2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Apr 3, 2015 14:50:59 GMT -5
Many airsoft events are labelled MILSIM which of course is short for MILITARY SIMULATION. That is a pretty broad sweeping term as any airsoft battle from a backyard skirmish to a weekend gathering at a paintball field with elimination play or capture the flag rules is "playing Army" hense it simulates the Military experience. When YOU think of MILSIM, what criteria do you think constitutes MILSIM? I pose this question NOT to start a "We're right and they are wrong argument" but rather to get a sense for what everyones heres fantasy MILSIM event needs to look like. I understand perfectly that it will be different for everyone but wonder what the consistent gotta haves are.
What destinguishes a "MILSIM" event from an aitsoft skirmish?
I am curious to hear everyones thoughts? My only insistent is a reminder that there is no right or wrong answer here. Airsoft is a team hobby with very individual aspirations so by its nature there will be differing opinions.
|
|
|
Post by insterburger on Apr 3, 2015 16:30:49 GMT -5
My criteria would be:
1) Immersive/continuous event-- no pauses to parlay the terms of the next skirmish, no communal lunch break 2) Realistic balance of arms-- tactical rules that create scaled armament (the rules we've been using in the NE with limited full auto, and appropriate limits on ammo, etc.) 3) Chain of command-- players remain in character and maintain proper chain of command
There may be more, but I'd say those are my big three.
|
|
|
Post by volkssturm on Apr 3, 2015 17:35:05 GMT -5
Pretty much what he says, plus (at least locally ) stricter rules on uniforms and weapons. "Russians" wear Russian camouflage and carry current Russian AK models, etc.
|
|
Dracul
Master sergeant
Posts: 1,341
|
Post by Dracul on Apr 3, 2015 19:04:48 GMT -5
I've been meaning to get this off my chest for a looooooooooooong time.
"Milsim" is just a term coined by airsofters who wanted to feel "elite" and separate themselves from other players. They wanted a fine line between the people who show in up tee shirt and jeans and Condor gear and themselves who buy what they really believe is gear and uniform worn by the military. A lot of "milsimmers" think that they are pro and know more about the military than actual military members. Many are pretty disrespectful to those who served. I have had a lot of arguments in the past with people who try to tell me what the Marine Corps uses and what they don't, despite telling them that I served for 5 years.
They want simulate military, but with out simulating an actual military force. They just find whatever gear and uniforms that happen to be popular and the current trend. Not what the military actually wears or uses. They will say things like "oh, so and so SF units wear this $300 5.11 plate carrier and this $200 Crye Precision pants and use this gun."
If you ask me, while airsofting, Reenacting is Milsim, and Milsim is reenacting. WWII, Vietnam, Desert Storm, etc etc. if you are not wearing a proper military uniform of any country or force, you can't possibly be simulating a military person. If you aren't wearing an impression of a force, reenacting something or someone from the past, then you are just playing airsoft.
I personally don't mean to sound like and elitist a-hole myself, but the term "milsim" carries a lot of negative connotation with it, and I hate what it became. Airsofting is a game, and in all honesty, airsoft can't be milsim. What people don't realize is that what professional military and LE uses for their training simulations are not airsoft guns, they are 9mm paint "Sim Rounds" that have actual gunpowder in them.
With that said, the closest you can achieve to Milsim with airsofting is era reenacting. If you aren't reenacting as a Military person in a scenario based off of an actual military operation, then you are just airsofting.
Side note, I'm not saying that everyone who buys the entire BLACKHAWK catalog are like this. Most players I've come across are good to go whether they wear Condor, LBT, tee and jeans, its the more than few elitist bastards that make me want to puke.
Closing note. I definitely also agree with Insterburger 100%!
|
|
|
Post by insterburger on Apr 3, 2015 20:13:10 GMT -5
But how do you REALLY feel about it Drac? Seriously, I would agree with Drac and Volks that proper uniform is important too. I guess with the relatively small numbers we've had in the NE the one place we've been pretty spoiled is in having for the most part very good to excellent impressions fielded. Quality over quantity, I suppose. And not saying we need Texled stitchnazi perfection, but having solid, good looking impressions is definitely a big part of the equation. Drac, I didn't know there was so much baggage with the term. We've never used it here in WWII Airsoft in the NE, but I think what we've been trying to achieve here has been fulfilling-- or coming very close to fulfilling-- your definition of the term (at least in the good sense you describe it... though I'm trying my best to be an elitist a-hole ).
