2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 4, 2014 12:59:05 GMT -5
The limited range of even the most powerful airsoft guns dictate that some adaptation of realistic tactics need to be made to operate effectively. These adjustments are actually fairly minimal as for close combat, airsoft as an instrument for simulations are actually pretty darn good while still remaining acceptably safe. The primary suspension of belief is recognizing that with muzzel velocities measured in hundreds of feet per second instead of thousands, brush and other thin materials create COVER as well as CONCEALMENT. in addition to light brush being capable of deflecting your shots, wind also has an impact and trajectories and ricochettes are bizarre and quite unpredictable. in my opinion these limitations are a good thing as they make the close combat decidedly more challenging which facilitates the shortened range in a good way.
The fundamental formations and tactic of fire and manuever and movement by bounds still are applicable but with everything scaled down. Unit size is the key adaptation that is needed. A typical Infantry squad in WW2 for all the belligerants was 10 to 13 men. In reality of course once in combat these numbers were much much smaller due to casualties and the inevitable reshuffling of forces. For airsoft a squad of 13 realistically spread out is not capable of mutual firesupportdue to the limited range. In fact once deployed the largest squad size that can consistently support other members with covering fire is six (at best) and five is probably more sound. For that reason I suggest that unit make up take that into consideration. To approximate the manuever capabilities and team tactics of the day I recommend there only be one full auto capable gun for every three to four players limited to semi auto fire. A platoon could consist of three squads of five or six with a platoon headquarters of two men. Radios should be available at platoon level and above and not allowed down at the squad level. In fact this is far more generous then reality (especially for the Germans and Japanese) A weapons squad of indirect fire, anti tank weapons or machine guns could be organic for a platoon.
ideally the sub machine guns should be weapons with more limited range or reduced accuracy. limit sub machine guns to lower FPS or have them funtion without hop up employed. this way the machine guns and SAW weapons with their greater length and more awkward handling characteristics would enjoy some positive trade off. As it is MP 40s and Thompsons are typicaly every bit as lethal and powerful as MG 42s and BARs which just isn't right.
low cap magaines requring frequent changes should be a norm for riflemen while mid caps should be allowed on SAWs and box magazines for crew served machine guns. functional mortars with range of 100 plus meters can be a real game changer and depict the 60 mm mortar quite authentically. Grenade rules and usage adds a lot to game play authenticity as well. Medic rules and standards should increasingly be employed and standardized at WW2 events. Eventually the common employment of vehicles and indirect fire will find their way into WW2 airsoft which is at the cusp of increased sophistication and formalization of rules and standards.
|
|
Jerry-ADK
Private 1st Class
Unteroffizier, Heeresgruppe Nord-Ost
Posts: 418
|
Post by Jerry-ADK on Feb 4, 2014 14:34:51 GMT -5
2nd Bat, That is very well said and thought through. It is all a matter of scale when thinking of airsoft compared to real world tactics. When designing play area and placing objectives for a field, scale should really be thought out for distances to travel to each objective. This can really help with fire support if no two objectives are too far out of range. Opposing spawns don't really need to be very far away from each other if the play area is scaled down and provides a lot of opportunities for CQB to happen with objectives to take or defend dispersed evenly around the play area. Much like the field we just had the BotB game on, Objectives were very close together which allowed us plenty opportunities to get in close to be able to use our smg's and employ the MG's more effectively. But also big enough to allow us to have opposing patrols on a scout. With the idea of scaling tactics and squad size to fit airsofts capacity for ranges, what do you think the optimal feild size should be? How far apart should spawns be? If the play area is big, say 20 acres + mobile spawns/forward aid stations would really come in very handy and so would support fighting vehicles and combined arms operations.(minus airplanes I guess) your idea of a smg w/o hopup for every squad of 5 to 6 men is very good. That gives more players the opportunity to use their smg on full auto but not completely match the MG gunner or rifle teams abilites. Making these weapons much more effective and giving them a more realistic role in combat. Especially providing a key roll when forces are engaged in CQB. This could give our squad leader an advantage close in but very little effect at range, keeping him doing less of the fighting and concentrating more on directing fire. But if CQB is happening often maybe we should think of a assault trooper type class to be one of the privates or second in command. But severely limit their ammo and take away hopup so they cant spray and pray as effectively. It would be especially realistic for more than one German NCO to have a smg, and it would even things out against American forces who have mostly semi automatic fire anyway. These limits might actually make a sniper class more effective if fps rules don't disallow higher velocities used for long range sniping only. But like we have talked about before, having a reliable K98 springer that is mag fed and affordable for the entry level airsofter, or any airsofter for that matter, would really help things along as far as making the squads and combat tactics for WW2AS more realistic. Fire support such as AT or mortar teams even sappers I think are coming for us. I really like the story you tell of your Recondo school where you have Artillery support in the form of a field piece that shoots 3 tennis balls at a time and being able to call it in. And the guy can accurately direct it with the F.O.'s help via radio. That would solve our arty problem. But play field would have to be scaled to facilitate the employment of that weapon unless you make it tow behind a jeep or some scaled down weapons carrier to mount it in, i.e. a Wespe or other self propelled artillery piece like the Japanese airsofters have. A bunch of food for thought, but I really like where this topic is going, its going to make our games very unique in the airsoft world. Cheers, Jerry
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 4, 2014 15:00:25 GMT -5
Actually at RECONDO school we typically do NOT have an actual indrect fire weapon employed but controllers discharge planted artillery simulators. The most effective use of actual firing indirect weapons was from BIG ED there in the NE with his amazing air cannons and mortars. When we did RECONDO school in Conneticutt he brought his cool toys.
