vBall pt. 2

Over the last while I've been considering the problems with tournament paintball as it stands. It's all ended up in this idea that I think could make paintball more accessible as a sport. RaceTo is awesome, but I have just one suggestion. It's very simple:

Remove the flags and replace them with touchdown style lines. That's it.

Call it vBall for now, just for the sake of having a name.

It's not at all like moneyball, bacaball or the new NPPL TVball (or whatever). Those all had a big problem in common - unnecessary complexity for the referees, players and spectators. Bacaball was terrible for this with four different ref flags and four field flags. Moneyball was doomed from the start - everyone knew on sight that it would have massive issues with enforcing the line of advancement kill law. Nobody really seems to know what's going on with NPPL TVball, least of all casual spectators. My system has avoided these problems.

Here's the reasoning behind the idea:

1. Focal point. We all know the game currently lacks a focal point like other sports, which makes filming and spectating difficult. While vBall wouldn't completely solve this it does go a long way towards it by focussing attention on the one or two players closest to scoring. Who and what they're shooting at becomes less important than where they're moving and how close they are to the line.

2. Flags. The flag in the current formats is 99% redundant. A point is almost always completed with one team eliminated before anyone bothers trying to actually get or hang the flag. Sometimes it happens during a game (Chicago final), but this is too rare to matter. vBall would make scoring more realistic during a game so teams down on points, out of paint or running out of time would have good reason to try to push into the endzone rather than trying to shoot everyone first. You'd end up with more exciting odds defying moves and games like J Rab at Chicago. The Millenium rules go some way towards this, but the position of the buzzer in the centre back still means that teams don't bother til after the action.

3. Variety. vBall would encourage greater tactical variety. In current formats there is some difference between team tactics but the uninitiated will have difficulty picking them. In vBall teams can attempt to score by pushing the tape, or going up the middle, or rushing the whole team at once, or waiting til a dead spot opens up to run through. Good defensive lanes really start to matter in a way they haven't before as the whole point of the game is to go for a run (and everyone loves run throughs). Variety and unpredictability of tactics would be more pronounced and obvious than RaceTo and 7man. Set plays would start to make more sense to spectators, a la football. Perhaps a team has weak defence on the left? Exploiting that would have a more immediate and appreciable impact than it currently does.

4. Aggression. Because a defensive play would be difficult, aggressive plays would be encouraged by default. This makes for a more exciting game to watch. Crazy dives for the line under fire, mad run throughs and so on would become more common. Star players would frequently make amazing moves. The last player alive in a 1v3 has a better chance of winning the point than currently where it hardly ever happens = more star power and amazing turnarounds. Star power is very important in sports as I'm sure you know and this format would emphasize that aspect. Stats such as touchdowns (may as well call them hangs for old times sake) per event per player etc. would make more sense.

5. Stalemates. In RaceTo and other formats stalemates are common. In vBall the touchdown line makes scoring during a game both likely and reasonable, meaning a team in what would otherwise be a stalemate situation can attempt to run for the line.

6. Paint consumption. With points often over quicker, less stalemates and less focus on shooting everyone, paint consumption may drop. In this economic climate that would probably be a good thing.

7. Easy to explain and watch. When explaining the game to a newbie the basics are "they have to get over that line without getting shot". Easy enough, but then again so is "they have to get that flag to the other end". Where things change is in the tactics. It should be easier to tell what a team is trying to do and thus easier to explain.

For paintball spectators once the novelty of watching people shooting at each other has worn off the game becomes very dull until they start to understand the tactics. At present the gap between these stages is too large. In order to get "into it" a spectator currently needs excellent commentary to explain what's going on. My friends enjoy watching the webcast when I'm there explaining team tactics and the basics of the game. Matty and co. can't do this all the time. When I'm not doing so my friends get bored - fast. Any sport that completely relies on commentary for mass appeal is unlikely to take off. With vBall this should be far less of a problem.

8. Tuning:

Here is the fail-safe. In testing the game can be tuned by altering the position of the touchdown lines. For example, if the teams are constantly using rush tactics to the point that most other tactics are ignored and the game is too chaotic, moving the touchdown line back will make it harder to get there and encourage some other plays. If the opposite is true and teams tend to sit back and score after the game, the touchdown lines can be moved towards the centre of the field a bit so that it's easier to score during the action and harder to defend your own line. This tuning is over and above the usual tuning that can be done with field density and layout.

Because the game could so easily be tuned a sweet spot could be found to encourage maximum tactical variety. Ideally teams would be equally likely to use defensive, rush or left/right flank tactics etc. from play to play in order to keep the element of surprise. In the current game teams have mostly settled on one overall strategy with tactics being limited to nuances like which bunker and angle will counter a particular opposition position. These things are hard for commentators and spectators to pick out during a game, and very unlikely for the uninitiated to pick up on their own. You'd still see such nuanced tactics in vBall, but in combination with more overt differences which enhance the spectator appeal.

Problems and special rules:

There a couple of potential problems with this format I can think of. If a team attempts a blitz play and all run for the line at once it may be difficult for refs to tell who was and wasn't hit before getting to the line. This may prove not to be an issue in reality, or failing that a simple rule like "no more than two players may attempt to cross the line in the same movement" could be implemented.

A second problem is that when a player has dived over the line opposition players may keep shooting them a bit. Also, players may be more likely to attempt to score with a hit on them than in regular paintball. This is something the refs will need to be aware of and looking out for. So long as they do that and there are clear penalty rules about not shooting a player once they're in the endzone and exactly when a player counts as being in said endzone (one foot touching the ground or something) then this shouldn't be too much of a problem.

If a player gets into the endzone, the point would immediately end and the player would be checked. A potential procedure following this would be that if the player is found to be hit the point would end and be declared "incomplete", and if the player clearly should have known they were hit in time to stop or put their hand up there would be a penalty of some kind. If the player was determined to have been shot after scoring, the opposition may be penalised. That's just one way to deal with it however.

One interesting point is that the pro division now has regular live filming with replays. As any potential difficulties with determining scoring will always happen at the end of the point it may be realistic to use video footage to assist the refs in this area.

Overall I don't think these problems are major, nor are they any greater than the usual problems for refs determining hits. They would need playtesting in any case.

So there you have it. All that from one fairly simple change. This whole idea might be fraught with difficulty which is why I'm sending it to you for critique. However I believe it could work. In any case it really needs some playtesting. Thoughts?