David Banks, a senior lecturer in wargaming at King's College London, sheds light on the intricate balance between realism and engagement in game design. He argues that understanding immersion is critical for effective learning. The discussion dives into the historical evolution of wargaming, contemporary research challenges, and scenarios like Taiwan's recognition that influence foreign policy. Banks emphasizes the need for robust evaluation frameworks and transparency in game outcomes while acknowledging subconscious biases that can skew decision-making.
43:31
forum Ask episode
web_stories AI Snips
view_agenda Chapters
menu_book Books
auto_awesome Transcript
info_circle Episode notes
insights INSIGHT
Wargaming's Lack of Academic Foundation
Wargaming lacks a solid academic foundation, despite its long history.
David Banks found this when researching cybersecurity wargaming.
insights INSIGHT
Methodological Concerns in Professional Wargaming
Professional wargamers often address methodological concerns like bias.
They lack the incentive to formalize and share their practices, unlike academics.
volunteer_activism ADVICE
Focus on Purpose, Not Realism
Focus on a war game's purpose and its success in achieving that purpose.
Avoid using 'realism' as a key metric; prioritize engagement.
Get the Snipd Podcast app to discover more snips from this episode
Peter Perla's "The Art of Wargaming" is a seminal work that explores the history, theory, and practice of wargaming, offering valuable insights into its application in military and strategic planning.
Homo ludens
Johan Huizinga
In 'Homo Ludens,' Johan Huizinga argues that play is a fundamental element of human culture, essential for the generation of culture. He traces the contribution of play from ancient times through the Renaissance and into modern society, highlighting its role in law, science, philosophy, and the arts. Huizinga defines play against a rich theoretical background, using cross-cultural examples to illustrate its universal significance and its civilizing functions[2][3][5].
Despite centuries of experience designing and playing war games, there is still very little rigorous research on how to evaluate what makes a good game. What’s the design goal? How much should (or even can) a game reflect reality? Are tighter or looser rules more likely to lead to productive learning? Is having fun important? That lack of rigorous analysis has historically stymied the wargaming profession, but a new generation of researchers want to push the field forward.
Today, with both Danny Crichton and Laurence Pevsner on vacation, we bring back our independent Riskgaming designer Ian Curtiss to host David Banks. David is senior lecturer in wargaming at the Department of War Studies at King’s College London, where his research focuses on the empirical evaluation of war games and how the craft can evolve in the years ahead. He is also the academic director of the King’s Wargaming Network.
Ian and David discuss the antecedents of wargaming, firming up the foundations of the field, why realism isn’t as useful a metric as engagement, why balancing play and realism is so challenging, how to consider internal validity in games and why its important not just to evaluate a game as a whole, but also its constituent parts.
Riskgaming 