Game hosting and design notes

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Game Design and Hosting Notes


I’ve been involved in the Canadian Airsoft Community since April of 2005, and started out as a Venue owner and Game host. I had talked about doing a game host and design workshop, but I just never seem to have the time to do it, so I thought I would put a few notes together. Not everyone will agree with my approach, I’ll let my record speak for it’s self


I have hosted literally hundreds of games, some small with 10 - 20 players and some as large as 100 or more.


Operation Smash and Grab. Operation Hotbox, Dusk to Dead, the Deadfall Series, and now Several WWII re-enactment games. Most games I designed and executed on my own with no staff. Some I have had one or two helpers. Some I was able to design, and launch and also play in. All of my Field games would be classified as “military simulation” in that sides are organized with a defined chain of command and the game is focused on achieving objectives


The key to a good game is preparation and contingency planning before the game and flexibility and good communications on game day. If you have done it right, you should be able to pretty much sit down and watch it all play out on game day with little more than the odd “poke” to keep things on plan.


From a game design standpoint there are in general just a few basic elements that can be put together to form the framework from which to build a good game.


Building intensity:

There is one element that has to be created in order for players to get the thrill they are looking for. Stress, players have to be under pressure and need to have to make choices that will affect their success. Without this element the game will be little more than a shooting match and body count skirmish, which can also be fun, but is not worthy of the term “Milsim”


Ammunition must be limited, very limited:


The key element to create stress for players is limited access to ammunition. Ammunition is the fuel for all fights in an airsoft game. Some of the best received games I have offered involved very tight ammunition limits. When you have to count every shot, you are cautious about fights you get into and you don’t stay in fights you can’t win.


Strictly limited ammunition is the key to a good game. It is my preference to strictly limit ammunition to real cap loadouts carried , generally not more than 300 rounds for a rifleman and not more than 1000 for a LMG. Often this limit will be for the duration of the game, and often that duration is 24 hours.


Some of the best remembered games were games in which players started out with little to no ammunition at all and had to fight to get these resources. At Dusk to Dead, which was a zombie game, players started out with no guns or ammunition at all,The did not even have flashlights, they were forced to move through zombie infested forest in the dark to find hidden resources. out of 60 starting players 2 had pistols, one had no ammunition and the other had 10 rounds. and 2 people had flashlights. This game was very high intensity, and ended up with 6 survivors fighting back to back in an open field with both guns and melee weapons against a horde of 50 zombies. No one who was there forgets that game.

Hotbox is also remembered because of the limited resources available to players.. they had to not just play, but they had to think as well.


The other element that can be limited in an airsoft game other than ammunition is “lives” unlimited respawn permits players to treat their “lives” casually Limiting the number of available respawns also adds stress. The most intense games I have been in had the loadout carried , realcap, for the operation, and ONE life, hit , you are out for the game. Admittedly this is extreme and few players want to take it that far, But those that do are rewarded with a very intense experience.


Kill Cards need to mean something:


The use of Kill Cards must be tied to the total lives available to each player. At the beginning of the game each unit commander should be issued a specific number of cards which represents the total human resources available to the faction for the game. If you run out of kill cards you run out of people. This also serves as a means to make up for numerical differences on a side. A side with fewer players may be given more kill cards increasing the available reinforcements. While a numerically superior force may have the number of respawns curtailed.


What I have done in some games to increase the stress on both commanders and players is to permit players found on the field without cards to be captured and held by the opposing side. This way a commander low on cards may still commit forces but risks losing them.


This makes Kill cards mean something and rather than being a hinderance become a focus of action. Players will work hard to get the opponents cards because it reduces their ability to fight in a very real tangible way, Commanders must pay attention to casualty counts and card losses, to many rash assaults could result in the loss of his ability to bring force to bear.


These factors coupled with limited ammunition results in real stress for both players and commanders, a heightened intensity and a demand for decisive thought and actions. It is what everyone wants when they come to a “milsim”


Why “ easter egg” games just don’t do it for most people:


I have seen a trend in many games billed as “milsim” to have a series of objectives being the finding of various objects, or possession of items. I would include the gathering of “kill Cards” to be in the same class. Most players don’t care about such objectives, if the possession of or loss of the objects don’t create stress they are meaningless to the game experience of the players. In addition players generally don’t care about “scores” in games. Tallying objects found and kill cards acquired is absolutely meaningless no one cares who wins the tally. What everyone remembers is how the felt, what they saw, and what they did themselves. If objectives don't result in increasing the intensity of those experiences they are meaningless to players. you want players to have experiences like this.


“ I was out without a card, and on my last mag, I knew if I did not evade the enemy I could not fight my way out and I would probably be captured.. so I became one with the swamp”


Objectives need to really matter:


Objectives in a “milsim” need to be real military objectives. Such as taking and holding ground. seizing or destroying resources ( ammo and lives as these are the only resources there are in an airsoft game) or the capture of prisoners, or the defense of or destruction of a specific installation or location. All of these objectives will consume resources ( ammo and lives) and will require planning and effective execution to make the risk to the attackers resources worth it.


Searching areas to find “easter eggs” that have no real impact on the game other than for some end of the game “score” that no one cares about is how to assure some payers will feel disconnected from the game, get bored and either leave or start their own skirmish within your game.

Once you have lost the engagement of the players in your game, it is very difficult to get it back. Once one player leaves because they find the game uninteresting or pointless it will be a cascade of quit after that. You want people to leave your game because they can’t take it, it’s too intense or they came to skirmish and you are not offering an opportunity for them to do so. Or they are just so wiped out from the game they have to go home. Often it works out that exactly the right people leave, and the right people stay.


If you craft the objectives of the game correctly you will be afforded opportunity to inject new resources into the game. Making an objective to Capture medical supplies ( more kill cards for whoever is able to capture or defend the resources ) or Destroy an enemy ammo dump ( more ammo for your side less for the other) then people will fight for these objectives because they really have an impact on the game right now.


Choosing Commanders:


This is a critical element in hosting a successful Milsim. Each unit commander has to be capable, organized and respected if not liked. Also, they must be willing to take on a quasi game control role. The first objective of any faction commander at an airsoft game is to ensure everyone is taken care of and no one is left out. The second objective is to see to it that everyone has a good time. The third objective is to assist game control in the management of the game. The fourth objective is to plan missions to objectives and execute the missions to the best of their ability.

The game should not be about maintenance or growth of the commanders personal Ego, nor should it be about “taking down” the opposing Commander. Commanders must be permitted to select their own sub unit commanders and structure their force as they see fit. You pick the boss, but the boss decides how to run the outfit.


Finding Commanders is always a challenge, the really capable people get asked to do the job so much that they start to dislike it. They want to just slip back into a section and be a shooter.

As a game host you have to take a chance on new guys to lead sometimes. Sometimes it blows up in your face sometimes you find a great new leader who was just waiting to be given a chance.


Chain of command enhances immersion:


This is a significant element to the running of a successful Milsim. There must be strict adherence to the chain of command, rogue units can not be tolerated, everyone must be in communication with their commander. I generally deal with rogue units harshly, I declare them hostile and deny them resources, to more kill cards no more ammo until they either leave, are all captured or choose to re engage in their chain of command. In extreme cases rogue units should be ejected from the game.


At the top of the chain of command is the game controller/Host. place yourself as the next unit up commander in all the factions on the ground. You are in overall command of ALL units on the field. This affords you the opportunity to serve as both a key game element and as a monitor and influence on the actions of the units in the game. Keeping in mind that the overall goal is to ensure that the players have a good time and also keeping in mind that the commanders all work for you. In this role you can be a hidden hand in the game, setting objectives and seeding opportunities to both sides to manage game balance and keep needed resources flowing. In this role you have no need for artifices like “spys” and “traitors” you can introduce new information in the game at any time through the relevant chain of command without breaking role. This enhances the immersion for all persons in the game.


