Mission: DOUBLE CROSS

[Foxx]

As far as I know, Bravo failed to secure the final nuke in the morning.

Defeat is defeat. Victory is victory. Alpha had their faces in the dirt all day, and bravo were stuck between a rock and a hard place. Such is war.

I don't know what "advantage" there was to any of it. We may have have a close respawn on rocky top, but I can tell you that a well timed advance of bravo's forces could've easily overwhelmed the position. I can also say that a well coordinated counter attack could've purged bravo from our doorstep and allowed for a stronger perimeter. Not a single airsoft game in history has been 100% balanced, be it from player skill, superior equipment, or just sheer numbers.

My point is that I don't think either side should point fingers. It was a deadlock, not a slaughter.

[Dominum]

Wait... so what some are complaining about is that the game mechanics designed to prevent one side from winning too quickly... were trying prevent one side from winning too quickly? I fail to see how that doesn't make sense. Who was in what color camo doesn't matter, the fact is that there were certain game mechanics in place to prevent a total steamrolling by either faction, and that's precisely what they did. I tell you what though Bishop, the next time you are on a faction that has control of almost nothing and I am running the game, I'll be happy to listen to any request from you NOT to try to make it more balanced for everyone at the break and to let you continue to have nothing whatsoever to do for the entire game than sit on a single hill. Does that sound more reasonable to you?

Seriously people, I know it's not always easy to see things from a perspective other than your own, but try approaching the problem from multiple angles. Is there ever a solution that will make everyone happy? No. Are there sometimes solutions that can mitigate circumstances? Yes. I'm not saying that having to make modifications it ideal, but it is often necessary. Game mechanics that can increase or decrease the difficulty level for whichever faction starts to gain a major advantage are an obvious necessity for any game of this nature. I fail to see how that isn't being grasped.

[watchman1513]

Why can't we be friends. . .

[Murphy]

So there seems to be a lot of discussion/argument about who won, who deserved to win, etc etc...

I was "CO" for Bravo. I play back and forth between Alpha and Bravo so I hope no one thinks I'm biased Bravo. Honestly I would have changed to alpha had I had time to check around and see that a few more Bravo had showed up, but unfortunately Gold Team had to run all of the morning operations due to leadership and admin being busy and/or late.

I don't care who officially won or lost, I had an overall good time. I show up to shoot people and chat with old friends; of that I had plenty.

Had everyone been privy to the rules beforehand I think the game would've run a lot smoother; like Dom said.

My overarching complaint is this: as Bravo I feel we were being punished for winning during the beginning of the day. Spies were shooting us and themselves in order to hinder out efforts. But I did not hear any accounts of the spies on Alpha doing anything similar. Some one is going do win for the day, and I do not think it should be up to admin to fluctuate or control how that happens.

I think Bravo kind of pooped out at lunch due to all the confusion over comms, spies, the rules applying to spies, etc etc. Nothing else needs to be said about it or argued.

I know a lot of players on the field were new to the AOSC and to SQA so I hope all of you guys had a good time and plan to come back to future games; at this field or on others.

Also wanted to apologize for shooting wolfie while she was dead maybe 3 times :S colorblindprobz.

[Bishop]

Wait... so what some are copmplaining about is that the game mechanics designed to prevent one side from winning too quickly... were trying prevent one side from winning too quickly? I fail to see how that doesn't make sense. Who was in what color camo doesn't matter, the fact is that there were certain game mechanics in place to prevent a total steamrolling by either faction, and that's precisely what they did. I tell you what though Bishop, the next time you are on a faction that has control of almost nothing and I am running the game, I'll be happy to listen to any request from you NOT to try to make it more balanced for everyone at the break and to let you continue to have nothing whatsoever to do for the entire game than sit on a single hill. How's that sound?

Seriously people, I know it's not always easy to see things from a perspective other than your own, but try approaching the problem from multiple angles. Is there ever a solution that will make everyone happy? No. Are there sometimes solutions that can mitigate circumstances? Yes. I'm not saying that having to make modifications it ideal, but it is often necessary. Game mechanics that can increase or decrease the difficulty level for whichever faction starts to gain a major advantage are an obvious necessity for any game of this nature. I fail to see how that isn't being grasped.

Again, I have played games where I have been steamrolled. Guess what, it can still be fun. Look at it this way. By changing games mid way, you are basically saying to one side "well, look, You did well, and that is very good, but see these other guys? They aren't having any "fun", so we are going to change it, so that those guys do good, and you do bad" I don't like that idea, it sounds ridiculous when put that way. Considering how much we hate when that gets done in politics, how should we feel about it in games? I can look at the game from multiple angles, and from every angle, it looks like a mess of poor planning implementation and design. I love this field, I love air soft, I love playing the game, shooting people, and hanging out with friends. I love having hard objectives, I love working as a team. I like Alpha, and I like Bravo, I like people on both sides. But at some point someone has to speak up because things with the AOSC are getting worse and worse in my opinion, and I care too much about air soft in this state to not give my opinion because some people may be offended by it.

