Gulf war milsim game, march sunday 8/3/09

Harlequin Wolf

defenderdude wrote: »

+1 on above post
also,
Now that I've thawed out somewhat - have to say yesterday was an very enjoyable day. There are things we can change for the next one etc. but it's all a learning process...

What I love about it - is that it make us think about the event, our tactics, thoughts, movements and actions etc.

I second that. The great thing about milsim is that its all about the players themselve's, how well they perform individually and as a team, much moreso than regular airsoft. I think the only problem yesterday was a lack of aggressive play in the beginning and a lack of mobility for the Iraqi players, but as ye say it's a learning process.

Masada

Spetzcong wrote: »

We (scud team 1 or was it two, the hard one anyway) got to choose where to locate our scud at the start of the game, you can't really whinge at us for picking a good spot, it's mil sim.

Iraqi Commander: "Lets not put the scud up here, it'll be too hard for the enemy special forces to attack..."

Dont read my post as a moan, I only meant it as feedback on things we should do differently next time in order for all to get their games worth.

your lot did a great job to locate the Scud in a well fortified area and it was extremely difficult for our team to overrun you.
The only reason i point the location out is because its simply impossible to take the area, we proved it my fighting off the second round of SF with little or no casualties.

conor-mr2

I enjoyed the day yesterday. Certainly Ill look for more milsims and we all learned a lot yesterday with some very good dialogue going on here.

Being on the SF for the first game was tough. You gotta remember we had a few young 'uns with us aswell so that does make it tough to coordinate. No other team had that. But Im not maiking excuses as I enjoyed the game full stop and really I dont care too much. If this was football that I play competitively then Id be pissed but its not. I was annoyed with my gun jamming more than Id care to like--g&g m4 cqb

Being an SF, the enemy shouldnt know you are coming which obviously is hard to simulate in an open environment. A certain element of surprise is lost.

I eventually decided to give up on scud 1 and made my way round to the other base where all the Dogs were. I walked up to the window and popped around. I wasnt gonna shoot from that range.
If I had the flashbang Im pretty sure I could have taken the scud out but Id say at that stage you guys wouldnt have minded.

However lessons were learnt by me.. Have a better map and utilise air strikes. We didnt do that at all. Our own fault Ill admit to not being prepared. I knew very little about pyros so wasnt going near them but next time I will.

Oh and indeed a great clap of hands for the gamesmanship yesterday which is most important.

sliabh

I was one of the idle Iraqis in the first game on Sunday. Like Stercus Accidit says, we did a lot of standing around and people spent some time suggesting improvements. I had a bit of a think myself and I put them down below.

This isn't a criticism of Paul or Ronan. They did a great job, and it was made harder by not knowing how many people were going to turn up on the day, and a lot of people asking questions about the rules (in particular the airstrikes). But this was a good opprotunity to see what works and what doesn't and to learn from it.

What worked and could have been better
As people said before we had a third of the players standing around for a few hours watching the fun. Ideally we should have been able to get into the action.

Radio comms and use to the field telephone was very good. The two Iraqi sides were in regular contact relaying information on the SF movements. At the idle site we were watching to see where the one Israeli medic was and encouraged the other site to press accordingly.

The two scud sites were totally different in the level of difficulty to take. The one by the lane was very hard to get. The second one was doable, but 10 people were probably too many to defend it. There just wasn't enough cover for that many people (some were knocked out after only firing 5 or 6 BBs).

Traditionally the view is that attackers need a 2:1 advantage. I know the attackers here are supposed to be SF, but this is airsoft and the playing field is much more level. On the day the SF team were outnumbered 2 to 1, with the same ammo, weapons and medic while attacking two groups of dug in defenders. After we took the first scud, we were down to 4 men, with only a few mags each. There was no way we were going to take the second (harder one).

The suggestions I have below are to:
1) Allow everyone to get stuck into the fighting
2) Give the SF a realistic chance of getting both scuds
3) Force each team to think strategically, to think "mil"
4) Not be too complicated!

Groups
I would have split the two teams half and half into Israelis and Iraqis. The Iraqis then would have been split into three even sized groups. The first two to defend each of the two Scud sites. And the third as a patrol/reinforcement group. Each group would have one medic. The Israelis would have all their men in one group, and have two medics.

Movement Rules
The two scud defending teams should be confined to their deployment zones for a given time limit (say 60 minutes). After that they can choose to move to reinforce the other team. The patrolling Iraqis can go where they want.