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Apr 3, 2015 20:31:02 GMT -5
Any event that keeps score is in my opinion NOT what I conceptualize as MILSIM. Not once while I was in the ARMY did anyone layout the means by which one team was going to "win". Missions had asigned tasks and desired outcomes but not victory parameters. To carry this argument further obsessions over having fair fights and even sided teams is not "MILSIM". Seldom in combat were sides even. Typically when they were, contact was avoided. In combat a "fair fight " is an indication of poor decision making and bad tactics. In MILSIM its okay to be defeated if the process allowed you to feel emmersed in something that felt real and allowed you to apply military skills (especilly team skills) A mission that turns into your teams massacre can be highly emmersive as can a recon mission where no BBs were fired. its nice when success in one phase builds on future outcomes within the event.
MILSIM players should not have to wonder what they have discovered. (Hmmmm do these orange cones or flags represent our objective). Is that van with the PVC pipe a rocket launcher? Every prop should be convincing. Maps if used should look authentic as should radios and the way they are used with proper procedures.
Those things that are incongruent to the environment and experience should be eliminated if at all possible. Admin time should feel like down time in the real military. activities that foster a sense of time travel or emmersion should be implemented where possible. Sound effects, props, mail call, signage, orders, role players who are convincing. an effort to use the lingo of the time and hide items that are incongruent. Coolers, bottled water modern cots. (Unless of course its a modern themed event! All of these are elements that I think seperate MILSIM from Airsoft.
i agree that uniforms, chain of command, ammo restrictions and gameplay that avoids stalemates, lone wolves, and point spreads head events in the MILSIM direction. This in no way suggests that AIRSOFT games as are most commonly played are BAD or Wrong but I hate hearing them referred to as MILSIM and if tye term keeps being used meaninglessly, a new word or phrase needs to be found.
|
|
Dracul
Master sergeant
Posts: 1,341
|
Post by Dracul on Apr 3, 2015 20:58:34 GMT -5
Insterburger: There is or was no reason to ever even say "Milsim" in our games. Since our games have always been appropriate era uniforms and scenarios based off historical battles, "military simulation" has always just been insinuated, whether we realized it or not, and never needed to be said.
I've been to big airsoft games, walk on weekend games, and our games here. I'll have to say, as a former Grunt in the Marines, the stuff we do in our games, have been the closest to my experiences and my training in the Infantry. Even though we are all wearing and using out dated uniforms, clunky gear, battery powered guns, eating pretend rations, listening to 40's radios; the team work, command, tactics, fire and maneuver, movement under fire, single shots relying on automatics, always brings me back to my time in. I don't get that with standard airsofting, weekend walk on game at a paintball place or the big milsim games. I enjoy standard airsofting and I always do my best to have fun with it and try to remind others that its just a game, but this here is the closest I've been to military simulations while airsofting.
If any of this makes sense, hahaha.
2ndBat: I agree completely. I have seen too many crappy looking props and point systems should not be a way to conduct milsim. Should be about objectives, taking ground, pushing back the enemy, setting up ambushes, engaging enemy units 3:1, etc etc.
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Apr 3, 2015 21:37:14 GMT -5
MILSIM within the Airsoft Community has definitely taken on negative connotations as it so over used.
|
|
|
Post by insterburger on Apr 3, 2015 21:43:22 GMT -5
I agree with all your points, 2nd Bat. A good example of an event that had a great many of these elements was Nate's D-Day game last summer. The first action of the day was absolutely hopeless for the Germans-- we were attacking a much larger force that was hidden in the darkness of a wood while we had the dawn at our backs-- and we got kicked around pretty good. But we did keep at it, and we got creative about how to approach the situation, and made progress (though we never dislodged the enemy). Very evocative of the confusion that would have come from small German patrols appropriate to an occupation coming up against Airborne concentrations.
