Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
I have a proffessional developers edition of VBS2 on my system. It only works well with real humans behind it. The only combat simulation that does a better job than most soldiers is the orders based AI-system in Steel Beasts.


Do not hold your breath. Computer simulations are extremely capable, but very limited. They are not virtual training areas!
They are basically calculators, which spit out the right result, given the right problem.
They can teach and they can do some limited experimentation, but that is about it.
The simulation itself is usually very un-important compared to how and how many people can use it for a specific purpose.
I think games can make great training tools. I just don't like VBS2 very much (or its little brother, VBS2 Lite).

To use commercial games as examples, I think I could do really good things with the poorly-named, but workable Combat Mission Strike Force, and also with older products like Close Combat (if equipped with a more robust scenario editor).

I think games are a good way to explain concepts and let the student figure out "what right looks like" before they go out in the box and train on it hands-on. (That hands-on training is a real requirement and I do not think that gaming can replace it. No way, no how.)

The problem with some games (like VBS2) is that they sometimes reward gaming-specific skills more than they do tactical skills and doctrinal knowledge. For example, some games place too much emphasis on deft manipulation of an interface. Trying to operate a weapon with a mouse is more difficult that doing it in real life. The use of expensive weapon-like controllers can make it a bit easier, but it's still not there.

If one is trying to instruct a Soldier to operate a particular weapon, then a simulator designed to support that specific training may be helpful (weaponeer). But, if one wants to train Soldiers to perform a battle drill, or to make sound decisions in response to a given event (say reacting to a near ambush) then you don't really need to worry about how good a shot the Soldier is. We should be able to set that aside and concentrate on whether they understand what actions should be carried out. Marksmanship skills can be developed elsewhere. Let them point the mouse close enough to a target to make it apparent to the computer that the Soldier wishes to engage that particular object when he left-clicks, and so be it. Don't score a miss because he isn't a gaming superchamp. All we need to know is if his decision to engage that target at that time is a sound decision given the situation. This seems to be lost on some of the commercial gaming companies trying to create content for the military.

When a game is too complex, it gets in the way of training. Simple interfaces are good.