As game host, you need excellent comms gear and the ability to monitor and respond to 3 nets at the same time.


Game in game elements:

Over the past two seasons I have been experimenting with game in game elements.

The concept of a Game in game element is an operation by a group with a specific objective of their own using an ongoing game as the operational backdrop and environment within which the unit must operate. Usually this plays out as a small “special forces” unit deployed to the area to achieve a specific objective, such as capturing or Killing a specific person. or delivering specific intel. In some cases the ongoing game can be used as a training environment for a small group of players wanting to practice E&E actions or looking to practice Recce operations. I have done this in a few games often without the foreknowledge of the unit commanders or anyone else at the game for that matter. This can add an exciting element to the game and can also provide a venue for people whose interests lie outside of traditional airsoft gaming.
Gamein game elements should be operating under no resupply, no respawn rules. The either achieve their objective, abort the mission or are eliminated trying.


Control the exit from the game:


Set up a procedure that all people leaving the game before it is over must check in with game control before they leave. Ask everyone why they are leaving, and get an answer. You want to know if players are just tired, Sick or upset. If they are upset find out why.


After action on the field:


Once the game is over, gather everyone that is still on the ground and conduct your after action in the field. Ask what people liked, what they did not like.

Ask if there were any issues that needed to be addressed but were not.

Ask if there were any issues with sportsmanship.

Resolve all issues before people leave the field, that way you won’t have a crapstorm in your online AAR.


Rules should be simple:


complex medic rules, different FPS for different guns, Minimum Engagement Distances /Mercy. The more “rules” the more likely it is you will have issues with interpretation. The more arguments you will have

I keep my rules simple.


Field rules are.


No Mercy, don’t take a shot you would not want to receive.

Maximum 450fps for any gun.

Fire for effect, if someone appears to not be taking a hit, give hi the benefit of the doubt and shoot him again.

No one is hit till they call hit. do not call other’s hits, it’s grounds for ejection from the event.

When hit fall where hit pull out you kill rag. and put it on your head. stay put for 5 minutes unless someone comes to take your card. then give up your card and head to respawn. Pick up a new card from your commander when you report in.

if you find someone without a kill card you may take him prisoner place both hands on the person and state you are searched, you are bound, you are my prisoner.


Concerns and issues that can’t be resolved on the field between the parties affected will be resolved by game control.


If there is structures present on the field and the the chance for very close engagements a Semi only in the buildings rule will apply.


AMMO rules are game specific.



Final Thought


Have fun, if you don’t genuinely enjoy hosting games more than playing them, then don’t do it.

[Fong242]

Thank you for sharing these very interesting notes!

[m102404]

Very nice notes, than you.

I'd add that some of the best games are small in numbers, simple in purpose and free flowing. The generalities you describe set a solid foundation for it to go off well...my point being that a really intense game doesn't have to be complicated or wrapped layers upon layers of backstory and plot lines.

Combat of the 30 may or may not be a milsim in purist form, but it's one of the best games of the year around here. Rules, objectives, etc haven't changed for several years but the intensity is still very high each time.

Recently the capture rules have been such that all captures end up being returned to game control. Deadfall 2 was a good example of that. I felt that worked very well and added a level of resource management that wasn't there before.

Another "ploy" that has worked in the past to keep game flow flowing and resources where they need to be is the use of "partisans" or some non-committed players. That could be just yourself as game control...or at times the others who may be helping you run the game. They can be temporarily attached to whichever side needs some information/ammo/reinforcements....then removed when not needed. At any one of Brian's games its not uncommon to suddenly see him either shooting alongside of you....or shooting at you...sometime during the game. Snatch and Grab made excellent use of partisans. Shame there hasn't been a SnG 2.

At any rate...thanks for putting the notes to print and the many games over the years.

[hollywood...]

That is why I make sure to attend all your games.

[bizkilter]

I don't know how I could thank you enough for this thread. Starting up a club on a local field in my hometown and flying by the seat of my pants, there are a multitude of questions I have resigned myself to figuring out when they arise. You've answered a few of them here ")

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by bizkilter

I don't know how I could thank you enough for this thread. Starting up a club on a local field in my hometown and flying by the seat of my pants, there are a multitude of questions I have resigned myself to figuring out when they arise. You've answered a few of them here ")

my pleasure.. ask any questions you may have.

[tygr701]

Great post Brian thanks for writing this up

[Flatlander]

Great writeup Brian. The only thing I would disagree with is the "Chain of Command Enhances Emersion". This is because I find the Chain of command to be horrible in any large milsims I have attended, and this includes Irene down in the US (it was one of the worst actually). Reason being is I find we get orders that are very simple and specific (ie. take this building, hill, etc) but never get the full picture as to WHY we are doing what we are told. As you mention the point is to create stress and ask yourself WHY before you do anything (pull the trigger, take a position, retreat, etc). It's tough to make your own decisions and feel like you're using your brain, and not just slinging plastic, if you're not given the "full picture" as to the intel your command is given.

There have been many AAR's for big games, such as Irene, in which I read the AAR and thought "Wow that sounds like one hell of a game! I wish I knew half those game details during the actual game".

I'm a big fan of public/team specific knowledge and background being posted up before the actual game. Therefore I can strategize before hand and I don't necessarily have to rely on command to fill me in with all of the details during the game (details I rarely ever get anyways). This allows me and my guys to make critical decisions on our own in terms of strategy, ROE, etc.

One of my favorite games I played years ago had the game host post the list of objectives on a white board at the bases. This allowed anyone to read the objectives and get completely "in-the-loop". This also allowed the enemy to sneak in your base and do the same.

We've been in many games where we've simply given up on the command to give us decent intel to involve us to a point where we're happy. A lot of times we tend to ignore the command channel and find ways to make our own fun.

I completely agree with you that the goal of winning should be near the bottom on the commanders objectives. It would appear a lot of time that winning and ego stroking has been the problem in the past and that a "need-to-know" or "do what I say" type of command has been implemented in hopes of achieving victory. Everyone wins when everyone goes home happy, not when one team crushes the other.

[Janus]

As a host myself I never tell the players how to organize their teams. If one team takes the initiative to send/receive information and acts as part of a greater unit, that team typically dominates. I leave it to the players to do that.

Developing strategy and leadership is as important as developing your cardio for this game.

[metagod]

Great write up. I'll be taking this into consideration when I begin planning milsims in my community.

[Ricochet]

Two things that make a huge difference, is to enforce the rules (always stick to your guns), and people make the game. Don't hang on to bad apples, trouble makers, or rule breakers; if you can't play fair and maintain sportsmanship, you don't belong on an airsoft field.

Realistically it all comes down to people. The first game I designed and hosted was a very dynamic and objective based 24 hour simulation. There were a few holes in my planning, and a few contingencies that were not planned for. We never ran into a big issue though because the players adapted and kept her rolling on.

[Trev140_0]

Originally Posted by Ricochet

Two things that make a huge difference, is to enforce the rules (always stick to your guns), and people make the game. Don't hang on to bad apples, trouble makers, or rule breakers; if you can't play fair and maintain sportsmanship, you don't belong on an airsoft field.

Realistically it all comes down to people. The first game I designed and hosted was a very dynamic and objective based 24 hour simulation. There were a few holes in my planning, and a few contingencies that were not planned for. We never ran into a big issue though because the players adapted and kept her rolling on.

+1 for this.

I had a few games where things did not go perfect. A simple radio of to the other side and we went to side frequency-game back on side.

Same for a game we had on the hottest day of the year last summer. One force was in the shade in the woods, the other was baking in the sun. After 20 min of that we radio'd both sides as the end of that would have been hospital time.

All about the guys, but I am saying that as we are a field that is FILTERED. Applying stuff like this will be easier for us as guys are coming aren't expecting to be "served". They in fact are looking to help and do their part in whatever way possible. Small or big.

But hands down this is the most helpful informative write up I have seen.

Going to be reading this one a few times over the coming weeks.

Thank you Brian.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by Flatlander

Great writeup Brian. The only thing I would disagree with is the "Chain of Command Enhances Emersion". This is because I find the Chain of command to be horrible in any large milsims I have attended, and this includes Irene down in the US (it was one of the worst actually). Reason being is I find we get orders that are very simple and specific (ie. take this building, hill, etc) but never get the full picture as to WHY we are doing what we are told. As you mention the point is to create stress and ask yourself WHY before you do anything (pull the trigger, take a position, retreat, etc). It's tough to make your own decisions and feel like you're using your brain, and not just slinging plastic, if you're not given the "full picture" as to the intel your command is given.

There have been many AAR's for big games, such as Irene, in which I read the AAR and thought "Wow that sounds like one hell of a game! I wish I knew half those game details during the actual game".

Too much information is a bad thing, finding out about other elements of a game that you were not involved in in the AAR is in my opinion one of the best parts of the AAR.

The significance of Why, increases as you go up the chain, a good commander will provide the Why, a poor one won't

For example, in the just past game in Picton, I was a LMG gunner in a section,
I was often directed to do things or go places.. my commander advised me that "command has directed that we defend the lower floor of this building"

That was all the Why I needed, Everyone in the unit does not need to know strategic details if their role is tactical. They need tactical context to their actions.

why did I have to go set up an overwatch position at a woodpile 60 yards form our FLB .. because we needed a buffer to ensure the opposing forces could not infiltrate our position, so we could hold that lower floor.
I had no idea why it was important for us to hold that building until after the game was over.

One thing that should be done , but is often not is the formal issuing of orders. In the orders, the actions of other units and the wider picture can be given.

When I am in a command role, I try to issue formal orders, and make sure sub unit commanders also issue formal orders. If does not always happen but it is something to strive to.

orders don't have to be complex.

Situation:
Enemy:
Mission:
Execution:
Co-ordinating instructions:

The other thing that can be done to provide better context is operate your units in a Mission based way, rather than letting the game all run together into one long operation. Set specific goals, with specific timings.

this avoids units heading out and not being seen again until game end.

Missions take very simple form.

Observation
Recce
defense
attack

All missions need to be time limited so that the commander can predict the flow of resources and know when available people will ebb and flow, access to resources can define the possible missions.

Reorganization of forces must be done regularly and fully.


Often as game host, and playing the role of overall commander of all forces I know pretty much everything that is going on in a game. Monitoring all radio traffic, and hearing the fight from both sides over the radio is cool.. but it's not useful to a player to know all this stuff if their job is to stand a line, or participate in an attack. it can be a significant distraction to be dealing with information that is not relevant to your task.

[scottyfox]

If I may interject with a little real world that might be helpful (And I will refrain from quoting Charge of the Light Brigade, bonus points if you have any idea what I'm talking about).

The highest level of command simulated in MilSim is the operational level, obviously we don't get into the strategic, that's up to game control (the why and how of organizing forces that will be employed at the operational level, read Clausewitz).

The principles of command and leadership articulated in CAF doctine discourage "big picture" thinking at the squad level and actually discourage the "strategic corporal". The squad level's purvue is simply fire and movement, using those two concepts to achieve the commander's intent. While it may be fine to give the squad level context for why it will deliver an effect, the chain of command expressly forbids any sort of thinking of operational "whys" at the tactical level. It is the responsibility of the squad leader to deliver on the commander's intent without question and perhaps even without context.
TLR, sometimes at the tactical level, you are not given the big picture, nor should you necessarily be.

Now this is the way that a professional military is meant to work.

Unit discipline and a commander's competence are sometimes in question in airsoft. So obviously your mileage will vary.

But a great topic of discussion nonetheless.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

I use Strategic in the context of "overall game objectives" vs Tactical ... pulling triggers and moving to take out targets. But I think your point supports that position.