User:Rudzko

REFLECTIVE PRACTICE ANALYSIS
The aim of this assignment is to analyse several political simulations and to provide the reader with the potential benefits these simulations may have. The analysis will argue that playing board games could be not only entertaining, but extremely useful as well, in the sense that “they help you think about the practical issues and engage with the theory” (Matthew Reisz; 2011, online). It will aim to prove that board games, especially those of political nature could be of great aid to anyone who wishes to simulate the experience of any given (political) field. The analysis will be separated into four parts – each depicting a different political simulation, the chief points of which will be summarized in the conclusion.

==== * MONOPOLY ====

Among the great number of board games, it could be argued that Monopoly is by far the most popular. Created in the first half of the 20th century (est. 1935) – although the game’s development dates back to 1903, Monopoly has undeniably dominated the world of board games. Furthermore, it could be also argued that Monopoly has been the matrix for, and has facilitated the creation of countless other board games. Taking into account the popularity of the game, Monopoly has been adapted to fit individual countries, by changing various properties of the board. The fact that Monopoly is easy to play and entertaining (even among children) has further contributed to the game’s popularity. Every few years, national champions from all over the world meet for the MONOPOLY World Championship tournament. World Champions have emerged from 10 different countries, including: the United States, Ireland, Singapore, Italy, New Zealand, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Hong Kong, Japan and Spain (Hasbro; 2011, online).

Monopoly tends to be very realistic, as it engulfs the players in a world of capitalism, where greed, risk-taking and self interest are the key to victory. Additionally, it enables players to conspire together in order to diminish the chances of other players, but ultimately only one can achieve victory. As Monopoly is a dice-based board game – luck is a core factor; this facilitates new, inexperienced players to win, despite them being new, and not entirely familiar with the rules of the game. Taking into account that the stage in Monopoly is based on actual places (Atlantic City, Islington, ect.) it is easy for players to relate to them, and feel like being a part of the capitalist machine. All players start at the same stage with an equal opportunity to win. “Money and property ownership symbolise success in the 1980’s and the MONOPOLY brand seems to match up. Localisations, licenses, and spin-offs of MONOPOLY allow people all over the world to live the dream of owning it all” (Hasbro; 2011, online).

The political nature of the game could be argued to be somewhat unsettled, and open for debate. The board game involves obtaining and selling properties, and ultimately winning at all costs, putting personal interest before everything else in order to own it all – which at first glance could be seen as entirely capitalist in nature. Furthermore, during the Cold War era, both Russia and America claimed that Monopoly is a capitalist game. Nevertheless, the argument that Monopoly is in fact a socialist game possesses an equal amount of validity. The board game suggests that a free market would eventually lead to a monopoly, which in its turn may results in the bankruptcy of all the rest. Monopoly teaches players to take heed when dealing with money in order to avoid becoming bankrupt – which is the opposite of the (risk-taking) capitalist way.

Recently, Monopoly has undergone various modifications to certain platforms, such as the introduction of debit cards taking the place of cash (in the original board game) – which is more suitable for the contemporary players; with more innovation in the near future to come.

==== * KINGMAKER ====

Kingmaker is a historical strategy board game (first created by Andrew McNeil and PhilMar in 1974) based in the times of struggle and conflict in medieval England (more accurately 1455 – 1487) known as the Wars of the Roses. The players will undertake the military and political struggles between the houses of Lancaster and York to decide the rightful heir to the English throne. Every single one of the players aims to build and takes control of a faction of nobles that, through skirmishes, politics and diplomacy, attempts to eliminate the factions of all the other players (Vintage Toys and Games; 2011, online).

What generates further interest in the game is that although “Kingmaker” is more or less historically accurate, the players are in no way bound to abide by past historical events, and are free to alter the historical outcome of England. The fact that “Kingmaker” is based in medieval times, the game helps players to understand the way society functioned in the past. Politically “Kingmaker” could be regarded as an excellent recreation of the balance of power between the barons and royals in the Wars of the Roses. Furthermore, playing the game is an entertaining way to understand English politics in medieval times. Additionally, upon playing the game, a player starts identifying with the barons and other historical characters who took part in the Wars of the Roses. Realism is another key feature of the board game (especially considering that luck was an important aspect in medieval warfare); for example – the plague card, a card drawn by a player by sheer chance, could entirely cripple the said player’s efforts in finishing the game – not unlike the actual plague, which was a major issue which could alter various events it the times of medieval England; by playing “Kingmaker” a player learns that despite being well on his way to victory – all can be lost in an instant. Subsequently the game’s realism is further highlighted by the way it simulates the struggle between baronial families rather than royal claimants as in other Wars of the Roses games – additionally – the game underlines the importance of the church in medieval times. The necessity to be in control of one archbishop or two bishops in order to crown a monarch in a cathedral town is a superb imitation of the connection between the church and the state in that era. The board could be regarded as an excellent lesson in the political and economic geography of medieval England as the events take place around towns and forts and castles which bore a great amount of significance at the time, but are no longer.

Perhaps the only shortcomings of the game, which may require some attention, are large amount of rules, which render new players to stand little if any chance against an experienced veteran of the game. Certain simplifications in the rules of the game could greatly facilitate new players to learn how to play, while at the same time avoid altering the entertaining gameplay of “Kingmaker”.

==== * ORIGINS OF WORLD WAR II ====

The Origins of World War II is a board game first published in 1971 by Avalon Hill, and was based on A. J. P Taylor’s views on the origins of the Second World War. The action of the game takes place in the years leading up to World War II (more precisely 1933-1939). Players assume the roles of some of the chief participants of World War II, including, Germany, the USSR, Great Britain, France and the United States. It could be argued that the action of the game is highly abstract. Participating players have to place political factor markers on their countries, their opponents' countries, as well as the countries which are non-playable (like Italy for example). Players put up to five factors in any given country which can create an understanding or a control power in that country, given that a country is allowed by the rules to have that power. The Origins of World War II tends to be a highly realistic game as well, as it is based on the actual events of the pre-World War II period. In a standard game, the United States for example is not allowed to have either understanding or control of any other country, reflecting isolationist sentiments and a general lack of any significant influence in European politics. Furthermore, it is highly difficult to win if playing with Nazi Germany (despite the fact that Germany starts at the highest position) as all the other countries will form an alliance, and team up against it. The amount of political factors chosen to the country varies, depending on the player’s country (the US has the least and Germany the most, respectively) and the stage of the game in progress (in the later year, all players receive more political factors, reflecting heightening tensions). Victory and defeat are based on an individualized scoring system that gives the various countries points for either having a control or understanding in a specific country, or preventing other countries from having said controls or understandings.

The highly abstract nature of Origins of World War II board game is perhaps its greatest asset as well as (arguably) its most severe design flaw. Understanding the dynamic of how exactly countries get involved in wars is a rather problematical task. Consequently, attempting to recreate a simulation of these mentioned dynamics that could be easily learned and applied within a game is perhaps an even greater and more difficult feat to achieve. In an attempt to make the game play simple and easily understandable, the game uses political factors which seem to combine military invasion, treaties, and informal alliances. “To direct the flow of the game play, Origins of World War II creates game objectives that force players into conflict. While these models succeed, to a certain extent, in re-creating the unfolding of history, they seem to do so only by hard-wiring historical outcomes into the model of play itself. Ultimately, the game does a nice job of walking a player through the tangle of politics that preceded World War II, but a poor job of explaining why World War II was structurally inevitable” (Wargames; ND, online). Nevertheless, for anyone interested in the historical events prior to World War II, the game provides an enjoyable way of exploring the Origins of World War II, and offers an accurate simulation of pre-war political behaviour.

==== * THE GAME OF WAR ====

“The Game of War” is a military strategy board game which is based on classic eighteen century warfare. The game puts the players in control of the manoeuvres of two armies of identical force, each one of them aiming to crush their opponent via superior strategy and well calculated skirmishes. “The Game of War” could be argued to be a highly demanding game, requiring a great amount of dedication to master. New players may face some difficulty at the beginning. Unlike many other board games, “The Game of War” excludes the factor of luck, making the player carefully analyse possible moves, in order to avoid mistakes – and ultimately, defeat. Furthermore, risk taking is a part of the game as well, as a well calculated risk may result in victory. The core feature of the game is strategy – the strategic aspects of the game are realistic (maintaining a single strong army, for instance tends to be much more beneficial to a player than separating his forces). In addition, a very (if not most) crucial aspect of “The Game of War” are the lines of communication, which must be guarded throughout the continuation of the game – needless to say, keeping armies in constant contact is critical in times of war. Some aspects of the game however, are less-so realistic – for example weather conditions and fog of war are ignored within the game – whereas said conditions could have turned the tide of any battle in the eighteenth century (It was in fact the severe weather conditions which ultimately saved Russia from permanent French occupation, greatly crippling Napoleon’s army). Not unlike chess – “The Game of War” requires the participants to think ahead of their current moves – and teaches new players how to do so. Furthermore, in order to achieve victory, the board game demands from the player to attempt to predict the future moves of their opponents as well.

“The Game of War” teaches players strategic thinking and the cost of making mistakes in warfare-related conditions. By playing the game, players undertake the full weight of being in command of an army in the eighteenth century during times of war. As the game often requires teammates to exchange confidential plans of action, participants can really experience the importance of planning and strategy.

Despite being challenging and perhaps time-consuming, “The Game of War” tends to be rather fun, and is possibly the ultimate in strategy simulation board games, where every next decision could result in the potential victory or defeat of the player. The rules of the game become clear to new participants with further play, and the players could develop various intellectual skills as they play.

IN CONCLUSION, it is important to state that board games are much more than just a way to pass time or a means of entertainment. Not only are simulations, such as “Kingmaker” or “Origins of World War II” an invaluable source for the understanding and practicing of political theory – they also provide the players with various historic facts. Finally, simulations facilitate the players to experience scenarios (political or otherwise) which would have been impossible in real life.

==== '''BIBLIOGRAPHY ''' ====

Class Wargames (ND) ‘The Game of War’. Online, available from http://www.classwargames.net/?page_id=829, accessed on 23 March 2011.

Hasbro (2011) ‘(Monopoly) Did you know?’ Online, available from http://www.hasbro.com/monopoly/en_US/discover/75-Years-Young.cfm, accessed on 22 March 2011.

Kingmaker Board Game (2011). Online, available from http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=kingmaker+board+game&aq=f, accessed on 23 March 2011.

Reisz Matthew (2011) ‘Tales of the unexpected’. Online, available from http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=415486&c=2, accessed on 21 March 2011.

Vintage Toys and Games (2011) ‘Kingmaker, board Game’. Online, available from http://www.vintagetoysgames.co.uk/kingmaker_1974.html, accessed on 22 March 2011.

Wargames (ND) ‘The Origins of World War II’. Online, available from http://www.faculty.virginia.edu/setear/students/wargames/page3a.htm, accessed on 23 March 2011.