Originally Posted by lt_poncho
Broadsword certainly could have been a launching pad for something bigger (and potentially better); ironically a lot of posts about Broadsword have been deleted, so it's difficult to understand all the facts involved with how things came to be.
Blaming the 'lack of participation' is just like a marketing department blaming the consumer for not buying their product.
Personally I believe if there were more visibility and reliance into certain aspects that some feel were intentionally played down, as well as the inclusion of particular aspects of an event that are not specifically designed to attract first time players completely new to the sport, there would have likely been a lot more participation from a larger percentage of the community.
I think I mentioned before that it was 'Quality' not 'Quantity' that generally makes an event stand out; personally I couldn't care less how many players attended an event. Events should be planned from the ground up with that in mind - plan it so that it doesn't come down to a scenario where 'we need X attendance in order for game to happen' - if you are there you are there, if not you miss out.
Airsoft is a voluntary game, not conscription, no?
Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle
With you 100% Poncho,
Some venues, however require a certain participation to make it cost effective.
Few hosts can afford to float an event and then take a bath on the fixed costs of the venue.
Often events at "other use" facilities set a minimum revenue threshold and Game organizers are on the hook for that nut to get the game going.
For example FR requires 70+ paid players to get the field for exclusive use.. This is by all measures a pretty large game.. If I wanted to "reserve the field" I'd need to pony up $1800 and then hope I can sell the event.
Even TTAC3 has a Minimum participant threshold to make the use of space worth it ( and my time ) even though the best games always have fewer attendees of higher quality.
Both points, as stated above are accurate, numbers does not dictate awesome games, but fields require numbers to break even/turn a profit and most hosts take a loss just on running a game.
I for one look forward to a future canadian Border Wars event, went to the first two and enjoyed them. For all the glitches and issues, any game with that many players is bound to have issues, and knowing how the Host and officials handled those issues, I support the idea of a large scale event from Krusty and team in the future.
That being said. I am one voice, and while I can usually get 15-30 players from the dragons to committ to an event given enough notice and monetary planning, hosts coordinating with the teams for future large scale high risk ($$) events may be prudent to get the minimum player numbers needed.