UNCLASSIFIED
THE CAA Wargaming Analysis Model
(C-WAM)
29 July 2016
Version 7
(Post LRRDPP-GC and NATO Fires Wargames)
(Changes since last rule set highlighted in red)
Dan Mahoney
The C-WAM is designed for internal use by the Center for Army Analysis. While the rules are unclassified and available to other activities for study and evaluation, use of the C-WAM system without the supervision of CAA personnel is not advised.
Table of Contents
Section TitlePage
Wargame Sequence
1) Introduction1
1.1) Overview1
2) C-WAM Structure2
2.1) The Map Board2
2.2) Unit Counters and Map Hexes3
2.3) The Player Teams3
2.3.1) The White Cell (Umpire Team)3
2.3.2) Player Teams4
2.4) The Simulation Venue4
3) The BasicC-WAM Process4
3.1) Determine Weather Conditions4
3.2) Cyber/Space/Electronic Warfare (EW) effects5
3.3) ISR Operations6
3.4) Integrated Air Defense System Allocation8
3.4.1) IADS Internal Coverage8
3.4.2) Establishing the IADS CTO8
3.4.3) IADS Constraints9
3.5) Strategic Strike Missions10
3.5.1)Tactical Ballistic Missiles (TBMs)11
3.5.2)Cruise Missiles and Standoff Weapons (CMs & SOWs)12
3.5.3) Fixed Wing Aircraft (FWA)12
3.5.4) Long Range Artillery (LRA)12
3.5.5) IADS Gates vs TBM, CM & SOW Packages13
3.5.6) IADS Gates vs. Fixed Wing Strike Packages13
3.5.7) Combat Air Patrol (CAP) Gates vs. Unmanned Atmospheric Penetrators (UAP) 14
3.5.8) Fixed Wing Aircraft (FWA) vs. DCA CAPs15
3.5.9)Suppression/Destruction of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD/DEAD) Missions15
3.5.10) Targeting Airbases16
3.5.11) Targeting Logistical Support Areas17
3.6) Air Superiority18
3.6.1) The ATO sub-step18
3.6.2) The CAP Placement sub-step19
3.6.3) The Air-Air Combat sub-step19
3.6.4 Air Combat Results Table20
3.6.5) Electronic Warfare and other Air Combat Considerations22
3.7) Strategic Deployment23
3.7.1) Default Strategic Deployment23
3.7.2) Explicit Strategic Deployment23
3.8) Logistical Sufficiency Checks24
3.8.1) Forward Area Logistical Check25
3.8.2) Rear Area Logistical Check (Strategic Resupply)26
3.9 Naval Combat27
3.9.1) Naval Detection27
3.9.2) Naval Movement29
3.9.3) Naval Combat Value30
3.9.4) Naval Engagements31
3.9.5) Optional Separate Submarine Map Rules34
3.10) Tactical Strike Missions36
3.11) Ground Combat36
3.11.1) Counter-SOF and SOF Extractions/Insertions36
3.11.2) Intra-Theater Lift37
3.11.3) Reception, Staging, Onward Movement and Integration (RSOI) Operations37
3.11.4) Offensive Team Maneuver38
A) Maneuver Basics38
B) Terrain Limitations38
C) River Crossing38
D) Defending Behind a Major River39
E) Battlespace Limitations39
F) Forward Passage of Lines / Relief in Place40
3.11.5) Offensive Team Attacks40
A) Basic Maneuver Unit40
B) Ground Unit Combat Value (CV)40
C) Ground Combat Basics41
D) Supporting Fires41
E) Continuous Ground Combat Results41
F) Unit Overrun Situations42
G) Determination of Defensive Preparedness Posture42
H) Ground Combat Details43
I) Fires-only Attacks44
J) Fires effects on Stacked Units44
K) Force Multipliers45
L) Chemical Attacks45
M) XAI vs Road Marching Ground Units46
N) Unit Strength Limitation and Reconstitution46
O) Irregular and Urban Combat47
P) Tactics Degrade Multiplier47
Q) Short Range Air Defense (SHORAD) vs Helicopters47
R) Joint Forced Entry Operations48
S) Strongpoint Operations49
T) Engineer Effort Markers49
3.11.6) Defensive Team Maneuver49
3.11.7) Defensive Team Attacks50
3.11.8) Administrative Unit Counter Adjustments50
3.12) Post Combat50
3.12.1) Refugee Flow50
3.12.2) Stabilization Operations51
3.12.3) Strategic Target Recovery51
4) Optional Rules52
4.1) Expanded SOF Rules52
4.1.1) Direct Action (DA) Type Missions52
4.1.2) Visiting, Boarding, Search and Seizure (VBSS) Operations53
4.1.3) Training of Partisans53
4.2) Cover, Concealment and Deception (CCD) Measures at Airbases53
4.2.1) Critical Airbase CCD Assumptions53
4.2.2) Decoy Systems Functionality54
4.2.3) Concealment System Functionality54
4.2.4) CCD Measure Effects on ISR Collection54
5) Extended Day Turns (EDT)55
5.1) EDT Concept55
5.2) EDT Weather, Cyber/Space/Electronic Warfare and ISR Operations55
5.3) EDT Strategic Deep Strikes56
5.3.1) Attacker Pre-execution Actions56
5.3.2) Defender Pre-execution Actions56
5.3.3) EDT Deep Strike Adjudication56
5.4) EDT Air Superiority57
5.5) EDT Naval Combat57
5.5.1) EDT Naval Surface Combat57
5.5.2) EDT Naval Subsurface Combat58
5.6) EDT Tactical Deep Strikes58
5.7) EDT Ground Combat58
5.7.1) EDT Ground Combat Special Rules59
5.7.2) EDT Ground Combat Battle Formulation59
5.7.3) EDT Ground Combat Battle Adjudication60
Wargame Sequence
1. Determine Weather
2. Cyber Operations
3. ISR Operations
4. Integrated Air Defense System Allocation
5. Strategic Strike Missions
6. Determine Air Superiority
- Air Tasking Order
- CAP Placement
- Air-Air Combat
7. Strategic Deployment
- Strategic Air Movement
- Strategic Sea Movement
8. Logistical Sufficiency Check
- Forward Area Logistical Check
- Strategic Logistical replenishment
9. Naval Combat
- Resolve Subsurface Engagements
- Surface Movement
- Surface Detection
- Surface Combat
10. Tactical Deep Strike Missions
- Tactical TBM Strikes
- Cruise Missile (CM) & Fixed Wing Aircraft (FWA) Air Interdiction (AI) Strikes
11. Ground Combat
- Counter SOF
- New SOF insertions
- Intra-Theater Lift / Onward Movement & Integration Operations
- Ground Maneuver
- AI vs. Moving Ground Units
- Ground Attacks
12. Post Combat
- Refugee Flows
- Stabilization Requirements
- Securing High Value Assets /WMD
13. Post-turn Hot Wash
(Page Intentionally Left Blank)
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
1) Introduction
- The Center for Army Analysis (CAA) manual wargaming process for conventional conflict is one of the primary tools available to the agency to perform pre-computer-modeling campaign analysis. The purpose of the tool is to allow analysts to test and evaluate operation course of action (COA) alternatives, while simultaneously enabling them to develop a high level of familiarity with a particular area of operations (AO) and the requirements, limitations, opportunities and risks involved with operations in the AO. The tool is not meant to develop highly accurate, quantifiable answers to particular study questions – we have other tools for that purpose. When executed in conjunction with the military decision making process (MDMP) the CAA Wargaming Analysis Model (C-WAM) provides a vehicle for turning analysts into true subject-matter experts on various analytic scenarios.
1.1) Overview
- The C-WAM is a manual, time-step, man-in-the-loop, force-on-force simulation method that seeks to account for the actions and interactions of modern, conventional conflict at the operation level of war. While the C-WAM does include tactical events such as brigade-level maneuver, close air support, ship-to-ship combat, etc., these things are used primarily as event generators to explore the larger operational effects associated with a campaign. As such it should be remembered that while careful effort has gone into producing rules and results tables that represent tactical actions and outcomes as accurately as possible in an aggregate fashion, individual tactical outcomes are less meaningful and should never be held up as predictions of “how a particular fight would go”. A stochastic methodology (rolling of dice) is used to reflect the chance involved in combat and as a means of investigating a COA’s robustness given the unpredictable nature of combat outcomes. One must never lose sight of the fact that the C-WAM is designed to provide insight into operational-level concerns such as joint effects; force sequencing, allocation and sufficiency; theater sustainment and lines of communications (LoC) management, etc. rather than with particular tactical results.
- The C-WAM features two (or more depending on the number of competing factions involved in the scenario) opposing teams of players that execute simulated combat operations on a map-based playing surface regulated by a set of game controllers. The control team (called the White Cell) does not assist or advise the competing teams in any way other than to ensure that the actions taken are consistent with the simulation rules. The competing teams, typically a “Blue” or coalition force team and a “Red” or enemy force team, deploy, maneuver and fight unit counter pieces on the map in an attempt to achieve the objectives identified in their concepts of operations (CONOPS) developed during the pre-simulation planning phase. The competing teams control assets from across the spectrum of joint forces (air, ground, naval, marine and special operations) throughout the Phase II (Seize the Initiative) and Phase III (Dominate) segments of the campaign construct as required by the scenario. Recorders from the White Cell and each of the competitive teams track relevant descriptive data (things such as unit strength, movement and activity, etc.) throughout the simulation in order to provide a robust data set for later analysis and the development of key campaign insights. The simulation ends when the White Cell determines that events have proceeded to the point where no additional new insights can be gained from continuing the process regardless of the actions taken by the respective competitive teams. The roles and responsibilities of the various sub-teams will be covered in detail later.
- The simulation proceeds in time-step fashion with each turn representing either a 24 or 72 hour period depending on the scenario’s scope and the degree of granularity required in the output data to develop the best insights. It is possible that turn length could shift back and forth between 24 and 72 hour time steps over the course of a single scenario, slowing down to provide greater focus during critical events and then speeding pack up again during more routine activities. Regardless of the time-step interval, each turn follows a basic event sequence. Not every sequence item will apply to every situation so some items may be skipped on a given Turn. The default Turn Sequence is:
1. Determine Weather
2. Determine Cyber/Space/EW Effects
3. ISR Operations
4. Strategic Strikes (Phase 1 – Theater Ballistic Missiles/Special Ops/Terror)
5. Determine Air Superiority
6. Strategic Strikes (Phase 2 – Atmospheric Penetrators)
7. Strategic Deployment
8. Logistics (Strat & Operational)
9. Naval Combat
10. Tactical Deep Strikes
11. Ground Combat
12. Post Combat Effects
13. Hot Wash
- The Turn Sequence will be explored in greater detail later in these instructions.
2) C-WAM Structure
- This section covers the structural components of the C-WAM in detail. It provides specific guidance on the simulation’s default design to include specifications of the map board; the unit counters; the team structures, roles and responsibilities and basic data recording requirements.
2.1) The Map Board
- The scale of the map employed to execute the C-WAM will be determined largely by the size of a particular scenario’s AO and the physical size of the area available to house the simulation. We have used maps with scales ranging from 1:250,000 to 1:1 million, the key to picking the map scale is finding the best compromise between map detail and map size that allows for ready determination of terrain features while simultaneously allowing player access to all map regions. The map can be overprinted with a representation of the Joint Integrated Contingency Model (JICM) links and node network for the AO if it has been developed. This serves two purposes. First, when simulating a campaign in a region that contains highly restrictive terrain the JICM network, being the product of intense cartographic route analysis, gives a good approximation for the aggregate trafficability through a region when all available routes are used. This simplifying graphical feature can be a tremendous aid to following the maneuver rules during the simulation. Second, since the insights and expertise gained during the C-WAM are typically carried over into JICM campaign development, having the JICM network considered during the pre-modeling analysis will naturally benefit subsequent JICM modeling. On the other hand, if the scenario AO is new and relatively unknown to the analysts involved then the JICM network is not required since the results of the simulation will help inform how the JICM network should be structured.
2.2) Unit Counters and Map Hexes
- The driving principle behind the C-WAM unit counters is that every unit or system that takes up space on the ground should be represented by a counter in an appropriately sized map grid. The map grids represent an estimate of the battle space a brigade-sized unit would occupy when in its fully deployed defensive battle configuration (as opposed to its size when strung out along a road during movement or compressed while in a tactical assembly area.) Battle-space management and battlefield geometry are vital to the study of the operational level of war, and so every effort must be made to accurately account for units’ ground footprints. The methods used to account for units in other tactical states will be discussed later in the rule set.
- The default echelon for unit counters is brigade-level formations. Lower (or higher) echelon formations can be used as needed but these would be exceptions to the preferred practice.
- The map grid size used for a scenario is based on a standard, doctrinal configuration for a brigade (BDE) or brigade combat team (BCT) in the defense. The amount of ground that one BDE/BCT controls in that layout is given in the Map Grid Sizing Table below:
Map Grid Sizing TableOpen / Rolling / Mountain
Grid Size (Km) / 10 / 5 / 2
- The selection of map grid scaling is a function of two things, predominant terrain type in the theater and available map space in the wargame venue. Experience has shown that map grids should be 1 inch x 1 inch to facilitate unit icon manipulation. If the terrain in the AOR being represented is predominantly rolling, then the best scale would be 1” = 5 Km in accordance with the Map Grid Sizing Table. If, however, that scaling produces a map too large for the available map surface then it may be necessary to increase the scale to 1” = 10 Km in order to make the map fit (this is often the case.) This will be a judgment call on the part of the Study Director.
2.3) The Player Teams
- This section covers the composition, roles and responsibilities of the teams involved in the C-WAM. There are two basic team types, the controller team and the player teams. While any given wargame will employ only a single controller team, the number of player teams involved will be two or greater depending on the scenario’s nature.
2.3.1) The White Cell (Umpire Team)
- Composition:
- Study Director
- Umpire
- Assistant controllers (2 x naval if separate subsurface map to be used)
- Cartographer
- Head Battle Tracker Recorder
- Responsibilities:
1. Securing / Preparation of simulation venue.
2. Preparation of simulation materials
3. Control of simulation events
4. Interpretation / application of simulation rules as required
5. Collection of critical event data
6. Execution of after action reviews
7. Break down of simulation venue post game
8. Storage of simulation materials
9. Photographs of game turns (as required)
10. Control of simulation pace to ensure timeline is followed
** The White Cell lead (the Umpire) is the final authority for wargame execution. All participants, even the Study Director, are subject to his/her rulings and directives concerning the wargame.
2.3.2) Player Teams (minimum of Blue and Red Cells)
Recommended Composition:
1. Commander-in-Chief (CINC)
2. Ground Component Commander(s) (span on control issues may increase #)
3. Air Component Commander
4. Maritime Component Commander
5. Recorder / Battle Tracker Operator
- Responsibilities:
1. Execution of concept of operations (CONOPS)
2. Supply detailed data for battle adjudication as required.
2.4) The Simulation Venue
- Most C-WAM simulations are executed at the SECRET classification level and so must be conducted in a secure facility. While any room within the confines of CAA is likely feasible as long as access can be controlled, the Buhl or CA map rooms (which are approved for open storage) have proven to be the best choices due to the ability to leave the simulation materials in place for extended periods.
3) The Basic C-WAM Process
- This section gives the details of the basic CAA Wargaming Analysis Model. The C-WAM rules will be presented in the order they would be executed during a normal simulation game turn. It should be noted that the presentation below is all-inclusive and that depending on the scenario being executed not all process steps need necessarily be used. Rules for the C-WAM Extended Day Timestep (EDT) process will be presented after the basic process.
3.1 Determine Weather Conditions
- The weather has a marked effect on military operations including air support, ISR collection, ground maneuver and chemical weapons effects to name a few. These effects can, in turn, have a profound impact on CONOPS execution. For example, the Blue Team typically gains air superiority where it desires early in the simulation which makes it very costly for the Red Team to move ground units. Bad weather on a given turn limits airpower effectiveness making Red moves less expensive in terms of combat power lost.
- Each turn the umpire will roll one twelve-sided dice (1d12) to determine the weather two turns in the future when one-day turns are being used or for the following turn when three-day turns are used. This method reflects the relative accuracy of modern weather forecasting techniques and allows players to factor weather effects into their long-range tactical planning. The weather for the current and following turns should be posted by the White Cell for all to see.
- The results of the weather roll are determined on the Weather Effects Table. The chart takes into account seasonal effects on weather making it useful across the spectrum of scenarios.
Weather Effects Table (roll 1d12)Dry Climate / Moderate Climate / Wet Climate / Weather / Effects
Roll 1-8 / Roll 1-6 / Roll 1-4 / Clear /Calm / None
Roll 9-11 / Roll 7-10 / Roll 5-8 / Cloudy / Rough / - 25% AI/CAS reduction
- 25% ISR reduction
- 25% naval strike reduc.
- 25% ship speed reduc.
Roll 12 / Roll 11-12 / Roll 9-12 / Storm / Stormy / - CAS grounded
- 75% AI reduction
- 50% ISR reduction
- Chem. Effects Neutralized
- 50% mvmt off road
- 50% naval strike reduction
- 50% ship speed reduction
- ATK AVN grounded
- MPA/LAMPS grounded
- Wind Direction: In scenarios where chemical weapons play an active role it is also necessary to determine the wind direction since combatants will typically not employ such munitions when the wind is blowing towards them. The default method of determining wind direction is for the White Cell to throw an eight sided die (1d8) and then record the result as indicated below:
Wind Direction Table (1d8)1 – out of the N / 2 – out of the NE / 3 – out of the E / 4 – out of the SE
5 – out of the S / 6 – out of the SW / 7 – out of the W / 8 – out of the NW
- The wind direction is determined for the current day only.
3.2) Cyber/Space/Electronic Warfare (EW) effects
- The challenge inherent in representing cyber and space operations in a wargame is that these operations tend to be highly technical and are usually considered at classification levels far above the SECRET level generally used in CAA wargaming analysis. We will get around these issues by focusing on the operational effects of Cyber/Space/EW operations without getting involved with the details of how they happen.