Jump to content
AMS Forums set to ARCHIVE MODE (POSTING DISABLED). These forums will be used for historical reference, otherwise you can find the AMS event pages located on Facebook. ×
American MilSim
AMS Forums set to ARCHIVE MODE (POSTING DISABLED). These forums will be used for historical reference, otherwise you can find the AMS event pages located on Facebook.

Recommended Posts

 

 

4) This is one of two instances where I will call someone specific.  To the CDF guys.  You were all great people.  You all worked well together. You showed great sportmanship, and were honest players.  I have no gripes with any of you.  That being said, as much as I like your technical with the rotating turret (And how badass of a engineering feat that is).  I think your lexan turret armor is BS.  Seriously, you were on my team, but that is pretty cheap.  You make yourselves completely invulnerable, and you would never find those on real vehicles.  (Because real bullets would zip through them).  I really believe you make yourselves too powerful using that. (And again, you were on my team).  I hear rumors you were planning on coming back with all of them set up that way, and I would personally beg you not to.  I believe that that much overpower makes it unfair to the other people playing against you.  The opacity of a solid armor plate is the handicap that makes it fair to the other side.  (Yes, I'm aware that if we had a decent way to make those armor plates clear IRL, we would, but this is still a MilSim event, and those aren't very MilSim in my mind.  We had debated it for our vehicles, and decided against it, because it was so unfair against OPFOR).  It's your decision, but please keep the fairness in mind for other players.

 

 

CoST CO and myself are trying to work with AMS to change some of the vehicle rules and enforce some of the ones there are currently that people aren't taking the time to remember. Especially for OPs like Broken Home where vehicles are a major part.

If we have our way the clear turret armor will not be allowed in the future. Any sort of armor should have a draw back of some sort, such as limiting visibility for the gunner.

AMS is definitely working on making things better though. I think that is evident based on this year versus last year. It just takes time, especially when you only have so many chances throughout the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was the CDF CO and I fully agree with your point number 4.  I don't not think that you should have a clear "protective" armor.  I am in full support of someone making a m2 with a chicken plate on it.  That chicken plate should not be clear, there should not be a situation where a play should feel invulnerable.  Now I am sure there are many of you that are jumping to the conclusion of "what about windows".  I do not have a problem with windows, I used to but now I don't.  

 

If it was me personally, if the vehicle is an un-armored vehicle (such as a jeep, buggy and such) then the widows should be down and everyone is vulnerable inside to small arm fire (you still go hit right).  If there has been an obvious attempt to armor the vehicle (such as replace the windows with solid panels and such (and even add gun ports) then that should be treated like an armored vehicle.  And I am fine with the ruling of you can't role down and back up the windows.  For arguments sake you don't just roll down bullet proof glass.  

 

The vehicle that Refuge was talking about, I had not seen before that Friday and was unaware of its turret.  I personally do not think that it is in the best interest of gameplay, and I would suggested that at least the clear armor that wrapped around it on the back 3/4 be removed.  But I am in the minority on this and this is a game of volunteers (ie no real authority).  Once upon a time I didn't like the gun ports on armored vehicles either, but then you have to realize that there is sever limitations in visibility and firing arc.  To me that makes it more "fair".  

 

There are several people that will complain about how powerful the vehicles are.  Let me tell you we did not feel that threat this year. Because we brought over 400+ rocket rounds and had 4 dedicated Anti-tank launchers for that reason.  We also had several members that were solely focused on one task, resupplying the launchers when the limited ammo that we where allowed to carry ran out.  Several say that true battles are won buy logistics, I agree with this.  When I have to pull a whole squad off the line to secure a safe route from our FOB to our front lines just to transport rockets, that impacts the battle plan.  However it is worth it and that is where the fun is.   There were many vehicle on vehicle battles, they just didn't last that long.  As this sport grows and more and more money is poured into by players we are going to see a progression.  Right now I believe that as whole there needs to be more AT and artillery and IED/Mines to counter the growing vehicles.  Once that happens players will start to understand the relationship between vehicles and troops on the ground.  When the work in concert with each other is a very powerful thing.  A vehicle alone, should get chewed up quickly.  A mechanized platoon with members that understand that the vehicles are transport and special weapons platforms, and are not something that you fight from or hide behind and use a rolling cover, is very powerful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree with Congo about the concept of CDF and I really like the idea of limiting magazines on individuals to numbers like that, on my kit I was running 5 primary and 2 secondary. 

