 Unified Quest 04, like Unified Quest 03 before it, was a war game co-sponsored by the U.S. Joint Forces Command and the U.S. Army. Focusing on its goal of coherent joint operations, the thrust of U.Q.04 was the joint operations concepts, specifically major combat operations, transitions, stability operations, network-enabled battle command. Unified Quest 04 looked at how future concepts and capabilities will be pitted against opponents whose conventional forces have been largely defeated and are turning to a protracted unconventional approach, including the use of weapons of mass destruction or effect. The game included representatives from all branches of the armed services and a number of combatant commands, an increased multinational presence playing their own forces fully integrated into the player teams, and a more robust international and interagency contingent, supported by a distributed network and represented through the Joint Interagency Coordination Group. U.Q.04 was a major event that integrated the objectives and insights of a series of joint and service games. This game continuum allowed an examination of a common set of joint and service objectives, leading to future joint games that include all services and joint experimental goals. Unified Quest's 03 and 04 was a two-year war game. The entry and shaping operations of U.Q.03 transitioned to the major combat and stability operations in U.Q.04, resulting in an examination of future conflict in its entirety, from pre to post conflict. The game scenario and national guidance was developed two years ago. The game design was modified to enhance gameplay and expand our knowledge of U.Q.03 insights. In Tactical Case A, staff and war college students investigated how future concepts might be executed employing current capabilities in a metropolitan region. Tactical Case B focused on the same metropolitan region employing future capabilities. Operational Case C involved a major combat operation at the theater level, and Operational Case D examined joint operations in a small-scale contingency. All forces were headed by different commanders from the joint community. Free play was emphasized. Blue forces were facing a worldwide global threat environment that may have limited their resources to the forces in theater. The strategic setting of 2016 envisioned a world of tensions and crises, including a major conflict in Nair and an insurgency in Symmesia. All gameplay started in early January 2016. In Nair, after several weeks of major operations, blue forces held much of the country but faced significant red forces in the Wrethan area. Red forces outside the capital were conducting small unit actions aimed at drawing out the war to test blue's national resolve and preserve red forces. Red was able to continue attacks on sustainment efforts along the Rutke-Wrethan line of communication. In Symmesia, blue coalition forces had domination over the airspace and blue waters. In the capital city of Ashkarat, stability operations were underway after blue had repelled an attack on the city. In the cities of Jambi and Medan, red support allowed red forces to attack blue and then disappear back into the masses. In the countryside, along littoral and river systems and in rural areas, red forces were strong and able to launch guerrilla attacks on blue supply lines. Both Nair and Symmesia, red continued asymmetric attacks on blue's extended lines of communications and positioned for a protracted fight. In Nair, blue had tactical successes securing air and seaports and ground lines of communications. Red used its dispersed, decentralized forces to conduct ambushes and artillery raids. Red significantly improved its defensive position in Wrethan. Blue isolated Wrethan but lacked the necessary forces to enter the city. Red continued non-conventional attacks against blue. In Symmesia, blue forces improved control over Ashkarat and Palembang. In Medan and Jambi, the urban insurgencies continued. Guerilla attacks on blue forces, supply lines and lines of communication continued. As did red's mining operations in estuary areas. Red's fighting strength in these areas remained strong. Blue controlled air and seaports. Joint sea basing enhanced blue's capabilities. Red's laser attack on a commercial satellite had little effect on blue but had major commercial impact. In both theaters, Red's military strategy of survival was to prolong the fight by using guerilla attacks. In Nair, blue successfully used air and long range fire. Blue faced significant reconstitution challenges in four task forces. In Wrethan, the World Health Organization reported growing privations. Yet Red's information operations campaign helped maintain support within the population. Red continued ambushes on the main supply routes from Rutke and Senahaf. Blue gained control over selected areas and conducted civility operations. While blue isolated most cities, Red still controlled them. Red was able to launch several major operations, impeding blue's progress, prolonging the conflict. Red's goal was to sustain the fight long enough to break blue's resolve. In Sumizia, the red insurgency in rural areas grew unchallenged by blue. Red's guerilla attacks against blue's logistical efforts succeeded in closing down one task forces ground line of communications. Despite blue challenges, Red continued operations in littoral and river systems. Blue gained control of Jambi and opened a sea line of communication. Blue tightened control over Ashkarat and Palambang. Blue's reduced presence in Medan allowed a gang war to grow, setting off a humanitarian crisis. In both theaters, blue shifted its focus from combat to stability operations. Red continued asymmetric attacks. In Karaj, blue forces established a provisional government. A red chemical attack on Karaj was militarily insignificant, but inflicted substantial casualties on the population. In Sumizia, blue forces made gains in urban areas, while red forces consolidated their strength in the rural areas. By March 2016, the conflict in both theaters continues, as Unified Quest 04 concludes.