THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM

"Can I really get paid for working on wargames?" I asked incredulously. The university's Sponsored Programs office had routinely distributed "Research Themes and Technological Base Program in Behavioral and Social Science for the US Army," and I had been casually thumbing through it when I read a heart-stopping phrase, "analysis and integration of historical data ... for the construction of battle simulations." Did they really want someone to design wargames for them? Could it possibly be that I could do what I enjoy most all day every day and get paid for it?

Minutes later I was on the phone and after charging down several blind alleys I finally got in touch with Mr. James Baker of the Army Research Institute (ARI), who told me about the Army's Command Post Exercises (CPXs), which are used to train officers in strategy and tactics. CPXs, he explained, are nothing more than "monster" board games. Having played Drang Noch Osten, I figured I knew what he was talking about. I was half right.

Mr. Baker sent me a lot of information through the mail which included a draft of a paper entitled "Microprocessor Supported Training, Evaluation and Critique (MISTEC): A Plan for Research," by Dr. Irving N. Alderman, et al. This paper proposed research which would test the concept that microcomputers can be used to enhance CPXs. It was proposed that the microcomputer be used for such functions as bookkeeping, movement determination and combat outcome calculations.

Bingo!! Everything fit! My background was so perfect that I couldn't miss. I had designed and marketed my own games, among them The Conquest of Space and Swordplay (there, I got in my plug), published an educational game, written an article on game theory, taught a course on game design, directed theses on computer games and taught a microprocessor course.

So I called Dr. Alderman and said, "Hey, you can't do without me." In fact I called him several times with variations on the same theme until he finally gave me a two-week job as a consultant. The situation was this: ARI had awarded a contract to a company which I shall call The Vendor to take the Pegasus CPX game and computerize it, using the concepts of Mistec. This means that they were to take the game, computerize the movement system, and the combat results tables and provide bookkeeping to keep track of all units and their strengths. This was not to be a totally computerized game in which there would be no gameboard; it would instead be a computer assisted game in which the computer would handle the routine calculations and maintain status on units while retaining the gameboard. My job was to review the work that The Vendor intended to do and give my recommendations for changes and improvements.

FIRST CONTACT

In order to be able to do this effectively it was necessary that I become familiar with the manual operation of the Pegasus game. To this end, ARI sent me to Fort Knox to view a CPX in March 1978. It was a mind boggling experience. The Pegasus boards (2 identical boards were set up in adjoining rooms. One US battalion was set up on each board. The board is made from Army topographic maps blown up to a 6 foot by 12 foot size. Overlaid on the board is a hex grid. There are 26,000 hexes on each board! Each hex is 200 scale meters across. But the hexes look very strange. This is because they have forced a 5 hex by 5 hex grid to fit into a one kilometer square. The only way this can be done is to distort the hexes. Looking at this board you get the feeling that it's time to visit the optometrist.

The boards represent the terrain in the vicinity of Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas. I hasten to point out that although there hasn't been a war in Kansas in quite some time, the Army frequently holds wargames there, and it was hoped that these Field Training Exercises (FTXs) could be duplicated by Pegasus CPXs.

Each unit is a strip of metal bent at a 90 degree angle so that it looks like the letter "L". Standard military symbols are used on 3 faces; the fourth face is a blank. In this way, the blank side can be faced toward the enemy (as in Milton Bradley's Stratego. The largest unit is a company (rarely used) and the smallest is an individual vehicle. US forces include M60A1 tank platoons, infantry platoons, mortar sections, TOW sections and choppers. OPFOR* forces include T62 tank platoons, infantry platoons equipped with saggers, BRDMs and artillery. In addition there are mines, blocks, dummy-counters, air defense artillery, artillery barrage makers, smoke markers, improved position, HQs and engineers, to name but a few.

When I arrived the day of the exercise, there were about 15 soldiers clustered around each board preparing to begin. The Board Controller was seated on a raised platform overlooking the board. The US was about to engage in an assault on prepared OPFOR defenses.

The battle began with a preplanned artillery barrage on suspected OPFOR positions. This is done by having forward observers (FOs) call in grid locations to an artillery command post using field phones. Artillery officers approve the fire and call back the FIO to specify the intensity of the fire. The FO then places smoke, illumination or HE markers on the board as appropriate. If an enemy unit is bit, a die is rolled and a table consulted.

An armored spearhead next charged into a minefield (more dice rolls on tables) and had to call on the engineers to clear it out. When the US came within firing range of the OPFOR, elements of an OPFOR mechanized infantry regiment opened fire at 2000m with BMP-mounted saggers. The procedure for this was to look up the results on a "whiz wheel," which looks something like a circular slide rule with lots of little windows and sliding panels. The outcome depends upon the type and number of weapons firing, the type and number of targets, range to the target, and the condition of the target, e.g., in trees, hull down, etc. Strangely enough, the outcome does not depend on chance, so the outcome of a particular engagement will be exactly the same every time.

After several hours of play the OPFOR was forced to retreat, take up new positions and commit the reserves of T62 tanks. The US was already in trouble since it had been moving much slower than planned, so the Battalion Commander (who was not permitted to see the game board) called out the Air Force. Sorties of A10s pounded the tanks and BMPs, causing much more damage than the ground forces could manage, but the US was still unable to penetrate.

Twelve hours after the exercise began, the wargame was halted. A debriefing was held, and the commanding officer labeled the exercise a success. I left with my head swimming. Tic-tac-toe is hard to simulate an a computer, now could it be done with Pegasus?

A further complication to all this is that the Pegasus game was being rewritten, and the pre-production copy which I received indicated that the major substantive change to the game would be that the whiz wheels would be dropped in favor of a book of combat results tables. A big book of tables. Thirty pages jammed with numbers.

In the following week I flew to Washington to meet with ARI and The Vendor. After a week of study and meetings, I wrote a 20-page report giving my recommendations and my analysis of The Vendor's plan of action for automating Pegasus. Although none of this was classified, courtesy (and good sense) forbid me from going into any of this. Also it would probably bore you to tears. Suffice it to say that I returned to Louisville convinced that I had done a good job for ARI.

(* OPFOR stands for opposition force of "threat." This is used because the Army is very careful not to say "Russia" or "Soviet". However, the OPFOR units are equipped with Soviet-type arms and the OPFOR pieces are red.)

DOWN TO THE WIRE

My department chairman had been dropping gentle hints for quite some time - at least they started as gentle hints: "You've never had an outside job for the summer have you, Tom?" and "Lots of our faculty have spent the summer on fellowships from NASA." Then the hints became more pointed. "I don't think we will be able to support all our faculty this summer," and "How about getting off your lazy duff and finding a summer job?" I may be somewhat obtuse, but the point was clear. Therefore I started to nag Dr. Alderman again. And at the eleventh hour when I was considering the myriad of job offers I had had from McDonalds and Fotoman, ARI came access with an offer no wargamer could refuse: I was to come to Washington for the summer to work on improving the Pegasus manual game, to write acceptance tests for the Pegasus automated game, and to outline new ideas for improvement of the automated game.

INTO THE BREACH

So Jan and I loaded up two cars with clothes, kid, three cats and a box of Oreos and headed East into the sun. After a harrowing experience of sneaking our animals into a hotel room, we finally arrived in Northern Virginia and found that our rental agent had picked out a somewhat less than perfect house for us - a $600/month hovel which had been previously occupied by a family of trolls. Left to our own devices and classified sections, we found an acceptable place, a little house in the suburbs for only $550/month plus utilities. At this point I realized that my financial savvy would not allow me to retire at fifty.

When I arrived for work at ARI, I was shown to a tiny cubicle which I was told was my "office," then introduced to the staff, most of them PhD psychologists. Naturally I immediately took upon myself the task of clearing up the fuzzy-headed and frivolous thinking of these non-physical scientists. This was no easy task in the "human zoo." One senior staff member came to work one day and challenged his colleagues to discover what was wrong with his physical appearance; no one was able to figure out that he was wearing two different kinds of shoes. Once an impromptu belching contest was held. Another staff member entertained us with her Yoga headstand. I spent the whole summer laughing.

But work had to be done! The rules for Pegasus are written in a conversational non-rigorous style which left room for plenty of ambiguity and judgment. Computers, being intolerant and really rather stupid beasts, can only accept information which is precisely defined. I therefore set about to provide that precision. How I longed for a set of SPI rules! Boring but accurate. A major at Ft. Leavenworth had written the rules, and therefore I spent a good bit of time on the phone clearing up rule ambiguities which kept cropping up. The rules are so lengthy and detailed, that many of the ambiguities weren't immediately apparent. Finally I became convinced that study of the rules would not be sufficient for complete understanding. I would have to conduct my own Pegasus exercise.

I had no idea what I was letting myself in for when I made this decision, because it took me two hectic weeks to get prepared for it. First, I needed to set up the game which, it turned out, required that a special table be built. I had to obtain maps of the Leavenworth area for use in the command posts, and all I could get were in maps that depicted only a small portion of the terrain board. This restricted me severely in choice of a scenario.

One of my biggest problems was determining the make-up and doctrine of US and OPFOR units. I studied army field manuals to find out such things as how many tanks and men make up a tank platoon, how far apart the tanks are when moving under fire, who carries the dragon missiles in an armored infantry platoon, etc. The military and civilian staff at ARI were very helpful to me in this task.

I finally designed a scenario which pitted a US tank battalion with a cross-attached armored infantry company against an OPFOR motorized rifle company. The OPFOR had set up an echeloned defense of which the motorized rifle company was the advance security force. This company had prepared hasty defenses on a ridge line north of Ft. Leavenworth. Other forces (not represented in the game) were set up along the west side of the Missouri River. The US forces had just bridged the Missouri north of the OPFOR positions and had been given orders spearhead an attack south to break up a suspected OPFOR force buildup. The OPFOR forces were ordered to delay the US until reinforcements could be brought up.

Next I needed people. Approximately 20 people were required to take the roles of the company commanders, forward observers, artillery officers and US battalion staff. ARI personnel expressed grave doubts that I could convince 20 people to spend 9 hours on a Saturday without pay to help me play a wargame. But I had no fear, for I was armed with back issues of The General! I my faith was justified. It took 21 phone calls to get the 20 people, and the extra person begged me to change the date so that he could come, too.

THE ENEMY IS ENGAGED

On Saturday, July 29, 1978, the Pegasus exercise was held. First, a one hour rules briefing was conducted, and it seemed to be sufficient. This is amazing because the game materials recommend six to eight hours of training on the rules. Perhaps this means that these gamers are six to eight times as smart as the average soldier.

Next, the US company commanders were called in to battalion headquarters to be briefed by the commanding officer and his staff. Meanwhile, the OPFOR players were at the mapboard discussing their strategy, for the OPFOR had no command post. The reason for this is that the purpose of Pegasus is to train US battalion and brigade officers, not OPFOR. Therefore the OPFOR players take on all the roles of the enemy from forward observers to division commander.

At 11:00 AM the battle was begun. The US dropped smoke and HE on suspected enemy positions and then sent its main force across the Missouri to take up positions along the eacarpment of the Missouri-Pacific railroad. The Scout platoon pressed forward and ran into heavy sagger fire from high ground. More US HE fire was called down which tended to "suppress" the sagger fire of the BMPs, but then the OPFOR got cagey, they would fire and move. When the US artillery fire fell, the units would no longer be there.

A US tank company was sent around left flank and took heavy losses before forcing an OPFOR retreat. A second US tank company was sent to sweep the river line but it ran into a mine field which caused the loss of one vehicle.

US artillery was having less and less effect, except when a US tank platoon ran through a barrage from US 155mm SP guns. US forward observers were constantly on their walky-talkies trying to call down effective fire, but their major effect was just to keep the enemy on the move. Meanwhile, the US battalion commander was calling his company commanders on the walky-talky, issuing orders and demanding information on enemy positions. With regard to the communications, it should be noted that the exercise was held inside a metal building, and the antenna had to be positioned very carefully in order to hear or be heard. There were many complaints about this, but I said that this made the exercise even better because it simulated electronic warfare.

Air operations were being held simultaneously. The OPFOR had very poor results, their MiG 21s being sent home without scoring a single hit. The US air missions were concentrated on rear areas and therefore had no effect on the outcome of the ground war.

The US lost an entire engineer platoon to sagger fire and a 4.2-inch mortar platoon to a minefield, but finally the OPFOR line broke and was forced back about 2000 meters. Motorized rifle platoons took positions on two hill tops which were then assaulted by US tanks and TOW-mounted APCs. After heavy US losses the hills were taken. At this point the OPFOR losses were about one third of the US losses, but the OPFOR had too few units to cover the front, so the US units could not be stopped. However, the US had lost almost two thirds of its armor and was an ineffective fighting force for its assigned task. The exercise was therefore ended with the results being judged a draw.

In the debriefing that followed, the wargamers were enthusiastic about the exercise and gave many helpful suggestions for improvements. Later I spent many hours going over their comments (which were recorded) and watching the videotapes of the exercise.

MOP UP OPERATIONS

The July 29 exercise brought up many questions which probably would not have occurred to me otherwise, and it is hoped that all the important questions were raised and that I made no misinterpretations of the rules. Based on this exercise and my previous study, I wrote the documents "Notes and Comments on the Preparation for and Running of PEGASUS Command Post Exercise" and "PEGASUS Rules, Notes and Clarifications." The latter, which was 15 pages long was sent to Ft. Leavenworth for their information.

Throughout the summer I had been working on the combat results tables. They were not suitable in the form in which they were written to be directly used by the computer. There was just too much data for the computer's memory. Therefore I attempted to find mathematical algorithm which fit the data so that combat outcomes could be expressed as formulas instead of tables. My applied math and probability background made the task possible, but not without considerable effort. The mystery behind most of the tables was eventually broken, and is given in its simplest form below, for those with a mathematical turn of mind.

H = ( 1 - ( 1 - P / T ) ! ^N ) T