Likewise the later battle where we were defending very convincing gun batteries that were actively firing as we defended them. With a proper balance of arms all the weapons on both sides fell into their appropriate roles and I have to say that the event as a whole and those two actions in particular provided insight into WWII tactics that I had not previously known. That, in the end, should be the purpose of our games.
|
|
|
Post by kiwi432 on Apr 4, 2015 0:41:12 GMT -5
Yes the whole Milsim tag seems to be way overused it annoys me alot.
I have been to a lot of Milsim games living in Taiwan. They have been well organized, uniforms and gear are exactly what has been used by soldiers in Afhgan. Although the problem we have had is, people are way way to uptight about wearing everything perfect. You try to explain that soldiers don't wear that or use it differently, but oh because they have seen it in a pic means its right. But simple tactics and the emersion into the game were always missing. (Its all about looking cool and not getting your kit dirty.) I once hid in a tree with a bolt action, and held up a whole advance, no one still found where I was that day. That or other simple tactics were enough to outwit other milsimers. I found these games rather boring as they were never a true Milsim. Just on the outside.
WHen living in New Zealand, we used to run ww2 games. Although we did not have the right kit. Some of the days we only had 8-12 people. But there were set objectives and missions to complete. You had to think as a team how to hold or push the enemy back. Basic ammo limitations, meant tactics had to used to overcome objectives. A good example of one was to take our mortars. The props looked real and had ballons in them, once popped would simulate being decommissioned. These were the best games I remembered as people were not up themselves and just got on with it.
Its about working as a small group. Trying to survive and overcoming what could not be overcome. And having fun
Anyways I think you lot have hit it right. Its what makes ww2 airsofting especially fun.
|
|
|
Post by luftwelle93 on Apr 4, 2015 20:34:59 GMT -5
That's one thing I would love to see in WW2 airsofting is the implementing of actual tactics as done by each army in the war.Imagine what games would be like if there was an MG-42 team with its squad in the defense against US with a couple BAR's,M1 Carbines,and Garands trying to flank and attack.Bunkers,pillboxes,shell holes,ect. with such tactics and combat would be epic no doubt.
|
|
|
Post by insterburger on Apr 4, 2015 21:48:03 GMT -5
That's one thing I would love to see in WW2 airsofting is the implementing of actual tactics as done by each army in the war.Imagine what games would be like if there was an MG-42 team with its squad in the defense against US with a couple BAR's,M1 Carbines,and Garands trying to flank and attack.Bunkers,pillboxes,shell holes,ect. with such tactics and combat would be epic no doubt. No need to imagine. The events in the NE have generally been built around this model, and the results have been awesome. I referenced it above, but the German defense of the gun batteries at Nate's D-Day event was a perfect example. We set up our MG42 well dug in but with awesome fields of fire. Everyone else on the German side was in trenches around it and basically there to keep the enemy away from our killing machine. The Allies, on the other hand, had their MG provide covering fire so that their riflemen could move into position (or try to, anyway) to destroy our MG. Just like WWII. It was insane. I wish everyone with an interest in WWII could have a similar experience.
|
|
|
Post by luftwelle93 on Apr 4, 2015 22:18:02 GMT -5
That's the stuff I want to be in.Too bad the Nord-Ost is out of my range sounds like you go all out there.
|
|
Jerry-ADK
Private 1st Class
Unteroffizier, Heeresgruppe Nord-Ost
Posts: 418
|
Post by Jerry-ADK on Apr 5, 2015 8:32:32 GMT -5
That's the stuff I want to be in.Too bad the Nord-Ost is out of my range sounds like you go all out there. yes, here in the NE we have really been experimenting with all these ideas. I went through an entire weekend with using my mp40 on semi auto. that is unrealistic for my weapon, as in reality it only fired full auto, but it really helped the balance of arms at the event not to use it on full auto. In that event we also had a good amount of Pyro's and smoke. you really need them to fully simulate the tactics we are talking about. Its great to have a MG all dug in nice with riflemen protecting it, but the other team needs to have smoke and grenades so they have a chance of killing it if they get close. I look forward to the day when we can utilize indirect fire in our events too. We had a Co2 mortar at our Remagen event last year that fired nerfs. It worked well, but could use improvements. Also, the field we were using was thick woods, not to condusive to using nerfs. hopefully we will see some more of those weapons show up on the field in the near future.
|
|
|
Post by shiftsup on Apr 5, 2015 18:03:48 GMT -5
MILSIM is a broad and over-used term up here. Seems to be a marketing term used to attract a certain type of player. Can usually be interpreted as you may not fire one shot all weekend.
Games usually include a chain of command, higher kit requirements and no breaks. That appears to be the basics.
Term is rarely or even never used in regards to wwii airsoft around here.
|
|
Jerry-ADK
Private 1st Class
Unteroffizier, Heeresgruppe Nord-Ost
Posts: 418
|
Post by Jerry-ADK on Apr 5, 2015 20:35:08 GMT -5
MILSIM is a term we have also never used here for our WW2 events. At least I have never herd it coined at a game I was present at. I do also equate the term with modern type airsoft events. I would actually rather the term historical reenacting be used to describe what we are trying to do with our ww2 airsoft events. Although, we have a long way to go yet to be on par with what traditional ww2 reenacters pull off as far as authenticity.(I realize that most reenacters who thumb their noses at us would never consider us reenactors, but that doesn't matter) I dont actually think we will, or need to go as far as they go with authenticity standards because we really only need to have the appearance of the belligerents, not an exact look alike to a specific unit that fought in a specific battle. But that is a personal preference, others who who do ww2 airsoft may have another opinion. But what I would like in a event, milsim or otherwise, is more role play and good organization to the event or scenario. Continuous play without snack and lunch breaks with the enemy between phases. And a Period military encampment. How about a new term: MILHISTORYSIM?
|
|
|
Post by shiftsup on Apr 6, 2015 12:52:01 GMT -5
In regards to wwii airsoft I believe anything that aids in the suspension of disbelief beyond eyepro, electric guns and bb's is critical.
Playing at a paintball field and taking cover behind wooden pallets has its limitations. But sometimes that is all you have access to.
Had the privilege of participating in a DDAY airsoft event last year that had a bren gun carrier converted to an early model panzer. Certainly added to the event. Mind you, the bazooka firing a tennis ball did not.
But again, any effort made by an organizer or participant to heighten the suspension of disbelief is key to a successful event.
|
|
|
Post by ssgjoe on Apr 6, 2015 23:03:38 GMT -5
I'm gonna be the odd guy here and say that there is MilSim in airsoft, and some modern events can be called that. A MilSim, I think, doesn't need to be historically based. It can be based on a conflict in the near future that is yet to happen, and in these events gear doesn't need to be as strictly regulated. While it does need to be regulated to some degree, ie you can't have American infantrymen with British camo and say "oh, it's the future. Anything could happen" (kinda know what I'm saying?), but it doesn't need to be an accurate impression to a specific time.
Me, for my modern airsoft kit, I'm a PMC. I don't follow any impression, I kinda put my own load out together. And I believe that I should be able to use this in near future themed MilSims, and I feel it should be okay for me to represent a fantasy Private Military Firm (there are many PMFs out there).
But to answer the question, I do agree that a MilSim needs to be one continuous game, no score is kept, and there are units and there is a command structure. There should be uniformity among each opposing side. Ammunition should be limited, and respawn times should be lengthy as to add more incentive for one to live. Operations should be executed strategically and have a realistic objective to them. An event should have one large objective for each side (ie one side is to reach a certain town a good distance away, while the other side prevents them), and there should he smaller objectives set by the commanding officers, that lead up to accomplishing the large objective. That way you go to the event knowing what you ultimately need to accomplish, but it's up to the team/side/simulated military to figure out, and strategize, how they'll go about accomplishing the objective. Fire support should also be implemented.
If you are reasonably simulating a military operation (besides the fact that our weapons are toys), whether it be historical, modern, or near future, then you have a MilSim.
I believe that events like MilSim West are in fact military simulations. But to each his own.
I dunno if I made any sense lol
P.S. elitists piss me off just as much as the next guy. I
|
|
|
Post by Rekkon on Apr 7, 2015 13:36:23 GMT -5
On the way back from East Wind last month, one of my first thoughts was "every milsim event I have attended to date was a lie." Granted, I was thinking of modern airsoft and not so much our WW2 games, but the difference between an emphasis on the immersion and fieldcraft vs. pure trigger time was profound. It is not enough to have a "command structure." It has to actually work (in both directions). There were no points or predefined victory. You accomplished your objectives or not, and you survived or not. I came to know and rely on my squadmates and knew they in turn were depending on me to do my job.
The last couple years I had already been moving this direction for the event I run. Large areas, less combat centric scenarios and less hand holding. How do you accomplish X? Figure something out. Did we win? Does it feel like you won? Sure you ambushed and killed 10 guys, but your job was to get eyes on something and return alive. That second part seems lacking, and I am all out of necromancers. If you do something stupid, there may be consequences beyond "wait 5 minutes to respawn."
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Apr 7, 2015 13:49:39 GMT -5
I see MILSIM more from the gameplay and tactical realism than the gear and uniforms although they help greatly with the sense of emmersion. In Asia the uniforms and gear at events (even historical ones) tend to be extremely good but the gameplay is just silly. Caprure the flag, massive elimination games, lots of time standing around between action phases. No doubt the folks there are having fun but in my book that isn't milsim. Since the vast majority of Airsoft players have little or no military background its not surprising that the tactical aspects seldom resemble actual conflict.
The notion of continuous combat is NOT a prerequisite in my book for an event to be called MILSIM. I have held events where specific action phases have been laid out that are stuctured, timed action phases. The difference is they mirrored (or attempted to mirror) combat missions. An example would be a roadblock mission. I set up a simulated road block with bunkers, fortifications, simulated barbed wire and fake metal obstructions, a small force was assigned the missin of holding the roadblock for a set time frame. The other (much larger force) was tasked with attacking it, planting simulated explosives on the obstructions and securing it enough for military vehicles to pass through within that time frame.
Squads alternated in the role of defenders throughout the day. The same missin phase was repeated multiple times. In each phase the attackers had time to plan, brief and even rehearse their actions prior to departing on their mission. The defenders could ambush enroute, plan counter attacks or simply maintain a static defense. No two action phases were alike and while there was lots of trigger time it felt authentic and emmersive. Ammo, SAWs and magazine restrictions as well as boobytraps and even the ability to call in indirect fire (for both sides) was incorporated. To me although not continuous action that falls under an acceptable label of MILSIM.
|
|
|
Post by insterburger on Apr 7, 2015 22:19:02 GMT -5
One thing I had been hoping to unveil this weekend (ugh) but very much want to work into future events here is the sense of the unknown. You might be tasked with holding an objective for a certain period of time and not actually get attacked, or you might be moving out to attack an enemy held position and get hit yourself on the way. I don't see immersion as just uniforms and props or staying in character (though those things help). I see it as being in a situation where combat comes sometimes according to plan and sometimes very much not. Ideally, participants should be on their toes constantly... the "thousand yard stare" didn't come about from being spoon-fed action in predetermined doses.
I guess since it's airsoft, are we trying for a hundred yard stare?
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Apr 8, 2015 1:04:16 GMT -5
The unknown is tricky to deliver while still keeping things moving along but it ABSOLUTELY can be done. Even with these set missions each side has wide variation in terms of how they execute their assigments. When defenders decide to ambush close to the line of departure and then fall back the risk is that the attackers won't come along the expected route. Likewise the attackers may assault an undermanned defense only to find themselves fighting an intense counter attack. Sometimes a split attack doesn't materialize as one group gets lost or unexpectedly delayed. By establishing perameters there is never too much down time and mission briefs for the next phase come immediately after the mission phase debrief. Preparing never quite provides adequate time and both defenders and attackers have to reverse time their preperation just like the real deal.
A unit leader has to brief adequately so everyone knows what they are expected to do. Reality sets in and plans seldom go as anticipated but that is what makes it cool. I like having a game controller providing radio instructions to each element so adequate friction is applied. If an attack is brilliantly executed and the defense fails to present much of a challenge. awsome job but to insure adequate exitement for everyone the defense is ordered to fall back, given immediate respawn and sent back in as a fresh counter attack force.
Artillery is a force balancer and the controller can see that it keeps things intense for both sides. So long as participants know the event is about intensity levels and not "winning" this is seen in the poitive light it is intended to be. I always tell my participants that if gameplay starts to look a little too tilted one way it means they are kicking it!
