jaeger
Private 1st Class
Posts: 478
|
Post by jaeger on Dec 29, 2006 11:08:34 GMT -5
Ok Guys, the past couple days I have been putting some thought into how to improve on the Chicagoland Event held last time. We all had a great time, but there were a couple things I thought I would mention and see what you all thought. For me, the biggest problem seemed to be that during the heat of battle, the medic situation and respawn situation became very confusing. Now bear in mind that I will be talking from the perspective of the axis side, but I think that both axis and allies had similar problems. Some times we would be healed, others we would have to go all the way back to the HQ and respwan, and still others, we ended up just going to certain trees of half way back, etc. Essentially, it was chaotic. It was also less realistic: I mean soldiers would be hit and then come back into battle alone. In reality, reenforcements would arrive in groups as opposed to one here and there. I may have a solution to this problem. The axis side has a nice setup for a more sensible respawn. When hit, a soldier would return to the drive-way area/artillery field. While the rest of the unit would keep fighting and hold the line, the hit soldiers would wait here. There would be two ways that they could return to battle. The first would be for remaining soldiers in the field to send a runner (since we would have no real on-the-fly radio contact in a real fire fight). The runner would come back to the base, gather whatever troops are waiting there and run them all as a group back to the battle. This would help keep things more organized and keep the actual battle lines more stable since larger moving groups would be able to hold their positions and use tactics as opposed to there being people scattered and coming back and forth. The second way in which the hit soldiers could respawn would be sort of like a default. Let's say for instance that there are 10 axis soldiers total at the event. Before the battle, rules would be set out and a specific number would be picked out that would represent the minimum required for a group of respawing soldiers to go back themselves without a runner (for instance with 10 soldiers, it could be like 5 or 6). This way, the runner system would provide more realism and if a certain group is being decimated in the woods and a majority of the troops from a group are waiting to respawn, there is a default number at which they can go back as a group on their own and support their fellow soldiers. At no point should individual soldiers simply make their own orders and return to battle. If we were to use this system, I think it would give us a couple other benefits as well. Strictly from the axis perspective, instead of there always being confusion about who is defending the artillery field, there would always either be a group of respawing soldiers waiting there or a group of fighting soldiers in the area. Any soldiers waiting in the actual HQ would be able to take up defensive positions behind the artillery, etc. before any large allied groups could simply charge in past all the axis. However, there would also need to be a rule, that in the case of the allies actually reaching the artillery field and fighting there, any soldiers from the axis defending there/waiting to respawn would only be alloted one death. So, in other words, if a defending soldier is actually shot in the HQ/artillery field by an allied soldier (firing from the actual artillery field itself... not from the woods or something), then he needs to fall where he is and wait for either the game to end by allied victory or for remaining soldiers in the woods to return and defend. If all objectives are destroyed or all axis soldiers are killed in the artillery field, then that would be victory for the allies. However, if the remaing axis soldiers in the woods could return to the artillery field/HQ and retake it, then all the dead axis soldiers there would respawn. This same system, would easily be able to adapt to the allied side as well. Please let me know what you guys think.
|
|
jaeger
Private 1st Class
Posts: 478
|
Post by jaeger on Dec 29, 2006 11:28:31 GMT -5
I thought I would mention one other thing that may help the airsoft action during the heat of battle last longer and be more interesting. Last time, I wore a helmet in the field, however, it occured to me that it really provided no benefit and actually hindered my ability to fight effectively. In actual battle I know that helmets often did not provide perfect protection from gun fire, however, they provided enough benefit to outweigh the hassle of wearing one. I know that many people are going to disagree with me on this, etc., but I think that those who wear helmets in the field should be given the benefit of not having to take shots that reflect off the helmet. I know that everyone will say that this is contrary to reality where head shots through the helmet were common from heavy machine guns. My logic lies in the whole notion of WW2 airsoft. We want to seperate ourselves from regular/modern airsoft by relying more on historical accuracy and reality. We want to as best we can accurately represent the soldiers of WW2, yet by allowing headshots for bb's reflected off the helmet, we discourage the use of helmets in general. They have no benefit and one can move faster and duck quicker without them. If we are just going to run around in circles shooting one another, then we may as well wear regular modern clothing as well, because it weighs less and allows for one to run MUCH quicker. So why don't we encourage those who wear helmets, because they help uphold the historical reality of soldiers wearing helmets as well as allow soldiers to hold their positions longer and provide for more interesting games?
