Peer Review: Art of War Op Blood Diamond

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Balance is required in defining the sides.. and conditions of play, there are ways to bring elements into a game that can address issues of imbalance. that is for the game host and came control to monitor.

I agree that it is no fun getting slaughtered constantly, neither is it fun to stack up against an inferior force and dominate them. The are 100% true statements.

Trying to dominate and failing, being fought to a standstill, and having to come up with a new plan is what you want both sides to be doing from a game control standpoint.

It's like paying big dollars to see a live UFC matchup.. and having the fight end in a knockout in the 1st round. Great outcome for one guy. lousy for the other and everyone kinda feels a little ripped off.

what you wanted was a long fight, where the advantage went from one guy to the other and you were never sure who was going to win.

well designed and executed games should come off that way.

[CR0M]

thats exactly how i feel ^^^

its just been rare lately for me to be in a milsim where the sides were balanced.

one other note. maybe have registration fees increase over time leading up to the event. give people a discount for committing early. Same way marathons do it.

Theres games out there right now, that look to be good but im waiting for the rosters to get bigger if im going to commit to a high priced game. And with that train of thought games get cancelled or have low turn outs because of peoples hesitation.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by CR0M

Theres games out there right now, that look to be good but im waiting for the rosters to get bigger if im going to commit to a high priced game. And with that train of thought games get cancelled or have low turn outs because of peoples hesitation.

Exactly, if everyone waits to see if the roster fills up before committing, obviously the roster is never going to fill up.

Known hosts who have put on solid games with great players satisfaction rarely have any issues filling the rosters.. Case in point, Nightmare 2 -- put on by force recon earlier this year sold out in a week

New hosts often bite off more than they can chew -- post a huge game .. and then have to curtail their plan when they get a lackluster response.

Start small, build your audience, and once you have a solid rep in the existing active community, do the big game

[Scarecrow]

"They are looking for intense fighting experiences without the need for arithmetic or ledger-keeping, even very simple game dynamic elements that require attention to specific items such as kill cards are often lost on the players of today"

To address the criticism about the card system being too complex:

The cards are presented to the diamond seller who is a game actor. The cards set the maximum amount of diamonds someone can carry, so there is no interpretation by the player - so even if you can't add or subtract, you won't be interpreting that number as a player or doing anything complicated with it. So I fail to see why the cards are complicated.

When Blood or Diamonds (B&D) are turned in, they are given to game staff who add the B&D count into a spreadsheet - again, game staff, not players. My experience with Trifecta shows this was simple, took any scoring complexity away from the players and provided an instant comparable in game score.

Details on how scoring will work.

As people turn in their B&D, its put into a spreadsheet and will appear on both sides of the field at the buyer and seller points on an LCD monitor. There will be individual scores, group scores (for those who register a group) and team scores. The score is updated live as B&D are turned in. We've even thought up a way to broadcast it on a website so you can log in and look at the scores live from the internet.

We found this immediacy of feedback at Trifecta created game intensity as people throttled up and down their performance because they saw real time rewards and penalties for various behaviours - that game dynamic was totally unexpected and it was priceless.

Brian, I don't think you can categorically say that this type of gameplay is no longer saught after by this generation of airsofter - thats painting too many people with the same brush.

As for Milsim - thats what YOU as a player make it when you're playing in the field. If you want to run a SOG group or some type of secret squirrel society and plan out how you're going to run your group, fill your boots. Similarly those who want to run loosey-goosey can do so as well. So it creates a playing environment for everyone and doesn't cater to one type or another. And given the way people bail on games at the last minute these days, I am disinclined to run a game that caters to anyone in particular, precisely for that reason.

[Blackthorne]

I agree with there being a formula that makes everyone happy.

The main reason we changed to "BattleSim" at Art of War and are moving away from MilSim is because we want to do multi-day in field events that maximize the suck and keep people in a more realistic environment longer. In other words, very little skirmish, structured gunfights, and realistic timelines punctuated with the solid camaraderie that develops from multiple days camping out at a FOB.

