«

[dorkbot]

Fair enough. I'm sure not trying to flame. I do find that part of the joy in playing this game comes from noticing how charmingly absurd and simplistic its political scenarios are when compared to the real world situation it purports to "simulate."

Even within a vacuum, the game itself is a little crazy. Surely I'm not the only one who noticed that you "win" by creating a zone of lawlessness and destruction around you. Like, as Prime Minister your objective is to mess up the entire region and then say "peace out!" I find this hilarious.

[Balthasar42]

Totally agreeing with Dorkbot.

If someone were to release "Bloody Sunday: The 1st Person Simulation" (horrible idea) it would be difficult to talk about that game without real life events bleeding into the discussion, somehow.

This game has "Political Simulator" right in the title. If, in a flight simulator, biplanes handle like jet fighters, I don't think it's wrong for anybody to point that out.

I definitely do not mean to be insensitive, but I also don't believe the people who made this game were overly worried about being insensitive.

It's good this game was posted. People should be free to play this game, but I don't think the game should be free from criticism.

Your goal as Prime Minister of Israel is to surround yourself with a sea of anarchy so that you can "retire in glory." How does Israel benefit from the government of Egypt being overthrown by "Islamic extremists?"

In the game defense though, I always saw the game as insulting all countries in the Middle East, Israel included. If you win the game by overthrowing everybody, you can get the ranking of "Fascist". Not really something Israel would love to parade around.

[dorkbot]

Originally Posted by Servant Corps

In the game defense though, I always saw the game as insulting all countries in the Middle East, Israel included. If you win the game by overthrowing everybody, you can get the ranking of "Fascist". Not really something Israel would love to parade around.

An excellent point. In fact, a friend of mine suggested to me that the game is actively anti-Israel, since it casts the country as a nation of despoilers, bent on the destruction of their neighbors by any means necessary. Indeed, you even corrupt Arab forces to further your own interests.

It's an intriguing argument, but I personally feel it's a little too meta. IMO, the first-person nature of gaming--the fact that you yourself play as Israel--trumps any other bias as you naturally sympathize with yourself and your "character" nation.

Ultimately, I don't think the people who made this game had any agenda whatsoever, aside from making a fun and politically accurate game. (I would argue that they succeeded at the first goal, but ran into problems with the second.) The fact that they chose such a volatile subject and devoted so little thought to political correctness or cultural sensitivity is, to me, what makes this game so amusing. I consider it to be charmingly naive.

[Fubb]

Right, back on track

Has anybody ever actually been able to defeat egypt in an actual 1 way Egypt vs Israel war before? I've only been able to do so if Egypt was at war with Libya, then i'd sneak attack them adn the war would be over quickly (assuming Libya didn't fall!)

Instead, my hard liner strategy (that is, when i just want to see my neighbours fall apart rather then actually trying to be peaceful) is to just fund rebels and all that rot in the countries, destabalie them, watch them fall apart form within until only Israel and Fubbles stand strong!

[dorkbot]

I've only beaten Egypt with Lybia's help or with nukes. Timing a war with Lybia is very tricky, since Egypt can spank them in a single turn if you don't distract them by posting enough troops. I doubt a 1-on-1 victory against Egypt is possible, except late in the game, after you've been able to expand your army by a few brigades.

I've defeated Egypt twice:
1) I used nuclear weapons after I wiped out all of Israel's neighbors. Of course, there is a random chance that you cause WW3 and lose, but if you succeed, you'll win the game even if the Americans embargo you.
2) In a Let's Play of Conflict: MEPS, I was unlucky enough to be at war with Egypt within the first two months of a game. However, the ensuring war was a stalemate that ended up hurting Egypt's economy. Eventually, the rebels I've been funding grew powerful enough for me to overthrew the Egyptian government, and therefore I won the war.

I have never beaten Egypt conventionally.

Originally Posted by dorkbot

I've only beaten Egypt with Lybia's help or with nukes. Timing a war with Lybia is very tricky, since Egypt can spank them in a single turn if you don't distract them by posting enough troops. I doubt a 1-on-1 victory against Egypt is possible, except late in the game, after you've been able to expand your army by a few brigades.

It's actually not hard to defeat Egypt about half the time on your own. Starting with relations as indifferent or even satisfactory, post a single brigade on the border. Then reduce relations, and the first month that you have to invade, do so (it should be the next month after posting the single brigade). You should find that the first month after invading, you are one tick mark away from winning the war, at which time you deploy everything you have. If you get to that point, the war will be over, and Egypt will be defeated.

[MonsignorGabriel]

I actually liked this game.

Israel is one of my favorite countries, and I was psyched that I could play as it's leader. The mechanics are good, the gameplay is addicting, and it reflects the possibilities of conflict there. Of course, the politics are outdated (it's 2010 and the political geography has changed little, if at all. I always found it funny that Lebanon just shits it's organs out by the end of the 90's when it still exists today in the real world). But it was fun bullying the weaker states and using Mossad to weaken the stronger ones.

However, I always found the rating odd. No matter what I did (lower defence spending, agree to reduce the size of the military, create the Palestinian homeland, maintaing stability all throughout the years), I was always denounced by either the Knesset or the public and labeled as "Fascistic". It was annoying when I really wanted there to be peace/I wanted to win via Mossad rather than the military and my people started complaining for absolutely no reason. To compensate for this, the game should have a public relations/economic management menu to alleviate these problems. Also, it should have allowed further invasions (if you take over a state, you should be allowed to go over to it and have it assimilated into Israel. I would have felt SO proud if Israel all of a sudden became bigger).

Overall, though, it was a good game.

Some tips to avoid Israeli protest would be appreciated!

[MonsignorGabriel]

Oh, and it IS possible to beat Egypt conventionally... You just need a really big military with a lot of different units.

It's enough to have about 3 units that you have more than Egypt, though I would focus on tanks, jets, and SAMs.

Needless to say, the war is always long and brutal, and the Israeli people don't like that.