are we trying to fix something not broken?

Speaking for CiA, our plan is more of the same kind of event that we have run in the past. Smaller, more focussed events which focus more on the experience than trigger time or an overused or gimmicky site. We will not be going to "real steel" ammo limits, we will adjust ammo limits, regen, medic and other rules based on the scenario we are running. I'd like to think that our track record speaks for itself too and, that some of the newer players will give CiA events a go, as well as the veterans.

Organisers have always played around with different rules and approaches, trying to do what they want to do best. In this regard there is never any real discussion or agreement between organisers, it is always an individual thing. I don't think there would be a way to concertedly try and change what 'we' do as a whole, even if we wanted to do so.

The only real 'shift' has been a couple of Josh's recent games, and they are his games to decide how he wants to run them. He has an additional burden that the rest of us do not: he has to make a living from it, and consequently try and keep everyone happy. He tends to not disappoint, and even when I have been at games where the majority of the ethos is 'not to my liking' he manages to run them in such a way as to still be great fun for me. I would put my trust in Josh, and I you won't be disappointed.

As for the rest of the organisers, we all look to be pretty much doing what we always have. I decided to refine my rules recently, mainly because I had run earlier games with much more open rules to get bums on seats, and it didn't work. So I thought if I am gonna only get 20 players anyway, I might as well try something different that we had thought about doing for a long time.

Do I generally think that the more restrictive the ammo and immersive the experience the better? yes, I can't pretend I view that and a 600 rounds per man game day the same, as I just don't. Some changes people make annoy me, some do make me not go to a game, but so long as it is all put up in advance so I can make an informed decision I am a, generally, contented bunny and am happy for organisers to run what they want, how they see fit to run it.

I can see where the OP is coming from. While I know where my personal preferences lie I am an advocate for a 'broad church' and yes, I believe at the moment there is a gap in the market. Tight rules are well catered for now. What is missing is what was rather pejoratively (but accurately and amusingly) called by my erstwhile co-organiser as a SISK - skirmish in silly kit. That is to say, something that has fun as the principle aim rather any sense of accuracy or historical accuracy. Would I attend one - well no, but I'd rather someone attended one of those and enjoyed it rather than one of 'ours' and hating it (or cocking up an event by not 'getting it'). It may well be that they 'progress' into something more challenging...

Having attended Craigs rifles only game I have to say that was one of the best events I have been to and it certainly produced some very positive feedback that some other game organisers will have taken note of. However as much as I enjoyed it and would like to attend similar games, I certainly would not like all games to be that style. I enjoy the eclectic mix of games and like to go to some that are a bit more of a blatfest and can wear kit that might not otherwise get a look in.

I think there will always be a good mix of styles for everyone although personally Im glad some are moving towards being more restrictive because I enjoy it, just not all the time.

I think one of the things is that the reason this whole scene exists at the level it does now is that the six of us who set us CIA wanted something *more* than just 'allies vs axis' blatfests.

We were pleasantly surprised when we ran the first game 'clash of eagles' that a *lot* of people felt the same way.

The thing is if you just want to dress up in WWII kit and blaze through hi-caps there are a million open days a year across the world where you can do this but if you actually want to feel like you're in a WWII battle (or probably more accurately war film) then there are still only about 20 games a *year* where you can do this.

I think as well that for many people into this scene (and it does tend to be older players as a whole) who are *really* into their history then games where 18 different allied regiments all mysteriously turn up to fight a random selection of swastika wearing opponents just feel like you may as well just wear coloured arm bands and sod bothering to dress up in period kit.

I know not everyone feels this way but I honestly feel that the changes are player led. Players wanted it to be a bit more like a 'historical battle', organisers put on these games and those are the ones attended. strangely the more 'free and easy' games tend to not do so well.

as for it being 'like re-enactment' , you're probably right but thats probably because *most* most of the game organisers are also re-enactors.

Dave is (or was in a re-enactment group), Kermits been in half a dozen, yith and wladek are in the same group and Josh himself took part in the battle at war and peace last year to name a few.

I think the thing is, and its really at the core of this hobby, is that when you feel games are not giving you what you want... take the plunge and ask your local site for a quiet day and run the sort of game you want to see. You'll soon find out if you're right when you're bookings roll in or dont.

I know CIA, PBI, and AGS were all set up pretty much to create 'games we wanted to play in' , the only problem is (as it says in old un excellent guide to running a game)... the irony is you dont get to actually play yourself

I can see where you're coming from, to a the new player or the players whose not that fussed about history there must seen to be a bewildering set of ever changing rules and some needlessly 'finickity' (is that a word?) requirements for players. the thing is though, realistically each organiser perhaps introduces one or two rules a year if that (and its usually fine tuning exisiting rules) and to the players there for a while it seems like a natural evolution but if you're relatively new to this it must look like things get re-written every week

All i can say is that while it might *seem* like a pain in the arse you should have been at some of the WWII 'themed' events we went to before CIA started doing more 'controlled' scenarios... if you like your WWII with DPM, M4s, throat mikes and camelbacks it would have been heaven but i thought they were pointless The first few CIA games were very light on rules and *very* accomodating on kit... we spent ages writing a 'counts as' list of acceptable substitutions... which were completley pointless as nobody used anything except proper kit at CIA games... again player led and so the counts as list was left to disapear as no one actually needed it.

Good question to ask though, id' be interested to see if i'm right in thinking most people like the evolution and if i'm wrong and most people are fed up then its something we need to look at i suppose, but then that brings you back to the point of 'running games you want to be in'... if for example the overiding feeling was, for the sake of argument we'll go to extremes, that more games should be 'free for all' with no ammo limits and personal radios allowed and no command structure other than someone saying 'go out there and capture all the flags' then i know i wouldnt want to play that and certainly wouldnt put hundreds of hours of my time in for free to run it.

good thread, interested to see how it goes.

Likewise, form me its the gradual evolution which interests me. Ideas tried, discarded and the best ones kept. So yes keep it up. I too remember the initial ak/ stg44's and mp5 as mp40's. all things evolve and we have seen some interesting changes. Very enjoyable thread

For me I can honestly say I wish I never bothered trying real steal in ww2 as all it's done is create a debate I can't be bothered to defend. I'm so busy with so many games I simply don't have the time to put answers together. Filmsim is not just a set of rules, it's an attitude and style of playing out war games. It's 'not' rigged at all but has core rules that never change. I'm not sure there has been that many changes (there's a response on the gunman forum to the topic of real steel) only improved explanations to stop reading between the lines or interpretation. The spirit of any game is truly the only real rule anyway!

I do feel there are to many debates questioning the organisers decisions that possible have no place in debate but better pm'd to the organiser so no pressure is put on them to make a decision. I personally am only interested in entertaining my punters, supporting our little WW2 hobby and putting on the best show I can. I can get things wrong and have no ego in the field when it comes down to changing something if its not working! However, I think to much debate is being focused on rules and rules breakers rather than how lucky we all are that we have such a dynamic troop of organisers that are dedicated to running stuff for us.

It took 3 events and players feedback to get our standing orders right and now that's set it stone. That to my knoll age is the only rules addition we have had in years. No idea about the other organisers as I don't get out much
It didn't need an open forum debate with loads of opinions, just being played and if it hadn't worked, it would have been dropped!

So in short you lot, stop moaning, give us your support and we will continue to entertain you. What we don't need is 10 people dictating to an organiser how they think the organiser should run their game do we....otherwise it's not their game anymore. Lol I bloody hate forums.......pub anyone?

I couldn't agree more Josh. This all seems a bit of a storm in a tea cup. But that is the nature of forums. If only people got as worked up and active about some of the real problems in this world we might live in a better place.

While I am comparatively new to all this I think some are assuming that there are problems or that stricter rules are being introduced across the board when perhaps all that is happening is some minor tinkering or that they are being clarified and needed to be clarified as some people were not playing by them. I attend WW2 Airsoft precisely because it is not a free for all blatfest. Yes, the rifle only game was great and I'd like to do it again and Ideally I'd like to see a better, more realistic balance between weapons. However that doesn't mean I think all games should be that strict. I have rifles and sub machine guns and I'm certainly not going to argue myself out of using the latter. I am happy with a mix of games and very grateful to the organisers for providing them.

The problem might be that despite what Gadge said about there being 20 games a year unless I am missing something I make it only half that number - and it's not always possible for people to attend all of those. This perhaps increases people's concerns and perceptions if they think (erroneously) that massive changes are being made, they appear more concentrated.

Having said that in a semi-serious way at times this does all seem a bIt like the American Gun Lobby with the right to bear a Hi-Cap while acting as a Lone Wolf still being defended in a more enlightened age.

well maybe 20 was a bit of an exageration.

at a rough count Josh runs about four a year usually

Cia run three to four

AGS do one or two

Craig does at least one

Portas running two this year

Oddball does one or two

Add to that Warren does WWII events up in scotland and players of war do WWII 'themed' events where they try and encourage WWII players very regularly.

I dont mean to leave anyone out as its late and im tired but thats the main regular parties that initially spring to mind so thats what 11 at least and possibly 15? But it sort of re-enforces the point that if you *dont* want effectively a sunday skirmish in serge you've got a finite ammount of options and i think if people are going to spend £30 - £80 quid on an experience they usually want something that 'immersive'... thats the feeling i get anyway from talking to players over the years and from the emails i used to get from the readers when i ran AI's WWII airsoft column.

As people have said, you can debate this til the ends of the earth and it doesnt help that much, and Josh is right we should be greatful we've got such a diverse WWII scene that can support so many events. I wish there were as many players into Cold War airsoft (my current fave thing).

