Cover: The implications of some game-theoretic analyses for war gaming

The implications of some game-theoretic analyses for war gaming

Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price Price
Add to Cart Paperback3 pages $15.00 $12.00 20% Web Discount

An examination of the appropriateness of war gaming as a device for determining the major features and significant details of optimal strategies. Several fairly realistic game models of tactical air warfare, which have been solved analytically, are presented. These games involve sequences of simultaneous moves, with a continuum of choices available to each side at each move. The question is then raised whether playing the game--which is essentially the testing of a finite number of alternatives at each move--will be a helpful device for learning about the solutions of the particular games presented. It is shown, in terms of these games, that war gaming, despite its usefulness for other purposes, is not a helpful device in determining optimal strategies.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Paper series. The paper was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.