PAXsims

Conflict simulation, peacebuilding, and development

Tag Archives: Connections North

Leveraging games for strategic insight

Global Affairs Canada, Defence Research and Development Canada, and Connections North held a webinar today, featuring yours truly presenting on the topic of “leveraging games for strategic insight.” Over forty people were in attendance. The session wasn’t recorded, but you’ll find my slides here (pdf):

The presentation was largely pitched at gaming policy challenges outside the national security sector (such as African Swine Fever), and for a Canadian audience (that is, reflecting a smaller serious games community).

The webinar discussion series focuses on the growing strategic, professional policy gaming community of practice in Canada. Through informal virtual discussion and presentations, we look forward to sharing lessons learned from gaming experiences, and discussing topics such as game types, game design, and how gaming can be used as a tool for generating insights and analysis in support of policy development. The forum will also provide the opportunity to build game ideas and identify opportunities to (beta)test new games.

Future events will be publicized here at PAXsims and on the Connections North email list. If you work in government in Canada, you may also want to contact Madeline Johnson (GAC) to be added to their internal list for future notifications.

Leveraging games for strategic insight

Global Affairs Canada, Defence Research and Development Canada, and Connections North will host an online presentation on “Leveraging games for strategic insight” at 10:00am ET on Wednesday, July 15.

Rex Brynen (McGill University) will offer an introduction to the use of serious games to address a broad range of strategic challenges, whether in foreign affairs or other policy areas. He will discuss how games can build teams and crowd-source ideas; generate insight into the behaviours of stakeholders, allies and adversaries; anticipate challenges; and explore consequences. He will also discuss the role of organizational and bureaucratic factors in the encouraging, disseminating, and utilizing such insights.

Rex Brynen is Professor of Political Science at McGill University, where—in addition to his work on Middle East politics and peace operations—he teaches serious game design. He has served as an advisor at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, as an intelligence analyst for the Privy Council Office, and as a consultant to the Department of National Defence, NATO, United Nations agencies, and others. He is also senior editor of the conflict simulation website PAXsims.

Global Affairs Canada, Foreign Policy Research and Foresight Division conducts independent research and analysis on foreign policy issues to support, inform and challenge Global Affairs Canada on priority and emerging international policy questions. Products are intended to better understand changes in our operating environment, provoke thought and discussion, and challenge our mental assumptions about the world and Canadian foreign policy.

Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) is the national leader in defence science and technology that develops and delivers new technical solutions and advice to the Department of National Defence, the Canadian Armed Forces, other federal departments, and the safety and security communities. DRDC is an Agency of the Department of National Defence and work with partners in academia, government and industry and with Canada’s allies.

Connections North is a community of practice devoted to the professional use of wargames (and other serious games) for education, training, and policy analysis in Canada. It is open to professional game designers, military and other government personnel, researchers, NGOs, and others associated with professional (war)gaming.

This is part of a new webinar discussion series focused on the growing strategic, professional policy gaming community of practice in Canada. Through informal virtual discussion and presentations, we look forward to sharing lessons learned from gaming experiences, and discussing topics such as game types, game design, and how gaming can be used as a tool for generating insights and analysis in support of policy development.

Space is limited and primarily limited to those within the Canadian policy and serious games community, or other strategic gaming professionals. If you would like an invitation (and webinar information), please contact Rex Brynen by July 12. (Members of the Connections North email list will have already received an invitation from GAC.)

UPDATE: The slides are now available here.

Connections North 2020 conference report

ConnectionsNorthMcGill

On February 15, McGill University hosted the annual CONNECTIONS NORTH interdisciplinary conference on conflict simulation and other professional/serious gaming. This was the fourth such conference—and the largest yet, with 79 registrants. Of these, over half were a mix of national security professionals, game designers, and researchers, and the remainder were university students (mainly from my POLI 452 Conflict Simulations course). Participants came from Canada and three other countries this year (US, Japan, Finland), and just over one-quarter were women. Some of the slide presentations are linked in the summaries below, and the full conference programme (and presenter biographies) can be found here.

Following weldoming remarks by Ben Taylor (Defence Research and Development Canada) we started off with a panel reviewing the past year or so in Canadian (war)gaming.

In the military domain, Scott Roach (Canadian Joint Warfare Centre) provided an overview of the work of the JWC’s small but growing wargaming section. This included joint wargaming (a series of a capability-based planning wargames, as well as games for the Canadian Joint Operations Command), joint experimentation (notably concerning information operations, electronic warfare, cyber, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance), and joint simulation (using KORA, MASA Sword, JCATS, and others). He noted that they hoped to expand their staff, establish a resource/data library, and move towards more digital gaming. Jonathan Evans (Canadian Army Simulation Centre) spoke about the work of CASC, together with Brian Philips (Calian). CASC is headquartered in Kingston, with distributed locations in CFB Gagetown, Valcartier, Petawawa, and Edmonton. It provides support to the Canadian Army (both digital simulation and tabletop and other exercises), as well as Canadian Joint Operations Command, the RCAF, and other organizations. The major activities of CASC include support for Divisional Simulation Centres, UNIFIED RESOLVE, the Army Operations Course and Canadian Army Command and Staff College, and the Army Experimentation Centre. He also provided an overview of current Canadian Army simulation capabilities: ABACUS, JCATS, and VBS3, linked together and to command and control systems through the Virtual Command and Control Interface (VCCI). Murray Dixson (Defence Research and Development Canada) presented on gaming force planning scenarios, reviewing the work that DRDC had done with the Joint Warfare Centre on capability-based planning. This took the form of five wargames conducted in the spring and summer of 2019 to support Department of National Defence strategic planning. Three of these were conducted as matrix games (stabilization, peace enforcement, and peer combat), one as a combination seminar and commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) game (humanitarian assistance), and one as a seminar game (domestic security and pandemic operations). He also discussed future work by DRDC’s Centre for Operational Research and Analysis (CORA), which includes continued support to strategic planning, as well as gaming for concept development and developing a DRDC wargaming community of interest.

In the foreign policy field, Anna Bretzlaff (Global Affairs Canada) discussed several games that GAC has run in recent years (on topics ranging from diplomacy in the South China Sea to global pandemics), as well as outreach efforts within GAC. The response within the department, she noted, had been very positive: this was clearly a foresight and analysis technique that officials wished to make use of. Finally, I added a few comments about gaming at McGill University, as well as some other PAXsims initiatives, including game development with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada on the African Swine Fever threat.

Subsequent discussion addressed how to better connect up the various gaming initiatives and interests across the government of Canada.

After a coffee break (kindly supplied by local serious game developer Imaginetic), our next panel explored methodological reflections on wargaming.

Stephen Downes-Martin (US Naval War College) presented on reversal effects and wargames—part of his “malign wargames series” whereby he seeks to inoculate game designers and participants against game-distorting techniques. Here he argued that the outcome of a game could potentially be distorted to suit analytical or policy preferences at the outbrief and after-action review stage. One way of doing this, he suggested, was to use insights from psychological research into probability, risk assessment, and loss aversion. Framing game outcomes in different ways could subtly render options more or less appealing. Because of this, he suggested, just “playing the game” was not good enough. It was important to also be familiar with social science and psychology theories, discuss subjective likelihoods of success using “high” through “low” text scales, describe alternatives in terms of advantages and disadvantages, use both selection and pricing techniques when framing outcomes, use both gains and losses, and identify biases of participants. Next, Andy Lee (McGill University and DRDC) reviewed methods of adjudication in matrix and seminar games. His presentation was based on a review of the available wargaming literature, together with interviews with a range of practitioners. Multiple systems were assessed (umpired, weighted probabilities, probability, voting, consensus, rigid) and he offered an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of each. Finally, David Redpath (Canadian Joint Warfare Centre/BI-5 Inc.) offered extensive thoughts on refining wargame methods, focusing on four essential “problem” areas: fog of war and situational awareness, player level and expertise, and the orders they can give in the game; move/countermove and turn order; and who loses—and why. He argued that in all four of these areas, many hobby and professional games alike suffered from serious deficiencies. He then offered a series of suggestions and techniques whereby each might be addressed.

Following lunch, Tom Fisher (Imaginetic) chaired a session on gaming civilians in conflict. He briefly reviewed the enthusiasm for gaming techniques in evidence at the recent Humanitarian Networks and Partnerships Week in Geneva. Matt Stevens (Lessons Learned Simulations and Training) then talked about serious games for humanitarian capacity building, offering an overview of a current research project being undertaken by  Save the Children, Lessons Learned Simulations and Training, Imaginetic, and Kaya. This research asks whether serious games contribute to training for local humanitarian aid workers, exploring the extent to which digital or in-person tabletop exercises prompt changes in behaviour and/or attitude. They are also examining the potential barriers to engagement with mobile-based and tabletop serious games as a learning tool, as well as the practical requirements necessary to roll-out mobile and/or tabletop serious games to learners working in an emergency setting. To do this, they have undertaken experimental workshops in Amman and Nairobi using both manual games (AFTERSHOCK, The Day My Life Froze) and digital games. Participants were very positive about the use of games for humanitarian training. Manual games were preferred by participants, but it is not yet clear which is the better learning tool. He also noted that “digital games cause digital problems” (interface, bandwidth, system incompatibilities, and so forth). 