I agree with Brian tho that we need to take more balance approach to building BattleSim up as a game option for people in Ontario. Exactly what he outlined happened to Derek and I and we have learned from that lesson. We need to start smaller (and more affordable per person price) to get it rolling. We also need a bigger field with no exposure to the public whatsoever so we can run bright and loud without issue. That issue will be addressed next year.

I think MilSim should be defined by Scarecrows approach (I have been saying this for years) that allows the skirmishers and new players to have objectives that fulfill their expectations of event play, and some more challenging objectives, story lines and time lines that keep the hardcore (CoreSim?) guys tasked and happy.

It can be done but it ain't easy.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

I have noted.. that practically NO players are chiming in on this thread. Yet many complain about games after the fact.

maybe we are overthinking this, as it seems that players don't really care what kind of games there are, as long as there are games.

[testtube]

why are people complainning on how much it cost we up here in Canada are payin beans for a good milsim event in the states you are paying $175 to $200 for a 24 hour game. as for equal teams hell look @ AOW and what was the outcome of that game. and yes you keep it simple tan vrs green. I for one would love to try this game out and plan on attending it either on a player roll or on the admin side of things.

[DBspotter]

Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle

I have noted.. that practically NO players are chiming in on this thread. Yet many complain about games after the fact.

maybe we are overthinking this, as it seems that players don't really care what kind of games there are, as long as there are games.

As a player and a host I feel the need to say something. While I agree with much of what Brian is saying I also disagree with much of it. Players of today are no different than players of the past. The difference is back in the day the sport was new and fresh, getting the guns was difficult, expensive, and it catered to those that had money. The community was so small and tight it was easy to know everyone. The community felt more like a community, for those that were in it and for those that were onlookers (myself included into the onlooker category) These days getting into the sport has never been easier or more cost effective, in Canada that is. Anyone can get into the sport, regardless of their budget. This brings in a greater volume of players all at one time, with little to no guidance. Many of the old timers share biased and bitter views (Like Brian's) on new players, which in my opinion is the wrong way to do it. Granted there are some real asshats out there, but that happens with every sport. Why as a community do we not welcome new players into the sport with open arms. Guiding them into making safe choices and making them productive members of the community. Instead many of the vets shun "newbs", ostracizing them, and leaving the new generation with nothing but a bad taste in their mouth for the veterans of the sport and in many cases the sport its self. All that said, I welcome new players onto my team every year and I will continue to do so. I prefer completely green players, they come with a clean slate, no ego, no bad habits, and most of them are eager to learn. Why is it that so many share Brians views for new players yet so few will stand up and take the new players under their wings?

As for the questions at hand in this thread. Simplicity and cohesion are everything. Too many games are put together that have easily misinterpreted rule sets, game control seems to be lacking a strong presence, and more work seems to go into the back story than into the actual objectives put into the field. As a player I have a strong appreciation for physical objectives that make sense for the game structure. Actual comm towers, crates, bombs to be disarmed, dummies to be carried out, decent maps, etc are what really turns me on to a game. When I pay to play and the event boasts a flag or a jar of jam as part of the objective list it starts to lose its appeal to me. Game control also needs a firm and strong presence at all times. If an issue arises game control needs to handle it asap and without bias. Too many times I see game control handling an issue with bias because they are friends with one of the accused or they don't want to upset a whole team for fear of them never returning to a game. This makes game control appear weak and spineless, which is a massive turn off. Multiple obtainable objectives with strict guidelines and time structure is huge too. Loose time lines and single file type objectives are over done and lacking in creativity.

Here are some issues I encountered at AOW.

1) Game Control was sparse and slow to respond to in game issues. Fast to respond to injuries or health concerns though. In game conflicts were handled half assed and with a biased tone.

2) Time lines and objective structures were unclear at time, loosely enforced, and changed on the fly to suit one team or the others outcomes. I understand changes must be done on the fly to make the game move along smoothly but it must be done with great caution. Confusion makes the players lose focus.

3) The secrecy surrounding the teams, structures, etc leading up to the day of the event put a sour taste in my mouth. I had no clue what was going on up until a few days before the event, and I had been signed up well in advance.

Just my two cents

[gilps03]

I was at AOW and had a blast. With my limited experience so far, I think the numbers suffered at AOW for one reason alone. That being it was on a long weekend. I think the turn out would had been double if it was held on a normal weekend. Too many family commitments to keep on long weekends. I heard it from the boss for going, but I did not want to miss it. That said, I don't think I will be missing a summer long weekend with the family for a while now.
Score keeping at the end is fine so long as command know ahead of time what each objective is worth. That way they can decide if it is worth the resources to go after a certain objective.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

DBSpotter, you make some good points, can't disagree ( even with the bitter part)

The influx of new players has altered the demographic, and the dynamic in many games. the experience level of many players is low, many have less than 2 seasons under their belt.

The community certainly is much larger that it was when I got started in 2005, and ASC though still a key clearing house for much of what is going on in the community certainly is not the only center of activity.

There are a lot of people stepping in to hosting games , many new venues opening up. All of these things are good for the community at large.

With a community this large there should be room for every kind of game conceivable, and the people who like them to go.

I only offer my observations based on what I have seen work, and not work, on feedback on games I've hosted, and participated in. I'm hooked into many diverse sections of this community I hear feedback from practically every game that happens within 4 hours drive of Toronto. I ask questions, I seek answers. I look for ways to improve game play satisfaction for games that I host.

I've had hits.. and misses, I've had games that people rave about and some that people were bitterly disappointed in. I've learned what people like and want, and I try to deliver exactly that.

I don't have all the answers, but I have some of them. I think.

[pusangani]

I think one way to build the Airsoft community up to what it used to be is to have everyone introduce themselves at the beginning of games, like go around and everyone says what their Callsign/ASC handle is as well as their real name.

When there are no strangers there is more honor. Less cheating and a friendlier vibe will do wonders for the sport.

[DBspotter]

Originally Posted by pusangani

I think one way to build the Airsoft community up to what it used to be is to have everyone introduce themselves at the beginning of games, like go around and everyone says what their Callsign/ASC handle is as well as their real name.

When there are no strangers there is more honor. Less cheating and a friendlier vibe will do wonders for the sport.

I couldn't agree with you more. I mentioned a few weeks ago that one of the issues with the sport is no one shakes hands after a game. When I play baseball or when any of my friends play hockey they always shake hands after the game. It just breeds good blood.

[MADDOG]

Originally Posted by pusangani

I think one way to build the Airsoft community up to what it used to be is to have everyone introduce themselves at the beginning of games, like go around and everyone says what their Callsign/ASC handle is as well as their real name.

When there are no strangers there is more honor. Less cheating and a friendlier vibe will do wonders for the sport.

There was a time when everyone wore their call signs on their airsoft uniforms like a badge of honor, your reputation was tied to it. Those days are gone now only a few still do it.

When work dies down in Sept. I will review the game as well and add my .02's.

[docholiday]

That should be interesting at games with 200+ or even 300+ players. 2-3 hours of introductions 1-2 hours of handshakes... alright good to go.

But I feel like you know who his who with team badges and name tags its not that difficult to make friends and put faces to teams and call signs, just introduce yourself if nobody comes to you and doors will open.

So far I have only encountered open arms and everybody has helped and was friendly on the field.

[Rabbit]

I hope future hosts are reading this thread - its chaulk full of bang on ideas and theories.

I've been reading since the beginning and haven't posted simply because you're all saying what myself and probably what a lot of players are already thinking - or at least the ones that care enough.