As far as "fail to be grasped" well, I don't think rules should be changed in the middle of games. The closest game to perfect that I have ever seen is OP: Second Sun, and the objectives were changed to make it harder, perfectly. This game? Not even close, not even halfway to close.

[Dominum]

No one's being unfriendly, people are just voicing differing opinions. It certainly doesn't mean we aren't friends, discussions like this are how progress is made. One of the ultimate questions in running an airsoft game has always been that of how to balance gameplay, both in styles that different players enjoy, and in difficulty and complexity levels. As game organizers, myself and others are constantly striving to strike the perfect balance where it is interesting, but not too complicated; challenging but not discouraging; exciting but not exhausting. For example, a couple years ago, all games were based on either the retrieval of physical objectives, or the holding of a location. Many players got very bored of it and complained. We tested a few things that involved RPCs, and it was a hit. Lately more OPs have had RPCs. The flipside of that are the players that don't like RPCs. We are trying to find the perfect balance between the two, and it will take some effort. The only way to get there is for people to be honest and hash it out, like we're doing now.

[Dominum]

The rule modifications were very minor, you're acting like the entire game changed.

As far as where you're coming from on admins helping to balance difficulty, what both of you are suggesting used to be done. A long time ago, when Robin ran all the airsoft games in the state, he used to refuse to change rules and objectives during the lunch break. He told the faction that was losing they had to suck it up. In many ways, that's good. No matter what, the objectives and game mechanics didn't change. Factions weren't even rebalanced after lunch. Guess what happened to the faction that was being mauled? They had an awful time, didn't want to come back, left early, posted AARs about how crappy the game was, etc.. He quickly realized that in order for everyone to have fun, he had to start making contingency plans for major balance issues that arose during the game. Is this a form of punishing those who are winning? Yes, it is. Long before I ever hosted a game, I was on all sides of that issue too. I was at the old games, being in both circumstances. There is always a point at which you have to say it's time to balance things more so that everyone has a good time. This isn't politics, this is a game. This is a game where people drive a long way and spend a lot of time and money coming to them. That means that there has to be more than just "suck it up" when someone comes to an admin saying their's no point in playing anymore because the other team already has everything. That being said, that puts you in the position of being the guy that worked hard to be so successful, and then gets slapped with a handicap. Where do we draw the line? We can't draw it where you want it drawn, but we can't draw it too far the other way either. It's a very precarious and subjective thing to do, and it takes a lot of experience to be better at determining that, which is what Cleric is working on right now. So, while I don't like being "punished" for winning either, I hope you can concede that, in airsoft at least, there comes a point when that has to happen.

[Murphy]

RPC's are just a delicate instrument. I think if RPC's are intended to be used there needs to be a solid story behind the character and a logic behind their actions.

As a commander I wasn't sure how to handle the spies. I was told they were friendly and would help me but at the same time they were killing me and creating a lot of problems. Were they definitely friendlies, obviously that wouldnt have happened and I would have put their combat skills to use. Were they enemies, I would have disarmed them and escorted them.

My confusion was in the fact that they were expected to act as both; I just wasn't sure what to do with them.

I can't say I'm the biggest fan of RPC's, but I'd love to see them executed perfectly. Its my understanding that at larger milsim events its very common for RPC's to simply be unarmed HVT's that are there to help you out.

Unfortunately the AOSC doesnt have 200 people showing up to every game and 20 people lining up to play RPC's. So they take players who are seasoned, respected, and trustworthy. But at the same time you don't want to rob those players of the chance to actually play airsoft on the field.

Personally I think the solution to RPC's is giving them defined roles/allegiances, and possibly putting them on the field without weapons if the scenario logic calls for it.

[watchman1513]

Sarcasm, Dom. Twas sarcasm.

I understand the need for hashing things out so that better games can be designed for the future. However, I do agree what has been said before and it all comes down to this: yes, there when a team steam rolls the opposing team, the game needs to become more difficult for the more dominate team. But that does not mean structuring the game to punish a winning team. I think that objectives should be used as balancers, and not the will of someone in captivity. I enjoyed watching the spies, and waited for them to give me a chance to shoot them. I had a few laughs with them, and even almost got shot by one. But that's it.

[Felix]

my input: Doesn't matter what they are or what they are doing, shoot first, ask, then medic.

Games are getting to 'in-depth' and to retiredly confusing. If it takes more than 1 minute to explain all of the rules, then people wont get it. I understand keeping things off of the forum for cool factor, but that too is annoying. Let people read what the heck is going on, then play a good game with well informed people.