Medic cards can also dictate intensity. The game controller can manage the percentage of issued "grazing wounds" and KIA cards and even though they are randomly drawn from their first aid pouch when hit this can keep things intense even with unequal sides. realistic medic rules han't been mentioned but handling wounds and avoiding airsoft traditional respawns is a step toward better MILSIM in my book. Kill rags and folks walking through the battlefield saying "hit, hit hit just doesn't do it for me.
|
|
Jerry-ADK
Private 1st Class
Unteroffizier, Heeresgruppe Nord-Ost
Posts: 418
|
Post by Jerry-ADK on Apr 8, 2015 7:56:25 GMT -5
Medic rules are a must for me. having a dedicated medic (dressed in proper kit with stretcher) really adds to the realism factor, and should be a element in MILSIM. Having aid stations to use as forward spawn points add much to any event. Using field dressings to simulate wounds is also good, and if players are allowed to use their dressing as a get-out-of-respawn one time use for none critical hits that is ok by me. there can be a whole other thread for medic rule discussion, to get ideas flowing, and I think there is already on this forum somewhere. That thread could prolly be revisited too. But Medic rules should be decided by the event basis, and should be flexible if team balancing is needed durning a game. Players getting up after a hit and walking to respawn points is lame and kills it for me too. But we have all played that way. Much better would be a hit player acting out a wound a bit and calling for help from a team mate or medic, then being assessed by the medic with wound cards. If critical wound, player could be carried back to forward respawn point. if KIA, better for player to lay dead on field until action passes, then return to respawn. There are many ways to do medics and deal with hit players, but a bit of role play here is a good thing for battle simulation. Down players yelling for help adds to the confusion and chaos of battle.
Also you mentioned a game controller, very important to have a person in charge of game flow and allotting missions and objectives for both sides. And with that a reliable radio for both team leaders, and the controller is necessary so that they will be able to stay in contact throughout the event. That person hopefully has done a lot of prep for the event and has a variety of scenarios planned to keep the action interesting. If not, its just a backyard skirmish with expensive uniforms and gear and not really MILSIM.
|
|
|
Post by insterburger on Apr 8, 2015 8:42:22 GMT -5
Jerry alluded to this but it's worth stating outright: The game controller can't be one of the commanders, and ideally should not be part of the game at all. Unfortunately with the low numbers we currently have we need everyone in the field that we can get, so in reality we may need the controller to be part of a team. My plan for the cancelled April game-- and I'll use it going forward-- is to control the game from the position of a soldier, and "play dumb" about what is coming next, i.e. if I know we're walking into a potential ambush, resist the urge to remind our commander that we shouldn't be bunched up. Short of having a dedicated controller outside the game that's the best that can be done, but it takes someone with the maturity and self control to realize that the game is about creating an experience and not about "winning."
As for winning, I'll have to say that we must be doing well in the NE because I couldn't begin to tell you who "won" our past few games. I can say that at the D-Day event defenses tended to be tough to crack and neither side was ever able to mount a successful assault. I can say that at Remagen we gave up the bridge in the end but made the Amis pay through the nose for it. And the next day our small force couldn't wrest it back. Sounds more like war than "our points total provided a marginal victory."
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Apr 8, 2015 13:31:29 GMT -5
these comments are extremely encouraging as it sounds like most folks on this Forum are on board with a similar vision. Many of these concepts thus far are not fully implemented but the trend is a steady movemen in this direction and that's terrific. The ideal is for the controller to be someone not invested in either camp but often I have seen them role play as though they were.
At my age and with my physical limitations I find myself increasingly assuming that role which I find myself enjoying more and more. I find that it helps if both commanders are someone filled in but the main thing is that both have confidence that directions are in the interest of authenticity, emmersion and event flow and that no side is being manipulated with mal intent. In fact directions might put a team at a disadvantage but those circumstances will be reversed enough so all players have a shot at a balanced experience.
Ambushes are always challenging because other than when role player "aggressors" are employed without the legitimate element of surprise they seldom feel very legitimate. they can are pulled off effectively but it requires creativity and a real focus on safety as players who get sufficiently relaxed are sometime lax with eye pro which the controller has to be real mindful about.
|
|