Final Thesis Submission Jan 15

UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY MARA
WARGAME SIMULATION:
APPLYING MILITARY
APPRECIATION PROCESS IN
MALAYSIAN ARMY WAR-GAME
SIMULATOR
MOHAMMAD FARISZUL SYAUQIE

BIN ISMAIL
MSc.IT
January 2015
UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY MARA
WARGAME SIMULATION:
APPLYING MILITARY
APPRECIATION PROCESS IN
MALAYSIAN ARMY WAR-GAME
SIMULATOR
MOHAMMAD FARISZUL SYAUQIE BIN

ISMAIL
IT Project submitted in partial fulfilment

of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science in Information Technology
Faculty of Computer and Mathematical Sciences

2
January 2015
AUTHORS DECLARATION
I declare that the work in this IT Project was carried

out in accordance with the regulations of Universiti
Teknologi MARA. It is original and is the results of my
own work, unless otherwise indicated or acknowledged
as reference work. This IT Project has not been
submitted to any other academic institution on nonacademic institution for any degree or qualification.
I, hereby, acknowledge that I have been supplied with
the Academic Rules and Regulations for Post
Graduate, Universiti Teknologi MARA, regulating the
conduct of my study and research.
Name of Student
MOHAMMAD
Student ID No.
2012711321
Programme
Master
Computer
and
Wargame
Simulation:
FARISZUL SYAUQIE BIN

ISMAIL
of
Science
in
Information Technology
Faculty
Mathematical Sciences
IT Project Title
Applying Military
Appreciation Process
Army War-
Signature of Student :
in
Game Simulator
Date
Malaysian
January 2015
ABSTRACT
Military simulation systems are categorized as training, analysis

and acquisition applications. Military training is conducted
through the use of virtual, constructive and live simulations. The
development and expenditure in simulation programs will draw
engineers and scientists from other fields. These practitioners
bring valuable skills, but lack an appreciation of the historical
and technical foundations of military operational knowledge.
Concerning the importance of enhancing the knowledge
technology in wargame simulation, Malaysian Army has
acquired the system called BattleTek 4.0 which is developed by
SAAB Intl. of South Africa. In applying this system to suit the
requirement in Malaysian Army environment, a few upgrades
have needed to be applied and added into this simulator. One
critical element that shall be adopted is the decision making
process which is obviously will involve the needs of Military
Appreciation Process (MAP). This thesis will discuss more on
the feasibility of making the MAP decision making become
more realistic and reliable base on the output and result which
will be produced automatically. The result will then influence
the decision that will be chosen in each simulation either in the
real or training scenario. A session of interviewing the user and
the operator of this simulator had conducted to identify the pros
and cons of this system. A set of proposed solutions for future
versions of BattleTek 4.0 with some improvements will be
discussed thoroughly in this project paper based on the
information collected.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Immeasurable gratitude to Allah S.W.T. for granting the

opportunity in undertaking and completing this piece of work.
The hard work and pains of researching this study bear the fruits
of in-depth and invaluable knowledge, indeed.
This research will never be a completed without the guidance
and support of many people. A very special thanks to my
passionate supervisor, Mr Fauzi bin Mohd Saman, for guiding
me when I am lost during the completion of this research. I am
very lucky to have him as my supervisor, her vast and wide
knowledge with are very useful and valuable to me, and he kept
me motivated.
I would like to thank all of my family members, especially my
wife, Norhidayah Md Zain and my lovely kids, Aniq Hamizan,
Aqil Hazimi and Afiq Huzairy for the encouragement and moral
support. Thank you for being the best family. Without their
courage, this study paper couldnt be finished on time.
I deeply appreciate those who lend me hands without thinking
twice, offering me shoulder whenever I need it, especially to my
best friend Muhammad Asri and Muhamad Zuhir.
Finally, I would like to give special thanks to all Malaysian
Army personnel that assists me a lot in finishing this study
especially the staffs and operators in Army Warfare Simulation
Centre. Without their contribution, support and opinions I
wouldnt be able to complete this valuable paperwork.
Thank you.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
AUTHORSS DECLARATION
ABSTRACT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ii
iii
iv
v
ix
x
xi
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
Introduction
Background
1.2.1 BattleTek 4.0
1.2.2 Military Appreciation Process (MAP)
Problem Statement
Research Question
Research Objective
Scope of the Research
Significance of the Research
1.7.1 The Malaysian Army
1.7.2 Users
1.7.3 Simulation System
1.7.4 Researcher
Research Design Summary
Research Paper Outline
1.9.1 Chapter 2: Literature Review
1.9.2 Chapter 3: Research Methodology
1.9.3 Chapter 4: Analysis and Findings
1.9.4 Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation
1
1
2
5
6
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
11
11
11
11
12
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
2.2
Introduction
War Game Simulator in Global
2.2.1
Effect Based Operation Wargame System (EBOWS)
2.2.2
Synthetic Theatre Operations Research Model (STORM)
2.3
Malaysian Army Warfare Simulation Centre
2.4
Army Warfare Concept
2.4.1 Guerrilla Warfare/Counter Insurgency Warfare (CIW)
2.4.2 Conventional Warfare
2.4.3 Electronic Warfare
2.5
War Games Simulation Concept
2.5.1 Stochastic Modelling
2.5.2 Command and Control Decision Making
2.5.3 Analytical Combat Simulation
13
2.6
25
Conclusion
13
14
18
20
22
23
24
24
25
27
29
30
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1
3.2
3.3
Introduction
Research Phases
Planning
31
31
8
3.3.1 Phase 1: Preliminary Analysis

3.3.2 Phase 2: Literature Review
3.3.3 Phase 3: Data Collection
3.3.4 Phase 4: Analysing Data
3.3.5 Phase 5: Documentation
3.4
Research Methodology
3.4.1 Questionnaire on Experience
3.4.2 Operator Interview
3.4.3 Observation
3.5 Variables Identification
3.6 Data Collection
3.7 Interview
3.8 Scale of Score Benchmark
3.9 Correlation Classification
3.9.1 Direction
3.9.2 Strength
3.10 Data Analysis Methodology
3.11 Conclusion
32
32
33
33
33
34
34
34
35
35
35
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

4.1
Introduction
43
4.2
Instrument Reliability
43
4.3
Demographic Details
44
9
4.4
Analysis on Efficiency of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0
47
4.5
Analysis on Learnability of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0
48
4.6
Analysis on Memorability of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0
50
4.7
Analysis on Operability of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0
52
4.8
Analysis on Satisfactory of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0
54
4.9
Overall Mean Score
56
4.10
Interview Findings
57
4.10.1 Efficiency
57
4.10.2 Learnability
57
4.10.3 Memorability
58
4.10.4 Operability
58
4.10.5 Satisfactory
58
Conclusion
58
4.11
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1
Introduction
60
5.2
Summary of the Research
60
5.3
Proposed Solutions for MAP Automation Improvement
61
5.4
Reviewing Research Objectives
62
5.5
Limitation and Constraints
62
5.6
Conclusion
63
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
64
68
10
LIST OF TABLES
Tables
Title
Page
Table 1.1
10
Table 3.1
Variables
36
Table 3.2
The Direction Strengths and Correlation Classification
40
Table 4.1
Reliability Test Results
43
Table 4.2
Mean Feasibility Level
48
Table 4.3
50
Table 4.4
52
Table 4.5
54
Table 4.6
56
Table 4.7
Feasibility of MAP Automation Mean Level
56
Table 5.1
62
11
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures
Title
Page
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.3
3
BattleTek 4.0 Initial Page
The Deployment Simulation
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.5
Engagement Simulation in the System
Figure 4.8
Figure 4.9
Figure 5.1
17
20
Conventional War Gaming Process

Operational Level Course of Action Wargaming Process
STORM Air to Air Methodology
Decision upon Situation Appreciation Model
Research Phases Illustration
Relation Framework of the Research Variables
Gender Comparative of Respondent
Figure 4.6
Figure 4.7
4
16
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.4
28
32
41
45
45
46
46
47
49
Using Experience
51
53
Using Frequency
55
Years of Experience
The Efficiency of MAP Automation in BattleTek 4.0
The Learnability of MAP Automation in BattleTek 4.0
12
61
The Memorability of MAP Automation in BattleTek 4.0

The Operability of MAP Automation in BattleTek 4.0
The Satisfactory of Using BattleTek 4.0 for MAP Automation
Command and Control Decision Making Model
13
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
Abbreviations
MAP
Military Appreciation Process
POP TD
Pusat Olah Perang Tentera Darat
SMAP
Staff Military Appreciation Process
IMAP
Individual Military Appreciation Process
CMAP
Combat Military Appreciation Process
LWD
Land Warfare Doctrine
COA
Course of Action
SA
Situational Awareness
MD
Military Doctrine
SPSS
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
EBOWS
Effect Based Operation Wargame System
CW
Conventional Warfare
CIW
Counter Insurgency Warfare
IPB
Intelligent Preparation for Battlefield
STORM
Synthetic Theatre Operations Research
Model
HLA
High Level Architecture
FM
Field Manual
EM
Electromagnetic
EW
Electronic Warfare
EME
Electromagnetic Environment
14
DOTMLPF
Doctrine, Organisation, Training,

Material, Leadership, Personal, Facilities
C2
Command and Control
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Introduction
This chapter delivers a brief explanation to clarify the

purpose of Wargame Simulation System and its rationality of
applying the system in the training, exercises and real operation
while in the same time capable of assisting in developing
warfare tactics, technics and procedures which commonly called
as the doctrine. This chapter also covers the research
background that deriving the research problem. Then, the
objectives of the study will be identified, followed by the
significance of the study. At the end of this chapter, a research
15
design summary is provided to give the initial idea of how the

study will be conducted.
1.2. Background
Military simulation system can be categorized as a tool

for training, analysis and acquisition to gain precise result.
Current training done by military normally conducted through
the virtual, constructive and real simulations. Wargames, one of
the particular cases of constructive simulations that will be
studied in this project paper. The complexity of the battlefield
model will require a high level of understanding in a diversity of
technologies considering the Performance of the Vehicle,
Physical
Environmental
Modeling,
Software
Engineering
Simulation Techniques and Military Operation Doctrine for Blue

and Red Forces which indicating own forces and enemy forces.
All of the factors shall be fulfilled to accomplish the essential
outcomes from the simulation conducted. The users and
operators are usually interested in the simulated entities
depending on their analysis and training objective only at
particular level of abstraction. However, by simulate a high
resolution model of operational and tactical behavior of the
battlefield entities, realistic results can be determined and
16
generated. For the modeling that will present that present the
significant
challenges
developing
such
high
resolution
simulations, even if the required knowledge of military tactics

and doctrines are available. Object oriented methodologies and
concepts are generally used to model and develop such systems.
Be that as it may, it is not able to create and create an
extremely mind boggling war zone framework adequately on the
grounds that it oblige better issue disintegration, all the more
effective reflection instrument and better representation of
authoritative chain of command. A reflection system that
embodies conduct actuation gives rich association and has
conjuring toward oneself ability will give less demanding
displaying
of
war
zone
elements'
strategic
practices.
Programming and framework produced for the test system can

be utilized for reenacting the operational and strategic conduct
of the war zone substances including human choice making
procedure ability to a certain degree. On the off chance that
mimicked combat zone substances can display such a
naturalistic thinking capacity, the reenactment will render more
reasonable results. This proposal will mull over the quality of
applying this innovation in demonstrating and reenacting the
combat zones. It will roughly discussing about applying the
computer technology to develop a complex system to enable the
simulation concept and implement the Infantry, Artillery, Special
Forces and Armor deployment into the battlefield.
17
1.2.1
BattleTek 4.0
In the vision of developing a modern and multi-capable

Army in Malaysian Armed Forces, a brand new training method
by applying wargame simulation has been developed and
enhanced since the year of 1982. The pioneer study has done in
March 1982 based on the method used by New Zealand Defense
Forces and adopted from their wargame doctrine, The First
Forray (POP TD, 2008). In the following year, Malaysian Army
has developed their own doctrine on implementation of
wargame simulation which was more suitable according to their
organization and warfare technics used in time being. This
doctrine which called as Tempur Pertama has been used until
1992. Starting from June 1993, Malaysian Army has enhanced
their doctrine and produced Tempur Utama which has been used
since. Tempur Utama was the advanced version of Tempur
Pertama which used the advantages of computer application.
Tempur Utama had been applied to the Malaysian Army tactical
doctrine assisted by the computer. With the lower specification
and limited capability, they had sometimes faced the problem on
simulation realistic, calculation precision and inaccurate output
when the input given was a big and various inputs.
18
Figure 1.1: BattleTek 4.0 Initial Page
Figure 1.2: The Deployment Simulation
19
Figure 1.3: Engagement Simulation in the System
20
With the current development of modern Army concept,