Air Support
The Iraqis still get one artillery stonk per hour. I liked the idea above of giving the Israelis a choice between an airstrike or an ammo resupply (if the marshals can figure out how to police it ).

This would mean that the Israelis have enough men to overwhelm any individual scud site (up to 3:1). But they also need to watch their backs for the patrol. And if they don't move fast they will get surrounded by the second scud's defenders as well.

The game shouldn't last much more than 2-2.5 hours. So it gives time to swap over and see can the other team get do it faster!

My two cents.

Fiach Dubh

I want to give a big thanks to Paul for setting up this event and to Mel for sorting the grub. The setup was a step beyond what we have achieved in a milsim game before with the excellent scud props and the field phones linking the launch sites. I was on the team that got no action for 3 hours and I have to say it didn't bother me in the slightest. When we ran my milsim game at the end of last year I had based it on a historical mass-attack scenario so all players got plenty of action. Paul was trying to simulate the opposite end of the spectrum, surgical strikes on fixed high priority assets. I think all in all he achieved that.

The scenario was tough, very tough. Balancing aggression with not over extending and being wiped out, conserving ammunition in the hope of having enough to clear both launch sites. Although we managed to clear and destroy one scud we hade taken too many casualties and used up too much of our supplies to effectively attack the second (although we gave it a bloody good go;) ) It was possible to complete this scenario but every aspect of strategy had to be carefully controlled. These are the conditions special forces units operate under, if any part of the plan fails it can all go pear shaped very quickly. Only in hollywood do SF teams always complete their objectives, Bravo Two Zero anyone?

The scenario can of course be modified and reworked so it plays out differently but if the difficulty is scaled down to much could it really be called a special forces operation anymore?

On a final note I see a bit of e-peen going on over this event. I know most of it is just joking but some of it seems a bit more serious. As far as I'm concerned everybody did really well, no cheating and quite good adherence to the scenario. A big thumbs up to everybody!

Harlequin Wolf

I'll agree with people saying that the Iraqi side need to have a little more mobility, it will give them a better chance of getting some action and add a new tactical dynamic for the SF to take into account. But i'm still not so keen on the idea of 50/50 team splits. I believe the SF should be more limited in number, but be able to call in resupply drops.

Spetzcong

Yeah those sound like good ammendments, I really did feel sorry for the lost Iraqi team in the first game, it was freezing cold and standing around for two plus hours without so much as a special forces probe on your position has got to be demoralising.

In my above post the word "whinging" isn't quite what I mean (although it is what I said) nobody is moaning in the traditional sense, all anyone has done in this thread is voice legitmate concerns and suggest ways that the game could be improved.

The location which we picked for our scud was very difficult to take, the SF team only really got the tactics right for it at the very end, a well placed airstrike which took out at least 5 of our players (luckilly not our medic) combined with and assault from both sides of our base, where you had dug in, combined with harassing fire from the one or two people you had out in the main field, probably would have done us in. Sadly by the time you got the airstrike off most of your team was already dead and you just didn't have enough people to secure the objective. That still wouldn't have solved the problem of the other iraqi team being left twiddling their thumbs for as long as they were though.

I think it would have been very difficult for anyone to take out both scuds, even when the dogs assaulted us on the easy scud position they lost half their team and used most of their ammo taking out the position, leaving them poorly equiped to take out the second scud.

Maybe even something as simple as saying that both scuds must be placed no more than 50 meters apart would have made sure that every player got to see some action in that first game.

That said, even with the teething issues, I had a great day and would definately play that game again.

hrta

The damper to the day was the cold, sorry about that, as there was not alot, i could do about that.

I did not pick the missile site's, I asked the iraqi teams, were they would like to set up there missile site's.

A few showed up, and did not read them.
Rules
It is your responsibility to read and understand these rules before attending the game.
Much effort has been made to make these rules as simple and easy to understand as possible.


This was posted on the 6/3/2009.

And just to let poeple know, this is not like, any other airsoft days gaming, most of the time, you might not get a shot off, for up to an hour or more, there are a few rules, that you will have to fallow, you need to have read the rules, or print them, and bring them with you, if you dont know the rules on the day, you might have to sit out for a few hours till you have read them.


The milsim game of the day was to give every one a game as the IDF Special Forces unit.

