MILSIM : Fixed role in units + complex unit structure.
 

In milsim context, should roles be fixed in a specific unit ?

I compare with a hockey team :
-If I play hockey outside, most of the time, players have no position (role). We still make goals and have fun but it's a little free for all. Most of airsoft game I played looks like this. Only squads of different number of players with or without a CO. In each squad, no specific role. We can see 2 snipers, 1 lmg, all assault etc.

-If I play hockey inside in a ligue, each player has a fixed position. I'm left wing, I know it, everyone in my team know it and I play as a left wing. It help coordination and execution of basic plays. I think same thing should apply to a good milsim game. Everyone should has a role, knows it and plays like it. It will help leaders to have better coordination and knowledge of what he can or cannot do with his units.

This being said, as the number of player in a team increase, the structure of units should evolve too. I never saw in a game a platoon level. Everytime is all squads + CO. I read often (rule of thumb) a leader should not have to lead more than three element to perform well. A fireteam leader should have 3 guys with him. Squad leader should have 2 or 3 fireteam.
A Commander should not have more than 3 elements to control. It's there we should see platoon. A platoon should have 2 or 3 squad with a platoon leader. And the CO should have to control 2-3 platoons.
If you have more people than 3 full platoon + leading element, you can create company with 2 or 3 platoon. And so on.

Commander can deal with 2 or 3 element on comms, same thing for platoon leaders and squad leaders. I think it can improve communication not having 9 to 10 elements trying to talk to each other on a single channel.

To build such structure, I think fixed role is mandatory. Op Nightfall is a good example of fixed role lineup. But I don't see that often.

What do you think ? Is is too complex for what we do in airsoft game? Have you experienced both of this systems (fixed and free for all) did you see a difference?

My inspiration is :
http://ttp2.dslyecxi.com/st_platoon.html
http://ttp2.dslyecxi.com/leadership.html
Tactics and rules for Arma 2, but I don't see why it could not be applied in airsoft if the number of players justified a more organized structure.

I think alot of this already applies at large, well run games. You have to keep in mind though, that what we call MILSIM here in Canada isn't a real MILSIM, it's just a giant skirmish with objectives that usually runs longer than a standard 6 hour or so game.

There's no strict requirments, there's no doing exactly as told when told or being told to leave the game, there's no digging trenches to sit in and wait for an enemy that never shows up, there's no seemingly meaningless tasks to be done. Most of the time, squads run around looking for a fight, when a "patrol" or "recce" is done, they go out of their way to start a firefight, it's not "MILSIM".

So far, I made the same observation as you. This is why I try to bring something to think about.

I have played both in Canada and USA . yes you can run squad based games I actually find it easier to comand squad based teams who know what there role is. In the USa the 11 man squad is how they do things. I even went down to maryland for a squad tactics course and have had the instructor come up here and we both taught the course. the students who came it was an eye opener to them and the games after the course you saw a change in how they played less lone wolfing and more objectives were beeing done.

I've been to, Organized and commanded several games, where all of the elements you say "never" happen, all happened, at least on the side I was running.

making these things happen require 2 elements, Effective command, and willing players.

often there is a lack of both at many games

+1^

we should have one here more often,

Did 2 last season, but focused on WWII tactics.

Im far from a "commander" and at your average skirmish game i tend to lone wolf it. I mean heck i often run as a sniper and carry an aeg for when the need is there.
Most skirms are like you say a giant free for all depending who attends.
That being said you also get games with the more seasond players and even tho their isnt a set command structure you will see guys organize themselves ie they will break off into groups of 2-5 set uo comms with the whole team assign someone to command the group use good communication so folks arent off trying to accomplish the same thing and because of this they become an effective fighting force and often will accomllish all of their objectives while the other team is stuck wondering why they cant get stuff done and keep getting their buts kicked.
The last game rennegade hosted at flag raiders was like this. The first half of the day was easy for our team untill the opfor was given some advice on how to organize and after that they made or day that much more of a challenge.

For the milsim games that ive been too they have always been quite organized (at least the teams i was on) and tho we may not have always came out ahead im sure we didnt make it easy on the other team(s).
Cpl good examples are the Z3 zombies game where Brian was our leader. He organized us well kept us organized and i belive we accomplished our main goal for the night.
Or the muskoka game a cpl years back where, Jaroon form Army Issue was our commander. We where out numbered 3 to 1 or something crazy like that. obviously we didnt win. In fact i think it is how the game was designed that it was almost if not entirely impossible for us to win but we definately drove the other team crazy with out small but well organized group hitting them when and where they least expected and making them work hard for their victory.

I love a good skirm where i can run around (or crawl in my case) pickin folksoff from the cover of my ghillie and surroundings and rackin up my killsjts a tonne of fun and no pressure but i defenately have just as much fun in a larger group that is well organized working as a unit and that useually has me crawling around observing and relaying info and on occasion taking o7t a high value target from long range when needed.
Both are fun tho even in those lone wolf skirmishes we can all benifate from a baisic understanding of the squad dynamic and sort of self organize ourselves to be more effective via minor planing and communication so we are not all out just run and gunning and we can actually acomplish what we set out to do.
Id be down for some of those training sessions for sure knowlage is power and is one skill we can all have on the field

This is excellent and if the players are of a mindset conducive to playing a like a unit this would be awesome and more than likely happens.

The problem is. Cod-Tards. Who are in need of pulling triggers for as long as possible then crash after about six hours. The COD-Tard can't or won't understand the concept of holding ground or guarding an area for an extended period of time. Let a lone following orders. They normally sign up as a random then go and bugger off to do what they like even when they are put into a squad, which is why milsim at the moment means long game skirmish.

I believe there are a large number of Airsofters in Ontario and elsewhere who pine for the day that games can be organized in such a way that it doesn't fall apart into a large skirmish. One excellent example of a great actuall mil-sim game was/is the Deadfall series.

I attended the Deadfall at the Muskoka primary in fall 2011. Setting off in the pitch black the only guide is holding on to the shoulder of the next guy in-front of you. Setting up actual base in the middle of the woods. Creating defensive positions sitting out in the freezing rain waiting for the enemy to come. Knowing that I can count on my team mates to actually watch my back. Sharing a Sip of Tea in between attacks trying to stay warm. Trusting my team mates that I didn't know as I was laying down watching BB's come centimeters past my goggles while trying to respawn while they shoot through our canopied base at the OPFOR.

You can't get that with COD-tards.

It might be an Idea to have a list available to like minded individuals of who these Cod-tards are and start not allowing them to come to certain games.

Just a thought

It seems like everything is kind of dynamic, and there’s good and bad with that.

In the Milsims I’ve been to I’ve seen the top-tier squads organized by existing Teams made of people who’ve worked together, followed by the bottom tier guys who are either newbs or skirmish guys smushed into squads. The top-tier guys work their own dynamics because they’ve played together and know each other’s position. They usually benefit from the established Fire Team/Squad order. The bottom tier guys… well, don’t. Usually they’ve got an otherwise decent/freshly promoted airsofter as their Squad Leader, and two random guys picked out as FTLs. The SQ has to do double duty of moving the squad through hostile territory AND teaching basic squad tactics (if not outright babysitting).

What’s the alterative? Intermixing? Have each squad take some Newbs and ‘draft’ experienced players into the low-tier squad? Eh, tricky. I’d think a lot of the top tier guys would revolt (another difference between real life and Milsim…), and even the newbs might wander back towards their friends/cliques/clusters.

There’s no simple solution.

What’s possible is that in larger games the positions of Squad Leaders has to be either picked out, approved or drafted by that side’s Command staff. And treat the top tier vs. lower tier squads like fists in the boxing match. Jab (send newbs straight to Valhalla), Cross (flank & supress with mid-level guys), Uppercut (top tier up the rear). Mix it up and mercilessly hammer at the enemy so they don’t get used to a pattern.

The problem is to get good squads / teams you need to play that way all the time. Every weekend game needs to have achievable objectives, and avoid random skirmish all together.

So you need "Milsim" fields to feed the teams and get more teams.

Pretty tough when when your starting players have little gear or training. To get a good solid core of teams you need a fairly large player base.

We have had good groups out here, they break down as players move on then you wait for the next group to mature (or not).

seriously?

I'm not ex-military or 1337 commando but I've been slowly training and working with my team to become more precise and deliberate in our movements. There are plenty of online field manuals to get info from, and after that its a matter of practice practice and more practice. A great deal can be accomplished with as few as 4-5 dedicated players.

Seeing the results on the field has definitely been encouraging and to me and my team makes the games regardless of how complex they are a LOT more fun. To promote "team" play on the field is easy enough to do, simply grab a couple extra folks who are willing to listen and go have some fun.

Once they see what can be achieved they generally don't want to go back to the "lone wolf" thing.

The only thing that kinda annoys me about the way some "teams" play is that the odd group will show up to a game, ignore the objectives, and run around mowing down the OPFOR with no consideration of the overall goals in an attempt to show how bada$$ they are. Very frustrating.

A little training can go a looong way,

at one of Zeon's zombie games I took a collection of noob, and first timers , sorted them into a 10 person section, numbered them, spent 15 minutes working through some very basic actions on contact.. and re-organization procedures.. and then dominated the field with them ( till we all got zombied.)

if everyone else on the field has no organization or leadership even a little of both can tip the balance.

At Werewolf in Muskoka in 2011 I fielded a light Company, 55 people .. but we had been training in preparation of the game for 6 months. Everyone knew their job, and did it , I had excellent platoon and squad leaders. and I had a group of players willing to go along with us and engage in the simulation.

We dug in , we patrolled .. we rehearsed expected actions for the next day under moonlight while our opponents slept. We sat in holes and peered into the night for an enemy we knew would not come. The next morning I moved the entire company to within 20 yards of the enemy position unseen, when we attacked, they were still sleeping, we took out many while they were still in their fartsacks. The rest were so demoralized by the trouncing they pretty much quit. They never really recovered

The only difference between my group and theirs was preparation, we spent months getting ready for that game, and on game day it showed. Lots of people say that game was "rigged" so the OPFOR would fail, this is utter nonsense. One side prepared the other treated the game like any other weekend skirmish. It's true that they did not have much of a chance, certainly not because of anything spectacular that I did, but because the players on my side of the equation committed to learning, training and preparing.
the week before that game I had 40 of the 55 players show up for a sand table exercise and communications exercise. That is commitment. I don't think the OPFOR did any of that.

Now, I'm pretty much into the WWII scene, because the players there love to train, and they want to do things as they were done. they want to dig in, they want to spend time in the Muck waiting for attacks that don't happen.
they even want to learn things they will never use at an airsoft game because it makes the experience more immersive

If you want Milsim.. real milsim, join a WWII unit, and get your kit together, there are several units in Ontario. ( a couple 'Nam units as well, those guys are cool as well )

Force Recon conducts TRG / SOP'S for our Team that is Tactically sound for CQB, Advance to Contact and Patrolling...our Team plays internationally and we are getting prepped for Operation Pines Plain (USA) this summer and Operation Cove (USA) this Fall

Will be doing CQB TRG at PRZ on Apr 6th and Field/Battlecraft/Ptl TRG 27th and 28th of April

You guys open to having others join in for training? Just curious, wouldn't mind drillings some things.

As an example, the ATQ courses at TTAC are really good foundations for CQB and get you in with some good people for outdoor training.

The demand for training in the Airsoft community is relativly limited. Most people just are not interested in doing the work, all they want to do is shoot stuff.

TTAC3 has been successful in moving from a gaming focused facility to a training focused facility, we do a lot more events that are training focused than skirmishes now.

Most of the training is private for groups that have their own training goals and direction.

We do occasionaly offer courses for general public consumption.

In practice most training happens at the team level, like what Force Recon does for their members and what the Ghosts do for their members.

We should agree at some point to have some sort of standardised basic knowledge bootcamp across canada like the sniper certification level.

