The researcher is not a computer game player. Therefore, there were no preconceived notions about the final design and nature of 72-Hours. A literature review of game design was complete before beginning development of 72-Hours. Based on the literature review, it was determined that the game would be a collaborative, serious, role- playing, real-time strategy game. Furthermore, for the thesis to be a valid concept for DHS and FEMA to use, it would have to provide positive transfer to actual Regional Response Coordination Staff positions. Part of the realism includes using real-world data and planning guides. Finally, the nature of the play itself should capture the essence and feel of a Regional Response Coordination Center. This section outlines the researcher’s methodology for realizing each of these factors.
Player Roles: The essence of Regional Response Coordination Staff performance is collaboration. While key members of the RRCS have the authority to actually commit resources and make operational decisions, they not only rely on their subordinate section’s staff, but other leaders as well to accomplish the mission. This condition lends itself to a direct translation to good gaming design of using asymmetric roles to force players to work together. While the interdependencies are simplified in the game, the
roles match actual Regional Incident Support Manual roles and responsibilities. For example, in the prototype, the RISM information sharing methodology is emphasized by having the Situational Awareness Section Chief being responsible for drawing and distributing all situational input cards.
Serious Game Elements: Serious games have a purpose other than entertainment. Since the very intent is to use 72-Hours as a training platform, it needs to emulate a real world disaster response. Battlestar Galactica and Pandemic are excellent, cooperative, role playing, strategy games. Since they are so difficult to win, the players must work well together and learn from past games to be successful. This is, of course, similar to the necessary condition of FEMA RRCC training and exercises. While having Regional Response Coordination Staff simply play these games may help them to become better strategists and team players, they will not learn their respective Regional Incident Support Manual positions. Therefore, the game design is based on RISM positions as well as individual FEMA Qualification System standards. The player roles and responsibilities (Appendix B) are as defined in the Regional Incident Support Manual. There are no fictitious characters or super capabilities.
Realism: The game should use accurate planning factors to enhance realism. The challenge with the 72-Hours prototype is to develop a “board” game with a realistic enough feel for players to have a positive transfer to Regional Response Coordination Center Operations. Actual or realistic planning factors are used in the player handbook materials. FEMA essentially conducts its disaster response efforts by creating resource requests and issuing mission assignments. Mission assignments are nothing more than contracts between FEMA and other organizations to provide disaster response support. The resource sourcing cards (Appendix D) are based on the FEMA Region IX pre- scripted mission assignment library. Due to the extreme time constraints in 72-Hours, the statements of work on each card are simplified. The numerical factors on each card are either based on actual FEMA guides or are representative of real world conditions. For example, FEMA’s “Incident Support Handbook”81 is the source for many planning
factors such as the truck payloads, number of personnel required for a Point of Distribution, and the amount of commodities such as ice, water, meals, blankets, and tarps each disaster survivor will need. FEMA’s “Commonly Used Sheltering Items & Services Listing Catalogue”82 is the source for information about requirements such as infant-toddler kits, durable medical equipment and, consumable medical supplies. The Department of Health and Human Services was the source for the capacity of Federal Medical Stations, Disaster Management Assistance Teams, and Disaster Mortuary Operational Response Teams. The airlift capacities of C-1783 and C-13084 aircraft are
from official U.S. Air Force web pages. FEMA’s, “Schedule of Equipment Rates”85 was the source for costs such as the material handling equipment. In short, the planning factors are actual numbers to the maximum extent possible.
Simplifications: The three, major simplifications are for resource movement costs, the amount of durable medical equipment and the amount of consumable medical supplies. Although FEMA responds to many disasters each year, the final statements of work are not let until each disaster occurs. This means that even with DOD, FEMA negotiates a final cost for its movement needs. However, what is consistent is DOD airlift is the most expensive airlift option, commercial airlift is less expensive, and surface movement is the least expensive of the three options. In order to simulate this relationship, the resource sourcing cards simply reflect that differential with realistic costs. In addition, FEMA’s “Commonly Used Sheltering Items & Services Listing Catalogue”86 uses a planning factor of 10% of a shelter population requiring infant toddler kits. However, it has no similar factor for durable medical equipment or
82 Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Commonly Used Sheltering Items & Services Listing (CUSI-SL) Catalogue,” (Washington, D.C.: Federal Emergency Management Agency, August, 2011), 2- 10.
