| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| Foreign Policy magazine publishes wargame in which points are scored for killing Jews |
| 2012-11-28 |
| "A Reign of Missiles" is a print-and-play game, meaning that the map, playing pieces, and rules are in three small PDF files that you can print out yourself. This is no wargame at all. The headline is inflammatory enough, "Launch your own Gaza war". You could contact them and say something. |
| Posted by:gromky |
| #5 *That is, the Hamas player is auto-directed and has the first move sequence, therefore it is an Israeli defence, according to the game. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2012-11-28 21:52 |
| #4 First, the headline is stupid and gross. Note: I have designed/modified my own board games with two from-scratch originals. Had a chance to read the instructions, and it reads well (some prototype spell check problems but to be expected). Of course play testing by x times ,but reads well. Basically a game of chance with a action scene plinko-type rocket hit system, rolling low is to sides' advantage. Game ends when one side scores enough point, that number increases or decreases depending upon where the international opinion scale is. 1 player game, number of Hamas attacks is on a set scale. Israel is granted a set number of attacks, and can hedge international opinion (against Israel) points for additional attacks. Also, can wager low/high risk/reward attacks. Random event generator keeps each game different to an extent. The problem with it being a simulation rather than just a game, which it is, is that the odds are basically split down the middle. In real life, the international opinion marker starts off at least two point against Israel and Israel does not seem to be able to gain IO points back. Line in the Sand (Desert Storm/Shield) had something similar with the a Jihad thermometer if you will. If the western player made aggressive moves, especially if they failed, the scale would go up, giving abilities and events to Middle East player(s). |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2012-11-28 20:50 |
| #3 I have a copy of last year's Labyrinth, by Volko Ruhnke for GMT, a serious card-driven game about the WoT. It's in the same style as the superb Twilight Struggle. People have objected that it's tacky, or inappropriate, but what would you say about a typical WW2 Eastern Front war game? That you want both sides to lose? I'm not sure what you meant, Swk. |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2012-11-28 19:33 |
| #2 Line in the Sand had a jihadometer. Don't have time to playtest it, but as Eric states to think that Israel has a fair shot at international community is already a falicy in the game theory. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2012-11-28 11:17 |
| #1 Has this been reviewed on BoardGameGeek.com yet? There have been similar solitaire games about the Battle of Britain. The part in this one about excessive Israeli force leading to international condemnation and losing the game is ridiculous; the international community will always condemn Israel. |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2012-11-28 07:15 |