No one used this to there advantage.
All teams will have to draw a map of the site, to call in air strike's, Iraqi's can call in air strike's every hour, on the hour, only, Israeli team can call in air stike's every 30 min's, on the hour, only, Air stikes can only take out one room of a building, at any one time, or 5 meters out side in the open, any one in the room is taken out, or any one in the 5 meter's area out side. Missile's can not be taken out with air stike's.

Hits on buildings
If a shell or air strike hits a building then everyone inside is killed and the building is taken out of play for 30 minutes, Airstrike's can only take out one room at a any one time.


Here is how it should have been played, IDF Special Forces unit, splits in to two teams, each team to take up an over view of missile site, working with the other team push iraqi's in to a noose, with Grenades, to be taken out by airstrike's, as you had them every half hour, take the last few out with some rounds, plant your shaped charge, to the missile, and take them out, and be home in time for tea, job done.

Hivemind187

Interesting comments.

From a planning and game writing perspective I might make the following suggestions.

Ammo drops. Good idea but it doesnt make a lot of sense. Ammo drops of that nature would reveal a covert operators position and would need to be dropped in an open zone which would draw the fire of any observing unfriendlies. However - there is an alternative.

I've been doing a spot of research on the tactics of special forces units compared to those of regular infantry in the run up to the MilSim night kicking off and there are some interesting things to note about equipment selection. Special forces units will often bring equipment that is similar to that commonly used by their enemy so as they will be able to take advantage of any captured munitions and leave a smaller evidence footprint.

The key thing here is "captured munitions".

Instead of having ammo-drops a SF team performing a sucessful attack on an enemy position (or neutralising a patrol etc) could be granted a limited reload privilege based on enemy casualties. Say the equivalent of 20% of the enemy ammunition capacity. This would simulate a genuine battlefield situation for any trooper in the field for an extended period and provide an immediate reward for a victory.

The "lost" Iraqi's: This was unfortunate and as much doen to the inaction of the SF team as it was down to the parameters of the game scenario.

I would suggest that the focus was on the SF team a little too much with regard to objectives and the Iraqi's, in hind sight, should have been given something to do to keep them occupied. This could have been things like erecting a guidance control beacon in the play area, repairing downed communications, perimeter patrols etc. This gives the SF unit the additional headache of avoiding or engaging targets on their way to the objective and means that the Iraqi's have concerns other than standing in one place waiting for the first muppet to get slotted.

This is not a criticism of the game plan we had, its far too easy to be critical in hindsight, it is certainly something to be learned for next time.

Balancing and making things "fair": I can't agree with this sentiment. Life isnt fair. Adverse conditions are part of the fun. Perhaps some of this could be mitigated by providing adverse conditions to both sides but keeping the details of these from becoming known to the opposition forcing both sides to watch one another closely for opportunities to exploit such weaknesses. It should be up to the participants to "balance things" themselves through better planning and execution of their tactics. Sounds harsh but its the only way to be genuinely fair.

None of this is meant to be too criticial of any players either. MilSim isnt easy and often times reality steps into balls things up (the weather, tehnical hitches etc).

I'd like to echo Fiach though and say that I was generally very happy with the level of sportsmanship yesterday and also Stercus in that I sincerely want MilSim to grow in Ireland.

hrta

Rogue-Trooper wrote: »

Yeah, they sat around for half an hour working out their strategy (over tea & soup apparently) and when they finally emerged they attacked the hardest of the 2 sites and died trying. The soup was obviously THICK COUNTRY VEGETABLE....

If the iraqi's were on the ball, they could have taken them out with the first airstrike.

Harlequin Wolf

If it was true milsim then the SF would have to use the same weapons as the Iraqi's to take their ammo........................bye bye Armalites, you'll be missed..........kinda:P

gerrowadat

Rogue-Trooper wrote: »

Yeah, they sat around for half an hour working out their strategy (over tea & soup apparently) and when they finally emerged they attacked the hardest of the 2 sites and died trying. The soup was obviously THICK COUNTRY VEGETABLE....

Cream of chicken actually. With croutons. Was lovely and warm up in that cabin and all.

OzCam

Dogs (reinforced): 1 - everyone else: Big Fat Zero.

'Nuff Said.

Dr_Pepper

Ahem it was Dogs and DrPepper!
On that flank i took out, oh maybe 4 of the opposition.
Funniest thing when gar was shooting with his big sniper and i pop off 4 shots only to see a hand raised! RPK down! Not sure who actually hit him.

Ah the assault on the SCUD1 was good but an i wanna point this out to anyone who decided to make a point or some ****.

We took the only scud all day.
We did it an lost 5 men incl medic -- our mistake.
We had 1/2 mags left each to attack a heavily defended 10 man team in an elevated and dug in position. Johnny decided to "go for it" with less than a mag. I blew my remaining 2 mags and was trying to squeez the last outta the final one when richie got me (admittedly i had 10 bbs or so left in it), and Sam had 1 mag left, oh and oz had 1 mag.

Overall it was good, as a learning experience i think we can take some good ideas from the previous posts and move with it.
The lack of Medic respawn and the lack of return to safe zone completely changed what the game was designed to be -- that should have been looked at too.

TheDoc

i am absolutely swetting for the next one, like swetting, cant wait.

o and sam

"wtf is a star craft?"

Your barred, give me back that shotgun I sold you, you do not deserve it.

Sounds like it went well, and good to see loads of people giving shouts for improvement.

As paul always says, its your site and your game, you get what you make from it. So lets make awesome milsim

Harlequin Wolf

I second Doc peppers post. The second SF teams assault was the most successful but even so a couple of mistakes were made that could have been avoided, i moved up to recover one of our players who needed a medic and ended up gettin pinned down and eventually hit tryin to run to recover a second. Admittedly i should have been a bit more careful, but i maintain the belief that the scenario is winable for the SF team, ye just gotta fight smart.

OzCam

I didn't feel it was necessary to point out that we were all Dogs on the day, I assumed that was understood. Previous item corrected.

Actually I had almost 5 mags left, but no idea where the defenders were, no idea who was left on our side (if anyone) or where they were, and trying very hard not to go for a swim in the inner ditch.

Special mentions for Hive, who really earned his money with the weather and the pressure of trying to keep things moving, and for PK for durability after splitting his trousers, getting soaked from the knees down and trying to knock a tree down with his head. Well done sir.

PS: Boredom is part of the game. Deal with it, and keep a watch.

sliabh

Harlequin Wolf wrote: »

i moved up to recover one of our players who needed a medic and ended up gettin pinned down and eventually hit tryin to run to recover a second. Admittedly i should have been a bit more careful, but i maintain the belief that the scenario is winable for the SF team, ye just gotta fight smart.

That would have been me (thanks for saving my ass). Thinking back there were three of us there taking fire from two windows. If we were more organised two of us could have covered one window each and allowed you to withdraw.

A big learning on the day was - Your medic is crucial. He is not a rifleman. Keep him safe at all costs!

sci-ops

Firstly, really enjoyed the day. Was part of Scud 2 for the first game. Felt really sorry for the other scud team, who had nothing to do. Second game, defending Scud 1. Yes we were overrun, in 35 mins or so. We were concentrated around the portacabin as we were under the impression that we could not place men in the ditch. Turns out, we could have. Probably would have stopped the first 3 or 4 of our team being taken out on the scud side of the cabin so quickly. That said, it was a good attack by the Dogs, oh and Dr. P....As they said though, they lost half their men and most of their ammo. Not a total disaster.

I would like to point out though, this score you guys keep talking about, because so many people bailed before the 3rd game, it was decided to change the game to the Conquest one. Don't see why people keep rattling on about this when we didn't get the chance.

Spetzcong

Dr_Pepper wrote: »

i pop off 4 shots only to see a hand raised! RPK down! Not sure who actually hit him. .

Alas but I was already downed at that point, I got shot by someone up the field towards the Ghosts base very early on in the game, there I was minding my own business, doing my very best impression of a mil-sim corpse (i.e lying flat on my back, eyes skyward, moaning medic every few minutes), and youse feckers kept slotting me all the same, for shame

Although fair play for getting yourselves a decent overwatch on the wounded, when I started getting hit from the other side it became quite clear that even if our medic was able to somehow get out of the building, there was no way he'd make it to me without getting shot himself.

I do think the mission was doable, if very difficult, proper use of airstrikes and flashbangs was the key though, I don't think any SF team, used airstrikes to their full potential. I would have liked to see how we would have fared at taking down a scud. In the end we played a mil-sim conquest game (who won that btw?).

Hivemind187

Spetzcong wrote: »

In the end we played a mil-sim conquest game (who won that btw?).

Technically the weather did.

However the Red team had taken more strategic points by capitalising on the White team losing their medic in the first five minutes.

Stercus Accidit

I ran out of "thanks" to give I think on this thread, about two pages back

My thoughts;


-Who thinks that the medic pouch should be droppable, and need to be recovered or captured, as an asset to gaining a medic?

-I'd be happy enough to leave mags down if I bled out, as a field capture, and my AK, but mines a very bodged gun, epoxy (moggy :P) and all odd bits in it, and a dodgey motor. How comfortable would a g&g user with eotech etc. be with this idea?

-Perhaps just as hive suggested, any SF player with a compatible gun can receive ammo, upon reaching the enemy base having killed their men.

-Also, if team 1 can get a man to team 2, without him being shot, maybe he can bring a few men back with him, (also adding the tactic of drawing men away from their scud), or via coms after the hour mark, if coms are up.

-Also, maybe a ratio of 4:3 attackers to defenders on the raised scud, it is a bloody nightmare to get, but maybe thats the game. Scud 1 was handy, the defenders are so constricted.

-when a man is down, he should sit down, there were a few lads that just stood there, I know I shot one a few times before realising what he was at. If you are on your arse, you are more obviously wounded. Can an injured man relay intel? Can he be finished off if he is?

Hivemind187

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

I ran out of "thanks" to give I think on this thread, about two pages back

My thoughts;


-Who thinks that the medic pouch should be droppable, and need to be recovered or captured, as an asset to gaining a medic?

Hmmm ... not sure about this. Being a medic is a fairly specialist role (likebeing an engineer or a signals operator). Most units would only have one or possibly two trained trauma experts capable of dealing with shrapnel wounds.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

-I'd be happy enough to leave mags down if I bled out, as a field capture, and my AK, but mines a very bodged gun, epoxy (moggy :P) and all odd bits in it, and a dodgey motor. How comfortable would a g&g user with eotech etc. be with this idea?

-Perhaps just as hive suggested, any SF player with a compatible gun can receive ammo, upon reaching the enemy base having killed their men.

Perhaps an ammo tin with a small bottle of one specific weight of BB's would be a better approach? 100-200 rounds between the team? If you happen to have a rifle that is compatable with the BB weight you can avail of the rounds?

Ok ... so there would need to be some fudge work here. Modern AK's use the 5.45 round which isnt compatable with the NATO 5.56 but they are close enough in ballistics for airsoft BB's of .2g to be universal.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

-Also, if team 1 can get a man to team 2, without him being shot, maybe he can bring a few men back with him, (also adding the tactic of drawing men away from their scud), or via coms after the hour mark, if coms are up.

Perhaps. But I think giving the Iraqi's something else to do other than worry about their rocket is the answer. Repairing comms to allow them to call in airstrikes wouold also give the SF units a secondary target to hamper the Iraqi defence.

Perhaps next time we should look at it that way?

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

-Also, maybe a ratio of 4:3 attackers to defenders on the raised scud, it is a bloody nightmare to get, but maybe thats the game. Scud 1 was handy, the defenders are so constricted.

Yeah. the thing is that both locations are conquerable its just he tactics for each are radically different. The proper use of airstrikes and hefty use of grenades is the answer.

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

-when a man is down, he should sit down, there were a few lads that just stood there, I know I shot one a few times before realising what he was at. If you are on your arse, you are more obviously wounded. Can an injured man relay intel? Can he be finished off if he is?

Agreed. this was in the rules but universally ignored due to the weather.

OzCam

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

-when a man is down, he should sit down, there were a few lads that just stood there, I know I shot one a few times before realising what he was at. If you are on your arse, you are more obviously wounded. Can an injured man relay intel? Can he be finished off if he is?

Unless you're using US rules of engagement (shoot first and identify target later), if someone's standing there with his hand up and rifle slung he's obviously out of the game and it's extremely bad manners to shoot him again. You're supposed to be actually looking at what you're shooting.

No and no. When you're hit, you're waiting for a medic. You're either healed within the time limit or not. Wounded men don't talk. They can, obviously, but let's not complicate things any further. If there's one set of rules for what you can/can't say when "dead" and another for when "injured" there's just going to be more arguments. KISS.

Harlequin Wolf

I agree the weather was a bit bad for lying down on the wet grass, but if yer hit ye should at least take a knee and shoulder yer weapon.

