War on Terror Board Game

Its Fun!

I spent a few hours last weekend playing a board game "War on Terror". This is a game which to my mind is on a par with "Risk" or "Monopoly", There are very few games about which one can say that. And it is generally a quicker game than either.

The board looks fairly similar to the Risk board, except that the continent of "Nowhere" sits where Antarctica would sit, with sea links to Australia and The Falklands (part of South America). The game starts with every territory having an unknown value for oil reserves. The only way to find out is to move onto the territory and turn over the oil value counter which is face down until the territory is occupied.

Players roll dice to decide who starts. The players take it in turns to place 3 village counters, and see what oil values they have. They also take "Empire" cards, and pay the World Bank for the development they are doing. As in Risk one faces the dilemma of whether to spread oneself thinly or whether to concentrate in one area. The "Empire" cards have attributes like "War", or "Kyoto Agreement" where you can require an opponent to pay tax to the World Bank for every town and city.

Then you throw the dice for oil revenues. The territories have oil revenues from 3 to 12 (and a few Nils). Whoever has a territory with the oil value resulting from the dice throw earns money. If they have developed a town or city on the territory they earn more money. I quickly realised that a territory with value "7" earns more than one with value "12" because two dice produce a 7 far more often than they produce a 12.

After this first round players throw a dice to discover how many territories they can develop this turn -if they have the cash. Development can mean upgrading your villages to towns or cities, or speading into unoccupied territories.The special dice has other symbols on it for shuffling the cards, or for spinning the wheel to decide which is "the Evil Empire". Each player has coloured counters, and if the wheel turns to your colour you are "the Evil Empire". The positive element about being the Evil Empire is that in addition to your Empire cards you also draw "Terrorism" cards.which give you more opportunity to damage your opponents. The downside is that anyone who attacks an Evil Empire receives a modest payment from the World Bank.

The Evil Empire player wears a black balaclava with "EVIL" emblazoned on it. An enterprising Evil Empire or terrorist can negotiate with potential victims "Is it worth $200,000,000 not to be attacked this turn?" There is no way that these agreements can be enforced, biut people who habitually break agreements find that no-one will deal with them.

How To Play

Each empire is trying to occupy entire continents. One cheap way to do this is to fund terrorists. You can keep them off the board in your training camp for future use, or you can place the terrorists anywhere on the board. Once placed, the terrorists are not in your control - anyone can stimulate them to activity. Terrorists interfere with oil revenues and can destroy or reduce towns and cities.

Unlike Risk or Monopoly, a player who is being squeezed out has the option to turn terrorist. They have no territory to defend, and can only be eliminated by destroying every terrorist in the world, including the ones you placed. The Empires are usually continuing to place terrorists in each other's territory because it is such an effective form of warfare. The terrorists work together in an alliance. Their aim is to liberate a number of continents from all the Empires.

Conflict with other players is inevitable.Sometimes one can have non conflict agreements with other players, which last as long as they are useful. However the immediate effect of such an alliance is the temptation for others to form a counter alliance.

The terrorists have very nasty cards, and the Evil Empire usually becomes quite powerful.

The game has nuclear weapons which wipe out a territory and empty those around it, and dirty bombs which only destroy one territory.

The game is lots of fun, and well worth buying.


Reflections of Real Life

The Americans supplied the Nicaraguan "Contras", who planted a mine that damaged a British ship and caused casualties. The Americans funded and assisted an armed invasion of Cuba and repeatedly tried to kill Fidel Castro. The Americans employed Saddam Hussain as a CIA agent, and of course trained Osama Bin Laden when he was opposed to the Russians in Afghanistan. And the Americans bombed Gaddafi and killed his two year old terrorist adopted daughter.

Recent relevations suggest the British and Americans colluded with Libyan Intelligence to help rendition of anti Gaddaffi opponents to be tortured and killed in Libya, and in return the Libyans gave information to help the Americans and British.

Truly in the War on Terror one sometimes has to deal with unsavoury people.

As for America

Louis XVI of France funded supplies of gunpowder and cannon to the Americans, and the role of LaFayette in the American Revolution is well known. The autocratic French King was not a supporter of democracy. He funded and encouraged the American Revolutionj to cause political difficulty and economic damage to Britain. An early example of an Empire funding terrorists to damage his opponents. And the Dutch,for similar reasons, aided the Americans.

It is relatively cheap to fund terrorists and insurrectionists. Without this help the Americans could well have lost the Rebellion.

More by this Author


Comments 11 comments

Micky Dee profile image

Micky Dee 5 years ago

Yes sir. I believe that the number of countries that the US, the military, the CIA etc. have invaded 17 countries without having to cross an ocean. I'm surprised the US hasn't invaded Canada. God bless you James. Keep up the great work.


Charles James profile image

Charles James 5 years ago from Yorkshire, UK Author

Micky, I am not sure you remembered to count Florida, Texas and California in your tally.

The Americans actually invaded what is now Libya when the US Marines stormed Tripoli to put down piracy.

Yes, modern America has a lot to live up to.


JT Walters profile image

JT Walters 5 years ago from Florida

Hello Charles James,

I am in Florida and I am pretty certain Saddam Huessin was a MI6 assest. Yes, we trained Osama Bin Laden but that is in the past.

Yes, we put Fidel in place but then he cut another deal with the Russians and went rogue. Intelligence agents do go rogue and they have to be hunted down. It isn't just a USA problem but one the Britian shares as well as every other country with intelligence operatives.

