The Mysterious Shrinking Field Kit

As reported in the last post it seems Adrenaline Games (Sup'Air) have done a wee bit more than gone "technical" all over the snake props as Huntington Beach was played on brand new Adrenaline supplied "Who Shrunk My Paintball Field?" NPPL style prop sets. It was suggested, not unreasonably, that perhaps the new reduced props are merely a cost saving device. Could be. After all it wasn't too long ago manufacture of Sup'Air props was moved from Morocco to China to pinch some pennies and maybe this is just another cost saving measure as far as Adrenaline is concerned. It's been a tough row to hoe in the paintball biz lately and maybe they're only doing what they had to do.
Except there's that business with the snake props in the PSP recently. That was a unilateral decision made despite the fact they knew full well the PSP was trying to cater to a broader--not to say less skilled or athletic--player base. Of course the PSP owns some of that for not taking control and making sure that everything about their game was consistent with their vision of it. Still, if Adrenaline has now begun shrinking props--again unilaterally--it isn't just a business decision because it can and will effect play on the field--just like those new snake props. And while I commend Adrenaline and Laurent for their contribution to bringing competitive paintball out of the woods it isn't carte blanch to do as they please whenever they please everybody else be damned.
So, what's the deal, Sup'Air? Are new tinier bunkers part of the "stealth" Adrenaline vision of how the game should be played or just a cost saving measure? And in either case why was the action taken unilaterally? Was nobody supposed to notice?
And finally what are the leagues that currently do business with Adrenaline gonna do? Maybe shrunken bunkers aren't the end of the world but a free pass can only encourage more of the same sort of conduct.

Last Word on the New Snake Props

Let's get the big question settled up front. The PSP Galveston layout is a playable design with a potentially very active snake that is capable of promoting (or inviting) explosive action. [In large measure because it's going to be damn difficult to intentionally shoot anyone out of it. It will however be possible to spray a lot of paint around and clip careless, large, clumsy and unprepared players all day every day.] Will that necessarily happen? No. How a field is played is ultimately in the hands of the teams and players but this layout is not the slower play norm propagated last season--although I suspect that's more of a happy accident than anything else.
It could also very easily prove to be a very difficult field to play but that too will be dependent on how teams analyse the layout and execute their game plans. If you want to play vanilla it will play vanilla and you can drag points out--particularly if your opponent settles for the same. If they discover a trick or two you aren't aware of it will also be possible to lose a few points very quickly. Do your homework.

Okay, that's the short term positive. What about the longer term? I think the layout confirms every concern that VFTD and others had from the first release of information and images of these new bunkers. The bunkers clearly don't function independently. They do not free up props for other uses or placements. They dictate the rest of the field in order to accommodate the new props and they certainly don't help fulfill the PSP's desire to offer a fully competitive but more forgiving playing environment. Did I leave anything out?  Probably but if you've been following the prior debates you know the score. No need to re-hash it again.
Here is where I would have liked to tell you why this decision and not something else. I can't because I don't know. I do know a number of options were considered. I strongly urged a different decision and I did so based on my concern for how these props will play in the lower divisions. (Of course all dressed up like this Galveston layout it's a different scenario.) Even so the apparently widening gulf between rec and competitive paintball at the grassroots isn't helped by this new, technical snake either. Still, I'm not privy to all the in's and out's and it's easy to focus on one potential concern perhaps to the detriment of others I'm unaware of.
Unfortunately there is also something of a Pandora's Box quality to having chosen to go this route. Even with the limitations involved it shouldn't be a problem to generate 5 designs that will satisfy the PSP and its player base for 2012. (That said by mid-season and after there's a good chance we see some consistent themes emerge.) But it will be an ongoing issue. What happens in 2013 or 2014? If everyone acknowledges the bunkers were a mistake what happens? Another kit undoing the effects of this one? Or a different kit of new props making the new snake more versatile and no longer holding the rest of the design hostage to the snake layout? Or the status quo carrying over trying to avoid another year another bunker kit upgrade? I'll be honest, none of those options sound like winners to me but I also don't see a better option given the path we're now on. For whatever reason the PSP made the call to accept the new props that choice also locked them into some future decisions.

Supporting Adrenaline Games

It's that time of year again--apparently--when the PSP supports Adrenaline Games by sticking it to the local field operators that support the PSP and Race 2. Was that too harsh? Upon re-reading it sounds pretty harsh. Unfortunately it's also true.
Confused? Here's the dealio. Every year or so it seems Sup'Air adds some new props that the major tournament leagues incorporate in their event layouts (also frequently designed by Sup'Air) that forces fields with airball fields used for tourney practice to buy the annual new props kit in order to keep up to date. Good for Adrenaline Games, not so good for local fields.
I noticed the NPPL expressly didn't change their bunker set this season--an unequivocal thumbs up--and it appears that Adrenaline Games hasn't kicked them to the curb by refusing to provide event fields or gone out of business. And while I have no desire to see anything bad happen to Adrenaline Games I have a hard time understanding how any league can justify placing their grassroots supporters in that position to benefit a third party. It's practically extortion.
Beyond that I have a couple of other issues too. Since when do real sports let manufacturers dictate what essential elements of the game will be? Yeah, I know, competitive paintball has always been an old boys club. Now's as good a time as any to change. Also, why is somebody other than those responsible for the sport deciding what's an appropriate change? Seriously, the whole thing ought to be a no go.
That doesn't mean the bunkers shouldn't ever be changed. Want to add some interest? Keep the game fresh? Sure. Sounds good but that's a job for the PSP--or any other league purporting to be focused on competitive paintball as sport.

UPDATE: Mr. Curious weighs in with some on point rumorology. It seems the PSP thought they had a deal with Adrenaline Games to make bunker changes every other year and had no intention of changing in 2012. Seems the first the league heard about the latest changes came from sources outside of Adrenaline Games. When confronted Sup'Air allegedly claimed they only had 4 2011 field sets left and given that the league uses upwards of 20 field sets a season the PSP was left with little alternative but to accept this year's changes. It will be interesting, to say the least, how the league responds to this practical blackmail in the future.