Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[marco_fera]

Greetings,
I'm new to this great forum, I've just found it.
I'm the developer of a remake of "Conflict: MEPS", I saw an entire thread about the original, and I also saw some of you found my remake.
I've tried to look for reviews and impressions on my version on the web with no luck; now, I didn't expect to be reviewed on gamespot but I really need some opinions because it's impossible to judge my own work, and since I'm working on a new project it would be great to know what you liked and what you didn't.
You can download the game at
http://www.filefront.com/13537306/Conflict-M.E.P.S./
Ciao
Marco

[Servant Corps]

Bridge over Troubled Water? I played it a bit, and am planning an AAR/Let's Play on it soon.

I think it's a decent remake, and am okay with it, but it took me some time to get it to work. I have made some suggestions on your blog a while back, but I don't expect much.

Others may have different views though on this issue.

Some random thoughts:

I must admit though that I never bothered actually waging a war in Bridge Over Troubled Water, because I didn't really understand and liked the combat system, so I guess that might be a problem. Instead, I just used the tried and true method of using Mossad to kill everything.

The thing I liked the most though was the data that you give the player. In regular Conflict: MEPS, you are left guessing what's going on, while in this game, you are granted a lot of information.

There is really no penalty for abandoning Palestine other than Israel being paralyzed for a turn. In regular MEPS, giving up Palestine gives more troops to Syria and Egypt, two Arab rivals that you have to kill anyway. But in your game, that penalty really wouldn't work since your goal is not to destroy Arab states, but just to survive until elections.

Speaking of which, it's such a shame the game ends after elections.

Once you destroyed the Arab dictatorships, you can begin to slowly lose popularity. Since you can't provoke any nearby nation, the Israelis start getting upset and angry at your rule. The game should really allow for the Arab dictatorships to respawn...

Conclusion: Compared to, say, Conflict.NET, which I have downloaded on another computer, this remake is pure gold. Though I really liked how Conflict.NET got rid of the overpowered Mossad.

[Deadmeat1471]

Im liking!!! i loved that game. Wished someone would remake

*edit*

Very good stuff, military system is a bit obscure  (needs more pointers as to what is going on), the map is nice, though the colours are not optimised for a political game. lines representing wars would be better as arrows with crossed swords or sommit showing explicitly war.

I like the diplomacy stuff, the political stuff, its brilliant. PLEASE keep it up!!! CMEPS is probably the best political simulator made, and this has very real promise!

[marco_fera]

Just one note: the game is called "Conflict: Middle East Political Simulator" as the original, while Bridge over troubled water is only the name of the blog.
I hope to read other precious opinions!
Thanks

[GreatJustice]

I am seriously sorry about the massive necro, but I think it might be needed.

Some of the new details on this look great (esp. diplomacy wise), but I don't see why you added a tactical war simulator when it wasn't needed.

Anyway, I can't run this properly. The screen size is just large enough that I can barely see around the Israel screen and I can't see any of the war options in the foreign policy screen. My screen resolution is 1024x600 and I think the game's resolution is higher. Unfortunately, I can't find any .ini file to modify, the game only runs from the start menu (not any desktop shortcut or the main .exe), and adding extensions to the command line only prevents it from working.

Any ideas on how to resize it?

[ssfsx17]

It might be neat to have different pre-set scenarios with very different situations, for example:
- Yitzhak Rabin has died, Netanyahu must pick up the pieces - this scenario would be the most similar to the original CMEPS
- Golda Meir deals with troubled times - can she maintain Israel's standing amidst all the events?
- Ariel Sharon tries to make peace - can he avoid being poisoned with stroke-causing drugs by his opponents? And, how will he deal with the fact that the infiltration of the CIA has gone too well and now the USA is invading Iraq?
- David Ben-Gurion tries to keep a brand-new country alive - this would be the most war-oriented scenario of them all
- Benjamin Netanyahu part 2 - for those who want to change current events. Will Bibi be able to handle the Arab Spring and the possible UN recognition of Palestine?

Also, it might be nice to have the game mechanic of infiltrating the KGB/FSB and the CIA, so that you can direct the superpowers to support various kinds of movements or perhaps even attack nations for you. For example, if you get near-total control of the CIA, you could make the USA do a full invasion of Iran or Iraq. Or, if you get near-total control of the KGB/FSB, you could make them slow the progress of a country's nuclear weapons program through something like Stuxnet.

Palestine definitely needs to be developed more as a game mechanic, especially because of all the changes it's gone through. For example, it should be possible to (for the stock Benjamin Netanyahu scenario) cause the PLO to split into Hamas and Fatah. The player should also be able to make crazy decisions like whether to completely take over Jerusalem, build a big wall to contain the West Bank or Gaza, try to withdraw settlers, etc.

If nations go Jihadist, there should be much bigger consequences than simply getting the USA angry, such as Hamas suddenly getting their hands on better weapons. Likewise with nations going democratic, for example, if Egypt goes democratic then it might suddenly be more hostile to Israel.

Support from America should be more complex - American Jews who donate lots of cash, American lobbyists with different goals (such as AIPAC), conservatives who just really want to kill Muslims, etc.

[mainiac]

The war mechanics need to be made a bit more user friendly.  The various unit types don't really add much to the game.  A minimize screen option would be nice.  Also it is rather irksome that Lebanon is treated as a dictatorship.  They are a democracy, with a constitution that is respected.  Admittedly, they have severe sectarian complications, but a lot of that can be blamed on Syria and Israel.  Having a democratic revolution in Lebanon just doesn't make sense as a result.

[Servant Corps]

In any future Conflict: MEPS remake, Mossad will have to be nerfed or even removed. It's far too easy to hang back and sponsor terrorists in the Middle East to overthrow the Middle Eastern dictatorships.

[marco_fera]

I am seriously sorry about the massive necro, but I think it might be needed.

Some of the new details on this look great (esp. diplomacy wise), but I don't see why you added a tactical war simulator when it wasn't needed.

Anyway, I can't run this properly. The screen size is just large enough that I can barely see around the Israel screen and I can't see any of the war options in the foreign policy screen. My screen resolution is 1024x600 and I think the game's resolution is higher. Unfortunately, I can't find any .ini file to modify, the game only runs from the start menu (not any desktop shortcut or the main .exe), and adding extensions to the command line only prevents it from working.

Any ideas on how to resize it?

I guess you're trying to play on a netbook. Unfortunately a lot of the game interface requires at least 768 pixels in height. So unless you can pan on your monitor there's no way to play the game, I'm very sorry.

[marco_fera]

I've seen all the comments, I'm glad to see that someone still plays the game, and they're quite precious comments indeed. I'll follow your suggestions in case there's a sequel, personally I think that combat is probably too detailed. For sure the idea of scenarios is really good.
Regarding Lebanon, yes it's rather unjust to portray it as a dictatorship, but it's useful for the game. A good sequel would probably include many political groups, and would be more complex on the political side. In any case, bear in mind that a realist sequel would mean a quasi-democratic Libya (we all hope) a quasi-dictatorial Egypt, a terribly weak regime in Syria and god only know what looms next for the Middle East. Now even if in the real world these changes are positive, a game set in this new Arab world would be quite boring, so to make the game funny to play one would in any case have to change reality and set the game in a sort of imaginary Middle East.
Marco

[mainiac]

I think that a democratic Lebanon would actually make for more interesting gameplay.  Lebanon plays a very interesting role for Israel because their status as another democracy and ties to the west means that Israel should face severe western condemnation for messing with them, as happened during their invasion back in 2006.  If Israel actually did a complete military takeover of Lebanon (without there first being a dictatorial coup, possibly backed by Syria), they would lose all American funding.  But groups in southern Lebanon would use this to their advantage to hurt Israel like the PLA does, knowing that retaliating across the border would be costly.  These strikes would be more severe the more belligerent Israel behaves.

[Servant Corps]

It will, most of all, require mechanics for military occupation, something Conflict: MEPS never had, due to its wargame nature. Once you won the war, the UN would come in and pick up the pieces.

I like the idea of having terrorism continue even after you release Palestine, and that this terrorism is tied towards Israel's (mis)behavior to the regime.

[meduvar]

Dear Marcus,

I'm a big fan of the original game.
I'm very curious about your version and can not download it using the link you have posted.
Apparently the link is broken.
I'd be very grateful if you could create a new link!
Thanks in advance (-: