Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 20 Aug 2014 11:05

Friends,

I've recently run across the concept of the Engle Matrix simulation system as a basis for collective wargaming. It's a fascinating system that can lead to the collaborative construction of scenarios that are as realistic as the players and umpires are knowledgeable. It is applicable to a vast variety of scenario types, from tactical squad-level engagements to grand strategic contests and even business simulations.

Here are some links that explain the Engle Matrix system:

http://www.mapsymbs.com/wdmatrix.html

What are Matrix Games?

Matrix games are different to normal Wargames. In most of those games you compare lists of statistics and peer at complicated books of rules containing someone else's idea about what things are important, before rolling a dice. It takes a long time and can be very difficult to explain to a newcomer. Instead, in a Matrix Game you simply use words to describe why something should happen, the Umpire or the players (or both) decide how likely it is and you roll a dice. If you can say "This happens, for the following reasons..." you can play a Matrix Game.

Where did they come from?

The Chris Engle Matrix Game was created in the USA by Chris Engle, and published in 1992. Chris wanted to create a system by which it was possible for a player to "role play" anything from a single person to an entire country. Chris felt that previous numbers-ridden game designs essentially missed the point (and anyway were toocomplicated and boring). What he wanted was a system that could take into account anything the players though was relevant, including intangible elements such as culture, beliefs, and perceptions of themselves. Taking as his starting point the work of the philosopher Emmanuel Kant, Chris began to develop a "matrix" of cue words that would form the framework for his "model". To this he added George Hegel's idea that argument and counter-argument (thesis and antithesis) lead to a synthesis or consensus of ideas. Thus the basic idea of the Matrix Game was formulated.

Over the years the actual "matrix" of cue words has been dropped, but the name has stuck. Like all good ideas, the Matrix Game is very simple in concept, but has huge potential in that it can be adapted to fit any game setting.

Matrix Games have been used by the UK MOD with the Unmanned Underwater Vehicle capability, education of Consultants in UK MOD Procurement systems and in the preparation by HQ ARRC for the deployment into Bosnia. They have even been used by the US DOD.


http://www.mapsymbs.com/wdmatrix1.html

The following is a well-developed ruleset for Engle Matrix simulations using the ProCon system:

http://theopenendedmachine.blogspot.com/p/rules.html

Here is an example of an Engle Matrix game that simulates the situation unfolding in Ukraine, at a strategic/political/military level:

http://www.mapsymbs.com/CrisisInCrimeaV2.pdf

If you didn't want to go through all that, let me try to explain it in brief.

1) The main point about the Engle Matrix is that you have a Matrix of information on which player actions depend, and which in turn can be changed by player actions. The initial Matrix can consist of a specific briefing, but also includes all the real-world, hard factual knowledge that the players and umpire have about the situation (this is what makes the system so ideal for a platform like Bharat-Rakshak).

For example, the Briefing may involve a situation similar to what emerged in Keran sector along the LoC last October:
Last week, shortly after they took up their new deployment at Sarta Post near the LOC, two jawans of 20 Kumaon were beheaded by Pakistanis while on patrol near the border fence. Today we have learned that a large number of infiltrators from Pakistan seem to have taken up positions around, and possibly within, the village of Shala Batu about 30 kms northwest of Sarta Post. [This will obviously be more detailed and lengthy, but I am just giving an example here.]


In addition to this, our Matrix will also include the wealth of information that expert posters like Rohitvats, Vivek Ahuja, Jagan, Singha and others bring with their vast knowledge of military ops and the J&K LOC sector. To support game play, there would be a Map detailing terrain features and elevations, and also counters representing forces (these could be moved as necessary and new images uploaded after each successful turn).

2) There are two types of participants: the Players and the Umpire(s). The Umpires will typically be the most knowledgeable participants, and their function is to determine how the scenario develops, while adjudicating the arguments and conflicts brought up by the Players.

The Players (which can be individuals or teams) take on a slightly different role than what they would in a purely entertaining, competitive game like Chess. Firstly, they role-play either characters or factions, and try to advance the interests of the character/faction by meeting certain goals within a certain number of moves.

Examples of characters in the example scenario may be:
i) Major Vyas: CC at Sarta Post.
Goals:
(a) Investigate Shala Batu and evict all infiltrators from the sector.
(b) Do not escalate beyond certain specific points (e.g. going more than 1 km over LoC)
(c) Minimize civilian casualties and takleef.
(d) Tend to the morale of your men, already damaged by the beheading incident.

ii) Majid Chaudhry, Lashkar-e-Taiba commandant in sector
(a) Infilitrate as many mujahedin as possible into Indian-administered J&K
(b) Humiliate the IA if possible, decreasing morale
(c) Try to sow FUD among civilians, undermining India's political authority in the sector
(d) Do not escalate beyond certain specific points

There may also be other characters: Pakistan Army Major of post facing Shala Batu, DG ISI, GOC-in-C IA Northern Command, Headman of Shala Batu etc. with goals of their own.

The second aspect of the Players in the Engle Matrix scenario is that they also have to play the role of *objective* observers. Always remember the facts come first, and do not get emotionally involved with the "role-play" aspect to the extent of undermining the main purpose of the simulation: to construct a realistic, believable scenario at the end of the day, utilizing the collective knowledge and experience of ALL participants. "Winning" is only half the game here.

3) How the Sim is Played:

The basic mode of gameplay is that Players go by turns making moves. Each Move consists of the following:
a) Specify an action or proposition that will change the Matrix
b) Specify the Intended Result, i.e. how the Matrix will change
c) Put forward a number of arguments as to WHY existing elements of the Matrix (both the briefings and general knowledge/expertise) support the Intended Result emerging from the action/proposition.

For example, Major Vyas might say:
a) This evening, I deploy two platoons with an HMG each to cover the two entrances to the village after 6 PM, and a third rifle squad with an MMG in the forest to the east.
b) This will prevent the movement of terrorists in and out of the village tonight, and allow me to monitor all such movements by villagers or others.
c) 1) There are only two entrances to the village shown on the map
2) The nearest water source can be reached only by passing the patch of forest to the east, as shown on the map
3) There is almost no activity in the village after sunset at 7:30, making any suspicious activity highly noticeable.

What happens after this is that everybody (the other players, but also all participants, who will hopefully include many members of BRF in our case) will chime in with COUNTER_arguments. These counter-arguments put forward reasons why Major Vyas' action may not have the intended effect.
For example:
1) It has been very foggy and hence easy for infiltrators to move under cover
2) 20 Kumaon has little experience in this particular area, especially as far as setting forest ambushes is concerned
3) Villagers regularly go outside the village enclosure for night walks at this time of the year

Once all the COUNTER-arguments have been made, the Umpires come into play. They adjudicate by giving certain weightages to the PRO-arguments, and certain weightages to the CON-arguments, using their own expertise (plus, of course, the crowdsourced expertise of people on BRF, even though the Umpires ALWAYS have the final decision.)

For example, the Umpires may throw out PRO-argument #1 because, in a previous round, the LeT player managed to build a tunnel that is a third entrance to the village. However, the Umpires may also throw out CON-argument #2 because in their opinion, 20 Kumaon has more than enough experience setting ambushes in the forest in this type of terrain. They may also throw out CON-argument #3 because it is just BS, and not supported by anything in the Matrix or from real-world information.

At this point, Major Vyas has two PRO-arguments in favour of his action and one CON-argument against him. This is used to weight the success of his action with bonuses/penalties over and above the base chance of 50%. Then, using a random number generator (such as a die) and a lookup table such as seen here http://theopenendedmachine.blogspot.com/p/rules.html

The Umpires determine what the outcome of Major Vyas' action will be. They will decide on what basis he succeeds or fails.

The key thing to remember here is that all players (at least in this version of the Engel Matrix Sim) are aware of what all the other players are doing. So Players have to consciously separate their "In Character" information from their "Matrix" information. For example, the Player who is role-playing the LeT Commander knows that Major Vyas has set a certain number of men in ambush in the forest; but when he takes his turn to specify Action/Intended-Result/Arguments as the LeT commander, he cannot take advantage of knowing something that the LeT commander would not.

