The Application of War Game in U.S. Military Operations

War game has become a key link in modern warfare. The results of the US military’s attack on Iraq are exactly the same as the pre-war game. The entire process of capturing Osama bin Laden alive has also been practiced countless times on the Pentagon’s war game system. All military exercises are also war game games. Go ahead. In modern warfare, the related role of wargaming and combat implementation is becoming more and more important. It is constantly rewriting the world’s military trends. During the “wargaming”, the decisive victory outside the “chessboard”. Based on the concept of future warfare, the US military adjusted the design, development, and application direction of wargames, shifting the focus of wargames from simulating traditional warfare to future warfare. As a military power, the US military has long used wargames as an important tool for training officers and studying combat operations.

U.S. military use of wargaming
The U.S. military has a number of wargaming institutions that provide valuable advice for its operations and military construction and development. There are many types of games and many advantages.

The main institutions of the US military chess game The US military has a number of research institutions for war game game and simulation simulation. Among the agencies of the Ministry of Defense are: the Office of Modeling and Simulation Coordination (M&SCO), the Ministry of Defense Model and Simulation Information Analysis Center (MSIAC), and the National Defense Agency. University Applied Strategic Learning Center (CASL, formerly War Game Game and Simulation Center), Joint Chiefs of Staff Research and Analysis and War Game Department (SAGD) under Joint Chiefs of Staff J8, Joint Operations Center (JWC) under Joint Chiefs of Staff J7; Among the Army’s units are: Army Modeling and Simulation Office (AMSO), Army Simulation Training and Equipment Project Executive Office (PEOSTRI), Army Training and Doctrine Command National Simulation Center (NSC), Army Training and Doctrine Command Intelligence Training Operations Center (TBOC), Army R&D and Engineering Command Simulation and Training Technology Center (STTC), Army War College Strategic Leadership Center (CSL); the Navy and Air Force also have similar professional simulation training centers. In addition, some professional military education academies of the U.S. military, such as various service command and staff colleges and research centers (combat laboratories, learning centers, and experience acquisition centers), also have related departments, but these departments are relatively small in scale and some The above-mentioned units belong to the superior-subordinate relationship. In addition, in addition to the RAND Corporation, some American think tanks, such as the Ocean Analysis Center, the Strategic and Budget Evaluation Center, and the Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, are also important wargame research institutions for the US military.

After the Vietnam War, wargaming was reintroduced into the various military academies of the US military and became an important analysis and evaluation tool

Types of U.S. War Game Game After World War II, the U.S. Army game game went to a low point. After the Vietnam War, the U.S. military underwent reflection and transformation, and wargame was reintroduced into various military academies and became an important analysis and evaluation tool.

One is single-level and multi-level. It can be divided into strategies, campaigns (operations) and tactics. In recent years, the multi-layer war game of the US military has replaced the previous single tactical war game. The two-tier war game has become the norm, and it is currently moving towards the three-tier war game. .

The second is free style and strict style. Free-style wargames are highly random and lack data support; strict-style wargames increase actual combat data, and the calculation of probabilities is more accurate.

The third is open type and closed type. The open type allows players to obtain information about the participating parties; the closed type restricts information, which better simulates the “fog of war”, which is also the method of Prudential soldiers chess.

The fourth is the discussion type and the system type. The discussion type is close to the open type of war game, which is a kind of professional war game. Research, discussion and learning are usually more important than the role played by the player in the amateur game.

The fifth is education and research. Its purpose is to learn new courses, strengthen courses already learned, assess mastery, assist in the formulation of strategies, identify problems and reach consensus.

Sixth is a new type. In recent years, the U.S. Naval War College has begun to divide wargames into three categories, namely, experience-based, participant-achieved, and “analytic purpose” wargames.

Features of the US military chess game First, the data is detailed, but usually the game is familiar with weapons and equipment and knowledge of arms. During the deduction process, the opponents need to check the data table repeatedly, and the information in the data table is very detailed; including detailed information such as equipment, weapons, ammunition, etc. In addition to armored vehicles, there are also infantry, light and heavy weapons, artillery, missiles, helicopters, and ground. Attacking fixed-wing aircraft, etc.

Second, the rules are comprehensive, tactics and technology are combined, and tactics are used comprehensively through confrontation. The rules of wargames are a treasure trove. Learning the rules means learning tactics. The rules of wargames do not tell you how to use battle formations, how to use firepower, and how to organize coordination; but the rules tell you the minimum restrictions, through which you can repeat trial and error! In the words of Mark Herman: “Give them a tool to make mistakes on it.” Once they make a mistake, they will be impressed. The so-called tactics are the proficient use of technology and terrain. In wargames, after being familiar with the rules, mastering the rules, terrain and technology can achieve good results.

The third is to exercise thinking, promote thinking, educate and have fun, and increase interest in learning. Interest is the best teacher. Practicing strategies and rigid tactical homework against the map sand table can’t make people interested. There are confrontations, exchanges, quarrels, and teamwork in wargames, which greatly promotes the team commander and the team.

The fourth is the culture of war chess deduction, which promotes the improvement of quantitative awareness. Wargame emphasizes quantitative analysis and data, not only the art of war, but also emphasizes the combination of technology and tactics, which greatly improves people’s thinking through deduction.

The impact of wargames on US military operations
Wargame is an important way for the US military to train and train commanders, optimize and evaluate their combat plans, guide actual combat, plan the future direction of the US military, and design future wars.

Wargames improve the commanding qualities of US military commanders. In recent years, with the advancement of war chess training in the US military academies, the military and academies have successively launched a series of military training practices on actual battlefields and virtual battlefields, which has effectively promoted the ability of US military commanders to “fight” in real battlefields; as commanders The virtual stage of commanding confrontation-war game deduction, which effectively sharpens the commander’s command planning ability. This kind of physical training and virtual military exercises are each other’s strengths and complementary advantages, providing a mutually coupled OODA chain for the improvement of the commander’s technical and tactical capabilities and the formation of command quality.

One is to be diligent in quantitative situation research and judgment to enhance the commander’s in-depth understanding of the combat situation. In wargames, combined with terrain and combat mission types, it can qualitatively analyze the enemy’s offensive route, thereby further depicting the enemy’s possible combat intent (combat intent identification, understanding and prediction), so that one can move, shoot and intelligence reconnaissance. Through wargames, commanders can exercise their knowledge, judgment, and understanding of combat elements such as topography, road traffic, altitude, visibility, and fire threat range contained in the situation, so as to develop a quantitative understanding of complex problems. Combining with qualitative comprehensive awareness of combat situation. Wargaming is one of the effective ways for the US military to train commanders to win battles. The commander can gradually conduct wargames in accordance with the operational regulations, using the chessboard as the battlefield to evaluate and optimize the combat plan, and then draw up a scientific and rigorous combat plan.

The second is to use rigorous tactical calculations to enhance the commander’s ability to accurately command and make decisions. In the process of wargaming, the commander needs to perform meticulous tactical calculations in order to secure the winning ticket in the interlocking command and decision-making process. There are mainly two aspects here. On the one hand, the situation of the own side changes, which mainly includes the reconnaissance range, fire strike range, and maneuverability of the combat force; on the other hand, changes in the enemy’s situation, such as the position of the enemy’s observation post, the position of the firepower, and the main attack direction. Through precise calculations, the commander can accurately grasp the changes in the battlefield situation and better conduct operational deployment and command. In the course of combat, the commander must not only calculate tactical problems, but also grasp the comprehensive application of equipment to maximize the results. Finally, wargaming can exercise the commander’s quantitative assessment ability. Through the research and analysis of the battle report, the commander can accurately grasp the dynamic trend of the battlefield and drive the next action decision.

U.S. military uses war chess to deduct the Gulf War

The third is to develop the thinking habit of “play first and then make decisions” to improve the tactical quality of US military commanders. It is better to give thoughts to matter, and to think than to give thoughts. Wargaming allows commanders to consider issues more comprehensively, study issues more objectively, and analyze issues in more detail. In the process of wargaming, the commander changed the original rough thinking mode of “thinking about problems with his head”, and developed the habit of objective analysis, rigorous calculation and fair judgment, formed a more meticulous logical thinking mode, and exercised the commander’s planning , Communication, cooperation and leadership. The biggest feature of wargame is to strictly follow the rules and data to make judgments. Whether it is in the planning stage or the combat implementation stage, the commander needs to conduct the game first and then implement the decision. Commanders who have been conducting wargames for a long time, whether in wargames or in daily work, have a very different way of thinking from other commanders.

