Saturday, October 27, 2007

Computer War Games: How To Estimate Decisions Made By C & C Trainees

Pictured: A radio controlled Sherman tank

by: Donald Jones

Now that the Russian military is cash-strapped and can afford only a limited number of field preparation exercises, computer warfare games (CWG) ar of special importance for in operation(p) grooming of C & C agencies and elements because they make it potential to upgrade career-area skills of officers and rehearse modern C & C methods. Estimation of decisions made in the procedure by members of missile forces and artillery (MF & A) C & C authorised personnel department presents the hardest part of it. Modern theory and methods of estimating the results of CWG education numerous on the one hand and, on the other, there no sufficiently studied and in general accepted methods and templates to estimation decisions being interpreted. This can be put down first of all to objective difficulties involved in formalizing the outgrowth of estimating the decisions of commanders (persons in authority): the complexity of initial operating(a)-tactical situations; considerable uncertainty of stimulation information; the numerous criteria used in estimating the trainees' decisions and the need for reducing the -making values to one generalized value.

Moreover, existing methods of processing the results of CWG breeding not quite adequate for dealing with uncertain stimulus ; the many criteria used in estimating decisions made by authoritative personnel office of C & C agencies of MF & A during state of war games either not into history or into chronicle without due thoughtfulness. This, as a rule, reduces estimate objectivity. In order to achieve the main objective of CWG--to train C & C staff office of MF & A and pinpoint their errors--the CWG headquarters should have tools to promptly and objectively approximation the decisions ; to idea the caliber of work by C & C agencies in the main and by person members of its force; to appraisal the performance of trainees on a leg-by-microscope stage basis.

Meeting these requirements calls for careful preparations of CWG, designing appropriate methods of estimating the performance of C & C agencies and someone members of the who undergo . Continued from page 1. Estimation of armed combat employment plans is based on decisions made at the stagecoach of preparation for the functioning of MF & A subsystems: reconnaissance, command and control, effective engagement and support.

To this end, we take indicators of the selected system for stimulant , whereas indicators of the other subsystems selected and normalized to match the computed units. This organization of the modeling cognitive process makes it conceivable a more complete gauge of the calibre of decisions made by C & C trainees in provision the functioning of MF & A subsystems. Thus, comparative approximation of decisions made by C & C and the drafting of recommendations for upgrading these decisions include: the assignment of problem (formulation of basic characteristics of decisions to be made of C & C trainees); for variants of computation experiments (determination of the functional-tactical background, usable-tactical scenarios of MF & A fight trading operations, forecasts of enemy fighting ); the development of an integrated information model ( squad versus supporting team up); determining the values of indicators essential for idea of decisions related to variants of scrap under considerateness; analysis of values of the indicators essential for estimations; of decisions for every of C & C trainees; the selection of the best arrived at by the trainees; analysis of mistakes made by the trainees and the drafting of recommendations for upgrading their decisions.

The suggested methodological approach makes it imaginable to upgrade the timbre (validation and speed) of of decisions made in various forms of useable of C & C agencies, such as games, command post exercises and during the course of solving somebody problems of battle employment of MF & A in army (corps).

About The Author

Donald Jones

Soccer The War Game! —Looking Back To Its Origin

by: Ray Smith

Believe it or not, but the modern day soccer owes its origin to the barbarous war mongering nature of human beings.

There is no proper documentation that can state the date and place of origination of the most popular modern day sport—Soccer. However, depending on the socio-historical facts and data we can assume that some type of a ball game was played somewhere in this planet for at least over 3000years now.

The earliest evidence of soccer was found in Kyoto, Japan where a field marked to play a ball-kicking game was found.

There is also proper documentation that supports the fact that the Chinese military forces around 2nd and 3rd century BC (Han Dynasty) played a game that involved kicking a ball into a small net. This was then an essential skill building exercise for the armed forces.

Historical evidence also shows that some form of Soccer was played also by the Greeks and the Romans, however, the primitive form involved a larger team on each side. At times the team strength would go up even to around 27 people on each side. The Greeks were playing four different forms of the ball game, namely "Episkyros", "Ourania", "Pheninda" and "Keritizein". Episkyros was the closest to football. In this 2 equally numbered teams, would try to throw the ball over the heads of the other team. There was a white line between the teams and another white line behind each team. Teams would change the ball often until one of the team is forced behind the line at their end.

Now, how many of you would believe that the modern day soccer actually originated as a war game?

Unbelievable, but true! The first Football (as Soccer is called in Britain) game was played by the locals of east of England, where they started a game, kicking around the severed head of a Danish prince whom they have defeated in a war. That marked the origination of Football as a war game.

After this, for a long time, football was played by rival towns and villages where the objective was to move the ball to a predetermined spot. Hundreds of people would take part in these games and a single game could last a whole day. Punching, kicking, biting , everything was allowed.

The savage nature of this form of football was not much appreciated by the rulers and the Royalty took all possible steps to stop these games. King Edward III of England, passed laws in 1331 to stop the game, he was followed by King James I of Scotland in 1424. The Queens were not far behind, rather, had a more strict approach. Queen Elizabeth I of England, enacted laws that could sentence a football player to jail for a week followed by penancing in a church.

However, in spite of all their best efforts and intentions they could not stop the game. It was too popular among the masses and they loved the game.

The first approach to regularize and give a civilized form to this game was taken by the famous Eton College of England in 1815 when they established a set of rules for the games. These rules were accepted by the other schools, colleges and universities. Later, in 1848, these rules were further standardized and a new version was adopted by all the schools, college and universities. This new set of rules was known as the Cambridge Rules.

At this stage, there were actually two set of rules that were being followed in this game. Some organizations preferred to follow the rules of the Rugby School, that allowed tripping, kicking and carrying the ball, whereas the Cambridge rules prohibited all this methods.

In October, 1863, The Football Association was formed, when eleven London schools and clubs came together to establish a single set of rules to administer any football match that were to be played among them. On 8 December 1863, Association Football and Rugby Football finally split onto two different organizations.

In 1869, these rules were further amended to exclude any handling of the ball beyond the scope of acceptability and that created the foundation for the modern day sports mania—SOCCER !

About The Author

Ray Smith, by profession a marketing expert is also an authentic source of sports information. A sports enthusiast and self-motivated researcher, he is always updated with the latest happenings in the sports world.

Live scores, league tables, fixtures and updated statistics available at

Monday, October 1, 2007

Review of Game Meet of Sept. 30th, 2007 in Tokyo

Battlelore: Nick D. & Sam First game of the day. Sam showed up first so got to play Nick D. on Matt's nicely painted set (Matt was on a mission to have eggs and bacon cooking in the kitchen). The "real" trees on the board made for a very nice feel during the game.

We played the first scenario The Battle of Agincourt and it was Sam's first time, but that didn't seem to slow him down any. Nick's archers did some nasty work at the beginning, but he possibly got too aggressive with his units in the center (and did a dumb move too). Sam drew the dreaded Mounted Charge card and devastated some of Nick's troops. He was up 3 to nil in a big hurry. However, Nick got a few decent cards and did a little troop rearrangement dance to keep his half-strength archers in the back while collecting 3 of Sam's flags.

Read More: