$15.00
$20.00
$30.00
$5.00
Recommend
27 
 Thumb up
 Hide
20 Posts

New Angeles» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Do you like BSG, Semi Co-Op, Hidden Roles, Negotiation? Meet BSG 2.0. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Christopher James
United States
New York
flag msg tools
mb
1) Overall Game Flow/Strategy:

Think BSG Crisis - and that is this game. You have 2 ROUNDS of play to collectively ensure that the city of New Angeles has the supplies it needs.

If you do not provide for the city, the Government will take notice. If they take to much notice, they will come in and clean house. (If you get to 25 threat ALL players except the federalist lose).

Meanwhile you all have personal goals. You can either have your card as your goal (meaning you must be ahead of 3 other players), Have an opponents car, meaning you win as long as you are ahead of that person...even if you are behind EVERYONE else. Or the Federalist who wins if they have 25 points AND the Threat track reaches 25.

2) Game Play:

There are 3 rounds. First you draw a "DEMAND" card. It will tell you what level of Entertainment/Food/Credits/Technology ECT the City needs. Thing the reverse of BSG. Instead of not losing X amount of FUEL you need to gain X amount of FUEL to avoid Threat/Losing.

Each player will have 1 market card (chosen from 2 at random). These are your personal mission for that ROUND. Ranging from having epidemics in districts (IE you invest in pharma and make points the more districts that are sick). So while you are trying to collective get resources for demand...you also want to get them while covering off on YOUR personal goal for that round. Example: manipulating districts to gain resources for the primary goal when they are suffering a plague causes threat to go up (I.E. you are ignoring a problem in a district while trying to generate profits and this pisses off the government). So if you have the secret investment cards for plagues everywhere...you may not support removing plagues even as you look for ways to produce to not fail the main goal.

The meat of the game and how you manipulate the map is the Proposal/Counter Proposal phase. First an asset comes out (assets are upgrades that go to the player who passed the proposal...they give you game effects..for instance Caprice Nisei allows you to FORCE someone to tell the group how they will activate their proposal if we vote for it, and they can NOT go back on this. You can even use it on yourself to prove to the group you will do what you promise.

These proposals are cards in your have (private info). They come from 6 different schools of cards that have different specializations. Some are great at exploiting districts, some cure diseases, some build infrastructure making distracts better. My favorite is MEDIA as it basically uses news broadcasts and propaganda to stop protests and strikes.

The FIRST player places a proposal next to the asset which will manipulate the board in certain ways to allow for production of the resources you need. There are too many cards to explain but they are all interesting and many have advantages and drawbacks built in allowing you to put in a sub optimal one that helps you but keeps threat from causing everyone to lose.

Then you go around and everyone clockwise can put in a counter-offer. Only one counter-office can be active at a time. The second player (in order) may put in a counter-offer for free, each other player can replace that counter-offer..at the cost of discarding extra cards. If nobody counters the proposal passes and the player who played it activates it as they wish, and takes the asset. If there is a counter offer then starting from the first player each player can put in cards (face down) in support of the offer they wish to support. Sometimes you won't even care but can ask for bribes. Sometimes you REALLY need one to pass to help complete your goals. Sometimes its just obvious the one is the one we all need to pass and only the federalist would vote against it. Which offer succeed, it goes off. You then pull the next agenda and repeat.

Each PHASE of a ROUND (of which they are 3 rounds and 2 phases per round) you draw a crisis. The crisis will add things to the board , impact resources ect... it will also tell you many actions (player turns) you have for that phase. Can be from 3-6. So you may get 12 actions to fix the city or 6 over 2 rounds. So this is variable.

After the second PHASE of each ROUND you go to the MARKET phase and collect profits based on how well you accomplished it.

This repeats 3 times and then you determine a winner!

There is so much more so here are some highlights:

1) Each district in the city produces different resources.
2) You can only produce from 3 districts each PHASE within a ROUND.
3) Producing in a district (called exploiting - cuz mega corps bad!) causes that district to first protest, then strike, then riot so hard that the district gets blacked out until order can be restored. At Strike and Black Out no resources will be produced.
4) Org Crime units (mafia) show up on spaces taking a part of the profits if you don't get rid of them
5) Human First protesters cause districts to go on strike after the first production...skipping protests completely
6) PriSec (Cops/Security) can be used to keep Mafia and Human First people out of districts... but they DON'T get rid of them. They just protect that district and push the crime to neighboring districts. If ever there is no legal spaces for Mafia or Human first the go off the board increasing threat (similar to marching Cylons in BSG)

That is general the gist. All the mechanics work together SO well. You may have a mafia infestation and you want to fight OrgCrime as a team...but one person may have a personal investment in the mafia (meaning they get points for each mafia unit on the board). So you may try to get others to not remove mafia...even though they make it harder to generate city resources ect...

Each Mega Corp has a specialty. They all draw from different card types. Similar to characters in BSG. Cards are used for voting AND for proposing things to vote on...so hand management is important.

You have next to unlimited negotiations. Any promises made that can be done immediately are binding, any future promises are not.

If I say Ill give you 5 victory points to vote for my proposal, you MUST do it if you accept. If I promise to give you the agenda reward for passing my proposal...I may change my mind if we win.

Because not everyone is against everyone, it is possible for the majority of players to win which means you can ALWAYS find allies (if you trust them) and there is no such thing as a SPOILER in this game. If you are losing you can't just refuse to help and let the city burn...because the other players will band against you (because they aren't necessarily fighting each other!

In my game at BGG Con I had my own agenda card meaning I needed to be ahead of 3 other corps...and since NOBODY had my card ...nobody had to be above me (unless they had their card and couldn't get past 3 other corps). So I was able to negotiate HUGE point swings. I had a rare card that would help prevent the feds from coming in (threat hitting 25) ..so I am like (hey give me ALL your points up to where you need to be above your own opponent and I was able to get 75 points to play this card...without actually making anyone who gave me points LOSE. In any other game this would be a dick move because you are actively saying you will ruin the game if people don't support you...but here you can work together with allies so the deal isn't as bad as a dick extortion, and more of an acceptable extortion that doesn't hurt the people you extorted.

The game in short, is unbelievable.

There is next to 0 down time. Nearly everyone is always engaged at ALL times. Bribing people to vote for your proposals, asking for bribes to support others. There is NO alpha player issue because nobody knows what is best for everyone, and there will almost never be a move that IS best for everyone (especially if a federalist is in the game).

Some will lose but MANY can win together. And that knife edge balance creates this exciting, fun and NON-TOXIC negotiating game.

If I where to rate this game I would give is an easy 10/10 as it is one of the best designed games I have ever played.

If you enjoy player interaction, negotiation, and semi-coop with personal goals...this will be your favorite game, for a LONG, LONG time.
44 
 Thumb up
1.50
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
trevor

Missouri
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Great review, I'm cautiously optimistic about this one.

How did you get a chance to play? How many plays do you have?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Honig
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
They had demo copies open at GenCon and BGG.con. The game is very good.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher James
United States
New York
flag msg tools
mb
Bggcon. We played 5. I couldn't see 6 being any slower or better or worse...just different.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Dirkes
United States
Louisville
Kentucky
flag msg tools
Happy Corgi
mbmbmbmbmb
Hearing that getting your own card and needing to beat everyone else feels fair because no one is trying to edge you out specifically is cool because at first I thought it sounded a bit unfair, but it just highlights how much negotiation and interaction there is. How does the federalist feel, and does it scale? In archipelago, I have sort of found that the equivalent in that game is a bit too easy to win with at 3 players, really tight and interesting with 4 players, and really difficult to win with at 5.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Big Head Zach
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The key to the Federalist being a challenging but reachable goal, is that you still have to earn 25 Capital, so it's not as simple as tanking the game. It requires you to act like you care.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher James
United States
New York
flag msg tools
mb
bhz1 wrote:
The key to the Federalist being a challenging but reachable goal, is that you still have to earn 25 Capital, so it's not as simple as tanking the game. It requires you to act like you care.


This ... and it works beautifully. In a wild game where I was up to 103+ points, threat was at 16 (not bad for last turn)...the federalist won by 1 threat through some epic plays.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tyler DeLisle
United States
Dallas
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
There wasn't a federalist in my game, and I didn't feel like anything was missing, the game is very strong and tons of fun even just trying to best your rival. I could definitely see though, how a Federalist could slowly build up a glut of powers and cards and make a mess of things in the end if the other player's don't notice and plan accordingly.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lee Shelton

Charlotte
North Carolina
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
TyDeL wrote:
There wasn't a federalist in my game, and I didn't feel like anything was missing, the game is very strong and tons of fun even just trying to best your rival. I could definitely see though, how a Federalist could slowly build up a glut of powers and cards and make a mess of things in the end if the other player's don't notice and plan accordingly.


That's rare, also. With the full player count there will be a Federalist 6/7 of the time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Luongo
msg tools
<Because not everyone is against everyone, it is possible for the majority of players to win which means you can ALWAYS find allies (if you trust them) and there is no such thing as a SPOILER in this game. If you are losing you can't just refuse to help and let the city burn...because the other players will band against you (because they aren't necessarily fighting each other!>

BS. In the game we played the Weyland player used his need to win to hand the Federalist the game. It was determined at setup that this was the way the game would end.

The Weyland player had the choice of maybe winning or playing Kingmaker. He's going to choose 'maybe winning' every time, thereby handing the game to someone else, be it the Federalist or another corp.

And with the hidden Rival mechanic that will happen in nearly every game, or some version thereof.

I.e. it's a 4 hour game where a couple of players will most likely lose simply because of the way the Rivals were dealt. That's not good game design.

I don't like games where all we're doing is uncovering how the game is going to end versus actually trying to beat the other players.

No way this is a 10. 4 maybe 5. It feels deeper and more interesting than it is.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Graham Gass
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
zhstalt wrote:
BS. In the game we played the Weyland player used his need to win to hand the Federalist the game. It was determined at setup that this was the way the game would end.

The Weyland player had the choice of maybe winning or playing Kingmaker. He's going to choose 'maybe winning' every time, thereby handing the game to someone else, be it the Federalist or another corp.


I'm not really understanding what you're trying to say. Can you go into more detail about what exactly happened? How many players? What rival card did Weyland have and who got Weyland's rival card? How exactly does Weyland trying to win hand the game to someone else?
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Felipe Bulhões
Brazil
flag msg tools
mb
I guess it was a 4 player game with a federalist and the weyand player picked up his own card.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Clasing
msg tools
mb
Flame112 wrote:
zhstalt wrote:
BS. In the game we played the Weyland player used his need to win to hand the Federalist the game. It was determined at setup that this was the way the game would end.

The Weyland player had the choice of maybe winning or playing Kingmaker. He's going to choose 'maybe winning' every time, thereby handing the game to someone else, be it the Federalist or another corp.


I'm not really understanding what you're trying to say. Can you go into more detail about what exactly happened? How many players? What rival card did Weyland have and who got Weyland's rival card? How exactly does Weyland trying to win hand the game to someone else?


I must be missing something also. Weyland drew his own card, so he only has to beat out the two lowest opponents at the end of the game, and mobilize against anybody getting close to 25? Tough but it would seem far from impossible. And that's with knowing with certainty that nobody is dedicated to trying to keep him down. Sounds like an interesting game to me.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Zach Mckinney
United States
Willington
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mb
Under that logic presented that would make cosmic encounter is bad game because certain powers are less useful than others ones at the table. Which is not true you can win that game with awful powers, because of negotiation.

The rivals do not set the end game state the only give the goal to achieving it.

If you lose only due to your rival card, not the federalist, not the investment cards, or to much threat, then some one negotiated better than you did.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allan Clements
Norway
Oslo
flag msg tools
Turns out Esseb did touch the flag. Don't tell him I said so though.
mbmbmbmbmb
If Weyland has his own card, and the others had each others then it seems he could simply make deals with both sides since they don't care if Weyland has more money than them.

It doesn't seem like that was what he referring to though, he was suggesting the entire game was predetermined based on how the rivals were handed out. However if the Weyland took the option of "Maybe winning" then there was a chance he could win, so I fail to see how that equates to the game being over before it starts.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Felipe Bulhões
Brazil
flag msg tools
mb
My guess was based on a misconception. I thought you always have to do better than 3 other players if you draw your own rival card, but you only have to be better than other 2 players on a 4 player game.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Krister Dahlgren
Sweden
Gävle
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Wow, just the header for this review put me off. The review itself was very good however!

I didn't care much for BSG, I find it too long for the amount of "game" there is. And don't get me started on the expansions, they are even worse than the expansions for Arkham Horror. Talk about bloated.

I don't particularly enjoy co-op games but absolutely despise semi-co-op games with hidden roles, where you have to do some worthless thing like collect forks for yourself first, and then only secondly help the team. It is a poor way of artificially adding difficulty and accusations to a game. These types of games are often sensitive for one player busting the entire game.

I also find that open negotiation in these types of games usually falls victim for the alpha-player syndrome.

Good review, it made it very clear that this game is not for me!
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bob Thurman

California
msg tools
mb
BSG? Don't have a clue what that is.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Conn
Canada
Victoria
BC
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
buzard wrote:
BSG? Don't have a clue what that is.


Battlestar Galactica
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nathan Baumbach
United States
Omaha
NE
flag msg tools
kadavriak wrote:

I don't particularly enjoy co-op games but absolutely despise semi-co-op games with hidden roles, where you have to do some worthless thing like collect forks for yourself first, and then only secondly help the team. It is a poor way of artificially adding difficulty and accusations to a game. These types of games are often sensitive for one player busting the entire game.

I also find that open negotiation in these types of games usually falls victim for the alpha-player syndrome.

Good review, it made it very clear that this game is not for me!


Well, I thought something similarly at first, since the game did seem to be "just get all the x to beat the rest while trying NOT to trigger the lose condition." But it's not that - half the time I was playing, I was trying more or less to push the limit to gain profit, knowing I could be giving someone (possibly my rival) a boost as well. How far do I push it? Will the Federalist capitalize on me doing TOO much? Will someone else manage the hat-trick at the end?

And the alpha syndrome never happened because we could never trust anyone enough to listen to one player bark commands. Half the time, it came down to a really good argument for X instead of Y by every single person playing. I realized I had to cooperate once to get what I wanted next time.

So both of my assumptions of this game were cancelled after I had played it. I would say you have to try it before you make any assumptions. None of the mechanics felt bloated or artificially difficult. It capitalized on actually making every player analyze their turns ahead of time, because there's some depth to the interaction and actual goals of the game.

8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.