How not to be useless when playing soldier ( in this section) has to be accepted as general basic knowledge.

Organisers can decide for themselves after if they wish to use or not that parameter as a way to filter out players.

Eventually, the public knowledge of this would grow and people might actually want to pass the course because they will feel like they are missing out on something so they might actually bother going to it to go to games where this is a parameter to enter.

At least this way, you would'nt have to breif ppl on what a peelback is on the fly and team leaders will be able to concentrate on actually relaying the co's orders while the players are checking their proper sectors without having to tell them to.

I've had various experiences over the years playing with and without my team at games and I've noticed that the people who do have that basic knowledge tend to react the same way I do say in a peelback or what ever. We cover each others ass and expect it in return whether it's running away or towards an objective. In other aspects, playing games without my team have proven to be some of the most frustrating experiences for reasons mentioned by other players before in this thread.

Makes perfect sence to watch the left side and have my AEG pointing the left side when the guy walking in front of me is looking on the right and having his AEG pointing to the right.

Now why is this not common and accepted knowledge?

We're starting doing a general basics bootcamp this year because this is the kind of thing I still see from 3-4 years veterans.

People giving bootcamps out there, keep giving them even if it is for 10 people. Knowledge has to get out there.

Airsoft players keep acting dumb because the majority acts dumb.

Monkey see, monkey do.

That muskoka game was somewhat one sided we wer outnumbered 2 to 1 at least and during the night while yku guys wer sneakin round our camp siziing us up and planing your morning attac we wer not alloud to leave our camp to engage you or to scope out your set up or anything.
Im not complaining im just sayin thats the way the gake was layed out. I still had a blast. And getting woken up in my tent with a gun in my face was quite exciting lol.
Also yes i was on your team in the Z3 game and we did quite well for a small inexperienced group till we became infected now i crave brains for lunch lol

Thanks for the info, Shelled Pants and Brian.

Good luck with trying to standardize things. I think that this is one of the big reasons people join teams because they want structure and competent people to play with. I think it would be impossible and not even viable to try and impose some sort of training for people to come certain games etc. When I hear this all I can think is "money grab."

I'm sure if you went to every team and looked at their SOP's etc, they wouldn't be the same. I think this is really cool because teams use what works for them and build on it.

More and more teams are forming. More and more people are realizing that if they are serious about playing and want structure, they will take a look at recognized teams in the community such as Ghosts, Force Recon, Danger Close and the list goes on.

Playing against better teams makes for better games. I don't think anyone want's to go to a game and completely mow down their opponent. As much fun as it is, I would much rather play against teams of the same caliber so we can learn.

I think that there are people heading in the right direction seeking out teams to learn more and become better. You will never have everyone be able to do this simply because of things such as lack of time to dedicate yourself, money among other things.

I am privy to the actual on the ground numbers for both sides JOTF outnumbered SOJ by 12 people , 6 were left in our position when we attacked, so in the attack SOJ was outnumbered by 6 people. Standard SOP is to outnumber 3 to 1 to attack a defensive position to be likley to have success.
Effectivly that is what happened because so many SOJ were not prepared to fight when the attack came in.

within 10 minutes we were mopping up objetives achieved,

What happened at that game was not about numbers, it was about being prepared.

We did deploy scouts into your position at night, the conditions provided by game control was that if they were caught or hit, they would be out for the game, no respawn.

I deployed a small unit of 8 to scout the routes in to the assault positions, and to map the defense, They achieved their objective with no casualties, and none captured, but they had a very intense night.

I agree most players are not all that interested in putting the work in to get better,
Imposing a "standard" is not viable.
The current system of periodic "noob days" seems to work well enough. That and the action of established teams to train their own members will get us to where we want to go.

Everyone has their own reasons why they participate in Airsoft, for some it's just about fun and exercise outdoors, and that is just fine.

For others it's more than that and they are willing and able to commit more resources to the endeavor.

@Reignman

You've taken this from the wrong angle I think, take a look at the how not to be totally useless whil playing soldier .pdf and tell me it's not full of common sense?

