The simulation is not intended as a wargame--quantification or reflexive--but as an exploration of possible scenarios from a reflective, political/strategic perspective.
Process
Briefing
All participants in the simulation are advised to review the papers at the Journal site (http://www.iwar.org/) for a general introduction to the scope of the domain. Prior to simulation initiation, a sitrep to all participants will be e-mailed; individual information on which team the participant will be playing with, and the team specific information will also be sent.
Turns
The simulation will have one turn per week, with each turn being due 120 hours after receipt of each turn's sitrep by at least the team captain; each turn will require 48 hours of management, then the next turn's sitrep will be emailed. Each turn will represent a variable amount of time as the tempo of the simulation shifts; given that most of the simulation is intended to be political and strategic in focus, this term could vary from as short as one day to as long as weeks.
Interaction
The simulation will be managed through electronic mail. Broadcast of information known to all parties will be sent to a general list. Narrowcast of team-specific information will be sent to sub-lists; team interaction will be enabled by a basic remailer system that allows a team member to send one email, and have it redistributed to only their own team. Teams are encouraged to communicate internally prior to making decisions for each turn. Team to team communication may also be possible as an option during a team's turn.
Each team will either decide upon, or have a team 'captain' named; this team captain is responsible for entry of a coherent team 'move' or plan for each turn. Lack of an entry equates to a 'pass' on a turn.
At the end of the simulation, all materials regarding the simulation, including broadcast briefing materials, team sitrep materials, and team turns will be made available to observers who are interested, as well as all simulation participants. This is be accomplished by posting the materials to the IWAR site; with team member permission, team interactions may also be made available. For this reason, team interaction must be in English as the common language of exchange.
Simulation
The initial situation of the simulation will be established at the initiation of the simulation.
Interested participants would please indicate your role preference as an opposition force or defending force when notifying the Journal of your interest in participation.
Deadline
The deadline for initial participants is April 19, 1997; entry into the simulation is _not_ closed, and new players can be added with each turn. The initial briefing materials will be emailed to the participants for April 21, with the first turn deadline on April 25.
Address questions or willingness to participate to:
iwar@iwar.org
Background
The simulation is situated in the context of the current time and level of technology; the setting is with the United States as the target of the IWAR Opposition Forces (OpFor).
As an initial and central focus, the US is a vulnerable target, yet may seem limited in scope; but as we are all aware, actions in the global perspective or in cyberspace may be carried out for intended effect upon the US, so the perspective is actually quite wide.
Teams will be opposition forces, defending forces, and a group of 'arbitration judges' who will mediate and decide on effectiveness and outcomes of operations or initiatives undertakes as team turns.
Team members and captains will be furnished with briefing materials with each turn, as well as templates in which to plan actions; each team will receive a communication email address for intra-team discussion, but inter-team discussion will be mediated. Attacks upon the simulation mechanism are grounds for expulsion from the game.
OpFor
Players wishing to operate as an attacking force may operate as independent agents, or in concert with other players (on the same team, or as cooperating teams). Participants interested in OpFor roles must indicate whether they wish to be a team member or run an independent effort, as well as:
-- OpFor motive/intent (participants wishing to be members of a team will be collected by 'intent' selection); possible selections could be corporate, guerrilla, terrorist, paramilitary, ideological, criminal, hacker, etc.
-- OpFor communication mechanism
-- OpFor organization
-- OpFor methodology (denial of service-material/virtual, psychological warfare, political warfare); see Wilson's papers at http://www.iwar.org for definitions.
OpFor armament, intelligence, finance, and other resources will be selected by simulation administration.
Defense
Players wishing to participate as a defending force may select a political, military, law enforcement, intelligence, or civilian role. Given the well defined structures for these elements already in place, they will be based upon current structures and resources of existing organizations (Administration/Congress, Department of Defense, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, and selected civilian organizations).
Administration
Judgment and arbitration will be managed primarily by Journal staff; some participants may, however, be asked to aid in this process rather than being a regular participant.
Simulation Function
The intent is to provide an active, long-term forum to experiment with IWAR concepts and potential operations. As such, the context will be a set of diverse OpFor able to engage the US in a variety of attacks, and the potential responses of the defenders. OpFor may be caught or eliminated during the course of the game, freeing participants to adopt new roles; defenders may also opt to shift roles with proper notice. We expect a considerable amount of evolution in attacks and responses, with players shifting often to attempt different perspectives, methods, and otherwise explore variables in the simulation.
Here's to a good game!