SPIR608 Political Simulations and Gaming/2011/Week 2

Friday 28th January


 * Week 2 Discussion of Guy Debord, The Game of War.

* Is the design of the game's mechanics (board, pieces, cards, etc.) fit for purpose?
 * the game is confusing at first sight, as we're not used to its mechanics;
 * the game is serious, bold, adult, intellectual, mathematical;
 * it would be a good idea to have the combat values for attack and defence on the pieces - maybe on the bottom of the pieces;
 * the game is beautiful to look at, but it can be confusing as the board & terrain are the same colour as one of the two sides' pieces.

* Is the game enjoyable and sociable to play?
 * yes, but not necessarily sociable - as it's a one-on-one game;
 * it works surprisingly well as a team game;
 * the game is time consuming - we didn't finish the game even though the class overran its time;
 * the rules and principles were easy to pick up.

* What techniques does the game use to model its chosen subject?
 * the game is about warfare in Napoleonic times;
 * the main goal is keeping open your lines of communication;
 * the best way to win the game is to keep your forces in groups;
 * the game rewards correctly assessing the element of risk in your decision-making.

* How does the game combine abstraction and realism in its workings?
 * the pieces are abstract;
 * its strategic principles are realistic;
 * the game doesn't involve luck which means that every move that you make counts;
 * the game doesn't take into account weather and fog of war.

* How accurately does the game simulate the decision-making processes faced by the real-life protagonists of its chosen subject?
 * the game is modeling the thinking processes of warfare;

* What political lessons can people learn by playing the game?
 * its aim is to teach you to be a political revolutionary - but it isn't obvious how playing the game helps in this process;
 * the game teaches military strategy rather than revolutionary politics;
 * if politics is about gaining power and eliminating your opponents, then the game is very political;
 * playing the game would have helped the people in Tahrir Square in their struggle against the Egyptian dictatorship;
 * the game teaches people to think ahead;
 * it teaches you to anticipate your opponents' moves;
 * this is why Debord's game is more like chess than contemporary wargames.

* How would you improve the structure and mechanics of the game?
 * the board and terrain should be a different colour than the pieces;
 * Kriegspiel computer version can help in learning the game, especially as it does all of the calculations for you;
 * the big problem with Kriegspiel is that it prevents you from making mistakes under pressure like accidentally moving out of supply;
 * Alice Becker-Ho disapproved of the computer version of the game;
 * it's a good game because it's challenging to play;
 * the two teams should be separated so they can have confidential conversations although we were able to communicate secretly by passing notes to each other;
 * this openness could be a political element of the game as it replicates espionage!

Links

 * Photos of Week 2 game playing
 * Alice Becker-Ho & Guy Debord, The Game of War.
 * Class Wargames
 * Film: Class Wargames Presents Guy Debord's The Game of War.
 * Film: Class Wargames представляет: Игра в войну Ги Дебора.
 * Radical Software Group, Kriegspiel.
 * Alexander Galloway, Debord's Nostalgic Algorithm.
 * Nathan Heller, What Is It Good For?.
 * Gene McHugh, Battle Code.