And my family took Florida over 100 years ago and Spain pretty much so seeded Florida to the USA as well as Cuba. My family also got California and Texas as well. But you are talking about something that happened a 100 years ago. And trust me all of those states like Hawaii, which England seeded to the USA, desperately needed to be apart of the USA so they could appreciate such luxuries as in door plumbing. Personally, my grandfather put toilets in both Cuba and Hawaii. People were dying of diseases from not having sufficient plumbing.

Yes, America has a lot to be proud of as well. Florida, Texas and California wouldn't want to be apart of any other country but the USA.

You should visit a country before you criticize it. I have lived in Europe and I know how Europe twists propoganda against the USA otherwise all of you would live here. And trust me there is a very long line to get into this country perhaps a longer line than to get into any other country in the world.

JT


Charles James profile image

Charles James 5 years ago from Yorkshire, UK Author

JT Walters

I have visited the USA. I like most of the Americans I meet. And I agree America has done good things.

I think of myself as as candid friend. A candid friend's comments are not always welcome.


JT Walters profile image

JT Walters 5 years ago from Florida

Hi Charles James,

That is not true. We are a very frank group of people here in America as most of us are German.

So you agree Saddam Huessin was MI6 agent and not a USA agent.

Just don't expect America to be any less of a candid friend with the UK.

Really my family served in the USA governemnt for 10 presidencies including the ones in which the Mexican American War and the Spanish American War were fought. I have detailed records of the time in our history.

Now wasn't the entire deal with Libya about a terrorist who blew up a plane full of UK citiznes who was released from a Scottish jail who was supposedly terminal with less then three months to live and he is free as a bird today and still alive?

I believe it was a compassionate release that turned out to release a terrorist from your country. Now how could you or anyone esle in UK complain about us going into Tripoli when it was a UK terrorist who we were after?

Or is the UK so divorced from the consequences of their actions and they just expect the USA to clean up after every mistake they make? The poor USA, we have spineless allies with exceptionally short term memory. Because we weren't happy about having to clean up Saddam Huessin for England.

The UK has been such a stranger to the truth of their involvment and it is so sad.

And since the UK is so unhappy with what has happened in Tripoli perhaps BP should wave any possibility at obtaining oil rights in North Africa. I'll copy Buckingham Palace. I am certain King Charles will be thrilled to know his people are waving the UK's right to oil.

Another candid friend of the UK,

JT


Charles James profile image

Charles James 5 years ago from Yorkshire, UK Author

I agree with you that the decision to give in to terrorists made terrorism much more profitable. It was a very bad mistake by the then British Government.

The compassionate release of a supposedly dying man by the Scottish government is more justifiable - had the man died reasonably soon afterwards the issue would be dead. Last time I looked he was still dying. And of course there is significant doubt as to whether he was actually guilty.

What I found very odd was that BP while doing nothing directly to free him made representations to the British government asking for a general policy for repatriating foreign criminals to serve sentences in their own country. I cannot see what legitimate interest an oil company can have in that piece of social policy.

When one looks at how Britain obtained its Empire we are not in a strong position to criticise the Americans.

Its the "we are the good guys and everyone else is evil" approach that is so annoying.


Jt Walters 5 years ago

Hello Charles James,

America and England are in it together and we should behave that way. I don't think America thinks they are the good guys and everyone esle is evil. I think that is a mispreception that is out there about Americans. Most of us have attended graduate school, lived in other countries and many of us are second genertion or first generation immigrants from England and or Germany.

I just think you haven't met the majority of America. You are basing your opinion on a very small proportion

of Americans. And as far as America invading Canada..you are joking of course. Ha! Ha! Canada is more involved in this war on terror than either my country or your country.

Love can't fourish betwen our countries with all this truth but the in all reality our countries are reflecting pools of each other.

Hey, Tony Blair bolted England when he awared all those lucrative oil contratcs to South Korea and your country completely flipped out. So even South Korea is living well off this war. I believ Mr. Blair teaches at Yale now.

We are no different.

And BP had no interest beyond obtaining oil rights by allowing the release of a terminal man who wasn't atleats by the definition of America (With less then six months to live) free except to gan access to Libya.

I lived in Europe in the 1980(s) when someone would leave a brief case a cafe' in Paris and everyone ran. I am use to terrorism. And while terrosim is aired on television and broadcasted on the news it will still flourish. I remember in Europe they wouldn't air attacks on cafe's.

As for whether the terrorist was actually guilty? Well he was fouond guilty by your Justice System and as a Barrister you probably are more aware of his case but he didn't get the sentence over turned. He didn't appeal the conviction and i have seen the people of Lockerbee (sp?) and they thought he was guilty.

I think the USA and their allies need to stop pointing fingers at each other as it is counter productive and encourages the terrorists as they believe they can divide us.

Are you certain the news you have out of Libya is true? There is a lot of prooganda in war.

Conglomerates are evil but people's original intentions are good.

JT

We are all dying and most of us not in such luxurious settings. The point was the man was suppose to be dead shortly and he is not.


Charles James profile image

Charles James 5 years ago from Yorkshire, UK Author

Much of what you say I agree with.The peoples of the USA and Britain have much in common. Our Governmemnts sometimes lie to us. Big companies have the ear of government. The rich have more political influence than the poor, even though the poor many times outnumber the rich.


JT Walters profile image

JT Walters 5 years ago from Florida

Something we can agree upon.

JT


habee profile image

habee 4 years ago from Georgia

Charles, I'm glad you don't judge all Americans by the actions of our government! Wonderful hub. Voted up!


Charles James profile image

Charles James 4 years ago from Yorkshire, UK Author

Fortunately I have met a few Americans over the years.

Like every nationality there are lots of lovely ones.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working