Hi guys
For two years we've accepted a 600 rounds/3000 rounds support limit in games.
This was initially chosen (by Yith, myself and the cia crew) as the max you could get in an ak hi-cap meaning players only needed one mag for a game etc. Remember at the time we were running our first game and didn't know what to expect, the only real wwii gun available was the Thompson and the initial rule set reflected a need to make the first battle as accessible to all as possible.
We did expect a lot of 'counts as' but in reality got *very* little.
Is it time to change it for PBI events?
Is 600 to much or two little, should hicaps (excluding those fixed in some guns) be disallowed.
Have your say.
At the pbi/Hohenstaufen private battle next year we may well trial a 300 round limit but how do you feel about it?
"I think we are in rats' alley - Where the dead men lost their bones."
I have no problem with reducing the ammo limit...
It will start to be awkward though when players try to estimate how many rounds should go in a pair of 190rnd mags to make it 300 or in a 420 round mag to make it 300 etc... but that shouldn't be a massive problem.
What I am against is saying that hicaps are banned... I'm happy that hasn't been done with this suggestion.
Lets try it and see what happens.
I'm happy to try out a lower ammo limit for standard weapons. Support weapons should stay about the same I think so their effective use is more important than it currently is.
I hate hi-caps (both using and on the recieving end) so have no problem getting rid of them.
However I realise this could create problems with certain guns so how about not allowing mags over a certain capacity like 200-300 rounds? Although you would have to exclude any guns with a fixed hi-cap mag but there aren't that many and I'm sure we can rely on the owners to not take the piss. 
Instead of restricting hi-caps, has anyone tried a game limiting the amount of ammo allowed in each mag (in the spirit of realism and also to balance the Thompson vs MP40 niggles)? Shouldn't be too hard to estimate 50 rounds with a standard speed loader. Sure it relies on a lot of self-policing, but I think most of us are quite good at that
As per my post on the Mist game thread, I think that hi-caps should be banned except in circumstances where it is not possible due to the gun design like the S&S stens etc. The reason is, as I said, the hi-cap user doesnt have to stop for mag changes, which DOES give them an advantage and detracts from the combat realism (and enjoyment IMO) I dont think its the total amount of ammo that is nessersarily the issue, I think 600 works well but I'd be up for trying 300. I use abolt action whenever possible anyway
I would not want Support guns restricted on ammo any further but would like to see them have forced stoppages every 300 rounds or so to simulate belt changes. which would be done by baggin up ammo and only loading the mag with the prescribed amount each time. This ammo could then be kept in an ammo tin carried by the MG no2 which again would add to the realism
“I wanted to come to the Volga at a specific location at a specific city. By chance it carries the name of Stalin himself. So don’t think I marched there for this reason – it could carry another name – but because there is a very important goal... this goal I wanted to take – and you know – we are very modest, we have it already."
Adolf Hitler, November 1942
"Comrades, Red Army men, commanders and political workers, men and women guerrillas! It is on your perseverance, staunchness, fighting skill and readiness to discharge your duty to the country that the defeat of the German-fascist army and the liberation of the Soviet land from the Hitlerite invaders depend! We can and must clear the Soviet land of Hitlerite vermin."
Joseph Stalin, November 1942
Instead of restricting hi-caps, has anyone tried a game limiting the amount of ammo allowed in each mag (in the spirit of realism and also to balance the Thompson vs MP40 niggles)? Shouldn't be too hard to estimate 50 rounds with a standard speed loader. Sure it relies on a lot of self-policing, but I think most of us are quite good at that
A good idea in theory but sadly as always there will be a small minority element who just wont do it! 
The other big issue is that unlike full hicaps, half full hi-caps will rattle like barst*'#ds in your pouches when you run 
Still we would certainly hear the enemy coming!
“I wanted to come to the Volga at a specific location at a specific city. By chance it carries the name of Stalin himself. So don’t think I marched there for this reason – it could carry another name – but because there is a very important goal... this goal I wanted to take – and you know – we are very modest, we have it already."
Adolf Hitler, November 1942
"Comrades, Red Army men, commanders and political workers, men and women guerrillas! It is on your perseverance, staunchness, fighting skill and readiness to discharge your duty to the country that the defeat of the German-fascist army and the liberation of the Soviet land from the Hitlerite invaders depend! We can and must clear the Soviet land of Hitlerite vermin."
Joseph Stalin, November 1942
Sorry I have to disagree...
For instance with the Tommy gun. The only correct mags for use by the Brits are the 20rnd box mags and the drum mags... Now fair enough drum mags are a little silly, but the 20rnd mags are only available as 190rnd hicaps. I'm sorry, but I'm not using those nasty long 30rnd mags in my Thompson.
