Hi folks
CiA have a bit of a tradition for organising events that we like to attend in the hope that others will also enjoy them too.
However, we seem to have hit a bit of a bump in the road with a recent post by Old 'Un about the intended capture rules for our Schaulen event.
With this in mind, I thought it might be a good idea to find out what our punters actually want to do at this event by way of capture rules.
In the past we've run two types of capture rule:
1: The player is captured by way of the opposing force 'regenning'* them and taking them back to their base. At this point the captured player has been told to hand over all intelligence they hold (maps, notes etc) but are allowed to keep all their kit and weaponry. The captured player is not allowed to assault his enemy and is not man-handled or 'interrogated' as part of a gentleman's agreement. They are kept in comfort. They are later re-insterted into the game when appropriate.
2: The player is captured by way of the opposing force 'regenning'* them and taking them back to their base. At this point the captured player has a hessian sack placed over their head and all of their kit and weaponry is removed from them. They are searched and placed in isolation, then later questioned and interrogated. The players are never man-handled or forced into uncomfortable positions, but are subjected to verbal insults and probably shouted at a bit. Later the player has all their kit and weaponry returned and they are reinserted into the game when appropriate. All of this is done by organisers only. A safe-word is in place should players not wish to be interrogated, in which case the capture rules in option 1 are invoked.
Capture rules are used to deny the opposition forces of manpower and to make your decision to engage the enemy and expose your position a more difficult decision and one that require a bit of forethought and planning so that you can effect a safe retreat if necessary. In essence, it removed the choice of an opportunistic blat.
From early days of planning this event we have said that capture rules will be part of the game. So we will be using one or both of the above options at this event.
This thread is intended for people to give the above a bit of careful forethought and discussion and to vote for their preferred option. It is not the place to discuss the use of capture rules at all, as that is not for negotiation and will be part of the event.
Those who feel very strongly about the inclusion of these rules at all, or looking for reassurance of their fair use, are free to discuss this with me via PM, but I'd prefer not to contaminate this thread with posts about the validity of capture rules at all.
Cheers
HS
*I think I just invented a new verb.
I voted option 1.
Both options do give the same results in terms of the game - depriving forces and obtaining intelligence.
The second option creates a two tier level of participation, which is unavoidable despite intentions or reassurances, between those who are hardcore or not, between those who are wimps or not.
how much comfort?
I voted option 1.
Both options do give the same results in terms of the game - depriving forces and obtaining intelligence.
The second option creates a two tier level of participation, which is unavoidable despite intentions or reassurances, between those who are hardcore or not, between those who are wimps or not.
Interesting. It is the notion of being players being identified as 'non-hardcore' or 'a wimp' that is the issue then?
I don't think anyone would think better or worse of people for going with one option or the other, rather that people get the choice of either experience should be wish it.
For the record, I'd err very strongly on the side of giving the safe word if I got captured, because interrogation's just not my bag. 
Incidentally, that's the big point that needs to be made here ;"If I got captured". The idea here is that so much more is at stake from an inclusion in the gameplay if you reveal your position, which changes the game dynamic is a way that hit-and-regen wouldn't.
how much comfort?
Well, we're not talking comfy chair and pointy cushions here, but you'd be able to sit down on the forest floor and not be shouted at.
Interesting. It is the notion of being players being identified as 'non-hardcore' or 'a wimp' that is the issue then?
The same thing is actually an issue with the whole night game thing as well.
The ones that don't do it are seen as wimps by those who do.
I know 1st hand... I've done 24 hour all-night games and the ones who sleep through it are wimps and you had to hold their positions for you whilst they got their beauty sleep. I was one of the ones who stayed awake... even whilst the guy in the same room was snoring. It was superb, but I'm not doing it again.
Interesting. It is the notion of being players being identified as 'non-hardcore' or 'a wimp' that is the issue then?
The same thing is actually an issue with the whole night game thing as well.
The ones that don't do it are seen as wimps by those who do.
I know 1st hand... I've done 24 hour all-night games and the ones who sleep through it are wimps and you had to hold their positions for you whilst they got their beauty sleep.
That's just not true on any terms Rich. No-one was called a wimp at Jedburgh and everyone was asleep by midnight. Unfit and out of breath, perhaps, but not a wimp.
I don't think CiA have ever done a full 24 hour event to be honest. We've advertised them as such, but after 12 hours of humping around the forest, even the fittest people have flagged and jacked it in for a kip.
Of course, if you sacked it off at 8pm for a brew-up and a game of cards around a camp fire, then that might be seen as a bit naff and it's not really getting into the spirit of the event as advertised, but not wimpish. 
Personally I think option 2 makes sense.
To me, it's nothing to do with being a wimp or being hardcore, just to do with what people prefer in a game. I personally would find option 1 too jarring from the game experience, going from an enemy hunting you down to suddenly being 'nice' for lack of a better way of describing it.
In my own odd way, I enjoyed the experience of being captured at Op. Jedburgh, it completed the experience for me. Also, for me, it added an extra amount of incentive to avoid capture, making each firefight against an overwhelming enemy force more exciting.Option 2 allows for all players preferences, at the end of the day we're all different in what we want from an event!
Going for option 1 would mean detracting from the game experience for some, whereas option 2 allows for everyone to enjoy the game whichever way they prefer.
I think this sums up our intentions perfectly. 
I don't think option 2 adds anything to the event, it removes from it. I was uncomfortable being around it last time, and will be again. I know at least two of the captives were not happy, but didn't want to complain. I don't think we should be forced to make that choice in a hobby.
I also echo Wildfires comment in reverse - nothing has ever jarred me out of the experience more then the (option 2) interrogations at Jed'.
i would also say option one. Nothing to do with wimping out or anything like that.
There is a time and place for interrogation and if its not the whole hog i dont see the point of it.
I would never frown on anyone for not wanting to be a part of it , especially in whats primarily an airsoft event.
And i wouldnt frown on anyone for wanting to "sack it" after a hard days play. I did that myself at jedburgh as i was physically tired.
The main purpose of the event is to have fun , escape the "home life" for a few days and play airsoft while dressed in ww2 kit. I dont see how anyone should be frowned upon or judged for wanting to do that.
so Option 1 for me chaps.
[url]<a href=""http://www.enjin.com/bf3-signature-generator"" alt="bf3 forum sigs"><img src=""http://sigs.enjin.com/sig-bf3/2ef021eacb42913b.png"></a>[b"]
[/url]Age. Fac ut gaudeam.
I don't think CiA have ever done a full 24 hour event to be honest. We've advertised them as such, but after 12 hours of humping around the forest, even the fittest people have flagged and jacked it in for a kip.
And that is the problem. If it's not a 24 hour event, don't advertise it as such.
I don't think CiA have ever done a full 24 hour event to be honest. We've advertised them as such, but after 12 hours of humping around the forest, even the fittest people have flagged and jacked it in for a kip.
And that is the problem. If it's not a 24 hour event, don't advertise it as such.
Right, this is rapidly derailing, so this is my only reply.
Rich, READ THE EVENT DESCRIPTIONS! Read all the posts made by organisers.
They're advertised as such to allow people of all preferences to get what they want. As we've said, repeatedly on many different threads on this and other sections of the forum, if individuals don't want to go the full 24hrs, they don't have to. No pressure, no name-calling if you don't.
We all make our best endeavours to give the best experience to everyone involved, which means making all the options we'd like to make available, available!
can we keep it to a vote and a comment. We don.t do games by commitee. As mentioned early on this event is based around the film The Star. In that film a bunch of russian scouts are sent to recce and disrupt the germans. Both sides will have a similar remit. Hunt down and kill the enemy and retrieve intell- which will be given to you on site. My earlier post aboutu a safe word was to give all players on both sides the option to go for the added realism or not. It's not about being a wimp or otherwise- it's just a choice offered same as you can alkl choose to sleep on the ground under a coat or in a nice warm sleeping bag in a tent. You've paid your money it's your choice not what we say that goes. If you take the time to read what we have said you may find that a lot of the "rules" are what other people are saying about our event.
To be honest I don't mind either, might just be because im young and up for anything which is why I plan to either pull an all nighter in a fox hole or at the very least get up very early in the morning to get the jump on the enemy. Not sure if I like the idea of having a bag over my head the whole time im captured though, possibly if I was being interrogated by a soviet political officer which in fairness would be realistic but as long as it wasn't for too long. 
On the note of people being considered whimpy, I don't see anyone who would rather sleep after a hard days slogging than stay up all night in muddy ditch as a whimp. I just know which one id prefer to do and that would be my own choice. I might have a little plan forming in my mind to boost German morale and shock the russians.
incase anyone doesnt realise , when you have a Hessian sack over your head , even though its a bit weird, you can actually see and breath perfectly well.
No one is gonna pee on it first (i hope LOL)
Even though i think its a bit pointless like i say if its not gonna be the "whole hog" i will happily go with the flow if it comes down to it.
As far as "24hr" event goes , i have always thought of that as meaning 2 days of play when CIA is concerned , not an all nighter.
I always thought people liked the social part of the event as much as playing, infact most of the time a lot of you play the "last man standing game".
Bit daft to argue about it chaps.
[url]<a href=""http://www.enjin.com/bf3-signature-generator"" alt="bf3 forum sigs"><img src=""http://sigs.enjin.com/sig-bf3/2ef021eacb42913b.png"></a>[b"][/url]Age. Fac ut gaudeam.
I voted for option two, it allows for those who want the added realism but the safe word means that anybody who doesnt want to go for that option isn't forced to. Just my 2p, i would be happy with either!
I have gone option 1. I just feel uncomfortable with the whole thing of imitation 'beasting' of prisoners. At Jed last year I found myself feeling very uncomfortable with the questioning phase and keeping prisoners in the bags and so on. Now I did not grasp how seriously we were meant to take it to begin with (sorry Guy) but even when I did I was uncomfortable in that role and frankly useless at it (I tried to get into character and barked at a prisoner, Steiner I think, 'get on your knees', only problem was after 30 odd years of conditioning to be polite it came out 'get on your knees... please!'. I kind of gave up after that and just kept an eye on them all. Possibly in the wrong army playing a German 
).
I would rather not be put in a bag and so on and I would rather not do it to other people. Is there not some half way house where prisoners can be interogated without the 'beasting'? From much of what I have read it seems to have been more the second and rear echelon troops that treated prisoners badly rather than the front line troops. Plenty of accounts of prisoners being treated very well at the point of capture.
Anyway, let's not fall out over it for God's sake, it's meant to be fun afterall, what ever is decided.
Going back to Jed for a brief second, it was interesting that the SS dressed troops got into it and most of the Heer ended up sitting around a fire muttering darkly about how this sort of thing is just not Cricket. Art imitating life? 
I'm with option 2 as it allows for both! Can't see a reason for voting option 1 if that will be an option anyway whilst allowing those wishing to indulge in the role play a bit further to do so!
nothing has ever jarred me out of the experience more then the (option 2) interrogations at Jed'.
I would be OK with either. However having been one of the captives at Jed I also noticed that a good few of the German players seemed ill-at-ease with the idea (think we couldn't see through those bags?? - well we could, so 
)
Asked my mate Gary who's playing but hasn't access to site! He's chosen option 2 but can't vote! I'll let the administrators do what they like with that info!