 

But if you will indulge me for a minute on the Milsim view (which is broad due to the many styles and interpretations of so many groups, teams, and individuals). I love AMS's story line so in a role playing capacity let's start with this;

 

CDF weren't "civilians" they were a militia, and in a active in combat zone there would be a metric ton of weapons and vehicles strewn about, just take the movie (I know fictitious) Red Dawn and the Wolverines into consideration. It's hard to moderate but I think a cumulative acquisition of ammo, weapons, and assets to assist in a more "Milsim" experiance would be a blast.

 

As for identification there was discussions about vehicle color, we felt that tan was confusing and wanted to resolve that but prep time and money became prohibitive in the eleventh hour so offset was attempted by making CDF stencils and flags to tag all over the vehicles. And I would love more input on this, not just for CDF but for main forces as well.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also agree with Daihl.

 

When Anderson and myself agreed to be CO and XO one of the first things that came to our minds was that we needed to make sure every platoon had a way to handle armor. I believe Anderson even made quite a few calls to make sure this was implemented.

 

Many battles are won before they even start. Logistics is a HUGE part of warfare.

 

I'm immensely proud of everyone who fought on Green's side. Sure, we had a lot of problems. Always will. But the level of planning this year compared to previous OPs was beyond comparison. Awesome job guys!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for identification there was discussions about vehicle color, we felt that tan was confusing and wanted to resolve that but prep time and money became prohibitive in the eleventh hour so offset was attempted by making CDF stencils and flags to tag all over the vehicles. And I would love more input on this, not just for CDF but for main forces as well.    

 

Actually, you guys spray painting CDF on your vehicles was awesome. But, this isn't something other people will do as some POVs were actual personal vehicles. Perhaps next time a bit bigger and on the hood as well, but you guys definitely did quite a bit to make sure people knew who you were. No one expects you to repaint your whole damn vehicle lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree with the CDF part.

That was not milsim.

CDF should be the must under-equipped force on the field and should not be able to hold their own against either force without assistance. I think their should be a CDF "town" in the center of the field and whoever takes over the town and raises their flag should have control of CDF forces.

 

-0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also not a more rockets but more launchers.  We had at least one rocket launcher per platoon but the majority of them went down and failed early on.  Next year I just say we get all the new players together and put suicide vests on them and Jihad the vehicles.  You can't escape forever =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree with the CDF part.

 

That was not milsim.

 

CDF should be the must under-equipped force on the field and should not be able to hold their own against either force without assistance. I think their should be a CDF "town" in the center of the field and whoever takes over the town and raises their flag should have control of CDF forces.

 

-0

 

Oh trust me, there were several teams on CDF that would have preferred to have been a dedicated mechanized unit for a regular army lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jahona,

 

We should talk, I built five of the six CDF launchers. We only needed three, we never had to fall back to the other three back-ups ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Uniform Requirements: I COMPLETELY agree with you. I made kind of a stink about wearing the right uniform on the forums. Players still showed up in the wrong uniform requirements. While I was CoST XO I am not AMS staff and cannot enforce rules like this as the only way to enforce it is to kick the player who decided not to follow the rule until he has corrected it.

 

Just like in the military, this is the responsible of the individual solider, his/her squad leader, platoon leader, XO and CO to make sure their TROOPs are in uniform.

 

Same with Hi-CAPs, this was communicated to all command staff. If you saw players out of uniform or using hi-cap you should have escalated that up through your chain of commands, the staff can't police over 500 players and inspect every mag, every, uniform shirt, etc...  so sorry that ones on you guys.

 

As for CDF "flip flopping" AMS staff had zero control of any forces actions, this was 100% sandbox. I hate "random" side changing as much as anyone else (and we don't design events that way) but at the end of the day if you want to get down to it whats CDF did was 100% true to reality. Just take a look at what our troops have to deal with on a daily basis in Afghanistan. If I was fighting with any faction outside my regular army I would just task someone to watch them like a hawk.

 

Awesome feedback guys, keep it coming!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was on the CDF force and I can tell you from my side that the whole OP my squad was always fighting UFS forces and the only time we did not is when we invited them into colville for lunch hahaha. We may have had more vehicles, but we did not have the man power, but still managed the second day to push back UFS forces all the way to the bridge without Cost help and our vehicles except for one were mostly used for transport. I will agree that maybe our uniforms could possibly change a bit to look even more militia like if others feel that would help, but it didn't seem like a huge issue from the UFS guys I talked to. So we will see how the AMS staff decides to work this all in the future. I for one loved being apart of the CDF force and never really saw COST that much all weekend. The UFS guys were really cool and put up a great fight with us all weekend! Overall I had a great time and thanks to the AMS guys a whole lot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not like when the CDF is friendly to us and fighting along side us one moment, and the next moment was shooting at us from the inside out.  That's my one big gripe.  Also we had several CDF from one of the smaller factions within it, at our TOC who were upset that they were ordered to switch sides like that and walked off to our TOC to play with us only for the rest of the weekend.

 

I would much rather have had the CDF integrated into one side or the other and minimalize the "special teams" but that's just my opinion, not really a gripe. 

 

The sandbox was great and we loved the more freedom to do what we wanted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Main issue with one of them is it used 40mm grenades as the fuel source.  Only one grenade had the capacity to expel the rocket with a decent amount of distance.  Next year we will come prepaired.  I'm already thinking of how to make a better design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Main issue with one of them is it used 40mm grenades as the fuel source.  Only one grenade had the capacity to expel the rocket with a decent amount of distance.  Next year we will come prepaired.  I'm already thinking of how to make a better design.

 

We also have a great source for the 40mm rounds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear CDF did not flip flop, I know because I was the CDF commander.  My AAR is not even started yet but for those that want to know.  Here is the rough timeline on the flip flop possibilities.  

 

Saturday Morning:

CoST successfully meet up with the CDF XO and negotiated the agreement to help support the CDF in their attempts to fight the UFS.

About 11:30-12:00 Staff requested that CDF pull back and disengage, most of the CDF force pulled back to our FOB, some wanted to stay in Coleville for awhile.  During the CDF pullout a representative of the UFS approached the CDF command and wanted to talk about purchasing the support of CDF to turn on the CoST.  Durring these negotiations the CoST Command staff approached the CDF CO directly and asked if there were any problems.  I have to say well done guys staying right on top of that issue.  The UFS offer was turned down as CoST had held their side of the bargain and the CDF felt that CoST still had our best interests in mind and where supporting us.  We only had one situation of a CoST squad or two firing on CDF which was quickly dealt with (CDF killed them)  Not sure if that is being counted as a flip flop but the standard ROE that I told our entire force was.  If someone shoots at you, you shoot back.  

 

On our Pull out I personally talked with the CoST XO and told him that they have done right by us and that we had been given an offer, and we declined.  CoST had earned our support at that point.   The Majority of the CDF regrouped at our FOB and where then tasked by Staff to the opfor for the P-DAM's and DAM's against both UFS and CoST.   Durring the aftermath of the CoST P-DAM, the CoST CO was informed that we had not-flip flopped but were disengaged and operating as DAM opfor.

 

Sunday started off with a meeting between the CoST command and CDF command to negotiate or re-involvement with the conflict.  We came to an agreement ($$$$$$$$$$$$$$) and shared a rough battle plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daihl, I am glad to hear you disliked that turret, and in fact I agree with your statements about the gunports, and viewports (Something our larger vehicle was planned to have, but couldn't due to time constraints).  The 8 Vehicles you guys brought were definitely a huge force multiplier, and probably seemed unfair at times, but then again, things like the suburbans are most troop carriers, and only effective when they have enough cover to deploy.  Like I said, I didn't have a problem with any of the players, just that one vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top will have to expand more then because mid day saturday we were given information by our command elements that CDF were now friendly and we were allowing them into our lines and they stayed up with us on the top floor of the church on coleville.  Then all of a sudden they decided to shoot us instead. Very confusing and frustrating situation for all of us who were defending coleville, or trying anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the concept of civilians in games and frequently play then, but I've noted the frequent frustration "regular forces" have in dealing with them. Do you know what a civilian with a gun in a war zone is generally considered? A criminal subject to summary execution.

 

Under the Hague Convention, to be a partisan, four conditions must be met:

 

1) they must be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates ;

 

(2)  they must have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

 

(3) they must carry arms openly ; and

 

(4)  they must conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

 

In most milsim event, item two is entirely ignored, so confusion occurs and everyone hates all civilians.  At two recent ops, we've instituted an armband system where the partisans were required to tie a certain color bandana or cloth on their arm depending on which side they were on (e.g.. orange for Dutch Resistance or black for Dutch SS in a WW2 game and blue and yellow for Ukrainian militia in a NATO v Soviet game). When wearing a particular color, the player had to honor it and not attack allied players. However, the player could switch bandanas or even take it off (with the understanding that an armed civilan was subject to detention or summary execution).  The feedback on this was positive both from the players that were civilian and regular forces. The civilians could shift from "innocents" to "criminals" to playing alongside regular troops depending on the admins need to balance the game and, where that was not an issue, how a particular player decided to place himself within the sandbox. The regular players found this benefical as they knew clearly their rules of engagement when approaching a civilian and could even bribe or entice unarmed civilians to bring weapons out of hiding and join the fight.

 

While following international conventions may not be happening in some venues where American forces are stationed today, the rules of partisan warfare have been recognized in form or another for a couple centuries and may help alleviate some of the problems that occur with them in milsim games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, as N7GHOST said we are looking into and still trying to figure out what "actually happened", but I doubt we will never know.  I just wanted let the players know what the official CDF command take was on it.

 

I do not think that it helps the long term event planning if as a faction you do everything right and support a third element just to have them turn on you regardless of the fact that you did nothing wrong.  That is one of the main reasons I informed our force the CDF is not fighting against the CoST, they had done everything right to keep our support.

 

Also FYI in relation to DANARCHY.  We made a special effort to make sure that we were not wearing any CoST flags.  When we were doing our recon and presense patrols on Friday we noticed that several players had on them both the CoST and CDF flags (because both were given to us at registration)  Saturday morning we made sure no one had CoST flags on.  I like your mentioning of the 4 points, very helpful.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, Its Mitch from the Gray State crew. First of all, I want to thank AMS. It was an amazing time. This was David and I's 2nd event. We both had a blast. Just as a little history, both of us are not newbies to airsoft. We started playing in about 2000 and got involved in the MN airsoft community and attended several ops. Side note, but was anyone at Art of War II in Missouri? This was 2002 I think. Maybe 2003. That was my first big op. In 2003 we moved to making movies and choreographing things with airsoft guns. 2004 we went in the Army.

 

Anyway, I think I have a unique view on the games as I don't take sides. I follow the action so if tan is doing cool guy shit I will follow them, if green is doing some secret squirrel mission I will follow them. On Saturday I only caught a little bit of the action and the rest of the day was spent shooting the DAM missions. Unfortunately about 15 minutes into the start of the game on Saturday my camera got shot and the LCD went black so I could not see what I was shooting so that was a major hindrance to me. Need to get some screen protectors. 

 

On DAMs. Here are some things that I notice from an outside perspective. Communication is #1. You guys need to talk to your team and let them know what is going on. If you have already been compromised then you can yell all you want. They already know you are there so no need to try and sneak around. The rescue mission was a huge teambuilder. You guys fought through the contact and got the injured people on board. I saw some incredibly awesome feats from several teams. I saw more than one person pick up injured people by themselves and put them in the back of the deuce and then go back to get more! You guys worked together and it was awesome. Good job.

 

On Sunday I was able to get back into the action and I spent most of my time at Pegasus bridge but a fair amount of time at coleville too. Here is something I want to stress. Some of you really need to identify targets before opening fire. On more than one occasion I stepped around a corner of a building or from behind a tree and I got lit up in the face. I understand there are bbs flying everywhere and I would be more than happy to get shot if I was playing. My clothing choices, while not military at all, were probably not good enough to identify even with the yellow PT belt around my upper body. It just annoying to get shot as a non-combatant. I talked to some of the admins and they got shot their share of times too and they had red shirts on. I know its gonna happen, but please be sure of what you are aiming at before you pull the trigger.

 

David and I will be at the next OP and hopefully every single op. It is an amazing time and we want to help AMS, the sport, and everything else continue to grow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To say that CDF transports were mainly used just for transport purposes is total BS. My squad was pinned down for about half an hour by a CDF truck with little holes cut out just big enough for a gun barrel to stick through. With all the windows rolled up and no way to get a grenade in as well. Completely unfair, but we fought it out, adapted, and overcame. Just waited until they got tired of pray and spraying and drove off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We also have a great source for the 40mm rounds

 

Did you have the little blue/purple rockets with CAT written on the side? I saw alot of those out there.

 

But in any event, where is your source. We are down on rockets right now, but eventually most find their way back to us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call all the BS you want I was generally speaking that about 95% of the time thay were used as transport or cover and the jeep was used as a attack vehicle. That was just for the most part, but I am sure small inncidents like yours happened here and there. Look though you adapted and over came it you said, so no issue there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...