What is your true definition of "Milsim"

[XxMAGGOTxX]

My answer to that would probably be realism. You know, pull the bolt back to chamber a round, only have 30 rounds in your mag. Essentially, I guess it would be gas blow back rifles.

[Jimski]

the goal of military simulation is to reproduce tense situations of military fights, like these

[SuperHog]

Originally Posted by XxMAGGOTxX

My answer to that would probably be realism. You know, pull the bolt back to chamber a round, only have 30 rounds in your mag. Essentially, I guess it would be gas blow back rifles.

Agree. Even AEG is fine with 30 rounds per mag although not the same when it comes to the last round fire.

It forces you to take only the good shots and focus on positioning for each shot.

Until you try it, you won't know how satisfying it is to play with real cap.

[drakar]

End of debate! 😉

[talon]

Originally Posted by drakar

End of debate! 😉

Negative, MilSim is not the gear. It can involve the gear, but it is not the gear itself.

[drakar]

Originally Posted by talon

Negative, MilSim is not the gear. It can involve the gear, but it is not the gear itself.

Agree!

That was just for fun! 😉

[naminator]

Milsim is just that. A Simulation of Military Activities. This means how you gear up, your movements, your speech.

I think capping mags at 30 rounds in the pursuit of "realism" is crap. It is the same thing with video games. Even some of the most realistic games take liberties with how many rounds of ammunition, the types of guns, the speed with you can use them and the amount of bullets you can take to the face before you die. Yet we still play these games (atleast I do).

Realism needs to be balanced with fun. True Milsim would not be fun in anyway. Sacrificing some realism in the name of fun is best. That's why I believe midcaps are fine (real bullets can fire further than 200 feet and go through light underbrush) and that SAW gunners should have 2000 round drum mags (in real life 100+ rounds of ammunition can keep a lot of heads down).

[FirestormX]

Originally Posted by naminator

True Milsim would not be fun in anyway.

You'd be surprised.

[naminator]

Originally Posted by FirestormX

You'd be surprised.

Let me clarify.

True Milsim would not be shooty call of duty fun in any way.

I would love to participate in a "true milsim". Moving as part of a unit, patrolling an area for hours on end ect. I always wanted to participate as the typical bored guard of a military establishment without any idea something was about to go down.

These things I would love.

[FirestormX]

Games like that exist.
I'm not sure how it is out in Alberta, but we've got them to varying degrees in southern Ontario. A lot of it is in the WWII reenactment groups, but they exist for "modern" or unspecified military eras as well.

You occasionally hear people (mostly Brian McIlmoyle) talk about how the most fun they've had are at games where they never fired a shot. Or where there's an intense pressure of "don't get shot, because you'll be out for the entire game".

After finally participating in such a game (~32 hours of trekking through an undeveloped forest, avoiding the enemy because we don't want to get shot out of the game, spending hours crawling slowly through a field or sitting around waiting or standing guard, and never firing a single shot for the entire OP), I can say that it is indeed very miserable and satisfying...And in retrospect, fun!

If you can make it out to Ontario in October for a Deadfall event, you definitely should!

[naminator]

I used to be in Northern Ontario, near the Manitoba Border. We never did much Milsim.

Honestly Alberta seems pretty good from what I have heard so fingers crossed. Southern Ontario was just too far for me (16 hour drive, 32 hours of crawling through mud then 16 hours home lol)

Originally Posted by FirestormX

Games like that exist.
I'm not sure how it is out in Alberta, but we've got them to varying degrees in southern Ontario. A lot of it is in the WWII reenactment groups, but they exist for "modern" or unspecified military eras as well.

You occasionally hear people (mostly Brian McIlmoyle) talk about how the most fun they've had are at games where they never fired a shot. Or where there's an intense pressure of "don't get shot, because you'll be out for the entire game".

After finally participating in such a game (~32 hours of trekking through an undeveloped forest, avoiding the enemy because we don't want to get shot out of the game, spending hours crawling slowly through a field or sitting around waiting or standing guard, and never firing a single shot for the entire OP), I can say that it is indeed very miserable and satisfying...And in retrospect, fun!

If you can make it out to Ontario in October for a Deadfall event, you definitely should!

[Danke]

If it's a miltary simulation that you want but also need "fun" then Filmsim is more like what you want. That gets rid of many of the un-fun military duties and subs action and adventure plus more shooting.

Some of the AB guys have praised the events that go down in Golden BC as solid 24-48 hour games that play out well.

[Gato]

MILSIM is just that, Military Simulation.

You do and act as troops would. On the "Accurate" side of this, it involves a lot of bullshit details like Fire Pickets, Patrols, fueling generators and tons of other mundane and unexiting things, with little in the way of action and fire fights for the majority of people.

On the commonly run side of "MILSIM" you get long games, ranging between 16-24 hours with high action and tangible mission parameters, essentially, Mission Oriented Skirmishes. FUN AS HELL, but not actually a MILSIM for the most part.

[SuperHog]

Originally Posted by naminator

Milsim is just that. A Simulation of Military Activities. This means how you gear up, your movements, your speech.

I think capping mags at 30 rounds in the pursuit of "realism" is crap. It is the same thing with video games. Even some of the most realistic games take liberties with how many rounds of ammunition, the types of guns, the speed with you can use them and the amount of bullets you can take to the face before you die. Yet we still play these games (atleast I do).

Realism needs to be balanced with fun. True Milsim would not be fun in anyway. Sacrificing some realism in the name of fun is best. That's why I believe midcaps are fine (real bullets can fire further than 200 feet and go through light underbrush) and that SAW gunners should have 2000 round drum mags (in real life 100+ rounds of ammunition can keep a lot of heads down).

Real cap means the capacity of real steel. 30 rounds is referred to M4 only which is the most popular airsoft assault rifle. If a airsoft gun has a real steel counterpart that has a magazine capacity of 100 rounds then the airsoft version should be limited to that same capacity.

So to answer your post, a airsoft M4 with a 450 round magazine is not realistic. In real steel, I doubt you can stuff 450 rounds into a AR15 magazine.

[ThunderCactus]

No, but they do have 100 round midcaps now