True 24 hr green game Input Needed

[BlackRain]

Hello Everyone,
I have been working on putting together a true 24hr green milisim scenario game for awhile now and would like some input from players that would attend such an event. I have been incorporating various aspects to the game such as supply lines, supply drops, demolitions missions, recon etc. and would like to know what other aspects folks would like to see put into a scenario of this type. Before we get started I will give a bit of the scenario layout to help get some input in the direction I am looking for. The scenario will incorporate 2 main staging areas for both sides in which participants will be camping in, there will be a forward command area for both sides and players will be required to sleep and eat on the field during the game. There will be no official breaks and the scenario will run the full 24 hrs, command communications will be given via radio to each teams commander who will also be responsible for organizing their teams to accomplish the objectives.

Now to be clear I am not looking for wild hopes and dreams kind of things but stuff that will truly make the scenario pop so to speak and enjoyable for everyone. Please keep your suggestions realistic and feasible. I thank you for your input in advance and look forward to hearing some great ideas.

[Goldman]

To be honest I liked the set up of Moonwalk from a couple years back up at Muskoka Primary.

Instead of fixed objectives, you just had two forces in the field attempting to destroy eachother. Throw in a few modifiers (IE capture/control a SAM site and your respawn time is cut in half since you can use helis), stuff like that, and Wham, great game day.

[FOX_111]

I'd take the moon phase in consideration for the game date. A full moon, or close to it, with few or no cloud will really improve the game, visibility wise.

I did a few overnight games, and those on the full moon where the best. You still can't see shit in the wood, but you see small shadows and reflections that get you shooting at ghosts.

Also, like goldman said, something dynamic. People get tired faster at night and if the game become dull, they will sit on their ass and talk around the fire (or light).

It's anoying when you hear the echo of all those dead players, yapping in the distant and breaking to mood of the stalk.

[BlackRain]

We want to be able to keep people busy throughout the entire event so the moon phase was already a definite factor to the game. It will also help reduce the amount of possible injuries during night maneuvers.

[Dracheous]

Take sun cycle in to account as well, I'd say try to get the longest day time Saturday, that way there's only a few hours of true darkness; giving lots more time of the grey dawn The High sun and heat will also push forces into the woods to retreat from the scorcher, should help keep people moving; but of course hydration becomes an issue on these days for some. Also a three day weekend would be a good choice too, so the majority of us have that Monday to snooze a little before work haha.

[BlackRain]

Never thought about the sun phases ... good point... be sure to keep that one in mind. I did however plan on making it a 3 day event with registration and chrony on the Fri. as well as encampment set up for each team then run the game through Sat. and the Sun. giving folks plenty of field time and action.

So far there have been some great points posted up... keep them coming. A great game is only great if the folks who are playing enjoy themselves. So your opinions and suggestions count, so post up folks.

[Mizfit]

Consider the ratio of people to acreage. Muskoka Primary is a great example...the more people you have, the more area you can open to play. When you get a smaller number of players, you risk the game slowing down to a crawl as you can't find anyone and the risk of people getting lost if it's a new field and heavily forested.

[Viking]

What I've always enjoyed in a 24 hour MilSim game is when the game is proactively-driven. By that I mean you do not always have nice and neat objectives laid out for you before you hit the ground. Rather, you deploy your numbers, or portions of them and discover items of interest that get generated into tactically-relevant objectives that will benefit your team in the end. In other words, allow each team to establish their objectives with the primary focus remaining; the elimination of the opposing team.

This formula seems to function on it's own without a major requirement of referee involvement. The emergency radio channel, dispute guidelines, and timing coordination remains a constant, but it otherwise allows those who would be normally monitoring a game to participate as well. My two cents.

[MADDOG]

Too build on Vikings point:

I find too many organizers try to over complicate the games. Find keys to missiles, find three components bring them together, or some other co-ordination of tasks that mostly never end up being accomplished. That is not to say it cannot be done but for bigger games it becomes very hard to control.

Most teams knowing their objective before they start would bring the necessary tools to accomplish a direct action mission. Having to search and find these does not add to the realism and many times leads to frustration. The goal is to close with and destroy the enemy, second capture any intel or an objective, take it, hold it or take off to fight another day.

These types of games are the most fun because you focus on tactics (Patrolling, CQB, Defense, Ambush) instead of running around looking for a key to open a box before you can move on.

