Red Teaming Iraq

[Steve Blair]

Serious gamers, especially folks who've been serving as game masters for some time, would also be good to put in this role. We're used to thinking on the fly, bringing in different things to hinder, confuse, or kill off (depending on our moods, of course... ) our players.

Seriously, a good GM has to be able to immerse himself at least partway into any role that's thrown at him. Gamers from the early to mid 1980s are especially good at this, IMO, since the computer crutch wasn't developed yet. Even a computer gamer isn't going to be as good at the sort of non-linear thinking that we're talking about here. Computer games tend to act (and react) in certain patterns, while a good RPG never really did.

To properly game or test a situation, you need someone who's actively trying to break it, someone wandering around throwing spanners in the works, and a group that's actually trying to follow the plan. In a decent RPG, the GM takes on the role of both the random chance and the person actively trying to break the plans of his players (within the framework of the game and certain conventions, of course). You would certainly get a lot of "non-school" solutions from such people.

[goesh]

should be included on the team - some career NCO preferably who hates the system but will work for a reduced sentence and nice perks during the operation.

[marct]

Seriously, a good GM has to be able to immerse himself at least partway into any role that's thrown at him. Gamers from the early to mid 1980s are especially good at this, IMO, since the computer crutch wasn't developed yet. Even a computer gamer isn't going to be as good at the sort of non-linear thinking that we're talking about here. Computer games tend to act (and react) in certain patterns, while a good RPG never really did.

Hi Steve,

I would certainly agree with that. What would be even better would be tro try and recruit some of the GMs who served as alpha test play-testers.

Marc

[Steve Blair]

Marc,

There are a fair number of them out there. I'd also suggest going after those who have "home-brewed" rules systems, since they have experience reworking existing systems to fit a game environment or scenario (a friend and I did this with the core Rolemaster rules to get them to fit a world I'd created...we ended up redoing almost the entire character development system and skills systems). Such folks are used to getting the most out of existing systems, as well as finding flaws and holes in same.

[marct]

There are a fair number of them out there. I'd also suggest going after those who have "home-brewed" rules systems, since they have experience reworking existing systems to fit a game environment or scenario (a friend and I did this with the core Rolemaster rules to get them to fit a world I'd created...we ended up redoing almost the entire character development system and skills systems). Such folks are used to getting the most out of existing systems, as well as finding flaws and holes in same.

Steve,

I'd agree with that. I used to work with a team like that for the VSG material. The last game I was involved in up here, the entire group was like that. I think that we had, collectively, something like 15-20 game publication credits plus innumerable home-grown systems.

The key is always a combination of adaptability and the ability to spot holes in a system that you can manipulate to your advantage. Of course, if all else fails, you just twist the system up in knots

Marc

[jcustis]

What do you folks think about the idea of a "Grey Team"? Their sole responsability would be to help, or hinder, either side based solely on their own self interests. Just to make it even more "realistic", let the grey team split into as many factions as they want at any point in time.

Without a doubt, "grey team" elements are critical, because that is exactly what the bulk of the Iraqi population is going right now, laying low and coming out of survival mode every now and then to advance specific interests.

Until such time that effective security for the popluation is the norm, we will always have "grey actors", and therefore need members to represent their interests and the way they drift with the prevailing winds.

Powerful sheiks with financial interests, clergy, lower-level mandarins, etc., could be represented fairly easily within most wargame constructs. One of the spin-off benefits is that their actions could contribute to the "white noise" events that increase the complexity and keep the Blue Team running ragged.

[selil]

I like the guys I've met from groups like "Blackwater Tactical" but wouldn't they also be "grey" teams? They use resources, have different agendas, and can create tension and hostility by their actions. How do you represent that in an excercise?

[120mm]

should be included on the team - some career NCO preferably who hates the system but will work for a reduced sentence and nice perks during the operation.

+1 on the "Brig Rat". This almost always improves the breed. I had several in my CAV Troop, and this was a win-win. You saved the "rat" and improved the organization at the same time.

I write "White Noise" for a living and the biggest problem with this is breaking it down into small enough pieces to give it value. I'm convinced that in 4GW, a competent RPG from pre-computer times would make a decent General.

[Steve Blair]

I like the guys I've met from groups like "Blackwater Tactical" but wouldn't they also be "grey" teams? They use resources, have different agendas, and can create tension and hostility by their actions. How do you represent that in an excercise?

Very simple if it's an RPG-based tabletop exercise. These guys would be represented by a separate team, already briefed on their own goals, or as a group run by the GM who had their own agenda and would act according to it. This would, for a good GM, be very easy to simulate.

[Steve Blair]

+1 on the "Brig Rat". This almost always improves the breed. I had several in my CAV Troop, and this was a win-win. You saved the "rat" and improved the organization at the same time.

I write "White Noise" for a living and the biggest problem with this is breaking it down into small enough pieces to give it value. I'm convinced that in 4GW, a competent RPG from pre-computer times would make a decent General.

Agree completely, 120mm. You can do a great deal with the older games, including modifying them to suit your needs. Brig Rats are naturals at the "white noise" and "wrench in the machine" things, stuff that you need to accurately simulate what folks will encounter in the field. That's one of the beauties of a good RPG system: it allows you to add in just about anything you want. It does require good control staff, but that can be "grown" fairly easily with some time and effort. I've known lots of servicemembers who game...often they just need a little encouragement to come out in the open.

[Rob Thornton]

I'd writen Marc on a PM that I thought a war contractor could play a "grey" guy since they are sort of in that mindset anyway, but I would not have the contractor play a contractor - your not going to hear a guys admitting he's overcharging for something he's really doing, they may be greedy, but they are not stupid. However, you could learn allot about a contractor by having him play a sheik, or vice versa

[selil]

I'm trying to get my mind around how to make a computer simulation game like being discussed happen. In the interest of disclosure I'm in charge of standing up a computer gaming simulation academic program (engine design not graphics) at my university in that thing called spare time.

In a couple of ways I hear that computers actually cause problems with the "play" of the game. However I would suggest that they can draw in a larger group of people and hide the identities of adversaries from the players allowing for more personality to emerge and a larger base of talent to be involved.

I hear a role playing game or real time strategy game where there are roles instead of sides would be a good idea. For example a game like Age of Empires 3 the player has control of all roles on his side of the game (builders, warriors, priests, etc..). A benefit would be to have individual players able to play the roles, and then have sides defined by the players conduct. Multiple players could play the same role thereby replicating reality further in the decision/political space.

Following the theme the computer could play the populace and sway them back and forth based on cultural elements defined for a variety of populations. The populace patriotism/jingoism (or lack of support) then would be a feedback to things like funding and sustainability variables for the players. Population variations could be broken up into segments and rule base definitions created to show how when one neighborhood is bombed or damaged (hit points for buildings!) things get rebuilt quickly but in other neighborhoods things don't get fixed showing societal decay.

The definable roles in this type of construct could be nearly limitless, and the number of sides could quite large too. It would require coordination between the coalitions to play well, but the computer could take over roles not currently being played. To make it interesting military actions and campaigns could be played with commanders giving orders, and the chain of command enacting what they think those orders are giving semi-realism to the concept of the players.

As an example of role play you could insert a special ops team into an ongoing game play without others knowing and see what the impact would be.

I'm sure in the pantheon of military technology something much better than this likely already exists, as it seems quite easy to do.

[Rob Thornton]

Selil,
I've had some opportunity to work with some pretty powerful simulations in the last job I was in. We also did MAPEXs and used other tools to answer certain questions. While computer sims have some utility in answering certain questons, I'm not a big believer in them answering "people" questions based off of what I've seen. This may not be the right adjective, but I've always thought of them as too "flat". People often make decisions off of perceptions which trigger emotions - they anticipate things far off in the future based not only on what they see analytically, but what they wish to see, or what they wish not to see. I've seen programmers adjust this variable and that, but the key word in that is "adjust".
Running computer sims where physical properties can be plugged in and the "knowns" in the equation decrease the probability of error saves time, but trying to assign values to arbitrarily when the number of players is on the increase is more in the realm of HAL (it was HAL wasn't it?). There is a grail out there of intuitive planning aids that seek to reduce the cognitive requirements on planners (there was a great paper of Cognitive Readiness by RAND I think).
Since COIN is mostly about people, I'm more in favor of using people to flesh out action/reaction/counter action/counter - counter cycles. Even though a computer may be able to run the simulation many more times - I'm still going to have to have somebody change the variables, and somebody to sift through it to tell me what it means, then convince me why I shold trust their interpretation. My experience with computer sims when dealing with people and decisions is that the data ends up meaning whatever the analyst wants it to mean. I prefer the more "messy" people solution

Regards, Rob

[marct]

You know, I've been mulling this over for a couple of days now, and I have a feeling that the best type of sim would actually be a virtual universe that mimics a specific operational environment. Think of it as Second Life on steroids with COIN thrown in. Now THAT type of game, I would definately be interested in testing

Marc

[RTK]

You know, I've been mulling this over for a couple of days now, and I have a feeling that the best type of sim would actually be a virtual universe that mimics a specific operational environment. Think of it as Second Life on steroids with COIN thrown in. Now THAT type of game, I would definately be interested in testing

Marc

You'd have to come to grips with the fact that some 12 year old with no life could probably kick your butt online within three days though....

[marct]

You'd have to come to grips with the fact that some 12 year old with no life could probably kick your butt online within three days though....

And this is differerent from reality???

Sure, why not - if they can, then let's recruit them.

Marc

[Stan]

The success of this program will depend on the quality of the officers who complete the course and become members of the red-teams.

JonSlack said it best (OK, my abysmal opinion again)

I've been paying much attention to Rob over the last two weeks. He has his hands full.

The so-called Red Team would enter say Africa at the airport and reality would abruptly kick you in the behind.

Hope they are ready.

[Rob Thornton]

If you have never been in one you are indeed fortunate - they suck - well literally - they suck enough electricity to run a large village or small city - certainly a neighborhood. They suck enough $$$ to outft an IA BDE for a year. They requre lots of people and embody the acronym - SLICC - Self Licking Ice Cream Cone. I would not wish them on my worst enemy The antics that go on in them are akin to Monty Python meets the Osbourns. Blach!

[Steve Blair]

You know, I've been mulling this over for a couple of days now, and I have a feeling that the best type of sim would actually be a virtual universe that mimics a specific operational environment. Think of it as Second Life on steroids with COIN thrown in. Now THAT type of game, I would definately be interested in testing

Marc

This is what I was looking at with the MUD suggestion, although there are more sophisticated models on the market these days like SL and others. The point is to use the computer environment as a medium for interaction, and not a "hack point" for those who want to cheat the system.

[marct]

This is what I was looking at with the MUD suggestion, although there are more sophisticated models on the market these days like SL and others. The point is to use the computer environment as a medium for interaction, and not a "hack point" for those who want to cheat the system.

Okay - so, what's the delay?

Actually, do you think the owners of Second Life would rent / lease the engine code?

Marc