New round limits and regen thoughts

I like having regen points...It gives guys a chance to reload take on some water, and discuss tic tacs.. Its the careful controlled flow of this which needs not addressing just enforcing. Thats why a contingent of medics would be an asset. it needs someone turning the players around as quickly as posible and getting them back into the game to keep the game flowing. Healing them in the field so that having to wander back to a CP is only a last resort.

I like the games the way they are - ok, so the Axis won convincingly at Pocket, but we were slaughtered at Husky - that's the way it goes. I used the same amount of ammo and pyro at both - with different results. I use grenades and smoke because it suits my style of play - others don't - that's their choice. Whilst it's interesting to debate things like controlling people's ammo / pryo loadouts even more, it would be an absolute logistical nightmare. Much of the way games are played - just like the heart of the game, the hit rule - is based on trust. We trust rifle / SMG users not to exceed 600 rounds.

On the subject of ammo limits I am inclinded to agree with a more restricted limit to ammo capacity due to a bias in the way in which I play. I often use a bolt action to which they basically don't apply and even with an AEG I tend to get nowhere near the limit most of the time ( and strangely I quite like running out of ammo).
However I can see where those who are opposed to it are coming from. In larger games having to go back to reload is just another thing that breaks up the continuity like regening. As CW suggest that can be a real chore especially on some sites where the terrain can be quite challenging.

So really what I am getting at is I think I agree with both sides. For larger rolling games like CIA games they're probably good as they are. For short games like varsity then I'd quite like the idea of a 300 rnd limit.

As regards regens I don't like them either. Largely for the points Gadge has already out lined; it stunts tactial movements and it can can detract from the emersion when people are wondering in and out of a firefight. Again however it comes down to short games vs long games. In short games you can get away without regens (& at varsity this worked well) but at longer games they are a necessary evil. The use of medics/aid stations no matter how tweaked the rules are is just a variation on the regen idea and having people get more lives is necessarily something we want. If you have a bunch of invincible medics running around you could end up with two unbeatable sides fighting to a stalemate over and over.

On woodlanders overall ammo limit idea, I quite like it but I'm not sure if it could be implimented effectively or what difference it would really make. It would be difficult to judge what the right amount would be or even enforce it- I don't tend to keep that close a track on what I have used for the day so far. Still I think it could be worth try to see what difference it does make

As for LMGs I think the main factor in the lack of them is the price/skirmishablity of those currently available not the ammo limits. I'm sure we'd all love to have at least one in our arsenal but out wallets dictate otherwise. The idea of spreading an LMG gunners ammo between the squad to promote teamwork I like though. I believe the the Brits tried something like that at Husky didn't they?

As McV I think wrote, the medic system at ItP worked well (but bigger bandages please! ) and kept the game flowing.

The medic system at the pocket is a pretty standard for most of the ww2 games I've been to, but it does work well. The bandages were crap though webby

Much like ammo supply, why not make the provision of a grenade or smoke as part of the ticket price?

At some games, particularly CiA ones you will find this may be the case. Not that I ever seem to get any (but thats probably a good thing given my throwing arm)

Oooh, so many points Woodlander! I'm going to pick up on some of them and bear in mind this is Comrades in Arms 'philosophy' and seen from an organisation POV largely - other runs games differently.

1. Day ammo allocations wouldn't work - you either end up hoarding or worse running out. You (as a player) have no idea of the actions planned later in the day, nor whether you have to do a major assault or a critical defence. All of which will fail if there is insufficient ammo or chaps won't use what they have.
2. No way can ammo be issued as part of a game fee - I wouldn't put any ammo in my guns that I hadn't bought myself (let alone issues of favoured weights etc)
3. Regens not only are a mechanism for R&R (as bigUK say) but also represent 'new' troops. They are also tools for re-grouping and allow a battlefield to be emptied of enemy so giving ground to the attackers yet the same players returning from a regen (let's call it a CP or Field Hospital) will be a 'new' enemy to battle with.
4. All CiA games use a dedicated medic system, represented by a medic bag. It's by volunteer, if they get tired of the role then another player takes over, but if someone like Doug relishes the role for the whole event that's fab. If used properly then rolling actions can be accomplished easily. Be disorganised, your medic wanders off or (say) you are all ambushed or hit by an arty barrage - tough luck, back to the field hospital. That's pretty 'realistic' I would have thought?
5. Logistic nightmare not charging for medics and sites want paying per player - we can't say 'oh, they don't count'!
6. CiA don't have marshals - ever.
7. As for tactics - that's down to the players. If you have a support gun then part and parcel of that is you are going to get through some ammo. Tight-wads will have to stick to sniping!
8. It's quite impossible given the age and health of your average WW2 airsofter to keep going continuously for a six hour game - they need breaks whether enforced (PBI short half hour games) or unenforced (CIA games/dying in-game). Personally, if we are talking about suspending disbelief, I prefer one long battle as being more realistic.
9. LMGs have yet to become a force to be reconned with in a game. I thought this might change at Husky but it didn't happen - Barry has done stirling work with his over several games, but the practicality of lugging does get a bit much. Ah, I forgot Pete's fantastic defence fo the US base at Eagle - static position so no lugging!