The pre planted artillery pyro is a cool way to supend belief and create the emersive realism of indirect fire safely but requires game controllers.
|
|
Jerry-ADK
Private 1st Class
Unteroffizier, Heeresgruppe Nord-Ost
Posts: 418
|
Post by Jerry-ADK on Feb 4, 2014 15:23:26 GMT -5
Actually at RECONDO school we typically do NOT have an actual indrect fire weapon employed but controllers discharge planted artillery simulators. The most effective use of actual firing indirect weapons was from BIG ED there in the NE with his amazing air cannons and mortars. When we did RECONDO school in Conneticutt he brought his cool toys. The pre planted artillery pyro is a cool way to supend belief and create the emersive realism of indirect fire safely but requires game controllers. my bad, sorry got the details of the Big Ed story wrong.
|
|
|
Post by brownien on Feb 4, 2014 21:20:09 GMT -5
I do like the idea to limit squad sizes a bit. Once combat really starts, squad members get so spread out that having more than 6 per squad really makes them hard to control and provide each other with suppressing fire. Also areed on limiting smg's to use no hopup. That way, players arent being asked to modify their guns, just turn a dial. Terrain wise, most combat in Europe took place within 400-500yds, shorter depending on terrain. I don't think that CQB would be the best way to set up ww2 events, or even making the fields pursuade CQB type combat. This would really emphesise the importants of small full auto weapons, just like the smg's which we are trying to limit! Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy CQB type of enviroments! I love the idea of slinging my M1 and pulling my pistol to clear a town or farmhouse! But to make LMG's and riflemen prominent members of the squad, the terrain would have to caiter to combat that forces both sides to initially engage at close to max rifle range (200ft?). This could be done a multitude of ways; keeping obsticles and cover farther apart (emphesise Fire & Manouver), use lots of foxholes and entrenched positions to defend objectives or the outskirts of towns, try to utilize both wooded and open fields for combat (if a field is to large, slap a town/fire base in the middle!) I think having objectives close together, but far enough apart, to allow for skirmishes in between objectives would be best. I like the way Lash's Paintball field is set up, where cover is spread out, and objectives are decently close, but I find it bit upsetting to have just taken a "fort" from the enemy, look up and see that the enemy just reached their fallback position in the next objective "fort". Its all too close together to allow skirmishes to take place in between objectives, without having one team always dug in at a "fort". I also feel that having "forts" are a bit anti-climactic. There is no real CQB! once you reach the fort, you either clear it, or die! There isn't any adjacent buildings to clear like in a town. This is why I like GZA's setup. Town-wise there are only 4 or 5 real buildings in the town witha road running through it. each building has a couple of rooms, so for a squad to clear the entire town, it takes some time! Half the town can be Allied and the other Axis, at any given time! You get the feeling of "OK, I just cleared this building.... and I have 4 more to go! But i don't know which ones my other squad-mates have already captured!" I also think that having roadways should be crutial. Roads that lead from objective to objective, like at GZA, really gives participants options. You can take a dangerous but fast route up the road, or flank through the woods, or both! They also give a means to more quickly link up after respawn to reinforce, or to fall back from an attack. Jer, Whenever you plan on starting work on your field, let us know! I wold be happy to help out any way I can! You could even do a weekend long 'work Sat/Skirmish Sun' type deal. It would get you more hands on deck to get work done faster, and we could get some gaming in to test out our efforts for play-ability, and in the process we would be learning how we can tweak the field to maximise immersion.