Patrick Robitaille (Laval University) then presented on the annual SimEx humanitarian field exercise organized by Laval University. He discussed how they challenge and assess participants, and changes they have made over time.

The keynote address at Connections North this year was provided by Yuna Wong (RAND), who spoke on “gaming and the unknowable future.” She addressed the challenges of gaming the future, and the difficulty game participants have in imagining the truly new. In the end, she suggested, we had to recognize that the futures we game are unlikely to come to pass in quite the way that we play them, although that does not invalidate games-based reflection and exploration.

Our final panel of the day addressed an important and sensitive topic: expanding the community. It was chaired by Matt Caffrey (US Air Force Research Lab), the founder of the worldwide Connections conferences, and the man who has probably done more than anyone to build global networks amongst professional wargamers. Many of the presentations focused on the challenges facing a field that has historically been dominated by middle-aged (and increasingly older) white males drawn from the military and wargaming hobby. Yuna Wong highlighted her own experiences as a woman and visible minority whose background was in the social sciences, not hobby gaming: while many veterans in the field have been generous with their time and support, she said, all too often she still encounters subtle biases and presumptions. Brianna Proceviat (PAXsims)—who recent graduated from McGill University and who will soon be joining the wargaming team and the Canadian Joint warfare Centre—dressed in pink to ask the rhetorical question “what does a wargamer look like?” She highlighted how subtle gendered pressures during childhood (for example, steering young girls away from conflict-themed toys and games) could leave them having to catch up with male counterparts who had a different experience of childhood socialization. Matt Shoemaker (Temple University) explored the history and design of war games in relation to gender. Independent game designer Roberta Taylor then followed up by discussing a game that she and Matt are developing which depicts the final military conflict in the French conquest of the Kabyle region of Algeria (1854-1857). This will look at the dynamics and effects of war across the entire local (Amazigh) population, and will also reflect the key role played by resistance leader Lalla Fadhma N’Soumer.

The discussion that followed was especially interesting. Several conference participants noted that the wargaming hobby—which is, surveys suggest, is more than 98% male—has had trouble reaching out to younger and more diverse demographics. A few even detailed incidents of outright misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia in online (hobby) wargaming communities. Several students made the point that they would not have even been aware that wargaming—and especially professional wargaming—existed, had they not encountered it in the classroom or through events like Connections North or megagaming. A few noted the popularity of model UN (which takes place on an impressive scale these days: the annual McMUN at McGill University involves more than two thousand participants and X days of programming—all organized by students). Several experienced professional wargamers even went so far as to say the hobby was increasingly less important as a source of new talent for professional wargaming. What was needed, they suggested, were those with social sciences backgrounds, familiar with both POL-MIL issues and rigorous analytical methods.

And this the conference came to a close. As I was busy chairing sessions and otherwise conference organizing, I’m afraid that I never did get around to taking pictures. If you attended and had any to pass on, please send them on! Feel free to many comments below too.

The following day, February 16, was our annual McGill megagame. That was a separate event, but many participants stayed on for it. A report will follow shortly!

Registration open: CONNECTIONS NORTH 2020

CONNECTIONS NORTH

Registration is now open for the CONNECTIONS NORTH professional wargaming/conflict simulation/serious gaming conference, to be held at McGill University in Montréal on Saturday, 15 February 2020.

For details of past conferences, see these reports.

Further details and conference registration via Eventbrite.

CONNECTIONS NORTH is proud to be part of the globalist conspiracy anarcho-syndicalist commune international network of Connections interdisciplinary wargaming conferences.

Connections graphic.jpg

 

Call for papers: CONNECTIONS NORTH 2020 wargaming conference

connections-north.png

The CONNECTIONS NORTH 2020 professional wargaming conference will be held at McGill University, Montreal on Saturday, 15 February 2020.

CONNECTIONS NORTH is a one-day conference devoted to conflict simulation. It is intended for national security professionals, researchers, educators, game designers, university students, and others interested in the field of wargaming and other serious games.