The U.S. military chess game guides actual combat. During the Gulf War, the 18th Airborne Army and the 7th Army both conducted wargames before the US military implemented the “Desert Storm” operation. In order to implement ground combat operations smoothly, the US military conducted a wargame based on the training level of the troops and the possible course of the war and the time required for actual combat. The deduction shows that the operation will last 100 hours. General Norman Schwarzkopf, commander of the Central Headquarters, also found that if effective measures are not taken, the “Desert Storm” will be a long-running battle with heavy losses for both sides. If the US military quickly moves from the desert of the Arabian Peninsula to the Iraqi flank, it will greatly accelerate the process of ground operations. Accordingly, General Schwarzkopf commanded the famous “Cheer Mary” maneuver in actual combat. The ground forces performed a beautiful “left hook” with lightning speed, and soon surrounded the right wing of the Iraqi army, causing the multinational forces to crush Saddam’s “Mother of War” plan with minimal casualties. Finally won the Gulf War. Practice in the Gulf War proved that the U.S. military used the problems discovered in this wargame to perfect the plan, so that the time displayed by the game was almost exactly the same as the actual time spent on ground operations. This shows that the U.S. military uses wargames to perform various combat operations and possible consequences in a virtual combat environment. It not only allows success but also allows failure, which is conducive to people seeking advantages and avoiding disadvantages, and transforming various combat ideas into actual situations. Action plan.

Wargaming advances the U.S. military’s combat design. The 2019 U.S. military did not launch the concept of multi-domain operations 2.0 as originally planned. This concept will be postponed until 2020. This may be related to the problems and deficiencies found in the war game. In August 2019, the Army Future Command organized a war game codenamed “Unified Challenge 2019”. More than 400 people participated in a large-scale online war game that lasted for nearly two weeks, exposing the US Army’s future “multi-domain combat” The biggest shortcomings and shortcomings.

The “Unified Challenge 2019” war game is based on the future army weapons and equipment, including robotic mini-tanks, high-speed reconnaissance aircraft, high-power jammers, long-range artillery and other equipment, and a simulated force of more than 16,000 people. There are nearly 400 players in 13 venues. participate. The exercise exposed the biggest shortcoming of the US military, that is, nearly 400 exercise personnel lack the real-time digital situation of remote forces and radio waves that can track their fast-moving forces on land, air, and cyberspace in real time. The Army is accelerating the pace of transforming its nascent concept of future operations (multi-domain operations) into a realistic mode of warfare, and an urgent need for a command system that can adapt to complexity.

For decades, U.S. military planners have adopted a rigorous step-by-step approach to reduce conflict chaos to manageable tasks. First, the U.S. military deploys quickly through trains, cars, planes, and ships; then, the air power of the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps weakens the enemy’s defense capabilities; finally, ground forces come in. The U.S. military is assumed to have unrestricted access to the ocean, air, electromagnetic spectrum, and cyberspace, so that they can move troops, materials, and data unhindered. This model exists in Afghanistan and Iraq, but like Russia or China High-tech powers will be able to compete with the United States in all these areas. After wargames and years of exploration and in-depth research, the US military believes that the best way to counterattack is to fight in all areas immediately. The United States will no longer carry out attacks strictly in accordance with the old order, but will attack through land, sea, air, space, cyberspace, and electromagnetic spectrum at the same time.

The development trend of U.S. military chess game
Since 2019, the Sino-US trade war has been in full swing, and the Syrian battlefield has gradually shown its end. Various operational concepts have emerged one after another, the development and evaluation of weapons and equipment have expanded in depth, artificial intelligence competition has become increasingly fierce, and the application of wargames has developed in depth, concepts, experiments, and There are wargames in various fields of demonstration and evaluation. Wargames play an increasingly important role in US military construction and combat design.

Professional seminars on war chess deduction move to the high end. 2019 was a very active year for academic exchanges and seminars on wargaming games. The “Connections” wargaming professional seminars were launched in various countries and had a great impact. The seminar is an interdisciplinary conference held annually since 1993. Its mission is to promote and preserve the art, science and application of wargames. Participants come from all aspects of wargaming, including participants in the military, government, academic institutions, private companies and business enthusiasts. By providing a forum for practitioners to share insights and best practices, Connections is committed to improving the research, analysis, education, and policy tools of wargame.

Wargames play an increasing role in the construction of the U.S. military and combat design

The Connections 2019 war chess seminar in the United States was held from August 13th to August 19th, 2019 at the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. The theme of the conference was “Demonstration of the Distant Future”. A total of 177 participants (excluding those from the U.S. Army War College) came from 89 organizations in 10 countries. The post-event survey results section provides a more detailed analysis of the participant demographics and survey responses, most of which are from the Ministry of Defense (68.38%), followed by private citizens (24.14%, mainly amateur players or retirees). Within the Ministry of Defense, most of them are from the Ministry of Defense (19.27%), followed by the Army (17.25%) and Air Force (14.21%).

Artificial intelligence application wargaming has become a trend. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has invested nearly US$2 billion in the development of new artificial intelligence technologies. Its next-generation artificial intelligence (AI Next) plan divides artificial intelligence into three categories: “description”, “recognition” and “interpretation.” Waves, there are also three key points of development: improve the robustness of the second wave of AI technology, actively apply the second wave of systems to new applications, and further study the third wave of technology.

Cover of Connections 2019 War Chess Seminar Report

In April 2019, the U.S. Army War College held the 2019 AI War Game Conference. Experts at the conference discussed the application of artificial intelligence in wargames. This 117-year-old academy dedicated to educating future generals, military officers, and civilian personnel There was an exchange on how artificial intelligence changed the nature of command. The US Army Training and Doctrine Command and the University of Texas at Austin held a “Mad Scientist” conference at the university. The conference brought together military, academia, and private enterprise experts in the fields of artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, future innovation and space future ethics. Former US Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Walker pointed out: “The United States cannot go back to the old path, which means we must think, innovate and surpass our competitors.” The United States actively promotes the “third offset strategy”, develops disruptive technology, and wargames. Combining with artificial intelligence, developing interpretable artificial intelligence technology, verifying combat concepts, and promoting technological development will be key development trends.

Continue to conduct wargames in hotspots. In recent years, the United States has continued to promote its high-end war transformation, and deductions aimed at hotspots have become the focus of the Department of Defense, academies, institutions, and think tanks. According to statistics from the Joint Council, nearly three-quarters of wargames focus on competition among major powers.

In April 2019, Dr. James Ransey, a strategic research professor at the U.S. Marine Corps War College, published a titled “How will the next great power conflict work?” The article “Lessons of Wargaming Game” introduces the situation of the academy’s organization of wargame teaching in detail. In this teaching exercise, the US military simultaneously engaged in wars with Russia, China, and North Korea in Europe, the Taiwan Strait, and Northeast Asia. The scale and intensity of the force used was as if it were a World War III scale. Many of the contents are worth studying. . This teaching exercise uses the “Next War” series of wargames designed by GMT. This wargame belongs to the strategic battle level. There are five parts before and after, including Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam, India, Pakistan and Poland in the next war. Except for Poland in the next war, which has nothing to do with China, the remaining four parts have Chinese troops directly or indirectly involved.

Matrix wargame has become a new favorite. The matrix war game was originally invented by Chris Engel in the early 1990s. Due to its relatively simple organization, combination of exercises and discussions, and good openness, matrix wargames are favored by many organizations. In addition to the U.S. Army War College, the U.S. National Defense University, Naval Postgraduate School, McGill University, Incranfield University, DSTL, etc. Research institutions have also adopted this method, deducing a wide range of topics, including strategic battles, the situation in Syria, urban operations, etc., and have received very good results.

Matrix wargames are low-overhead (low-cost/simple settings), convenient, multi-player and role-playing games. Wargaming is based on arguments. The player weighs the pros and cons of arguments and refutations, and then proposes actions. The success or failure of this action mainly depends on the strength of the deduction party’s argument, and the use of dice in the deduction will introduce risk factors. Compared with large-scale constructive simulation exercises, the materials, time, and personnel required to run matrix wargames are relatively small. The matrix wargame only requires a written scene with simulated maps and operators to perform. The game requires counselors, subject experts, 4-6 gamers or 4-6 game teams. The deduction time is usually 2 to 3 hours, but the deduction time can be tailored according to the learning results.