I showed up at lunch, and no one knew the exact rule set, or could explain it to me fast enough. All I heard from my friends who had played, AND who had left for the long ride home, is how the 'spies' killed themselves to stop the bomb from moving, and how it was retarded. And I don't want to hear any 'Oh but this is different, and engaging, and more realistic!' If I lead a force and was told to repel an enemy force while moving a WMD to a target zone, you better believe that I would have friendly experts on site that knows what the hell we are moving and how the hell to use it. If there are 'spies' in the field that know it, you better believe no REAL spy would kill themselves to stop a WMD from being moved UNLESS they were fully against that force. So, to prevent suicides, capture the HVT guns hot, torture/interrogate his ass, and either ship him to Gitmo or kill him.

Remember K.I.S.S. people..

[Dominum]

RPC's are just a delicate instrument. I think if RPC's are intended to be used there needs to be a solid story behind the character and a logic behind their actions.

As a commander I wasn't sure how to handle the spies. I was told they were friendly and would help me but at the same time they were killing me and creating a lot of problems. Were they definitely friendlies, obviously that wouldnt have happened and I would have put their combat skills to use. Were they enemies, I would have disarmed them and escorted them.

My confusion was in the fact that they were expected to act as both; I just wasn't sure what to do with them.

I can't say I'm the biggest fan of RPC's, but I'd love to see them executed perfectly. Its my understanding that at larger milsim events its very common for RPC's to simply be unarmed HVT's that are there to help you out.

Unfortunately the AOSC doesnt have 200 people showing up to every game and 20 people lining up to play RPC's. So they take players who are seasoned, respected, and trustworthy. But at the same time you don't want to rob those players of the chance to actually play airsoft on the field.

Personally I think the solution to RPC's is giving them defined roles/allegiances, and possibly putting them on the field without weapons if the scenario logic calls for it.

These are very astute observations, and IMO very reasonable suggestions to help improve RPCs as a game mechanic. Yes, at some large MilSims, there are some unarmed civilians that do nothing but give helpful information, but you have to weed those out from the other guys with guns, knives, and "bombs" hidden on them that will help you one minute, then blow everyone up the next. Also, as you said, people are most certainly NOT lining up to be unarmed RPCs, or even armed RPCs that rarely have the opportunity to engage anyone for that matter.

[Mr. Marauder]

Given the name of the game was Double Cross, and that I, as a spy, DID NOT double cross either faction, I'd say no complaints can be had there. In regards to myself and Hoss committing suicide, we had our reasons. I was completely out of ammo and needed to go back to the parking lot and Hoss was tired of carrying around the wooden case. (Yes, spies did assist in carrying the heavy wooden case throughout the day) Not to mention, Bravo had taken almost all objectives at this point. The spies weren't overly needed.

[Rev]

removed for lack of care anymore. If i could delete it I would.

[Star_folder]

Start of the day, ran out to trenches to capture the spies. Ended up not doing much but medicing a whole bunch of people. A team mate's gun went down (bad battery), so I gave him mine and pulled my pistol. After we captured a few of the spies, we grabbed the case and went back to the HQ, or something... I'm a little fuzzy at this point. But I left trenches, slowly making my way down the road, when we met opposition further up the road. We started to engage them, so I decided to try flanking for a better angle.

While I was flanking, in the woods, I heard an odd noise behind me. It sounded like a thick twig snapping, judging that I was twisting my body, I assumed that's what it was. But I get into a position, not moving, and hear it again. I think to myself, no way something fell and hit me that hard, and I know it wasn't a twig this time, this must be sniper fire. So, I call myself out and pull out my dead rag. I just wanted to apologize again for not calling that first shot. It was C Taylor and a friend of his. They performed excellently all day. But, he posted while I was typing this. You can see, lol. Again, sorry about that Taylor.

After that, I bled out and went back to HQ (wanted to pace how far they were. The pair of snipers were right at 100ft. Thank goodness they shot me in the camel back and not in the skin.) We had the case, a nuke, and one of the other objectives, a little black case. I learned we needed to go get the other nuke that we saw by the Road House. We had Nugget, Hoss, Marauder, and Gerbalizer, I think. So, we got everyone together, and packed up and started to ship out. We got to the base, got the objective, and then started back. On the way back, Hoss and Marauder shot each other, and Gerb shot himself in the foot. Wasn't happy about that. But I'll touch on that later. We still had Nugget and the Grill Sgt with us, so we still had two spies, and could still move the crate. We got it back to HQ without incident.

It was touched on about moving the crate. We all had our turns on the crate. We didn't make the spies carry them unnecessarily. Everyone had their fair share, at least while I was around.

