Real World Tactics don't work (in airsoft), and here's why

I think Porta's idea of tweaking the regen rules to improve the advantage for the attackers have a lot of merit.

That said, recent games experience suggests the rolling scenario made up of a major objective followed by a regrouping and scouting objective with dead an outs on the major objectives might be better than regenning as individuals. That keeps the squad together more and lets people sort their kit and plan the next move better?

its hard to fight and die as a block, 3 or 4 guys get wiped out and 1 or 2 guys go to ground, the sections become fragmented quickly and it all goes to ratcrap

What would happen in a real combat situation? It's a genuine question 'cos I have no military experience beyond making dental crowns for Bundeswehr squaddies.
I'd imagine you'd try to find a larger unit to hook up with or return to HQ, no?

Martin, you'd grab some cover and call in the artillery! It's the platoon Sergeant and then, the Company Sergeant Major's job to round up stragglers and do something with them.

proper squad tactics can work on occasion such as at the St Lo game which I have to say was probably the most realistic and therefore one of the most immersive, enjoyable and realistic games I have ever been too.

You obviously weren't part of the attack with the bazooka! When ordered to get up and advance, then keep advancing despite casualties (as they would for real!), many reverted to being airsofters when the rounds started flying and promptly hit the deck, leaving me standing there on my own to get mullered!

other wise are you not just having a SIHK (skirmish in historical kit).

I'd like to know what Ranj's thoughts are on this.

Well, it nearly says Sikh doesn't it?!

Apologies for a very late contribution to this interesting thread.

As has been pointed out, there are indeed some issues to do with:

i) effective ranges
ii) terrain density
iii) unit cohesion
iv) 'odds' in conventional balanced sides type games

The first two are related really, if the terrain is fairly dense, particularly if it is complex with plenty of covered approaches, then short effective ranges matter less. Fire and movement is only really used when units can't make further progress by using covered approaches. Unfortunately there isn't much that can be done about this in terms of games apart from picking sites carefully, or setting the scenarios up to take best advantage of the terrain available.

One effect of short ranges and ad-hoc groupings of playes is that you dont; get much unit cohesion, which makes doing fire and movement that much harder. When the players are willing to do it and will accept the direction of 'NCOs', then it works much better. We've managed to do both modern fireteam tactics as well as WW2 rifle group/gun group, but only in situations where it has been smallish private games and we've set it up so the defenders are outnumbered 3:1 and taken it in turns to repeat the various drills. We didn't use full strength subunits though, but had the players working in pairs or threes which seemed to work very well (so as a minimum a 'section' might be an NCO plus two teams of two).

I have seen fire & movement work in regular airsoft games, the pre-conditions seemed to be that the range was right for effective suppressing fire, the situation was static enough that the ad-hoc players could get organised in safety, and most important, that one of the players took the initiative and got them organised. It is possible, but it needs the players to be willing to play their roles appropriately. This just backs up the point made above that smaller groups than real units seem to work.

As far as balancing sides goes (or rather, giving attackers a simulated numerical advantage when the player numbers are the same), playing around with regen/medic rules can work wonders. A particularly effective approach IMHO is a 'hit and fall back' rule for the defenders as you can simulate genuine defence in depth but keep the attackers rolling. If modelling assaults on prepared positions, then may some sort of suppressive artillery barrage on the defenders to keep their heads down (mix of smokes and pyros)?? Might need some creative marshalling.

Apologies if this has all been said before, but the milsim aspects are one of theings which attracted me to WW2 airsoft.

Cheers
Martin

"creative marshalling" I don't think anyone in WW2 airsoft has used marshalls for 3 plus year AFAIK

Kidding aside though the hit and fall back idea is one that can be used to good effect. Unit cohesion is the main reason why fire and movement fails though. When I used to do modern airtsoft as part of a well run team of 10, we occasionally managed to do some effective squad tactics, but that was because we trained for it , knew each other well, had discipline and were playing a lot. As every army trains and trains so that it's manoevers are instinctive, so the transient and temporary nature of airsoft works against this. As a commander in the field I have occasionally got people to do F&M , but even then it's hard and needs a lot of shouting and direction at the right time . Most airsofters will instinctivelyhide behind a tree and take pot shots when they come under fire, the more maturing nature of our regular players is defying this , but take a look at any open day to see this behaviour . The other thing that works against real world tactics is fear . Airsofters do not get killed if they get it wrong, and therefore the decision making processes are reversed from reality . Most real troops will avoid contact if the situation is not advantageous or part of their misson, airsofters actively seek out the enemy just to shoot the gun This reverse psychology is one of the main stumbling blocks and hence why we've looked to include a larger amount of other soldiering activity in our events to distract from the the "run at the enemy and shoot them" mentality , as well as give a more rounded experience of soldiering in the 1940's.

No-ones ever seemed appreciative when I've tried to cleave them over the head with my e-tool

....

No-ones ever seemed appreciative when I've tried to cleave them over the head with my e-tool

....

Maybe one of these would be seen as more friendly than fiendley

http://www.outofthearmoury.co.uk/eftest ... m/larp.htm