
The Navy Needs a Wider Look at Wargaming - protomyth
http://news.usni.org/2015/03/18/opinion-the-navy-needs-a-wider-look-at-wargaming
======
bkohlmann
In addition to the compelling arguments made here, I would argue wargaming
should also be introduced at the very lowest levels as well. Many of us joined
the service loving strategy games like Risk, Axis and Allies, Settlers, etc.
Bring that to a Secret-level, tactical wargame, and all of a sudden you get
innovative tactics from those unburdened by institutionalized doctrine. Our
adversaries are wily - we must be doubly so. The only way to test is to play.

~~~
ianstallings
I had to dig in a lot of libraries and bookstores for knowledge on armor
warfare when I joined up _way back when_. I found a book that actually gave me
a great baseline for setting up interactive scenarios called Armor Attacks:
The Tank Platoon. I still use this for armor wargaming.

[http://www.amazon.com/Armor-Attacks-Interactive-Small-
Unit-L...](http://www.amazon.com/Armor-Attacks-Interactive-Small-Unit-
Leadership/dp/0891413839/ref=pd_rhf_dp_s_cp_1_T9PP?ie=UTF8&refRID=18A20CF0YBPAVVR9FTS6)

------
vonmoltke
As one of the commenters on the USNI site said, I didn't realize naval
wargaming had fallen so far. It sounds as though games like Harpoon are not
used at all anymore, at least not in a serious fashion.

I think Armstrong is being a little optimistic about the benefits, though. Top
Navy brass has a history of showing disdain when creative junior officers bust
the shit out of their tactics and doctrine.

------
woodman
I'm surprised to hear that this is a problem for the Navy, because it
certainly wasn't a problem in the Marine Corps (a department of the Navy).
Table top exercises were pushed all the way down to the lowest level in the
infantry, with force on force exercises occurring at the company level. It was
a common sight in the field, between exercises, to see squads huddled around
dirt terrain models - gaming out scenarios with the squad leader acting as
dungeon master. Some interesting ideas came out of those sessions, like
prehooking tow straps on humvees and top down building clearing. A few times a
year there would be battalion level exercises, where the officers got to play,
but the enlisted were always running scenarios.

The lack of officer war gaming might explain why casualty projections for
urban combat where so insanely high, stale information plugged into models
that no longer fit reality.

------
dba7dba
I'm sure those interested enough in checking this thread may already know this
but before the Battle of Midway, Japanese admirals ran a wargame to see how it
may turn out.

Their wargame showed Japanense navy would lose with losing some big carriers.
However rules were bent during the wargaming (or result ignored) and it
erroneously showed Japan would win. Of course history proved their wargaming
(unpolluted version) proved to be correct.

~~~
todd8
The Japanese probably didn't wargame the possibility that cryptography by the
Allies revealed their plans. See [1], where General George Marshall is quoted
as saying: "as a result of Cryptanalysis we were able to concentrate our
limited forces to meet their naval advance on Midway when we otherwise would
have been 3,000 miles out of place." [1]

[1] [http://www.navy.mil/midway/how.html](http://www.navy.mil/midway/how.html)

~~~
dba7dba
Highly recommend "Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway".
Great book on why Japanese navy was doomed to lose at Midway.

------
niche
Here is some defense innovation: cease all violent activities and promote
peace through passivity, treaty writing and well-to-do local economic
development

~~~
logfromblammo
It must be nice to have a division of unicorn cavalry at your command.

We will never be able to abolish war until we have first defeated fear. Until
then, violence and the threat of violence will be an effective way to
influence human behavior.