Registration details will be posted to PAXsims in December. In the meantime, we welcome paper and panel proposals. These should be sent to Rex Brynen (rex.brynen@mcgill.ca).

Details of previous conferences (and the CONNECTIONS NORTH digital community) can be found here.

As is tradition, the annual McGill megagame—a separate and rather less serious event—will be held on the following day.

CONNECTIONS NORTH 2019 conference report

CONNECTIONS NORTH

On February 16, McGill University hosted the third annual CONNECTIONS NORTH professional wargaming conference. We might be biased as the organizers, of course, but we were very pleased at how it all turned out.

Attendance was excellent, with 73 people registered for the event. This was triple our attendance last year. CONNECTIONS NORTH is now the third largest of the Connections wargaming conferences, behind the Connections US and Connections UK—although Connections NL and Connections Oz still have us all beat on participants relative to national population.

The conference programme and speaker biographies can be found here.

Of those who attended, slightly over half were national security professionals, researchers and educators, game designers, and hobbyists. The reminder university students from McGill University, other Montreal universities, and beyond. We were pleased to see participants from across the Department of National Defence (Canadian Joint Warfare Centre, Royal Military College, Canadian Forces College, Defence Research and Development Canada, and elsewhere), other government departments, the US Army War College, and the US Naval War College, as well as colleagues from as far afield as the UK, Netherlands, Norway, and Australia. Amongst the students there was even a group who travelled up from Tufts University and MIT for the event!

The first panel featured Ben Taylor (Defence Research and Development Canada) and LCol Mike Beauvais (Canadian Joint Warfare Centre), who provided an overview of wargaming in Canada. Ben surveyed a range of activities that DRDC had supported in recent years (slides/pdf), while Mike discussed a recent ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) wargame conducted at the CJWC. They both noted a recent resurgence in wargaming in Canada, although it remains somewhat sporadic and disconnected, with many parts of DND (or other government departments) not aware of what others might be doing. Hopefully, activities such as Connections North, outreach by DRDC, and the establishment of  a wargaming and red teaming group at the CJWC all provide an opportunity to “connect the dots” in this regard. David Last (Canadian Forces College), Stephen Downes- Martin (US Naval War College), and David Redpath (Revision Military) all offered their own thoughts as discussants, and then other attendees had an opportunity to offer questions or observations.

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Next, our attention turned to wargaming methods and approaches. Murray Dixson (DRDC) talked about the work he and others are doing on updating and developing course of action analysis as part of NATO SAS (System Analysis and Studies panel) 130 (slides/pdf). Stephen Downes-Martin  (US Naval War College) explored group dynamics in wargames (full paper/pdf), highlighting the ways in which group discussion and decision-making processes might produce sub-optimal analysis. His presentation certainly highlighted the relatively unstructured and unscientific way that the wargaming community has thus far approached the issue, and the insight that could be had from drawing upon existing scholarship in the fields of psychology, decision science, and management.

After lunch, a session on “from war to peace” looked at the use of serious games to examine insurgency, peace and stabilization operations, and peacebuilding more broadly. This session had been made possible through a McDonald, Currie Professional Development Award from McGill’s Institute for the Study of International Development.

Game designer Brian Train (who has likely designed more commercial counterinsurgency wargames than anyone else, ever) discussed “Soft Power Maps: Integrating the Political, Social and Economic in Insurgency Games” (slides/pdf). His presentation highlighted the evolution of game systems and approaches in his own work. Anja van der Hulst (TNO) offered some “Reflections on Peace and Stabilization Games,” recounting the various steps (and missteps) in the development of the Go4it Comprehensive Approach simulation Model, which she ran very successfully for McGill University students last year. I talked about serious games and peacebuilding, introducing a few cases where we have used games or game techniques to assist in contingency planning in the humanitarian sector, to support peace negotiations, or even to influence parties to an ongoing conflict (slides/pdf). Finally, Jim Wallman (Stone Paper Scissors) offered his own thoughts on gaming peace operations, drawing upon the examples of both his War in Binni megagame, and his smaller Barwick Green peacekeeping game (slides/pdf).

With that, the formal sessions came to an end. However, we weren’t quite finished yet. After some moving of chairs and tables, we were ready for a few hours of gaming. The games on display or being played included:

  • Barwick Green (contemporary peacekeeping operations)
  • We Are Coming, Nineveh (the Iraqi liberation of West Mosul)
  • Reckoning of Vultures (a matrix game of coup plotting in a fictional republic)
  • District Commander Maracas (counter-insurgency in a fictional megacity)
  • Nights of Fire (1956 Hungarian rebellion)
  • Trump’ets at Dawn (hypothetical MEU landing in Venezuela)
  • The Day My Life Froze (refugee/humanitarian simulation)

Next year we will continue efforts to promote greater diversity among participants. One-quarter of the participants were women (better than most Connections conferences in the US, UK, and elsewhere), but only one of the presenters was. We would also like to see more colleagues working in digital game studies. medical and emergency management simulation, and other related fields. We will also have to decide whether to cap attendance at 75, or book a larger room for next time.

Professional colleagues commented very favourably on the opportunity to network with colleagues and hear new perspectives, while students were very positive about the opportunity to interact with professionals who use serious games in their work. My own POLI 422 students also had an opportunity to discuss their various game projects with expert designer, both during the conference and thereafter.

The following day, many of the participants stayed around for a rather less serious activity: defending Canada from zombie hordes in APOCALYPSE NORTH, the fourth annual McGill megagame. That, however, will be the subject of another PAXsims report.

On a final note: if you are involved in professional wargaming, conflict simulation, and other serious gaming in Canada, you can always join the CONNECTIONS NORTH email list.

CONNECTIONS NORTH 2019

https---cdn.evbuc.com-images-52648159-589940880-1-original.jpg

Registration is now open for the CONNECTIONS NORTH interdisciplinary wargaming conference, to be held at McGill University in Montréal on Saturday, 16 February 2019. The conference is intended for national security professionals, academics and educators, humanitarian and development workers, diplomats,  community activists, game designers, and others interested in conflict simulation and serious gaming.

The programme for the conference is available here.

Further details on CONNECTIONS NORTH are available at the link above. The conference Facebook page can be found here. The following day (February 17) we will also be holding the annual McGill megagame, APOCALYPSE NORTH.

For details of the 2018 CONNECTIONS NORTH conference, see the report at PAXsims.

 

Save the dates: CONNECTIONS NORTH 2019 (and McGill Megagame)

CONNECTIONS NORTH

PAXsims is pleased to announce the dates for the 2019 CONNECTIONS NORTH professional wargaming conference, as well as the 2019 McGill Megagame.

CONNECTIONS NORTH: Saturday, 16 February 2019

McGill Megagame: Sunday, 17 February 2019

Both events will be held at McGill University, in Montréal.

A call for papers for CONNECTIONS NORTH will be issued closer to the date, and registration information will be posted here in the fall.

The megagame will be APOCALYPSE NORTH, an game of emergency response, national survival, and federal-provincial politics during a zombie armageddon. (We are also referring to it as Bon Zombi/Bad Zombie, for the Canadian cinephiles amongst you). In keeping with post-G7 world, Canada will face undead threat from across its southern border. While the scenario will be very fictional (we hope), the emergency management/aid to civil powers elements of the game will be realistic—and challenging.

Update: registration for these events is now live. Further details at the links below.

CONNECTIONS NORTH 2018 wargaming conference report

CONNECTIONS NORTH.png

On February 24, almost two dozen defence analysts, game designers, academics, and conflict simulation students met at McGill University for the CONNECTIONS NORTH miniconference on professional wargaming in Canada. It was a modest affair, but also a resounding success, I think—possibly the largest meeting of its kind ever held in Canada.  We were also buoyed, of course, by the official message of support and encouragement sent on in advance of our meeting by our British wargaming colleagues at Dstl. A key impetus for the meeting was the presence of a number of professional colleagues from Ottawa and Kingston who had travelled to Montreal for the DIRE STRAITS megagame at McGill on Sunday, which will be the subject of a subsequent report.

IMG_9301.jpg

Waiting for things to start.

The afternoon started off with three surveys of wargaming and other serious gaming. Ben Taylor (Defence Research and Development Canada) discussed the development of gaming techniques to support and enhance the Capability-Based Planning (CBP) process. DRDC CORA is exploring matrix games as a relatively simple method for exploring scenarios and scenario development, and recent games involving a former defence planning scenario have found considerable receptivity. One advantage of a matrix game approach, he suggested, is that players are not limited by game components, and therefore more likely to think broadly and creatively. In the discussion that followed, participants raised such issues as the need for senior leadership-buy in, possible limitations of matrix games for operation or tactical-level gaming, the strengths and weaknesses of more structured gaming techniques (such as RCAT) and how various gaming approaches might be integrated, and where in the CBP gaming methodologies best fitted. You’ll find a copy of Ben’s slides here.