83 U.S. Air Force, “C-17 Globemaster III,” accessed July 8, 2015,
http://www.af.mil/AboutUs/FactSheets/Display/tabid/224/Article/104523/c-17-globemaster-iii.aspx. 84 U.S. Air Force, “C-130 Hercules,” accessed July 8, 2015,
http://www.af.mil/AboutUs/FactSheets/Display/tabid/224/Article/104517/c-130-hercules.aspx.
85 Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Schedule of Equipment Rates,” accessed July 7, 2015, https://www.fema.gov/schedule-equipment-rates.
86 Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Commonly Used Sheltering Items & Services Listing (CUSI-SL) Catalogue,” (Washington, D.C.: Federal Emergency Management Agency, August, 2011), 2- 10.
consumable medical supplies. The 72-Hours prototype uses a planning factor of 5% of the shelter population for both of these categories. In addition to the situational input cards and the resource request sourcing cards, the planning factors are used in the player handbook. The researcher combined the various guides and sources into an Excel workbook and the player handbook into a consolidated resource that players and even Regional Response Coordination Staff can use to expedite their response efforts. The Excel workbook, as well as the other supplemental materials, may be accessed through the Dudley Knox Library at http://hdl.handle.net/10945/46412.
High-Tempo Environment: Finally, in actual RRCC operations, personnel are synchronized by an operational tempo and operate simultaneously to accomplish their individual tasks. This dynamic lent itself to making 72-Hours a simultaneous play, turn- based game. Not only does this type of game provide realism, but simultaneous play is also an excellent game design technique to increase player engagement. 72-Hours is specifically designed to be a simultaneous, turn based game. Just as in actual disaster response operations, the players work on their respective responsibilities and then come together at the end of each turn to accomplish tasks similar to those outlined in the Regional Incident Support Manual operational tempo. For example, the Planning Support Section typically works with a small team on the Regional Support Plan and then briefs that plan according to the operational tempo. This same concept would be captured in 72- Hours. Since developing a computer game by writing code would be a high-cost and high-risk venture, the first step is to establish a proof of concept with a board game prototype.
In summary, 72-Hours was designed by deconstructing the operations and nature of Regional Response Coordination Center disaster response operations as defined in the Regional Incident Support Manual. RRCC operations were then overlaid onto computer game design fundamentals. Then, as with the industry standard, the board game prototype was developed to mimic Regional Response Coordination Center and an eventual 72- Hours computer game to the maximum extent possible. The prototype is essentially a board game played on a web-based platform. Due to the fidelity of the prototype, even if
FEMA does not develop the full 72-Hours computer game, the agency could use the prototype as a training aid.
Limitations: While 72-Hours is designed to improve FEMA’s RRCC training and exercises, the prototype and final version of the game have limitations. The most significant limitation is 72-Hours is intended to help leaders and staff make decisions under pressure. The assumption is the leadership and the staff are fundamentally sound and have accomplished basic FEMA training. This is especially true for the board game prototype. Computer games, on the other hand, can be designed to coach individual players and provide performance feedback based on the FEMA Qualification System. As with existing computer games, 72-Hours can be designed with a training mode in which players could play alone to learn the system. However, due to the design of the prototype as a board game, the assumption is that the players are already qualified. The position descriptions are very brief. In addition, the quick pace of the game requires a high proficiency level. If players wished to use the prototype for training novices, they would need instructors. They could also slow the game clock or stop it all together to allow instruction and discussion.
A second, major limitation is 72-Hours requires a large number of players. Again, the nature and pace of the game requires the players to work as a team. Given the state of MMO games, this is not a technological leap for the final game. The large number of required players is more of a limitation for the prototype. A team of teams will be beneficial to a point. An ideal number is likely to be between five and ten. However, it is difficult to imaging a full, 40-person Regional Response Coordination Staff playing the prototype.