Stercus Accidit

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Hmmm ... not sure about this. Being a medic is a fairly specialist role (likebeing an engineer or a signals operator). Most units would only have one or possibly two trained trauma experts capable of dealing with shrapnel wounds.

Fair point and one I considered, really dependant on the realism of being able to treat a gunshot without being a specialist, maybe or maybe not, I'm no expert.

Perhaps an ammo tin with a small bottle of one specific weight of BB's would be a better approach? 100-200 rounds between the team? If you happen to have a rifle that is compatable with the BB weight you can avail of the rounds
Ok ... so there would need to be some fudge work here. Modern AK's use the 5.45 round which isnt compatable with the NATO 5.56 but they are close enough in ballistics for airsoft BB's of .2g to be universal.

I was thinking more along the lines of if you swapped rifle with an enemy, you could use his ammo and mags if he was killed, or if you have a compatible rifle (a spare AK) you can just take the mags and avoid swapping guns, or just be allowed reload your own mags, but not to the extent that ammo no longer is a limiting factor, it should be, the defenders would have used a lot of ammo themselves.

Perhaps. But I think giving the Iraqi's something else to do other than worry about their rocket is the answer. Repairing comms to allow them to call in airstrikes wouold also give the SF units a secondary target to hamper the Iraqi defence.

Perhaps next time we should look at it that way?

If we had had anything to do, we'd have been happy, once team 2 couldn't answer their field phone, we were very much out of the game.

Yeah. the thing is that both locations are conquerable its just he tactics for each are radically different. The proper use of airstrikes and hefty use of grenades is the answer.

True, I imagine if we had kept the medic safer, we'd have had a much better chance.

Agreed. this was in the rules but universally ignored due to the weather.

I sat down when shot, It was a bit confusing when firing on the enemy figuring out who was hit, hopefully people will tough it out in future and sit on the damp grass

Stercus Accidit

OzCam wrote: »

Unless you're using US rules of engagement (shoot first and identify target later), if someone's standing there with his hand up and rifle slung he's obviously out of the game and it's extremely bad manners to shoot him again. You're supposed to be actually looking at what you're shooting.

Sorreee.

But If a guy is obscured by a wall, and I cant see his hand, I can only see a man standing. Think through what you are saying please if you want to contribute.

No and no. When you're hit, you're waiting for a medic. You're either healed within the time limit or not. Wounded men don't talk. They can, obviously, but let's not complicate things any further. If there's one set of rules for what you can/can't say when "dead" and another for when "injured" there's just going to be more arguments. KISS.

It isnt very complicated, they are supposed to be able to shout medic, how else do they call for aid if coms if they don't have a radio? I was injured at one stage and wanted to relay some info, but didn't due to lack of clarification, clarification on that situation is all I want.

Masada

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Sorreee.

But If a guy is obscured by a wall, and I cant see his hand, I can only see a man standing. Think through what you are saying please if you want to contribute.



It isnt very complicated, they are supposed to be able to shout medic, how else do they call for aid if coms if they don't have a radio? I was injured at one stage and wanted to relay some info, but didn't due to lack of clarification, clarification on that situation is all I want.

If that was me your refering to, ( i dont think it was but i did stay standing after being hit) the reason behind it was that i was in cover when i got hit and if i had of sat back down then it would appear to the guy who shot me that i was taking cover again. I stayed standing so he knew i was shot. which i think is a logical thing to do.,

Harlequin Wolf

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

I was thinking more along the lines of if you swapped rifle with an enemy, you could use his ammo and mags if he was killed, or if you have a compatible rifle (a spare AK) you can just take the mags and avoid swapping guns, or just be allowed reload your own mags, but not to the extent that ammo no longer is a limiting factor, it should be, the defenders would have used a lot of ammo themselves.

I'd be wary of swapping guns with people, its a bit of a grey area with respect to liability in the event of a gun being damaged while gaming and what not. I'm sure some of the people who play together regularly wouldn't mind but if yer playin with new players or rentals you don't really know it could cause problems with regards to possible damage of property..............i hate it when my gun gets damaged when i'm usin it, if some guy i don't know comes over and whips it off me in the middle of a game and busts it up i'd be pretty freaked.

OzCam

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

But If a guy is obscured by a wall, and I cant see his hand, I can only see a man standing.

Ah. Well in that case it's his fault for not being obvious enough. The responsibility lies on both players, not just one or the other. Richie, stick your hand up where everyone can see it next time. Then you can sit down again.