Long game Question

[FOX_111]

Originally Posted by Brian McIlmoyle

Managing resources over a long game would be a challenge

Pulling units out to force rest .. making sure everyone is fed and watered..

This coupled with the fact that commanding airsofters is like herding cats...

logistical.. battle managment worst case scenario

When do we go?

IMO, airsofters should be managed like the mujahadeen do. The commanders organise their missions with the jihad mindset: mujahadeen are there to shoot stuff, kill the infidel invaders and go home. Missions must have simple goals and releive must be ever present.

That, or go the opposit and enforce very strick rules for squads and commanders, to avoid people from wandering the field on their own, and the dead from respawning alone. I tried it in OP Backstab and it worked very very well. Locked squads with a chain of command. It worked all day for 99.9% of the players. (except for "Alpha-7"... that did not understand how a team work...)

[PaganThunder]

Originally Posted by Comanche

This makes a lot of sense, but I see one problem: while people from outside the area can work to travel to the field, they can't do this that for three, four, etc linked events.
Or, those "preparative" events could be some kind of "simultaneous" battles organised let's say at Rawdon, for eastern players, and another at *place a western field name* for western players.

Now again it's a nightmare for organisation, but a cooperation beteen two teams could make it quite feasible. But still hard.

The way I was thinking the "Preparative battles" would be encounters leading up to the main day. So that if you were not able to attend all the games it would not be an issue (other than the stress of missing a game you really really wanted to play in).

For example,

game #1 could be an 8 hour game in which red team and blue team battle to find pieces of a downed spy sat.

game #2 (a week or so later) another 8 hour game (maybe even on a different field) Red team and Blue team battle to control key positions on the field.

game #3 (once again a week or so later, at yet again the same or even yet another field) a 12 hour Game in which the team (Red or Blue) that managed to control the most positions from game #2 have to defend fixed positions against the other more mobile team.

game #4 (same time gap as previous) This is the BIG 24/48/72 Hour game.
Each teams base camps, respawn points, starting points, game "Props", what ever, are determined by the results of the previous games (with some fudging by the "creator of the game" to keep things some what fair). Information that was recovered from game 1 has an effect, results from the battles in games 2 and 3 also have an effect, on missions ran, points and missions from previous games have an effect on what each team can do.


If well planned each event would be a chapter in an on going story, and if you miss one you can still attend the other, or if you wish even switch sides to play on the opposite team. Fields could even run single skirmishes during a day/night of play, with the result being sent to the event organizers so even if you never make it to one of the "BIG" days of play you are still adding to the continuing story.

I come from a back ground of paper and pen role playing and have always enjoyed a continuing campaign, rather than just a series of non connected adventures.

Hope no one minds my ramble. And if anyone is interested in help with something like this PLEASE let me know, would be more than willing to lend what ever help I can.

Ian

[BlackRain]

Some very good ideas here, as well as some great info on what people are thinking in relation to longer scale games. So from what I can tell the majority are interested in a milisim game geared with lots of mission based operations and a continuing story line?