by Michael K. Robel
June 18, 2004
Civilian and military wargames are quite different. On the face of it, there does not seem to be a great difference between a civilian and military wargame. They both have much the same view of the battlefield ? the helicopter view from above and the players have a selection of various tasks that they can order. However, there are several differences, not all of which are apparent to the casual observer.
The U.S. Army recognizes three types of simulations. The first are Constructive Simulations. These are much like typical civilian wargames with a helicopter like view of the battlefield and the older ones actually used hexes to control movement. Next are Virtual Simulation, like a flight or tank simulator, but also for rifles, air defense missiles, drivers training, and even mechanics. Last are Live Simulation in which an entire unit from platoon to brigade unit may be deployed to the an instrumented training range in a giant game of laser tag at places like the National Training Center and the entire unit is trained at one time.
Finally, the military is looking at integrating all of these, so that in a single exercise, all of these simulations could be used at once. For example, a corps commander in Fort Hood, could be playing a constructive simulation which uses terrain in the South Western US, while one brigade is training live at the NTC, and while his attack helicopter battalions use virtual training to attack constructive units.
A challenge with this approach is to have the constructive and virtual units interact with a live unit in such a manner that they are not engaged by forces they cannot see on the battlefield.
The most widely used U.S. Army ?wargames? are called ?Constructive Simulations?, and include JANUS (not an acronym), the Brigade/Battalion Battle Simulation (BBS), and the Corps Battle Simulation (CBS). JANUS is used most for company to Brigade Training, BBS for Battalion and Brigade Training, and CBS for Division and Corps Training. These are the most widely used simulations for training in the Army today, although others are available. Finally, there are the emerging simulations like WARSIM or OneSAF.
The DOD definition of a wargame is ?is a simulation......of a military operation (that) involves two or more opposing forces, using rules, data, and procedures designed to depict an actual or assumed real-life situation.? Further, Wargaming is the process by which command and control (C2) training simulations task the participants to employ during the conduct of an exercise. Wargaming allows the participants to conduct various military tactics and operations against an opposing force normally in a competitive environment. This process forces participants to react to the responses of the opposing force in the development of plans and the execution of operations so as to satisfy participant missions. The complexity and sophistication of current simulations allow a high degree of reality to wargame participants. Wargaming is used in both training simulations and simulators.
Note the emphasis on ?Command and Control Training Simulations? versus tactics. Here is a list of things that these C2 simulations can be expected to do:
Assist units in preparing for Mission Training Evaluation Plans (MTEPs) while minimizing costs and resources.
· Exercise and evaluate internal staff training and unit standard operating procedures (SOPs).
Develop an awareness of the lethality and complexity of the modern battlefield.
Evaluate written material and verbal communication processes between: commanders and staff members; commanders and subordinate commanders; commanders and adjacent commanders (US or international); and commanders and higher levels of command.
Provide feedback to measure situational responses and staff ability to develop alternative courses of action.
Note that there is no stated emphasis on tactics. Further, the Army states there are several things that these simulations should not be used for:
C2 training simulations should not be used:
as "truth machines" relied upon to determine if C2 decisions made by commanders were correct or incorrect.
in a context to provide a "go" or "no-go" solution to a particular operational problem.
to analyze plans in specific terms of outcome.
to validate war plans and they must not be used for that purpose.
Finally, ?it is a mistake, repeat mistake, and a misuse of these simulations to attempt to validate war plans. The algorithms used in training simulations provide sufficient fidelity for training, not validation of war plans. This is due to the fact that important factors (leadership, morale, terrain, weather, level of training of the units) and a myriad of human and envir
