Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical (More info?)
This also came from the StrategyPage mail-out. I thought it might interest
some here.
Andy
--------------------------------------------------------------
COMBAT SUPPORT: Turning Your X-Box Into a Weapon
August 12, 2005: The following item describes how commercial wargames, the
ones available for PCs or game consoles, are adapted for use by the
military. The author of the following piece, Jim Lunsford, retired four
years ago, as an infantry lieutenant colonel. His last assignment was at the
Command & General Staff School, where he created and programmed a PC based
wargame, Decisive Action, to meet a classroom requirement in the late 1990s.
The game is still used at the Command & General Staff School, and available
in a commercial version as well. The following piece was initially created
during a listserv discussion among military and commercial developers of
wargames and military simulations.
Since I retired from the Army, I have been designing and developing PC-based
trainers using gaming technology for both the U.S. and foreign military. I
am currently involved with the development of two USAF trainers (PC games),
a USMC trainer (MAGTF XXI), and the DARPA DARWARS program. In addition to my
business development, design, and development experiences in this niche
market, I have been intimately involved with the fielding of the completed
trainers and the training of the instructors/users. During this time, I've
seen a lot and learned even more from some very intelligent and talented
people.
Listed below are my insights and OPINIONS that I believe may help with the
development of "Best Practices" in the areas of production team experience
and skills, appropriate use of trainer, good design, effective project
management, and training.
1. Few, if any, COTS (Commercial, Off The Shelf) wargames can be effectively
used by the military for training without modification. Granted, in the
past, some talented military trainers effectively used COTS wargames for
training or education for brief periods of time, but their use rarely
continued once that innovator transferred or retired.
2. Government project officers who manage COTS games contracts should
possess wargaming/computer gaming experience. Those that have a good working
knowledge of wargames are much more likely to be effective in their role
than those who have never played one before. To put it into perspective,
could we expect someone to produce a passable TV sitcom who neither owned or
watched a TV before? Although its great that more people recognize the value
of using games for training, many project officers have a limited
understanding of what they propose to manage.
3. The most effective PC-based trainers (wargames) have been developed by
people with military experience or who employ SME (Subject Matter Experts)
with both military AND wargaming experience. The quality of the SME's
wargaming experience is as important as his/her military experience. It's so
much easier to translate requirements and develop feasible, acceptable
designs when both the developer and the government representative can easily
talk using both military and gaming - speak (Example: Could we model
"just-in-time" logistics in this trainer using something like a combination
of the way PC game "A" and board game "'B" model supply?)
4. Wargames are best suited for improving the following skills:
decision-making, visualization (friendly vs. enemy capabilities with respect
to time, space, and distance), critical thinking, and
communication/coordination. Keep in mind that wargames are often not the
best training solution. Although they can be very effective in the military
classroom/unit, they tend to use more time and resources than other
instructional methods. This is rarely understood and could cause problems
later if the end-user does not understand or is unwilling to make room for
it in their training/instructional schedule.
5. STEP 1 (Government Project Officer): Identify a SPECIFIC need that can be
satisfied in a SPECIFIC location in the military force using a PC-based
trainer (wargame). Part of this search ideally should include the
identification of a talented and willing military end-user (an innovator who
will ideally become or designate the military SME). General solutions
targeted at a wider audience will be less likely to succeed. This cannot be
a "Field of Dreams" process - "we'll build it and they will come". If you
can't achieve step 1, you should postpone your plans until you can meet this
critical first requirement. Otherwise, you're wasting our valuable
taxpayer's money and jeopardizing the reputation of everyone involved.
6. STEP 2 (Government Project Officer): Clearly and concisely define the
requirements: intended training audience, training/learning objectives,
training conditions (intended training environment), and other technical
requirements. Keep these simple and clear. If it can't be described in a few
pages, you are probably describing something so complicated that no one
(end-user, project manager, or the developer) will be satisfied with the
final product, and it will never be completed on time and within budget.
These requirements should be clearly identified in your announcement so that
potential developers know what you want when they write their proposals.
Developer: Be warned. Dealing with the government can be very frustrating.
At times, the money may be good, but it's never easy. Although you will
encounter many talented government professionals who are working as hard as
you to create something great, they and you will often be severely
constrained by a seemingly confusing and lethargic bureaucratic processes.
Contract deliverables must be submitted on time - payments are usually slow!
If this doesn't sound like something you're willing or able to accept, do
not submit a proposal.
Developer: Always remember you are building a military trainer first! This
must be job #1. Any plans on building/marketing a commercial me using the
completed trainer must be a distant second priority. If you can't accept
this policy, you shouldn't bid on the project. A successful military trainer
that employs gaming technology to create a more engaging, experiential
learning environment will unlikely be a quick port to a successful
commercial game. Likewise, a successful commercial wargame will probably
require some radical modifications before it will meet the needs of a
military training audience.
7. STEP 3 (Government-Developer Team): During the first meeting, clearly
articulate and then reach an agreement on what is being developed. A clearly
defined requirements document should be the start point for this process.
Once this is achieved, make every effort to prevent "requirements creep" (
frequent or major changes to the requirements). Insure the work schedule
includes frequent meetings to review progress. If possible, the government
SME/end-user should be present at this meeting. During the initial meeting,
present and agree on the work schedule and contract deliverables.
8. STEP 4 (Government-Developer Team): Insure the developer spends time
visiting and meeting with the end-user to better understand their needs,
training environment, and culture. Whenever possible, the developer should
observe the military training that the completed trainer is supposed to
enhance or replace. Encourage and support frequent contact between the
end-user and the developer. However, everyone must understand that no major
decisions can be made unless all parties are informed and agree. The
end-user and the developer must provide the government project manager
detailed reports of their meetings when he/she is absent.
9. STEP 5 (Developer): Design a PC-trainer (wargame) using the following
principles:
a. Stay focused on the training audience and training objectives
b. Design and develop simple but elegant solutions. Employ appropriate
fidelity in the model to satisfy para 10a. - Abstract everything else
c. Design GUI for the military trainee, not for another engineer or
wargamer. As much as we all hate plain vanilla windows interfaces, most
military personnel currently prefer them over cool, game-like interfaces.
d. Manage expectations or they will manage you - In your zeal to please,
don't create unrealistic expectations with your customer.
e. Effective communication is critical. Misunderstandings can create false
expectations.
10. STEP 6 (Government-Developer Team): Conduct spiral development. Create
and test sequential prototypes in support of actual end-user administered
training. Document technical results and user feedback. Incorporate feedback
into the development of the next prototype. The end-user must be willing to
provide solid support during this step or the effort will be wasted.
11. STEP 7 (Government-Developer Team): Be flexible. No matter how good or
experienced the team may be, or how solid the original requirements
document, you will discover during spiral development what you didn't know
when you started the project. When it doubt as to what action to take,
remember to stay true to the fundamentals of the original requirements
document: build an effective trainer that facilitates the target audience
achieving their intended training objectives, under their stated training
conditions (environment). Maintaining this focus greatly facilitates making
quick and effective decisions about when and what changes must be made and
increase the odds of success.
12. STEP 8 (Government-Developer Team). At the end of the contract, you must
deliver a reliable, working trainer that achieves its intended purpose. If
not, everyone has failed. Likewise, understand that it will not be perfect.
It's almost a guarantee that more $ will be needed to further enhance/modify
the trainer once more people use it and provide feedback.
13. STEP 9 (Government-Developer Team). Budget time and money to train the
trainer. Even if the team builds the best PC-trainer (wargame) ever
produced, it is only a tool. Like all tools, it's effectiveness is solely
dependant on the skill of the workman who uses it.
14. STEP 10 (End-User). Gain and maintain chain-of-command support early and
often. If the senior leader doesn't make its use a priority, it will fade
into obscurity fast. -- Jim Lunsford
This also came from the StrategyPage mail-out. I thought it might interest
some here.
