Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

1960: The Making of the President» Forums » Variants

Subject: Suggested Rule Change rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andrew S. Fischer
United States
Devon
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
Instead of returning half of your momentum markers to stock during that phase, just return one.

Reasoning: it doesn't seem that hard to avoid playing a really bad-for-you event card or really good-for-opponent event card, since there are not that many of them and you can always put one into your strategy pile. Consequently, during the game both players are reluctant to use their momentum markers, hoping for a really juicy event to appear during their opponent's last card of the turn.

Effect: Since momentum markers will be more plentiful, they can be used on the moderately beneficial event cards, i.e., more often. Accumulating, say 5, is a real threat. Under current rules, doing so (highly unlikely) will result in a loss of 2 of them if you can't play any during the turn, then another 1 after the next turn, etc., rendering their acquisition a lot less meaningful.

It seems the game was designed so that both players will have 2 or 3 markers most of the time. I'd prefer the wider variation offered by my variant.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Poole
United States
Goldsboro
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Udu Wudu
badge
Udu Wudu
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with kevin. One of the agonizing decisions to make in the game is to determine how to spend your small supply of Momentum markers. Do I buy an event, or wait until a better one comes around? Do I save my last Momentum marker as insurance against my opponent playing cards with my events freely? By having a limited Momentum supply makes the issues that much more important in winning, since that is the only way to gain momentum markers (barring some events).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ananda Gupta
United States
Los Angeles
CA
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmb
I agree with the two other responders -- this variant would lead to too much event play, and therefore too many games that are similar to one another.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Myke Madsen
United States
Salt Lake City
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It would also mean you would lose your last momentum marker if you only had one. I really dislike that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
RIK FONTANA
United States
St. George
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
OK guys, Here is what I played with and it might help make the Momemtum a touch more flexible without upsetting that balance that has been pointed out in each Reply.

I really dislike the rule that says you spend TWO momentum markers to prevent an event AND have to call that BEFORE your opponent even says whether he wants to pay ONE for the Event or not!
Instead, a very small but powerful tweak:
IF the opponent says he wants to spend ONE to have the event, the card player may NOW spend TWO to prevent it. In this case, the opponent still does NOT lose his one.

In essence, it is just like the current rule, but without the (IMO Silly) situation of the candidate wasting two MoMarkers FIRST. He can wait to see if the opponent Wants to try to run the event.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dick Hunt
United States
Orlando
Florida
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I like the way the rule is originally written; the variants you guys are suggesting would make life too easy.

You only spend two Momentum Markers to prevent events that would really be bad for you. For those events, if your opponent has even ONE Momentum Marker in his possession, you spend your two. Don't mess around trying to guess whether or not he's going to trigger your icky event--if you can't afford to have that event triggered, you pre-empt it.

If you would really, really like to know whether or not he's going to trigger the event if you fail to pre-empt it, then that's an event you could probably survive. Such events might not be worth pre-empting in the first place.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Todd
United Kingdom
Manchester
England
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
In essence, it is just like the current rule, but without the (IMO Silly) situation of the candidate wasting two MoMarkers FIRST. He can wait to see if the opponent Wants to try to run the event.


I don't understand why you think the original rule is silly.

The original rule forces you to make a difficult decision whether to pre-empt the event or not. In your version, the decision is a lot more obvious, cos you can wait and see. Sorry, but I don't see how simplifying the choices improves the game.


Edit: cos I can't spell decision!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Blumentritt
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
[quote]You only spend two Momentum Markers to prevent events that would really be bad for you. For those events, if your opponent has even ONE Momentum Marker in his possession, you spend your two. Don't mess around trying to guess whether or not he's going to trigger your icky event--if you can't afford to have that event triggered, you pre-empt it.

If you would really, really like to know whether or not he's going to trigger the event if you fail to pre-empt it, then that's an event you could probably survive. Such events might not be worth pre-empting in the first place.[/quote]

And it allows some bluffing in the game too. You can act as if you are really thinking hard about playing an event, reach for your momentum marker as if about to play it but then hold onto it as if you aren't sure, or make a remark the moment you see the card about how great an event for you it is. You might get your opponent to spend 2 momentum to preempt it.
 
 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.