http://www.armchairgeneral.com/off-the-shelf-computer-games-aid-military-training.htm All things military history! Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:45:27 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://www.armchairgeneral.com/off-the-shelf-computer-games-aid-military-training.htm/comment-page-1#comment-6361 Gerald P. Illies Fri, 12 Sep 2008 20:02:43 +0000 http://www.armchairgeneral.com/off-the-shelf-computer-games-aid-military-training.htm#comment-6361 You present a delightful reflection on a pastime that I regularly enjoy. I have long had an interest in military figures, and for some time a friend and I devoted our efforts to the representation of the clashes set during our own American Civil War. It was an excellent way to get a more solid grasp of the difficulties involved in moving and conducting an army, and to explore possible alternatives for actions that history has marked as mistakes. Likewise we have gifted our senses with computer battles using such classic computer games as Sid Meier’s “Gettysburg”. However, when I stepped onto the field of Gettysburg this year, acting as a reenactor in the 2nd US cavalry, I found myself experiencing something like I have never known amid our miniature soldiers or our warrior shaped computer pixels. A whole now realm of battle was opened to me, and not in the form I had expected. When the blue-clad boys rode out along a rail fence to set up a skirmish line, I could hardly see the battle because of the limits of the hill from which they fought. Terrain had suddenly become a reality to me. Additionally, when I went out as a dismounted member of the 17th PA cavalry, I can hardly reflect on the overall course of the battle since I was all too occupied by the brown and gray clad figures directly in front of me, and by the process of getting more cartridges into my Sharps carbine. I remember a moment in which the Lieutenant announced the advance of cavalry upon our right flank, and ordered the right end of the line to “refuse”, or move back at an angle. We managed it after some difficulty, but I would perhaps have been oblivious of their approach had I not been informed, and I don’t know what eventually became of those Rebels. I immediately went back to placing powder charges and caps in their respective places amid my weapon. As much as I tried to foster a belief in the danger of the situation, I always had the comfort of being free from the disconcerting “Zing” of passing lead. I do believe that games of the nature we are speaking can be training tools of real effectiveness, but can also supply a misleading separation from the reality of the events. In playing “Call of Duty 2”, I found that running across open spaces while jumping up and down was an effective way to greatly reduce the chances of being hit. To imagine such a thing being conducted on the training grounds would be cause for laughter. I guess this leads me to two conclusions. Nothing beats direct field training; and, those who revel in their success at cutting down enemies on their computer should be careful not to consider themselves soldiers. Cheers to you Mr. Swick for the article. It’s delightful to see that ACG is actively involved in the wargamer’s hobby. You present a delightful reflection on a pastime that I regularly enjoy. I have long had an interest in military figures, and for some time a friend and I devoted our efforts to the representation of the clashes set during our own American Civil War. It was an excellent way to get a more solid grasp of the difficulties involved in moving and conducting an army, and to explore possible alternatives for actions that history has marked as mistakes. Likewise we have gifted our senses with computer battles using such classic computer games as Sid Meier’s “Gettysburg”.
However, when I stepped onto the field of Gettysburg this year, acting as a reenactor in the 2nd US cavalry, I found myself experiencing something like I have never known amid our miniature soldiers or our warrior shaped computer pixels. A whole now realm of battle was opened to me, and not in the form I had expected. When the blue-clad boys rode out along a rail fence to set up a skirmish line, I could hardly see the battle because of the limits of the hill from which they fought. Terrain had suddenly become a reality to me. Additionally, when I went out as a dismounted member of the 17th PA cavalry, I can hardly reflect on the overall course of the battle since I was all too occupied by the brown and gray clad figures directly in front of me, and by the process of getting more cartridges into my Sharps carbine. I remember a moment in which the Lieutenant announced the advance of cavalry upon our right flank, and ordered the right end of the line to “refuse”, or move back at an angle. We managed it after some difficulty, but I would perhaps have been oblivious of their approach had I not been informed, and I don’t know what eventually became of those Rebels. I immediately went back to placing powder charges and caps in their respective places amid my weapon.
As much as I tried to foster a belief in the danger of the situation, I always had the comfort of being free from the disconcerting “Zing” of passing lead. I do believe that games of the nature we are speaking can be training tools of real effectiveness, but can also supply a misleading separation from the reality of the events. In playing “Call of Duty 2”, I found that running across open spaces while jumping up and down was an effective way to greatly reduce the chances of being hit. To imagine such a thing being conducted on the training grounds would be cause for laughter. I guess this leads me to two conclusions. Nothing beats direct field training; and, those who revel in their success at cutting down enemies on their computer should be careful not to consider themselves soldiers.
Cheers to you Mr. Swick for the article. It’s delightful to see that ACG is actively involved in the wargamer’s hobby.

]]>