Nick
|
|
Russian
Corporal
Magician
Posts: 923
|
Post by Russian on Dec 29, 2006 11:48:06 GMT -5
I thought these helmet rules were already in place...the shots the hit helmets count? When did this happen?
I like your innovations on the medic rules. They make alot of sense, and I think we should try them at the next event. Just a few question: How do you think this would run in a two day event? What if there is only one man left defending a position, so he can't send a runner? Just a couple things that I thought of.
Russian
|
|
jaeger
Private 1st Class
Posts: 478
|
Post by jaeger on Dec 29, 2006 12:07:55 GMT -5
Hey Russian, thanks for the quick response! I should start out by saying that I am not new to airsoft, but the last Chicagoland event was my first ww2 airsoft event. So, I posted these ideas on my experiences. I have not done a two day event before, so I am not sure how they run. Are they completely different from one day events? What is involved? Do certain groups hold certain positions? Please let me know. I am sure there is some way to adapt these rules. As for the helmet rule, I didn't mean to throw anyone off, but I just wanted to express my frustration with the helmet situation. I was told that helmet hits completely count. Oh yeah, by the way, are you actually Russian? Just curious...
Nick
|
|
Russian
Corporal
Magician
Posts: 923
|
Post by Russian on Dec 29, 2006 12:13:51 GMT -5
In a two day event, things are always "on", so to speak. If the Axis that are killed on the artillery field can't be respawned, that is going to suck for them. I think the rule should be when the Allies are driven back from the field, the standard respawn rules apply once again. Interesting about the helmet rule, I was always told they don't count. And, yea, Russian by blood.
Russian
|
|
jaeger
Private 1st Class
Posts: 478
|
Post by jaeger on Dec 29, 2006 12:29:44 GMT -5
Hey Russian,
I understand the confusion I caused you in my wording. You worded it perfectly. I meant that once the allies enter the artillery field anyone they shoot on that field alone is out for the count. However, if and when that field is liberated (the allies are pushed out/killed by the remaining soldiers), then regular respawn rules apply. Once there are no allies left on that field, then those who were "killed" rejoin battle as normal (following the new group respawn rules). Does this make sense? As for the helmet rules, we should make sure, because maybe I was mistaken/misinformed. I don't like taking helmet hits and counting them. It just seems unfair that's all. I am trying to remember if we met at the last event. I am Ukrainian and Russian by blood. Do you speak Russian?
Nick
|
|
|
Post by spitfire740 on Dec 29, 2006 13:05:57 GMT -5
Those are some great ideas, Nick! I was thinking of somthing similar, where we have a mobile spawn set up. A MS is basically a portable CP so it is closer to the battle than your HQ, but not all the way on the other side of the forest. You don't want to put it too close, becuase the enemy can destroy it or take it over. When a soldier is hit, he is brought back to the MS which is also a medstation. And that is where he is determined dead or alive? I have been toying around with some ideas, I don't know what else to add. Maybe we could use the MS for the Allies in this case, becuase the axis are defending, and your idea for the axis's respawn?
