Airsoft Canada - View Single Post - MILSIM : Fixed role in units + complex unit structure.

Akhéron Sombre · March 5th, 2013, 15:30

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.

March 5th, 2013, 15:30	#1
Akhéron Sombre Trader rating Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: St-Jean-sur-Richelieu	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. __________________ Last edited by Akhéron Sombre; March 5th, 2013 at 21:18..