Just what is mil-sim?

[dos_Santos]

To OP, you've just described airsoft. Hahaha!

[Lukens]

You cant really talk too much about milsim games till you've been to one. People can gripe all they want online, doesnt change how it really went. Ive only been to one Wendyland game, so I cant comment much. But its completely different than any other BB warz games people have going.

[Android]

Winter break, man. Almost as bad as summer but at least it's shorter.

[Pharaoh 6]

Sounds like this post was started as more of a complaint and less of a fact find. However, I think the definition of milsim was well defined by Welsh, Darius, Matt and a few others.

To Tankwitch. It sounds like you're just trying to pick a fight. I'd say quit posting, attend a MILISM West event, and then you won't have to ask other people what milsim is because you will have experienced it.

P6

[frogfish]

Welshy... this stuff is pure gold

I love this argument. I love it when people play a hobby with realistic looking weapons/replicas, invest in realistic kit, realistic uniforms, then think that milsim is gay because its "too real".


As for you discussions about belts... I actually know which belt you are talking about the Bianchi B9 Fancy Stitched Leather Belt. I own two, one for holding up my pants, and another for holding up my pants and a CCW (I lost too much weight on a shitty job so I use my old one for this), and there is something special about that belt, it's probably the best CCW belt on the market, and it is issued to a large Navy unit, doing an impression of that unit with "any old leather belt" would be incorrect.

That however is not Milsim, that is impressions, a different beast entirely.

By the way I'm a heavy Milsim player, I don't play in MC anymore unless its free or cheap. When I played in decked from head to toe in MC I was anything but a "Milsim" player (BTW the new airsoftpat is ATACs).

[Variable]

A lot of "milsim" around the airsoft world is like virgins re-enacting sex based on what they've seen in porn movies. Its people trying to do what they've only seen done in an exaggerated way made for entertainment. (See Grossman "On Killing"). From playing too many video games we're taught that battles have to be even sided. In real modern warfare things are almost never even sided. Professional armies rarely engage each other any more. For infantry to take a position you need 3-1 odds and artillery. A 1-1 engagement on the squad or platoon level will result in a stalemate and a lot of people dying. To simulate modern conflict you have to accept that one side will be simulating an underarmed unprofessional group of fighters that will likely get their shit pushed in during a stand up fight.

MilSim using airsoft replicas has to be scoped and defined within the limitations of those replicas. That essentially means that we're going to be playing at being infantry, because we don't have access to (correctly) simulated aircraft and artillery (which rule the modern battlefield). Once we know the scope we're dealing with we can start building out requirements and ideas of what milsim is.

Milsim is more than just dressing up. You can have a 100% authentic kit that you spent thousands of dollars on, but if you are playing capture the flag in a airbunker maze you aren't simulated military. So we need to look at engagements that are/were primarily light infantry engagements to come up with an idea of what we should simulate.

Consider just a few examples of infantry based conflicts in rural areas.

Rhodesian Bush War. (See "Fireforce" by Chris Cocks) This is my favorite example of what airsoft could be. The bush war was an asymmetric conflict between trained professional infantry (Rhodesian Light Infantry) and communist supplied guerillas crossing into Rhodesia. Although there were artillery and aircraft involved, due to the undersupplied nature of the Rhodesian armed forces this war was fought mainly by infantry, in the bush (woods). This model of conflict translates very well to airsoft in the northwest, as most of our fields are forested instead of urban.

Afghanistan conflict (Soviet era or modern era). Pacification of urban centers and infantry operations in rural areas. Again this is an asymmetric conflict between trained professional soldiers and untrained guerillas. The use of armored vehicles, air assets, and artillery is difficult to accurately simulate, but this could be done. Unlike the bush war this is less seek and destroy, and more pacification. This model would rely heavily on the use of dedicated actor/opfor players would understand their role and don't mind not getting their gun off 24/7.

Cold War land battle in Europe. Although this never happened there are ms games that simulate the infantry side of that conflict. This is the only example I'll list that is a symmetric battle.

Bullet list of things I believe good mil-sim should involve:
-Chain of command, organization
-Accurate (or at least a good attempt) gear/loadouts
-Immersion. This means you don't try to game the rules, you don't camp with your enemies, each individual stays "in character" willingly during the entire game.

But this is just the opinion of a virgin since I've never been in the military.

[Tankwitch]

Welshy... this stuff is pure gold

I love this argument. I love it when people play a hobby with realistic looking weapons/replicas, invest in realistic kit, realistic uniforms, then think that milsim is gay because its "too real".