This is just an example but the most fun I ever have is when the objective is to eliminate the other team and keep them from eliminating you.

[The Saint]

Adding to some of the points above on item-based objectives... It's nice if the items you're securing provide relevant in-game effects, and I don't means getting Item A allows you to get Item B to open Item C.

Simply capturing and holding missiles or nukes or whatever else is nothing more than CTF without Flag. I personally never care about points tallied after the game.

If you recover a lost satellite phone/radio that allows you to call in regular resupply or intel or other Game Master Plot Event, that makes an item objective worth searching/fighting for.

[BlackRain]

In respect to milisim games outdoors should the magazine requirements be real cap or should it be mid caps? Myself I am thinking real cap but once again it is a matter of what customers prefer in this type of venue that matters. Thank you everyone for the input you have given me so far, it is great and will definitely be put to use.

[Endymion]

Consider lowcaps as well, as they tend to be a happy medium. Or else perhaps an actual ammo count restriction, carried any way you like (no hi caps though please).

Personally I'm a fan of ammo restriction + real cap or low cap.

[Donster]

i personally like buildings and bunkers and such as they literally change the face of a game. While it is always nice to have forests and brush and such, having defendable and attackable compounds are nice. Especially two story ones with ramparts and battlements. That being said, just to reiterate, i like games with simple objectives. Capture this building as an objective and slowly push the enemy back to their home base. Upon capturing their home base, the game is over. Stuff like that, where an objective exists, but it is essentially Force on Force is IMHO, the best game type and provides the most amount of fun. Also, the bunkers and buildings should be lit at night.

[Brian McIlmoyle]

Thoughts..

Ignore protests about ammo restrictions.. make the game limited on Ammo

If you are looking at a safe rear area into a hot forward area make all ammo have to pass from the rear to the front and players have to resupply by either waiting for resupply from the rear or withdrawing to the rear to resupply.

Allow NO loose ammo to be carried , everything in Mags -- NO highcaps allowed

The game control should supply ALL ammo and build the costs into the game fee.

Just keeping the ammo flowing then becomes a significant game objective , defense of supply lines would have to be maintained.

Allow teams to cache ammo in forward areas ... so that their forward base becomes a valuable target to both attack and defend.

Make one of the objectives the gathering of intel about the enemy .. building up information about location, numbers and other details .. pay off the accuracy of this information with AMMO bonuses

It is possible to make the whole game about gettin ammo and stopping the enemy from getting ammo.

Another resource to limit is "respawns" respawns represent reinforcements.

Make respawns a Commodity that is also limited and capturable

All battle is about resources .. bodies and Bullets .. if you make both of them in short supply .. you will create an inducement to fight.

Most playes could care less about points scored.. but they do care about having enough BBs to shoot and lives to do it with.

Controling these two commodities will reward skill and co-ordination.. people too fearfull to risk life will enventually run out of ammo, People to careless with their lives will run out of respawns.

Make the game about the things that people care about and you will have a good game.

Also .. make people responsible... some people will complain if they are running out of ammo .. and say things like the Game sucks because I have to be carefull about how much I shoot.. Others will complain about having to cool their heals in a rear area because their team ran out or re-spawns...

If you want to keep shooting and keep alive you have to THINK about the use of resources .. and you will need intel about the enemy so you can decide when and wehre to spend them and when to reserve them.. The game then becomes less tactical and more stratigic. Now you are adding psychological stress .. now you have a MILSIM

[Crunchmeister]

I personally don't like real caps. AEGs tend to have a higher rate of fire than the real firearms, expending ammo faster. Plus with most mags, you lose 4-5 BBs every time you reload, so in reality, you can only realistically use 25 rounds of a 30 round real cap.

50-75 round low caps are a nice alternative. They allow for a bit more shooting before reload, take into account the higher rof of AEGs, but are low enough capacity to discourage excessive spraying. For most Armalites, lowcaps are 68 rounds, so realistically, the player had about 63 rounds available.

I've often seen game rules for milsim that ban high cap (except in dedicated support weapons), limit the number of midcaps, but allow unlimited real / low cap mags, and bans reloading of mags on the field. To me, that makes perfect sense. It encourages ammo conservation and trigger control.

And I agree with Brian here as well. To have players be able to carry limited ammo and have the ammo as a commodity in the game could make it very interesting and provide a concrete game objective that a team can benefit from.