Note also that the "Action" specified by a Player during his Move need not necessarily be a task or order. It can also be something that influences the Narrative in a way that might prove beneficial, and which has not yet been contradicted by anything in the Matrix.

e.g.
a) ACTION: Even though it is October, there are still thunder showers nearly every afternoon. (this would be a narrative addition to the Matrix)
b) RESULT: Movement of enemy troops and heavy equipment through XYZ terrain feature will be hindered or impossible to accomplish, because of flooding.
c) 1) In the past five years there has been a consistent pattern of late monsoons stretching well into October (supporting link)
2) It is an El-Nino year
3) ...

If the Player is successful, of course, then the Umpires determine a certain probability of rain every "day" of the game scenario, and this will affect all parties in the simulation going forward.

The Players take turns making moves. The first Player keeps making Action/Result/Argument presentations until one of his initiatives fails, then the initiative passes to the next Player.

Conflicts are resolved by the Umpires using a probability look-up table as and when they arise (e.g. combat engagement between units). The probabilities used are also weighted according to the Matrix.

4) Most importantly: each successful "argument" recognized by the Umpires, and the consequence of each successful Player "action", then become incorporated into the game Matrix. These factors can then be used as supporting arguments by Players for future actions.

Here is a gameplay example that is probably clearer than mine, which I'd request anyone interested to go through. It is the last section ("Sample Game") on this page: http://theopenendedmachine.blogspot.com/p/rules.html


5) The game ends at a predetermined point: either when one Player has achieved all his starting Goals, or when a certain number of turns are finished. Finally there is a debrief to review the entire scenario and see how things could have possibly been changed for an alternative outcome.

6) Why Play An Engle Matrix Simulation Wargame?

I can think of many reasons.

A) This is what we do on BRF anyway. Argue-- often based on valuable real-world knowledge and expertise, and sometimes based on BS. The Engle Matrix gives us the opportunity to formalize and structure our arguments so that they contribute to a larger open-ended narrative, and construct a scenario that is realistic and perhaps even applicable in the real world.

B ) We... all participants... end up learning a whole lot of things and how they work when applied in context. Right now BRF is full of little shards of valuable information depending on the chance contribution of various expert members in various fields. Just for example, Rohitvats may be a master of infantry TOE, Shiv an expert on terrain, Jagan very knowledgeable about helos. But if they all participate in an Engle Matrix Simulation, we all get to see how these different factors can influence one another and fit together in the context of a real-world scenario.

C) The Engle Matrix system is applicable to just about any scale of scenario. We could start out with something simple like a company-level engagement on the LoC. But as we grow more proficient, we can apply this system of collective reasoning, objective decision-making and information pooling to much more ambitious projects: Two-front India-China-Pak war, geopolitical contests, even governance and electoral politics scenarios.

D) I strongly believe that there is an opportunity for BRF to be taken seriously by the new GOI as a sort of Think Tank in the near future. However, this will ONLY happen when we develop a disciplined way of presenting and adjudicating arguments, leading to the development of collective scenarios. It will not happen if every thread disintegrates into one-line, unsubstantiated opinion posts and ego-driven pi$$ing contests over someone's technical conceit (which takes place all too often in our discussions). We have to demonstrate the ability to work together, think constructively, pool our collective strengths, and use our collective wisdom in a targeted fashion if we want to be taken seriously.

E) This is an alternative format to the Possible Indian Military Scenarios initiative. Those threads are brilliantly and knowledgeably written by Vivek Ahuja, Shankar and others; however, they have become a largely one-way platform where the onus is on a single member to produce while everyone else is essentially an audience. Using Engle Matrix, we can construct Scenarios collectively and leverage the expertise of many members collectively.

F) I think it could be fun :)

Please let me know if there is any interest. I would like to start an Engel Matrix sim and see how it plays out.

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2062
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby member_20292 » 20 Aug 2014 13:47

wow.

Rien
BRFite
Posts: 267
Joined: 24 Oct 2004 07:17
Location: Brisbane, Oz

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rien » 20 Aug 2014 14:18

Rudradev I would love two wargames featuring two countries who we all know and love in a two front scenario. Can we get some extra dose of realism with Google Maps of the actual territory and known open source info on ORBAT.
I would like to see if Cold Start is realistic or not, and when we find it isn't, how can we make a new Cold Start 2.0 that would work using IN/IAF instead of the Army's solo plan.

I think this could be a great wargame if enough research is done, and we do have some knowledgeable people on BR. Sounds excellent!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50759
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby ramana » 20 Aug 2014 19:39

I like the idea. We had Leila a decade back.
This one looks like a quick simulation.
Fr eg. lets game the India-TSP talks game as it is developing now.

---
RD please email me the crisis in crimea pdf as its not opening for me.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 20 Aug 2014 20:45

The Crimea file is not available. Like a child, let me play first without knowing all the rules. I did briefly scan the following link
http://theopenendedmachine.blogspot.com/p/rules.html

I will be conch holder and represent a hypothetical entity that represents Paki army and Pakistaniyat establishment. I will need advisers in any case.

i will try and follow the rules as I understand them in the following introduction. I think that once I become conch holder about the Paki army and establishment - I own that rank and only my decisions will count. However I will take on advisers - and will take advice. If someone represents - say "Modi sarkar" then he will be conch holder. he can have advisers and someone can be Khangress. Of course someone can be onch holder for Afghanistan, and someone else conch holder for USA, Taliban etc.

i like the idea. I think we need to jump in to see.

Some rules:
http://theopenendedmachine.blogspot.in/p/rules.html
Gameflow
This section describes the flow of a game from the point when each player is assigned a faction to the moment when the scenario ends.
The initiative holder
The player who proposes an initiative is said to be "holding the conch", in reference to the mechanism to designate the speaker in William's Golding's "Lord of the flies". Only the player holding the conch can propose an initiative. However, the analogy ends here since all players/umpires are encouraged to provide arguments and counter-arguments when appropriate.
Scope
The scope refers to the set of allowable initiatives that a player can propose; it can be open-ended or drawn from set of allowable actions. Scope can be changed as the result of an initiative if the umpire allows it. Another possible way to define the scope of an initiative is to associate a time span in which both the event and the outcome will be observed (e.g. an initiative per day).
Phased game
As a general principle, the conch remains in the hands of the holder for a subsequent initiative if the proposed outcome is ruled true. Once an initiative fails, the conch is passed to the player for which it makes the most sense from a narrative perspective

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 21 Aug 2014 01:32

ramana wrote:
---
RD please email me the crisis in crimea pdf as its not opening for me.


Damn... looks like designer Tom Mouat has taken the download link offline as he is publishing the game in a book. It used to be a free download, and unfortunately I don't have it saved.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 21 Aug 2014 06:17

Let me position myself as a Pakistan military general of unspecified seniority at a Crore Kammandu meeting raising some general points about "state of the nation" and asking for inputs on the way forward. Let me simply call myself Gen. Pakhan. Inputs can be made by anyone, but everyone has to assume an identity and stick to that identity. You cannot be COAS Reel Sheriff one day and LalTopi the next day. Assume a role and play it until the outcome comes to naught, after which your identity can either be remove, or someone else takes over that identity.

Need some time to get the ball rolling. Let's see where this goes.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 21 Aug 2014 10:36

Excellent, Shiv. Glad you are jumping in. However for this to run as an Engle Matrix sim, we need to add just a little bit more formalization by defining a few things.

Opening Briefing: The situation with Pakistan, India and the region exactly as it is today.

Player Characters: Shiv is playing Lt. General Pakhan. It is best to specify as much as possible what Lt. Gen. Pakhan is, so that all participants have a clearer idea of just what powers you have at the start of the game, hence what actions you are realistically capable of. Let us say for now Lt. Gen. Pakhan has newly assumed command of X Corps Rawalpindi. The following units are in your command:

12th Infantry Division headquartered at Murree
19th Infantry Division headquartered at Mangla
23rd Infantry Division headquartered at Jhelum
Force Command Northern Areas – headquartered at Gilgit
111th Infantry Brigade headquartered at Rawalpindi
8th Armoured Brigade headquartered at Kharian
Independent Artillery Brigade

Everyone else in TSPA, ISI, LeT, India, China etc. correspond to the real-world people in those roles, unless their role is taken up by some other player as a fictional game-character. By default Raheel Sharif is COAS PA, Lt.Gen. Zahir ul Islam is DG ISI, Ajit Doval is NSA India etc.

It is also good if your character has specified GOALS (so we can limit the length of the game till goals are achieved or defeated). Example of a goal for Gen. Pakhan may be: "I want to become COAS and lead Pakistan to victory in Kashmir". For this trial game, please determine your own goals and state them at the outset.

The only other thing to note: When you are the conch-holder you get to make "moves" one at a time. Your "move" MUST be stated in the following way:

A) The ACTION you are taking. This can be anything Gen Pakhan could realistically do. e.g. "I cancel all leave to my command and lay in fresh stores of ammunition and fuel". Or even "I make the following statement at Corps Commander meeting....." as you suggested.

B ) The INTENDED RESULT of your action. IF SUCCESSFUL this will change the Matrix from the opening state. e.g. "this will make the Indians put their forces on alert along LoC", or "this will mentally prepare the other Corps Commanders for a coup and separate the patriots from the weaklings."

C) The ARGUMENTS as to why you think your ACTION will cause the intended result. They can be as many or as few as you like but each argument should be stand-alone (not a function of other arguments also listed, or a restatement of other arguments also listed). e.g. C1: "The Indians are already nervous about infiltration". Or C1: "Many other Corps Commanders are discontented by the excessive kowtowing to America".

That's it.

After that the other players, umpires and in BRF's case the general board membership, will chime in with their own PRO- or CON-arguments as to why your ACTION will or will not yield the INTENDED RESULT.

Umpires measure PRO and CON arguments, use a random number generator if necessary, and determine if your ACTION was successful or not.

If you succeed, then the INTENDED RESULT of your action becomes part of the Matrix going forward. It can, itself, be cited as an ARGUMENT by yourself or other players in future turns.

If you succeed, you remain the conch-holder, and can take another ACTION. If not, it is the next player's turn to become the conch-holder.

*****

Some other suggested roles for other players to take on, please volunteer:

1) Lt. Gen commanding Pakistan Strategic Forces Command
2) Amir of LeT
3) NSA of India
4) Minister of Defence, India

I would prefer to be the Umpire for now, just to help the game get under way.

Rien
BRFite
Posts: 267
Joined: 24 Oct 2004 07:17
Location: Brisbane, Oz

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rien » 21 Aug 2014 11:36

I will be the MoD. What does the Minister of Defence do exactly during the war? He can't be in charge of operational aspects, so some role clarification please.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5004
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby jamwal » 21 Aug 2014 15:26

Amir of LeT sounds nice.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 22 Aug 2014 06:22

Speaking as Lt Gen Pakhan, I want to make a few general observations and call for inputs.

The army is now facing unprecedented challenges. Because of the war in the west, all my units in the east, facing India are less than full strength. We have also faced desertions and indiscipline as soldiers naturally do not want to face fellow Muslims in the west. There is loss of morale because of lack of action in the east. My junior officers inform me that the rank and file are eager to fight and defeat Indian forces who are, as usual resorting to their unprovoked assaults on the border and against our brothers and sisters in Kashmir. Even our second line of defences, under retired Brig (nameless), in charge of our training camps in concert with the Lashkar e Toiba speaks of disaffection from the lack of serious action since 2008. We have had, in recent days some remarkable successes in eliminating enemy forces across the border using out Border action teams that have struck terror into the heart of the Indian army, but very few units have been involved with this.

Apart from depleted unit strength and morale issues, we face some other problems. The action in the west is consuming a fairly large amount of ammunition and spares and fuel costs are high. The Saudis have been helpful, but in a crisis we need to be careful.

The recent moves by India, inviting PM Nawaz Sharif have angered our heroic men who would like nothing more than be given a free hand to assault the effete Indian forces across the border. The cancellation of talks between the foreign secretaries of Pakistan and India are a welcome development that we must not allow to pass un-utilized. This is a good time for some action against India that should appear like an Indian provocation leading to our retaliation.

My colleagues in the ISI inform me that sleeper units in India are not fully ready. Some of our operatives are in hiding, and are not in a position to conduct major attacks until we can get a few more people in. The Sri Lanka and Nepal routes have become difficult and we are left with either the LoC infiltration or a seaborne infiltration - but the latter falls outside my purview and as new attack in India of that type is sure to attract negative internationl attention on Pakistan

What we need is action that looks as if India has attacked us so that we can retaliate. I suggest a plan of shelling of some of our villages on our side of the border to cause some casualties and visible damage, as well as qatl of a few villagers by men dressed in Indian army uniforms near the border with India in full view of others so that there are witnesses. This should be publicized by ISPR followed by commencement of shelling across the line of control. We must utilize the 500 mujahids who are waiting to cross into Indian occupied Kashmir and infiltrate them at multiple points along the border under cover of widespread shelling and mortar fire. Even if only 20% get in we can infuse fresh hope into the people of Kashmir - we will have 100 men inside for future use.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 22 Aug 2014 08:18

Excellent. Lt. Gen Pakhan has made his first MOVE. Now what we must do is PARSE Shiv's eloquent post into the ACTION-INTENDED RESULT-PROCON format required. In future I will ask players to do this themselves, in addition to the "role-play" type post that Shiv has put up, but for this first move, let me do it.

ACTION: Lt. Gen Pakhan wants to PERSUADE the Corps Commanders and Pak Army COAS to go forward with the following plan:

I suggest a plan of shelling of some of our villages on our side of the border to cause some casualties and visible damage, as well as qatl of a few villagers by men dressed in Indian army uniforms near the border with India in full view of others so that there are witnesses. This should be publicized by ISPR followed by commencement of shelling across the line of control. We must utilize the 500 mujahids who are waiting to cross into Indian occupied Kashmir and infiltrate them at multiple points along the border under cover of widespread shelling and mortar fire. Even if only 20% get in we can infuse fresh hope into the people of Kashmir - we will have 100 men inside for future use.


INTENDED RESULT: The plan will be put into action. IF the plan is successful (that will be determined in later turns depending on how things play out) then India will be seen as the aggressor in a cross-border incident and a hot war can be prosecuted against India. This will have many beneficial effects from Lt. Gen Pakhan's point of view.

PROCON: These are the PRO arguments (why would Shiv's move succeed... that is, why would COAS and CC agree to go along with the plan?) And the CON arguments (why would Shiv's move fail... that is, why might COAS and CC reject Lt.Gen. Pakhan's plan?) They have to be listed as stand-alone arguments one way or the other.

Shiv has already provided some PRO arguments:

PRO 1: COAS/CC would agree that taking the fight away from the West improves morale, because currently morale has been severely eroded by the fight against fellow Muslims. Restraining the anti-TTP actions will stop desertions in regular PA and restore a sense of mission.
Because of the war in the west, all my units in the east, facing India are less than full strength. We have also faced desertions and indiscipline as soldiers naturally do not want to face fellow Muslims in the west.


PRO 2: COAS/CC would agree that taking the fight to the East improves morale FURTHER, because the kafir are a hated enemy who need to be taught a lesson.
My junior officers inform me that the rank and file are eager to fight and defeat Indian forces who are, as usual resorting to their unprovoked assaults on the border and against our brothers and sisters in Kashmir.


The recent moves by India, inviting PM Nawaz Sharif have angered our heroic men who would like nothing more than be given a free hand to assault the effete Indian forces across the border.


PRO 3: COAS/CC would agree that... APART from the PA itself, even our Tanzeems like LeT are getting restless and demoralized for want of action against the kafirs.
Even our second line of defences, under retired Brig (nameless), in charge of our training camps in concert with the Lashkar e Toiba speaks of disaffection from the lack of serious action since 2008.


PRO 4: COAS/CC would agree that the small, but remarkable successes our Border Action Teams have had against the Indians need to be capitalized on; and that we can use the 500 mujahids we have ready to cross into India, to expand the scale of this success.
We have had, in recent days some remarkable successes in eliminating enemy forces across the border using out Border action teams that have struck terror into the heart of the Indian army, but very few units have been involved with this.

We must utilize the 500 mujahids who are waiting to cross into Indian occupied Kashmir and infiltrate them at multiple points along the border under cover of widespread shelling and mortar fire.


PRO 5: COAS/CC would agree that, even if we manage to infiltrate 100 mujahid successfully into India, it would be worth it to have these operatives behind enemy lines for future ops. That would supplement the inadequate number of infiltrators/sleeper cells who are currently in place.

Even if only 20% get in we can infuse fresh hope into the people of Kashmir - we will have 100 men inside for future use


PRO 6: COAS/CC would agree that the plan I am proposing would keep us (relatively) safe from international condemnation/retaliation, because it makes India seem the aggressor.

The cancellation of talks between the foreign secretaries of Pakistan and India are a welcome development that we must not allow to pass un-utilized. This is a good time for some action against India that should appear like an Indian provocation leading to our retaliation.


PRO 7: COAS/CC would agree that the plan I am proposing is better for this purpose than the Nepal/SL routes, or sea-borne infiltration, both of which are more difficult and relatively risky.
The Sri Lanka and Nepal routes have become difficult and we are left with either the LoC infiltration or a seaborne infiltration - but the latter falls outside my purview and as new attack in India of that type is sure to attract negative internationl attention on Pakistan



***However, Shiv's post has already suggested a few CONs to Gen Pakhan's move. Nothing wrong with this, remember the point is to do a realistic Sim, not for a player to "Win" necessarily.***

CON 1: COAS/CC would object that we are already low on fuel, spares and ammunition (because of the action in the West) and there is no guarantee the Saudis would necessarily step up if these were exhausted. Hence the plan is too risky... what if we can't fight a war and end up losing?
Apart from depleted unit strength and morale issues, we face some other problems. The action in the west is consuming a fairly large amount of ammunition and spares and fuel costs are high. The Saudis have been helpful, but in a crisis we need to be careful.


CON 2: COAS/CC would object that our subconventional forces already in place are not in a position of readiness to help out optimally when things get hot. Therefore other methods should be used to increase infiltration, and shore up their numbers... methods which do not stand as much chance of blowing up into a hot war that we might lose.
My colleagues in the ISI inform me that sleeper units in India are not fully ready. Some of our operatives are in hiding, and are not in a position to conduct major attacks until we can get a few more people in.


In addition to these I will add another CON that comes immediately to mind:

CON 3: COAS/CC would object- "Creating a big incident with shelling, etc. is going to be counterproductive to infiltration. Infiltration works best when you do it slowly, quietly, while the enemy is asleep in their barracks. If you create a big incident the LoC will be swarming with kafir troops. Most of the boys we send over, if not all, will get killed. What sense does that make?"

***

Now we enter the next phase of the game.
Everybody on this thread, including Shiv himself, can chime in with more PROs (reasons why COAS/CC would accept Gen Pakhan's plan) and CONs (reasons why they would reject it). You can ALSO offer your opinion on the existing PROs and CONs that others have posted ("PRO#2 is a very strong argument because..." or "CON#3 is a weak argument because...") All this will be used to weight the arguments to arrive at a Matrix-changing outcome.

I will leave 24 hours from now to do this. Finally we will tally up the arguments and see what happens. Right now it is looking good for Gen Pakhan's first move. 7 PROs vs. 3 CONs.

Please chime in!
Last edited by Rudradev on 22 Aug 2014 08:53, edited 3 times in total.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 22 Aug 2014 08:39

Rien wrote:I will be the MoD. What does the Minister of Defence do exactly during the war? He can't be in charge of operational aspects, so some role clarification please.


Rien, that's great. MoD of India, like all the other players, has to fulfill certain goals.

1) Guarantee the security of India from external aggression by any means, unless overruled by the PM.
2) Try to achieve this with the least amount of collateral damage to our own plans for economic reconstruction and expansion. Remember that if it can be avoided, a war is the last thing we can afford.
3) Try to achieve this with the least amount of compromise to our internal security, and being sensitive to people's confidence in the newly elected Modi govt.
4) Try to achieve this while preserving the greatest number of options for Indian diplomacy internationally.

Now MoD of course doesn't get involved with operational aspects in real life. However, in the absence of another player taking on another role in the Matrix Sim... e.g. COAS of IA, ACM, GOC-in-C Northern Command... that would be directly involved with operational aspects in real life, you as the MoD can propose actions involving operational aspects, because you are higher up than those guys in the real-world chain of command.

So for example in your move you can say

ACTION: "On the advice of my defence chiefs, I order 39th Infantry Division to Rajauri to reinforce 25th Infantry Division along the LOC".

(Or you don't have to get that detailed... Umpires can decide for you, but then don't complain later!)

INTENDED RESULT: "Infiltrators are more likely to be apprehended with 39 ID, 25 ID and 10 ID all deployed between Rajauri and Akhnur"

PRO: (e.g.) Defence chiefs would agree that concentrating more manpower on LoC enables us to guard more terrain
CON: (e.g. someone else may say) Defense chiefs would never suggest that you move the whole of 16 Corps west... what if the Chinese thrust towards Himachal?

Of course if other players join as (say) GOC Northern Command you can leave the maneuvering to them and take care of the more political/strategic aspect.
Last edited by Rudradev on 22 Aug 2014 08:46, edited 1 time in total.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 22 Aug 2014 08:44

Jamwal ji, please join if you can commit the time (we'll play in 24 hour cycles, hopefully, so one post per day!) I am sure you would play the Amir of LeT very well :)

Rien
BRFite
Posts: 267
Joined: 24 Oct 2004 07:17
Location: Brisbane, Oz

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rien » 22 Aug 2014 11:21

Rudradev wrote: Right now it is looking good for Gen Pakhan's first move. 7 PROs vs. 3 CONs.

Please chime in!


Cons 1: Corps Commanders/COAS would want Chinese support for this action. In case of escalation, and to support any gains made troop movements along the LoC would be extremely helpful. Delay to gain support.

Cons 2: Corps commanders/COAS would want to mobilize and assure troops are combat ready in case of retailatory action. Not an argument against action, only results in delay.

Arguments 2 only result in a delay for Gen Pakhan even if successful. Only Con 1, China refuses help, matters.

Pro: Kashmir situation has not been kept alive in the international media, leading to a default situation on the ground where we have to accept defeat. We must do something!

Pro: India's economic growth rate means they are growing stronger. Situation is slipping out of control. Strike now and change the facts on the ground.

9 PROs vs. 5 CONs

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5004
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby jamwal » 22 Aug 2014 11:48

Speaking as Amir of LeT:

Due to army deployment on Pakistan's western border, LeT and other tanzeems are not getting enough support in their operations against India.

We need Pakistani Army (PA) help with the following:

1) Damaging fence on border to create gaps for infiltration.
2) Help with covering fire and diversions.
3) If needed, help with digging tunnels below the fence.
4) Intelligence related to deployment of Indian forces.
5) Weapons training, supply of weapons, supplies etc.
6) Advise and intelligence regarding targets to be engaged.
7) Protection from external as well as internal enemies.
8) Finance, on short notice.
9) Positive coverage in media.

In last few months, we have not been able to do much in India due to following factors:

1) Some of our mujahids has moved to Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan to fight. It has divided our manpower as well as focus.
2) As army is mostly busy in FTA and other areas, we are not getting enough support to infiltrate in to India.
3) We do manage to get a few people in to India via Bangladesh and Nepal border, but both are far away from our operating areas and it's getting difficult everyday due to cooperation between intelligence agencies of these countries with India. It's also tougher to supply weapons and explosives.
4) Our army handlers don't seem too enthusiastic. Some of us suspect that it's because of American pressure.


Our short term goals:

1) Atmosphere of fear and terror inside general Indian population.
2) Pressure on pro-Hindu government led by Modi. Prove them incapable of handling security of citizens.
3) Disrupting communal harmony and getting us more Indian muslim recruits.
4) Damaging capability of Indian forces in border areas.
5) Distract Indian intelligence agencies with false information.



How we plan to do it :

1) We want to repeat attacks like Mumbai, Kaluchak in multiple towns all over the border. Major population centers and traditional operating areas like Rajauri, Poonch, Baramulla etc. have very tight security and attacks by our operatives there fizzle out as soon as they begin. Rashtriya Rifles has a good intelligence network as well as highly trained soldiers which makes any attack in these areas difficult. Further, any attack in these less developed and remote areas doesn't get much mileage in media.

We want to do a number of spectacular attacks in a number of more populated towns near border areas, not just limited to J&K. Some of our possible targets are:

i) Jammu, Kathua.
ii) Amritsar
iii) Pathankot
iv) Ganganagar.
v) Firozepur

We are willing to attack other targets of opportunity if possible or required.


2) Using sleeper cells to incite riots, spread false information. Assassinate members of some Hindu, Sikh groups to create tension. Indian muslims who don't agree with us can also be killed in path of jihad. A necessary sacrifice.

3) Using our proxies and sympathisers like SIMI, MIM etc. to further our agenda, getting new recruits. We need them to do some low level attacks like bombings in places of worship, vital infrastructure, crowded areas etc. The easiest them of using is to create communal tensions.

4) Coordinating with Maoists, insurgents in north-east, khalistanis for intelligence, weapons, smuggling etc. We need to make such groups more powerful.

5) Cultivating useful idiots like Mani Shankar, Arundhati, Prashant Bhushan, Barkha Dutt, Vardarajan and others who will be willing to spread our agenda in their won ways.

6) Use madarssas, masjids as places to get more recruits, spread our agenda, safe houses, supply dumps.

nishu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 19:49

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby nishu » 22 Aug 2014 12:42

Here is the Crisis pdf please download as soon as possible .

Code: Select all

https://www.mediafire.com/?84n32a8z6tejwqk

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 22 Aug 2014 14:05

nishu wrote:Here is the Crisis pdf please download as soon as possible .

Code: Select all

https://www.mediafire.com/?84n32a8z6tejwqk

Done. Many thanks

Rien
BRFite
Posts: 267
Joined: 24 Oct 2004 07:17
Location: Brisbane, Oz

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rien » 22 Aug 2014 15:55

Dowloaded pdf. Thanks Nishu.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 22 Aug 2014 20:48

Cons 1: Corps Commanders/COAS would want Chinese support for this action. In case of escalation, and to support any gains made troop movements along the LoC would be extremely helpful. Delay to gain support.

Cons 2: Corps commanders/COAS would want to mobilize and assure troops are combat ready in case of retailatory action. Not an argument against action, only results in delay.

Arguments 2 only result in a delay for Gen Pakhan even if successful. Only Con 1, China refuses help, matters.

Pro: Kashmir situation has not been kept alive in the international media, leading to a default situation on the ground where we have to accept defeat. We must do something!

Pro: India's economic growth rate means they are growing stronger. Situation is slipping out of control. Strike now and change the facts on the ground.

9 PROs vs. 5 CONs


Rien: superb! Nice and very valid additions to the PROs and CONs for Shiv's first move. You totally get how the Matrix Sim works :)

Your use of "will result in a delay" as a CON argument is perfectly fine. That's because, IF it turns out the decision is delayed, that means that COAS/CC did not accept Lt.Gen Pakhan's persuasion to go forward with the plan immediately, and Shiv's first ACTION ended in failure. Then the next player becomes the conch holder.

Later, on Shiv's following turn, if he wantsGen Pakhan can propose the same action again... persuade the COAS/CC to go with the same or modified plan immediately. Because other moves and their consequences will have been played out in the preceding turns, he may have some new and better PRO arguments to offer the next time he attempts this.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 22 Aug 2014 20:53

Nishu, many thanks for the PDF!

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 22 Aug 2014 21:09

Jamwal, re: viewtopic.php?p=1705555#p1705555

Good post with a lot of info. However, what you have done in this post is lay out your entire game plan, your overall strategy.

You have laid out in broad strokes, what possible ACTIONS you might take in future

ACTION: Request help of DG ISI/COAS PA with respect to one of the following (you would ideally specify location(s) and time for things like border covering fire, tunnel digging etc.):

1) Damaging fence on border to create gaps for infiltration.
2) Help with covering fire and diversions.
3) If needed, help with digging tunnels below the fence.
4) Intelligence related to deployment of Indian forces.
5) Weapons training, supply of weapons, supplies etc.
6) Advise and intelligence regarding targets to be engaged.
7) Protection from external as well as internal enemies.
8) Finance, on short notice.
9) Positive coverage in media.


OR

ACTION: one of the following, stated specifically with respect to target, time and operation


1) We want to repeat attacks like Mumbai, Kaluchak in multiple towns all over the border. Major population centers and traditional operating areas like Rajauri, Poonch, Baramulla etc. have very tight security and attacks by our operatives there fizzle out as soon as they begin. Rashtriya Rifles has a good intelligence network as well as highly trained soldiers which makes any attack in these areas difficult. Further, any attack in these less developed and remote areas doesn't get much mileage in media.

We want to do a number of spectacular attacks in a number of more populated towns near border areas, not just limited to J&K. Some of our possible targets are:

i) Jammu, Kathua.
ii) Amritsar
iii) Pathankot
iv) Ganganagar.
v) Firozepur

(you would ideally pick one or more of these for a single ACTION/move)

We are willing to attack other targets of opportunity if possible or required.


2) Using sleeper cells to incite riots, spread false information. Assassinate members of some Hindu, Sikh groups to create tension. Indian muslims who don't agree with us can also be killed in path of jihad. A necessary sacrifice.

3) Using our proxies and sympathisers like SIMI, MIM etc. to further our agenda, getting new recruits. We need them to do some low level attacks like bombings in places of worship, vital infrastructure, crowded areas etc. The easiest them of using is to create communal tensions.

4) Coordinating with Maoists, insurgents in north-east, khalistanis for intelligence, weapons, smuggling etc. We need to make such groups more powerful.

5) Cultivating useful idiots like Mani Shankar, Arundhati, Prashant Bhushan, Barkha Dutt, Vardarajan and others who will be willing to spread our agenda in their won ways.

6) Use madarssas, masjids as places to get more recruits, spread our agenda, safe houses, supply dumps.

(any of the above could be an ACTION but you would need to state it more specifically with a specific INTENDED RESULT and relevant PROs/CONs.)


You have mentioned some goals that you could state as INTENDED RESULT of a specific ACTION


1) Atmosphere of fear and terror inside general Indian population.
2) Pressure on pro-Hindu government led by Modi. Prove them incapable of handling security of citizens.
3) Disrupting communal harmony and getting us more Indian muslim recruits.
4) Damaging capability of Indian forces in border areas.
5) Distract Indian intelligence agencies with false information


You have also mentioned some general factors that could be PRO (we want to fix this!) or CON (this is currently a disadvantage) arguments that may favour/oppose the success of your ACTIONs.

1) Some of our mujahids has moved to Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan to fight. It has divided our manpower as well as focus.
2) As army is mostly busy in FTA and other areas, we are not getting enough support to infiltrate in to India.
3) We do manage to get a few people in to India via Bangladesh and Nepal border, but both are far away from our operating areas and it's getting difficult everyday due to cooperation between intelligence agencies of these countries with India. It's also tougher to supply weapons and explosives.
4) Our army handlers don't seem too enthusiastic. Some of us suspect that it's because of American pressure.


However, to make a MOVE you would have to choose one ACTION, specify its INTENDED RESULT and give the PRO/CON arguments for that ACTION's success.

You can only make your MOVE when you become the conch holder. Right now Shiv is the conch holder. Shiv will remain the conch holder as long as he keeps proposing ACTIONS that succeed. When he proposes an ACTION that fails, he has to pass the conch to the next player (Rien, who volunteered 2nd). Then when Rien fails an ACTION, the conch passes to you and you can make a MOVE.

If, your ACTION succeeds (based on PROCONs and Umpire Ruling) then you keep the conch and keep proposing ACTIONs (making MOVEs) until one of them fails. When it fails you pass the conch on to the next player, and so on.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50759
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby ramana » 22 Aug 2014 21:26

RD, Add to shiv's list
Procon 8: PAA is heirarchial organization that follows orders. They never had a colonels coup. Its always the generals coup. So they will follow the orders by Lt Gen Pakhan.

Aside what Lt Gen Pakhan is proposing has been done earlier but only on Indian side of Kashmir in the Chattisingpora massacre. So it is feasible to execute a false flag operation. They have done it in past and have the resources to do it now.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 22 Aug 2014 21:36

ramana wrote:Procon 8: PAA is heirarchial organization that follows orders. They never had a colonels coup. Its always the generals coup. So they will follow the orders by Lt Gen Pakhan.


Thanks ramana... so I assume this is a PRO rather than a CON, correct? Meaning, it is a reason why COAS/CC of TSPA will tend to agree with carrying out Pakhan's suggested plan at this time.

Good point about Chittisinghpora.

Score for Shiv's first ACTION is now 10 PRO, 5 CON.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5004
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby jamwal » 22 Aug 2014 23:24

I've download the PDF and reading all the rules. Will post response accordingly.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50759
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby ramana » 23 Aug 2014 06:02

Yes its PRO8. I was fat fingered.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby johneeG » 23 Aug 2014 07:29

Saars,
I wanted to post a general observation, maybe you guys can incorporate it into your simulations:
Brics have been emerging as an alternative front to the old world order. This process seems to have started in 1990s. By 2000s, it became very apparent. It seems that the old world order started taking steps to pre-empt the threat of rise of brics.

What can be those steps?
a) missionaries and foot-soldiers of x-ism, malsI and commie-ism
b) secular ngos, internal revolutions and secessions.
c) entangling the brics in a war which will hamper their growth and increase debt

The wars have to be designed in such a way that the brics sustain maximum damage and minimum advantage. The ideal solution would be for the brics to fight among themselves.cheen vs bhaarath, cheen vs roos are two such solutions. From 2000s onwards, the old world order may have been trying to provoke this type of conflict.

But, thats the ideal situation. A more practical situation is making the brics get entangled in a war using puppets of old world order. Bhaarath vs baki, cheen vs japan, roos vs georgia (or ukr), ....etc. This type of conflict seems to have been pursued much more seriously.

26/11 may have been part of that plan. A short destructive war with no clear winners but which negatively affects the economy and increases the debt.

But, after 26/11, the kowtowing of previous regime seems to have convinced the powers that they can directly control desh. Infact, 2004 regime change may have been crucial. The idea was to hamper desh. Manufacturing and agriculture may have been the targets. All infrastructure building had to cease. Damaging electricity production would damage manufacturing and agriculture. To stop electricity production coal should not be mined. Hydro dams must not be built. Ngos, x-ist, jihadis, naxals, separatists ,...etc can be used to stop coal mining and dam building.

After the recent regime change and brics trying to come together, the old plans seem to have been re-activated. Bhaarath vs baki, cheen vs japan, roos vs ukr, ...etc.

The puppets don't start wars on their own. At the very least, puppets ask permission from masters before starting war.

member_23360
BRFite
Posts: 152
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby member_23360 » 23 Aug 2014 08:36

CON6: Modi govt. can take extreme steps like calling back diplomatic mission similar to recently called off talks..

World community will pressurize pakis to back off, in the end it might be again a false move like kargil. good at tactical level but bad at strategic level.

CON7: China may not approve of pakistani actions due to its sensitivity towards Xinjiang islamic militancy.


PRO10: Nawaj sharif can approve of such action to take away some pressure from rallies of imran khan, to divert public attention.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 23 Aug 2014 08:50

From the viewpoint of Gen Pakhan

1. The action planned is perfectly in consonance with the request from the emir of LeT that they need holes in the fence and support from us.

2. Nawaz Sharif and the civilians will be gagged. They are irrelevant. No rallies will be allowed if there is a national emergency such as an unprovoked Indian attack on a Pakistani village.

3. China will only know that India has attacked and we are retaliating. China need not know our plans. But it would be good to feed China with "Intel" information that India may be planning an attack 24 hours before we attack our own village and claim it was an Indian attack, prior to our vigorous "retaliation".

4. World community can be made to shut up for a week or two with images of the devastation caused by Indian forces on a border village in Pakistan. Infiltration will have to be planned for the window when the Indians are caught off guard. It is essential they they be caught off guard

5. Prior to this we will require a silent withdrawal of some forces from the west. Artillery and mortars munition stocks in particular must be built up. Orders need to be placed now as replacement for stocks consumed in operation Zarb- e Azb in Waziristan. Funds, I take it will not be an issue as this is a national emergency.

6. The Lashka e Toiba have access to their own funds via Filah e Insaniyat/ Jamaat ud dawa and we may not need to provide them funds.
Last edited by shiv on 23 Aug 2014 08:57, edited 1 time in total.

member_23360
BRFite
Posts: 152
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby member_23360 » 23 Aug 2014 08:53

PRO11: There is a distinct possibility that this bait and bleed strategy may convince indian goverment for coming to table with a compromise formula.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 23 Aug 2014 09:26

Meanwhile, in other news
http://www.dawn.com/news/1127237/firing ... jures-four
IALKOT: Firing by Indian security forces security along the working border on Saturday killed at least two people including a woman, and injured four others in Sialkot, DawnNews reported.

In Charwa and Chaparral sectors of Sialkot, heavy weapons and mortar shells were fired early in the morning. Chenab Rangers retaliated, and the exchange of fire continued till 7am.

A woman named Nazia was killed while her two daughters were severely injured in the attack. Several houses were also damaged and a number of livestock were killed.

Ceasefire violations along the Line of Control and working border between Pakistan and India continue intermittently, with casualties reported on both sides of the border.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 6586
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby disha » 23 Aug 2014 09:50

Primary Goal: Send in at least 100 or more mujahids into India.

Sub-GOAL send in 100 more mujahids into India.

Secondary GOAL as I understood is for COAS to have some visible retaliation from India so that the baki army can retaliate and use that pretext to bring Army back in Saddle.


CONS PROS for overall primary GOAL,

All of this ties down India from retaliating in kind., India has to look for alternatives

PRO14: US wants to put cold water over India's cold start. Since cold start is no go, India has to escalate at a crucial juncture in the economy. This will impact India if US and the West call off flights to India - they may use "Ebola" scare and the #mediapimps and #khangress will do their bit. Motabhai and Southie Bhai (Reliance and Infosys) will step in to "de-escalate"

PRO15: US does not want another instance of Sharif landing up in US to negotiate pi$$ particularly when Ukraine is burning and ISIS is doing the needful in Iraq

PRO16: The tyranny of distance affects #mediapimps. They will mention that Siachen is a remote place and no blade of grass grows there and has to be given away for everlasting pi$$. Loony Shankair Aiyar will launch another track pee - at the minimum to stay relevant.

PRO17: Khangress will leak enough details on troop movement to ensure that India's effective response will be muted. It can then challenge the Sher-e-Gujarat about lack of effective action.

PRO18: If the COAS plan is for India to retaliate, it has to do something on the scale of 26/11 or larger., since with 26/11 itself India has not retaliated. What are the chances that India will retaliate with another 26/11?

No CONS for primary-goal. All PROS only. And the major PRO

PRO19: Bakistan can step up the escalatory ladder and show its Mujahids that it can deliver increasingly deeper cuts.
Last edited by disha on 23 Aug 2014 10:31, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 23 Aug 2014 09:59

disha wrote:CON8: US wants to put cold water over India's cold start. Since cold start is no go, India has to escalate at a crucial juncture in the economy. This will impact India if US and the West call off flights to India - they may use "Ebola" scare and the #mediapimps and #khangress will do their bit. Motabhai and Southie Bhai (Reliance and Infosys) will step in to "de-escalate"

CON10: The tyranny of distance affects #mediapimps. They will mention that Siachen is a remote place and no blade of grass grows there and has to be given away for everlasting pi$$. Loony Shankair Aiyar will launch another track pee - at the minimum to stay relevant.

CON11: Khangress will leak enough details on troop movement to ensure that India's effective response will be muted. It can then challenge the Sher-e-Gujarat about lack of effective action.

CON12: If the COAS plan is for India to retaliate, it has to do something on the scale of 26/11 or larger., since with 26/11 itself India has not retaliated. What are the chances that India will retaliate with another 26/11?