Andy
--------------------------------------------------------------
COMBAT SUPPORT: Turning Your X-Box Into a Weapon
August 12, 2005: The following item describes how commercial wargames, the
ones available for PCs or game consoles, are adapted for use by the
military. The author of the following piece, Jim Lunsford, retired four
years ago, as an infantry lieutenant colonel. His last assignment was at the
Command & General Staff School, where he created and programmed a PC based
wargame, Decisive Action, to meet a classroom requirement in the late 1990s.
The game is still used at the Command & General Staff School, and available
in a commercial version as well. The following piece was initially created
during a listserv discussion among military and commercial developers of
wargames and military simulations.
Since I retired from the Army, I have been designing and developing PC-based
trainers using gaming technology for both the U.S. and foreign military. I
am currently involved with the development of two USAF trainers (PC games),
a USMC trainer (MAGTF XXI), and the DARPA DARWARS program. In addition to my
business development, design, and development experiences in this niche
market, I have been intimately involved with the fielding of the completed
trainers and the training of the instructors/users. During this time, I've
seen a lot and learned even more from some very intelligent and talented
people.
Listed below are my insights and OPINIONS that I believe may help with the
development of "Best Practices" in the areas of production team experience
and skills, appropriate use of trainer, good design, effective project
management, and training.
1. Few, if any, COTS (Commercial, Off The Shelf) wargames can be effectively
used by the military for training without modification. Granted, in the
past, some talented military trainers effectively used COTS wargames for
training or education for brief periods of time, but their use rarely
continued once that innovator transferred or retired.
2. Government project officers who manage COTS games contracts should
possess wargaming/computer gaming experience. Those that have a good working
knowledge of wargames are much more likely to be effective in their role
than those who have never played one before. To put it into perspective,
could we expect someone to produce a passable TV sitcom who neither owned or
watched a TV before? Although its great that more people recognize the value
of using games for training, many project officers have a limited
understanding of what they propose to manage.
3. The most effective PC-based trainers (wargames) have been developed by
people with military experience or who employ SME (Subject Matter Experts)
with both military AND wargaming experience. The quality of the SME's
wargaming experience is as important as his/her military experience. It's so
much easier to translate requirements and develop feasible, acceptable
designs when both the developer and the government representative can easily
talk using both military and gaming - speak (Example: Could we model
"just-in-time" logistics in this trainer using something like a combination
of the way PC game "A" and board game "'B" model supply?)
4. Wargames are best suited for improving the following skills:
decision-making, visualization (friendly vs. enemy capabilities with respect
to time, space, and distance), critical thinking, and
communication/coordination. Keep in mind that wargames are often not the
best training solution. Although they can be very effective in the military
classroom/unit, they tend to use more time and resources than other
instructional methods. This is rarely understood and could cause problems
later if the end-user does not understand or is unwilling to make room for
it in their training/instructional schedule.
5. STEP 1 (Government Project Officer): Identify a SPECIFIC need that can be
satisfied in a SPECIFIC location in the military force using a PC-based
trainer (wargame). Part of this search ideally should include the
identification of a talented and willing military end-user (an innovator who
will ideally become or designate the military SME). General solutions
targeted at a wider audience will be less likely to succeed. This cannot be
a "Field of Dreams" process - "we'll build it and they will come". If you
can't achieve step 1, you should postpone your plans until you can meet this
critical first requirement. Otherwise, you're wasting our valuable
taxpayer's money and jeopardizing the reputation of everyone involved.
6. STEP 2 (Government Project Officer): Clearly and concisely define the
requirements: intended training audience, training/learning objectives,
training conditions (intended training environment), and other technical
requirements. Keep these simple and clear. If it can't be described in a few
pages, you are probably describing something so complicated that no one
(end-user, project manager, or the developer) will be satisfied with the
final product, and it will never be completed on time and within budget.
