
PAXsims is devoted to the discussion of conflict simulations and serious games that address issues of security, development, and peacebuilding for educational, training, and policy purposes.
If you wish to be notified when new material is posted here, simply use the RSS feed or "email subscription" features below.
Relevant comments are welcomed.
Recent Posts
- Simulations miscellany, 22 May 2013
- Simulations and their use in the humanitarian sector
- JPSE: Bringing Interactive Simulations into the Political Science Classroom
- Military Operations Research Society 81.2 Symposium
- Connections 2013 registration now open
- Wargaming North Korea
- Student interactive simulation-writing in political science
- Game for Peace: Progressive Education in Peace Operations
- Roleplay simulations and the challenge of modern SBTNs
- Reflections on a humanitarian policy simulation
Top Posts
- Student interactive simulation-writing in political science
- COIN in Afghanistan: A Distant Plain
- Simulations miscellany, 22 May 2013
- Masters of the World: Geo-Political Simulator 3 released
- Review: Ici, c'est la France!
- JPSE: Bringing Interactive Simulations into the Political Science Classroom
- (Virtually) bombing Iran and limits of (real) military power
- NDU: Peter Perla on "The Way of the Wargamer" (April 4)
- Carana
- Review: Rulers of Nations
Categories
- call for papers
- conferences
- courses
- crowd-sourcing
- forthcoming games and simulations
- job opportunities/positions vacant
- latest links
- not-so-serious
- request for proposals
- simulation debacle
- simulation history
- simulation ideas
- simulation journals
- simulation materials
- simulation news
- simulation publications
- simulation report
- simulation review
- simulation software
- simulations miscellany
Archives
Active Learning in Political Science
- Helping others with using simulations 21/05/2013
- Guest Blog: Getting Feedback 19/05/2013
Grog News
- Karzai to Pakistan: F-Off, We're Hanging Wit' India, Yo 22/05/2013
- Syrian Hackers Running Amok 19/05/2013
Guns, Dice, Butter
- Back soon 17/04/2013
- GDB Download Stats 24/02/2013
Ludic Futurism
- Stack Academie trip report 07/05/2013
- Stepping out East for a bit 29/04/2013
Play the Past
- Epic Life: Immersion and Flow, 1 15/05/2013
- Epic Life: Ritual Immersion in Papo & Yo 01/05/2013
Wargaming Connections
- Connections 2013 update 22/05/2013
- How humanitarians do it 17/05/2013
Twitter Updates
- ICG on Drones: Myths and Reality in Pakistan crisisgroup.org/en/publication… 2 days ago
- RT @blakehounshell: John Cook is going to be so upset when this Toronto crack tape just turns out to be Rick Astley. 5 days ago
- PRRN blog: Required reading for refugee researchers prrnblog.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/req… #Palestine 5 days ago
- RT @KetyDC: Crowdfunding breaking news: @Gawker is raising $200,000 to buy Toronto's mayor crack tape indiegogo.com/projects/rob-f… 5 days ago
- RT @rolandparis: Oh, Toronto. This one's for you: http://t.co/NXT32WiIrT 5 days ago
Journals & Periodicals
- Academic Gaming Review
- Battles Magazine
- C3i Magazine
- Eludamos: Journal of Computer Game Culture
- GAME: The Italian Journal of Game Studies
- Games and Culture
- International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations
- International Journal of Role-Playing
- Simulation & Gaming
- The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation
- Training & Simulation Journal
- Virtual Training & Simulation News
- Well Played
Web Resources: fragile and conflict-affected countries
- Berghof Handbook for Conflict Transformation
- Current Intelligence
- International Alert
- International Peace Institute
- OECD DAC—Conflict and Peace
- OECD DAC—Development Effectiveness in Fragile States
- PRIO (International Peace Research Institute)
- Small Wars Journal
- UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations
- UN Peacekeeping Resource Hub
- UNDP—Crisis Prevention and Recovery
- US Army—Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute
- World Bank—Conflict and Development blog
- World Bank—Fragile and Conflict-Affected Countries
- World Bank—World Development Report 2011
Web Resources: games and simulation
- A Force More Powerful—game
- A Horse of Peas
- Acrasian Security Blog
- Active Learning in Political Science
- Against All Odds—game
- Air War College—wargames, simulations, and exercises
- APSA—simulations for teaching political science
- Barnard College—Reacting to the Past
- Best Delegate
- Beyond Intractability—Exercises and Simulations
- BoardGameGeek
- Class Wargames
- Columbia American History Online—classroom simulations
- Community Organizing Toolkit—game
- ConSimWorld
- CRISP: Crisis Simulation for Peace
- CUNY Games Network
- Darfur is Dying—game
- Economics Network—classroom experiments and games
- Emergency Capacity Building project — simulation resources
- Federal Consortium for Virtual Worlds
- Fletcher School/Tufts University—SIMULEX
- Game Theory .net
- Gameful
- Gameology
- Games & Social Networks in Education
- Games for Change
- Games for Educators
- Games for Health
- GeoGame
- Giant Battling Robots
- Global Justice Game
- Grog News
- Guns, Dice, Butter
- History of Wargaming Project
- Ian Bogost
- ICT for Peacebuilding
- International Game Developers Association
- International Simulation & Gaming Association
- Journal of Virtual Worlds Research
- Kings College London—Conflict Simulation
- Little Wars
- Ludic Futurism
- Ludology
- Macquarrie University—Middle East politics simulation
- McGill Model UN
- McGill University—Brynania simulation
- Mike Cosgrove—wargame design class
- MIT-Harvard Public Disputes Program—simulation materials
- Model UN Headquarters
- MODSIM World conference
- MSSV
- MUNmatters
- National Center for Simulation
- National Security Decision-Making Game
- National Security Decision-Making game
- Naval Postgraduate School—MOVES Institute
- NDU—Center for Applied Strategic Learning
- Negotiation-Based Learning
- News Games
- North American Simulation and Gaming Association
- Oil Shockwave Simulation
- Open Simulations Platform
- Pax Warrior
- Peacekeeping the Game
- Pearson Peacekeeping Training Centre—exercises and simulations
- Pervasive Games: Theory and Design
- Play the Past
- Play Think Learn
- Public International Law and Policy Group—Negotiation Simulation Exercises
- Purple Pawn
- Reality is Broken
- Red Team Journal
- SAGSET
- Santa Clara University—Conflict Resolution Simulation
- Serious Games Institute
- Simulations Interactivity Standards Organization
- Social Impact Games
- Strategikon (French)
- Technoculture, Art, and Games
- Terra Nova (Simulation + Society + Play)
- The Ludologist
- Tiltfactor
- Trans-Atlantic Consortium for European Union Studies & Simulations
- UN Association USA—model UNs
- University of Maryland – Laboratory for Computational Cultural Dynamics
- University of Maryland—ICONS Project
- University of Michigan ICS: Arab-Israeli Conflict Simulation
- US Army Combined Arms Center—Military Gaming Blog
- US Army—Modelling and Simulation
- US DoD—Games Developers' Community
- US DoD—Modeling and Simulation Coordination Office
- US DoD—Modeling and Simulation Information Analysis Center
- US Military Academy – Warfighting Simulation Center
- USC—Institute for Creative Technologies
- USIP—Training and Education Center
- Virtual Peace
- Virtual Worlds Research Consortium
- Wargaming Connection
- Web Grognards
- World Bank—EduTech
- World Peace Game Foundation
- Zones of Influence
Web Resources: games and simulation (commercial)
- Booz Allen Hamilton—modeling and simulation
- BreakAway—serious games
- Brian Train-game designs
- Civic Mirror
- Consequences Consulting—peacekeeping simulation
- ConSimWorld
- Decisive Point
- Defense Linguistics
- Fabulsi—online roleplay simulations
- Fiery Dragon Productions
- GamePolitics
- MCS Group
- MegaGame Makers
- mōsbē
- Peacemaker Game
- Persuasive Games
- PlanPolitik
- Sea Change Simulations
- Serious Games Interactive
- Statecraft
- Strategy and Tactics Press
- Track4
- Two-Stone LLC






Wow, exciting news. I became a fan of Volko and Brian after studying their games for Sabin’s Conflict Simulation course. Am I mistaken, or does the pre-order site you linked not have A Distant Plain listed? In any case, I look forward to learning more about this game.
Robert–No, its not there yet, but should be soon.
Probably next week the notice will be there – Rex got the “scoop” for the blogosphere!
I hope the game will address the post-US-withdrawal situation. It looks like Afghanistan is going back to the 90′s free-for-all civil war situation.
Reblogged this on The Big Board and commented:
While in CDG format this conflict sounds more appealing to me than Andean Abyss. Having spent a bit of time in Chile , Argentina and Brasil the US centric view point of AA does not resonate well with folks that follow history down there. These friends are not the be all and end all of Political Military history but the general populace takes a much keener interest in their history than that typical American.
It will be of interest to see how this game plays.
Good news! Both Volkho and Brian have major bona fides in this area.
hipshotau, there’s a lot of inaccuracy in your post. First, AA is not a CDG. Second, it does not have a US centric view. Try speaking to Volkho about his sources; they FAR outstrip yours in accuracy.
Gee, another game which forces you into acceptting a losing premise in the first place: just take all the pointless things that have been done in the last ten years, put them in a bag, and shake them up.
There would have been no war in Afghanistan after the liberation if the Terrorists had thought for a moment that we would stay and finish things. They aren’t stupid – or motivated by anything other than personal gain – they are just opportunists. The only reason Nato troops and Afghans have been dying every day for the last ten years is the propaganda of the Liberal News Media and the cowardice and hypocrisy of those whose only mantra is Cut-n-Run.
And I would never buy a game which calls Terrorists “insurgents.”
Well, the game has been “live” for P500 on the GMT site for about 12 hours, and already there are 126 pre-orders. http://www.gmtgames.com/p-416-a-distant-plain.aspx
Rex also reports that this post on Paxsims has set a website record, with over 500 views in a day!
Michael, as it is the game is balanced for four players with victory conditions determined by the relations between them. Play with fewer than four human players will be made possible by flow charts, as in Andean Abyss. It would certainly be possible to try and play the game with no Coalition present, we haven’t tested that yet though.
Everything about COIN is BS. All you are doing is trading lives (unnecessarily) for the time required to get the local military up to speed – because the terrorists know THEY won’t be leaving.
John: If you can’t keep your comments civil, they’ll be deleted. If you wish to try to score broader political points, please do it elsewhere. And, if you critique a game design you haven’t actually seen–well, you’ll mainly look foolish.
You’ve had another 100 views in the past 4 hours too, Brian. You and Volko had better finalize that game design or there will be lots of disappointed folks!
Makes me wonder if this could work as a Vietnam design – US / ARVN vs VC / NVA – but this systems to capture the dynamics of allies who are not totally joined up in their objectives and strategic aims!
I think what this game will need is some pretty comprehensive design notes setting out the thoughts and assumptions behind the game design. As this is still a ‘live’ issue, I expect lively debates about the design decisions.
Some of the comments on the board illustrate the numerous competing naratives about the war, it’s aims, reasons, justifications etc. Even the use of insurgents vs terrorists vs rebels is contentious – and there are PhD papers written on the terminology used to describe the various actors in the conflict.
Whilst we all have our views, from a design point of view, I’d be interested to see what the game designers view on the situation is – and then – how they have modelled their game based on their real-world assumptions and views.
Either way I eagerly look forward to this release.
I’ve long dreamed of an Afghanistan COIN game. Glad to see the two leading COIN game designers teaming up for such a project.
I see the designers have chosen to pair down complexity by not making it an AfPak game, but one about Afghanistan (and Pakistan only figuring into it in regards to its posture towards the various players over in Afghanistan). Arguably a wise decision as grappling with Afghanistan’s complexity is quite enough to take on!
Reading the above, I have to say I especially wonder how “graft” figures into the game. Hopefully the game doesn’t crudely portray matters by making “graft” an end in itself for “Kabul”. I hope rather that the government faces a trade-off decision between centralisation/improved governance and co-opting/cooperating with the “Warlords” and indeed these being part of the Kabul government, at the expense of degraded governance, less effective counter-narcotics.
So whereas the counter-narcotic effort might be a victory criterion for NATO (“coalition” strikes me as not as suitable a term, I have to say), Kabul would have a more “pragmatic” outlook on the matter, siding more with NATO or the Warlords on the matter as it sees fit.
Anyway, while I was one of the more involved playtesters for Lab, I missed the boat on AA and CL. But I hope I’ll jump onto this train. Time to dust off my “Graveyard of Empires” and “Descent into Chaos” copies.
Well, as this project progresses, I am certain there will just as many people standing there telling us we were wrong, immoral, misguided and Just Plain Evil as there will be people expressing duly cautious optimism and support for trying out something new and unusual! We stand ready to explain our reasoning, assumptions and mechanics to anyone prepared to listen, but as James points out that’s what good designer’s notes are for.
I have placed my order, and am looking forward to this.
A long time ago I did the War Studies BA and MA at King’s College, but am tempted to pick up the MA in Consim design. Partly because there is a growth in simulations to offset the cost of exercises, and some of those I’ve taken part in the reserves have been very illuminating – but also because what fascinates me is how your ‘world veiw’ determines the game conditions, from what a player needs to do to win, to how the combat mechanics work.
I.e. a unilateralist might design a very different game from a multilateralist, by having zero-sum scoring system and no facility for joint wins or vice versa. I also like how you can have several Normandy landing games which emphasise different things depending on the viewpoint of the designer. Then there is the balance between realism and playability – I don’t think it’s ever a trade-off between realism and fun!
One game I did enjoy was the ‘Battle of Baghdad’ – although disapointing as a tatical simulation of the situation, the 6 player dynamics and mutually inclusive and mututally exclusive win conditions for the various factions made for some interesting comrpomise and alliances of conveience.
This is all a long way of saying; looking forward to this one, and some, hopefully, good solid games modelling the difficulty of COIN operations.
Thanks James, and thank you for your order! Up to 235 now, after less than five days on offer.
It’s a truism that we are the products of our personal ideologies, which are formed from our personal experiences and inculcated beliefs, and any intellectual item we create – magazine article, board game, thesis, interpretive dance – will be informed by that ideology.
These days I think we are seeing quite a few games where the emphasis is less on straight-out zero-sum competition, and more towards winning based on alliances of convenience (which are usually created though building, in the mind of the person you want for an ally, the idea that you will both benefit) or necessity (where you can force a partnership or compliance on someone through your position of local strength). I think this is what they were trying to get at with Battle for Baghdad, and it’s definitely an aspect of the current design we are working on.
Brian, You were kind enough to send me a preview a year ago of your Kandahar game. Apologies that life got in the way of me investigating it too much and getting back to you. I’ve just learnt about this game via a random route. Is it the development of the model you were employing in Kandahar? The solitaire flowchart option looks interesting
(I’ve just added myself to the P500 list)
Sorry for the delay in reply Bob; as you saw from subsequent posts, I was at the Connections conference in Washington.
No, A Distant Plain is is not a development of my Kandahar game, it uses the COIN system developed by Volko in Andean Abyss (which was originally inspired by my Algeria game), with research, card, rule, scenario and map development by me.
Though I did show at the “board game demo” event at the conference a game (once called Kandalite, but now also called Kandahar to confuse things) that is a development of it.
It is an area-movement COIN game inspired by situation in Kandahar province, Afghanistan, 2009-10
Players take roles of mid-level Afghan Security Forces and Taliban commanders, who are often caught between what they think they need to do to win the battle and what they are told to do by higher echelons.
Features:
Additional factions and forces: organized crime; ISAF; tribal militias; NGOs
Three levels of increasingly detailed play – each version adds more options and greater depth
full menus of kinetic and non-kinetic operations;
intelligence and deception;
troop cohesion; staff and troop training;
informers,
intimidation;
corruption;
the lasting effects of violence;
economic development; etc.