It really isn't as simple as just banning hicaps... there are so many side cases... some people insist that 190rnd mags are midcaps etc..
Anyway with the 110 rnd mags now available for the MP40 this is less of an issue. These are a LOT more reliable than the old AGM mags...
The new mid-caps may even things up a little but its not solving the problem. 110 rounds is still no match for 420 and increasing the axis firepower I think is basically going about things the wrong way. I don't want to turn it into an arms race, I want it to be a closer reflection of the real thing whilst remaining as fair to all parties as possible.
Thats why I said about banning mags over a certain capacity- there is no need for using a 420 round hi-cap in a thompson when you have lo-caps, mid caps and 190rnd hi-caps (they use winding mechs so cannot be considered mid-caps IMO) available.
Ideally I'd like to say no hi-caps but cost and in some cases historical accuracy will prevent people from doing this with certain guns. Therefore I think it would be better to have a cut-off point to make things a little fairer. At least with those 190 rnd capacities you have to change mags at least a couple of times before reloading unlike some others.
Would you say that someone using a hi cap is compensating for the lack of artillery in the overall game. Keeping the volume of fire up to a level that although it doesnt simulate artillery at least makes the battlefield very hot. I say this as someone who only has the 110 round mags for his MP40.
That said back in my paintballing days the games I enjoyed the most were with the old single shot and reload markers, always something Napoleonic about making one shot count.
I understand where you are coming from Yith and I dont blame you for wanting to keep authentic 20rnd size mags rather than use the 30rnd size mid caps.
The prob is that you do have approx half the mag changes that the MP40 user does so there is a genuine advantage there, maybe not a huge one but an advantage none the less.
In a one-on-one firefight, Thompson vs MP40, the thompson user with a hicap is more likely to be victorious especially when you factor in the better range and reliabilty.
Dont get me wrong, It's not something that upsets me in any great way, I relish being
the underdog. But leveling the playing field can only be a good thing.
I Agree with Lardy, getting rid of at least the big 420rnd sized hicaps would be a good start.
“I wanted to come to the Volga at a specific location at a specific city. By chance it carries the name of Stalin himself. So don’t think I marched there for this reason – it could carry another name – but because there is a very important goal... this goal I wanted to take – and you know – we are very modest, we have it already."
Adolf Hitler, November 1942
"Comrades, Red Army men, commanders and political workers, men and women guerrillas! It is on your perseverance, staunchness, fighting skill and readiness to discharge your duty to the country that the defeat of the German-fascist army and the liberation of the Soviet land from the Hitlerite invaders depend! We can and must clear the Soviet land of Hitlerite vermin."
Joseph Stalin, November 1942
I Agree with Lardy, getting rid of at least the big 420rnd sized hicaps would be a good start.
I'm okay with that... but then I don't use 'em so I'm biased.
Okay... lets hear a few more arguments from different people and also on the 300 rnd limit rather than mag sizes/types...
Would you say that someone using a hi cap is compensating for the lack of artillery in the overall game. Keeping the volume of fire up to a level that although it doesnt simulate artillery at least makes the battlefield very hot. I say this as someone who only has the 110 round mags for his MP40.
No, not unless it was common practice for every other soldier to carry a howitzer around with them. 
We're mostly dealing with small engagements where artillery would have taken no part. Where we do need artillery we have in the form of various types of pyro. High volumes of fire should be provided by support guns not riflemen with big magazines.
Would you say that someone using a hi cap is compensating for the lack of artillery in the overall game. Keeping the volume of fire up to a level that although it doesnt simulate artillery at least makes the battlefield very hot. I say this as someone who only has the 110 round mags for his MP40.
That said back in my paintballing days the games I enjoyed the most were with the old single shot and reload markers, always something Napoleonic about making one shot count.
Splatmasters were ace.
We used to have retro splat days at the site i marhsalled/ran.
But back on topic I think that limiting ammo in mags doesnt work so well as to have any 'realistic' effect you need 2 or 3 bbs for every real bullet you'd have in a mag as bbs obviously dont penetrate foliage, get caught in wind etc etc.
I'm personally leaning towards 300/3000/100 for riflemen/support/snipers carried any way you see fit but still want to hear more player ideas.
"I think we are in rats' alley - Where the dead men lost their bones."
Would you say that someone using a hi cap is compensating for the lack of artillery in the overall game. Keeping the volume of fire up to a level that although it doesnt simulate artillery at least makes the battlefield very hot. I say this as someone who only has the 110 round mags for his MP40.
No, not unless it was common practice for every other soldier to carry a howitzer around with them.
Fair enough. For small skirmishes I can see the point of limited ammunition. I'd certainly support it. I guess it depends what level of realism you're after, always a tricky balancing act. I'm happy to play under whatever rules give the best game not necessarily the most realistic simulation.
Lets face it in the real thing most casualties were caused by artillery and the allies nearly always stopped once they advanced beyond their own artillery support.
Aye but I think short of pre layed 'barrages' which are not idela as they create dangerous areas you have to shepherd players away from, or marshalls dropping in pyro its very hard to simulate artillery.
One of the reasons we do the micro 'combat mission' approach with PBI games rather than trying to simulate an entire weeklong operation over thousands of kms in a day is that we can focus on the activities of a single platoon or so that didnt have any support allocated to them.... it was all needed for a big push in another sector.
What do we feel is a sensible limit for a sniper. I can carry 120 rounds for my lee enfield and quite easily blat off 90 of them in a 45 minute skirmish if not all 120...
However should we limit snipers to 100... forcing them to pick their shots and not get involved in shooting matchs?
"I think we are in rats' alley - Where the dead men lost their bones."
I think that limiting ammo in mags doesnt work so well as to have any 'realistic' effect you need 2 or 3 bbs for every real bullet you'd have in a mag as bbs obviously dont penetrate foliage, get caught in wind etc etc.
I'm personally leaning towards 300/3000/100 for riflemen/support/snipers carried any way you see fit but still want to hear more player ideas.
So a mag with 50-60 bbs would emulate a 20 round "real" mag, no?
All the beefs I've seen here have been less to do with total ammo limits and more to do with the differences in how many times you need to change a mag. Yes, a half-full hicap rattles, but only as much as one which is half-empty (that's not supposed to be Zen airsoft btw, you know what I mean 
)
Some people will cheat at any type of ammo limitations the same way they cheat with calling hits but I think it's pretty rare in our type of gaming.
I say don't bother limiting snipers at all...
When I've used a bolt action in a computer game (closest I get to using a proper one is a good simulation) then I expect to maybe get a 50% hit rate...
With an airsoft, you'd be very lucky to get anywhere near that. So the ammo advantage is needed.
Having said that I'm really looking forward to trying out my shell ejecting DBoys Kar98 in a skirmish, assuming it has any range/accuracy at all! (It'll probably be trialled first at the next open day I attend...)
So a mag with 50-60 bbs would emulate a 20 round "real" mag, no?
No... The generally accepted multiplication factor is actually 10x... so you'd need 200 rounds... but that's probably too high.
As for the mag changing issue... Using 30rnd mags... I've been there, done that. Its fecking hard work and I don't want to repeat it. Its personal choice for me.
So a mag with 50-60 bbs would emulate a 20 round "real" mag, no?
Theoretically yes.
However a 50 round mp40 mag might only actually let you carry 40 and of those the last four dont always feed and drop out when you change mag.
The 100 round capacity ones probably give you the best balance.
A soldier carries between 100 and 200 rounds 'ready' ammunition for his personal weapon into the field with him in reality (then as now in the Brtish Army) so using the 2/3 for 1 equation I reckon 300 is a fair number for riflemen.
I'm not set either way on this i want to see what the players want, i'm totally open to suggestion and change if folk feel the mechanics dont work.
The more we discuss this the better IMO.
"I think we are in rats' alley - Where the dead men lost their bones."
No... The generally accepted multiplication factor is actually 10x... so you'd need 200 rounds... but that's probably too high.
Ridiculously so...
you can only really compare it to accuracy on say a 50 metre range.
Once you take into consideration variables as cover etc then its a 'how long is a piece of string' thing really.
I mean we all go on about 'realism' but 90 per cent of the cover we use in airsoft would be shredded by SMG rounds let alone .303
I've seen 7.62 shred a tree and 5.56 go through both sides of a cavity brick wall! 
"I think we are in rats' alley - Where the dead men lost their bones."
The way to look at this is to not try to translate the direct quantities in the game as this is a too complex thing to do. A bb is not a bullet.
Instead you should look at the way the rules affects the game play until you get something that feels "right".
For a long regen game like CiA does then 600 rounds may be about right. But for PBI games that are split into small scenarios is probably too much and the 300 round works best.
If that 300 rounds limits then mean that the players have to be careful with their ammo then this will counter any mag changing issues as the advantage will slew to the other side...
One rule I've used was this...
Each player can use one of two options...
1) a single hicap
2) as many locaps as they can carry.
All to be reloaded only at base/regen
(BTW, I did not create that rule)
I'm not suggesting this is what we should do as I don't think it will work for us, but it does give an interesting example.