Milsimmmm!!!!

[mmmken]

Now that I've gotten your attention, how much "milsim" should be considered within the limits of a milsim?

No particular game will be mentioned, but there have been several games where the boundaries of the actions of players have been considered dishonourable by some, while completely justified by others. I haven't seen any game threads discuss or define this idea of a "just-how-milsim-are-we-talking-about" rule set yet, so this may be something that we as a community should address and discuss. Perhaps if game threads formally declared the level of "milsimness" that is allowed, much of the AAR complaints would probably disappear.

Discuss. Let's be productive towards enhancing our games and community and not let this thread resort into a flame war (don't cite explicit examples from events).

[Conker]

For a combo-breaking post:

If you have any understanding of french language, see the Quebec forum, there's a kind of tradition to make a thread on that every winter LOL

EDIT: Damn, no combo anymore

[c3sk]

Thread cleaned :P

[cooney]

http://www.operationeastwind.com/

True Milsim.

[HackD]

Originally Posted by cooney

http://www.operationeastwind.com/

True Milsim.

750 acre playing field with 45 miles of roads and trails, $165.00 for 9 days or $25.00 a day? There's true value, right there.

[Drake]

I think the definition of "milsim" has been skewed over the years due to a cargo cult-ish approach to it by people who didn't fully understand it.

Milsim is not about how long an event lasts, the complexity of the scenario, the amount of props on the field, or anything of that nature; Milsim is about a specific mindset which strives for a realistic military simulation. For video games, think OFP/ARMA vs. COD/BF, rF/LFS vs Need For Speed, or Falcon4/MS FS vs other "sims" with simplified flight models.

First and foremost, the player must enter a full temporary suspension of disbelief and play like that BB is a bullet that will kill him/her; the shooter mentality of running forward and getting shot being okay because you'll just respawn in a few minutes just won't do.

Usually the supporting elements should also be as realistic as possible: realcaps (or at least no hicaps), realistic tasking/mission objectives, etc. First and foremost the point is NOT just to get kills, it's to accomplish a given task. Shooting is just one of the many tools at your disposal (and often is not the best course of action). So players who are just out to rack up trigger time need not apply.

Extra props, complex scenarios, matching kit, etc all enhance what should be an immersive experience.

But it would be wrong to think that these elements alone equal milsim: you could have all that and only have a very lavish skirmish. Or you could have simple skirmish-like "drills" which are extremely milsim.

[Akhéron Sombre]

As Drake said, long event or complixity of scenario are not factors. For me, you need 2 things to convert ANY mission/scénario to a milsim : A good planning phase and an execution using military procedures. The simpliest mission with a small amout of time can be 'milsim' if you have these 2 things. The planning phase is, by far, the most neglected part.

Basics :
http://www.armystudyguide.com/conten...edures-3.shtml
http://www.armystudyguide.com/conten...er-opord.shtml

Try it and have fun

[whisper_kill]

The issue, as always, is to what degree is the MilSim you are participating in? For some MilSim is dressing the part, using the lingo and fighting. To others, it is a fully immersive experience simulating the period, forces, or event from start to finish.

[Deadpool]

The players makes the milsim and nothing else.

You could plan the biggest, baddest and most realistic scenario, if you have a players base that is skirmish oriented, your event is doomed to be a scenario oriented skirmish.

But take 2 hardcore milsim teams and do a capture the flag and you could have a full day milsim event.

As R3acon1 always says; "Good players make a good game!"

[ShelledPants]

Originally Posted by HackD

750 acre playing field with 45 miles of roads and trails, $165.00 for 9 days or $25.00 a day? There's true value, right there.

That event does look amazing, and researching to see if I can attend, the costs are as such:

The cost for full experience participants attending for 1-4 days is $165. For those attending from 5-9 days the cost is $200. Full experience attendees are provided with all meals, including snacks and drinks for the duration of the time they are in attendance. Additionally, full experience attendees are allowed to check mission equipment out from the supply tents including correct night vision systems, flares, IR systems, Claymore and POMZ mines, radios, period correct GPS units, telephone systems etc.

Day time players pay a fixed rate of $25 per day apart from day 1 and day 9 which are both free days since they involve a great deal of unit set up and tear down. Day time players are not provided with meals and are not allowed to check mission equipment out from the supply tents since most mission equipment goes out for night or multi-day missions.

1-4 days is $165
5-9 days the cost is $200
Day time players pay a fixed rate of $25 per day apart from day 1 and day 9

Total cost for full immersion is $365 for 9 days. Still an awesome deal. Would like to attend. Will talk to team.

[Ozone06]

The kit list is a pain though... EVERYTHING needs to be actual issued gear down to body armor

If you're out night fighting you get issued period NV's though... which is pretty cool

[Kingsix]

Originally Posted by Ozone06

The kit list is a pain though... EVERYTHING needs to be actual issued gear down to body armor

If you're out night fighting you get issued period NV's though... which is pretty cool

Yeap Certain Repros are not allowed. Russian side can't have Cotton socks, American side can't have Plastic PASGT Helmets and they must have PASGT vest.

Quite Honestly it's hard enough getting players to get Green Camo, Tan Camo in Canada. Imagine the hurt egos when we tell them they can't use certain Kit.

Eastwind is more of a Impression thingy with airsoft

[mmmken]

When I made this thread, I actually wanted to address the boundaries of milsims and not "kitting appropriately". Many of these boundaries are huge controversies on the AAR's.

Some examples would be:

- the destroying of unattended defensive assets to disable them;
- switching camo to avoid detection (as this happens in real warfare);
- counter-intelligence tactics: switching factions and double agents;
- a team signed up as PMC's switching factions that give the most benefit (or cash in real warfare);

These are just some of the many examples that continue to cause butt hurts in AAR's because they have not been formally addressed by game hosts. I think the definition of what a "milsim" is widely understood, but it is the extreme boundaries of a milsim that needs to be clarified.

[HackD]

Originally Posted by ShelledPants

That event does look amazing, and researching to see if I can attend, the costs are as such:



1-4 days is $165
5-9 days the cost is $200
Day time players pay a fixed rate of $25 per day apart from day 1 and day 9

Total cost for full immersion is $365 for 9 days. Still an awesome deal. Would like to attend. Will talk to team.

Thank you for the correction - it was in the wee hours of the AM that i read the sign-up costs. For those into this sort of game play, it definitely appears to be good value for the dollar given the range and variety of terrain- the stringent equipment requirements, not so much. As Ozone06 and KingSix mentioned, it's hard enough to get commonality in BDU's per team requirements here.

Originally Posted by Drake

Usually the supporting elements should also be as realistic as possible: realcaps (or at least no hicaps), realistic tasking/mission objectives, etc. First and foremost the point is NOT just to get kills, it's to accomplish a given task. Shooting is just one of the many tools at your disposal (and often is not the best course of action). So players who are just out to rack up trigger time need not apply.

Extra props, complex scenarios, matching kit, etc all enhance what should be an immersive experience.

But it would be wrong to think that these elements alone equal milsim: you could have all that and only have a very lavish skirmish. Or you could have simple skirmish-like "drills" which are extremely milsim.

As per what constitutes a milsim - I would think that the definition would really vary from player, to player and event to event. Even being defined by period of historical representation, as portrayed in any given event.

I've played 'milsim' type flight simulators (even built a pretty realistic 'simpit' at one point) and even if you get real close to it.. it's still not, and never will be the same as the real thing (I have pilots in the family to catch rides with) .. it's always going to be a facsimile of the real thing.

Milsim, skirmish, or not.. 750 acres and the sheer amount of variables involved with time, place, location, immersion, whether to attack, defend, retreat, reconnoiter etc etc.. in an opposing team environment, would trump the average 10-15 acre skirmish event every time, at least for me. I don't really need to know a definition of milsim, if immersion with a credible suspension of disbelief is working for me, in the course of participation.

Perhaps we have some time to go in Canada yet, before these sort of USA/European mass participant "milsim" style events will come to pass. Pity.

[Janus]

9 days would be long enough to use battlefield exhaustion as a weapon against the opponents. Think of it like trolling the enemy. You make sure they don't get ANY sleep and you run your team in shifts, bumping the enemy every 45 minutes. Demoralizing as fuck.

With a game THAT long, you could use things like that. It becomes more about leadership and strategy than who has the best AEG. I like it.