Wargaming Small Wars (merged thread)

**Hansmeister** · 10-13-2005

Originally Posted by Steve Blair

I actually have no problem with a free-ranging role play (hereafter RP), and think it would be a better tool for most instances. However, I have also seen a knee-jerk reaction against such proposals ("What? D&D here?") so chose to frame the issue as a computer simulation. You could, I think, use the computer model to simulate certain larger-scale activities or as a "super calculator" for the RP.

I'm not overly familiar with the practice side of military gaming, so I don't know how much use they make of major RP-type activites. Frankly, based on my own experience, I can see a number of very dynamic and viable ways they could use such RP (even a text-based MUSH type environment as opposed to graphics-heavy first shooters or tactical models) to simulate this environment. With such systems and settings it is very easy to model dynamic environments. You could use the CS side to model resulting firefights or combat actions, while keeping the rest in the human realm.

RP is the only way to go on this because irregular warfare is too unpredictable for a computer simulation. It is the ability of insurgents to continuously adapt their tactics to their enemy that makes it impossible to model via cs.

**aktarian** · 10-14-2005

I think problem is predicting how other side will react and then fitting that in your "game". Assume it's early 2003 and you want to prepare program for troops that will be stationed in Iraq after the war (the war hasn't started yet).

What will situation be like after Saddam is toppled? Who will be your friends and who your enemies? What methods will they use? Which way will population swing? And many, many more

The biggest problem is human behaviour. You simply can't reduce it to mathematical formula that will neatly fit into computer program. People act irrationaly, people act on different impulses than you expected, peopel work on different set of values etc.

I agree that computer programs are valuable for certain task, which are more or less mechanical and don't work on many variables. Say convoy escort. However certain task can't be simulated by computer. Say checkpoint duty.

**Steve Blair** · 10-14-2005

Originally Posted by aktarian

I think problem is predicting how other side will react and then fitting that in your "game". Assume it's early 2003 and you want to prepare program for troops that will be stationed in Iraq after the war (the war hasn't started yet).

What will situation be like after Saddam is toppled? Who will be your friends and who your enemies? What methods will they use? Which way will population swing? And many, many more

The biggest problem is human behaviour. You simply can't reduce it to mathematical formula that will neatly fit into computer program. People act irrationaly, people act on different impulses than you expected, peopel work on different set of values etc.

I agree that computer programs are valuable for certain task, which are more or less mechanical and don't work on many variables. Say convoy escort. However certain task can't be simulated by computer. Say checkpoint duty.

That's why you use traditional RP techniques, and bring out the computers for modeling combat. Computers are a tool to facilitate the game, and not the game itself.

**Strickland** · 10-14-2005

I have two problems with gaming solutions and events such as Millenium Challenge and Urban Resolve. First, they are expensive, and in a battle of limited reosurces, eat up tremendous sums of money that could be used for less "whiz-bang" things like seminars, books, training videos, and staff rides with police-officers during community policing intiatives. Second, the outcomes and "findings" of these events are usually within the realm of the "i knew that entering the game" and make these events worthless. Clausewitz spoke of events that tried to replicate military actions being less than useful due to the lack of "fricition" present.

**Steve Blair** · 10-14-2005

This is why people need to reach for new solutions when gaming.

If you use a role-playing framework it is very easy to add in friction. A tabletop game isn't going to eat up the kind of money you're talking about and will always expose people to new things. They are also interactive by nature, which makes them more valuable than seminars or training videos.

People who haven't had much RP experience often underestimate the usefulness of the method, IMO. Properly managed, it's a very open environment that will allow all sides to learn something new.

**aktarian** · 10-14-2005

Originally Posted by Steve Blair

That's why you use traditional RP techniques, and bring out the computers for modeling combat. Computers are a tool to facilitate the game, and not the game itself.

I understand what you are saying but you'll still have troubles with "rules" and even model itself. You do something and rules say you win. Fine, but in real life it might not work that way. Specially when you are dealing with nonconventional war/terrorism.

Plus you can really calculate reactions. Let's say you kill some number of enemy. Will rest surrender or raise those killed into martyrs and fight even more fiercly? If you create jobs for locals will this help you with creating image that you really have their best interests at heart or will workers be targeted and jobs themselves used to spy on you?

So you can write rules "If you do this this happens." Well, in real life it might not.

It might work if other side is played by somebody who has experience in such conflicts and if rules are flexible.

**Steve Blair** · 10-14-2005

With RP that's exactly what I'm talking about. You have a controller or group of controllers and then a number of teams taking the role of various sides within the game (insurgents, military forces, civilians, relief organizations, and so on). You could use computer systems to handle some of the paperwork and interaction, but the bulk of the effort would be in the hands of people. Rules within RP deal with methods of interaction, not the interaction itself. The game itself would be based on a time model, with results tabulated at the end of that time.

I personally have designed RP rules systems and done extensive modifications on existing systems. Such systems can and do work well for 'modeling' these kind of events. What is needed mainly is a flexible mindset and the willingness to use computers as calculators and mechanical helpers and not the main basis for the game.