I think we're never going to know until someone runs an incredibly inclusive, easy ruleset event where you've got loose objectives like 'kill all the other team' or 'capture these three hills' and takes in the bookings. Until someone *runs* a game of that nature we're not going to know realistically if anyone actually really wants that.

As CW often points out, polls usually achieve very little, as does designing games by committee on a forum.

Someone just has to take the risk... As in Waynes World book it and they will come... or wont?

well maybe 20 was a bit of an exageration.

13 including a US training day in 2011 and 10 in 2012 unless I've miscounted.

So in short you lot, stop moaning, give us your support and we will continue to entertain you. What we don't need is 10 people dictating to an organiser how they think the organiser should run their game do we....otherwise it's not their game anymore.

And with this, I completely agree.

Be thankfull that there is a broad range of choices between the type of games offered.

Porta's running some looser-ruled games this year so there is a balance. Our Grafton Park event is completely open to anyone.

I totally agree with Josh, players just need to book and play! Leave it to organisers to worry about how to run their games, and if you think things should be different then try to run one yourself!

I am just grateful to the organisers for putting games in a variety of styles. styles. As punters, ultimately we vote with our feet, so as long as games are well attended, there probably isn't a problem.

The only thing I ask is as much notice as possible, and information up front about what to expect so there aren't any last minute surprises.

Cheers
Martin

So there you go John - current game organisers have said they won't be changing what they are providing, so that really only leaves the suggestion that you organise a game yourself along the lines of a game you would like to play (the premise of all volunteer organisers). FWIW I think there could be a market for it - that is how POW run their events - just don't expect me to book!

That said, there seem to be a lot of other dressy-up themed airsoft events that are purely aimed at having a laugh - perhaps this is the antidote to WW2 games which are a bit more focussed and taken more seriously?

As someone who is n te initial stages of trying to put an event together this disscussion, the event planning thread, and the disscussion on the gunman forum have made interesting reading. Do believe that players hould give the benefit to the oranisers of an event to run it as they see fit, but as organisers should also be flexible enough that if something is not working then it should be revised and or dropped and not come to a point of 'its my ball, and i'm gong home..'
Do aswell think that som of the 'go on organise one yourself!' comments may actually scare people away from doing it, just bescause it sounds like you do your type of game but i wont come attitude ,and i am not pointing at anyone just thats how it can read, rather than we should be giving each organiser support to adopt the game they want to run andif it works then well done which is i beieve the whole crux of this disscussion.

Heh, I'm trying to encourage not scare away! As said,if anyone thinks that players may be interested in your own take on a game style then go ahead and organise it - I'll give you all the marketing support you on this forum and website. (But don't expect me to attend - I left 'looser' (not loser!) games behind years ago and look for something a bit edgier. )

In response to organisers being a bit more flexable, surely thats what changing things about a bit to suit a game is!

Maybe its the player that needs to be flexable too and not say, Im not going to that cause 'I dont think I would like it'. How the hell do you know.

I cant see this thread going anywhere from here other than players and organisers viewing opions best kept to themselves (me included) By all means post up 'ideas', but I think were all getting a bit sick of problems! Especialy when there NOT realy problems! or at least not until an opinion is made lol, see what I did there.

What happened to 'cant wait to get in the field and be a toy soldier' and when did it all get so serious that we need such debates.

How about threads like, what is your favirout memory from an event or Fuck I love WW2 games and this is why??

Hope your all feeling my love here

Kie, my comment about booking an event was not supposed to scare people off... but it *is* scary doing your first event but also really rewarding.

Its not easy but its not hard either if you plan properly and have a good team.

If anyone thinking of running their own game i cant recommend old un's guide enough... follow that and you should end up with a cracking event that will attract the sort of players and game *you* want.

I think we need to give Josh some more credit here too. Gunman, as far as i know, like any other airsoft site make their money on the bread and butter of airsoft the open day. I could be wrong but i think Josh does the WWII, nam and cold war cos he actually *loves the hobby* himself... or he wouldnt be playing the games too

having helped Josh at a fair few events i can safely say that he does them for the love of them, not to make megabucks and you can understand why you might feel like tearing your hair out when after every event or planning announcement there is never a thread going 'oh thats cool' its always 'oh i dont know about that'

I know *im* partly to blame in the past as i'm very self critical and like to analise events in detail and my forum manner can often be a bit brusque but... i'll echo josh here. Lets see if some 'postive re-enforcement' works this year.

If we dont like lone wolfing, what i *should* have done is put up a thread praising the players who played as sections not as loners.

etc etc.

there is in some games a need for specific rules to be in place because of what is being attempted, cant see a problem there.although most of us get frustrated at more allied v german with hi-cap games (i exaggerate) but we need entry level events to get new players involved.
i'm very happy with the rules both standard and at special event's, as CW said its broad church that works best and i'd get bored at clone'd games .
keep it coming