Help Design a Gaza Wargame

[DicedT]

Wargame designer Paul Rohrbaugh is conducting a public playtest of a game on the recent Israel-Hamas conflict, and he has Foreign Policy Magazine to host the files. You can download the files at http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/11/27/launch_your_own_gaza_war

Be warned that there is a furor over at BGG where some wargamers are complaining that it is immoral to design a wargame on a recent conflict such as Gaza. To spare an argument, I'll simply say that if you don't comfortable, then please don't participate. But if you feel that you can contribute a meaningful suggestion that will help deliver a more realistic simulation - and educate the public about the challenges that nations now face in defending against rocket warfare - then we would love to hear your comments.

I intend to publish the best suggestions later on. But the goal here is really to demonstrate that paper wargames can help people better understand current events.

Michael

[Al]

The concept of this game has offended a couple of posters at matrix, also.  I guess in the minds of a few some wargames are OK whereas others aren't.  Kind of a hypocritical stance IMO since they all depict killing and general mayhem in one way or another.   :o

[LongBlade]

The concept of this game has offended a couple of posters at matrix, also.  I guess in the minds of a few some wargames are OK whereas others aren't.  Kind of a hypocritical stance IMO since they all depict killing and general mayhem in one way or another.   :o

There's nothing wrong with attempting to simulate a conflict to gain a better perspective of how the various outcomes can be generated.

The problem comes in when someone's sacred cow is being slaughtered.

Most wargamers these days understand WWII and don't mind playing "the bad guys" because we all recognize that Nazis really are bad. By playing them we don't believe we're supporting the cause they supported.

Go back in time - no one gets too excited about Rome and Gaul playing Alesia.

But if you happen to have strong feelings about the Gaza conflict? I can see how some folks would get their knickers in a knot.

What makes that particular conflict vexing to simulate is - unless we're only looking at tactical outcomes - the military aspect is only part of a much larger one.

Technology, morale, domestic public opinion, foreign public opinion, support/hostility of the press - all these things play into it. Further complicating the problem are the back channel issues.

Consider for a moment Egypt, for example. Secretary Clinton visits the area in an attempt to calm things down. She succeeds, defying expectations.

24 hours later Morsi unilaterally, crassly, and unabashedly announces he's taking over Egypt. The only surprise has been how honest the US has been in not criticizing him. It's a certainty that he did so with our back channel support. I'm just surprised how obvious we're making it. Normally I would expect at least the standard "we're not down with that because we like democracy."

The world is complicated. Shoehorning all of these events into a boardgame will not be easy. I suspect if you locked a few of us on these boards in a room, gave us enough pizza, wings, and booze, we'd come up with a workable model. But it might take a couple of weeks.

[Al]

There's nothing wrong with attempting to simulate a conflict to gain a better perspective of how the various outcomes can be generated.

The problem comes in when someone's sacred cow is being slaughtered.

Exactly.

[bayonetbrant]

I had to shoot back at the Matrix weenie  http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3222421

[LongBlade]

I had to shoot back at the Matrix weenie  http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3222421

Nicely done. Too bad it will be lost on them. If things get too hot invite them over here.

[MetalDog]

WOW!  What a DOUCHE!!!  Have an opinion.  Express your opinion.  Be as calm or worked up as you want to be, but, say what you have to say and move along Kayoz. 

[GDS_Starfury]

if theres a button to launch nukes at Gaza Im in!
nothing major, just a spread of low 5kt neutron warheads.

[GDS_Starfury]

FWIW  I lent some fire support.  ;)

[Boggit]

It's a much wider issue than just Gaza.

Anyone playing Combat Mission Strike Force a modern tactical wargame set in Syria? You can, and I have played Red on Red battles. I don't think it's immoral. I'm playing a wargame, not making a political statement or endorsing what is currently happening. No one gets hurt, I've got no blood on my hands. It doesn't make me think that killing people is a good thing.

It doesn't alter in the slightest my view that war, especially war tainted by atrocity, is the most ugly, disgusting and generally nasty way we have for politicians to settle their differences. Playing a wargame might give you an insight into the conflict, but it does not mean you are unsympathetic to the reality of what happens. For most people it's not a celebration of current suffering, which I'd agree is immoral.

[DicedT]

First, I want to thank Brant and GDS Starfury for their support on the Matrix thread. Double kudos to Brant for a thorough and systematic dismantling of a self-righteous jackass.

I've been debating whether I should reply to the Matrix flame war, and even more to the BGG insanity (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/890368/we-need-your-help-to-playtest-a-gaza-wargame/page/1). I've decided not to respond because I don't believe will listen to anything I have to say. The flaming has nothing to do with me or the game, and everything to do with the mental baggage that many people have regarding the Middle East (and one Middle Eastern nation in particular).

I had three goals for this project. The first was to demonstrate that a paper wargame could be used as a tool to educate the public about current events. That was a success. The second was to let the public know that paper wargames even exist, because most people have never seen or heard of them. I think that was also a success.

The final goal was to see if the grognard community could play a useful role in mainstream publications in terms of promoting and educating the public about wargames. That was a failure, and I will not repeat that mistake. I'm not so much angry as sad. The fact that an influential publication like Foreign Policy is running an article on a paper wargame - and a game in playtest, no less - is a minor miracle. If you had asked me a year ago whether such a thing was possible, I would have laughed in your face. Instead of celebrating that the  non-gaming world recognizes that our hobby has something useful to contribute beyond mere entertainment, some grognards are pissing on the achievement. And then they wonder why there are so few wargamers in the world.

The consolation is that nearly 400 people gave a Facebook Like to the Gaza game article. I will bet that some of them - maybe just a few of them - printed out the game or read the rules, and said, "aha, now I understand the Gaza conflict better." And maybe a few others got their fire in their eye as they said, "wow, a paper wargame. I never knew those existed. I'd like to learn more about them." This gives me much, much more satisfaction than pleasing a bunch of idiots on some game forum.

Thank you all again for your support.

Michael

[MikeGER]

I had to shoot back at the Matrix weenie  http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3222421

+1
i saw the thread but didn't had time to write... until now :)

[Wolfe1759]

Michael (DicedT)

I am amazed that you seem surprised that an article titled "Launch Your Own Gaza War" is seen as controversial.

Admittedly it is a headline and headlines need to grab the attention of the potential reader but to then to call some of them "a self-righteous jackass" that have "mental baggage" are "pissing on the achievement" and are in your assessment "a bunch of idiots" when they actually respond to the bait that you laid is somewhat less than fair. To do it behind their backs on a different forum rather than responding to the criticism you have received and at least engaging in the debate you started is also a bit discourteous.

In you original posts you stated "we're hoping to get input from the wargame community" which is exactly what you have got at BGG, Matrix and here however you have "decided not to respond because I don't believe will listen to anything I have to say". You asked for a debate but now appear unprepared to engage in it yourself, or by input did you mean publicity ?

As to the game itself, in order to create "a more realistic simulation - and educate the public about the challenges that nations now face in defending against rocket warfare" there are so many more factors that need to be in the game over and above the shooting down of missiles and the destruction / suppression of their launchers. The player needs to be able to influence civilian morale (on both sides), international opinion, domestic and foreign support, back channels diplomacy rather than them being just being in a few of the cases a random result on a table if it is going to game the conflict. If the game is purely to focus on missile defence then significantly more tactical detail and decision making in the deployment and effect of the systems is needed.

[LongBlade]

The final goal was to see if the grognard community could play a useful role in mainstream publications in terms of promoting and educating the public about wargames. That was a failure, and I will not repeat that mistake. I'm not so much angry as sad. The fact that an influential publication like Foreign Policy is running an article on a paper wargame - and a game in playtest, no less - is a minor miracle. If you had asked me a year ago whether such a thing was possible, I would have laughed in your face. Instead of celebrating that the  non-gaming world recognizes that our hobby has something useful to contribute beyond mere entertainment, some grognards are pissing on the achievement. And then they wonder why there are so few wargamers in the world.

I agree with you that it is a minor miracle that FP is running an article about wargames.

Grogs being grogs, I'm not exactly shocked that the reception in some communities was less than helpful. By our nature we tend to have our druthers and don't take kindly to opposing viewpoints.

That said, I think you need to look at each community and how it's run before passing wholesale judgement.

I can't speak to BGG as I don't frequent it much. Two years ago Matrix was a very different forum and run far more constructively than it is today.

I trust your reception here was warm. We're small but growing. Our intent is to foster a community where opposing viewpoints can be exchanged sans personal confrontation. It's an imperfect world and we're imperfect moderators, but in general that is our goal. Hopefully you found us an exception to your otherwise largely unsuccessful quest. If not let us know either openly or in backchannel discussions (whatever is most comfortable). We'll do our best to accommodate.

[DicedT]

First, I didn't write the headline, and it's not one I would have chosen. But it wasn't a headline that read "Play the Ethnic Cleansing Game".

It's legitimate to argue that a current events wargame is inappropriate. It's insane to use what is essentially a game of missile defense and asymmetric warfare as an excuse to vow that you won't play a game that awards points for killing Jews or bombing Palestinian cities.

I don't know where you got the idea that I asked for a debate. I wasn't looking for a spirited exchange on the Balfour Declaration or the Hamas Charter. What I asked for was constructive suggestions from people who play wargames on how to make a better wargame. There is no shortage of people out there with half-assed opinions on the Middle East, but there aren't a lot of folks with experience with paper conflict simulations. That's what I was hoping the game community could contribute.

So far, the best suggestions I've received on the game have come from a non-wargamer who happens to be a librarian in Chicago. Go figure.

Michael

Michael (DicedT)

I am amazed that you seem surprised that an article titled "Launch Your Own Gaza War" is seen as controversial.

Admittedly it is a headline and headlines need to grab the attention of the potential reader but to then to call some of them "a self-righteous jackass" that have "mental baggage" are "pissing on the achievement" and are in your assessment "a bunch of idiots" when they actually respond to the bait that you laid is somewhat less than fair. To do it behind their backs on a different forum rather than responding to the criticism you have received and at least engaging in the debate you started is also a bit discourteous.

In you original posts you stated "we're hoping to get input from the wargame community" which is exactly what you have got at BGG, Matrix and here however you have "decided not to respond because I don't believe will listen to anything I have to say". You asked for a debate but now appear unprepared to engage in it yourself, or by input did you mean publicity ?