Matrix Games Forums

Well this design is purely terrorist according to Turkish authorities. Telling about Kurdish Peşmerge.

I think in this case it becomes political, when you use the term terrorist. I am not saying that you need to call them freedom fighters, but, terrorist is a valueladen word. Perhaps it would simply be best to call them the Kurdish Peşmerge, and then let the scenario (if there was to be one) in the briefing tell the players that the turks consider them to be terrorists.

Most wargamers (myself included) have a strong interest in history as well as the strategy and tactics of military conflicts. That's what we have in common despite our political differences.

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

Well this design is purely terrorist according to Turkish authorities. Telling about Kurdish Peşmerge.

I think in this case it becomes political, when you use the term terrorist. I am not saying that you need to call them freedom fighters, but, terrorist is a valueladen word. Perhaps it would simply be best to call them the Kurdish Peşmerge, and then let the scenario (if there was to be one) in the briefing tell the players that the turks consider them to be terrorists.

BINGO!! [note to self: research OOBs / Maps for possible scenario using TOAWIV]

if the Library ever opens.

ORIGINAL: Hellen_slith


There are other forums out there that discuss the Turks / Kurds situation in current political milieu.

I hope that that makes sense.

I've no intention. It was started 30 years ago and maybe another 30 years, it will go on. My point was not about discussing.

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

Well this design is purely terrorist according to Turkish authorities. Telling about Kurdish Peşmerge.

I think in this case it becomes political, when you use the term terrorist. I am not saying that you need to call them freedom fighters, but, terrorist is a valueladen word. Perhaps it would simply be best to call them the Kurdish Peşmerge, and then let the scenario (if there was to be one) in the briefing tell the players that the turks consider them to be terrorists.

Correct but according to Gov Authorities I've used the definition. Not my word. Again it doesn't answer what is political to who?

Of course it doesn't answer that.

The answer to that question depends upon who is asked. Or should that be, WHOM?

There is no "pat" answer to that, and grinding it here
(to me) is wasted time on your part.

This is a gaming forum, not a sounding board.

I hope that makes sense.

Have a great day!!!!!

ORIGINAL: gamer78

Again it doesn't answer what is political to who?

You know as well as anyone on this forum does. To the moderators of course. [;)]

I think what is political depends on a number of factors, some of which need to coincide at the same time in order to set someone off. As some have pointed out, time is not the only factor. I've even seen things from the Middle Ages dragged into the political realm. I've seen discussions of Walt Disney dragged into the political.

I just saw where Hinterland, the company that produced The Long Dark released a political statement on their Steam page recently. The forum went nuts with people on either side of the debate. The problem is, it used to be a very cordial and amiable forum with everyone getting along well. Now it seems to be a seriously fractured community. I'm sure it will get back to normal eventually but I think it demonstrates a good reason why gaming companies generally do and should stay away from political matters.

I think the problem here is about Americentrism in the forum. Easily some offended by any post and don't know much about Europa and the Middle east. They throw the word easily 'that post doesn't belong to here' and such. Moderation should decide what forum it will be. Is it international or USA member only.

ORIGINAL: Hellen_slith

Of course it doesn't answer that.

The answer to that question depends upon who is asked. Or should that be, WHOM?

There is no "pat" answer to that, and grinding it here
(to me) is wasted time on your part.

This is a gaming forum, not a sounding board.

I hope that makes sense.

Have a great day!!!!!

I advice you start with Persian Cossacks and go with this 'revolutionaries' in early century for game design. Peşmerge be with you. It is gaming for you.
Good day.

ORIGINAL: Hellen_slith


This is a gaming forum, not a sounding board.

And seriously who are you? How dare you use words. Tell me...

I think the difficulty on this forum is that discussing politics is banned, yet the games we play involve politics:

Strategic Command WW2 - player can spend production points to influence politics of other nations
War in the Pacific - player has "political points" to spend on moving units, commanders etc
Conflict Middle East - player can choose policing tactics, and create a Palestian homeland
Rule the Waves 2 - keeping increasing budget and "unrest" can grow


Let's not even mention "EPISODE 2: YOU BREXIT, YOU FIX IT!", or to quote the Matrix Games web site:
"The second scenario is this set ‘No BREXIT, no Problem!’ will portray a cohesive, non-destabilized NATO response."
https://www.matrixgames.com/game/comman ... you-fix-it

How do we discuss that without politics creeping in?

It isn't that difficult to separate politics from games. [8|]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

It isn't that difficult to separate politics from games. [8|]

Many of us here are not fanatics. We can change our opinions, in the face of evidence, and are delighted to change the subject to something more agreeable.

ORIGINAL: Mobeer
I think the difficulty on this forum is that discussing politics is banned, yet the games we play involve politics:
Strategic Command WW2 - player can spend production points to influence politics of other nations
War in the Pacific - player has "political points" to spend on moving units, commanders etc
Conflict Middle East - player can choose policing tactics, and create a Palestian homeland
Rule the Waves 2 - keeping increasing budget and "unrest" can grow

I don't think these game mechanics require a political discussion. Modeling diplomacy or alliances in historical settings does not mean that in order to discuss them we need to bring in more current and divisive political topics. Historical wargames about WW2 include Nazis and Communists, for example, yet playing them neither makes one a Nazi or Communist nor requires an extended politico-economic discussion of fascism or communism. The games themselves are not about politics, but about strategy, including grand strategy but that's a completely different focus than a game about political history.

Let's not even mention "EPISODE 2: YOU BREXIT, YOU FIX IT!", or to quote the Matrix Games web site:
"The second scenario is this set ‘No BREXIT, no Problem!’ will portray a cohesive, non-destabilized NATO response."
https://www.matrixgames.com/game/comman ... you-fix-it

How do we discuss that without politics creeping in?

I will admit that's a tougher one. I think as it really is a completely hypothetical setup for a set of military scenarios based on the EU completely breaking apart, the scenarios themselves and their tactics and strategies discussed without the political side, but I agree the title and the hypothetical are definitely the closest thing in our catalog to a game that is hard to separate from current politics. The focus with the Command expansions was to show how present day potential military conflicts could be modeled with that simulation, but it also necessitates stepping into the present day events rather than keeping to more distant history with cooler passions.

Regards,

- Erik

I once had a person state that they were "offended" by my comments. I then said, "I'm offended that you are offended. Now where do we go from here?"
Where most political discussions go south is when one side says "only what I say is right and you have no right to speak your opinion." At that point what is the sense of continuing?

RR

ORIGINAL: MrRoadrunner

I once had a person state that they were "offended" by my comments. I then said, "I'm offended that you are offended. Now where do we go from here?"
Where most political discussions go south is when one side says "only what I say is right and you have no right to speak your opinion." At that point what is the sense of continuing?

RR

Saw a lot of that in a recent thread. [:D]

I've moderated 9 years in one forum I can assure hard discussion was about whether II. Beyazıt (Ottoman Turks) really imprisoned in iron cage by Timur Khan. There was some ideological background for discussion. So anyway anything can be political but from my experience of moderating, forum members are not moderators. It is the job of moderators. Confusion could come writing too much and dedication. Matrix games forum tell theoretically about different nationalities but not correct unfortunately. It is very much Americanized forum.

Bottom line is most of us here are not fanatics. Cheers.

ORIGINAL: gamer78
It is very much Americanized forum.

I think it would be better to say the Anglosphere was more represented here, not simply the U.S. although the U.S. population is second behind China in digital gaming expenditure. Throw in the other anglo nations and the Anglosphere is the largest spender. So what you attempt point out is no surprise is it? [;)]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

ORIGINAL: MrRoadrunner

I once had a person state that they were "offended" by my comments. I then said, "I'm offended that you are offended. Now where do we go from here?"
Where most political discussions go south is when one side says "only what I say is right and you have no right to speak your opinion." At that point what is the sense of continuing?

RR

Saw a lot of that in a recent thread. [:D]

[&o]Got me!

RR

Positivism v. Constructivism.

It's subjective epistemology (i.e. constructivism). The part you may have noticed is it's the subjective reality of the people with power at the moment.

I'm glad I'm not a civil war gamer. Those games may become persona non grata as well.