|
|
jaeger
Private 1st Class
Posts: 478
|
Post by jaeger on Dec 29, 2006 13:27:53 GMT -5
Thanks Chris,
I am not so sure about your idea of a mobile spawn. The whole idea of a medstation still relys on the confusing medic system. It seems to me that maybe it would be best to simply remove oneself once hit anywhere and respawn. Plus it would be quicker. We want to avoid bogging down the action. If there are set rules in place and no one has to watch over them, then the system should run itself. You do have a point though about it being a long distance from th action to the spawn point. I still think that the axis HQ and field is close enough to justify the spawn location there. Plus if we use mobile spawn locations, I feel that they are too close to the action to keep things from getting confusing. People will be running back quickly to the spawn point and getting back. I thought it may be more realistic to have reenforcing units come into the game from the main HQ as opposed to appearing in the field. This would allow for groups to form up and take up different positions/use different tactics. It would also be more realistic. Let me use an example. Let's say that we have the standard situation where the allies and axis are clashing right in the center of the woods. The axis lose a number of men, but a few guys hold the position. Then a group of like 5-6 axis troops regroup at the HQ and go out together. They know the situation and can move around/ outflank the allies dug in. On the other hand, quick respawns would allow for very little variation in the action. It will like last time just be long periods of firing between the two sides where no one is grouped up enough to make tactical movements. Plus if a quick respawn is overrun, then there are effectively no troops left near HQ to defend. This gets confusing and results in a bum rush for the artillery with no resistance. Let me know what you think. Plus do you know anything about the helmet rules? Thanks!
Nick
|
|
Russian
Corporal
Magician
Posts: 923
|
Post by Russian on Dec 29, 2006 13:34:29 GMT -5
I like the idea of a medical station, Chris. To avoid confusion, and to determine when people have been hit previously, how about when one gets hit and is sent back to the med station, they have a piece of fabric, medical wrap, or gauze wrapped around where they were hit. They can then return into combat, and their name is recorded at the med station. Then, if they are hit again, they go to the med station, and are bed bound for, 5 minutes lets say. For an "operation" or soemthing. Then they may return to the fight, but it is recorded that they returned a second time. On the thrid time, they are pronounced dead, and cannot return until the end of the current skrimish, or in a "Always on" game, they must sit out for, lets say, 10-20 minutes, helping at the Medstation.
Nick, I was at the last event, I think I met Blake, however. I was pinned down with him during the second scenario. I speak a little russian, I was fluent when I was young, but, I lost it...
|
|
|
Post by 2ndranger on Dec 29, 2006 15:54:23 GMT -5
Ok you guys have some pretty sweet ideas for the medic system so im just gonna throw this one out there. First off 1 medic per team, the medic bag contains more injuries than kills, then when shot do your routine (you know scream, act or whatever) then fall yelling medic, if the shot is a head shot, your dead, if its a body or limb shot medic draws. If he pulls a injury card that card should say where your hit then the medic wraps the body part that was injured with gauze (you know fake blood on it) and then you continue on but without using that part. If you have more than 2 or 3 body parts wrapped you need to be brought back to respawn. When injured you cant return until 5 men are in respawn, then at once they return to the game as reinforcements.
Schutze
|
|
|
Post by Capt. Zak on Dec 29, 2006 16:07:14 GMT -5
The way I designed the medic's roll is pretty much what you guys are discussing here. The problem? At the last event I forgot the medic gear, and when I do have it...people don't want to play "medic".
What I came up with a year ago was this:
1. player is hit, he falls to the ground screming medic/sani.
2. medic comes over and presents the medic bag.
3. player pulls a card describing his injury/kill
4. medic marks appropriate body part. Kills are marked on the head. Player leaves the field and returns to his HQ.
5. injured players can continue playing but suffer a handicap, for instance, if you are shot in the leg, you can't walk unless helped by another player. I like the idea of (3) injured body parts and you are KIA.
6. when 3 players return to the HQ they can return to the battle but must report to their NCO/CO. As we get more players the amount needed to respawn will increase.
These rules will be STRONGLY enforced at the March event. Medics WILL NOT carry a weapon either.
As far as helmets, head shots have always and will continue to count. You may pull an wound card and remain in the game. The ratio of wounded to KIA is about 3 to 1.
|
|
|
Post by spitfire740 on Dec 29, 2006 16:58:56 GMT -5
except at the first game everybody was on the ground with a leg wound lol.
|
|
jaeger
Private 1st Class
Posts: 478
|
Post by jaeger on Dec 29, 2006 20:33:22 GMT -5
Ok, well I just thought I would mention it. It just seems to me that the entire medic system causes lots of bogging down and while it is much more realistic, the medic will have a very hard time getting to everyone if there are a number of people. I was just looking for a way to make things somewhat simplier. However, I noticed that rule 6 requiring 3 players to group up before returning to battle makes plenty of sense. We should really try to enforce this. Also, thanks for the clarification on helmets Capt. Zak. Thanks!
