DANGERS OF SIMULATION--I As publishers, military analysts/researchers, and game designers, we have reservations about the recent upsurge of interest in simulation-games. A critical evaluation of some of the computer-assisted games used by institutions, government, and the military over the past decade is that such games have left a lot to be desired in terms of results, for money spent. Yet simulation-gaming is still growing, with other than expensive computer gaming methods being sought by academics and military officials. They are looking to "paper" games, of which board wargaming is a part. Initially, games for teaching/analysis were used solely by the military, the Prussians applying wargames that helped them in the Franco-Prussian War. An interest in such games grew from the Prussian use and (presumed) success with games for their officers. The Germans, and many other nations in World War II, used wargames extensively to plan campaigns and battles. Most of these games were conducted by umpires in lieu of computers, although elaborate sets of rules did exist for many games. The umpires were military men with first-hand experience of the capabilities of weapons, effects of attack and defense, and a good idea of the number of "unknown factors" that could ruin a timetable or battle plan. It is not surprising that many umpire-moderated wargames were very accurate in their predictions and results. The Japanese wargamed the battle for Midway before embarking on that fateful campaign. The umpires declared all Japanese aircraft sunk or damaged by American planes that appeared from carriers presumed to be nowhere near Midway. A Japanese admiral observing the wargame reversed the decision of the umpires so that the Japanese forces could win the game. The battle, of course, proved the accuracy of the umpires' analysis, but by then it was too late. Civilian scientists were called on during World War II for many projects on behalf of the belligerent nations. One Allied project was to find the best method of destroying the U-boats ravaging the shipping lanes. Through mathematical analysis of results of attacks on U-boats, these men devised tactics which helped to curtail the U-boats until newer model submarines were introduced late in the war. This quasi-computer method of analysis was moderately successful, and post-World War II saw the creation of think-tanks with just that purpose in mind: civilian scientists/analysts using computer mathematical methods to find "solutions" and strategies for the military and government to use. But by replacing the military umpires with civilians and mathematics, wargaming became much more abstract and theoretical. Military men were game players in post-war wargames. The computers, or rather, the computer-programmers, were the umpires now. And the computers were often missing the human factor. Mathematical models are ideal models, and real life cannot fit neatly into an electronic abacus. Such wargames of quantifiable numbers for combat power, movement, etc. are a scientific approach that is not bad. In fact, it could be used quite successfully when taken as a part of planning and analysis. But too many mathematical models became the primary planning tools of the government and military, with only partial successes at best. The reason for the lack of success with these games was that they lacked the human element, the irrational. That is something that cannot be studied in a laboratory or think-tank environment, but can only be conceived of through experience in the field. New Prices Effective with this issue, a single copy of Conflict is $3.00 (including back issues), a six-issue subscription is $10.00, and a twelve-issue subscription is $18.00. A six-issue renewal is $9.00. Our boxed games are now $9.00 each. Issues #1, #2, and #3 will be reprinted when Conflict #8 is published (this year). The games with issues #1 and #3 have been modified while #2 has a new game. Please note the new Conflict Games now available. A description of these new games (by John Hill) appears on page 45. All overseas readers (other than FPO and APO) should contact our overseas distributors for our games and Conflict magazine. A complete analysis of the sumey we sent out to those who received all six issues of the first volume will appear in issue #8. We had a surprisingly good response to the survey and the results are quite interesting. We wish to thank the following individuals and firms, without whose usually unsung efforts this publication could never be produced: Helen Bandy Joe Ney Herb Barents Bob Novak George Barna Marian Tennison Jane Glatte Steve Vrabel Kathy Greene Neyenesch Printers, Inc. Louis B. Hansotte NKS Photo Studio Ray Hosler The Photo Shoppe Chris Janiec The Printery, Inc. Melanie King San Diego Paper Die Cutting Co. George Nafziger Sorrento Typesetting & Trade Service OVERSEAS DISTRIBUTORS United Kingdom: Simulations Publications UK, P. O. Box 46, Altrincham, Cheshire WA15 6BR, England. Australia/New Zealand/Papua/New Guinea: Games & Battles, 57 Wallalong Crescent, West Pymble, N.S. W. 2073, Australia. Back to Conflict Number 7 Table of Contents Back to Conflict List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1974 by Dana Lombardy This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com