In fact the above are all PROs for Gen Pakhan not CONs because they restrict India, not Pakistan. But these are not something that Lt gen Pakhan can plan for. He can only hope for these things as strokes of good fortune. For the moment he is leaving out hopes.

The goal you have stated as primary is secondary. The goal you have stated as secondary is primary. The primary goal is provoke an incident to dub India the aggressor and use that cover excuse to get in more terrorists into India. This will automatically put Army in saddle, but that is NOT a stated primary or secondary goal.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 6586
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby disha » 23 Aug 2014 10:27

Thanks for the clarification. Given that the primary goal of Gen. Pakhan is to send in bakis in teams of 6 to infiltrate in India., I am re-editing my post.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rudradev » 23 Aug 2014 12:51

Ok, Time Up for PROCON round of Shiv's first move. Time to resolve it!

Here is how I go about this as Umpire.

Total PROs listed: 7 (by Shiv) + 2 (by Rien) + 1 (by Ramana) + 2 (by Akshat) + 6 (by Disha) = 18

Total CONs listed: 3 (by Shiv) + 2 (by Rien) + 2 (by Akshat) = 7

Base chance according to http://theopenendedmachine.blogspot.com/p/rules.html is 50%, i.e. 10 or less on a 3 rolls of a six-sided die.

Each PRO increases base chance by +1

Each CON decreases base chance by -2 (According to the Open Ended Machine matrix schema, CONs are twice the weight of PROs because they favour the status quo, and one must account for inertia in the real world.)

The Umpire Team can also choose to make some rulings and change the weights of individual PRO and CON arguments based on perceived strength or weakness.

For this turn I will rule that Rien's CON 4 and Akshat's CON 7 can be rolled into a single CON argument since they both concern China's potential disapproval/non-cooperation in this venture.

CON 4: Corps Commanders/COAS would want Chinese support for this action. In case of escalation, and to support any gains made troop movements along the LoC would be extremely helpful. Delay to gain support.
CON7: China may not approve of pakistani actions due to its sensitivity towards Xinjiang islamic militancy.


I will also rule against some of the PROs.

Akshat's PRO 11 is relatively weak and does not seem to be convincingly borne out by history...

PRO11: There is a distinct possibility that this bait and bleed strategy may convince indian goverment for coming to table with a compromise formula.


I think this should be canceled. Yes, there is a possibility, but has this been borne out by India's response to bait and bleed strategy in the past? Could this argument as a stand-alone factor help convince the CC/COAS to forward go with Gen. Pakhan's plan at this time?

I will also down-modify some of Disha's PROs.

PRO19: Bakistan can step up the escalatory ladder and show its Mujahids that it can deliver increasingly deeper cuts.


Canceled, as it falls under the argument about Mujahid morale made in Shiv's original post regarding LeT cadres.

PRO16: The tyranny of distance affects #mediapimps. They will mention that Siachen is a remote place and no blade of grass grows there and has to be given away for everlasting pi$$. Loony Shankair Aiyar will launch another track pee - at the minimum to stay relevant.

PRO17: Khangress will leak enough details on troop movement to ensure that India's effective response will be muted. It can then challenge the Sher-e-Gujarat about lack of effective action.


These PROs both refer to chance of the plan's success being helped by Pakistan's political allies within India: the Media, the Track II constituency, and Khangress. I would say that given the current climate they are too weak to stand alone as separate arguments.

As Umpire, I will allow them to be collapsed into a single PRO which says "Our allies in the Indian Media, Indian Track II diplomatic nexus, and Indian National Congress Party will do their utmost to help reap the political fruits of any success on our part, because they REALLY want something to bash Modi with. This will increase the chance of an Indian retaliation that we are trying to provoke."

These Umpire Rulings leave us with 18 -3 = 15 PROs and 7-1 = 6 CONs.

Modification to roll of 10 or less (50% base chance) is + 15 -(6 X 2) = +3. Target Roll becomes 13 or less. This is an 84% chance or Very Likely that Lt. Gen Pakhan's proposal will succeed, per the lookup table http://theopenendedmachine.blogspot.com/p/rules.html

Rolling the dice per the random number generation protocol "3d6" here: http://www.brockjones.com/dieroller/dice.htm

Roll is "10". Target is 13 or less.

SUCCESS!


Shiv's move has succeeded and he continues to hold the conch. He can propose another "Action" as Lt. Gen. Pakhan.

Matrix Narrative (altering present day matrix as determined by Umpire:


Following MOVE 1 by Lt. Gen Pakhan (Shiv)

The motion by Lt.Gen. Pakhan is put to vote and, amid shifty eyes and tight-lipped glances, the Corps Commanders pass it by a small majority.

Later on, in a closed-door meeting with COAS Raheel Sharif, the following points are made very clear to Lt.Gen. Pakhan:

1) Ok, go ahead and do what you plan to do. But you better be damn sure you know what you are doing.

2) You will begin the action with only the troops under your direct command. You will be responsible for maintaining secrecy, providing cover and making excuses for any visible movement or redeployment of troops under your command. As far as the rest of the world knows... if they ever come to know... this whole thing is your personal initiative without any approval from the Pakistan Army or Government.

3) In addition to the troops under your direct command you will coordinate with the Amir of LeT for the cooperation of any mujahedin irregulars. You will keep DG ISI apprised of all such coordinated activity with irregulars.

4) IMPORTANTLY: Until and unless you have managed to stage what is clearly accepted by the international community as an incident of Indian border aggression, supported by the verifiable appearance of IA troop movements and deployments in preparation for war, you are ON YOUR OWN in carrying out this plan. No units of PA other than your X Corps will be involved in carrying out your plan upto this point, and neither will PAF. Other PA Corps, and PAF units will redeploy from their present positions ONLY when there is undeniable, incontrovertible appearance that India has deployed strike formations to forward positions for a large-scale escalation against Pakistan. Not before that. It is very important that you understand this. Plausible deniability will be maintained for PA and PAF until the last possible moment.

5) IMPORTANTLY: Whatever funds you need in addition to your own Corps' discretionary funds, you can request from the ISI's S Wing and Lashkar-e-Taiba. Do not expect funds from the PA budget.

6) Realize that the bloody Amrikis have a bug up their gaand about Rogue PA Officers pulling stunts on their own, and need constant reassurance as to the security of our strategic assets in particular. If there is any bloody hint of a leak to the Amrikis regarding your plans, rest assured that we will drop you like a hot potato. You will not only lose your command, but you will be handed over to the CIA as evidence of our good-faith partnership in the War on Terror, and will end your days at a Black Site in some Arap Country. That is, unless the DG ISI decides it is better to finish you here than let you talk to the Amrikis. We cannot afford to be seen as an army that tolerates Golas, Ilyas Kashmiris, or anything else like that in our ranks.

7) Good luck. Allah Hafiz.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 24 Aug 2014 05:58

We might require someone to play some Indian roles. Anyway - Lt Gen Pakhan come up with some kind of action - hopefully in the next few hours

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 24 Aug 2014 10:52

Actions taken by Lt Gen Pakhan

    1. Identification of 17 locations where LOC fencing is to be targeted for breaching. Sabotage and earth moving teams readied if necessary.
    2. Location and marking of Indian positions relevant to these areas
    3. Reinforcement of mortar and artillery along these areas and ensuring adequate stocks for 7 days of shelling
    4. Coordination with LeT to select 500 of the most dedicated Fidayeen, to be split into groups of 30 and transported to 17 locations where LoC fencing is to be breached
    5. Arms and supplies, comm sets, NVGs for Fidayeen provided to LeT ,
    6. Identification of suitable Pakistani village near LoC which can be shelled from a direction that makes it appear like shells are from India. Indian munitions to be used.
    7. Identification of crowded spot at which Pakistani civilians will be beheaded by commandos in Indian army uniform.
    8. Soldiers in civilian clothes to act as "witnesses" of killing, to be recorded on cellphones and security camera
    9. Readying of Nasr missiles with tactical nuclear warheads under Lt Gen Pakhan's command
    10. Information fed to Chinese Intel that India is planning an attack, requesting further info if they have any
    11. Direct Action (DA) day minus 1: Pakistani village attacked, 6 people beheaded by "Indian" soldiers and videos recorded. 4 hours of intense shelling to destroy houses and mosque. ISPR and TV channels including BBC and CNN given footage. 18 hours before "retaliation"
    12.DA day 0: From 4 AM: Intense, continuous, day long shelling of India and Indian positions. LoC fence confirmed breached in 4 places
    13. Infiltration of terrorists started at night, with covering fire via four known places where the fence is breached. Complete radio silence maintained

Operation Asz-e-Bum has commenced..waiting for response

Rien
BRFite
Posts: 267
Joined: 24 Oct 2004 07:17
Location: Brisbane, Oz

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby Rien » 24 Aug 2014 14:02

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
However, to make a MOVE you would have to choose one ACTION, specify its INTENDED RESULT and give the PRO/CON arguments for that ACTION's success.


