Simulation-supported Wargaming in MNE 4
1. Introduction
The objective of this document is to emphasize the importance of simulation as a measure of complexity reduction and planner’s tool for decision support in MNE 4’s Effects-Based Planning (EBP) process. Starting with an overview of the underlying principles of Wargaming and Modeling and Simulation (M&S), the outcome of this abstract is a ‘Process for the application of simulation to support Wargaming in MNE 4’. This document may also serve as a basis for MNE 4 design and execution decision-makers in order to determine the value of simulation as a wargaming tool for MNE 4.
2. The Art of Wargaming
Wargaming and Course-of-Action Analysis are approved instruments of military planning in order to determine the feasibility and validity of military options and plans. Traditionally wargaming was conducted by exposing Blue military options to the challenges of Red Team’s counter-actions just using people’s brain, pen and paper.
Today, the complexity of the battlefield has experienced significant increases due to the challenges of asymmetric menaces after the end of the Cold War. The concept of Effects-Based Operations (EBO) tries to embrace these new conditions based on ambitious processes like Knowledge Base Development (KBD). Furthermore, military planning and operation execution have to cope not only with a highly complex and dynamic adversary’s system conducting asymmetric operations, but also with great challenges on the Blue side, such as the coordination and interaction of multiple coalition partners and different agencies and organizations in a non-linear battlespace. Experiences from recent months and years have undoubtedly proven that EBO cannot be successfully conducted without adequate support by IT tools. Especially the various wargaming activities within EBP cannot be properly accomplished by just using traditional measures. Military planners desperately need automated tools in order to handle data masses, multi-dimensional and dynamic interrelations within the adversary’s system and own (blue) forces and instruments.
3. Simulation as an Analysis Method
Basically, there are two major approaches for answering optimization questions: the analytical approach and the numerical approach. As the analytic approach tries to exactly calculate results considering the objective function, limitation variables and all other relevant factors, the numerical approach allows only for approximate results often using iterative or even heuristic processes. Nevertheless, numerical methods have a far more practical weight (see Reference 3) since in opposition to the analytical methods they can handle complex systems with great varieties of variables. Simulation is one of a whole set of numerical methods and additionally, it comprises another major advantage especially useful for wargaming problems: it models dynamics.
The Army Problem Solving Model was design to be use when time is not critical. The Army Problem solving model is a systematic way to arrive at the best solution. This system considers the risk and a detail analysis of each course of action to prepare an unbiased solution for the decision maker. In contrast with the Rapid Decision Makin and Synchronization Process (RDMS) was design to give the commander the ability make timely and effective decision without the expending too much time on processing or analyzing all the information.
Unified Land Operations defines the army operational design methodology (ADM) as “a methodology for applying critical and creative thinking to understand, visualize, and describe unfamiliar problems and approaches to solving them. The operational design methodology incorporated into army doctrine serves as a method to compliment the military decision making process (MDMP). Although the ADM it is often confused with replacing MDMP, its purpose is to address complex problems from a nonlinear approach. ADM helps the commander to answer questions to problems. However, only a collaborative effort of an operation planning team (OPT) will achieve the approach to answering complex problems. Doctrine alone does not provide the answer to complex problems, but rather offers a guide to solve them. To conceptualize the MDMP, planners must incorporate ADM to provide a better understanding, visualization, and description of the problem. The purpose of this paper is to provide the framework to support why ADM is required in the MDMP.
...e. Logistically the Chinese were unprepared to support a force the size of the 9Th PVA and lost a number of soldiers to the bitter cold weather due to them being ill-equipped. Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB) is a crucial step in the Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) and is vital to mission success. Had the proper importance been placed on analyzing the Chinese threat, the outcome of the Korean War might have been different.
The text begins by examining a series of wargames developed for the military and the federal government to determine the best options for growing problems around the world (Mark Herman). Additionally, the ground work is placed to outline the goals which are expected by the client. The developers of the simulation begin by finding, with the greatest precision possible, what goals the client plays to achieve (Mark Herman). Moreover, the developers ask a number of questions, to include, is the client needing confirmation of an existing strategy, are they looking for potential weaknesses in their operation, are they looking to develop a new product, and the client needs validation to move forward with the introduction (Mark Herman). If during the test a fundamental weakness or an unforeseen problem arises the methodology is reworked and the test can be run again, all this is done long before any substantial money has been lost. Furthermore, if these tests are conducted by the military, a strategy for either a war time crisis or a civil catastrophe can be formulated long before human live is placed in harm’s way.
...portant before engaging in any warfare. The team should plan well on how to engage the enemy and adhere to the plan unless an unprecedented occurrence takes place; the team should also consider a plan B. Thirdly, apart from physical warfare, the mental warfare can be used to convey a message that affects the confidence of the enemy negatively. The First Special forces adopted a strategy of scaring away the Germans using stickers with threatening messages; the color of their faces was also scary and facilitated in camouflaging. Fourthly, military concepts should never be made public, the adoption of the force was a big secret but the success was tremendous. Lastly, coordination and a good chain of command is key in conquering in any battle. Without proper coordination an army can be destabilized by the enemy, however, proper chain of command guarantees performance.