Nick
|
|
|
Post by Capt. Zak on Dec 29, 2006 21:52:14 GMT -5
Ok, well I just thought I would mention it. It just seems to me that the entire medic system causes lots of bogging down and while it is much more realistic, the medic will have a very hard time getting to everyone if there are a number of people. SO pretty much just like real combat. ;D
|
|
jaeger
Private 1st Class
Posts: 478
|
Post by jaeger on Dec 29, 2006 22:35:27 GMT -5
Ok, point taken. Just wanted to bring the topic up.
Nick
|
|
Cpl. Hicks
Sergeant
Unofficial Flaggrantly Wrong Weapons Policeman
Posts: 1,425
|
Post by Cpl. Hicks on Jan 2, 2007 18:11:06 GMT -5
Very useful ideas for games, thanks!
|
|
|
Post by 2ndranger on Jan 3, 2007 0:12:24 GMT -5
Hopefully when these are applied in games, people will follow them more closely as they will make the games more interesting.
Schutze
|
|
Russian
Corporal
Magician
Posts: 923
|
Post by Russian on Jan 13, 2007 21:06:40 GMT -5
Sorry for an unintended revival, if this is deemed "dead"
Now, I have been thinking about the realism in these games, here in the midwest, and realized that it is kind of taking away from the realism when guys are walkin around after being shot. I suggest that after one is deemed "dead" by a medic, they stay where they died, slumped on the ground, or in whatever position they "died" in. Then if the area is retaken by the opposing side, the soldiers are brought to a medical area, to await either release with POWs, or the end of the scenario, or if the area is kept by their team, and their team moves forward, then they move back to a respawn, or "reassignment" area. (repo-depot? lol)
Just some thoughts, comments?
Russian
|
|
|
Post by 2ndranger on Jan 13, 2007 21:27:17 GMT -5
That is a FREAKIN AWESOME! Idea, That would add alot of realism to our games. Now Since I doubt anyone here is an actor, It wouldnt kill to scream a little bit, with people just dropping yelling medic that seems a little er...not unrealistic but doesnt make it any more realistic for your fellow players. Im gonna make some "medic props", Trying not to copy Battlesim, but I like their Idea...I will post pics soon.
Schutze
Schutze
|
|
|
Post by KippySmi7h on Jan 14, 2007 0:54:13 GMT -5
Yea I like it!
|
|
|
Post by spitfire740 on Jan 14, 2007 13:55:42 GMT -5
Great idea! Maybe we can make a little jail that the POWs can try to escape from, but somebody on the opposite team will have to gaurd the jail...
|
|
|
Post by phantom12321 on Jan 24, 2007 19:11:11 GMT -5
I dunno, that sounds a little "capture the flagish" to me.
|
|
|
Post by CharleyNovember on Jan 24, 2007 19:40:05 GMT -5
If I may make a suggestion. You guys should maybe organize your play rules in a similar fashion to the way we did. It doesn't have to be the same rules but atleast you could have it in a nice orderly page that anyone could print out and read. We do make changes to our rules occasionally but we like to have them in black and white and solid 2 weeks before a game there are no changes that way everyone knows the rules we play by. If you want to take a gander at our rules here: www.scenarioairsoft.com/ww2/articles/rules.htmAgain no reason you have to use our rules. The uniform rules are not up to your standards at all but perhaps the framework of how it is all layed out could help I dunno.
|
|
Lev
Private 1st Class
Posts: 454
|
Post by Lev on Jun 11, 2007 21:26:20 GMT -5
Sounds like everybody had a great time. I wish I could have been there. One important tenant to rules is the need to keep it simple. If you can't explain the rules to somebody in 2 minutes or less, people are going to screw it up Just some food for thought...
|
|
|
Post by kellhound on Jun 12, 2007 5:07:36 GMT -5
You are right, unionman. Too often around here people thinks "milsim" is enforcing a lot of hardly used rules that nobody (except it's creator) understands, and cause problems during the game, and adding several pages of ficticious background nobody cares about.
That only makes it harder for our hobby.
|
|
|
Post by Obergefreiter Raimund on Jun 12, 2007 7:42:34 GMT -5
I have been doing Airsoft going on six years now. I have played in Airsoft games that last 2-3 days at times, through the night, rain and snow. Some of these games had well over 100 people and some over 200 people.
Never in all of that time have I ever seen medic rules work well or not be confusing. Not ever!
What I have seen work well is exactly what jaeger has described. That is: reinforcing groups from the main HQ/Spawn. I have seen that type of re-spawn rule work the very best. Especially with larger groups of people!
Just to rehash what rules I’m talking about:
When 5-6 people are gathered in HQ from being hit they can return to the field. If HQ is attacked the dead and alive all become defenders with the 1 hit your dead rule in effect until game is either over or HQ pushes the attackers away. Then regular re-spawn rules apply.
Top Reasons these re-spawn rules work the best:
1: Guarantees fully equipped, fully loaded and organized reinforcements.
2: reinforcements actually become a relieving force and not just another man for the lines. You get a real sense of: “Thank God!” or “Oh God!” It depends on your perspective really. It is great to see your own guys come flooding in and a horrible feeling to see “theirs” come flooding in.
3: Prevents one team steam rolling another by enabling a faltered line to be re-established at another flank from the relieving forces. It also allows for tactful retreats. Especially if coordinated ambushes are emplaced by reinforcements.
4: Allows for more tactful playing. No longer are battles fought in a general area as reinforcing groups continuously attempt flanking maneuvers. Believe it or not more of the playing field is used this way.
5: There are no delays, arguments or waiting for medics. Nothing to remember! Just, if your hit you go to re-spawn. It is very simply and does not take trigger time away at all.
|
|
|
Post by CharleyNovember on Jun 12, 2007 10:14:04 GMT -5
I don't see the card system as complicated neither do most of the participants to the many games teamblackjack puts on every year. If you want "shoot em up there over there" style play...that seems very paintsoft to me. To each thier own.
|
|
|
Post by Obergefreiter Raimund on Jun 12, 2007 13:06:52 GMT -5
I don't see the card system as complicated neither do most of the participants to the many games teamblackjack puts on every year. If you want "shoot em up there over there" style play...that seems very paintsoft to me. To each thier own. I fail to see how it seems paint soft as re-spawning has little to do with the scenario. I thought we were simply discussing re-spawn rules? So how does the rules seem like paint-soft to you? Look if you don’t like the idea that’s cool… but don’t bring it down to the paint-soft level. That is a little bit of a low blow don’t you think? ;D
|
|
jaeger
Private 1st Class
Posts: 478
|
Post by jaeger on Jun 12, 2007 13:20:34 GMT -5
Thanks for your support Majorray! When coming up with these basic rules, my ideas were mainly based around keeping the rules simple enough so that everyone could remember them, but at the same time keep the action at a perfect pace. In coming up with the idea to have troops go back in groups, your commments hit the nail right on the head. I wanted to make sure that everyone was in a way forced to move out in groups. It would lend itself to situations in the battles, where actual squad based tactics could be utilized. When soldiers respwan individually, there always seems to be the phenomenon of them spreading out. Essentially, when we do this, we are reverting back to paintball rules, etc., because we are working on our own and doing whatever the heck we want (without thinking about the battle objectives or seening where reenforcements are required). I only wish that we utilized some system similar to this more often, because it would make things realistic enough to where they are not confusing, and still at the same time allow us to have fun.
Nick
|
|
mccallion
Private 1st Class
Official Road Sign Reader (retired)
Posts: 770
|
Post by mccallion on Jun 12, 2007 14:17:54 GMT -5
dont bring up dead threads -mccallion
|
|