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 5, 2014 1:31:46 GMT -5
At GZA before the intial Vietnam Liberty Canyon game several of my buddies and I flew out from Seattle and together with local players rented a back hoe and in one afternoon did up a very convincing fire base with bunkers and trench lines. The players arrived at the event and set about putting the finishing touches on the firebase and by the end of the evnt it looked real good. The village at GZA is nicer then the set up at Lashes but Lashes worked great for Battle of the bulge
|
|
|
Post by insterburger on Feb 5, 2014 9:46:19 GMT -5
I like the tone of this discussion as we delve into fine-tuning WWII airsoft for increased realism, but we should also be mindful not to get too far ahead of ourselves. The main objective right now should be growing the hobby. The good news is that the above tactical refinements could go a long way to doing that, provided game organizers stay aware that these should be guidelines and not regulations. We need to be able to adapt ourselves to local conditions, including but not limited to number of participants, relative team sizes, the specific field we're playing at (to Nate's points), weather, scenario, etc., etc. Being aware of the challenges and potential adjustments is basically like an artist having more colors on his palette-- it allows us to create a better game. Some adjustments may be appropriate most of the time, all the time, or seldom. Applying localized rules judiciously will make a huge difference in the quality of gameplay and attract players. I think the universally and intensely positive response to the semi-auto rules at the Bulge game is testament to that.
And Jer, once you start designing your field, keep in mind that I spent 10 years practicing as an architect-- with an emphasis on historic building styles. If you want to put up structures, there are ways we can lay out, design, and build something that will much more closely resemble a European village from the 40's than a bunch of plywood haphazardly put up as seen at most sites. It can look the part, and even be specifically designed to create interesting CQB challenges and opportunities. And all on the cheap! But more on that later.
|
|
Jerry-ADK
Private 1st Class
Unteroffizier, Heeresgruppe Nord-Ost
Posts: 418
|
Post by Jerry-ADK on Feb 5, 2014 11:54:24 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm going to need a lot of help. But a WW2 airsoft field designed and built by us would be a great boon to growing our hobby. I think I am ready to start the thread to see if I can generate enough interest to have it become a reality. But as for the squad size discussions, all this should be a rule of thumb to be adapted to each play area for sure. One of my mottos is" rules are for fools" no need for us to be committed to hard an fast rules all the time. Guide lines are great, regulations make me cringe. WW2AS needs to be adaptable and leave room for improvising. I have seen in some of the earliest post from back in 2007 the original admin of this organization tried to lay out squad and unit size rules for WW2AA sanctioned events, in order to try to prevent everyone from being officers or to establish a rank system of some sort. From the discussion that followed it wasn't received very well by the community and the thread died. Mostly because individual units had their own unit structures in place, and I don't think WW2 airsofters like being told what to do. So forcing units and players to abide by firm rules or else seemed to hamper more than help and kind of turned people off a bit. I'm not putting down those original attempts to organize the hobby, because it was meant to help the game. but I think the rules for any given game should be made up to suit the players and play area based on agreed upon guidelines and also what the scenario dictates. players should be in agreement to the rules before play commences. rules need to take into account the number of players present and what kinds of weapons the players have and the terrain. At our last game, things went very well, with the guidelines Nate laid out before the game started. Keeping guns on semi auto, and designating one team member MG really worked well. As long as people are honest and care about the game and care about the other players enjoying the game with them things should run smooth 99.9% of the time, no matter what rules we set out to play by.
As far as a good field to play on, how about constructing a village laid out around a town square with connecting defensive trenches with command bunkers and pill boxes. farm buildings spread around the outskirts. And have other objectives such as a AA battery and fuel or ammo depot and barracks. My wood lot is yet unlogged so as I am cutting I will be laying it out to be hedge rows or bocage with some open wooded areas. My property is just slightly smaller than Lash's play area, 12 acres, and it is shaped like a large rectangle with a stone wall which surrounds the entirety of it making a nice boundary. I have access to a tractor with backhoe so defense building will go fast. I would like to put a work/skirmish party together as soon as things warm up enough to dig. But all of your imput is welcome and needed guys, I'll start a new thread so we can start planning.
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 5, 2014 12:39:29 GMT -5
The small size of your venue is fine given that it is isloated and surrounded by wooded terrain. Having it deliberately tailored to WW2 airsoft is awesome. Quite often paintball fields get designed haphazardly and quite randomly with little sense for ambiance or with potential scenarios or fluid missions in mind.
There are definitely ways to make structures look the part theatrically which are not terribly expensive. A farm house or small village layout can be quite authentic and playable with minimal build effort by depicting it as a village in ruins. Walls, partial structures etc. A simple bunker line at the edge of the property can be used to facilitate an assault mission without impeding much of the field. Orchestrating hedgerows etc.is real exciting
|
|