Tight-wads will have to stick to sniping!

Tight wads! The ammo is 10 times the price.

ok, so the Axis won convincingly at Pocket, but we were slaughtered at Husky - that's the way it goes.

Notice any commonality in the command structure at both of these games?

Aaaaanyhooo.

Regarding the breaking up of squads when using field hospitals... I make this point EVERY single game that I command at, then it gets ignored. If you find your fireteam getting whittled down with players going back to the field hospital why not work more tactically as a team and consider a tactical withdraw and regroup? That way you all can stick together then mount a counter-offensive en masse. Better to withdraw alive and reorganise than to stubbornly fight to the last and then lose the rest of your squad somewhere in the woods.

Depending on the site and scenario the Stirling Services approached can work well. Regen alternates between 2 points at pre-designated times, and closes in between.

For example, point A is Allies respawn from 11.00-11.20, point B is for Axis. They both close for 10 minutes, then re-open as point A for Axis, and point B for Allies from 11.30-11.50, etc etc...

It stops the game from stagnating, as the attacks & re-enforcements can come from more than one direction, and makes people more aware of their surroundings, as the attack isn't all coming from one place.

Perfect example was phoenix rising @ sennybridge, which employed this method. After desperately slogging up and down the same hill to attack the east of the village, almost all the defenders had re-located to the eastern sectors. Regen switched, and 20+ attackers hammered into the virtually empty west side of the town, taking an objective site and half a dozen building in the process. Lesson learned by the defenders.

.

You are of course taking the piss.
The game play was stodgy , inconsitant and confusing to both sides for most of the weekend , resulting in crap firefights, stalemates and endless fudgingot get the gameplay going again .
The "Americans" spent most of the day working out where not to go , and the Brits had to retire at tea time to allow the game to open up again . I have worked with Ian W on 5/6 of TA events , I wouldn't hold up any of them as an example of how to run a game , in fact most of the fucks ups I have witnessed from 2 -6 have been fed back into CiA to make sure that our players have a good game , and are not overburdened with confusing changing rules such as the flip flop regen which add fuck all to a game other than pissing players off.
Both commanders at PR were exceptionally pissed off with the way it went , & I know em both personally .

Regarding the breaking up of squads when using field hospitals... I make this point EVERY single game that I command at, then it gets ignored. If you find your fireteam getting whittled down with players going back to the field hospital why not work more tactically as a team and consider a tactical withdraw and regroup? That way you all can stick together then mount a counter-offensive en masse. Better to withdraw alive and reorganise than to stubbornly fight to the last and then lose the rest of your squad somewhere in the woods.

Hear, hear. Trouble is and this is not pointing sticks at anyone, is that a lot of people don't get "in character" and run around like, well, airsofters. If players put in a little bit of effort immersing themselves in the period and trying to think like a Tommy, a G.I or a Landser, etc, then the airsofter mindset goes out of the window. You start to care about those around you (ie, you value their "lives"), you think more tactically but you also obey your orders. It doesn't matter what ammo and regen rules there are if people just treat it as a blatfest (or a sisk! ).

Totally agree, Pete.

Regarding the breaking up of squads when using field hospitals... I make this point EVERY single game that I command at, then it gets ignored. If you find your fireteam getting whittled down with players going back to the field hospital why not work more tactically as a team and consider a tactical withdraw and regroup? That way you all can stick together then mount a counter-offensive en masse. Better to withdraw alive and reorganise than to stubbornly fight to the last and then lose the rest of your squad somewhere in the woods.

This is exactly the point I was trying to get across before Operation Haggard - I certainly mentioned it on the forum, but with everything frying my brain, I missed repeating it at the briefing.

Regarding the breaking up of squads when using field hospitals... I make this point EVERY single game that I command at, then it gets ignored. If you find your fireteam getting whittled down with players going back to the field hospital why not work more tactically as a team and consider a tactical withdraw and regroup? That way you all can stick together then mount a counter-offensive en masse. Better to withdraw alive and reorganise than to stubbornly fight to the last and then lose the rest of your squad somewhere in the woods.

Hear, hear. Trouble is and this is not pointing sticks at anyone, is that a lot of people don't get "in character" and run around like, well, airsofters. If players put in a little bit of effort immersing themselves in the period and trying to think like a Tommy, a G.I or a Landser, etc, then the airsofter mindset goes out of the window. You start to care about those around you (ie, you value their "lives"), you think more tactically but you also obey your orders. It doesn't matter what ammo and regen rules there are if people just treat it as a blatfest (or a sisk! ).

Quoted for truth.

I've noticed that some guys really get into the mentality and play as a group and then to others its a private war film starring them, nothing wrong with either (as you pay your money you play how *you* want) but the latter dont get much done in the long run

Good discussion so far, one or the more interesting ones lately IMO.

Oooh, so many points Woodlander! I'm going to pick up on some of them and bear in mind this is Comrades in Arms 'philosophy' and seen from an organisation POV largely - other runs games differently.

Thanks for taking the time to plough through and reply to my 'thinking aloud'. Like I said, thus far I've only been to ItP and so as I attend more games my views will probably bounce around quite a bit before settling.

Depending on the site and scenario the Stirling Services approached can work well. Regen alternates between 2 points at pre-designated times, and closes in between.

For example, point A is Allies respawn from 11.00-11.20, point B is for Axis. They both close for 10 minutes, then re-open as point A for Axis, and point B for Allies from 11.30-11.50, etc etc...

It stops the game from stagnating, as the attacks & re-enforcements can come from more than one direction, and makes people more aware of their surroundings, as the attack isn't all coming from one place.

Perfect example was phoenix rising @ sennybridge, which employed this method. After desperately slogging up and down the same hill to attack the east of the village, almost all the defenders had re-located to the eastern sectors. Regen switched, and 20+ attackers hammered into the virtually empty west side of the town, taking an objective site and half a dozen building in the process. Lesson learned by the defenders.

.

You are of course taking the piss.
The game play was stodgy , inconsitant and confusing to both sides for most of the weekend , resulting in crap firefights, stalemates and endless fudgingot get the gameplay going again .
The "Americans" spent most of the day working out where not to go , and the Brits had to retire at tea time to allow the game to open up again . I have worked with Ian W on 5/6 of TA events , I wouldn't hold up any of them as an example of how to run a game , in fact most of the fucks ups I have witnessed from 2 -6 have been fed back into CiA to make sure that our players have a good game , and are not overburdened with confusing changing rules such as the flip flop regen which add feck all to a game other than pissing players off.
Both commanders at PR were exceptionally pissed off with the way it went , & I know em both personally .

I don't think i put my point clearly enough. I'm not saying the TA events are a standard to work to by any means [TA5 was a cluster***k of the highest regard, and almost stopped me playing PR]. I attended TA1, 2, 4, 5 & PR 1, and had some of the best and worst experiences i've had on the field. I meant to focus more on the example given, that allowing a changable regen [be it 2 fixed points or a moving 'aid station'] can free up the game play and gives an incentive for live players to stay on their toes.

This is coming from a player, not an organiser, so I can only give my personal experience. Having played the rules at Stirling games, it can be made to work, but it takes many other factors to bring the experience together. I'll back out of this discussion, as i'm yet to even play a CiA/gunman/etc game, and i'm not qualified to give opinions on whats already in place, let alone what needs changing!

Sorry for the confusion

No need to back out fella, debate is free on here and everyones opinion counts !
Having observed TAs2-6 from an organisers POV I've struggled to understand why anyone would go to more than one. I was getting paid so thats my excuse. Can't speak about Stirling events although they are well recieved by most who go .

To be fair, i've played at six or seven SS events and each one has been awesome, some minor niggles but all in all great value for money.

has anyone played blatfest open days using lo-caps and limited ammo??? its interesting, and can be done. one thing i have noticed about the twin mounted M249 grafted to a mini gun with 300 quid of BBs geardos is this, THEY CANT PLAY FOR TOFFEE . use a few well practiced battle drills against them and the dont know weather to shit or go blind. the amount of ammo you carry and use matters not if you know what you are doing.

has anyone played blatfest open days using lo-caps and limited ammo??? its interesting, and can be done. one thing i have noticed about the twin mounted M249 grafted to a mini gun with 300 quid of BBs geardos is this, THEY CANT PLAY FOR TOFFEE . use a few well practiced battle drills against them and the dont know weather to shit or go blind. the amount of ammo you carry and use matters not if you know what you are doing.

That is so true. I have had some of the best games I have played at a normal airsoft site using a spring tm 'shotgun' and a moscart attached; max range 20m or so with only 70 shots on the shotgun. Loads of kills by sneaking around. No good for a head on assault but great to practice stalking!

use a few well practiced battle drills against them and the dont know weather to shit or go blind....

I think it's time we had some more training days, they really help get the lone gunman attitude out of your head.

 

i agree, section battle drills save time and ammo. lets get a few practises done.

We will def have a PBI training day early next year.

Last one has already paid massive dividends

From a point of tactics, re-supply boxes could be captured, cut off an area for re-supply and your more likely to overun it as the defenders will run out of ammo, just as you would in real life.

As done at one of CiA's first game, 'A Bridge Too Far'. IIRC I was the mug who ran out to collect the ammo tin only to find it full of clothes.....