Peer Review: Art of War Op Blood Diamond

[Grudge]

I've been taking tons of notes. Lots of good advise on what to focus on, and it really is dependant on what time of event you are going to run.

I also like some of the elements of the OP, will probably use some of those ideas as well.

[pusangani]

Originally Posted by 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.

Imagine that!

lol but yeah as Maddog said, not everyone wears nametapes nowadays, I never did as I never got around to ordering some, but I intend to order a couple when I get back.

This would work for smaller games obviously, but smaller games are what most people go to on a regular basis anyway.

The less anonymity the better, so u don't end up hearing things like "that guy in the multicam with the SCAR didn't call his hits" in the AAR

[DBspotter]

While I agree that a game boasting 200 players just would not make sense, but it seems that you have missed the point. The point being friendly faces make for friendly fire fights. Then again how many events boast 200 players every year in Ontario? There is no reason not to introduce yourself to a new face or faces at any skirmish type event. However it's done doesn't really matter but in other sports the teams generally shake hands after the game.

Originally Posted by 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.

[Blackthorne]

Here are some issues I encountered at AOW.

Originally Posted by DBspotter

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.

You obviously were not present for the TWO times we pulled both sides into the game control area and worked out issues with a trained mediator. If you are going to bash the resolution process, be specific about where it failed. we have a resounding positive reports from players and team leaders on how issues were handled.

Originally Posted by DBspotter

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.

I don't like your tone in that it suggests bias towards one team of the other. Yes, some of the objectives could have been executed better, totally agree. That was due mainly to a couple of loopholes that Derek and I found in our rule-sets that created ambiguity and confusion.

We decided it was better to move the game forward and smooth things over than call a halt to the game and ruin everyone's morale. Command from both teams were directly involved in that decision. They actually came up with the solutions as mediated by Scarecrow.

If you have a problem with the changes to the event, I suggest you talk to your commanders and ask them about game decisions, as they helped make them during parley.

Originally Posted by DBspotter

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.

Agreed. People didn't know what to do with a more real life operational OPSEC situation. BattleSim will continue this approach, but with some changes to satisfy the requests of players to have more back story and key motivational objectives so they can get behind what their respective teams are doing.


At any rate, this is turning into a great thread, just not about the OPs topic of choice. we are going to have to start another one to focus on Blood Diamond and leave this one as a discussion on hosting.

[Blackthorne]

Originally Posted by 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.

Part of our game briefing actually has an exercise that can be completed buy 200-300 people, but at AOW we didn't have time to execute it. Scarecrow has a very effect 10 minute exercise in engaging players in a social contract that allows them to understand they are there to make the event as fun as possible for the people surrounding them, and not themselves. Others will take care of that.

I am not doing it justice here. Once we run a series of smaller events you will see it in action if you attend. It really adds to the playing experience.

[Aegiis]

Originally Posted by Blackthorne

Part of our game briefing actually has an exercise that can be completed buy 200-300 people, but at AOW we didn't have time to execute it. Scarecrow has a very effect 10 minute exercise in engaging players in a social contract that allows them to understand they are there to make the event as fun as possible for the people surrounding them, and not themselves. Others will take care of that.

I am not doing it justice here. Once we run a series of smaller events you will see it in action if you attend. It really adds to the playing experience.

Since this thread is turning into a hosting discussion, why don't you share it ? If it is that good, others may actually want to emulate you and run the same in their events.

[DBspotter]

No I was not present when the discussions were being had at but I was present for the the situations leading up to the meetings. Only when some of the parties were beyond pissed did you guys decide to bring both sides to the table. I was in our CP tent with my CO, 2ic, and one of the field owners before the issue was taken to the front to be discussed, so I have an idea of how displeased everyone was prior to the meet. You guys were slow to react, I didn't say you never did. A stronger and faster presence is required.

If you don't like my tone it's because you have conjured it up in your own head. I never stated a bias towards one team, but instead it seemed to swing in favor of one team or the other throughout the game. If you guys are going to change things up on the fly make sure it makes sense. You can call your quick game set changes done on the fly part of BATTLESIM but in the field it comes off as bad planning.

Originally Posted by Blackthorne

Here are some issues I encountered at AOW.



You obviously were not present for the TWO times we pulled both sides into the game control area and worked out issues with a trained mediator. If you are going to bash the resolution process, be specific about where it failed. we have a resounding positive reports from players and team leaders on how issues were handled.



I don't like your tone in that it suggests bias towards one team of the other. Yes, some of the objectives could have been executed better, totally agree. That was due mainly to a couple of loopholes that Derek and I found in our rule-sets that created ambiguity and confusion.

We decided it was better to move the game forward and smooth things over than call a halt to the game and ruin everyone's morale. Command from both teams were directly involved in that decision. They actually came up with the solutions as mediated by Scarecrow.

If you have a problem with the changes to the event, I suggest you talk to your commanders and ask them about game decisions, as they helped make them during parley.




Agreed. People didn't know what to do with a more real life operational OPSEC situation. BattleSim will continue this approach, but with some changes to satisfy the requests of players to have more back story and key motivational objectives so they can get behind what their respective teams are doing.


At any rate, this is turning into a great thread, just not about the OPs topic of choice. we are going to have to start another one to focus on Blood Diamond and leave this one as a discussion on hosting.

[marac]

Alright, I'll give it my 2 cents, feel free to agree or disagree, and add/change things - it's why we're doing this.

I think one of the issues here is lack of constant objectives, something to be achieved and held throughout the game. Example, spawn points. I never was a big fan of mobile spawn point, as in my opinion (I may be wrong but it's my opinion) it takes away from life importance and fear of getting shot. You get a buddy to run back with you 50 meters or so and you're right back in the game. Respawns could be seen as reinforcements, and reinforcements arrive, let's say, by air drop or helos. For that you need to have a secured LZ/DZ (read: spawn point). Put a few of these in positions across the field and it gives commanders a constant objective to achieve and hold. It will be up to commanders to decide which ones are more important, which ones to guard and with what manpower to do so, and also gives the opposing force missions to choose and execute on their own, rather than always waiting on direction. Put two different flags there (green and blue, whatever), have a visible place to put the flag up so the passing player can see if this LZ is currently under his control or enemy's. Needless to say, dead person cannot walk up to the LZ, change the flag to his team's, and then respawn. Add set time of reinforcement arrival, every 30 minutes let's say, and give commanders some time constrictions to think about when deciding what time to hit an objective, as he has to plan out his reinforcement arrival.
Have players report every LZ secured to game control, so they can keep track of who holds what at any given point. When a player is dead, he's now out of play and is technically a reinforcement waiting to deploy. Now to avoid players wondering around the field for hours trying to reach spawn points only to discover they're under enemy control, they can radio the team 2IC, as it's his job to deal with casualties, for direction (that doesn't mean giving info on the battle - you're DEAD). In order for a respawn to happen, a minimum number of LIVE troops has to be present on the ground (one, two or more guys, whatever, I'd go with two as it takes minimal manpower taken away for respawn, and a single guy could be lonely and bored), marking and securing the LZ. When it's set, the dead guys can be directed to make their way and "land" there. This system also gives missions to execute (mark and secure LZ/DZ for airborne drop or helo insertion) at commander's discretion. These missions will present themselves every time casualties appear, and they keep the game busy.
If the LZ gets taken by foe during the wait for the 30 minute on the hour mark, the dead bunch can be redirected to another secured LZ and do their drop there, which simulates LZ compromise and mission abort for airborne insertion. Their punishment for failing to secure LZ on the minute mark is now having to wait additional 30 minutes before they come to life (NOTE: if you think 30 minutes is too long, choose your own time, but respawning too often takes away from casualty impact on a team strength).
If ALL the LZ/DZ points are taken by one team, the game control, which keeps track of the points btw, can now inform the losing team that airborne resupply is now unavailable. Game goes on. Dead people from losing team make their way back to game control staging area, and wait. Two things can happen: either the live members of the losing team manage to meanwhile retake a point and the dead people can now make their way there to respawn (again, on the clock), and get back into the fight, or a whole team, killed, shows up (game control knows the number of players on a team) at the staging area, and the game's over.
Important thing for game control, have a game control member present at every drop to ensure fair game (dead people should NOT come to life and fire at the enemy to assist mark/secure team in holding the LZ). Team command must inform game control on which point their drop is going to occur. If you are going with ammo limitations, use air drops for ammo resupply, or to spice up the game, hide a few caches in the field, write the code on them, and if located and identified properly to game staff, the team gets more ammo.
If the game is a 24+ game and people need an area to camp, give each team a FOB, just like in AOW, and to make things better, FOB can be used as a respawn point too, with reinforcements appearing more often (every 15 or 20 minutes let's say), which gives a FOB an importance of ability to rush reinforcements and also an increased ability to defend it. However the FOB should be located at the edge of the map, opposite from the opposing FOB, so respawning there gives little meaning to gaining ground. FOB can still be overrun and if taken by the enemy (enemy puts his flag up, reads a code placed in the centre of the FOB to game control or whatever would symbolize that), its respawn capability is then taken away permanently. The enemy must then leave FOB so the players can still access their tents to sleep, eat etc, but the area is now out of play and has no value to the game. That could then become staging area for the team without spawn points and when whole team shows up dead, game staff can call it.
Game control can still create their missions in order to give certain bonuses, introduce a spy, have them control the bridge for the convoy pass at a set time which if successful gives the team extra ammo or whatever comes to mind, but the constant objectives will keep the game flowing even when GC has nothing on their plate at the moment. In the end, the pace of the game will be controlled by players, not the staff.
If the game comes to end by eliminating all enemy players, just restart the game, but if you have 6-8 spawn points in game, the more you control, the harder it becomes to take the next point, as a) all enemy will be in that area; and b) you now have more points to defend or risk them to be retaken without the fight.
When the end ex time hits, whoever controls more points at that point wins that game! No confusion. Winner is the team with more victories (if the games are ended by elimination), or who controls more DZ at end ex mark. If one team won by elimination earlier, and other team won the end ex, the elimination victory takes over the end ex victory as they actually defeated the enemy.

If you have more to add to fine tune this idea, I'm all ears. Criticism is also welcome, as I'm sure people will pick up things that might not work in real life.

[leth1337]

^ love it

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by marac

Alright, I'll give it my 2 cents, feel free to agree or disagree, and add/change things - it's why we're doing this.

.

Good stuff right there.. make the fight about territory control, tied to lives, tied to resource management .. that is exactly what I am talking about.

[CR0M]

Originally Posted by marac

Alright, I'll give it my 2 cents,

glad I decided to read it all lol

your ideas are simple and easy and I love them...

if there was a milsim with this type of idea behind it I would be all about it...

[Blackthorne]

Originally Posted by DBspotter

No I was not present when the discussions were being had at but I was present for the the situations leading up to the meetings. Only when some of the parties were beyond pissed did you guys decide to bring both sides to the table. I was in our CP tent with my CO, 2ic, and one of the field owners before the issue was taken to the front to be discussed, so I have an idea of how displeased everyone was prior to the meet. You guys were slow to react, I didn't say you never did. A stronger and faster presence is required.

We can only react when made aware of the situation. I don't think its fair or you to say we were slow when you were right there in it and we had to wait for the reports to come back of an issue, contact command, arrange a meeting and then execute.

One of the other problems was communicated by you on the radio, screaming for game admin to come solve a problem (hit calling issue I got that much between ranting), not giving an explanation on what was going on, cursing, swearing and then not answering at all when I asked for a location.

You sir, were part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I don't agree with you. We did the best we could and I don't think it was slow at all. You so far are the only person to express this opinion.

Originally Posted by DBspotter

If you don't like my tone it's because you have conjured it up in your own head. I never stated a bias towards one team, but instead it seemed to swing in favor of one team or the other throughout the game. If you guys are going to change things up on the fly make sure it makes sense. You can call your quick game set changes done on the fly part of BATTLESIM but in the field it comes off as bad planning.

I already apologized for our issues in confusing rule-sets. Take it or leave it.

[MADDOG]

Game Variables I find entertaining:

1. 3 to 5 “areas of interest” that need to be fought over and points awarded every time a flag is flipped. It forces you to use your personal and team in wider areas and I find it more “strategic” to have to use tactics and teamwork to deny the enemy ground and hence success

2. Random helicopter insertions where a team holds on to a rope and is lead into the AO and used to reinforce a team holding the ground or add to an attack. They cannot be shot at or killed until they fast rope from the line into the fight. Each team has a limited number of times they can use this advantage and a maximum amount of people allowed on the chopper. The chopper can be shot down by designated “Stinger” players put these individuals need to run up and touch the rope, they cannot be shot by the players on the chopper and if he reaches the chopper everyone is dead. There are minimal individuals with stingers and they need to be employed properly. This adds a different dynamic to the game and allows people to get right in the fight to keep the action going for those with limited patience,The adrenaline starts to pump when you can see the reinforcements coming and you need to reorg and change plans quickly.

3. I like the mobile respawn idea, games where you plant a flag that is the area you need to respawn in (groups of 3-5 at a time). Respawning players need to have kill rags on their heads and be within 5 feet of the flag to avoid ambiguity. This spawn can be overrun and captured if an opposing player touches the flag. A team loses their spawn for the next hour of play etc. If over run. Opposing players need to hustle to get the flag and each team needs to defend it. Adds another dynamic and points are given for overrunning a mobile respawn and denying the enemy an advantage. Mobile respawns can be moved but not by players waiting to spawn, only a live player.

4. No matter what a player has a 5 minute bleed out time (Unless medic reaches him) to allow other players to advance and take ground they just denied the enemy


Game Variables I Dislike:

1. I hate collecting cards and searching bodies, I am too busy looking for the next target and trying to gain ground to even bother unless I need to go right past them. Cover and survival is more important to me than searching a dead body for a card

2. Endless medic capability, you should only be able to get medical aid once, before you need to return to base to spawn. This allows for a conclusion to a firefight instead on an endless back and forth. If there is more than a couple of objectives on the field it also gives players a chance to try their luck in another area

3. A back story is nice, but I am not a roleplay/LARP kind of guy, so this is not real important to me. It could be aliens vs zombies and I would not care, as long as the game dynamic was fun and fair and clearly understood

[DBspotter]

You paint an inaccurate picture of how the "ranting" situation went down. It's clear you don't like your authority to be challenged. I stand by my statement. You guys were slow to react. Once you guys sort that out you guys will be golden.

Originally Posted by Blackthorne

We can only react when made aware of the situation. I don't think its fair or you to say we were slow when you were right there in it and we had to wait for the reports to come back of an issue, contact command, arrange a meeting and then execute.

One of the other problems was communicated by you on the radio, screaming for game admin to come solve a problem (hit calling issue I got that much between ranting), not giving an explanation on what was going on, cursing, swearing and then not answering at all when I asked for a location.

You sir, were part of the problem, not part of the solution.

I don't agree with you. We did the best we could and I don't think it was slow at all. You so far are the only person to express this opinion.



I already apologized for our issues in confusing rule-sets. Take it or leave it.

[CR0M]

the best medic rule Ive seen (and this should be standardized) is the one they use at trev's hill437

everyone is given a carabeaner latch with a piece of rope tied to it. the rope has 5 knots in it, each knot is a life. When you get hit, you have a 5 minute bleed out period in which a medic can get to you and untie one of the knots. If a medic doesnt come in time you walk back to your spawn point and take out one knot.

when your under fire trying to untie a knot it adds alot more challenge to the game. It makes the medic role fun as well. Sounds easy, but then take into account most of us probably wear gloves, and undoing knots with gloves isnt as easy.