Quantcast
Channel: Area Majority / Influence | BoardGameGeek
Viewing all 415457 articles
Browse latest View live

Everything Board Games Shasn Preview

$
0
0

by Delton P.



Quick Look:
Shasn is a political strategy game where you build your political platform as you play. It's surprisingly realistic, touching on many of the hot-button issues of today in a way that is true to the political process. Sometimes you have to compromise your values to get votes, but sticking to your guns will help you rise in power within your constituency. The base mechanics are set collection, area control, and negotiation, but there are a lot of other things going on including conspiracies, gerrymandering, and blackmail. It doesn't bash any particular ideological approach, but it points out some weaknesses in a way that's poignant and frequently humorous.

Designer:Zain Memon
Artist:Soumik Lahiri
Publisher:Memesys Culture Lab
Year Published: 2019
No. of Players: 4-5
Ages: 12+
Playing Time: 90-120 min



WARNING: This is a preview of Shasn. All components and rules are prototype and subject to change.

Review: Shasn
Rules and Setup:


Setup is speedy. Everyone gets a bag of pegs in their color, one of each resource, and a player board. Put the main and secondary board on the table. Shuffle the various decks and put them on their labeled spots on the secondary board. That's it.

The First Turn Rule is now this: At the start of the game, each player votes for an opponent to be the first player. You cannot vote for yourself. The first player gets one resource of their choice, the second gets two, the third gets three and the fourth gets four resources.

The rules are very clear and easy to explain. If you know the game well, you can teach it in about ten minutes.

Fast-forward a bit, and it looks like this:



The secondary board:



Theme and Mechanics:
This is politics, so your main goal is to gain enough voters to have the majority in a district. You do this by spending resources to obtain voters. Vote cards have a big number that tells you how many pegs you can put on the board in one district, and symbols that tell you what resources you have to spend to do so.



When you buy Voters, you place pegs into whatever region you like. You can buy as many cards as you can afford, but Voters on one card can't be split among different regions.



Each region has two numbers on it. The left number is how many voters are required for a majority. The right number is how many Voters total can be placed on that region. Once all the holes are full, no more Voters can be placed there. Each region only scores for the player who has the majority, and only as many points as are needed for the majority. For example, having four pegs in that darkest region (5/9) scores nothing. Five is the number necessary for a majority, so five or more would net you five points. Generally, you don't want more pegs in a region than are required for the majority, but there are a lot of powers that affect Voters. You might want a few extra.

Pegs have an S on one side. Voters are always placed blank side up until a majority is reached. Once a player has a majority, they flip a number of voters in that region to their S side equal to the majority condition. Each S-peg gets you one point at the end of the game. If something causes you to lose the majority, you flip them all back over. Most effects can only target non-majority voters. The ones that do say so.

If you place a peg in a Volatile Region (the ones with the black ring around them), they can't be moved by any effect. At the end of a turn that a peg is placed in a Volatile Region, the player that Voter belongs to draws a Headline card. These are events that can be beneficial or disastrous. The first one we drew killed the Voter.



This is a platform well into the game.



The theme is incredibly well done. You have four archetypical approaches to policy: the Showman, the Capitalist, the Supremo, and the Idealist. Each turn starts with the previous player reading a question in an Idealogue card. The Cards have a different answer on each side that corresponds to one of the 4 archetypes. You will get different resources depending on your answer and then slide that card into your platform with just the archetype showing. You aren't allowed to know the resources or the card type before you answer, but they are generally easy to figure out. Choosing is sometimes difficult because you will want to answer using your actual philosophy, but that's not always going to work out. Having more than 6 of a card type doesn't unlock any more powers. Sometimes your answer might make you throw up a little bit when you say it. But, that's politics. You can't do any good if you don't get elected. If you want to win, you have to compromise, lie, backstab, cheat, and occasionally murder.

Every two cards of the same type will get you one corresponding resource each turn. Also, four and six cards of the same type unlock powerful special abilities. As the game progresses, you will have more and more options on your turn. It's all very thematic. The Idealists are the nicest, so their 6 power is to move more voters around when gerrymandering. The Supremo is the meanest. They kill voters, but they have to pay resources to do so.

I love how the resources are divided among the different answers. Each answer reflects a combination of two archetypes. The funny answers usually provide media (Showman), the big evil government answers give you clout (Supremo), the nice PC stuff provides trust (Idealist), and the greedy cards provide funds (Capitalist). So if you have a card that asks if you should ship all the homeless out of the cities and the answers are "Yes, out of sight out of mind" or "No. We should give them tiny futuristic houses to wheel around in," you can guess which resources you'll get with each answer and what the card type will be. Sometimes it will surprise you, but it generally makes sense when you think about it.

Here are a few examples.