What is this I don't even...


Edit: The posts I have seen, that are constructive, are in fact very useful. I will read over them and try to pick out the common themes.

[Variable]

Since you've also attended the Wendyland games, and as a Russian, I'll ask you this. Do you feel like the immersion was made better by the Russians using proper kit and uniforms, or worse?

In my opinion having a dedicated OpFor that is trying to look the part helps a lot with those games. There's no mistaking who the opfor is when he's wearing completely different kit, instead of just some dude in different NATO camo wearing the same plate carrier as you.

We keep using MSW games as an example, because they're fantastic games. They're not just "let's go shoot shit" games, they try to simulate actual military missions and roles. You've got both sides setting up long term LPOPs. You've got NATO forces patrolling a road for 2 hours with no contact. You've got committed players that will sit in the same spot doing nothing for an hour just so they can ambush and disrupt a larger force. Games like that are MilSim, games like Multicam vs MARPAT trying to capture sectors across a small field is not MilSim.

Yes, this. My preference is for more realistic missions like that rather than spawn, hump 100 yards, go full auto, die, hump back to respawn repeat.
Granted these are more realistic albeit compressed from a time perspective.

[Darius137]

So what we need then is a baseline set of rules. That will establish what the base requirements are to be a Mil-Sim game versus a Force on Force with Objectives. Then you can use said set of rules to judge whether or not a game will be Mil-Sim. So far I like what Matt and Darius have said.

Games that have:
Well Defined Chain of Command
Well Established Objectives/Goals
Planning by said Chain of Command to Complete the Objectives
Specific Roles for Each Team (Sappers, Snipers, Medics??)
Longer Periods of Play with no Breaks (Six to Eight Hours??)

If we have a base set of rules to follow, then as a community we can plan and prepare better games.

Why do we need specific rule sets? This limits creativity and new options. The only limits we need as a community to enforce are based on safety. So no weapons over 600fps. Anything less is personal preference.

Any more rules than that for game hosters as a community is just going to stifle innovation.


Honestly there is no point to this discussion. Game hosts can ask for input about what people want, or they can make games based on what they want. If the community likes your interpretation of milsim, go with it. If they say it's not milsim, they can do better or GTFO.

Just go to games, make games, this is a pointless thread that we've expanded much beyond the original poster's ideas, which were really just uninformed complaints that are probably not even original.

[Farmer]

Based on what I have read from the OP, I believe they are trying to figure out what Mil-Sim means. As a new player to airsoft, one who has never played in a Mil-Sim game, I see Mil-Sim games from a different light.

Mil-Sim means by actual deffinition of the to shortened words. Military Simulation. That describes Simulating some form of Military. That "army" could be a fictional one, The Peoples Army of Sesame Street for example, or a real one, the US Army. Now, should you be simulating the P.A.S.S. You could decide they wear pink tutu's and black shirts with purple pants and candy cane gear. Great. Have fun. The entire "army" will need that gear to Simulate that Military. Now, the US Army, well, there are many many many photos, articles, posts on what they wear. Yes, you "should" use all the correct gear. Does that mean everyone will? As long as the appearence looks correct, that in my uninformed opinion is probably good enough. An AK-47 on the US side? NO. A M-16 with other M-4's? Yeah that should work.

Not only does gear matter, it means you can expect to do things the way some sort of military does them. Patrols for hours, ambushes set for 0dark30 (meaning oh my gods its no dawn yet). Listening to orders, following those orders no matter if you think they are gonna get you killed or not. Arguing with those people you agree to have appointed over you? Not for this game bubba-joe. Should the game be a weekend event, expect to set watches against the possibility of a night attack. Possibly attempting a night attack. Down to little things like using passwords and countersigns to prevent blue on blue events. Some can be tiresome, some adds to the fun.

Does my deffinition of Mil-Sim actually mean what everyone does? No way. These are things I see as meaning Mil-Sim to me. If I am wrong in my perception, so be it.

The "label" Mil-Sim frankly makes me leary. To me, Mil-Sim means what I was doing in Basic taining when I was 19-20. It was long, tough, intensive and trying. Can I do it now at 36? Maybe. Do I want to do it? Not so sure. I am willing to attempt to get a weekend and go to a MSW game, I just have had life getting in the way. Hopefully I will get to "Mil-Sim" sometme soon-ish

[Reaver]

For me, "mil-sim" is to play according to a "military simulation ". So to understand mil-sim is to understand military tactics and operation.