Jonathan Compton, Joseph Mroszczyk, and Matthew Tattar, writing for War on the Rocks, note that the U.S. defense community is increasingly interested in incorporating AI and modeling into wargaming to enhance analytical rigor. However, experts caution that this approach may undermine the core purpose of wargaming. These exercises are designed to examine human decision-making, rather than generating precise predictions. Overdependence on technology risks creating an illusion of accuracy, which can hinder meaningful learning. While AI can be valuable for tasks such as data analysis and scenario development, it should complement, rather than replace, human judgment. The real value of wargames lies in strategic thinking and dynamic human interaction, not algorithmic output. They write:
The U.S. defense community has developed a healthy obsession with innovation. AI, modeling and simulation, machine learning — these are the buzzwords driving conversations about the future of warfare. But when it comes to integrating these technologies into one of the military’s most valuable tools for strategic insight — the wargame — the defense community would do well to proceed with caution.
Over the past few years there has been increasing discussion within the wargaming community about the need to integrate AI, data-driven models, and computer simulations into military wargames. There have been a series of articles, books, special issues of journals, conference panels, and presentations devoted to this topic. Those advocating for more technology in wargames focus on a variety of benefits, such as enhanced player experience, assistance in processing vast amounts of data, and greater analytic rigor. For instance, integrating generative AI can replicate adversary tactics, improve operational planning efforts, and create diverse scenarios. We agree that there are many benefits of integrating more technology into the wargame process, but do not agree that more technology in wargames necessarily equates to greater analytic rigor. […]
AI tools could also assist analysts after the game, sifting through notes, surveys, orders, and debriefs to identify patterns or extract key themes more efficiently. This is currently a manually intensive process for wargame analysts. AI assistance could help analysts turn around game reports and briefs to decision-makers more rapidly, ultimately increasing the velocity of the research cycle.
But these approaches to technological integration support human judgment — they don’t replace it. […]
Military wargames should progress into the future while preserving the power of what a wargame is and what it does — and we can do that even without advanced technology. Pushing AI and modeling into games without a clear understanding of their limits is not modernization — it’s misapplication. Wargames work because they create spaces where smart people wrestle with hard problems in real time. That’s where insight lives. That’s what we should protect.
Read more here.
If you’re willing to fight for Main Street America, click here to sign up for the Richardcyoung.com free weekly email.