Another power you will unlock is Gerrymandering. If you're not familiar with that term, that's what politicians call the act of redrawing voting districts against the will of the people. The number of voters for each candidate doesn't matter as much as where they live. If you draw the lines so that the majority of Democrats are concentrated in one district with just a few scattered around those surrounding it, the Republicans can ensure that they get the majorities needed to win more district.That's why we need a 3-party system.

In the game, Gerrymandering is moving Voter pegs to a neighboring district. For each district you have a majority in, you can move one non-majority peg of any player to an adjacent district. You can't move any peg from/to anywhere, but if your majorities are spread out, you have a lot of options. This is a way to slow down opponents and even force pegs into Volatile Regions.

Then we have Conspiracies.



Pay the cost on the back of the Conspiracy using any combination of resources. That top one would cost 4, some cost 5. You never know what the conspiracy will be until you buy it. The two shown above are just examples. Some are better than others.

Finally, you can Form Coalitions. Two players can team up to form a majority. This gives them a point for each of the pegs they flip and the ability to Gerrymander. Coalitions can be dissolved at any time by any player involved. You can negotiate and exchange resources or cards at a rate of one to one.

Its serious strategic base is complimented with enough humor to make it fun for all players, even when playing with a mixed political group. Too many political games these days are targeting people of one specific ideology. It's refreshing to see political humor approached with maturity.

The game ends when a player gains a majority in the last open district. At that point, count up the votes. Each district is worth points equal to its majority value. Whoever has the most points gets to run the new world order.

Game Play:
On your turn, you can do as many actions as you can afford and have unlocked. In the beginning, you'll just be answering your question, getting resources, and buying voters. By the end, you'll be buying multiple cards, playing conspiracies, forming coalitions, and Gerrymandering Voters all over the place. Even with all that, rounds go fast. Shasn has a very nice flow. It's straightforward enough to prevent AP, but you get to do a lot of different, easy things on your turn.

Artwork and Components:
This is a prototype, but when I opened it I was legitimately dazzled.



It's a huge box covered in raised, shiny silver. It came with lovely magnetic keep boxes for the Idealogue cards and tokens plus decent drawstring bags for pegs. The creators made it a point to mention that the components would be improved upon in the final product, but this is already pretty nice.


Why don't more games come with these things?


The Good:
It's fun and ingenuitive.
Fast to set up and learn.
Great component design.
There are four sets of cards. One American politics, another is Indian, then we have Rome, and the future. This is actually an Indian game with an American version, but you'd never know from playing it. They nailed American politics better than any other game I can think of.
Quick turns.
This might help you to understand your own politics better, as well as the political process.
Looks beautiful on the shelf.
Player count from 3-6 makes it easy to get on the table.

The Other
It's a shelf hog, but it's too pretty for that to be a complaint.

Final Thoughts:
Shasn is the best thing to come out of American politics in a very long time. I wanted to review this because it sounded a lot like Twilight struggle for more players. This isn't as intense, but it's a lot more fun, IMO. If there's any chance you might like a medium weight game with a political theme, give Shasn your full attention.

For Players Who Like:
Politics, strategy games, engine building, set collection, mature humor of the non-CAH variety, area control.

Click here to see more from Stephen and the team at Everything Board Games.

Reply: Twilight Struggle:: Rules:: Re: Quagmire/Bear Trap revision

$
0
0

by YassWaddah

Ziemowit wrote:

I guess most people weren't recently traumatized by a Bear streak, so they don't see the reason to change the original card.
Oh well, it was worth a try.


Don't worry about others. You can have an unpopular opinion and it's still valid. Just unpopular.

I personally dislike the element of dice roll swinginess in this game, and it's increasing as I play more. (And I've been playing since 2012.)

It's a big but infrequent source of frustration in realignment rolls, a minor source in coups ("hey, another 4OP coup of a 2 Stab country that only reduces enemy influence by 1 Influence. Awesome"), and a complete toss-up for War Cards and BT/Quag.

My changes (which I'm tinkering with a spare copy of the paper game) have included:

Realignments are rolled with a smaller die, but enjoy one step of regional flexibility more than coups (so ME can always be realigned).

War Cards always grant a modifier if the target country is controlled by the enemy (rather than just Israel qualifying) and if successful, the victor gains influence equal to stability, not "winner takes all influence in the square".

Space Race cards have the same set of bonuses as the Tiananmen Square track in 1989 Dawn of Freedom. So, +1 if you've tried and failed at least once before, and +1 if you burn a friendly card on it.

BT/Quagmire I just set an upper limit of 2 AR trap, maximum. You still have to roll once, but if you fail then you exit the trap for free at end of next AR. This accounts for the majority of all statistical outcomes, and frankly I find it's no fun to be forced to play through the "statistical outlier" scenario with this mechanic that eats up your play rounds. (Of course, my definition of fun is very subjective and I'm not pretending this is universally applicable.)

My biggest issue with this game is that it's a long game to play by boardgaming standards (although yes, I'm aware that Gupta and Matthews pared down its play time when compared against the serious wargames of their past). Given its duration, I'm less and less willing to accept the mollifier of "you just had a bad run of luck, but play more games and in the aggregate, it all pans out". That might work for Race for the Galaxy or Tiny Epic Galaxies or another fast paced game, but my personal tastes and time constraints mean that I get no pleasure from sinking hours into a game when later dice rolls bork the whole playthrough for me.

Even given the above changes to dice rolls, another issue is that the cards' OPs values can be heavily destabilizing. If Player A draws a low-OP hand, it's inherently bad by itself, but due to the drawing mechanism, it also means that Player B is statistically more likely to have drawn a high-OP hand.

(In contrast, there's a graceful mechanic whereby if Player A draws a hostile hand of Player B's events, then at least Player B is likely to have also drawn a greater number of Player A's events - this quirk of the drafting is one that I like.)

Regarding the "A high OPs, B low OPs" issue, if Fantasy Flight Games had designed TS, I'm sure they might have considered a complex multi-step deck stacking process at the start of the game. Other than that, though, I don't see how this OP value swinginess could be solved. And in my opinion it has a greater effect on the game's outcome than the dice rolls.

None of the above should be taken as objective criticism of TS's merits. This is entirely a discussion of what I subjectively find annoying about the game and how (and whether) I can fix them. Ziemowit's proposal is right up my alley as far as this initiative is concerned.

Reply: Die Macher:: General:: Re: 2-player mode?

$
0
0

by curtc

Warxky wrote:

gmilitaru wrote:


A game of puppeteers perhaps: you win if your second ranking party is stronger than the other player's second ranking party?


That is a neat idea!

That works in games like Dominant Species, with open info. But the hidden cards in DM means that there will be massive collusion between the two "players" controlled by the same person.

Reply: Omen: A Reign of War:: General:: Re: News from Origins

$
0
0

by Kolossal

Asmodee will be distributing two fantastic games in North America : Omen and Mezo. We are excited to bring John Clowdus‘ design to a larger audience, he is a hidden gem many have yet to discover--and should! The Kolossal team is looking forward to this new cooperation! Omen is, and has been, THE 1v1 card battle game in my opinion!

Reply: Twilight Imperium (Fourth Edition):: Rules:: Re: Miscount Disclosed Directive

$
0
0

by kaiteinomen

Clipper wrote:

Wakke wrote:

Another question: when you are 'revoting' on the selected law, is it still in effect during that vote?

I would say it immediately loses its effect. You're going to have to ask FFG for a definitive answer, though.

My reasoning is based on it being treated as if it were just drawn from the Agenda Deck, meaning it wouldn't be in effect.

Also, I think it almost certainly has to be this way to avoid issues with the VP-scoring Laws.



So, due to new LRR, the law that is being voted on because of “Miscount
Disclosed” remains in play during the revote.

And I want to ask, if the revoted law is something like The crown of Emphidia or Shards of the throne, when another player is elected, what will happen about the old elected player? Because I think the card isn't been "discarded", it's a little confusing.

Reply: Dune:: Reviews:: Re: Finally got to try this!

$
0
0

by mpowers

gamesbook wrote:

I still wonder if they asked for input.


The people I thought would have been contacted were not contacted.

Starting to think maybe even a kickstarter may have been preferable.

Reply: Dune:: General:: Re: It's official: GF9 is reprinting Dune.

$
0
0

by tempus42

I just saw the photos posted above - and it's really awesome to see that the look and feel of the new components is great! Nice modernization there.

For the record, I am definitely buying a copy of the game as soon as it's available, so big thanks in advance to GF9, Ilya, and the designers for creating this beautiful new version.

Now what I'm going to say is clearly based on only being able to read these very partial examples, so it may not be at all fair, but with that disclaimer...

It appears some things things at least (e.g. BG Coexistence) have been cleaned up nicely, but there were other opportunities for important clarifications missed that I really wish had been addressed. For example, can the Emperor revive multiple Sardaukar with his Karama? Does the Fremen Karama worm cause a Nexus to occur? Can a player bid again after he has passed on a card? More troubling, it says you can't ship into storm, but nothing about if you can move into/out of/through storm (which I really am assuming must be covered on the next page we can't see?) Can the Guild ship out of the storm? These are just the kinds of fine details that super-experienced players are going to ask about (and try to exploit) the first time they play the game.

If these kinds of questions are clarified elsewhere in the rules, then ok (although why not give the answers right with the associated rule?) If not, then this is really disappointing because I've had scores of questions like these documented for decades. I really wouldn't care if the clarifications landed on the same answers I have chosen to use or not, as long as they are not left as ambiguities.

(Each of the example ambiguities I mention above were all captured in my existing documentation. They're not new questions.)

I know first-hand from my own designs how hard (impossible?) it is to write bullet-proof rules, but in this case, it really should have only taken a read-through of my documentation, freely available on the web, and a careful decision on how to rule on those cases in the new edition to fix a lot of potential problems. Yes, it would make for bigger rules, but it's all going to come out in the bgg forums as soon as the game is released, leading to even larger FAQs getting published, which is much worse in my opinion.

Ok, my apologies, I'll say it again: it's possible this criticism is totally unfair given that we can only see fragments of the rules which may not even be totally final. I hope I can be proven to be a crazy alarmist after we see the published game.

I *really* hope we can get a new bgg entry for this edition to keep the rules questions from getting confused. Has anyone tried to submit yet? If not, I'll do it.

Reply: Scythe: Modular Board:: General:: Re: Dings and Dents on Modular Board

$
0
0

by Bazrel

Got my board from post office just now, no dents so that’s nice... but my OCD kicked in as I saw one of the sides of the board. They are not centered at the top of the hexes... rather the tip of the icon is located 5 mm to the left. These things bugs me a bit, I would add a picture but I don’t know how to add one , sorry! :blush:

New Image for Root

New Image for Land of the Two Rivers: Iraq War

New Image for Land of the Two Rivers: Iraq War

New Image for Land of the Two Rivers: Iraq War

Reply: Gaia Project:: General:: Re: Tweaking the races for better balance?

$
0
0

by Beancake12

If you feel the game is unbalanced, just auciton the factions in the beginning of the game.

- All players start at 30 points
- Choose player order
- Player one picks a faction and start a bid
- Auction goes on until all players have passed
- The first player from play order without a faction starts the next bid

New Image for Land of the Two Rivers: Iraq War

Reply: Smash Up:: General:: Re: Smash Up it's dead?

$
0
0

by Da Senzai

TabletopAdept wrote:

I think I will stop buying at this point. Two things I have noticed: 1) there is no much creativity left in the last few releases, where it looks like the actions are just a mix of the same ones we see in other factions 2) they are not releasing the “boss” card with the new factions, which is annoying because we will have to buy them later. I am concerned that this has become a “cash cow” to the point that we will see a faction fimr every country on Earth, for every sport, for every book, for ever movie, for every animal, etc. I have enough at this point.


I love that they Keep pumping out 2 releases each year! Smash Up is almost the perfekt game for me. The game is easy to play and have a ridicilous amount of almost infinite replay value.

While not all of the newest factions has been my cup of cola (they cannot please everyone at once), I think World Tour part two looks extremely interesting.

The only thing I don´t like about smash up is the exclusive store event stuff (like titans) I think making gameplay related stuff hard to get on purpose is straight up bullshit, but Luckyly they skipped the store event this year. :)

Reply: Patton's Best:: Rules:: Re: AT Guns... a death sentence?

$
0
0

by nyhotep

You might want to try the optional rule from the General:

The third Optional Rule challenges the game's assumption that AT Guns are always activated oriented towards your tank. When an AT Gun is encountered, it is quite plausible that the gun crew could be engaging another target not in your direction, or simply be unaware of your tank's approach.

To reflect this, roll to determine the facing of AT Gun(s) which are activated using the "Tank" column of the Vehicle Facing table. AT Guns are
then subjected to the same DRM penalties for firing outside their covered arc as tanks/SPGs.

Because of its 360-degree mount, the German 88mm gun
would use the + 10 per Sector DRM; all other AT Guns would have to be manhandled into the new firing position and are subjected to the +25 per
Sector DRM. Unlike SPGs, AT Guns are allowed to pivot and fire in the same turn.

Reply: Patton's Best:: Rules:: Re: AT Guns... a death sentence?

$
0
0

by Frenky

Agree with ctcharger, besides that avoid buildup and forest areas. Thats no terrain for tanks so leave that for infantry.
But if you are orderd to go there, you'll have bad luck. A houserule I'm using. A ordertable from your commanding officer to go to a spcific area.

Have fun ....

Reply: Root:: Rules:: Re: Corvid Exposure (June PnP)

Reply: The Battle of Five Armies:: General:: Re: Official offer to pre-order Battle of Five Armies!

$
0
0

by GamesJart

Lawman5014 wrote:

Any more info on this at all or the upcoming preorder for the CE expansion kings of middle earth?


As the expansion does not exist yet we are talking a few years yet.

Reply: Root:: General:: Re: Best Playlist for Setting the Mood?

$
0
0

by mjroxas

littlemute wrote:


Needs more metal.

The SWORD
Red Fang
Black Tusk
early Mastodon

SLAYER.

....and maybe Haydn's 64th.


I LOVE this. But might meet this & the OP's progrock halfway with the album In The Court of The Crimson King.
Viewing all 415457 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>