Shiv, can you pick just one of those commands? Might have to rephrase them as more generic higher level commands

Action 4. Coordination with LeT to select 500 of the most dedicated Fidayeen, to be split into groups of 30 and transported to 17 locations where LoC fencing is to be breached

Result: Infiltration of Indian side of Border

Pro: Caught by surprise infiltration, same as Kargil. Have done it before, we can do it again.

Con: Indians have fencing, and UAVS/patrols. Low successful infiltrations recent years. High chance of being detected in large breakout.

So can you rephrase that action Shiv?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby shiv » 24 Aug 2014 19:01

Rien wrote:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
However, to make a MOVE you would have to choose one ACTION, specify its INTENDED RESULT and give the PRO/CON arguments for that ACTION's success.


Shiv, can you pick just one of those commands? Might have to rephrase them as more generic higher level commands

Action 4. Coordination with LeT to select 500 of the most dedicated Fidayeen, to be split into groups of 30 and transported to 17 locations where LoC fencing is to be breached

Result: Infiltration of Indian side of Border

Pro: Caught by surprise infiltration, same as Kargil. Have done it before, we can do it again.

Con: Indians have fencing, and UAVS/patrols. Low successful infiltrations recent years. High chance of being detected in large breakout.

So can you rephrase that action Shiv?

On second thoughts..
One action
11. Direct Action (DA) day minus 1: Pakistani village attacked, 6 people beheaded by "Indian" soldiers and videos recorded. 4 hours of intense shelling to destroy houses and mosque. ISPR and TV channels including BBC and CNN given footage. 18 hours before "retaliation"

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5004
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Engle Matrix Simulations: A BRF Wargaming Proposal

Postby jamwal » 25 Aug 2014 01:41

Sorry, I meant to post earlier and coordinate with Gen Pakhan.


What Gen Pakhan offered is quite generous, we need more than that.
INTENDED TIME PERIOD FOR THIS OPERATION
This whole operation will take 6 weeks if we have good intelligence from planning to execution. I'd like to christen it as Operation Dozakh

SHORT TERM GOALS
1) Wide spread state of panic in Indian citizens.
2) Loss of face for Indian regime.
3) Economy takes a big hit.
4) Communal tensions which will further help us.
5) Disruption of army supply lines in J&K.


Goals of LeT have been defined in previous post. As LeT is a jihadi tanzeem and is dependent on Army and ISI for training and intelligence, it needs help from both in Pakistan as well as India. Now posting the groundwork.

1) Get help from Gen Pakhan army, ISI and auxiliary units like Rangers to push as many mujahids in to India as possible from multiple entry points in J&K, Punjab, Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan. LeT will need to spread terror outside J&K to meet the goals.

LeT cadre of 500 men trained in fidayeen mission will infiltrate India from multiple checkpoints. The team size will vary between 5 to 10, depending upon terrain and mission objectives. As winter season is rapidly approaching, we need to make move fast. Indian Army deployed in upper reaches of J&K will be on full alert to counter our such moves. We will need to infiltrate from points like Jammu, Kathua and other points in Punjab, Rajasthan which don't experience snowfall. To ensure maximum success, we need to keep the pressure up in our traditional ingress points in J&K.

General Pakahans plan will have to be modified a bit. We need to create false intelligence, so that Indian border guards are paying more attention to the feints rather than our actual ingress points.

ACTION 1 Our expectations from ISI:

1) Activation of our sleeper cells in Punjab, Jammu, Rajasthan, Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Nepal and Bangladesh. Use them to help guide our fidayeens to our area of operations which will be cities like Amritsar, Ganagangar, Gorakhpur which have stayed more or less safe. We have already done some successful attacks on in Jammu region (Kaluchak, Akhnoor) which prove that such attacks are possible. We plan to repeat our success of Jammu and Mumbai attacks in these cities which are large and crowded enough to provide enough cover and confusion to help our mujahids. Benefits of these attacks:

PRO 1
Panic in Indian populace as it will prove that no Indian city is safe. Bigger places like Mumbai, Delhi are away from border and highly protected. Attacking such smaller yet important towns will spread fear and panic on a larger scale than traditional attacks in J&K.

ACTION 2
Use of SIMI, IM operatives to carry out recon and if possible small scale bomb blasts in Hyderabad, Bangalore, Varanasi and other targets of opportunity. The people involved in these attacks should have absolutely no knowledge of our plans

PRO 2
Attention of Indian intelligence agencies is diverted from the larger picture.



From Army:
ACTION 3
Deployment of armed army men in mufti in traditional infiltration points to generate false intelligence for the enemy.

PRO 3
They will have no idea about approximate number of LeT mujahids and their locations.



ACTION 4
Heavy use of artillery and small arms fire to create the illusion of covering fire for infiltration attempts by our cadre. We will provide small teams of 4-5 less useful mujahids or people from Azad Kashmir who want to go back to their homes as decoys. If they infiltrate back, good. No skin off our backs if they die.

PRO 4
More obfuscation and false information for Indian intelligence.



ACTION 5
While ACTION 4 is going on, we will try to get our men in via easier routes further south. The sleeper cells will help our men enter India over fence. We will use tunnels, ladders to bypass the fence. We will also try to get our men in from Wagah border or Nepal and Bangladesh. Logistics for this have to be provided by ISI and/or Army. The operatives will know their destination only after entering India. We intend to hit cities like Kolkata, Gorakhpur which have never witnessed terrorist attacks before.

PRO 5
Less chance of our men dying while infiltrating.

CON 5
Increased complexity of mission. Needs high level intelligence and trained manpower.



ACTION 6
Assembling the men in each target city in team size 6-15 which can be further divided in to 3-6 different teams to attack different targets inside their target cities. Major targets will be crowded but less guarded places like bus stations, schools, hospitals, temples, gurudwaras and markets. Police and military will be engaged only if absolutely necessary or as targets of opportunity. Each mujahid will wear a suicide bomb belt and carry a poison capsule.

PRO 6
Panic inducing attacks which will shut whole city down for one to multiple days. Much more beneficial in terms of propaganda value and number of civilians killed. Doing this in multiple cities concurrently will put the whole country in panic.

CON 7
Complex mission which will generate a lot of chatter.




ACTION 7
We may need to sacrifice a few operatives by feeding them wrong information and getting them caught inside India or Afghanistan. PA or ISI can do it as a gesture of goodwill for US or India as they case maybe.

PRO 7
More confusion and wrong information for our enemies.



ACTION 8
Apart from fidayeen teams hitting civilian targets, we will need to destroy certain critical military infrastructure and supply lines. As of now, most military convoy pass through Pathankot Jammu route to Kashmir and Laddakh beyond. Alternate route of Manali-Laddakh closes in winter months and is unreliable in best of times. Destroying a few critical bridges like the ones in Akhnoor ( for Rajauri Poonch sector), Pathankot (Punjab to Jammu) will severely curtail war fighting capability of Indian armed forces as well as cause serious civil unrest in J&K is it finds itself cut from rest of the country.

We will need small teams of 1-2 operatives at each point to place explosives to put the bridges, tunnels out of comission.

PRO 8
Severe blow to Indian army's as well as civilian line of supplies. Helps Pakistani army take on Indians from a position of advantage.

CON 8
Pak Army will need to make their moves immediately after the attacks. These points are hard targets with fair amount of security. Needs highly trained operatives.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Indranil, ravikr, VickyAvinash and 29 guests