Next, I offered an overview of various gaming initiatives that I have been involved with, whether in a teaching capacity at McGill University, in support of educational and policy research initiatives elsewhere, or through PAXsims. I also raised the issue of how best to carry forward the momentum we have seen in Canada in the past year or so, marked by the establishment of the CONNECTIONS NORTH email list for professional wargamers/policy gamers, the informal networks that have emerged from the Diplomatic Challenges in the South China Sea game that Global Affairs Canada sponsored last fall, from DRDC initiatives, and now from this conference. You’ll find the slides from my presentation here.

Connections North

Anja van der Hulst (TNO) then discussed some of the game initiatives she has been involved with recently. Of particular interest was her discussion of exploring hybrid warfare using matrix games. She noted that game design and components had a substantial impact on game play, with a preponderance of military assets predisposing players to kinetic methods. Anja also raised the important role that emotions and other psychological factors can play in shaping player behaviour and strategy. This spurred considerable discussion throughout the conference as to how best to encourage players to internalize game narratives and respond in ways that resemble either the psychology of particular actors, or their value systems, fears, and concerns.

A coffee break followed, complete with Timbits. This was a Canadian wargaming conference, after all.

After the break, Jim Wallman (Stone Paper Scissors) offered some perspectives on the UK Royal Air Force’s recent Eagle Warrior exercise, which consisted on one major wargame and  series of associated games. As noted by the RAF:

Exercise Eagle Warrior brought together the best and brightest military minds from the Royal Air Force, British Army, Royal Navy, Joint Force Command, Defence Intelligence, the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, the United States Air Force and the Royal Canadian Air Force.

This operational-level war game was the first of its kind in eight years but was in fact much more than a game alone, it was a platform for conceptual analysis and critical thinking as well as the development of further interoperability with our Allies.

The wargame lasted two weeks with multiple games being played throughout, focussing on how wars might look in 2030.

h-1.jpg

Exercise Eagle Warrior (picture credit: RAF)

While Jim was constrained to address only unclassified aspects of the exercise, he offered extremely valuable insight into the challenges of senior leadership engagement (both as a positive factor, and as a challenge for game facilitation), rapid game design, and the importance of game design and materials in shaping player experiences.

Grand Designs Design Thinking in Games Graphic Design Presentation

All of this led nicely into a presentation by Tom Fisher (Imaginetic) on “Design Thinking in Games,” in which he discussed how the presentation of a game shaped player experience, above and beyond the formal system represented in the game rules. Specifically, he drew upon Don Norman’s three levels of game design: visceral, behavioural, and reflective. Visceral design addresses the almost unconscious impact of graphic design and game components on how players “feel” about the game, and the intellectual and emotional associations these stimulate. Behavioural design is about usability, and how the graphic presentation of the game enhances, or detracts from, playability. Finally, the reflective element of design concerns how a player rationalizes the game experience, and the impact that it has. Throughout, Tom warned about inappropriate graphic or component choices that force players out of engagement and narrative (and also warned against the danger that beguiling graphics can result in players accepting unrealistic or misleading models of reality). Finally he emphasized the importance of making game designs as simple as possible for a given purpose, the value of “dual coding” (in which text and graphics are mutually reinforcing), and how one can use a player’s preexisting mental model to make something more acceptable and convincing. You’ll find a copy of his slides here.

IMG_9302.jpg

Some of the participants at CONNECTIONS NORTH.

That ended the formal activities for the day. In the evening, however, we ran a game of A RECKONING OF VULTURES from the Matrix Game Construction Kit (MaGCK) for those who wanted to stick around.

A RECKONING OF VULTURES is set in the capital of the fictional Republic of Matrixia. There, in the ornate Presidential Palace, surrounded by his most loyal Presidential Guards, the President-for-Life lies on his death-bed—and various power-hungry factions are jostling to take power themselves. Once the President passes, competition between these would-be successors will escalate into open conflict, until the Central Committee of the Ruling Party can meet and agree on a new leader.

The game was designed to show how matrix games can be used to explore a range of issues and modalities, from political maneuvering through to tactical employment of force in complex urban environments.

img_7835

In the first phase of our game, the Central Security and Intelligence Directorate (secret police) largely focused on gaining information and leverage, including control over the media. The Matrixian Armed Forces moved potentially disloyal troops away from key power centres, and focused on securing the loyalty of the armed forces. The Ministry of Interior dispatched police units to the potentially rebellious university campus, while the Oligarchs rented thugs and bribed religious leaders. The National Union of Toilers (NUT) infiltrated union organizers into the police unit guarding the prison, as well as a key armoured battalion (which had spent days parading around the city since no one wanted it outside their power base).

IMG_0950.jpeg

Early in the game of A RECKONING OF VULTURES.

When the President-for-Life died, NUT sympathizers in the police seized the main prison, while the tank battalion declared itself a supporter of the proletarian revolution. CSID control of the media and the Oligarchs’ influence with religious establishment allowed both of them to shape public expectations. The MAF commander was successful in both ordering military reinforcements to the city and securing the loyalty of the Presidential Guard, both of which then attacked CSID headquarters with support and encouragement from NUT protesters. Although the CSID spymaster managed to escape this attack, his efforts to relocate to the Central Bank were foiled when his thuggish convoy of black SUVs was shot up by soldiers at a MAF checkpoint. At a critical moment, the NUT-controlled tanks stormed the campus, and freed the students there from the tyranny of police occupation.

Finally, the Central Committee of the Ruling Party met. The Minister of the Interior went into the balloting with a small advantage, for the police had shown the foresight to quietly occupy several key locations in the city while everyone else fought. In the end, however, it was the MAF Commander who emerged victorious and was named the new President.

 

Connections North AAR

Join_the_Team_RCAF

On February 22, a small group came together in Ottawa in what will hopefully be the first of many “Connections North” interdisciplinary wargaming meetings. The miniconference—organized at the very last minute by Defence Research and Development Canada and PAXsims to take advantage of a visit to Canada by the one and only Jim Wallman—attracted eleven participants with expertise in wargaming, operations research, medical and humanitarian simulation, virtual simulation and training, higher education, and game design.

Following introductions and introductory remarks, Murray Dixson (DRDC) made a presentation on the MAGIC (“Matrix Games for Improvement of CBP”) project. This has involved a series of trials of the matrix game method to explore how it might be used to enhance capability-based planning at the Department of National Defence. To date they’ve run several games of the ISIS Crisis scenario, and found that the approach could be helpful for scenario testing and validation, although less so for identifying specific capability gaps. Analysis suggests that subject matter experts and non-SMEs take similar lengths of time to make a game move, and that the ratio of political, military, economic, social, infrastructure, information, and cultural (PMESII-C) actions was broadly similar across games. Both the presentation and the subsequent discussion highlighted the importance of game facilitation skills, and the risk that facilitators/adjudicators might insert their own views into the game. It was noted that the game materials also potentially cued players into making certain types of moves—a map with military assets displayed, for example, tends to encourage military actions. Game participants expressed some frustration at the difficulty of pursuing a coherent long-term strategy in ISIS Crisis. While this is partly a function of the sequential turn sequence, it likely has even more to do with the nature of the scenario, with its multiple conflicting actors and objectives. Future trials will likely involve a different scenario, thus allowing analysts to determine what game dynamics may be scenario-specific.

Paul Massel (DRDC) then made a presentation on a recent playtest of the Rapid Campaign Analysis Toolset (RCAT), which is being assessed by DRDC as a possible mechanism for stress-tresting defence planning scenarios, as well as a campaign planning tool. Given that the Canadian military is most likely to deploy as a “plug-and-play” component of much larger coalition efforts, other tools (such as the Peace Support Operations Model) have proven less useful for this task. As a member of the playtest group (and the nefarious Red commander), I had been impressed by RCAT’s flexibility and adaptability. Interestingly it sometimes uses a matrix game-like approach to resolving contextual circumstances and other issues that lie outside the normal rules, including those at the “fuzzy edge” of wargaming (ie, non-kinetic dynamics).

Next, I offered a slightly revised version of the presentation I made a few weeks ago at RAND on “Gaming the Semi-Cooperative: Peace Operations, HADR, and Beyond.” My key argument here was that extrinsic rewards and victory conditions were not the sole method to elicit semi-cooperative behaviour among players in a game. Player psychology is also important, and players can be influenced in a variety ways so as to introduce friction and tension in otherwise cooperative games, or to encourage a degree of cautious cooperation in otherwise largely adversarial ones.

Jim Wallman (Past Perspectives) offered some insightful remarks of his own on “wargaming for insight.” The key elements of such gaming, he argued, were the developmental or analytical requirements; relevant scenarios/vignettes; adoption of an appropriate game type and structure; resolution of the inevitable tensions between the time needed, the time available, and the time actually spent on a wargame; skilled facilitation; effective recording and reporting of the game; and post-game analysis.

With regard to the former he emphasized the need to define the scope of the investigation, and clarity as what was to be stress-tested or compared. He warned against the “kitchen sink” syndrome where sponsors attempt to encumber a wargame with too many components or questions. He warned against using off-the-shelf scenarios, or reusing those from different games, as they were rarely as effective as those that had been purpose-designed. Indeed it was important to recognize that insights were usually scenario-dependant. Game design and implementation should reduce the temptation and ability of players to “fight the white (cell)” by arguing against the scenario, rules, or adjudication. Game structures could be open or closed, rigid or free, and manual, digital, or a synthesis of both. Throughout he stressed that wargaming, while a very useful analytical tool, was not always the best tool to explore a particular issue—and that game designers needed to be clear about this.

A group lunch at Nandos was then followed by a general discussion of gaming issues, followed by a demonstration session of AFTERSHOCK: A Humanitarian Crisis Game. Here the players found the first days of the earthquake extremely challenging, with their collective (relief point) score approaching -20. However, by the second week of the disaster their position had improved considerably due to increasingly effective interagency coordination. The HADR Task Force and the government of Carana took the lead in repairing the port and airport, thus enabling a greater volume of relief supplies to flow into the country. Social unrest proved to be very limited, and was dealt with through community mediation and the occasional government security operation. The UN and NGO teams had begun to repair critical infrastructure, and thereby support a transition from emergency relief to early, sustainable recovery. We had to stop the game before it was finished, but the players seemed well on their way to a successful humanitarian assistance operation.

20160222_140637[1].jpg

All-in-all, I thought it was a very successful day. There seemed to be considerable support among participants for making Connections North a somewhat larger annual event that brings together an interdisciplinary group of those involved in the serious application of national security gaming methods in Canada. In the coming months the next steps will be to determine the best time of year for this, expand the network of serious gamers who could be involved, and to find an institution (ideally in the Ottawa area) to host such an event. If you’re interested in becoming involved, drop me a line.

AFTERSHOCK and Connections North

As I write this, Tom Fisher, Jim Wallman and I are en route to today’s Connections North professional wargaming “mini-conference” in Ottawa. As has become the tradition with Connections events, that means that AFTERSHOCK will be on sale this week. Save $10 off the regular price and get your copy now!

AFTERSHOCK discountAll net proceeds are donated to United Nations humanitarian organizations.

 

Connections North (Ottawa, February 22)

Join_the_Team_RCAF.jpgThis is rather last minute notice—probably because we’ve put it together at the very last minute—but Canadian readers will be interested to learn that Defence Research & Development Canada and PAXsims will be hosting Connections North, a one day miniconference on professional wargaming, in Ottawa on Monday, 22 February 2016. Among the presenters will be Jim Wallman (Past Perspectives), who is visiting the colonies this week.

Ottawa—deliberately located so as to be beyond the immediate reach of an US invasion, and with its scenic Rideau Canal providing strategic mobility for Imperial troops in the event of American aggression—is obviously the perfect place for such a get-together. You can’t be too careful.

Update—further details

We’ll be meeting in a meeting room at the Lord Elgin Hotel (100 Elgin St, Ottawa). The agenda for the meeting is below.

0930 Arrive at meeting location and set-up
0945 General Introductions: Workshop Overview and Objectives
1000 Presentation on DND matrix game trials

Dr. Murray Dixson (DRDC)

1015 Break
1030 Presentation on DND`s Rapid Campaign Analysis Toolset (RCAT) trial

Paul Massel (DRDC)

1100 Gaming the Semi-Cooperative: Peace Operations, HADR, and Beyond

Prof. Rex Brynen (McGill University)

1130 Perspectives on Wargaming

Jim Wallman (Past Perspectives)

1200 Lunch
1315 Round table discussion on the application of wargaming to defence analysis and to support strategic decision making
1400 Demonstration of AFTERSHOCK: A Humanitarian Crisis Game

Rex Brynen (McGill University) and Thomas Fisher (Imaginetic)

1530 Final Points and Conclusion

We hope to see members of the Ottawa wargaming community there, as well as those working on national security issues more broadly and others interested in the use of serious games for education and policy analysis. Pass it on!

%d bloggers like this: