> Troops describe the program as user-friendly. A soldier logs into an online store to peruse the offerings. **Only a commander can place the order**, paying with his unit’s account.
Oh ok, that makes perfect sense. The system would be incredibly stupid otherwise.
mwheele86 on
Submission Statement: This article is great in showing the elaborate system Ukraine’s military has set up to turn the whole war into almost like a CoD where you earn points and can upgrade your equipment.
A larger point related to this is more politicians should seriously look at video games for some rules about program design (especially dem politicians). A few of those points I can think of:
1. In RTS games, focusing on your macro always beats any micro decisions you make. Blue states should not forget attracting businesses, well paid workers and industry will trump any other efforts or programs you attempt over a long enough horizon.
2. If you have ever played Destiny, you’ll understand it has become bogged down by so many complex and competing systems, currencies, and game loops, that it is a significant deterrent to anyone new to the game or even those that have taken a meaningful break from playing. This leaves only the most dedicated players to dominate both the game and feedback on preferences. Likewise, adding more and more complex regulations and rules to an industry (like healthcare) deters and dissuades new entrants while incumbents slowly gain all influence with policy makers.
3. In Call of Duty, no matter how much time developers spend trying to craft systems to make a variety of weapons and tactics viable, within weeks of a game’s release, players converge on optimal weapons and loadouts with very little variety. Policy makers should understand there is no central engineering outcomes, humans and markets when left to their own devices miraculously converge on what will maximie their own individual outcomes.
In short, video game designers could probably give a lot of useful advice to lawmakers on human behavior and how the best laid intentions very rarely lead to the outcomes you expect the more you try and tinker with things.
Eilemthxx on
It’s pretty insane how quickly this became gameified. I understand its utility in this war, but I don’t see how easily this would translate to other country′s and their theaters of conflict. The point system is an outgrowth from the fact that you can reliably attribute kills and equipment destruction to individuals and their units, which itself is an outgrowth of constant video feed from cameras involved in the process. The market was born out of the necessity of a protracted war with very defined lines and very specific circumstances.
3 Comments
> Troops describe the program as user-friendly. A soldier logs into an online store to peruse the offerings. **Only a commander can place the order**, paying with his unit’s account.
Oh ok, that makes perfect sense. The system would be incredibly stupid otherwise.
Submission Statement: This article is great in showing the elaborate system Ukraine’s military has set up to turn the whole war into almost like a CoD where you earn points and can upgrade your equipment.
A larger point related to this is more politicians should seriously look at video games for some rules about program design (especially dem politicians). A few of those points I can think of:
1. In RTS games, focusing on your macro always beats any micro decisions you make. Blue states should not forget attracting businesses, well paid workers and industry will trump any other efforts or programs you attempt over a long enough horizon.
2. If you have ever played Destiny, you’ll understand it has become bogged down by so many complex and competing systems, currencies, and game loops, that it is a significant deterrent to anyone new to the game or even those that have taken a meaningful break from playing. This leaves only the most dedicated players to dominate both the game and feedback on preferences. Likewise, adding more and more complex regulations and rules to an industry (like healthcare) deters and dissuades new entrants while incumbents slowly gain all influence with policy makers.
3. In Call of Duty, no matter how much time developers spend trying to craft systems to make a variety of weapons and tactics viable, within weeks of a game’s release, players converge on optimal weapons and loadouts with very little variety. Policy makers should understand there is no central engineering outcomes, humans and markets when left to their own devices miraculously converge on what will maximie their own individual outcomes.
In short, video game designers could probably give a lot of useful advice to lawmakers on human behavior and how the best laid intentions very rarely lead to the outcomes you expect the more you try and tinker with things.
It’s pretty insane how quickly this became gameified. I understand its utility in this war, but I don’t see how easily this would translate to other country′s and their theaters of conflict. The point system is an outgrowth from the fact that you can reliably attribute kills and equipment destruction to individuals and their units, which itself is an outgrowth of constant video feed from cameras involved in the process. The market was born out of the necessity of a protracted war with very defined lines and very specific circumstances.