Malaysian Army had adopted a new technology of simulation
system
developed
by
South
African
company,
SAAB
International S.A. This brand new technology and infrastructure

has developed in Gemas, Negeri Sembilan. This project was
started since the year of 2009 and officially operational in 2013.
This latest simulation system used by the Army is the BattleTek
4.0 which is originally developed by SAAB International. The
BattleTek 4.0 contains all ranges of modern warfare practice and
also capable of simulating the past warfare from ancient time
(SAAB Intl, 2010). As shown in the Figure 1.1, users have to
login to the system according to their designated function either
21
as the Blue Force, Red Force or even the Assessor. The

intelligent function in the simulation shown in Figure 1.2 will
display the current situation played or run by the system. The
time of running the simulation will be depending on the
Assessor which has the authority to use the real time or the
game time as shown in Figure 1.3 where the simulation is
simulating the engagement scenario. The simulation also has the
capability of storing the simulation played by the user and
reviews the result as well. This capability is very useful for
training purpose and doctrine development references. The
system can be able to generate and produce a precise result and
provide the accurate data output that will be used in the
developing doctrine.
1.2.2
Military Appreciation Process (MAP)
The military appreciation process (MAP) as its rational

decision-making tool to support commanders at all levels make
timely and appropriate decisions. At the tactical level of
command, the MAP has three distinct variations that are applied
dependent upon several variable factors (LWD 5.1.4, 2009).
These factors including the size of the staff in that organization
which available to the commander, the time in which a decision
22
is required and the size of forces that will be maneuvered. Other

factor that may affect the decision made in the MAP is the
equipment that available to the forces. These three variations are
the Staff MAP (SMAP), the individual MAP (IMAP) and the
Combat MAP (CMAP). The MAP is employed as a process that
allows a commander to identify relevant considerations to a
problem and then balance these considerations against a range of
potential actions that could achieve the commanders intent. The
outcome is that the commander makes a decision on what action
he or she is going to undertake (LWD 7.0, 2009). A person
making a decision selects an action based on a range of variables
and options available. The critical aspect to making a good
decision resides in the appropriate balancing of the variables and
options. Finally, the human brain interprets, process and selects
all the information available and analyzes the critical criteria to
make the best decision.
The MAP's across the board acknowledgement and
fruitful application or devices sought numerous operations is
solid defense for its central legitimacy as a method for creating
successful arrangements. This is likewise upheld by trial results,
for example, a 1995 US Army Research Institute test that tried
the execution of distinctive gatherings of organizers considering
COA for a division-level development. The study demonstrated
that those gatherings that emulated an organized procedure, like
23
the MAP, attained better execution because of more thorough

thought of the applicable variables (Fallesen, 1995).
MAP is meticulously developed using the specific steps
which are currently used by almost all the military forces around
the world. These steps are:
Mission Analysis.
Evaluation of Factors.
Consideration of Course of Action (COA).
Selection of the Best COA.
Development of Plan.
The Outline has esteem as a method for creating

aggregate situational awareness (SA). SA has been characterized
in a mixed bag of ways, a helpful sample being that Situational
Awareness is an individual's view of the components of the
nature's domain inside a volume of time and space, the
perception of their significance and the projection of their status
within a brief period of time (Riese, 2003). Riese has led various
24
studies with US military associations to survey the linkages in

the middle of SA and choice making adequacy, and his decision
is that group SA is pivotal for viable choice making. Truth be
told, research has showed that getting and keeping up SA in
groups is much more mind boggling than in people. The MAP
exercises of deciding leader's expectation and imparting data
through consistent organized briefings serve exceptionally well
to create aggregate SA. Therefore, there is no motivation to
suggest principal changes to the doctrinal MAP to a powerful
and important arranging apparatus in its present structure. The
upgrades obliged identify with the application of human
components inside the current methodology.
1.3 Problem Statement
The first identified problem occurs in the simulation

system is the error in duplicating human decision making
method/capabilities. The system could only be able to collect
information about observed human reactions to certain situations
than it is to represent the process of cogitation (Page & Smith,
1998). This is the lack of intelligent behavior that shall be
required in making such process. The simulation process and
results represent real problems as opposed to artificial ones
25
generated only by the gaming environment (Perla, 1990). With

limitation capability like human being, the simulation system
unable to process more than single gaming or warfare
environment by itself. The results produced from the war games
will be carefully compared to the results of field experiments,
allowing for many war gaming experiments to be evaluated
against experiments with real forces (Watman, 2003).
The next problem identified is the time constraint. Four
hours of game play took three months to analyze manually
(Lindley and Sennersten, 2003). Unspecified scenario gives the
players too little time to evaluate courses of action and make
meaningful decisions (Perla, 1990). Scenario does not extend
far enough forward in game time to explore the results of player
action (Perla, 1990).
Another problem existed in the simulation system is the
problem solving automation unrealistic and in some cases, it
was totally unacceptable. Uncertain outcome of a game that
allows players to feel like their decisions do not have an impact
on the game (Salen and Zimmerman, 2004). Creativity is a key
human factor that requires greater emphasis in military planning,
so the caveat should be applied with caution (Hotskin, 2009).
The rational model of decision making or synoptic model is
capable of identifying the problem, clarifying the problem,
prioritizing goals, generating options, evaluating options,
26
comparing predicted outcomes, and choosing an option which

best matches the goals (Dearlove, 2003).
The last identified problem in this discussion is the
unspecified or indefinite command functions that appear in the
system. Players do not understand the implicit victory conditions
for a scenario because of failure to understand the beginningstate political limitations (Perla and Markowitz, 2004). By using
the limited resources of information, the thorough analysis
cannot be done. Another factor is the controllers do not have a
clear chain of command (Perla and Markowitz, 2004). The
system shall have to characterize the military capabilities of a
force, and parts of the force, and thus to objectively estimate the
significance of losing part of this force in terms of its effect on
capability.
The management and tracking, non-doctrinal
COA generation and lack of detail in the COAs generated

(Kardos and Chapman, 2003). Contentious issue for planning
models is the problem of whether to view the planning cycle as
an evolutionary process or as a sequence of independent
processes (Serfaty, Entin and Tenney, 1988).
The idea to develop the decision making tools for the
MAP using the current simulation system is produced from the
fourth step in the MAP itself. Current MAP practice is applying
the mind wargaming which is considered as personal decision.
The decision made by the people who conduct the MAP is based
27
on their level of knowledge including the experiences and

familiarities in certain fields. Thus, the judgment and the
perception may cause the lack of exactness in making decision.
The lack or poor decision can be reduced and synchronized as a
standard decision if only the tools used to produce the output has
standardized. From this point, all the information required by the
simulation system can be extracted from the input given by the
user and the simulation system will run the wargame constantly
for several options and produce the best decision according to
the suitability and effectiveness on each option available.
1.4 Research Question

The set of questions that acquired regarding to the issues
discussed are more towards the functionality and usability that
related to the manual MAP and the opinion to automate the
MAP which is then to be inserted and processed by the
simulation system. For the purpose of research studies,
questions raised are as follows:
a. What is the feasibility of applying MAP
automation.
b. How to implement the MAP automation into the
BattleTek 4.0 simulation system.
28
1.5 Research Objective

The objective of this research paper derived from the
arguments stated above and will be deliberately explained and
discussed. The discussion includes these particular points:
a.
To conduct the feasibility study onto MAP automation.
b.
Explaining the implementation of MAP automation in

the BattleTek 4.0 using the related decision making
process and model.
1.6 Scope of the Research
Scope covered in this research paper is focusing more to
the doctrine development team, Army combat units and also the
students among the various Army training centres. These users
shall be deeply understand the MAP and know how to
distinguish the compulsory input required by the MAP itself.
The concept of MAP automation is to process all the input from
the users and produce the output by running the wargame
according to the standard formatting. Then the output for each
different MAP will be directly run by the simulation system and
the system continues to project the result and determine the level
of effectiveness for each MAP. According to the step of MAP,
29
the fourth step required the user to execute mind-wargame either

deliberately or quickly depending on the situation. This mindwargame usually takes too long to be processed considering the
several Course of Action (COA) stated in the step three of the
MAP. As reported by US Naval Research Office (Marsh et. al.,
2001), a well-trained officer usually takes at least six hours to
produce result of a mind-wargame for one COA. And normally a
good MAP designed to have at least four sets of mind-wargame
which are (i) own most-likely COA and (ii) most-dangerous
COA against (iii) enemys most-likely and (iv) most-dangerous
COA (ATCHQ, 2011) .
1.7
Significance of the Research

The main significances of this study are to give the best
solution option to the entire Malaysian Army in developing,

training and reference resources of the MAP and doctrine. Other
than that, more advantages of doing this study are:
1.7.1
The Malaysian Army.

The Malaysian Army will enhance the capability of
gaining a new concept of doctrine development, training plan

and also method of execution of a military operation. It is also
30
give a big opportunity of studying the warfare concept and

deployment.
1.7.2
Users
Among the users, this study will enable the better way of
thinking in developing MAP and study it thoroughly. Other than

that, this study may evolve a new era of MAP development
where the users can save their time and produce a better result of
operation planning.
1.7.3
Simulation System
As for the Simulation System itself, this study will
enable it to be upgraded to a new level where it can be able to

store and recall all the previous operation planning. The
Simulation System will become more beneficial and practical to
the organization and the users.
1.7.4
Researcher.
This study give benefit to the researcher to study deeply
and enabling the new concept of MAP development by making

it automated. This concept has never been studied yet until now.
31
1.8 Research Design Summary
Table 1.0 shows the design summary for this research

paper.
Table 1.1:
Research Questions
What is the feasibility
of applying MAP
automation?
Research Objectives
To conduct the
feasibility study onto
MAP automation.
Tools/Method Technique
Research Outpu
Literature review on:

Conventional MAP
development process
Pros and cons of
developing technic of
MAP (manual and auto)
Benefits of applying
MAP automation wi
be identified
thoroughly.
Conduct Interview:
Towards user
Towards operator
Collect information data:
Questionnaire
Survey
How to implement the

MAP automation into
Explaining the
implementation of
32
Literature review on
Command and control
Process of
implementing the
the BattleTek 4.0

simulation system?
1.9
MAP automation in the

BattleTek 4.0 using the
related decision making
process and model
decision making process

Data Analysis: Comparison
between conventional MAP
and simulated MAP results.
Research Paper Outline
This thesis consist of five (5) chapters throughout which

will be discuss thoroughly. Discussions and arguments will be
done meticulously for achieving the objectives of the study.
Other than this chapters included are as follows:
1.9.1
Chapter 2: Literature Review.
In the Chapter 2, topics that will be discussed are closely

related to the objective of the research paper. All the information
described in this chapter will be thoroughly explained by
referring any related documents that explained the objective
requirement. Topics discussed in this chapter are Wargame
Simulator in Global, Malaysian Army Warfare Simulation
33
automated MAP to b
presented according
the selected model a
decision making
process.
Centre, Army Warfare Concept and Wargame Simulation

Concept.
1.9.2
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
This chapter discusses the research approach and

methodology used in this research. The information and data
will be gathered using various style including simulated data,
literature review and also survey questionnaire to get the exact
and better result for this research paper. Most of the data and
information will directly digested from the simulation result and
for the purpose of comparison, interviews and survey will be
conducted. Topic covered in this chapter including research
approach,
planning,
data
collection,
data
analysis
and
documentation for this research purpose.
1.9.3
Chapter 4: Analysis and Findings
This chapter will be discussed about the information

gathered and will be thoroughly discussed and analyzed. The
34
technic that will be used to evaluate the data is using the

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS version 19)
tools. Data will be processed and produced for the comparison
and quantitative calculation.
1.9.4
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation
Final conclusion for the whole study paper will be

concluded in this chapter. Some recommendation and suggestion
will be provided for the purpose of enhancement and future
development.
35
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter will review the previous studies which are
relevant to this research. All the required information regarding
the studies in particular fields will be referred as the concrete
facts in any arguments. In this chapter, the information on
concepts that are gathered from journals, articles, and
proceeding will be discussed in order to understanding this
research further.
2.2 War Game Simulator in Global
The military has constantly attempted to battle their
fights in a manufactured or simulated environment before
battling them in this present reality. There are such a variety of
variables that getting everything right is amazingly troublesome.
Arranging and practice are essential instruments for achieving
this. Sand tables with wooden and stone markers that permitted
36
authorities to clarify their plan to many officers were a

percentage of the most punctual virtual planets. Board wargames
supplanted the sand with paper and included manages so a
player could really do a few expectations in an unrefined virtual
space. New innovations like motion pictures, gadgets,
hydrodynamics, machines, and systems have all changed the
face and helpfulness of these military apparatuses.
In readiness for sending fighters to Europe amid World
War II, the United States Army made far reaching field moves in
the woods and slopes of the condition of Louisiana (Weiner,
1959). Countless warriors practiced their parts and utilized their
new radios to report their activities to administrators who were
miles away. This permitted these authorities to practice their
techniques for situating and moving vast units, and additionally
the conventions for transmitting that data precisely to the units
in the field. These Louisiana Maneuvers planted the seeds for
substantial scale, live practice which would turn into the
essential mission for the world's biggest preparing reach. Clearly
the real to life wargame are lavish to execute and oblige months
of arranging. Duplicating these with paper or a machine can
make the experience a great deal more available and repeatable.
Currently, most of the military forces in entire world has applied
and using the simulation system to simulate and utilize its
37
function to conduct training, rehearsal and also developing the

doctrine.
2.2.1
Effect Based Operation Wargame System (EBOWS)

EBOWS is the Wargaming component of the EBO
toolkit used by the United States of America Air Force to

simulate their warfare concept (Plotz, 2005). Its part is to survey
the relative benefits of contending Courses of Action (COA)
inside an operational connection and give the leader or client
with comes about that are definite and sufficiently exact to help
choice making. A completely created EBOWS models critical
parts of Aerospace, Land, and Naval fighting. It not just gives
the leader or client with bits of knowledge into the effect of their
choices upon future operations, it does so with sufficient subtle
element for investigators to follow startling comes about back to
an underlying driver.
The objective of the impacts based operations innovation
opportunity is to create new ideas, strategies and apparatuses to
help an impact based operations method. Plotz mentioned in his
study that impacts based operations are those situated of
methodologies, upheld by instruments and done by individuals
in authoritative settings that concentrate on arranging, executing
and evaluating military exercises for the impacts they deliver
instead of the targets or even destinations they manage. The
38
advantages of effects based over target-based and objectivesbased strategies include both economy of force for quicker,
more decisive, and lower cost deployment yet the probability of
reduced collateral damage.
Effects-based operations complement rather than replace
target-based or objectives based approaches. They are
exceptionally amiable to mission-sort requests and system
alternatives
that
don't
underline
wearing
down
based
methodologies. EBO applies over the whole scope of military

missions from helpful help operations, peace-production or
implementation operations or ordinary war. It applies whether
deadly or non-deadly, active or potential power is utilized.
The goal of the EBO model is to provide a framework
that helps Commanders identify and predict how actions taken
by own forces will lead to the direct and indirect effects required
to defeat the enemy or perform other missions. The EBO model
leverages and extends existing models used for planning,
execution and assessment. It augments them to support dynamic
tasking across planning, execution and assessment. It is also
providing an explicitly incorporate a model of the enemy-as-asystem and enemy reactions. The system also supports economy
of
force
via
the
specification
and
analysis
of
the
interconnections between target system and centres of gravity to

determine indirect effects.
39
EBOWS Program will formulate the EBO concept within

a wargaming environment and then build techniques and tools
for war-fighting commanders to implement the process. The
resulting product from this initiative will assist commanders in
building Operations Plans that focus on targeting to achieve the
specific effects required to achieve control over an adversary as
opposed to destruction.
The focus is expressly on physical and behavioural
impacts including immediate, roundabout, aggregate and falling
impacts. Focuses of gravity and target examination are utilized
to recognize targetable activities important to accomplish the
impacts sought. Existing electronic war-gaming devices are
restricted in that they don't address the transaction of different
COAs in a mimicked environment nor do they fittingly manage
impacts. A large portion of these are profoundly vigorous in the
matter of engagements, for example, tanks against tanks or air
ship against reinforcement compels yet are meagre at the battle
level and of little use in assessing an operational-level COA
including contrasting whittling down based and operationallevel wargames. In Figure 2.1 which adapted from research done
by Gary Plotz of United States Air Force Research Laboratory
represents the customary energy on-power or "weakening based"
war-gaming methodology.
40
41
Establish Air Superiority

Enemy sortie drawdown
Coalition aircraft attrition
Enemy force drawdown
Disrupt & disorient enemy leadership
Defeat war fighting forces
Coalition ground attack
Enemy armour losses
Defeat
war
sustaining
capacity
Weapon System and Target System
Input
Target
and
constraints
Attrition
Measure of Effectiveness
Rolled up Wargame Resu
Enemy strategic target drawdown
Aircraft
Fighters, bomber. cargo
Airbase
Blue aircraft losses, over time
Red aircraft losses, over time
Runaway, ammo, logistics, shelters
C3 Sites
Red ground targets destroyed, over time
Force-on-Force or attrition based Wargame and Analysis

Blue ground targets destroyed, over time
Missiles
TBM Launcher, SAMa, Ground to Air
Blue aircraft sorties, over time
Ground Forces
Tanks, artillery, infantry, etc
Red aircraft sorties, over time
Figure 2.1: Conventional War Gaming Process
42
Strategic level weapon framework and target framework

information and stipulations are nourished into the war-gaming
instrument. This incorporates data with respect to the numbers
and sorts of air ship and rockets, ground compel and air base
creation, and logistics data. Routine war-gaming apparatuses
investigate these qualities and mimic strategic engagements. The
results are target-wearing down Measures of Effectiveness
(MOEs, for example, those indicated in the Figure 2.1 which is
the blue and red airplane misfortunes over the long haul.
Whittling down based MOEs is moved up to mimic whether
authority's goals have been met.
In the Figure 2.2, the outline of the operational-level
which is developed as a guidance for all commanders and
warfare planner (ATCHQ, 2011), Red Force COA versus Blue
Force COA war-gaming methodology clarifies the steps and
ideas of creating COA. The war-gaming procedure will in reality
create the last arrange that ought to be picked by the higher
officer to execute the operation. The principle goal of
operational level war-gaming is to give the commandant the data
he needs to pick among different COA alternatives.
Figure 2.2: Operational Level Course of Action War-gaming
Process
43
Red Force COA Development (IPB Process)

Further Develop COA
Identify
FullDesired
Set of All
Potential Adversary
Evaluate and
COA
Prioritize Each COA
Identify Adversary Likely Objectives
and
Endstate
Time/Type of Operation
Area of Operation
Objectives
Force Disposition
Adversary COA Evaluation Criteria

Suitability
Feasibility
Timing/Phasing
Acceptability
IPB Constraints
Uniqueness
Adversary capability
Consistency
w/Doctrine
Battlespace
environment
Red Force COA
VS
Description of COA
Situational Templates
Scheme of Maneuver
List of High Value Target
Blue
Force COA
Generate Plan
Blue Force Deliberate Appreciation (MAP Process) Develop Plan
Execute/Monitor
Mission Analysis
Evaluate Factors
Course of Action
Selection of COA
Final Mission Statement
Review of Situation
Ground
Enemy Most Likely COA
Compare COA
Analyze Intent
Enemy
Enemy Most Dangerous COA Select the Best COA
Determine Task
Own Troops
Generate List of Own COA
Action/Limitation
Civilians
Facts/Assumption
Environment
Mission Statement
Time and Space
Task Assessment
The same number of the prioritized enemy COAs as time

grants ought to be considered and war gamed against the blue
44
COAs created. In any event, the doubtlessly and the most

hazardous foe COAs ought to be war gamed against two
potential blue COAs. The specialized test exists to create a
computerized ability to play out COA versus COA war
diversions in a reproduced and element environment. Wargaming ought to picture the stream of the operation representing
well-disposed and enemy qualities, resources, conceivable
COAs and the fight space environment. Wargaming is using the
"what if" scenario consideration to improve the COA. Every
COAs created are regularly viewed as suppose it is possible that
situations. These conditions are called as injections during a
war-gaming that will be inserted in the time frame when
conducting war-game.
2.2.2
Synthetic Theatre Operations Research Model

(STORM)
STORM is the centrepiece effort to design the next
generation analytical simulation of theatre-scale military

operations. System Simulations Solutions Intelligent (S3I) is the
primary model developer and system integrator. Regarding
model development, the STORM initial approach is to cover a
wide spectrum of missions and representation with a limited
level of detail. As development continues, specific mission areas
will be added as appropriate. The candidates for increased detail
45
include those missions most critical to the proper representation

of air and space power and missions most understood by
operators and subject matter expert (Youngblood and Dale,
1995)
STORM'S core model will be an event-driven, stochastic
process in which entities from multiple sides will interact in air,
land, sea, and space environments. It is being written in the C++
programming language and will be compliant with high level
architecture (HLA) requirements. There are five top-level object
classes in STORM which are the Environment, C2 Managers,
Interaction Managers, Assets, and Intelligence Managers. The
Environment is the foundation of STORM and serves as the
game board for the entities. It provides weather and terrain
effects for the rest of the model's objects. Weather is divided into
forecasted and actual weather. Forecasted weather is used in the
planning process while actual weather affects detection, attrition
and weapon delivery events. Terrain is the medium upon which
surface entities move and affects how the C2 Managers plan for
entity movements. Terrain also affects weapon lethality, direct
vs. indirect fire potential, terrain masking of sensors, etc. The C2
Managers provide computer control of the planning processes
for the simulation entities. An analyst must "teach" the computer
C2 Manager to make decisions that adapt to the warfare
simulation. The C2 Manager's plans, in turn, control the core
behaviour of each entity in STORM. Interaction Managers are
46
the "referees" for STORM and adjudicate any interactions

between entities.
In
order
to
facilitate
simulation
development,
modification, and enhance model transparency, STORM has

separated interactions into their own objects (e.g. Space, Air,
Ground, etc.). Assets are explicit representations of the entities
within the simulation. These assets are divided into object subclasses which are given individual characteristics through input
data. These assets are aggregated and disaggregated dynamically
to apply the appropriate amount of detail while meeting runtime
constraints. The capstone of STORM, the Intelligence
Managers, controls the perception of the entities within the
simulation (i.e. the ground truth). The Intelligence Manager logs
and updates information as it is perceived.
It also reconciles the degree of overlap and redundancy
as multiple observations are made of numerous entities. It
combines all observations of all entities into a single picture of
the battlespace. This perception employs the 'best' observation of
each 'known' entity to develop an information base to support
the C2 Managers' planning functions and the reactions of
individual Assets during the simulation (Brady, 1999).
Certain aspects of air-to-air combat are modelled outside
of the air-to-air adjudicator. For instance, the initial STORM airto-air prototype assumes that an engagement can occur. The
steps that lead up to an engagement are assumed to have already
47
occurred. The air motion and detection manager object triggers

the engagement outside of the air-to-air adjudication manager
object. The
air-to-air
algorithm
calculates
the
weapon
expenditure and attrition that result from the engagement. The

air-to-air engagement process is shown graphically in Figure 2.3
which is adapted from the tactical doctrine used by Australian
Air Force.
Figure 2.3: STORM Air-to-Air Methodology
Initialize Engagement
Allow
Escapes
Initialize
Phase
Initialize Volley
Select Flight Group Weapon

Select Flight Group Targets
Select Next Volley
Exchange Volley
48
End
Phase
STORM disaggregates the engagements into a series of

volleys that make up a particular engagement. This more explicit
modelling concept allows for a more accurate representation of
munitions consumption and firing doctrine since each volley is
separated by an assessment of the opponent's forces resulting
from your attack. Each of the three phases is subdivided into
sets of discrete volleys. A volley is defined as an opportunity for
aircraft to fire one or more salvos of one or more weapons
against one or more targets. There are two types of volleys,
answered and unanswered. An answered volley is where
weapons are exchanged and each side suffers attrition. An
unanswered volley is where only one side fires and only the
other side suffer attrition. The unanswered volley methodology
is used to capture aspects of surprise of aircraft and rangeadvantages of certain weapons.
Overall, STORM has captured most of the critical
elements of the air-to air engagement process. There were
significant methodology improvements that model attrition and
munitions consumption with a higher degree of fidelity
compared to the other simulation system.
2.3 Malaysian Army Warfare Simulation Centre
Malaysian Army Warfare Simulation Centre of also
called as Pusat Olah Perang Tentera Darat (POP TD,2008) is
49
located in Syed Sirajuddin Camp, Gemas, Negeri Sembilan.

Adapting the concept of advance armed forces technology
around the world, this simulation centre was officially operated
starting from early 2012 in a brand new compound. Previously,
POP TD was situated in various places which were in Shah
Alam, Sungai Besi, Port Dickson and Pulau Pinang.
Starting at Shah Alam, Selangor in 1982, a nucleus team
was developed as the pioneer for POP TD. Known as the Army
Warfare Simulation Team, it consists of seven officers whom
played the role to study and review the suitable simulation
system that going to be established (POP TD, 2008). At the end
of the year of 1982, the team was relocated in Sungai Besi
Camp, Kuala Lumpur and firmly establish there since. The very
first model used by the team was the First Forray which was
adapted from the New Zealand Defence Force doctrine. The
doctrine was studied thoroughly as guidance for them to develop
a new simulation concept.
In the mid of year 1983, the team was successfully
developed the very first Malaysian Simulation Doctrine called
as Tempur Pertama. Tempur Pertama has been used as a
reference for several Malaysian Army Training Centres in
assisting them to prepare the warfare planning during courses of
battle study. In 1986, provided with better facilities, the team
was then moved to Batu Uban Camp, Penang and re-established
as Warfare Simulation Project. In year 1990, the Warfare
50
Simulation Project was renamed as Army Warfare Simulation

Centre and moved to Segenting Camp, Port Dickson. When the
comprehensive facilities were completed in Gemas, they moved
to the totally brand new infrastructure in 2008.
Through all those years, Malaysian Army Warfare
Simulation Centre had using four types of simulation system.
The pioneer study has done in March 1982 based on the method
used by New Zealand Defense Forces and adopted from their
wargame doctrine, The First Forray (POP TD, 2008). In the
following year, Malaysian Army has developed their own
doctrine on implementation of wargame simulation which was
more suitable according to their organization and warfare
technics used in time being. This doctrine which called as
Tempur Pertama has been used until 1992. Starting from June
1993, Malaysian Army has enhanced their doctrine and
produced Tempur Utama which has been used since. Tempur
Utama was the advanced version of Tempur Pertama which used
the advantages of computer application. Tempur Utama had
been applied to the Malaysian Army tactical doctrine assisted by
the computer. With the lower specification and limited
capability, they had sometimes faced the problem on simulation
realistic, calculation precision and inaccurate output when the
input given was a big and various inputs.
51
With the current development of modern Army concept,

Malaysian Army had adopted a new technology of simulation
system
developed
by
South
African
company,
SAAB
International S.A. This brand new technology and infrastructure

has developed in Gemas, Negeri Sembilan. This project was
started since the year of 2009 and officially operational in 2013.
This latest simulation system used by the Army is the BattleTek
4.0 which is originally developed by SAAB International. The
BattleTek 4.0 contains all ranges of modern warfare practice and
also capable of simulating the past warfare even from ancient
time (SAAB Intl, 2010). The simulation also has the capability
of storing the simulation played by the user and reviews the
result as well. This capability is very useful for training purpose
and doctrine development references.
2.4 Army Warfare Concept
As the country's main area drive, the Armed force shields
national hobbies by leading military engagement and security
collaboration; deflecting hostility and savagery by state, nonstate, and individual performing artists to avoid clash; and
convincing adversaries to submit to national will through the
annihilation of their territory powers and the seizure,
occupation, and barrier of area zones. The aggregate Army force
gives national and state authority with abilities over the scope of
52
military operations in both local and remote settings. The Army

force supplies drives through a rotational, cyclical status model
to give an anticipated and practical supply of secluded powers to
warrior commandants with a surge limit for sudden possibilities.
To satisfy its motivation, the Army force must plan for a wide
scope of missions and stay prepared to lead full-range operations
to help the accomplishment of national strategy points.
Armed force powers must be arranged to direct
operations abroad to help ensure or progress Malaysian Defence
Forces' diversions against adversaries equipped for utilizing an
extensive variety of abilities. Armed force strengths should
likewise have the capacity to distinguish dangers to the country
in the forward ranges and methodologies and utilize a dynamic
layered protection to react to these dangers before they can
assault onto Malaysian region. Evaluating and consistently
reassessing how foes are prone to utilize their strengths and
different intends to seek after systems and destinations that
undermine national investments is basic to plotting the issues of
future furnished clash. There are three types of warfare that has
been identified as most critical type of warfare practised
globally.
2.4.1
Guerrilla Warfare/Counter Insurgency Warfare

(CIW)
53
Guerrilla wars are not interesting in their political

viewpoint, however the political measurement is highlighted by
the way that its political motivation is decisively what is utilized
to fuel the clash, and Guerrilla associations normally don't have
any concealed plans. Their political inspirations and goals serve
as the aggregate binding together compel for picking up
prominent backing. Che Guevara, in the same way as Mao Tse
Tung, stressed "guerrilla fighting is a war of the masses" and
that a basic prerequisite of guerrilla fighting is picking up the
backing of the indigenous populace. In such clashes, the
populace is the guerrillas' middle of gravity; the centre point of
all force (Guevara, 1985; Tung, 1992).
Guerrilla fighting may be encouraged by any number of
distinctive societal components which breed discontent.
Discontent gets from persecution, whether genuine or saw, and
may come in numerous structures, for example, political,
financial, religious, ethnic or ideological, which either
independently or in pair, may loan reason for inducing guerrilla
developments. Basically expressed, guerrilla fighting is a
composed disobedience to predominating conditions which are
seen by the indigenous populace overall, or to a limited extent,
to be severe or estranging. In Mao Tse Tung's words "guerrilla
operations are the inexorable consequence of the conflict in the
middle of oppressors and abused when the recent achieve the
breaking points of their continuance" (Tung, 1992).
54
In place for guerrilla fighting to start and grab hold, a

general public must be powerless or have the conditions which
make it ready for a rebellion. The reaction to helplessness can
change from one of complete renunciation to that of savagery.
The way in which the reaction is given is focused around
various different variables, for example, general training of the
populace, customary qualities and principles of the general
public, the way of the legislature and the extent to which it will
endure dispute, and also exercises happening inside other
defenceless social orders (DSC&SC, 1993).
A powerless society will be society of discontent that has
a lot of potential for social turmoil and dissent. It is inside this
defenceless society that a guerrilla pioneer can animate mass
backing; and it is he that can give the association that change
over their potential vitality of dissent into the motor strengths of
guerrilla fighting (Hessler, 1963).
2.4.2
Conventional Warfare
The notion of conventional warfare refers to a form of
warfare
between
states
that
employs
direct
military
confrontation to defeat an adversarys armed forces, destroy an

adversarys war-making capacity, or seize or retain territory in
order to force a change in an adversarys government or
policies (Smith, 2008). It focuses on the adversarys armed
55
forces and assumes the indigenous populations within the area

of operations to be non- belligerent, passive actors with minimal
interference on the military operations who will accept whatever
the political outcome may be either through imposition,
arbitration or negotiation.
The twenty first century however saw the rise in the
occurrence of terrorist attacks as well as the increased security
threat posed by the non-state actors. This begs the question
whether these events mark the decay of conventional warfare,
being rendered obsolete by these new threats in the twenty first
century. Being replaced with a brand new concept of modern
warfare concept, hybrid warfare, and conventional warfare is
considered as unsuitable warfare concept to be applied.
The hybrid warfare is the one that incorporates the full
ranges of mode of warfare, including conventional capabilities,
irregular tactics and formations, terrorist acts that include
indiscriminate violence and coercion and criminal disorder
(Hoffman, 2009). In short, hybrid warfare combined the lethality
of interstate armed conflict with the obsessed and prolonged
enthusiasm of irregular warfare concept of deployment.
2.4.3
Electronic Warfare
EW alludes to any activity including the utilization of
electromagnetic (EM) or regulated vitality to control the

56
electromagnetic range (EMS) or to assault the adversary. The

reason for EW is to deny the rival a genuine or saw advantage in
the EMS and guarantee cordial unrestricted access to the
electromagnetic environment. EW can be connected from air,
ocean, land, and space by manned and unmanned frameworks.
EW is utilized to produce wanted impacts including different
levels
of
location,
foreswearing,
duplicity,
interruption,
corruption, assurance, and pulverization. (MAF, 2007).

In order to dominate the EMS within the land component
commanders area of operations; the Army must develop the
capabilities
required
to
exploit
the
vulnerabilities
and
opportunities inherent within the electromagnetic environment

(EME).
The EW subdivisions of electronic attack (EA),
electronic protect (EP) and electronic warfare support (ES) will

assist commanders in shaping the EME by ensuring friendly
advantage, while delivering the capabilities necessary to create
threat disadvantage. EW will support Army, as well as joint,
interagency and multinational (JIM) operations, by providing
capabilities that enable full spectrum operations.
These
capabilities will require integration across the war fighting

functions and must address the broadening set of EW targets and
threats.
The combination of EW capabilities applied across the
Armys war fighting functions, in support of full spectrum
operations, will provide the capabilities necessary to address the
57
broadening set of EW targets and threats to enable land force

commanders to dominate the EMS within their area of
operations.
The integration of EW capabilities across the
doctrine, organizations, training, materiel, leadership and

education, personnel, and facilities (DOTMLPF) processes, will
enable full spectrum dominance through the implementation of
unparalleled ES, EA, and EP.
2.5 War Games Simulation Concept
2.5.1
Stochastic Modelling
The expression "stochastic" gets from the Greek word
intends to point or to figure and depicted as "irregular" or

"chance." The antonym seems to be "certain," "deterministic," or
"certain." A deterministic model predicts a solitary result from a
given set of circumstances. A stochastic model predicts a set of
conceivable
results
weighted
by their
probabilities,
or
probabilities. A coin flipped into the air will most likely come
back to earth some place. Whether it terrains heads or tails is
arbitrary. For a "reasonable" coin, these options similarly likely
and appoint to every the likelihood and can be viewed as
assigning to each other. (Breiman, 1969).
According to Taylor and Karlin (1984), these phenomena
are not all by themselves intrinsically stochastic or deterministic.
58
Rather, to model a wonder as stochastic or deterministic is the

decision of the onlooker. The decision relies on upon the
eyewitness' motivation; the model for judging the decision is
handiness. Regularly the best possible decision is clear, however
disputable circumstances do emerge. On the off chance that the
coin once fallen is immediately secured by a book so that the
result "heads" or "tails" stays obscure, two members may at
present conveniently utilize likelihood ideas to assess what is a
reasonable wager between them; that is, they might helpfully see
the coin as irregular, despite the fact that the vast majority would
consider the conclusion now to be settled or deterministic. As a
less unremarkable sample of the opposite circumstance, changes
in the level of a vast populace are frequently helpfully
demonstrated
understanding
deterministically,
among
spectators
despite
that
the
numerous
general
chance
occasions help their variances.

