MILSIM : Fixed role in units + complex unit structure.

[Akhéron Sombre]

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.

[Gato]

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".

[Akhéron Sombre]

Originally Posted by Gato

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.

[testtube]

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.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by Gato

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".

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

[Zack The Ripper]

+1^

[akko]

Originally Posted by testtube

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. .

we should have one here more often,

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Originally Posted by akko

we should have one here more often,

Did 2 last season, but focused on WWII tactics.

[Hectic]

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

[Ozone06]

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

[Covax]

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.

[Dirtbag]

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).

[akko]

Originally Posted by -Skeletor-

I'm moving to Durham Region soon; I'll run a tactics course...



... for a small fee

seriously?

[Varjeal]

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.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

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 )