@article{bibcite_1203,
  keywords = {Assumption-based Planning, Intuition-based Decision-making, Operational Wargaming, simulation, Tactical Wargaming, Wargaming},
  author = {Marko Hofmann and Tobias Lehmann},
  title = {On Simulation-based Wargaming: Comparison of Two Different Methodological Approaches},
  abstract = {<p>Wargaming has been neglected within the German Forces for almost fifty years. Only within the last two years, two so-called {\textquotedblleft}Leitfaden{\textquotedblright} (codes of best practice) have been developed. The first one, elaborated by members of the General Staff Academy, is intended for operational wargaming and fully rests on the tradi-tional analytical comparison of different Courses of Action (CoA). Own and enemy CoAs are played against each other on the foundation of a game between two staff groups. Within this paradigm, simulations are used as evaluation tools. The rea-soning is based on the premise that simulation systems are valid representations of reality. A successful simulation run is considered a corroboration of a particular course of action. The second {\textquotedblleft}Leitfaden,{\textquotedblright} developed at the University of the Fed-eral Armed Forces, is intended for so-called {\textquotedblleft}tactical wargaming.{\textquotedblright} The two central concepts of this approach are intuition-based decision-making and assumption-based planning. The core rationale of this method is that all military planning and decision making is liable to what is called the {\textquotedblleft}fog of war.{\textquotedblright} The irresolvable unpre-dictability of future developments in all military operations is considered an insur-mountable obstacle to all analytical approaches. This approach rests on the claim that pattern recognition and mental simulation of these patterns are the most valu-able cognitive functions of expert decision makers. Within this paradigm, simula-tions are used to support creativity, enhance imagination and trigger self-critical thinking. Simulation systems of complex systems are not necessarily regarded to be valid. This article discusses the pros and cons of the two approaches ({\textquotedblleft}Leitfaden{\textquotedblright}) from both theoretical and practical perspective.</p>},
  year = {2007},
  journal = {Information \& Security: An International Journal},
  volume = {22},
  pages = {64-72},
  month = {2007},
  doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.11610/isij.2207},
  language = {eng},
}