Um, At this point, lol, it was kinda funny. We heard the 3rd nuke was in the trenches, that it had been placed there during the day. So, we were going to do it. Nugget hears this, and just starts walking to the trenches, while we were still talking about it. All of a sudden, Nugget is gone, and we are all panicing, cause now we only have one spy. Well, he sorta comes wondering back to us, wondering what happened. lol. Thanks for that Nugget, you were the most reasonable spy all day long.

After he got back, we took more sniper fire, hunted them down, and took them out. Then, in my own ignorance, I didn't ask them if they were spies, basically meaning the only 3 kills I got all day, was on neutral or friendly players. Sigh. It's my own darn fault for not paying better attention during the breifing.

Sometime during this, Captin turned on us, and got away, or something. I'm not sure, but we were just down to Nugget, so we couldn't move the box any more. It was 12:50, so we just decided to call an early lunch.

After lunch, we learn that the whole game was turned on it's head. We only had one more objective, and no spies, with the only two remaining spies, being in alpha's control. So, with nothing else to do, we attack Rocky Top, where the third Nuke was. Being an inpentrable fortress with all the thick brush, and the unlimited respawning that was happening, we weren't able to make it up the hill. We eventually just gave up and returned to the trenches. At the trenches, we found out that our HQ was over run with alpha, so we walk back to see what's up. They were gone, along with everything we had. Obviously we weren't happy, and we couldn't find them anywhere. We go back to the trenches, and Cleric was there. We ended up calling the game, and then calling everyone else to the trenches.

We had a short 30 min game at the trenches. It was going really well, evenly balanced, then all of a sudden, we got run over and taken over in the last few seconds. Not sure what happened to my team while I was taking a leak at the back of the field. But, well, we all got killed and alpha one that skirmish. Well done guys.

Now, on to the sticky business.

Weather was good. I like the field (derp). And I found the scenrio challenging and fun in it's own way. Players were good sports all day. I only had two hit calling issues. One with a ghillie suit 150+ feet away (whatever, he probably couldn't have felt a rocket through that suit :p). The other was 200ft something, bbs were falling on him. Whatever, that's what happens at that distance. Not worried about it. Granted, if you can put two and two together, I shot all of 3 people during the day. Also, I can't say I saw a single mask off of a face on the field all day. Good stuff.

Spies were bad. Except Nugget. See, they get caught in a technicality. If I found a spy, I'd strip them naked, and give them a loin cloth. Now, in airsoft, we can't do that. (frankly, I don't want to see Hoss naked, maybe Nugget, but certainly not Hoss or Marauder.) In airsoft, doing that would be stealing, more or less. So we have to leave them with their guns. Which means they can still shoot us. Which they did. Now. That's not right. And it lead to some annoying things happening during the day. Nugget. Nugget was a good spy. He helped us out when we mediced him, and when we were foolish enough to not watch him, he wondered off, and then started fighting us. This is what should happen. He didn't shoot us point blank, or kill himself. But, I generally feel this way about all balancing teams or people on a game. All they do is make people angry and upset. No one likes them. So why do they keep being added to games? That's not how you balance a game.

Which leads right to the second point. I feel like our victory was taken from us, and given to alpha. The rules of the game were switched up so far so that alpha would have to leave the field to not win. All but two spies were taken from the game, and the two spies were given to alpha. Etc. Etc. I didn't think it was fair from a game view point. Good games are balanced with hard objectives. Granted, it was made nearly impossible for us to win after lunch, but we still tried. There are inconsistencies in stories of what happened, and inconsistencies in rules during the day.

Regardless. I haven't enjoyed the last few AOSC games I've been to. I miss the simple games of "keep these bases captured for this long of a time, and here are some other things you can do while you hold them" ojbectives. They were simple. Everyone understands them. People enjoy them. Seems to me, that most people want simple games where they can shoot people.

So, to wrap things up. Rules need to be written out before the game. Rules need to not change during the day. And Games need to start on time, regardless of who is ready or not. If half the team isn't ready. Sucks to be them. start the game anyway.

Speaking of which, one last thing. Lunch lasted for an hour. Which was right on schedule.

[Dominum]

Let people read what the heck is going on, then play a good game with well informed people.

At CID III the only NPC on the field was only dealt with if you accepted the completely optional special missions, and EVERYTHING about it was spelled out in detail on a free map given to EVERYONE at registration, and players were told to read it if they wanted to participate in the special missions THREE TIMES during the briefing. Yet, somehow, two people still managed to flip out when they decided not to head any of that. Bottom line: It's impossible to make a game simple or straightforward enough for everyone. I am about one of the largest proponents of KISS there is, I say it all the time when people run game designs by me, BUT people also want to do something interesting.

As far as I'm concerned, I think Murphy not only stated what he didn't like about the game, but also made some very good reccomendations on exactly how to improve that issue. IMO, his points are the solution we should take away from this discussion.