Experimental demonstrating has three parts which are a
common sensation under study, a consistent framework for
finding ramifications about the marvel, and an association
connecting the components of the characteristic framework
under study to the coherent framework used to model it. The
advanced methodology to stochastic displaying is in a
comparable soul (Hoel, Port and Stone, 1972). Nature does not
direct a one of a kind meaning of "likelihood," in the same route
that there is no nature-forced meaning of "point" in geometry.
59
"Likelihood" and "point" are terms in unadulterated arithmetic,

characterized just through the properties put resources into them
by their separate sets of adages.
Stochastic methodology is a group of arbitrary variables
X where t is a parameter running over a suitable file set T (Bhat,
1979). In a typical circumstance, the file t relates to discrete
units of time, and the list set is T = {0, 1, 2, . . .}. For this
situation, X, may speak to the conclusions at progressive tosses
of a coin, rehashed reactions of a subject in a learning
investigation, or progressive perceptions of a few qualities of a
certain populace. Stochastic procedures for which T = [0, c) are
especially essential in applications. Here t frequently speaks to
time, however diverse circumstances additionally habitually
emerge. Case in point, t may speak to separation from a selfassertive beginning, and X, may include the quantity of
imperfections the interim (0, t] along a string, or the quantity of
autos in the interim (0, t] along a thruway.
Stochastic methods are recognized by their state space,
or the scope of conceivable qualities for the irregular variables
X by their record set T, and by the reliance relations among the
arbitrary variables X, The most generally utilized classes of
stochastic methodologies are efficiently and completely
exhibited for study in the accompanying parts, alongside the
scientific systems for estimation and examination that are most
helpful with these procedures. The utilization of these courses of
60
action as models is taught by case. Test applications from

numerous and different zones of investment are an essential
piece of the composition.
2.5.2
Command and Control Decision Making

Modern command and control information systems are
focused on that objective and include a blend of technology and

human factors that support the cognitive process leading to
decisions (ATCHQ, 2003). Modern information technology can
improve situational awareness and understanding far beyond the
traditional fog of war, but these improvements are useful only
if the operators can apply that awareness and understanding to
reach decisions better and faster than before. The goal is to
achieve decision superiority not just information superiority.
The progression from understanding to decision involves
a relatively complex interaction of the users perception,
personal experience and judgment, and a further understanding
and interpretation of objectives (Marsh et,al., 2001). As decision
making move away from the rigid process-driven and toward
more dynamic decision making based on real time situational
understanding, those parts of the process that rely on
interpretation and judgment become very important. The
decision maker will need to be able to take initiative to interpret
guidance, constraints, and operational objectives in terms of the
61
immediate situation in the battlespace. The tactical decision aids

will need to provide support attuned to those judgmental and
inferential processes.
They were also agreed that the currently practiced
command and control theory lacks a clear definition of the part
of the cognitive process between understanding and decision. It
is sometimes called wisdom, but that term does not really
describe it. Perhaps a better term would be appreciation or
military appreciation.
Figure 2.4: Decision upon Situation Appreciation Model
OBJECTIVES, PRIORITIES, DOCTRINES,TTPs, CONSTRAINTS
Appreciation
DECISION
Experiences
Understanding
Information
Context
Data
REAL WORLD
62
Perception
Knowledge
That
term
is
traditional
one
that
means
comprehension of the implications of the situation upon an

ability to achieve operational objectives. This is precisely the
type of comprehension that builds upon understanding to reach
the decision and was adopted and inserted into the decision
making process model as shown in the Figure 2.4.
Tactical decision aids will need to help the decision
makers correlate all of these factors quickly, unambiguously, and
with sufficient confidence to make the decision. One of the
major complications at this stage is that the decision maker is
being asked to make a judgmental decision with potentially
lethal consequences and that the decision needs to be based on a
perception of the situation that is statistical in nature. The
decision maker not have the advantage of being able to feed
deterministic inputs into a well defined algorithm to produce a
deterministic result. Instead, a perception of the situation that
includes information of varying degrees of clarity and credibility
has to be used and also use a process that is largely judgmental
to decide on a course of action that appears to satisfy the
objectives, rules of behavior, and constraints. These related
factors have become the biggest influence in the process of
decision making where the decision maker shall be able to relate
and combine those factors accordingly. In some other events,
many of the factors will become unnecessary to be look into. In
63
other ways, some will become burden that will cause a liability
for that decision maker in making decision.
2.5.3
Analytical Combat Simulation

Explanatory recreations are utilized to study issues like
energy creation, weapons adequacy, and logistics issues. This

group is unequivocally affected by the exploration of operations
examination and may deliver re-enactments very much alike to
those utilized for valuable level preparing. Investigative reenactments normally vary in that they don't concentrate on
intelligent trades with individuals amid a reproduction run. This
permits them to execute much speedier or slower than on-going
without unfavourably affecting a human administrator (Law
1991).
The diagnostic applications of wargaming incorporate
the improvement of operational help apparatuses or choice,
examination and assessment devices. Operational help devices
incorporate computerized fight administration frameworks that
characterize and prioritize the dangers to calm the human chiefs
of that mechanical errand and highlight the quick dangers of
which they must concentrate. Examination and assessment
devices can be utilized for weapon framework advancement and
assessment Battle Improvement and a scope of Energy
Evaluations. The Power Evaluations can incorporate energy
64
ability and
Prerequisites Appraisals
including
Blueprint
appraisal for such things as emergency administration, power

blended evaluations, Energy Viability Evaluations and Asset
Arranging including Faculty and Logistics Administration. The
Scientific Gaming is gone for helping in the detailing of precept
method and arrangement treats issues all the more extensively
and is of more quick significance to the military. The issues
emerged in such records as reported, the Barrier White Paper
with other such manuals being appropriate to examination by
investigation and gaming (Dibb and Wringley, 1994). This could
prompt Refinement of Principle and Strategies methods and
approaches.
The level of human investment in wargaming extents
from aggregate association in a manual amusement to zero
human include in some logical machine amusements. The
diversions are all intended to shifting degrees to practice human
choice making or prohibit human issues and forms and ought to
just utilize machines to deal with the mechanical parts of the
diversion.
2.6 Conclusion
The simulation concept has already brought up since the
time of ancient warfare. During the time, the simulator just
developed from a higher commander ideas and intents which
65
translated into sketch or map model. The main objective of

practicing the simulation is to give a clear vision of mission or
operation that going to be conducted. In the modern era, the
concept of warfare already altered for several time including
Conventional Warfare and Electronic Warfare. To enable the
capability of choosing the right and correct decision within a
limited time, war-game simulator is one of the solution of
finding the best and final decision. The capability of analysing,
explaining and simulating the effect on each COA chosen will
be very helpful and efficient. It also has the capability in
designing a new concept of executing an operation.
66
67
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
Research approach and methodology used as guideline
for any researcher to achieve research objectives. This chapter
provides a set of directions for conducting the research and
explains
how the methodology has
been implemented
throughout the research. The chapter also highlights the research

approach, research planning, data collection procedures, survey
instrument, and plans for data analysis that will be used in
collecting and documented.
3.2 Research Phases
Research phases are the step-by-step processes that need
to be followed by the researchers in order to complete their
research. Research phases also work as a guide and track for the
research. For this study, from seven main phases normally must
be done in a research, it only took five phases where it only end
68
by the documentation phase without the design, testing and the

evaluation. Phase one starts from the preliminary study,
followed by the literature review, data collection, analysing data
and finally the documentation. Below are the details for every
phases and Figure 3.1 shows the illustration of this research
phases for this research study.
69
Figure 3.1: Research Phases Illustration

Preliminary Analysis
Formulation of Problem Statement, Research Questions, Research Objectives and Scope of the S
Phase 1
Literature Review
Phase 2
Data Collection
System Testing, Interview, Site Visit, Related Document on the System
Phase 3
Analyzing Data
Phase 4
Documentation
3.3 Planning
70
Phase 5
3.3.1
Phase 1: Preliminary Analysis

This phase refers to the understanding of the research
that will be carried out. It involves six main aspects that are
formulation of the problem statements, construct the research
questions, and determine the research objectives, define the
scope of the study, understand the significance of the research
and identified the research design. Research questions and the
objectives are determined based on the problem statements that
have been formulated. The objectives of this study are basically
based on this problem statement where it also formulated the
scope of the research as well as the significance to do this study.
3.3.2
Phase 2: Literature Review.

The second phase is the literature review. As mention
before, literature review concerns about the theories and

knowledge related to the research topic. It requires the
researcher to read a lot from various sources such as from
books, journals, proceedings, conferences and others. This phase
will benefit and help the researchers to analyse the data and
proposed their own focus area.
3.3.3
Phase 3: Data Collection.

71
In this third phase, the data and information that are

needed to fulfil the researchs requirements are collected
through some techniques and methods. There are a lot of
research methods can be done with two main approaches that
are quantitative approach and qualitative approach. The suitable
research methodology that could be used in this research paper
is the quantitative research methodology since it may involve
with a precision in data calculation and the factors involving the
numerical
value
instead
of
collective
data
sets.
The
considerations of applying this method are including the

manageable numerical data value, quantifiable input and it also
suitable to be used for testing the hypothesis when developing
all kind of tactics yet to be tested. However, some interview will
be conducted to gather information about user experience on the
simulation system.
3.3.4
Phase 4: Analysing Data

After each data and information had been collected, the
analysing part will take place and this part aim to get the issues
and problems in the simulation. All analysed data will be
merged together and will be studied meticulously and will be
proceed to the next phase of research paper.
72
3.3.5
Phase 5: Documentation
The last phase in this study is the documentation part
where everything about the research are been recorded based on

the analysis that been done. The purpose is to ensure that the
research will provide a valuable asset that can be used in further
study by other people.
3.4 Research Methodology
Research methods are the techniques in finding the data
and information for a study. Sometimes it is called Fact-Finding
Techniques. For this study, quantitative approach will be used.
This approach involves the collection and analysis of extensive
data on many variables in a naturalistic environment to gain into
the situation including the human resource factors.
3.4.1
Questionnaire on Experience
By conducting a set of questionnaire to ensure the
objectives of these studies can be achieved, a few factors that

needed to be considered are as follows:
73
Ethical
consideration
which
involves
the
participants privacy and secrecy without exaggerate

any situation which can implicate their job or career.
The results collected are just used for the study
purposes.
Population and Sampling a group of 20 operators

are selected which have used the simulation system
for more than two (2) years and another group of 30
students from Military School which currently
undergo commander course which involve the MAP
development in highest regularity.
Variables Identification there are five (5) types of

dimension
that
will
Demographic,
Memorability
be
used.
Efficiency,
and
Attractiveness
Those
are
Learnability,
(Errors
and
Satisfactory) of the simulation system.

3.4.2
Operator Interview
A few sessions of interviews been conducted with the
simulation system operator. From the interview session, it fulfil

the aims of this study which is to get the information about the
current method of conducting and using the simulation system
74
as well as to know about the users and operators performance

level.
3.4.3
Observation
The observation technique is done in many ways. One of
them is when at the site visits which is observing the operator

run the system. This technique also can be done through
observing the current software package or through the internet.
3.5 Variables Identification
Table 3.1 list all the involved variables that will be used
during the analysis process. Variables are defined by dimension.
The first dimension is Demographic that contains the
respondents gender, age, education background and years of
experience. Meanwhile, other following dimensions are
Efficiency,
Learnability,
Memorability,
Operability
and
Satisfactory which are indicated based on the studies

requirement.
75
Table 3.1:
Variables
Dimension
Demographic
Variables
a. Gender
Type
Nominal
Value
1. Male
2. Female
1. 20-29 years
2. 30-39 years
b. Age
Nominal
3. 40-49 years
4. 50-59 years
5. 60 and above
1. SPM
c. Education
Background
d. BattleTek 4.0
Experience
76
2. STPM
Nominal
3. Diploma
4. Sarjana Muda
Nominal
5. Sarjana
1. Yes
2. No
1. Never
e. Frequency of
Usage
2. Few time a month

Nominal
3. Once a week
4. Every day or two
5. Several time a day
1. <1 year
f. Years of
Experience
Efficiency
Learnability
Memorability
Operability
Satisfactory
Nominal
2. 2 5 years
Interval
Interval
Interval
Interval
Interval
3. > 5 years
15
15
15
15
15
3.6 Data Collection

Questionnaires have been used in this study to obtain the
findings on the topic chosen. Questionnaire is one of the most
well-known research instruments used by researchers. It is a set
of unstructured questions distributed among people at particular
places for them to fill in the answers. It is also an instrument
when researcher needs to quickly and/or easily gets much
information
from
people
in
non-threatening
way.
Questionnaires are chosen because they are written documents

which can be sent to a big group of people. The questionnaires
77
which can be seen in Appendix A consist of five (5) factors

which are:
Efficiency which will be studied on the benefit or

how efficient the MAP automation towards the
current purposes.
Learnability by evaluate the users capability of

adapting and learning the process and flow in the
system.
Memorability regarding to the ability of users to

memorize all the steps required in the system.
Operability by studying the skills and technic

adapted by users during the usage of the system.
Satisfactory by assessing the users level of

satisfactory after using the system.
The questionnaire is separated into two (2) sections. The

primary section of questionnaire is about the demographic
details of the participants including gender, age, education and
also years of experience in using BattleTek 4.0. The second
78
section consist the rating scales used to access the respondents

attitude. The five scales or degree of responses ranging from
strongly disagree to strongly agree which can be measured
for assessing the level of responses from the participant. Most of
the researcher used this type of questionnaire sets. By using
these scaling questions, it is easy to simplify and quantify the
factors that affect the related variables in the questionnaire sets.
3.7 Interview
This study has chosen a face-to-face interview. This was
used for the researcher to yield richer information and provide
many opportunities such as to fully understand someones
impressions or experiences and learn more about the problems
and issues regarding the matter.
A few sessions of interviews have been conducted with
the expert users who are using the BattleTek 4.0 simulation
system frequently in everyday basis. They are the group who are
involved in long term period in BattleTek 4.0 development team,
training team and also the mediator between the users and
contractor. The interview will takes into session when all
distributed questionnaire have been analysed. The question that
will be asked is based on the grading given from the respondents
as per shown in Appendix B. The focus of question is more
79
towards usability problems to get feedback from them in a way

to increase users satisfaction in using the system.
3.8 Scale of Score Benchmark
The Efficiency, Learnability, Memorability, Operability
and Satisfactory on the participants toward using the BattleTek
4.0 system will be based on the scores from the questionnaires.
A rational scale and benchmark scores is required to access the
usability of BattleTek 4.0. There is no specific scale used to
determine level of feasibility. In this study paper, the
formulation developed by Rennis Likert in the 1930s to access
peoples attitudes is to be used to formulate the scale. Most of
the questions in the questionnaire that were constructed by the
researcher contain Five-Point Likert-type items of which each
has five possible responses ranging from either strongly
disagree to strongly agree (Najib, 1999). The categories of
scales are as follows:
Level of Feasibility Factors
Mean
Score
Strongly Disagree
80
0.00 1.00
Disagree
1.01 2.00
Neutral
2.01 3.00
Agree
3.01 4.00
Strongly Agree
4.01 5.00
For the level of feasibility, the categories of benchmark

are as follow:
Level
Score (round up
to the nearest)
Negative
<
Neutral
2.5 -
Positive
>
2.5
3.5
3.5
3.9 Correlation Classification
Relationship is a measurable process by which the
analyst finds the way of connections among distinctive variables
(Leedy & Ormond, 2005). The ensuing measurement, called a
relationship coefficient, is a number between -1 and +1. Most
connection coefficients are decimals (either positive or negative)
some place between these two extremes. A relationship
81
coefficient for two variables all the while measures two separate
things about the relationship between those variables:
3.9.1
Direction
The heading of the relationship is demonstrated by the
sight of the connection coefficient, as it were, by whether the

number is certain or negative one. On the off chance that two
variables have a tendency to climb or down together, they are
said to be absolutely related and in the event that they have a
tendency to move in inverse headings, they are said to be
contrarily
corresponded.
The
relationship
measurable
examination in this study is alluding to Table 3.2.
3.9.2
Strength
The size of the correlation coefficient indicates the
strength of the relationship. A correlation of +1 or -1 indicates a

perfect correlation. The correlation statistical analysis in this
study is referring to Table 3.2 below.
Table 3.2:
The Direction Strengths and Correlation Classification
82
Negative Range
Description
Positive Range
0.00
None
0.00
-0.19 to -0.01
Very Weak
0.01 to 0.19
-0.39 to -0.20
Weak
0.20 to 0.39
-0.59 to -0.40
Moderate
0.40 to 0.59
-0.79 to -0.60
Strong
0.60 to 0.79
-0.99 to -0.80
Very Strong
0.80 to 0.99
-1.00
Perfect
1.00
3.10
Data Analysis Methodology
For this research, 20 sets of questionnaires are distributed

among the BattleTek 4.0 operators and 30 sets of questionnaires
to a group of Military School students. All the respondents fully
completed the questionnaires. Figure 3.2 shows the relationship
framework of the research variables. The lists of the investigated
hypothesis with proper statistical analysis will be coded in
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS Version 19) to
analyse the data. Figure 3.2 below illustrates the hypothesis:
83
Figure 3.2: Relation Framework of the Research Variables
Efficiency
Learnability
Memorability
Feasibility Factor of MAP Automation
Operability
Satisfactory
84
3.11
Conclusion
Even though the methodology of finding the feasibility

of applying MAP automation is followed thoroughly, a good
feedback may not be achieved as expected. The expectation on
participants to execute the conducted test and information
gathering session accordingly was not truly realized since many
of the participants were came from the group of military
personnel whose have the lease education background. Most of
the respondents were finish up the session earlier than allocated
time given. That shows the feedbacks given by those
participants are not as per expected. This occurrence will
become one of the factors that influence the results in the
findings. Other factors that can also be considered to influence
the result are the skills and knowledge of using the computer by
the participant from Malaysian Army Schools student. Some of
them are not familiar with the system and needed to be assisted
throughout the test.
The methodology was only given guideline or describe
about the procedure on how to retrieve data from test
participants, included were used observation method and
interview method before and after in execute test, but the most
important thing is to tackle test participants to produce honest
feedbacks. These data will be the most crucial factors on
85
determining the research results and finding the solution based

on the problem found.
86
CHAPTER FOUR
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
4.1 Introduction
This chapter delivers the results based on findings

conducted onto participant feedback from the questionnaire and
interview session. The results collected will be presented in the
form of listing, classifying and identification and shown in the
form of tables and figures. The techniques used will be involve
the
analyzing
the
factors
of
Efficiency,
Learnability,
Memorability, Operability and Satisfactory in evaluating the

feasibility of MAP Automation.
4.2
Instrument Reliability
87
In order to analyze the result produced, the questionnaire

sets needed to be tested for its reliability. Using the Cronbachs
alpha coefficient in SPSS, all questions in the set will be tested
thoroughly for checking its reliability. The results of the test
conducted onto the questionnaire summarized in the Table 4.1.
Table 4.1:
Reliability Test Results
Factors
Cases
Items
Cronbachs Alpha
Feasibility
50
31
0.873
Efficiency
50
0.621
Learnability
50
0.758
Memorability
50
0.882
Operability
50
0.537
Satisfactory
50
0.817
88
According to George and Mallery (2003), nearly 0 value

means that the level of reliability is lowest, meanwhile nearly 1
means that the level of reliability is highest. He also declared
that if the value is more than 0.8, that value can be accepted as
an appropriate level of reliability for any instrument that we did.
Therefore from Table 4.1, the result of Cronbachs Alpha
specified that the score of the reliability test for overall
feasibility factors is 0.873 and it shows the instrument that used
in measuring the feasibility of the BattleTek 4.0 simulation
system has strong reliability. The factors of efficiency,
learnability, memorability, operability and satisfactory have the
moderate score between0.882 and 0.537. These scores indicate
the reliability factors of the questionnaire are acceptable.
4.3
Demographics Details
Following tables show the respondents demographic

details. Overall, there are 50 respondents responded to this
survey whom came from two (2) different groups which are the
operator of the BattleTek 4.0 and the student from Military
School. The significant of selected these two (2) groups is their
expertise in generating MAP and operating the simulation
89
system. Among 50 participants, there are 76% male and 24%

female respondents completed the questionnaire as per shown in
the graph in Figure 4.1. Based on Figure 4.2, 28% of them had
never used this system previously. But it will not affect the result
of questionnaire as they are familiar enough with the MAP.
According to Figure 4.3, 36% said that they are using
BattleTek 4.0 very often which is several times a day or twice
daily and 32% of them use the system few times a month or less.
Meanwhile, another 4% used once a week. Based on experience,
Figure 4.4 shows 56% from respondents use BattleTek 4.0
system between 2 years and 5 years of experience, whereas there
are no respondents that have used this system more than 5 years.
90
Figure 4.1:
Gender Comparative of Respondent
Gender
40
30
Gender
20
10
0
38
Male
12
Female
Figure 4.2
Using Experience
91
Using Experience
40
30
Using Experience
20
10
0
36
Yes
14
No
Figure 4.3
92
Using Frequency
Using Frequency
20
15
12
10
Using Frequency
2
5
0
14
16
Figure 4.4
Years of Experience
93
Experience
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
4.4
Experience
22
<1 year
28
2 - 5 years
0
> 5 years
Analysis on Efficiency of the MAP Automation in
BattleTek 4.0
94
Figure 4.5 below describes the summary output in the

average numbers for each question answered by the participants
on Efficiency factor and mean used for it. The mean scores are
classified into five parts which are:
Level of Efficiency
Mean Score
Strongly Disagree
0.00
1.00
Disagree
1.01
2.00
Neutral
2.01
3.00
Agree
3.01
4.00
Strongly Agree
4.01
5.00
Responses/feedback:
1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 =
Strongly Agree
Figure 4.5:
95
The Efficiency of MAP Automation in BattleTek 4.0
50
40
30 1
20
10
0
A1
A2
A3
A4
Figure 4.5 above shows the numbers of feedback

gathered from the respondents and mean value of percentage
according to their factors question. From the graph data, it is
concluded that each questions mean valued higher than 4.00
and the highest value is 4.74 from the effectiveness of
completing task using the system. Meanwhile, the lowest value
score is the efficiency of completing task given in the BattleTek
4.0 which scored 4.12. This shows that all respondents agreed
96
with the efficiency using BattleTek 4.0 to produce decision for

their MAP sequence.
The mean scores then studied further into classification of
feasibility level which is categorized into three categories.
Level
Score (round up
to the nearest)
Negative
<
Neutral
2.5 -
Positive
>
2.5
3.5
3.5
Table 4.2:
Feasibility
Mean
4.44
Sum
17.76
97
Table 4.2 shows the mean score of feasibility of MAP

Automation using BattleTek 4.0 for its efficiency factors. The
score of 4.44 indicates that the feasibility level is in the positive
level category which proves that all respondents are very well
understood the system purposes and knows how to apply it on
making decision.
4.5
Analysis on Learnability of the MAP Automation in
BattleTek 4.0

average numbers of graph format for each question answered by
the participants on Learnability factor and mean used for it. The
mean scores are classified into five parts which are:
Level of Efficiency
Mean Score
Strongly Disagree
1.00
98
0.00
Disagree
1.01
2.00
Neutral
2.01
3.00
Agree
3.01
4.00
Strongly Agree
4.01
5.00
Responses/feedback:
Strongly Agree
Figure 4.6:
The Learnability of MAP Automation in BattleTek 4.0
99
35
30
25
20
1
15
10
5
0
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5

gathered from the respondents and mean value according to their
factors question. From the graph data, it is concluded that each
questions mean valued between 3.50 to 4.10 and the highest
value is 4.08 from the ability to adapt function and dialogue
buttons in the system. Meanwhile, the lowest value score is the
arrangement of the contents in the BattleTek 4.0 which scored
3.5. This shows that all respondents agreed with the learnability
of using BattleTek 4.0 to produce decision is easy for the first
time or even for the experienced users.
100
The mean scores then studied further into classification

of feasibility level which is categorized into three categories.
Level
Score (round up
to the nearest)
Negative
<
Neutral
2.5 -
Positive
>
2.5
3.5
3.5
Table 4.3:
Feasibility
Mean
3.84
Sum
19.18

Automation using BattleTek 4.0 for its learnability factors. The
101

level category which proves that all respondents are able to
quickly learn and adapt the system requirement during the
process.
4.6
Analysis on Memorability of the MAP Automation In
BattleTek 4.0

average number in graph format for each question answered by
the participants on Memorability factor and mean used for it.
The mean scores are classified into five parts which are:
Level of Efficiency
Mean Score
Strongly Disagree
0.00
1.00
Disagree
1.01
2.00
Neutral
2.01
3.00
102
Agree
3.01
4.00
Strongly Agree
4.01
5.00
Responses/feedback:
Strongly Agree
Figure 4.7:
The Memorability of MAP Automation in BattleTek 4.0
103
35
30
25
20
15 1
10
5
0
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6

value is 4.18 from the ability to speed up the task completion by
using the system. Meanwhile, the lowest value score is the
numbers of steps required to complete the task which scored
3.48. This shows that all respondents agreed with the
memorability of using BattleTek 4.0 is easy and simple to be
memorized.
104
Level
Score (round up
to the nearest)
Negative
<
Neutral
2.5 -
Positive
>
2.5
3.5
3.5
Table 4.4:
Feasibility
Mean
3.74
Sum
22.44