This is what I mean about Basics standardization.

It's about aknowledging what is already known to be good practice as a whole that all players should know and showing it in real life so that they have a moment to think about what they are doing and how they are doing it and for what purpose under a third party view.

I've paid for two bootcamps and have had no regrets doing it even if there was very little I learned.

You're basically saying that I've invested in a lot cash in dvd's, books, courses, time and put some time on the range to test these skills and that I should agree to show them to you for free but the guy organizing skirmishes at 35$ a head that put zero effort in them is more deserving than I am.

We both organise, we both must pay field fees, yet I've put more time and money in it making VTAC barricades and have shot timers and proper targets than mr X who paid for a breifcase with flares attatched to a kitchen timer attatched to it?

There is something a miss here...

Why is training frowned upon?

Am I the only one who likes doing the tutorial before starting to play a video game?

Sorry Metalsynth if that is how you took it. It was not my intent.

I'm sure your pdf is full of common sense however I was looking at it a little deeper than just basics. I was trying to get across in regards to standardization that it isn't viable due to how some things work for some but not others.

Training is not frowned upon. If it was there would be a lot of sad people.

I am not saying that anyone is more deserving than you either. No need to put words in my mouth.

Reading the tutorial may work for you, but everyone has a different style of learning. Some like to be told what to do, some like to get their hands dirty. Different strokes for different folks.

Always adapt and take losing lessons to IMPROVE
 

Some Military tactics don't comply to with MILSIM Airsoft because of characteristics of the weapon....I am a former Reservist SGT....I train Force Recon what is "Conducive to Airsoft" and apply it tactically to TRG. Most contacts happen in 30 metres minus...thats is usually when the assault starts and no one has actually won the Fire Fight, you have to adapt and overcome and take lessons learned and incorporated in future trg.

Indeed, every Airsoft contact is an ambush,

It’s your choice what you spend your time & money on, particularly a ‘decadent’ hobby like Airsoft (or, by comparison, golf). If you, or anyone, want to organize a game where only players who have passed your certification requirements can play… fine, that’s your prerogative. It’s no different than a ‘WWII guns only’ game or East vs West bloc game: felid owner and/or game organizer has the final say. If some person or organization wants to establish an ‘Airsoft league’ with its own standards and gear & rules… well it’s a lot of work, but if someone wants to go through the effort, sure. If you can pull in enough guys, that’s awesome… but good luck with that.

But to suggest that everyone has to conform to the same ‘basic standardization’ runs the risk of alienating a LOT of people from the game. Yes, by default if the dude paid his 35$ field fee he’s got the same rights as anyone else that paid that 35$ fee, no boot camp required.

This is imposed from the organiser if he so choses, it's like a kit restriction depending what game you're at. Sniper certification already works this way. I dont remember writing this would be imposed at every game o_O

I'm talking about standardization of the content, the info given at such a course if you will so that no matter where you are at, the basic info will be the same.

If you want a better general quality of players without sacrificing the players that are already playing, there will need to be some way to put everyone up to speed on some basics and the growing pool of players every year has to be adressed with concrete solutions in an inclusive and available state.

You've got teams now of 8 players who are total noobs but in the days, people were coming in by 2-3 every year.

Anyway, this is already becoming a problem here and now thus justifying the post's topic so we're just like the other teams before us that saw the giant ball coming to smash us and we decided to do something about it so were giving a public bootcamp to help people who desire it to get to speed and not suffer longer then they have to from beings noobs and who knows, maybe the next years, other teams will join in and make this a normal habit at the start of the season.

Just sharing our toughts on it and wondering how you approch this problem.

Right now, this is what we're doing here so we'll see in a couple of years if things got better.

We were all "noobs" once. You gotta start somewhere. Some people will change other's won't. Just the way life goes.

True but I dont think this should be considered something sacred like virginity, the faster it goes away the better :D

Virginity hasn't been sacred since 2008. Kids are losing it faster then their baby teeth

LOL...That's debatable. You wouldn't say that if you had a daughter would you?