't really go back again. That tourney paintball in the woods was always something less than the Golden Age of paintball, maybe. Or that cherished memories seldom, if ever, recall the refs or the price of paint or that lousy hole-riddled pallet nobody could live behind. Most of the best memories of paintballin' past revolve around moments and friends. Some of elation and others of frustration. If the NPL can recreate a few of those memories all of Paintball will be the better for it.