This book contains a powerful dramatization of current Marine Corps doctrine, but it also holds a hidden vision for many Generals. There are lessons in training methodology, leadership, and ethics as well. Because of this, it has made Card’s book, an often read title for many years; Ender’s Game has been a stalwart item on the Marine Corps Reading List since its inception. Then Captain John Schmitt, author of Warfighting (a foundational book on Marine maneuver warfare doctrine) used it to teach. Schmitt said, "Winning wars depends on the quality of the people you put into battle. Start with smart people, train them in imaginative and challenging ways, and ensure you force decisionmaking authority down to the person with a superior awareness of the tactical situation." Ender’s Game was published at the same time Marines started reading The Maneuver Warfare Handbook. We have since institutionalized maneuver warfare into the Marine Corps. The challenge to every generation of Marines is to continue to live up to what Maneuver Warfare philosophy demands of
Ever since you were a child you have unknowingly used game theory. When your parents gave you the option to choose a candy bar, your brain started thinking of all the possibilities that depended on which candy you chose. You would think which one would taste better, make your feel better, and maybe be healthier for you. In the end, you would narrow your choices down to one piece of candy and eat it happily. Game theory is the use of theory to think through all of the positive and negative possibilities that could happen in a problem and try to maximize the positive. Game theory is not just one theory, throughout the years is has spread into six main games. These games are: zero sum games, non-zero sum games, simultaneous move games, sequential move games, one-shot games, and repeated games. Each of these games will be covered more in depth in this essay, with the exception of zero-sum games. Dalton will be writing about the zero-sum game in his essay.
Past military events have demonstrated the importance of anticipation and preparation for a wide spectrum of missions and capabilities. To conduct these operations, the U.S. Military must prepare to move and conduct them anywhere in the world. The Military must also have the capability to conduct low intensity wars against an ill-defined enemy as well as major conventional style conflicts against major states.
War is a universal phenomenon, it is a violent tool people use to accomplish their interests. It is not autonomous, rather policy always determines its character. Normally it starts when diplomacy fails to reach a peaceful end. War is not an end rather than a mean to reach the end, however, it does not end, and it only rests in preparation for better conditions. It is a simple and dynamic act with difficult and unstable factors which make it unpredictable and complex. It is a resistant environment where the simplest act is difficult to perform. In this paper, I will argue why war is a universal phenomenon and what are the implications of my argument to strategists.
It is interesting and even surprising that the two major strategies regarding war were developed by European contemporaries of the late eighteenth and nineteenth century. Antoine Henri de Jomini (1779-1869) approached his philosophy of war in a structured, scientific manner. Carl von Clausewitz (1780-1831) took a more fluid, open-ended approach to his philosophy of war. The fact that they lived during the same time period in Europe is also fascinating in that they likely knew of each others’ writings as well as potentially influenced and were influenced by the philosophy of the other. Jomini’s scientific approach is more applicable to the tactical and operational levels of war while Clausewitz approaches war as more of an art or interaction between people that is more appropriate to the strategic and political levels of war. Although their two war strategies are presented as opposing strategies, by comparing concepts from each of the theorists to the other theorist’s work shows that they are actually more complementary than competing in that they are addressing different levels of war. The concepts to be evaluated are Clausewitz’s “Trinity of War”, “war as a continuation of politics”, and the “unpredictability of war” as well as Jomini’s definition of strategy and his “Fundamental Principle of War”.
The use of psychology in war is as old as war itself. In ancient Greece, Thermistocles sent his men ashore to carve messages urging the Ionians not to fight against the Athenians (Pease 3). Known as psychological warfare, it is the attempt by one nation to gain an advantage over another by exploiting fear, mistrust, suspicion, rumor, prejudice, and uncertainty to influence international opinion and/or the frame of mind of the opposing soldiers. Psychological warfare is designed to affect the enemy's mind, influencing him to take an action, even against his conscious will, favorable to his opponent (Pease xiii). The United States government employs psychological warfare, known as Psychological Operations (PSYOP), to secure national objectives in times of conflict as well as peace. They are a vital part of the broad range of U.S. political, military, economic, and ideological activities. The ultimate objective of United States military psychological operations is to convince enemy, neutral, and friendly nations and forces to take actions favorable to the United States and its interests. This is accomplished, with varied effectiveness, through several methods and techniques, both on the strategic and tactical levels (Payne). Psychological warfare is also utilized by the United States on civilians and the general population of liberated territories. This branch of psychological operations is known as consolidation (Pease 9).
Conflict is central to a game, as it creates an exciting element to achieving one’s goals. The difference between conflict and a challenge, according to Crawford, is the presence of an “intelligent agent” that “actively block’s the player’s attempts to reach his goals” (11). This intelligent agent does not need to be human, as the increasing complexity of artificial intelligence (AI) allows for more exciting forms of conflict. Over the course of the games he designed, Crawford developed several AI that strived to mimic human interaction. The most notable of these being the computer-controlled Russians in Eastern Front, who not only had somewhat of a personality but also had a variety of tactics depending on what was happening in the game (Myer 21). This concept of computer games needing a human-like AI could very well stem from the fact that games were originally non-electronic forms of human interaction, as stated previously. Crawford also discusses the types of conflict present in games but states that violence is the most common because is it the “most obvious and natural expression for conflict”
Brandenburger, A.M. and B.J. Nalebuff, ‘The Right Game: Use Game Theory to Shape Strategy,’ HBR July-Aug. 1995
Current military leadership should comprehend the nature of war in which they are engaged within a given political frame in order to develop plans that are coherent with the desired political end state. According to Clausewitz, war is an act of politics that forces an enemy to comply with certain conditions or to destroy him through the use of violence. A nation determines its vital interests, which drives national strategy to obtain or protect those interests. A country achieves those goals though the execution of one of the four elements of power, which are diplomatic, informational, military and economical means. The use of military force...
In modern military theory, the highest level is the strategic level, in which activities at the strategic level focus directly on policy objectives, both during peace and warfare. In the study of modern military strategy, there is a distinction between military strategy and national strategy, in which the former is the use of military objective to secure political objectives and the latter coordinates and concentrates all the elements of national...