Automation using BattleTek 4.0 for its memorability factors.
The score of 3.74 indicates that the feasibility level is in the
positive level category which proves that all respondents are
105
able to memorize the steps and function required within the

system in order to complete a task and achieves objectives.
4.7
Analysis on Operability of the MAP Automation in
BattleTek 4.0

average numbers in graph format for each question answered by
the participants on Operability factor and mean used for it. The
Level of Efficiency
Mean Score
Strongly Disagree
0.00
1.00
Disagree
1.01
2.00
Neutral
2.01
3.00
Agree
3.01
4.00
106
Strongly Agree
4.01
5.00
Responses/feedback:
Strongly Agree
Figure 4.8:
The Operability of MAP Automation in BattleTek 4.0
107
25
20
15 1
10
5
0
D1
D2
D3
D4

value is 4.28 from the clarity of providing troubleshoot message
to the user within the system. Meanwhile, the lowest value score
is the influence of making errors caused by the simulation
system which scored 2.70. This shows that all respondents
agreed with the operability of using BattleTek 4.0 are well
guided and user friendly. 46% of the respondents also disagree
with the error caused by the system itself.
108
Level
Score (round up
to the nearest)
Negative
<
Neutral
2.5 -
Positive
>
2.5
3.5
3.5
Table 4.5:
Feasibility
Mean
3.8
Sum
15.2

Automation using BattleTek 4.0 for its operability factors. The
109
level category which proves that all respondents are able to use
and operate the system without produce any simple mistake.
4.8
Analysis on Satisfactory of Using the BattleTek 4.0
for MAP Automation

average numbers in graph format for each question answered by
the participants on Satisfactory factor and mean used for it. The
Level of Efficiency
Mean Score
Strongly Disagree
0.00
1.00
Disagree
1.01
2.00
Neutral
2.01
3.00
Agree
3.01
4.00
110
Strongly Agree
4.01
5.00
Responses/feedback:
Strongly Agree
Figure 4.9:
The Satisfactory of Using BattleTek 4.0 for MAP Automation
111
40
30
20
10
0
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5
E6

value is 4.44 from the easiness of using the system by
information provided inside it. Meanwhile, the lowest value
score is the overall satisfaction with the system which scored
3.48. This shows that all respondents satisfied in using BattleTek
4.0 for MAP Automation.
112
Level
Score (round up
to the nearest)
Negative
<
Neutral
2.5 -
Positive
>
2.5
3.5
3.5
Table 4.6:
Feasibility
Mean
4.25
Sum
25.5

Automation using BattleTek 4.0 to evaluate users satisfactory
factors. The score of 4.25 indicates that the feasibility level is in
113
the positive level category which proves that all respondents are
highly satisfied with the MAP Automation by using BattleTek
4.0 as a tool.
4.9
Overall Mean Score

Table 4.7 below shows the overall mean score for
feasibility factors of applying MAP Automation using the

BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation System. The mean scores
used to identify the level of feasibility are divided into three
categories:
Level
Score (round up
to the nearest)
Negative
0.00 1.66
Neutral
1.67 3.33
Positive
3.34 5.00
Table 4.7:
Feasibility of MAP Automation Mean Level
Mean
Efficiency
Learnability
Memorability
Operability
Satisfactory
4.44
3.84
3.74
3.8
4.25
114
Feasibility
Level
4.01
Sum
17.76
19.18
22.44
15.2
Based on the level of all the five factors chosen, the

feasibility level are described and determine as the positive
which indicates all respondents agreed and accepted the
feasibility of applying MAP Automation using the system. The
mean for the feasibility of MAP Automation scored 4.01 and
determined as the positive category.
4.10
Interview Findings
The factors of feasibility output produced by conducting
a session of questioning and answering by using the set of

questionnaire method onto five chosen factors. These factors
provide the numerical information to be studied on. In order to
get more precise feedback from the users, another session of
gathering information was conducted in a different way such as
interviewing the operator. The summary of interview session is
described as:
4.10.1 Efficiency
According to the interview session with the user and the
operator, most of them agreed to accept the efficiency level of
115
25.5
20.02
applying MAP Automation using BattleTek 4.0 is high and

reliable. These practices are very useful for them to complete the
tasking of developing MAP especially in making such thorough
decision which involving the cost of time spent.
They had
saving much time during the process of making decision to

complete their MAP sequence and proceed to the next step
which is developing the plan.
4.10.2 Learnability
All participants declare that they are able to learn the
system process and working scheme based on the user
friendliness of the system. However, they also admit that all
personnel that are going to use the system need to attend a short
course conducted for their better understanding of using the
system. An expert had also highlighted the better understanding
will produce a better result in the simulation process.
4.10.3 Memorability
Even the simulation system has its own data storage and
capable of recording or archiving data, some certain materials
need to be memorized by the user such as the factors of
consideration that might be very useful to be merged with the
116
systems functions. This skills and techniques are impossibly

stored in the systems recording and archiving functions.
4.10.4 Operability
All the users have been familiar with all the steps and
concepts. However, when it comes to the system with
inconsistency interface, the user will be confused and forgets the
steps on how to operate the tasks given. Even though this event
sometimes occurs again, the system will provide guidelines to
the user such as the notification pop-up or reminder.
4.10.5 Satisfactory
Overall participants feedback was considered as a total
feedback as they admit the usefulness of applying the MAP
Automation had ease the work burden. The complexity of the
BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation System was truly assisting
them on completing the task. The function inside the system had
totally applied and the result provided by the simulation system
was proven practical and produced within a minute. The details
information was also produced in order to justify the selection of
approach options.
4.11
Conclusion
117
This chapter has discussed the information gathered and

the findings result by analysing such input. All information are
gathered from the interview session and survey conducted onto
50 participants which involve directly in the operating the
simulation system and developing the MAP process. It was
studied thoroughly into five factors which are the efficiency,
learnability, memorability, operability and satisfactory of the
user in order to determine the feasibility of applying MAP
Automation using BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation System.
In the end of the analysis, the idea of applying MAP Automation
is feasible especially when applied into the simulation system.
118
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1
Introduction
This chapter will deliberately discover and conclude the

overall analysis and findings for this study. Proper suggestions
and recommendation will be provided for future reference.
These suggestions will assist to the improvement and
enhancement of the Military Appreciation Process Automation
in the next study proposal. Some of the highlighted points will
be referring to the operator and the user. It also expected to be
very useful for Malaysian Army personnel and management in
improving the current system.
5.2
Summary of the Research
119
The aim and the purpose of this research paper is to

study the feasibility of applying MAP Automation using
BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation System and also to explain
the implementation of the MAP Automation using the related
decision making process and model. In order to fulfill the
requirement of studying the feasibility of MAP Automation,
there were five factors chosen to evaluate the degree of
feasibility. These factors included the Efficiency, Learnability,
Memorability, Operability
and
Satisfactory
which
were
produced from the survey and interview sessions. The overall

result of studying the feasibility is positive and it indicates that
the MAP Automation is truly feasible and practical.
As for the implementation studies done for the BattleTek
4.0 Wargame Simulation System, as shown in the Figure 5.1, the
Command and Control Decision Making model will be used
along with the Effect Based Operation Wargame Simulator
(EBOWS) as the tool to run the simulation. EBOWS will be
used to analyze the output produced from the BattleTek 4.0
Wargame Simulation System and provide the details of
particular results.
Figure 5.1: Command and Control Decision Making Model

120
OBJECTIVES, PRIORITIES, DOCTRINES, TTPs, CONSTRAINTS
Appreciation
DECISION
Experiences
Understanding
Information
Context
Data
REAL WORLD
5.3
Proposed
Solutions
Improvement
121
for
MAP
Automation
Perception
Knowledge
Referring to the results and output produced in this

study, a few suggestions might be needed to be highlighted for
future improvement in making more efficient decision making
model and suitable tool that will be used. The proposed
solutions are as follow:
a.
All Courses of Action shall be needed to be
keyed into the simulation system to allow the simulation

engine recognize and differentiate the suitable approach
to be chosen for current simulation.
b.
Each successful approach shall be stored into the
simulation system archive for future use or reference and

also can be used for speeding up the systems decision
making process.
c.
For the purpose of learning, each time of login
will show the quick guide of using the simulation system

especially for the beginner.
d.
Implying the real concept of modern warfare
such as hybrid warfare and asymmetrical warfare into

the system capability.
122
e.
The operator of the system need to undergo
thorough study about the simulation system and will

assure not to be transferred to another task force.
f.
Maintenance onto all of the devices shall be done
at least twice a month to ensure the system to perform of

its best.
5.4

This section will review the research objectives by
providing the deliverables to show achievement of the

objectives in proper view. As shown in Table 5.1, the project has
successfully achieved all its objectives.
Table 5.1:
No
1.
Research Objective
To conduct the feasibility study onto MAP
automation.
2.
Explaining the implementation of MAP

Automation in the BattleTek 4.0 using the
related decision making process.
Activity
Deliverable
Conducted
Quantitative
Details Statistics
Method
Explanation in
Literature Review
Chapter 4.
Implementation
of Decision
Making Model in
Chapter 2.
123
5.5
Limitation and Constraints

While doing this study, some limitation has been
encountered such as time constraint in finishing the study.

Investigation on the main actual problems and issues was quite
challenging as it was difficult to get full cooperation from the
participants within time allocation. Some factors involved the
professionalism attitude among participants whom were not
seriously answer the questionnaire. Thus, some results may not
be entirely accurate and cannot be used to generalized problems,
issues, and solutions in the bigger context of the use of the
system. Especially, when the system is migrated to web-based
system, further research on problems, issues, and solutions in
the context of usability need to be considered and examined.
5.6
Conclusion
Throughout this study paper, it is concluded that the
MAP Automation will be one of the important element in

developing tactics and doctrine for the Malaysian Army and
even for the whole Armed Forces. The idea of make it automate
is to achieve the feasibility and will be fully utilized in term of
cost and time saving. Other than that, the advantage of utilizing
124
this technology can reduce the human resource requirement in

order to conduct such training and exercises.
125
REFERENCES
Aparna Malhotra, Sanjay Biasht, S.B. Taneja. Using Intelligent
Agents to Simulate Battle Tanks Tactics, unpublished.
Army Training Command Headquarters (ATCHQ), (2003). MD
3.0.C TD Tactics, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysian Army.
Army Training Command Headquarters (ATCHQ), (2011). MD
5.0.A TD Malaysian Army Military Appreciation
Process, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysian Army.
Bhat, U. N., (1979). Elements of Applied Stochastic Processes,
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Brady, Jim. (1999) STORM Air-to-Air Adjudication Prototype.
Canberra: Military Operations Research Society.
Breiman, L. (1969). Probability and Stochastic Processes with a
View Toward Applications. Boston, Houghton Mifflin.
C. A. Lindley, and C. C. Sennersten, (2006). A Cognitive
Framework for the Analysis of Game Play, Workshop on
the Cognitive Science of Games and Game Play, CogSci,
Vancouver, Ramsmith.
Chang Ho Sung, Su-Youn Hong, and Tag Gon Kim, (2005).
Layered Approach to Development of OO War Game
Models Using DEVS Framework, in Proceedings of the
Summer Computer Simulation Conference.
Clark R. Karr, Dauglas Reece, (1997). Synthetic Soldiers, New
York, IEEE Spectrum.
126
Dearlove, Des (2003). The Ultimate Book of Business Thinking:

Harnessing the Power of the Worlds Greatest Business
Ideas, Oxford, Captstone Publishing Ltd.
Defense Services Command and Staff College (DSC&SC),
(1993). Counterinsurgency Operations (CI OPS), Mirpur,
Army Staff College.
Dibb, Earnst W. and J.K. Wringley, (1994). Our Future Defence
Force, Defence 2000 White Paper, pg. 56.
Fallesen Jon J, (1995). Decision Matrices and Time in Tactical
Course of Action Analysis, Military Psychology, Vol. 7,
No. 1, pg. 49.
Fayette, F. J., (2001). Effects Based Operations. Sydney, AFRL
Technology Horizons.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by
step: A simple guide and reference. Boston, Allyn &
Bacon Publication.
Guevara Che, (1985), Guerrilla Warfare, University of Nebraska
Press, pg.49.
Hessler, W. H., (1963). Guerrilla Warfare is Different, in Studies
in Guerrilla Warfare, United States Naval Institute, 1963,
pp 11
Hoel, R. G., S. C. Port, and C. J. Stone., (1972). Introduction to
Stochastic Processes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972.
127
Hotskin, R. (2009). The ghost in the machine : better

application of human factors to enhance the military .
Canberra: Land Warfare Study Center.
HQAT&DC - Army Intelligent Branch, (2010). LANUN Mock
up Red Forces for Malaysian Army, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysian Army.
HQAT&DC, (2001). Malaysian Army Land Warfare Manual
Conventional Warfare, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysian Army.
HQAT&DC, (2005). Military Appreciation Process Manual
Quick and Deliberate MAP, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysian
Army.
John R. Surdu, Udo W. Pooch, (2000). Simulation Technologies
in the Mission Operational Environment, Simulation 74:3,
pp 138-160.
Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman (2004), Rules of Play: Game
Design Fundamentals, Cambridge: MIT Press.
Law, Averill M. and Kelton, W. David, (1991). Simulation
Modeling and Analysis. New York, McGraw-Hill.
Leedy, P. D., & Ormond, J. E. (2005). Practical research:
Planning and design (8th ed.). New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
Lindley C. A. and Sennersten C. (2004), Game Play Schemas:
From Player Analysis to Adaptive Game Mechanics,
International Journal of Computer Game Technology, Vol.
1, Issue 1.
LWD 5-1-4 The Military Appreciation Process, 2009, para 1.4128
1.10.
LWD 7-0 Fundamentals of Education and Training, 2009, para
3.28
Malaysian Armed Forces (MAF), (2007). JDoc 3.13.1 Joint
Doctrine for Electronic Warfare in Modern Era.MAF
Headquarters. MAF.
Marsh, Dr. Howard S., Mr. Paul W. Quinn, Mr. Gary J. Toth,
LCDR David A. Jakubek (2001), Tactical Decision
Making: The Interaction of Human Perception and
Judgment with Automated Information Processing and
Presentation, RTO-EN-019, London, RMA of Sandhurst.
Monique Kardos and Taryn Chapman (2003). Constrained
Planning and Wargame Performance in Military and
Civilian Teams . Edinburgh South Australia: DSTO
Systems Sciences Laboratory.
Najib, M. (2003). Reka Bentuk Tinjauan Soal Selidik Penyelidikan,
Johor Bharu, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Page, E. H. and Smith R. (1998). Introduction to military

training
simulation:
guide
for
Discrete
Event
Simulationists, Winter Simulation Conference (WSC98),

USA.
Paul Davis, (1995). Distributed Interactive Simulation in the
Evolution of DoD Warfare Modeling and Simulation,
Proceedings of the IEEE, 83(8), pp 1138-1155.
Peter P. Perla and Michael C. Markowitz, (2004). Wargame
Pathologies. Virginia: The CNA Corporation.
129
Peter P. Perla,(1990). The Art of Wargaming, Annapolis: US

Naval Institute Press.
Pusat Olah Perang Tentera Darat (POP TD), (2008). Sejarah
POP TD, Kuala Lumpur, Markas Tentera Darat.
Riese, Lieutenant Colonel Stephen R. (2003), Quantifying
Information Availability for Situational Awareness: MORS
Workshop on Decision Aids/Support to Joint Operations
Planning, briefing at the US Army Training and Doctrine
Analysis Center, Quantico.
SAAB International, (2010). BattleTek 4.0 Operating Manual,
South Africa, SAAB AB Publ.
Serfaty, D., Entin, E. E., and Tenney, R.R (1988). Planning with
uncertain and conflicting information. In Johnson, S. E.
and Levis, A. (Eds) Science of Command and Control:
Coping with Uncertainty. Washington D.C: AFCEA
International Press.
Smith, C., (2011). Design and Planning of Campaigns and
Operations in the Twenty-First Century, Canberra, Land
Warfare Studies Centre.
Smith, R., (2008). The Utility of Force, New York, Vintage
Books, pp. 1517.
Smith, Roger D., (1998). Essential Techniques for Military
Modelling & Simulation Technologies, Winter Simulation
Conference.
130
Taylor, Howard M., Karlin, Samuel,(1984). An Introduction to

Stochastic Modelling, London, Academic Press Limited.
Tung, Mao Tse, (1992). Guerrilla Warfare, Baltimore, The
Nautical and Aviation Publishing Company of America,
pg. 69.
Watman Kenneth (2003), War Gaming and Its Role in
Examining Future Warfare. The Brown Journal of World
Affairs, vol X, Issue 1, pg 76-84.
Weiner Milton, (1959). An introduction to war games. RAND
publication P-1773. Retrieved June 1, 2011 from
http://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P1773/.
Youngblood, S.M. and Dale K. Pace. (1995). An Overview of
Model and Simulation Verification, Validation, and
Accreditation, Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest,
Volume 16. Number 2: 197-205
131
APPENDICES
132
APPENDIX A
PRE TEST QUESTION

INVESTIGATE THE FEASIBILITY OF APPLYING MAP
AUTOMATION
Instruction and Items: The questionnaires instructions and items are:
Dear Respected Respondents.
This questionnaire, which begins on the accompanying page, provides
for you a chance to let us know your responses to the framework you
utilized. Your reactions will help us comprehend what parts of the
framework you are especially worried about and the angles that fulfil
you.
To as incredible a degree as would be prudent, consider all the errands
that you have finished with the framework while you answer these
inquiries.
This questionnaire contains 31 questions in two sections:
Section A: Respondents Background
Section B: Feasibility Factors
Please read each statement and indicate how strongly you agree or
disagree with the statement by circling a number on the scale. If a
statement does not apply to you, circle the smallest scale.
After you have completed this questionnaire, I'll go over your answers
with you to make sure I understand all of your responses. Your
response will be kept strictly confidential and be used solely for the
academic purposes
133
Thank you!
With best regards,
Mohammad Fariszul Syauqie bin Ismail
Master of Science (Information Technology)
Faculty of Information Technology and Quantitative Sciences
University of MARA Technology
017-2237744
SECTION 1 : RESPONDENTS BACKGROUND
Tick () the appropriate box:
1. Gender:
2. Age :
40-49 year
3.
Male
Female
20-29 year
Education Background : SPM

(Highest qualification)
30-39 year
Degree
STPM
Master
Diploma
Others
134
4. Have you used the BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation System

before?
No
Yes
5. How often do you use the BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation

System?
Never use
A few times a month or less
Once a week
Every day or two
Several times a day
6. How many years of experience using this system?

< 1 year
2 years to 5 years
>5 years
SECTION 2 - INVESTIGATE THE FEASIBILITY
FACTORS OF BATTLETEK 4.0 WARGAME
SIMULATION SYSTEM
135
Using the following scale, circle the number that represents your
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Factor A : Efficiency of the BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation System
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
opinion about each of the following statements:
1.
I was able to efficiently complete the tasks and scenarios using this
2.
3.
4.
system.
I could effectively complete the tasks and scenarios using this system
It was easy to do the decision making using this system.
I believe I could make more efficient and effective decision using this
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
system
1.
2.
3.
It was easy to learn to use this system

I can complete the task easily without getting any training
It was easy to learn and understand the dialog buttons. (e.g: add,
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
4.
5.
delete, submit, view, browse, etc.).

The arrangement of the content was consistent.
It was easy to move around in this system without getting lost.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
Factor B : Learnability of the BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation

System
136
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
1.
2.
3.
4.
Steps to complete the task follow a logical sequence

It was easy to forget the steps on how to do things in the system
There are too many steps required to complete the tasks
I was able to complete the tasks and scenarios quickly using this
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5.
6.
system
It was simple to use this system
It was easy to conduct and navigate the system without much
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
Factor C : Memorability of the BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation

System
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
trouble.
1.
The system gave error messages that clearly told me how to fix the
2.
problems
Whenever I made a mistake using the system, I could recover easily
3.
4.
and quickly
The system caused me to make errors
The information (such as on-line help, on screen messages and other
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
Factor D : Operabilty of the BattleTek 4.0 Wargame Simulation

System
documentation) provided with this system was clear to avoid errors
137
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
It was easy to find the information needed

The information provided for the system was easy to understand
The interface of this system was pleasant
This system has all functions and capabilities I expect it to have
Overall, I am satisfied with the amount of time it took to complete
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
6.
the tasks in the system.

Overall, I am satisfied with this system
Factor E : Satisfactory of using the BattleTek 4.0 Wargame

Simulation System
Please check you have circled each item.
Please write your comments or opinions about the BattleTek 4.0

Wargame Simulation system:
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
Thank you
138
139
APPENDIX B
POST TEST INTERVIEW

INVESTIGATE THE FEASIBILITY OF MAP
AUTOMATION USING BATTLETEK 4.0 WARFARE
SIMULATION SYSTEM
1.
What are your overall impressions of the system?
2.
If you had to give the system a grade, from A to F, where
A was exemplary and F was failing, what grade would you give
it, and why?
3.
What are the three things you like best about the system
interface?
4.
If you could make one significant change to this
interface, what change would you make?
140
5.
Would you return to this system on your own in the
future? Why / why not?

6.
What entice you to return and using the system again?
7.
Are there materials or functions you would like to see
added to the system?

8.
Do you have any comments about the system?
141
APPENDIX C
Fakulti Sains Komputer dan Matematik

Universiti Teknologi MARA Malaysia
Form B : Supervisory Meeting Log

Sheet
Students Name
: MOHAMMAD FARISZUL SYAUQIE B ISMAIL
Student ID
: 2012711321
No
DateName : MR FAUZI
Comments
& Suggestions
Supervisors
BIN MOHD
SAMAN
13/9/2014 Discussing about the selection of the Topic.
20/9/2014
Reviewing chapter 1 Introduction that suit

the purpose of the study.
18/10/2014
Discussing Chapter 2 and 3 based on last

semesters proposal paper.
25/10/2014
Aligning the methodology that shall be used

for this study.
1/11/2014
Discussing for developing the suitable

questionnaire for the study paper.
15/11/2014
Analysis study the data gathered using the

chosen method.
10
22/11/2014 Compiling the paper write up.
142
Supervisors
Signature
Submission of the paper draft through email

for Supervisors endorsement.
12
6/12/2014
13
13/12/2014 Finalizing the paper write up.
I hereby declare that this log sheet represents the

actual meeting attendance between me and my
supervisor that have taken place according to the
stated date above.
Students Signature: _______________________

Date :_______________
*This form is to be submitted together with the IT Project report
143

Final Thesis Submission Jan 15

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Final Thesis Submission Jan 15

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY MARA

MOHAMMAD FARISZUL SYAUQIE

MOHAMMAD FARISZUL SYAUQIE BIN

IT Project submitted in partial fulfilment

Faculty of Computer and Mathematical Sciences

I declare that the work in this IT Project was carried

FARISZUL SYAUQIE BIN

Military simulation systems are categorized as training, analysis

Immeasurable gratitude to Allah S.W.T. for granting the

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.3.1 Phase 1: Preliminary Analysis

CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Analysis on Efficiency of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0

Analysis on Learnability of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0

Analysis on Memorability of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0

Analysis on Operability of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0

Analysis on Satisfactory of the MAP Automation in BattlTek 4.0

Overall Mean Score

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary of the Research

Proposed Solutions for MAP Automation Improvement

Reviewing Research Objectives

Limitation and Constraints

Research Design Summary

The Direction Strengths and Correlation Classification

Reliability Test Results

Mean Feasibility Level

Mean Feasibility Level

Mean Feasibility Level

Mean Feasibility Level

Mean Feasibility Level

Feasibility of MAP Automation Mean Level

Reviewing Research Objectives

Engagement Simulation in the System

Conventional War Gaming Process

The Memorability of MAP Automation in BattleTek 4.0

Military Appreciation Process

Pusat Olah Perang Tentera Darat

Staff Military Appreciation Process

Individual Military Appreciation Process

Combat Military Appreciation Process

Land Warfare Doctrine

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

Effect Based Operation Wargame System

Counter Insurgency Warfare

Intelligent Preparation for Battlefield

Synthetic Theatre Operations Research

High Level Architecture

Doctrine, Organisation, Training,

Command and Control

This chapter delivers a brief explanation to clarify the

design summary is provided to give the initial idea of how the

Military simulation system can be categorized as a tool

Simulation Techniques and Military Operation Doctrine for Blue

simulations, even if the required knowledge of military tactics

Programming and framework produced for the test system can

In the vision of developing a modern and multi-capable

Figure 1.1: BattleTek 4.0 Initial Page

Figure 1.2: The Deployment Simulation

Figure 1.3: Engagement Simulation in the System

With the current development of modern Army concept,

International S.A. This brand new technology and infrastructure

as the Blue Force, Red Force or even the Assessor. The