PDA

View Full Version : A different view of milsim


Wraith
02-27-2009, 05:20 PM
This is in response to recent threads started about the certification of teams and players as milsim worthy just because I think the topic is multi layered and we should first decide what "milsim" is before we can decide how to certify players and teams as worthy.

This is my plan for Ground Zero and how we will classify our events. This is not a suggestion as to what should be done or if it will work. It is simply how we will classify our events based on my belief there are more than open play and milsim game types.

Tier 1 Open Play:

No Magazine restrictions
No uniform restrictions.
Suggested for all levels of play, geared toward beginner.
Short, objective based missions may be played


Tier 2 Open Play: (or "milsim lite.")

May be magazine/ammo restrictions. Will be lienient towards use of hi caps.
Uniforms may be required.
Suggested for all levels, geared toward the beginner/intermediate level player.
Objective based missions of varying lengths.
Command structures may be in place.


Tier 3 Combat Simulation

Magazine restrictions. Ammo restrictions
Uniforms restrictions
Objective based missions may last several hours to a few days (or longer? don't know)
Command structure in place
(Most) Objectives designed to force combat.
Completion of objectives may earn points for your team
Roleplayers may be used.


Tier 4: Milsim

Magazine restrictions. Ammo restrictions
Uniform restrictions
Objective based missions.
Strict command structure used.
Commanding officers accountable for troop actions
Disciplinary actions in place for troops.
Points are earned for your team by accomplishing non combative objectives.
Combat is not forced.
Points may be used as currency
Roleplayers will be used.
Objectives will be mostly benign in nature.

Alright, I know people are going to throw a fit about those classifications, but hey, it really doesn't change anything other than the name of what we now call milsim. It also creates a new level of milsim for those wishing to try something a little more involved.

The subject of certifying teams as milsim oriented becomes a little tricky when you start looking more toward milsim. Ranking officers would have to know how to do multiple tasks as opposed to just running a combat squad.
Players would have to be willing to accept being made to do push ups, or being thrown in the "stockade" for x amount of minutes for doing something such as killing friendlies.

strikers_blade
02-27-2009, 05:45 PM
Wraith, what about not BDU restrictions at all? (i.e. no OD versus TAN) ?

Wraith
02-27-2009, 05:49 PM
I don't quite understand what you are asking, Blade (apologies)

A team of people wearing civilian clothes against a team in uniform? There again it would fall inside one of the tiers depending on level of involvement.

strikers_blade
02-27-2009, 06:03 PM
no, simply no BDU regulation; OD versus OD versus ACU versus Marpat versus MC versus DCU versus Tigerstripe versus XYZ....

Let the team figure our their own running password, challenge wor, friendly fire SOP, etc...

Wraith
02-27-2009, 06:09 PM
Okay, even so if a certain type of clothing is required, be it civilian clothes or bdus, it is still a uniform requirement. The tier system I am iplementing deals more with level of involvement. If the operation involves forcing the combat, and mainly the combat, it would fall into tier 3 regardless of what uniforms or lack thereof.

Does that make any sense? I kinda lost myself for a second.

If I am understanding you right, you would be talking about a tier 4 event. I am assuming you are talking in terms of fighting force when you say team and not individual teams. This is why I requested all interested in a command role to respond to me about Scorched Skies. It's because the level of involvement is a little more than what we currently see. COs would have to figure things like challanges/responses, troop rotation schedules, SOP and so on for their team, you are right.

Having individual teams do that is not what I would put into a tier 4 event as this is going against what the general military does(uniformity), and I'm not speaking in terms of special forces.

Locutus
02-27-2009, 07:56 PM
Not this again.....

Wraith
02-27-2009, 08:06 PM
The point of this thread was not to discuss how to classify games. It was to make a point that a persons perception of milsim may be different than yours, so by whose standards are we going to use to certify people?

Locutus
02-27-2009, 08:19 PM
It was to make a point that a persons perception of milsim may be different than yours, so by whos standards are we going to use to certify people?

Exactly. That was my point as well.

M0nk3y
02-27-2009, 09:30 PM
If we can all agree on what classifications need to be made for games, we can all understand what an open play/event involves.

Everyone can be prepared to follow certain guidelines prior to arriving at the game

Wraith
02-27-2009, 09:30 PM
Locutus, I was in no way directing that toward you. I just believe that if you (generalization) are wanting to certify players/teams as milsim qualified you should at least standardize exactly what milsim is. I would have no problems with doing something like that if I knew exactly what I was getting myself and my team into.

Locutus
02-27-2009, 09:33 PM
We have been down this road before.

We won't ever come to a consensus on what defines MILSIM anymore than we will ever agree on FPS limits....

Wraith
02-27-2009, 09:36 PM
I agree completely.

Fox
02-27-2009, 09:46 PM
So since we agree that we can't define milsim for each other...

We agree that I lock this thread. We have 2 others at the moment covering this same topic, and at least 6 in recent memory.

So cheers,
Locked