These requirements should be clearly identified in your announcement so that
potential developers know what you want when they write their proposals.
Developer: Be warned. Dealing with the government can be very frustrating.
At times, the money may be good, but it's never easy. Although you will
encounter many talented government professionals who are working as hard as
you to create something great, they and you will often be severely
constrained by a seemingly confusing and lethargic bureaucratic processes.
Contract deliverables must be submitted on time - payments are usually slow!
If this doesn't sound like something you're willing or able to accept, do
not submit a proposal.
Developer: Always remember you are building a military trainer first! This
must be job #1. Any plans on building/marketing a commercial me using the
completed trainer must be a distant second priority. If you can't accept
this policy, you shouldn't bid on the project. A successful military trainer
that employs gaming technology to create a more engaging, experiential
learning environment will unlikely be a quick port to a successful
commercial game. Likewise, a successful commercial wargame will probably
require some radical modifications before it will meet the needs of a
military training audience.
7. STEP 3 (Government-Developer Team): During the first meeting, clearly
articulate and then reach an agreement on what is being developed. A clearly
defined requirements document should be the start point for this process.
Once this is achieved, make every effort to prevent "requirements creep" (
frequent or major changes to the requirements). Insure the work schedule
includes frequent meetings to review progress. If possible, the government
SME/end-user should be present at this meeting. During the initial meeting,
present and agree on the work schedule and contract deliverables.
8. STEP 4 (Government-Developer Team): Insure the developer spends time
visiting and meeting with the end-user to better understand their needs,
training environment, and culture. Whenever possible, the developer should
observe the military training that the completed trainer is supposed to
enhance or replace. Encourage and support frequent contact between the
end-user and the developer. However, everyone must understand that no major
decisions can be made unless all parties are informed and agree. The
end-user and the developer must provide the government project manager
detailed reports of their meetings when he/she is absent.
9. STEP 5 (Developer): Design a PC-trainer (wargame) using the following
principles:
a. Stay focused on the training audience and training objectives
b. Design and develop simple but elegant solutions. Employ appropriate
fidelity in the model to satisfy para 10a. - Abstract everything else
c. Design GUI for the military trainee, not for another engineer or
wargamer. As much as we all hate plain vanilla windows interfaces, most
military personnel currently prefer them over cool, game-like interfaces.
d. Manage expectations or they will manage you - In your zeal to please,
don't create unrealistic expectations with your customer.
e. Effective communication is critical. Misunderstandings can create false
expectations.
10. STEP 6 (Government-Developer Team): Conduct spiral development. Create
and test sequential prototypes in support of actual end-user administered
training. Document technical results and user feedback. Incorporate feedback
into the development of the next prototype. The end-user must be willing to
provide solid support during this step or the effort will be wasted.
11. STEP 7 (Government-Developer Team): Be flexible. No matter how good or
experienced the team may be, or how solid the original requirements
document, you will discover during spiral development what you didn't know
when you started the project. When it doubt as to what action to take,
remember to stay true to the fundamentals of the original requirements
document: build an effective trainer that facilitates the target audience
achieving their intended training objectives, under their stated training
conditions (environment). Maintaining this focus greatly facilitates making
quick and effective decisions about when and what changes must be made and
increase the odds of success.
12. STEP 8 (Government-Developer Team). At the end of the contract, you must
deliver a reliable, working trainer that achieves its intended purpose. If
not, everyone has failed. Likewise, understand that it will not be perfect.
It's almost a guarantee that more $ will be needed to further enhance/modify
the trainer once more people use it and provide feedback.
13. STEP 9 (Government-Developer Team). Budget time and money to train the
trainer. Even if the team builds the best PC-trainer (wargame) ever
produced, it is only a tool. Like all tools, it's effectiveness is solely
dependant on the skill of the workman who uses it.
14. STEP 10 (End-User). Gain and maintain chain-of-command support early and
often. If the senior leader doesn't make its use a priority, it will fade
into obscurity fast. -- Jim Lunsford
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram