A discussion with Mike Lasher led to these possible rule variants in addition to those described on page 18 of the rule book.

Shorter Games

To shorten the game start the game with an additional 50 to 100 EU.

Military Occupation

In order to strengthen a Territory’s military defense after an Aggression Scenario the victorious player immediately after the takeover may transfer NS units from domestic Territories of the
attacking color group to the new Territory. However, the new Territory may not be developed even if sufficient R-units exist (reminder: development of Territories takes place during the Options Phase).

Precision Move

To provide more control over the advance of the Governor a player may chose to make up any difference between movement points rolled and desired movement points by paying CR points.
Exchange rate is 1 CR point for each movement point.

Business Propositions

In order to prevent voluntary or involuntary king-making situations especially in games with inexperienced players some restrictions regarding business propositions in the Options Phase can
be introduced:
(a) The proposing player may only exchange one Territory per opposing player per turn.
(b) Territories are exchanged one for one, i.e. Territories may only be exchanged for other Territories at a 1:1 rate.
(c) Resources may be exchanged between two players on a 1:1, 1:2 or 2:1 basis only.
(d) Ops or Influence cards as well as POW NIAs may be used in any trade as an incentive for the other player. Mission cards cannot be bartered.
(e) Any card(s) exchanged must not be disclosed to the other player before the trade is completed.
(f) CR points must not be used in any business proposition.

Calling Off War

Before the Engagement of an Aggression Scenario commences a player may start a negotiation in order to try and convince the opponent to call of war. This can include the payment of bribes in
the form of R-units, CR-points, money or Territory’s Title cards. Any R-units exchanged must be placed in the receiving player’s PS.

(This article was originally published in “Games
International”, issue #13 and is reproduced here with the permission of Brian
Walker, the former GI editor)

DESIGNER’S NOTES

Birth of a dynasty

Derek Carver explains the design of his game of competing
dynasties, published by Games Workshop as Blood Royale.

Ideas for new games present themselves in a variety of ways. Sometimes, though rarely,
as complete games, sometimes as a system devised, perhaps, with playing cards or
counters, around which a theme is subsequently developed, and sometimes as a scenario
which has the potential of being made the subject of a good game.

If Blood Royal (in common with many people, I prefer to drop that final
mysterious ‘E’) came into any of the categories it was the third one.

In my earlier game – Warrior Knights -I was enthusiastic about the idea of
games during the course of which the players ‘assembled’ and used their skills to
vote on issues which would greatly affect subsequent play. Although such an idea had
great appeal for me it wasn’t sufficient for a game in itself and a much wider game
had to be developed around this core concept. Much the same thing happened in Blood
Royal.

Unlike many gamers, I would not call myself a history buff, but I do enjoy reading
history, and I had also been an avid watcher of the TV series The Plantagenets,
having visited many of the locations as a result of my fascination with this period. The
history of the Middle Ages illustrates that not everything was achieved purely by
conquest (although military might was a great bargaining factor in one’s favour).
Prolonged campaigning was not easy. There was considerable diplomacy, often sealed by a
marriage contract. Here, I felt, was the substance for a game. I wanted to make a game
where each player was a monarch who would produce children, marry them off to the
family’s advantage, secure trade routes and wage war. Each player was Henry II, if
you like.

SURVIVAL CHANCES

From the start I decided the only realistic way forward would be to include an element
of role-playing in the game. I therefore gave each ‘character’ a character sheet
in the true role-playing tradition. The die-rolls recorded on this sheet determined 1)
how healthy the character was, 2) how strong in battle or diplomatic cunning, and 3) how
attractive to the populace. The first was an indication of survival chances – especially
important to the women who, it was hoped, would produce a number of children, hopefully
some strong males. The second is self explanatory, women being able to confer their
qualities on their husbands. The third quality reflected the character’s general
popularity. A popular king could roam Europe with less fear of rebellion breaking out at
home and an attractive princess was always to be hope for.

This all meant that the characters in the game also had to die from time to time so
instead of being only Henry n, the English player, for example, would have to represent
the more abstract concept of the entire dynasty, and this gave the game its original name
– Dynasties. Thus, the game differed from normal role-playing in that instead of players
being their character they would in this game control many characters, all
different.

Each player starts the game with a king, a queen, and two children, all of specified
age. Dice rolls are made to determine the sex of each child and rolls are also made to
determine the three characteristics of each member of the family. Each is given a
character sheet recording year of birth and so on, and the players also have to choose
their dynastic name and names for each of the characters. This meant that from the start
the game was peopled by seemingly real and quite different characters
(‘different’ because of their individual qualities). The only unreal thing about
it is that at the start each player controls families all of the same age, but this
situation doesn’t last for long.

FEWER CHILDREN

Play is in five year segments, starting with 1300. A survival die roll has to be made
for each character every five years. Their survival chances vary, of course, according to
age, childbirth, and fitness (the original die roll 1) mentioned above).

One of the many changes that took place during the early days was the reduction in the
number of small children that were around. Originally more children were born, but quite
a few died before they reached the age of 15, which is the age they are of any interest
to us in terms of the game. So in order not to make die rolls and fill out character
sheets for children that didn’t survive to 15 the system was adjusted. Fewer children
were born, but those that were born were guaranteed to survive to 15. We ended up with
the same number of young adults but saved a lot of time and paper in the process.

So this was the core idea. The early problem was what to do with the idea. We
couldn’t sit around the entire evening manipulating these royal families; we had to
do something with them.

The first problem was that history did not have a four to six player game in mind,
each with more or less equal chances. While England hasn’t changed much
geographically speaking, the rest of Europe has, and there was no Germany and no Italy as
such. Unlike Warrior Knights where I felt the correct answer was to create a
fictitious country, with Blood Royal I knew I could only maintain the historical
‘feel’ I was aiming for if I set my game firmly in medieval Europe, so I had to
create Kingdoms of Germany and Italy, and also give each country in the game the same
number of provinces. This doesn’t seem to have bothered people as much as I thought
it would (although I don’t know what German and Italian players think about it!). But
even with my cavalier attitude to history and geography there was no way in which I could
easily bring in a sixth power, so I restricted the game to a maximum of five.

So – I had already departed from history, but the general feeling in the game was all
right.

THRASH AND BASH

What next? I didn’t want it to be a thrash and bash wargame. I decided I wanted it
to be centred on the securing of trade and trade routes plus income from taxes. The
latter was pretty simple – I allowed players to collect taxes from each province they
owned with the option of double taxing. The latter increased the chances of the highly
taxed provinces going into rebellion – a calculated risk, in other words, which is a
concept that always appeals to me and about which more anon.

For the trading I hit upon an idea which I must confess to being rather pleased with
and which could, in itself, have been the core idea for another game. Wanting it kept
simple, I devised a system of three basic commodities (what they are called is
unimportant – let’s call them A B and C). Each country had to acquire these
commodities and transport them to their capital to be ‘cashed in’. But they could
cash them in only in sets of three (ABC). In the full five player game there are only
three of each type around the board, which means there are not enough for each player to
have a set each time. Also no single country produces one of each (they might produce two
As and a C, for example). This means that in order to secure the missing item(s) players
had either to trade, secure them by contract (about which more later), or capture the
province in which a desired ‘missing’ item is produced.

Additionally there are around the board two somewhat more luxurious commodities – two
Ds and one E. If, instead of trading in a set of just ABC, you can acquire ABC and
D you get much more for them, and if to this you add the true luxury item E you get
considerably more. On their own the Ds and the E are worth nothing; they have to
supplement the basic set. These commodities are placed on the board in their producing
province at the beginning of each five year period unless there is a specific occurrence
that prevents this.

ROYAL FAMILY

This trading aspect of the game hasn’t changed since the early days. It worked
well and provided the framework I needed. We now had a royal family that had to ensure
its own continuation and it needed to obtain commodities. It also needed income. If it
had some strong royal males plus a strong army it could go out and capture the producing
provinces by force. In the same way it could wage combat in order to secure its trade
routes. If necessary a country could build a string of castles. A castle means it
doesn’t matter what happens to the province in which it is located: goods can still
be transported through that otherwise enemy province, the castle ensuring safe passage
for troops and trade goods. But warfare was an uncertain business. Kings especially could
not normally safely leave their capital to indulge in prolonged foreign wars. If they
were generally popular and were doing well it was easier but if they were not too high in
the popularity stakes and also weren’t being too successful in their campaigning
there was always the possibility of domestic unrest looming over them. And if they
don’t at once rush back to quell it rebellion had a nasty habit of spreading.

So securing what they want by other means became important and here another major
aspect of the game comes into play – the royal marriage. For each player it is essential
to ensure the continuation of his dynasty. If he doesn’t do so control could go to
another player who can trace his monarch’s ancestry back.

Also an unmarried king cannot produce princes to lead his armies. So wives are in
demand – especially beautiful and healthy ones. (Even so, there are a lot of desperate
marriages between pretty nasty boys and somewhat sickly girls, I might add!) Most
marriages also seal a ‘Marriage Contract’ and if, for example, you are seeking a
girl to marry the King’s eldest son you can put your demands pretty high, because the
player controlling the potential future queen’s family stands to gain quite a bit
financially when she ascends the throne. These all-important contracts can concern
non-aggression, military support, money, trade rights, trade routes, land, or a mixture
of the lot. They have to be carefully worded because their terms become binding for as
long as both parties to the marriage survive. Players are not allowed to break the terms
of a marriage contract: they would have to arrange the death of one of the parties
first.

QUILL TO PARCHMENT

So crucial is the clever negotiation of these contracts that they presented one of the
early problems in the game. A new player could be totally at the mercy of an old hand who
easily tied him up into a contract that he subsequently came to realise he could well
have done without. (France is always best played by such a persuasive player.) This is
why a change was made so that at the start of the game the children are too young to be
married at once. This at least gives an inexperienced player time to see what it’s
all about before he puts quill to parchment.

One of the features of the game is that during each five year turn each player has to
announce to the rest of the players what has happened to his dynasty – who has died, who
has been born and the description of a child, and so on. The death of a king or queen is,
of course, a major event and the records are searched to establish the next in line in
those rare cases where it is not immediately obvious. It is even possible for a
player’s kingdom to pass to another player who has the only direct heir, but this is
rare. Legitimate claimants to the throne can be passed over, but from then on they
provide a nuisance factor in the game that other players can exploit.

There were a few other aspects that were slowly modified during the early days (or
years) but that was the game in essence.

As it stood it presented one important problem as I saw it, although it wasn’t one
that seemed to worry many of the groups that came to know it and made copies. To obtain
the full feeling of this continuing and developing dynasty it was essentially an ongoing
game. During the course of a three hour game the most one could expect is that the king
or queen (or both) might die and the next in line ascend the throne but it wouldn’t
go much farther than that. The true essence of the game, though, was the continuation of
the family and its ramifications as it married into other dynasties and produced
children. This meant that it either had to be played for a long time or it was best
played as an ongoing game by the same group (the winner each session being the player who
had best improved on his starting position). This is the way it was often played.
Chronicles were kept and huge family trees maintained. It has been turned into a play by
mail game in Austria and there they publish the appropriate dynastic announcements with
proper obituaries on the death of an important Royal Personage. This is what the whole
thing is about.

HISTORICAL EVENTS

So this was how the game stood when Games Workshop came on the scene. They had
recently done an excellent job with my Warrior Knights and I was happy to let them
have Dynasties as it was then called. They knew the game and were attracted to the idea
of incorporating role-playing features into a traditional boardgame.

The first thing they decided to change was the name. They were rather frightened to
use Dynasties because of the popular TV series. At the first meeting I tossed in Blood
Royal as an alternative title, which was finally adopted but with an additional
‘E’. I have noticed that continental players, obviously disliking the mixture of
languages, refuse to acknowledge this final E.

Unfortunately we then started to run into a bit of trouble and our good relations took
a temporary downturn. Warrior Knights had been published precisely as I invented
it. Well, that is not 100% correct – a few changes were made to assist production but not
only were they all made by me or with my approval, but I also felt they were
improvements. The GW developer for Warrior Knights was Albie Fiore, who had also
worked on my Dr Who (one of GW’s first boardgames) and he subsequently worked
on my Whirlwind (FASA). By this time he had left Games Workshop and the in house
developer of Blood Royal was somebody different, and he wanted to expand the game
and introduce more historical events. Although my contract allowed me to veto any changes
to the original I had respect for the enthusiasm and undoubted abilities of the
developer, even though I feared the additions would lengthen an already long game. But
the big problem was that in the main the proposed additions (and they were all
‘additions’ as opposed to changes) were not the sort of rules I would have
invented. Not that they were bad in themselves, they simply reflected the sort of game
the developer would have invented and not the sort of game I like.

Let me give an example to illustrate the different approaches. Games Workshop wanted
to introduce a series of historical events in the form of chance cards. These were to be
events that often affected (usually adversely) one player. Of course, they were not as
crude as ‘Go to Jail’, but you know what I mean. They also mirrored historical
events. While I was not totally against the idea of these events I wanted them to have
considerably more interest and add to the fun of the game. I also wanted them to be
different from the sort of thing people are used to. My feelings are that historical
events happen because a certain regime either takes a certain action (one out of a number
of possibilities) at a certain time, or decides to take no action at all. If at a
particular moment a contrary decision had been made the course of history would have been
changed in some way. What we see as history, therefore, is the result of one decision out
of a number of possible decisions taken at the time and in my game we were living in
the time.

INTELLIGENCE REPORT

So, to get back to the game, I suggested that firstly, we should try to restrict
events so that they affect all players, and secondly, that the event should be in
the form of an intelligence report listing what could happen in, say, two to three turns:
i) if no action was taken, ii) the chances of averting this occurrence if more money was
directed into the area (money that might be in short supply), iii) the chances of
suppressing the event by stationing troops in the area, and so on. The ‘chances’
would be expressed in terms of die roll odds. After all, these are the sort of questions
a ruler would have to ask at the time and he would decide on the action to take in the
light of the replies, the odds of success, and the effect on his exchequer, stability,
and so on. So in game terms it would mean that the player would do what he thought most
expedient and possible and he would have to await the outcome. At the same time other
players who have no love for him (and no contract preventing intervention) could,
possibly, lessen his chances of success by taking certain actions themselves.

The developer saw my point but sadly our minds didn’t run along the same lines.
Certain modifications were made, but generally speaking I thought the event cards at the
end of the day didn’t really reflect the original thinking I was aiming for. I
preferred to offer the game as I invented it and leave it to enthusiasts to extend it as
they wished as a result of play and the preferences of their own group.

As it was clear that we were thinking quite differently and time was being consumed it
was finally agreed to publish the game in my basic form with the new rules being included
as ‘Optionals’ to be used or discarded by the purchaser as he or she wished. In
this way I was able to give Game Workshop carte blanche with these additions,
without further reference back to me. It is pertinent to add at this stage that it is
rare for publishers to agree to allow an inventor to veto any changes. He normally has no
control whatsoever over the product that finally arrives on the shelves, which might be
quite unlike his original. An amazing situation when you come to think about it.

FOREIGN PRINCES

The solution reached was quite satisfactory. As far as the production was concerned
they made a truly superb job of it. I must admit that I took exception to the box cover,
which didn’t reflect the feel of the game at all, and it was rather sad that GW
scored an own goal by deciding to suggest names for foreign princes and princesses –
presumably for the benefit of players whose knowledge was limited in this regard- and
getting them wrong! But these are peripherals. No inventor could be anything but
delighted with the quality of the product offered, right down to such often overlooked
details as the magnificent presentation of the rules, which excellently carried through
the historical feel of the game. These are the qualities that show Games Workshop at
their best, and they deserve every compliment.

In its basic form Blood Royal presents a system that is ideal for building on
and I know a number of groups have developed additional rules bringing in the power of
the Church, rules that have qualities that appeal to their particular group and have
stood the test of playing over a period, being slowly refined in the process. This is
excellent and what I hoped would happen.

While one must be pleased in one respect, it is also a pity that Blood Royal
appeared just before GW made the decision to turn exclusively to the fantasy games with
which they are normally associated and which (as a result of their White Dwarf
readership) had been far more profitable for them than their ventures into non-fantasy
and comic strip themes. Having made this decision it reflects greatly to their credit
that they pushed ahead with Blood Royal in the quality that they did, it being no
small investment.

(This article was originally published in “Games
International”, issue #12 (January 1990) and is reproduced here with the permission
of Brian Walker, the former editor of GI)

Strategy Seminar

Steve Jones dons his toga and provides a comprehensive guide to the great
game of aspiring cultures.

CIVILIZING INFLUENCES

In purely abstract game terms, Civilization is a steeplechase race game; I
shall elaborate upon this theme as the article develops. Looked at in this light, the
game may seem quite ordinary. What elevates it to a classic is a combination of two
things: the subject matter (or the ‘chrome’ aspect of the game), and the
wonderfully balanced and rich structure of the rules. The latter moulds the game into one
with elevated player interaction in ways which are complex, subtle and shifting, and yet
are always under the players’ collective control. In my opinion, Civilization
is quite simply the best multi-player board game ever invented.

The subject matter of the game is an attractive and evocative one. It concerns the
growth and development of the ancient civilisations around the shores of the
Mediterranean Sea, and in the Middle East.

Each player starts off in control of a nomadic Stone Age tribe which then proceeds to
develop a highly advanced classical civilisation over the course of millennia. The object
of the game could not be simpler: it is to gain a state of overall advancement, involving
cultural, economic and political factors, faster than anyone else. Although this makes
the game into a race, it is vitally important to realise that it is one conducted on
several different levels.

It is also important to realise that it is a game which megalomaniacs always lose. War
is available as an instrument of policy, but the game is so structured as to make it into
a blunt and relatively inefficient one. The more efficient means available to combat your
opponents are, to a greater or lesser extent, subtle, hidden, indirect, sophisticated,
and ‘civilised’.

THE KNOWN WORLD

The game consists of a map board, an Archaeological Succession Table (AST),
eleven sets of trade cards, sixteen sets of civilization cards and seven sets (nine in
the Avalon Hill version) of faction counters. The map board consists of three leaves
(West, Central and East) depicting a region stretching from Sardinia in the west to the
head of the Persian Gulf in the east, and from the upper Nile Valley in the south to the
southern Ukraine in the north. Hartland have recently released an expansion kit
containing a fourth leaf (WXB) which extends the map westwards to take in Iberia.

The map is divided into land and sea zones in much the same way as Diplomacy
and Risk. The sea zones are subdivided into two types: coastal and open. The land
zones each have a population carrying capacity indicated by a number. Some of the land
zones also contain natural city sites. The map features, in addition, four flood plains
and three volcanoes; there is a fifth flood plain on the WXB extension leaf.

The faction counters each consist of fifty six tokens, nine cities and four ships. One
token is used as a marker on the AST, and the remainder may be used to represent either
population on the board or money in the player’s treasury. Depending upon the number
of players in the game, the players are limited to a specific number of tokens each. This
last is a deliberate design feature in the game. The main problem that the players
continually face is one of limited resources. The subdivision of the each player’s
finite number of tokens among population on the board, money in his/her treasury, and
his/her stock (tokens currently not in play) is a brilliant design mechanism for creating
this shortage.

During the course of the game, there is a constant flow of tokens between a
player’s stock on one hand, and the board and his/her treasury on the other.
Furthermore, this flow is more or less under the player’s control. Nevertheless,
players will find themselves facing problems, and occasionally windfalls, depending upon
where their tokens are currently located. There are many subtle aspects to the management
of the token flow, and players should acquaint themselves with these.

COMMODITIES

There are seventy four trade cards in the game. Of these, sixty six represent
eleven commodities which have values from one to nine. The remaining eight cards
represent calamities (more commonly known as disasters), and these all have value zero.
The commodity cards are initially stacked, face downwards, in nine decks, each deck
corresponding to the value of the commodities in it, and the calamity card of the
appropriate type is placed at the bottom of each deck except the first.

The eleven commodities are Ochre, Hides, Papyrus, Iron, Salt, Grain, Cloth, Bronze,
Spice, Gems and Gold; the first two have value one, the second two have value two, and
the remaining seven have the values ranging from three to nine in order. When more than
one card of a given commodity is held the net value of the collection is greatly
increased. The formula for finding the total value of several cards of the same commodity
is to multiply the square of the number of cards held by the commodity value; for
example, five grain are worth (5×5) x 4 = 100.

During the course of the game, each player takes the top card from each trade deck for
each city he/she has, and uses these to construct packages for trade with the other
players. Through trade, the aim is to increase the net value of the commodities held in
hand, and to use these to purchase civilization cards. The trade system is one of barter
involving trade cards alone. Any number of trade deals may be made between the players,
two at a time. In each trade deal, each player must offer at least three trade cards,
correctly quote the total value of the package and correctly give the commodity of one of
them; outside of these restrictions, anything can be said about the package. This last is
important because trading does carry risks: some of the disaster cards can be passed on
in a trade deal.

DISASTERS

The eight disasters are Volcano/Earthquake, Famine, Civil War, Flood, Epidemic, Civil
Disorder, Iconoclasm & Heresy, and Piracy. The first four are so-called red-backed
disasters and affect the players who pick them up. The last four, on the other hand, are
so-called black-backed disasters and can be passed on to another player through a trade
deal; the disaster then affects that player!

As the names suggest, it does not help your aspiring civilisation to be affected by
one of these disasters. Players will find it essential to acquaint themselves with the
effects of the disasters, how to lessen their effect, how to direct them at their
opponents, and how to reduce the chances of receiving one. In practice, it is impossible
to avoid disasters completely. This is because an individual disaster does not affect
only the player who received the card; that player may also, depending upon the exact
nature of the disaster, ‘distribute’ its effects among the other players! This is
just another one of the wonderful balancing mechanisms in the game.

If trade cards constitute the major currency in Civilization, civilization cards must
be considered to be the raison d’etre of the game, and the focus of all
actions. There are seventy two civilization cards representing sixteen different aspects
of civilisation. They are divided into four colour groups representing broad areas of
human knowledge/endeavour. Most cards are members of only one group, but some are members
of two. The groups are Arts (blue), Crafts (orange), Sciences (green) and Civics (red).
The sixteen card types are Mysticism, Cloth Making, Pottery, Drama & Poetry, Music,
Architecture, Astronomy, Metalworking, Agriculture, Coinage, Literacy, Engineering,
Medicine, Law, Democracy, and Philosophy. They each have a value of between 30 and 240;
the purchase price is equal to the card value but, in practice, it may be decreased by
cards already held.

Each type also has an effect on play, usually by modifying some aspect of the normal
rules. They are obtainable by exchanging trade cards and treasury of at least the same
value. They can be relatively costly, and there may be a shortage of the various types
depending upon the number of players in the game. If the latter is the case, you will
find yourself competing with your opponents for a very limited resource, particularly so
in the case of the more expensive cards. This has a considerable effect upon long term
strategy, of which more anon.

RACE TRACK

The AST is the race track of the steeplechase alluded to earlier on. It is essentially
a non-linear timeline consisting of fifteen time steps, plus start and finish
positions, and covering the period from 8000 BC to 250 BC. The non-linear nature of the
timeline is evident from the fact that the first time step covers a period of three
thousand years while the last step covers less than one hundred years. The timeline is
further subdivided into nine independent tracks, each associated with a starting area on
the map board and named after the various ancient civilisations and/or regions. These
are, in the order ‘down’ the table: Africa, Italy, Illyria, Thrace, Crete, Asia,
Assyria, Babylon and Egypt.

The WXB map leaf adds an extra track for Iberia and a modified African track which is
only used if the WXB leaf is in play; in addition, Italy is not used when the WXB
leaf is in play. Each track is divided into five numbered epochs identified as New Stone
Age, Early Bronze Age, Late Bronze Age, Early Iron Age, and Late Iron Age. Furthermore,
the epochs are not of the same length on the different tracks; this can have an enormous
effect on the choice of strategy of the different countries.

At the end of every turn, the AST tokens are usually moved forward one step; therefore
the game is at least 16 turns long. However, entry to a new epoch requires the fulfilment
of a minimum condition which depends upon the new epoch. The second epoch requires two
cities, the third requires civilization cards representing three groups, the fourth
requires seven civilization cards, and the fifth requires civilization cards totalling at
least 1000 points. Once in the fifth epoch, the player needs a stated value on the AST to
move forward; this time the value of treasury and trade cards may be included in the
total. In addition, in any epoch except the first, the token is moved backwards if a
player has no cities! It should now be clear why the game can be likened to a
steeplechase. Nearly every decision which a player makes during the course of a game
should be geared towards keeping that token moving on the AST. One of the things which
make the game into a classic is the fact that some of your actions can also be directed
to affect the movement of your opponents’ tokens along the AST.

ORDER OF PLAY

Each game turn is subdivided into thirteen separate phases. These are Taxation and
Revolts, Population Expansion, Census, Ship Construction, Movement, Conflict, City
Building, Trade Card Acquisition, Trade, Civilization Card Acquisition, Calamity
Resolution, Excess Trade Card Surrender, and AST Movement. In many of these phases, the
order of play will often change from turn to turn, and it is vital to become thoroughly
familiar with all the ramifications of this. This variable order of play is a
self-balancing mechanism that has been deliberately built into the game’s structure.
It is well worth briefly discussing the eight cases in each game turn where an order of
play is important.

Taxation

In the Taxation phase, any players who have insufficient tokens in their stocks to pay
the taxation on their cities will lose to a revolt those cities which cannot pay. The
cities in revolt go over to the player with the most tokens in his/her stock after taxes
have been paid. The order in which revolts occur is in AST order, and if two players both
have the same maximum number of tokens in their stocks, the recipient is decided in AST
order.

Thus revolts generally occur to empires which have grown too big in some
uncontrollable manner, and the recipient of cities in revolt is invariably the smallest
empire on the board. However, it should be noted that revolts are, by and large, fairly
rare, and usually result from player incompetence. The one exception is that a revolt can
be engineered if the player concerned was nominated in a civil war in the previous rum,
and this resulted in him/her having too many cities and too few tokens in stock!

Ship construction

In the Ship Construction phase, players should build and/or maintain ships in AST
order. In practice, players tend to do this simultaneously as the rule is not explicit,
but is implied by Rule [62] on page 16 of the rule book. However, players further down
the AST are perfectly within their rights to insist upon strict AST order being observed.
There are occasions when a player’s decision of whether or not to build or maintain
ships will critically depend upon what other players have decided. If those players are
higher up the AST, just watch what they do and make your decision accordingly.

Movement

In the Movement phase, movement is sequential in the order of the largest to the
smallest populations, with ties being resolved in AST order. Since combat occurs more or
less simultaneously, it is a disadvantage (except in the early turns) to move first, and
the player moving last can possess an enormous strategic advantage. This is probably the
single most important balancing mechanism in the game. In practice, it makes it virtually
impossible to eliminate players, and gives small empires a defensive edge over their
larger neighbours.

Conflict

In the Conflict phase, the order of play is only important if a token shortage is
possible. Then, a player under attack may insist upon resolving first all conflicts
involving only tokens, before dealing with those involving tokens attacking cities.

This is particularly important because conflicts between tokens and cities require the
defending cities to convert into at least six tokens; if there are insufficient tokens in
the player’s treasury, the city will surrender. The rule governing the surrender
of cities implies that the best time to attack another player’s cities is when he/she
has few or no tokens in his/her stock, and then, the attack should be a limited one
directed only at cities.

City building

In the City Building phase, play is in AST order. As with ship construction, city
building is not simultaneous, and a player is perfectly entitled to insist upon players
higher up the AST making their decisions first, as to whether to build any more cities.
The reasons for insisting on this are subtle.

First, it should be pointed out that the rules do not compel a player to build a city
if the conditions for city construction are satisfied; the players have a choice as to
whether or not to add to their city numbers. The reason for the players having this
choice is to enable them to manipulate the order of play in the Trade Card Acquisition
phase so as, on the one hand, to maximise the number of trade cards they acquire, and on
the other, to avoid disasters. Only the very best players will be constantly aware of
this stratagem during the hurly-burly of play.

Trade card acquisition

In the Trade Card Acquisition phase, the order of play is from the smallest to the
largest (in terms of cities), with ties being resolved (yes, you guessed it) in AST
order. This is yet another of the wonderful subtleties of the game. It is deliberately
designed to ensure that the largest empires pick up their trade cards last and, in so
doing, increases the chances that they will end up getting fewer cards than their smaller
neighbours.

There is no point in having more cities than anyone else if this results in you
gaining fewer trade cards than anyone else simply because the trade decks were depleted
prior to your turn to pick up! The good players will be aware of this, and will carefully
adjust the size of their empires according to what the other players are doing.

When it comes time to exchange trade cards for civilization cards, the order of play
is in reverse AST order. This is the only instance in the game where this occurs. All
things being equal, the players at the bottom of the AST normally have a higher chance of
finding some of the trade card decks depleted when they pick up their cards. To offset
this, they are given the first opportunity to purchase the relatively rare civilization
cards.

Calamity resolution

In the Calamity Resolution phase, the order of play goes in ascending order of the
disaster number. This can be important for players affected by more than one disaster,
since it can mitigate the effect of the later disasters. For instance, if a player has
picked up both the Famine and Flood cards, he could lose tokens on his/her flood plain to
the famine and end up avoiding the flood completely.

STRATEGY

Now that you have some idea of how the game is played, and how its many components
interact with each other, how do you develop a winning strategy? One aspect of this game is that there is no one, single winning strategy.
There is, however, a winning approach to how the game should be played, which consists of
six maxims.

The first maxim is to achieve the maximum population growth in the first five or six
turns without affecting your progress on the AST. This involves delaying building your
first cities as long as possible, and spreading out to occupy as much territory as is
possible without becoming involved in fruitless border disputes. If you delay building
your first city until the fifth turn, you can have six cities by the sixth turn. In
contrast, building two cities in the fourth turn leaves you so short of population that
you will have only three cities in the sixth turn; this will leave you short of trade
cards in the early trading sessions.

The second maxim is to aim to have a medium number of cities throughout most of the
second to the fifth epochs; the ideal number is six or seven, depending upon
circumstances. Sticking to this should, on average, maximise the number of trade cards
picked up every turn. It should also make it easier to manipulate your place in the order
of play so as to avoid the worse disasters.

The third maxim is to maintain a healthy distribution of
your tokens between the stock, treasury and map, and to avoid where possible having too
many tokens in one of these three locations. This should ensure that you are in the best
position to avoid the problems associated with over-population and inflation. There are
four ways of controlling your token distribution: deliberately killing off population on
the board by over-stacking, maintaining four ships on the board, partly paying for
civilization cards with treasury tokens, and purchasing the Coinage card as soon as
practically possible.

The fourth maxim is to offer mutually profitable trade deals wherever possible. It is
not a good idea to squeeze the last drop out of a trade deal. It is also good policy to
be truthful about your trade packages (except, of course, when you are attempting to pass
on a disaster card). If you follow this maxim consistently, players will tend to want to
deal with you in the future because they will know they are going to get a square
deal.

The fifth maxim concerns the ideal policy on how to distribute disasters should you be
unfortunate enough to get landed with one. In the early stages up until the end of the
Bronze Age, the best policy is to distribute disasters evenly amongst the other players.
Even so, there are occasions when somebody will be particularly deserving of the maximum
permissible dose, and that is perfectly acceptable should it occur. However, later on,
from about the start of the Iron Age onwards, disasters should be directed exclusively at
the leaders wherever possible in an attempt to slow down, or even stop, their progress on
the AST.

The sixth, and final, maxim is to maintain a low profile on the map, and a high one in
the trading sessions. In particular, don’t make unnecessary waves such as launching
unprovoked attacks on your neighbours. If you have to attack somebody, make sure it is
for a good reason, and immediately apologise, explaining your reasons for the attack.
And, above all, maintain a flexible approach in your actions at all times.

CALAMITIES

Following on from the general considerations discussed above, I shall continue the
discussion of game strategy by considering the eight disasters and the ten starting
positions, and finish up with some observations about trading and the best mixes of
civilization cards to aim for.

As observed earlier in this article, the disasters are subdivided into two blocks,
those which affect the player who picked the card up, and those which affect the
player to whom the card was passed in a trade deal. The former consists of
Volcano/Earthquake, Famine, Civil War and Flood, while the latter consists of Epidemic,
Civil Disorder, Iconoclasm & Heresy and Piracy. Before we discuss each of them in
turn, an important point should be made concerning the black-backed disasters in general.
If you pick one up, and decide to pass it on to another player in a trade deal, the
victim should be chosen carefully. By the time these cards turn up, it should be fairly
obvious who is doing well and who is doing badly. Under no circumstances should one be
passed on to the players who are doing relatively badly. These disaster cards are potent
weapons to be aimed only at the leaders. They are the most active traders in the game,
and they always want valuable cards. As soon as it becomes obvious during a trade session
what commodity one of the leaders is after, make up a trade package consisting of that
commodity and the disaster card and offer it him. And you should make sure the disaster
is well disguised, throwing in another relatively high value commodity if necessary.

Volcano/Earthquake is the least damaging of all the disasters. There are only three volcano sites on the map: Vesuvius and Etna in Italy, and
Santorini in the Aegean Sea. If any of your tokens or cities are on one of these volcano
sites, the volcano erupts and all units are lost. If you do not occupy a volcano site,
one of your cities is struck by an earthquake and is reduced instead; this involves
replacing the city with a number of tokens equal to the carrying capacity of the
area.

The best means of mitigating the effect of this disaster depends upon whether you have
a volcano or an earthquake. If it is a volcano, place population tokens only in the
volcano sites. Although all the volcano sites are natural city locations, it is not a
good idea to set up a city in one of them because it relatively difficult to rebuild it.
If, on the other hand, it is an earthquake, it is best to choose a city located in a high
population carrying capacity area since this makes it easier to rebuild. The only
exception to this is if you have a city on a 3-site, and reduction will lead to a token
shortage in your stock and taxation problems in the next turn. If you have a city located
adjacent to another player’s city, you have the option of reducing that player’s
city as well; whether you do so will depend upon the game position at that time, and it
is best to follow a flexible policy on this. You might even be able to force some favour
out of that player in exchange for not doing it!

Famine is a mixed disaster. Although it forces you to lose nine units (cities
counting as five units equivalent), you can force other players to lose up to twenty
units, with a maximum of eleven from any one player. For this reason, it is one of the
‘best’ of the game-balancing disasters. The effect of the disaster can be
mitigated if you possess Pottery and at least one grain; in this case, for every grain
card held, you reduce the number of units lost by four. This is obviously the perfect
defence against famine, but it does have the double drawback that Pottery is one of the
cheapest civilization cards available and it ties up grain cards which might be better
used either in obtaining better trade deals or in purchasing another civilization
card.

Civil War is one of the most potentially crippling of the disasters. If
you have picked it up, you choose a nominee from among the other players. You and your
nominee then divide your civilisation into two parts; you choose one, and your nominee
gets the other! Usually, one of the parts must contain thirty five units (with cities
again counting as five units equivalent), provided you do not hold Philosophy and/or
Democracy. If you hold Philosophy, your nominee must be the player with the least number
of tokens in his/her stock, (this might be you!) and fifteen units secede to the nominee.
If you hold Democracy (and not Philosophy), one of the two parts must contain forty five
units.

The one certain way to avoid the effects of Civil War is to keep your civilisation to
thirty five units or less (or forty five if you hold Democracy). Another method is to
maintain a mental count of the number of grain cards in the grain deck, and thereby know
when the Civil War card will turn up. Then, by manipulating the number of cities you own,
it is possible to avoid picking the card up.

If, despite all your efforts, you do pick up Civil War,
there are two ways to mitigate its effect. If you have a very big civilisation, choose as
your nominee a player with an equally big civilisation. Careful calculation may ensure
that the nominee will lose most of the seceding units by revolt because of token and city
shortage, and you might get them back provided you have the most tokens in your
stock.

The second way is to choose as your nominee the player with the weakest position and
make him an offer. This will usually involve the nominee choosing those units whose loss
is least damaging to your overall position. Whatever way, Civil War is always vicious; do
everything you can to avoid it.

Flood is the last of the red-backed disasters, and the easiest to absorb. If you have
no flood plain in your civilisation, the only damage is missing out on picking up a
valuable cloth card. If you do have a flood plain, the best policy is to keep it lightly
populated, avoid building cities in it unless the site is elevated above the plain, and
get Engineering as quickly as possible.

If you have been counting the cloth cards, and suspect that you will pick up
flood, it might be worthwhile moving some tokens into someone else’s flood
plain; that player’s units will be affected by the disaster as well!

Epidemic is the first of the black-backed disasters. The recipient loses sixteen
units, and these losses must be taken with no area being completely depopulated; thus, a
city is replaced by one token and counts as a loss of four. The recipient may then spread
the epidemic among the other players, forcing them to lose up to twenty five units, with
no more than ten from any one player. However, the player who passed on the Epidemic card
is immune to this spread of the epidemic; the lack of side-effects makes this disaster a
good one to pass on. The effect of an epidemic can be mitigated to some effect if you
hold Medicine. Should the card be traded to you, you can at least affect your rivals for
the lead. Consequently, the Epidemic is probably the least terrifying of the tradable
disasters.

The effect of the Civil Disorder disaster increases with the civilisation
size. Provided the recipient has more than four cities, and does not hold Law or
Democracy, the excess are reduced. If the recipient holds Law, only cities in excess of
five are reduced, and if he/she holds Democracy, cities in excess of six are reduced.
Civil Disorder is a good card to trade to one of the leaders for two reasons. The first
is that the leaders usually have a large number of cities, and this disaster can chop
them down in size considerably. The second is that the recipient is the only player to
suffer, and the player who traded it suffers no side-effects apart from the victim’s
wrath.

Iconoclasm & Heresy is a terrible disaster, particularly for players who do not
hold Law or Philosophy. In this case, the recipient loses four cities by reduction.
Unlike Civil Disorder, he/she may also order the reduction of two cities owned by the
other players, including the player who traded the card! If the recipient holds Law, only
three cities are reduced, and if he/she holds Philosophy, only two cities are reduced.
Similar decreases apply to the recipient’s counterattack. However, the one to watch
out for is the combination of Civil Disorder with Iconoclasm & Heresy. This can be a
killer for anyone without Law: the former reduces the recipient to four cities, and the
latter knocks these out! This, in turn, forces the recipient backwards on the AST; this
combination should be exclusively aimed at the leader if at all possible.

Piracy is potentially the worse disaster of all. The recipient loses one coastal city
for every ship owned by the player who traded the card. Consequently, the recipient could
lose up to four cities. If this should happen, the effect is worse than Iconoclasm &
Heresy since, in that case, the cities are only reduced, whereas piracy removes the city
completely, and leaves nothing behind. An obvious motto comes immediately to mind: be
wary of ‘Greeks bearing gifts’ – especially in ships!

STARTING POSITIONS

The ten starting positions are not all equal; the ones with better potential usually have a combination of excellent terrain to expand into and a
relatively easy track on the AST. I shall now consider them in AST order.

Africa

Africa has one of the easiest tracks on the AST, as well as a low end-game target
total of 1200 points. Its position at the head of the AST also makes it relatively easy
to avoid disasters, but is a disadvantage when purchasing civilization cards. This
implies that you must look ahead when planning what to purchase.

The AST advantages are offset by Africa’s poor lebensraum, and this is made more
critical by the location of the natural city sites in the best population areas. Africa
should therefore build at least one of the famous ‘desert’ cities (twelve tokens
converted into a city in one of its 1-areas), claim as much of north Africa as possible,
and should be prepared to go to war over Sicily. Agriculture is an essential acquisition
given the lack of breathing room. These problems are reduced by the WXB leaf, and this
has been offset by the larger end-game target of 1300 points.

Iberia

Iberia has a relatively easy track on the AST, and a low end- game target of 1200
points. This is offset by a lack of natural city sites, one of which is in a flood plain.
Although Italy is not in play when the WXB leaf is used, most of the Italian peninsula
will have been claimed by the time you get there. Build a couple of ‘desert’
cities in Iberia, and try to get Agriculture.

Italy

Italy is one of the blue chip starting positions, possessing an easy track on the AST,
plenty of natural city sites, and a medium end-game target of 1300 points. Aim to occupy
all of the Italian peninsula, and the Balkan coast as far south as Corfu. It really is
too easy playing Italy and the other players should be aware of it.

Illyria

Illyria is a very difficult starting position. (‘What should I do in
Illyria?’) This is because its two neighbours Italy and Thrace have easier AST tracks
and consequently tend to be chosen first. If this happens there is nowhere to expand
into, and the position should not be chosen. However, if the WXB leaf is in use, Illyria
effectively takes up Italy’s position in the standard game. Its slightly more
difficult AST track and maximum end-game target of 1400 points balances this part of the
map out nicely. You can now have a viable game with it.

Thrace

Thrace has an AST track of about the same degree of difficulty as Italy’s.
However, it suffers from a lack of natural city sites, and the Danube Delta flood plain.
Consequently, it should insist upon a frontier with Italy located as far west as
possible, and a frontier with Asia/Assyria as far east in southern Ukraine as possible.
It would also be an advantage to acquire Agriculture.

Crete

Crete’s central starting location is a relatively difficult one, offset partly by
its low end-game target of 1200. Although there is no shortage of city sites in Greece
and Asia Minor, there is a lack of breathing space. This is accentuated by the necessity
to build ships to get off the island of Crete in the early stages. Once these ships have
been built, Crete always moves last in the race to occupy as much land as possible before
the first bout of city building. Consequently, you should concentrate upon creating a
constantly mobile population, and the acquisition of both Agriculture and Astronomy are
essential.

Asia

Asia has a relatively difficult AST track, which is not helped by the high end-game
target of 1400. It also tends to be crowded out by Assyria. Consequently, it is advisable
to choose Asia only if Babylon has not been chosen; in this case, Asia and Assyria have
plenty of room to expand into. If Assyria and Babylon have already been chosen, avoid
Asia like the plague.

Assyria

Assyria is another blue chip starting position to rank along side Italy. However, its
slightly harder AST track and higher end-game target of 1400 make it more of a challenge
to play. You should aim to expand into Asia Minor and to the Med coast at Antioch,
working out sensible frontiers with Crete and Babylon. If Asia is in play in place of
Babylon, it is probably best to let Asia have Asia Minor, and take over the normal Baby
Ionian position yourself. However, allowing Asia through into the Babylonian position is
equally viable.

Babylon

Babylon has an excellent area to expand into on the map, despite the huge Euphrates
flood plain. However, its AST track is extremely difficult because of the early first
barrier. Against good players, the best policy is probably to go for maximum city
expansion in the early stage and take a deliberate stop for one turn at the first
barrier. You will then have to attempt to ensure that all the other players make at least
one stop later in the game. If Egypt is also in the game, and follows the same policy, it
is advisable to cooperate closely with him/her on this. Apart from this, it is advisable
to avoid building more than one low lying city on the flood plain unless it is absolutely
necessary.

Egypt

Egypt has a similar problem to Babylon, and should follow a similar policy. It is
essential to expand into Palestine and claim as many of the city sites there as possible.
It is also advisable to agree to a sensible frontier with Africa and thereby avoid
trouble on that side. And whatever you do, avoid building cities in the Nile Delta if at
all possible.

TRADING

In the trading sessions, your primary aim should be to build up a set of trade cards
with a value as large as possible. This generally means concentrating on one commodity at
a time, and trying to corner the market in that commodity. The best commodities to
concentrate upon are Salt, Grain, Cloth, Bronze and Spice. The first four commodities
tend to be used as short change to fill up a trade package, but if you manage to make up
a full set they complement your hand very nicely. Although Gems and Gold can make up
substantial sets, there are not many of them, and the number of players with eight or
nine cities is usually low. Even if you do not have nine cities, it is useful to convert
eighteen tokens in your treasury whenever possible. It gains you a useful card to trade
with players who do have nine cities, and helps relieve your inflation problems. It is
also a good idea to offer trade packages of four or more cards every now and then; this
may make it easier to conceal a disaster card in the deal if that opportunity arises.

CARDS

There is no ideal set of civilization cards to collect. If
somebody maintained that such a set existed, the maximum limit of eleven cards per player
would make things very tight in the five, six and seven player games. However, some
general guidelines can be given. Any winning set must contain at least two of the three
civic cards Law, Philosophy and Democracy, and preferably all three. The easiest way to
acquire Law is to pick up Literacy and Architecture first; together, they knock forty
points off the price of Law. Philosophy can purchase very cheaply if you also acquire
Music and the five science cards: Mysticism, Astronomy, Coinage, Medicine, and
Engineering; this reduces the price of Philosophy to seventy. The purchase price of
Democracy can be reduced to one hundred and ten with the additional purchase of the four
craft cards Pottery, Cloth Making, Metal Working and Agriculture.

The order in which you purchase your cards should be partly decided by two criteria.
The first is to buy them in the sequence which makes the entire set you aim to collect as
cheap as possible. The second criterion should be based on whether the purchase advances
you past all barriers on the AST in the shortest number of turns. The problem here is
that getting past one barrier ‘easily’ may create problems at the next barrier.
The most critical example of this dilemma is evidenced by a decision to purchase lots of
cheap cards in order to obtain the seven cards required to pass the third barrier; this
may make it extremely difficult to acquire an additional four cards with the values
required to push your net total to the one thousand points required to pass the fourth
barrier. However, it is sometimes not possible to stick to these criteria. This is
usually caused by buying pressure on specific cards.

The trickiest decision to be made is usually connected with the order in which the
cards belonging to a particular colour group are bought. The natural order is to buy from
cheapest to dearest, largely because this makes it easier to pass the early barriers.
However, it can be advantageous to buy some of the expensive ones first in order to
create a shortage in them. This is a particularly important consideration in the five,
six and seven player games.

The mix of civilization cards to aim for is also critically determined by the number
of players in the game. If the number is four or less, there is no card shortage, and it
is generally best to aim for the high value cards unless this causes problems during the
approaches to the barriers on the AST. With larger numbers of players, it is worthwhile
going for some of the cheaper cards if only to ease your passage along the AST. However,
you must make sure, firstly, that you pick up a substantial proportion of the highest
value cards, and secondly, that your main rivals miss out on more of them.

In conclusion, Civilization is an excellent multi-player game for those who
like long games which require considerable thought, concentration and decision making. As
a final point, I’ll leave you with a recommendation not to use the Avalon Hill
expansion set. The additional trade cards mean that the disasters are less frequent, and
this upsets the entire play balance of the game.

Civilization is a game for two to seven players; designed by Francis Tresham
and originally published by Hartland Trefoil; it is now also marketed under licence by
Avalon Hill and Gibsons Games. Players should be aware of which set they are playing
with: there are slight differences, principally in the sequence of play, between the
Hartland rules and the Avalon Hill rules.

(This article was originally published in “Games
International”, issue #9 (September 1989) and is reproduced here with the permission of the
author)

SHARP PRACTICES

by Steve Jones

1830 is a game for two to six players, designed by Francis Tresham and published by Avalon Hill.
Like its classic predecessor 1829 (Hartland Trefoil), 1830 is a railroad business game.

For those familiar with 1829, there are two major differences in 1830. The first is the locale:
whereas 1829 covers the Railroad Era in 19th century Britain, 1830 covers the growth of the
railroads in the north-eastern United States and south-eastern Canada from the early part of the
19th century to the present day. The second difference is one of emphasis. 1829 concentrates more
on the mechanics of running the railroad companies for high profits and less on manipulating the
stock market. In contrast, 1830 concentrates more on manipulating share prices and less on running
the railroad companies; indeed, the opportunities for swindle and sharp practices are many and
various for the unscrupulous investor. It is not an easy game to play. While its mechanics are
fairly straightforward, there are many elements involved during play, and the interplay between
them is both complex and subtle. If one were searching for an appropriate single sentence to
describe 1830, it would be “This is a sharp game for sharp players”.

PORTFOLIOS

The game consists of a sturdy fold-up board of which about one-half depicts the north-eastern
United States and part of south-eastern Canada. This map has superimposed upon it a grid of 4cm
hexagonal spaces; hexagonal railroad track tiles are placed in these spaces during the course of
play, and a railroad network is gradually built up. Around the edge of the map are marked-out
spaces for the Stock Market (where the current corporation stock prices are indicated), the

Bank Pool (for sold stock and trains), the initial stock offerings, the Par Stock Price list, the
trains on offer, and various explanatory tables.

The object of the game is to make money; when the game ends, the player with the most money wins.
The players achieve this by buying and selling stock in an attempt to build up a stock portfolio
with a high revenue and profit potential. The value of the stock certificates in an individual
portfolio is determined by two things: the revenue per certificate, and the current Stock Market
price per certificate. The six private railroads pay a fixed revenue, and are not quoted on the
Stock Market; they have poor long term prospects, but have considerable short term value, of which
more anon. The eight railroad corporations, on the other hand, have both variable revenue and Stock
Market prices. There are many subtle undercurrents associated with the valuation of the available
stock certificates, which become more apparent with experience.

OPERATING ROUNDS

There are no player turns as such in the game. Instead, play proceeds in a sequence of stock rounds
and operating rounds until either the Bank runs out of money or a bankruptcy occurs.

In the stock rounds, the players buy and sell stock certificates; there is one certificate per
private railroad, and nine certificates per corporation (one president’s certificate worth two
shares, and eight single share certificates).

In the operating rounds, the private railroads earn revenue for their owners, and the president (or
the largest stock holder) of each corporation performs its operations. These consist of laying a
track tile, buying corporation tokens (or garrisons, as they are popularly called), conning train
services (and thereby earning revenue), buying (and sometimes selling) trains, and choosing whether
or not to pay a dividend to the stockholders. This last decision affects the stock price of the
corporation’s stock: the price rises upon payment of dividends, and falls otherwise.

A corporation earns revenue if it has at least one train and one route between two or more cities
(the revenue earned is equal to the sum of the city values of the city stops on the route); this
route must include at least one city occupied by the corporation’s token.

The number of operating rounds between stock rounds depends upon whether the game is in Stage One,
Two or Three, and is equal to the current stage number at the end of each stock round. The game
starts in Stage One, and proceeds to Stages Two and Three respectively when the first type 3 and
type 5 trains are purchased by any corporation.

CORPORATIONS

To those readers who have played 1829, this is all familiar stuff. However, five major rules
changes were introduced into 1830 which have touches of genius and fumed what would have been a
good game into a great game. The first rule change is that the eight corporations can be floated at
any time, and in any order. Furthermore, the player who buys the presidency certificate gets to set
the par value of the shares; the allowable par values lie between $67 and $100.

The second rule change concerns the corporation garrisons. In both 1829 and 1830, garrisons enable
corporations to diversify their routes. A garrison in 1829 prevents rival corporations from using
the station. However, a garrison in 1830 only prevents rival corporations from passing through the
station; they can still run services to the station. This difference introduces a whole new
dimension to the planning of routes in 1830. Basically, short routes are relatively secure, and it
is the longer routes which are in danger of being chopped.

The third rule change is connected to the dividend payments. Dividends are also paid to shares in
the Bank Pool, with the payments being made into the corporation’s treasury. This implies that
there are times when the corporation president will feel less pressure to plough back in order to
increase its treasury. This rule can be particularly helpful to the weaker companies. There are
subtle implications to this rule which will become more obvious after several playings.

The fourth rule change concerns the purchasing of trains by corporations: if a corporation has a
route and no trains, it must buy one. If it has not got sufficient funds in its treasury, the
president must make up the shortfall out of his own resources. This requirement can easily break a
player’s financial resources, and will give any aspiring corporation president nightmares in
the later stages of the game. These nightmares are partly due to the technological obsolescence
built into the trains, and partly due to the fact that there is no official receiver, as in 1829.

TRAINS

There are six classes of trains available in the game: types 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, and the diesels. The
type N trains run between N consecutive city stops along a specified route; the diesel is unique in
that there is no upper limit to the number of stops along its specified route. Initially, there are
only type 2 trains available. Each successive class becomes available when the previous class runs
out. The catch is that when the first type 4 is sold, the type 2 Trains are removed from the game.
The type 3 trains are removed when the first type 6 is sold, and the type 4 trains are removed when
the first diesel is sold.

Consequently, a corporation might look healthy, with several trains and good revenue earnings, only
to find itself foundering with no trains when another corporation buys a new type of train that has
just become available. And if you should be so unfortunate as to find yourself running a
corporation possessing no trains, you cannot just sell out. To sell out of a corporation, there
must be another player with at least two shares to whom the presidency can be passed;
unfortunately, this ‘easy’ route out is not always available. Clearly, these corporations
are not limited liability companies! The good player will be aware of this, and should plan his
long term strategy accordingly.

This awareness should include becoming thoroughly familiar with what happens when each new type of
train comes into play, and the implications of this on long term strategy. The solution of the
problems associated with this unlimited liability rule tends to dominate play in the middle and end
game. Particularly critical periods requiring great care and attention occur when there is one type
3 left, and when only one type 4 remains; the former event signals the imminent demise of the type
2 trains, and the latter event signals the imminence of Stage 3 and the consequent maneuvering
which occurs when the players attempt to secure the limited number of permanent trains in the end
game.

STOCK MARKET

The fifth rule change affects the Stock Market and its operation, which is where the game is won
and lost, so it is well to discuss the Stock Market in some detail. The Stock Market, unlike the
linear track found in 1829, is a two dimensional matrix of stock price slots printed on the game
board. Low prices are found in the bottom left hand comer, and high prices are found in the top
right hand comer. Within it both vertical and horizontal movements representing stock price changes
are possible; the price increases if the movement is vertically upwards or a horizontal shift to
the right, and decreases if the movement is vertically downwards or a horizontal shift to the left.
The change in price associated with each movement is variable, with relatively high changes
occurring at the extreme ends, and relatively small ones in the middle.

Vertical share price movement takes place during the stock rounds. Every time a player sells a
share, the price marker of that corporation moves down one slot. At the end of each stock round,
the share price of every fully subscribed corporation moves up one slot. Horizontal movement takes
place during each operating round. When the president of a corporation declares a dividend, the
share price marker of that corporation shifts one slot to the right; if he/she ploughs the money
back into the company, the share price marker shifts one slot to the left.

FINANCIAL KILLING

The positions of the corporations on the Stock Market also serve one very important function: they
determine the order of play in each operating round, from highest to lowest. This use of the Stock
Market to determine the order of play in the operating rounds is of particularly vital importance
in the middle game just before the first type 5 train comes out. The good player will deliberately
buy and sell specific stock in an attempt to manipulate the order of play to his advantage; if he
gets it right, he can ensure that corporations in which he has a good holding will be in the best
positions to acquire the limited number of types 5 and 6 trains available.

Another important feature associated with the Stock Market is the priority deal: the possessor of
this gets the first option to buy and sell in the next stock round. This can be very important,
particularly when a player president has asset stripped his corporation and has somebody to dump it
on. It is also important early on when the first corporations to be floated have increased their
market values by a healthy amount. The player who can ditch his shares first has a double
advantage: he will make a financial killing at the expense of his fellow shareholders by selling
out just before the share price crashes, and he can choose which corporation to float next.

There are many other subtle features associated with the Stock Market, but there is no room to
include them all in this article; players new to the game should look upon it as a challenge to
pick them up in as few playings of the game as possible.

STRATEGY

Now that you have an idea of how the game is played, how do you develop a winning strategy? One of
the beauties of 1830 is that there is no single winning strategy as such. The closest thing to one
is to gain control of two corporations, but the hitch is that they both need to be good, strong
corporations; if you achieve that, you will be well on the way to winning. However, there are
plenty of things that your opponents can do to upset your plans. Another useful strategy is gaining
control of a corporation with a potentially good diesel route, and get a diesel train into it; if
you can achieve this without excessive expenditure, you could be on to a winner.

One of the tricks to playing 1830 is anticipating problems before they arise and taking the
appropriate evasive actions; equally useful is knowing what to do to limit the damage if you find
yourself in trouble. The most useful overall advice is to be flexible, and ruthless. Don’t form
any fond attachment to your corporations. Many players invite disaster because they let themselves
become emotionally attached to the corporations) they founded. They should be viewed as a means to
an end, and nothing more. If you have a corporation that is headed for the rocks and you have a
chance to get out, do so. Don’t stay around because you think you can rescue it; leave that
dubious distinction to someone else.

There are a number of useful rules of thumb to be aware of in general play. Always be aware of who
is sitting where, and take the appropriate action. For instance, don’t buy more than one share
of any corporation whose president is sitting to your immediate right unless it has a
‘safe’ train, and even then, think hard about it. The reason for this is that, in a later
stock round, your chances of getting rid of the excess ‘dangerous’ shares before he dumps
the corporation on you are virtually non-existent. Contrariwise, it is much ‘safer’ to
purchase more than one share in a corporation if its president is sitting to your immediate left.
In this case, he can only dump the corporation on you if you let him have the priority deal.

Another useful dictum is to avoid being excessively ‘greedy’. The number of times are
legion when players have bought that extra second share on the expectation of a quick short-term
profit, only to find the corporation dumped on them later, the risk is usually not worth it.

DIVIDENDS

On the question of declaring dividends, the best policy is almost invariably to declare. This
applies even in the case where your corporation has a vulnerable train and a low treasury. The
reason is that declarations will generally increase the values of your portfolio, and this will
improve your chances of weathering a bankruptcy crisis. In addition, if your corporation is that
weak, it will probably have shares in the Bank Pool, in which case the treasury will increase in
value even when you declare; this reduces the pressing need to plough back. The only time in which
it is cost effective to plough back is when this will gain your corporation an additional train in
the end game, or will ensure that it obtains a ‘safe’ train. For example, you may have a
type 5 train, and a plough-back will give you enough money in the treasury to purchase a type 6
train; if your corporation has the routes on which to run both trains, it can be a winning move.
Equally, a plough-back which gives you enough money to trade in a type 4 train for a diesel is
always worth doing.

One other general consideration worth mentioning is to try to build up as large a portfolio as
possible; if you have more shares than anyone else, your chances of winning are that much better.
One way of achieving this is to get one of your corporations into the yellow, orange or brown
sections of the Stock Market where its shares do not count towards the share limit for each player;
if you do manage to achieve this, you will have to keep the extra Shares in the yellow at least,
and that is as good an excuse to go for a diesel train as any.

The good player will also become thoroughly familiar with the different types of track tiles
available, and the attacking and defensive options associated with upgrades. In particular, get to
know the different types of station tiles and how they can be placed to build up highly profitable
routes.

One tactic with which you should become familiar is the laying of certain strategically important
tiles in order to deny another player their use. Included in this category are the yellow type #57
and the green type #59 station tiles. There are only four of the former and two of the latter in
the game. They are particularly important when corporations are attempting to build their first
routes; removing these tiles from play can delay that first route and cripple the affected
corporation.

THE PRIVATES

Following on from the general considerations discussed above, I shall continue the discussion of
game strategy by considering the six private railroads and the eight corporations, and finish up
with some observations about the beginning, middle and end games.

Although the private railroads have a limited lifetime, they are vital because of their potential
to provide a large influx of cash to the players later on in the game. This potential exists
because of the rule which allows the players to sell the private railroads to the corporations for
between half and double their face value; the only exception to this is the B&O private. This
rule effectively allows the president of a corporation to embezzle funds from the corporation’s
treasury.

If he times his move correctly, a player can strip the corporation of its cash and dump it on
another player possessing at least two shares in it; often, when this ploy is pulled off, the
corporation possesses plenty of trains which are in danger of being made obsolete in the near
future. In addition to throwing a potentially disastrous problem into someone else’s lap, the
large infusion into the player’s cash reserves puts him in a good position to float another
corporation which will be in a better position to obtain the new trains.

Let us now consider the six private companies in ascending order of price.

Schuylkill Valley Railroad & Navigation Co.

The Schuylkill Valley Railroad & Navigation Co. is a bit of a joke. Its low face value and
revenue make it of little value to anyone. Even its location in a mountain hex (G15) to the west of
New York possesses little strategic value apart from being an obstacle. Its one asset is a
relatively high revenue for little outlet in the early stages. Don’t break your neck in the
lush to pick it up.

Champlain & St. Lawrence Railway

The Champlain & St Lawrence Railway is a slightly better prospect. Its main asset arises after
it has been sold to a corporation: the owning corporation can then lay two tiles in one turn, its
normal lay and one in the C&StL hex located at B20. This can be of particular value to the
CanPac in its efforts to break through to the lucrative routes near New York; but it should be
pointed out that this is a long shot, and if it is to be played at all, it should be early.

Delaware & Hudson Railroad

The Delaware & Hudson Railroad is starting to hit the big money. In addition to its trade in
value being as high as $140, it has a potentially high strategic value in its location near to New
York in hex F16. The owning corporation can lay a station tile and garrison in F16 even if this
does not connect into its network. This gives corporations like the C & O, the Erie, and the
CanPac the potential to set up lucrative routes to New York. This one should be watched.

Mohawk & Hudson Railroad

The Mohawk and Hudson has a potential double value. In addition to its relatively high revenue of
$20 and trade in value of up to $220, it can be traded at any time for a NYC certificate. This last
capability means that even if you never get the chance to use it to asset-strip a corporation, you
will never lose its capital value since it can be traded in for an NYC share at any time before the
first type 5 train is brought in. But don’t hold on to it too long, particularly if the NYC
comes out fairly early on.

Camden & Amboy Railroad

The Camden & Amboy Railroad is a potential gold mine. Worth up to $320 cash in an asset-strip,
it also has attached to it a free Penn certificate. This latter feature makes it easier to float
the Penn early on, and makes an asset-strip even more likely. Even if you don’t get to use it
to asset-strip a corporation, its location in H18 is potentially valuable in the struggle to
control the approaches to south New York. Its high potential value will mean that there will be a
lot of competition in the rush to acquire it; whoever gets it should be made to pay well above the
asking price for it.

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad is a bit of a mixture. On the plus side is its high revenue of
$30 and the automatic acquisition of the B&O corporation presidency. On the negative side is
the fact that it automatically closes down when the B&O corporation buys its first train.
Therefore, it is not as valuable as the Camden & Amboy, and as such, it is rarely worth paying
more than $S over the odds to purchase it. The most critical decision which the purchaser has to
make is the par value of the B&O corporation. In most cases, it is best to set it to the
maximum possible value of $100; this value ensures that the capital loss from the relatively fast
disappearance of the B&O private is a minimum. The par value should only be set at a lower
value if you have a partner who is willing to help buy out all the shares in the first stock round,
thereby ensuring that the price rises steadily in the early stock rounds; even then the decision is
marginal, and better terms might need to be set.

The eight railroad corporations are not all equal; some have better potential than others.

Pennsylvania Railroad

The Pennsylvania Railroad (PRR) is potentially one of the best long term corporations, partly
because of its relatively close starting position near New York, and partly because of its five
tokens. The latter also implies that the PRR is a good corporation to put a diesel train into, if
only because all those tokens give it the capability to defend the long routes which a diesel
requires to be cost effective.

The PRR is usually one of the first corporations to be floated, because only five shares need to be
bought instead of the usual six; the sixth share is already owned by the owner of the C&A. The
one drawback of the PRR is its low revenue growth rate; even with two trains in it, it rarely gets
above $6 a share early on.

New York Central Railroad

The New York Central (NYC) is potentially the best long term corporation, better even than the PRR.
This is because its home base has a better revenue and track switching potential than the
PRR’s. However, it also suffers from poor initial revenue growth rates, and because of this it
rarely comes out early on. It usually comes out in the middle period of the game. Like the PRR, it
has excellent potential as a diesel corporation, particularly if it can get through to south New
York via G 17, and into the PRR network. However, its one weakness is that it needs a yellow type
#57 tile to build its home base; therefore, any prospective president should make sure that there
are plenty of these about when he floats the corporation.

Canadian Pacific Railroad

The Canadian Pacific (CPR) has a poor long-term potential despite its five tokens. Its starting
position in Canada is isolated by river and mountain barriers from the lucrative routes in the
centre of the board If we add to this the relatively poor revenue growth rate, it is not difficult
to conclude that it is probably a lame duck corporation. The only chance it can have to become a
good long term prospect is either through early access to New York via a garrison in the D&H
hex in F16, or through outside help in route building.

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

The Baltimore & Ohio Corporation (B&O) is another potential diesel corporation. This is
particularly so if it gets

staved early, and gets to H16 before the PRR; in this case, the world is its oyster. Even if it
cannot break out of its comer to become a diesel corporation, it still has a good potential to be
one of the strongest of the medium corporations. But its president must be prepared to make things
happen. And there is no harm done if it is not floated early in the game; just sit back and rake in
the revenue from the B&O private. Another advantage associated with a late flotation is that
the par value of $100 ensures that there is plenty of cash in its treasury with which to buy a good
Train.

Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad

The Chesapeake & Ohio (C&O) is another good medium corporation with an outside chance of
gaining good diesel routes. It has excellent revenue growth potential because of its close
proximity to Chicago. Consequently, it is a popular choice for flotation in the first stock round
Its one drawback is its relative isolation at the western edge of the board This can be partly
overcome by its early flotation, which can give it the time to build up its routes.

Erie Railroad

The Erie (‘Erie’) is one of the poorer corporations. It should never be floated early on
because its home base can never be built until Stage 2; the only legal tile that can be placed in
E11 is a green type #59 tile. Great care should also be exercised in laying its home base tile and
token; it is dangerous to locate its home base on the north-west edge of E11 facing D10 because
there are only two green type #59 tiles in the game, and if the second one goes into H18, the Erie
will be crippled until Stage 3. These disadvantages usually lead to the Erie being one of the last
corporations to be floated. It is strongest as the second corporation in a player’s portfolio.

New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad

The New York, New Haven & Hartford (NYNH) is an excellent New York based corporation which
possesses good revenue growth potential. While it is not common to see it floated early on, it can
do well when it is. The one drawback to the corporation is its three tokens; this low number of
tokens means that it is a poor choice to put a diesel train into. As one player observed, ‘If
the Hartford had an extra token it would be a cracking company!’

Boston & Maine Railroad

The Boston & Maine (B&M) is a corporation with mixed potential. If it is floated early on,
it can do very well. It suffers from two drawbacks. The first is its geographical isolation from
the bulk of the map by the Appalachian mountains and the river in F22. The second is its three
tokens, which give it very little route flexibility. It is therefore hardly surprising to see it
usually doing well only when it is floated early on. If it is one of the last to be floated, it
will need friends if it is to do better than moderately well.

There is no ideal strategy to be pursued at the beginning of the game apart from being flexible.
The one thing to keep in mind is that it is not vital to buy a presidency and float a corporation
in the first stock round. However, if you are going to do so, the vital figure to keep in mind is
$402; this is the amount of cash you need to float a corporation on your own. The only exception is
the PRR for which you need only $335 in order to float it by yourself, because of the free share
that goes with the C&A private. If you do have this amount available after all the private
railroads have been sold, well and good; pick the corporation you want and get going. If you
don’t have the cash, you will need to strike a deal with another player in order to get his
help to float a corporation The one thing to keep in mind when striking such a deal is not to be
dogmatic. Certainly, try to strike the best deal that you can, but remember that the other guy
should be offered something to entice him into the deal in the first place. And when you make such
a deal, stick to it; as a general policy, it is counter-productive to welsh on agreed deals.

The only other thing to keep in mind in the first stock round is to make sure that the other
players don’t get their private railroads too cheaply. This applies particularly in the case of
the C&A; it is criminal to let a player get this for $165. A useful rule of thumb to keep in
mind is whether the price reduces the player’s cash reserves to less than $402, or in the case
of the bidder for the C&A, to less than $335.

It is difficult to pinpoint exactly when the beginning game ends, and the middle game starts.
Probably the best definition is when the second set of corporations is floated. Generally speaking,
the players who are floating these corporations are doing so out of their own resources, and so it
is probably a good bet that they are doing well. If a player is floating his second corporation, it
is invariably a sign that he is doing very well indeed, and the other players should be thinking of
ways of tripping him up. There are many ways of doing this, but the most common means involves
hitting his share prices, and attempting to remove from circulation specific tiles which he may
require.

Once into the middle game, you should be devoting all your efforts to ensuring that your
corporation gets at least one of those valuable type 5 trains. This will usually involve keeping a
close watch on the share price trends on the Stock Market, and attempting to predict which
corporation is likely to be able to buy the first type 5 train. This includes taking whatever steps
are required to manipulate the share prices so that the trends go the way you want them to go. The
trick then is to ensure that your corporation buys the first type 5 train, or failing that, has its
operating round immediately afterwards. In the former instance, you should be trying to ensure that
your closest rivals do not get the good trains.

The middle game usually ends and the end game begins when the first type 5 train is brought. This
usually triggers a mad rush for the type 5 and type 6 trains, and more often than not the game
settles down to an uneasy period during which someone is usually saving up for a diesel train. If
your corporations are ‘safe’ with their type 5 or type 6 train, and your prospects for a
diesel are poor, you should be thinking about closing up the game, and making sure that any diesel
routes are not very lucrative. On the other hand, if you are saving up for a diesel, you should be
building, or have already built, your diesel route, and be taking whatever steps are required to
protect it. The question of going for a diesel can be critical, especially since it will usually
cost you something to get it. If you think you are already in front, it is probably not worth going
for it. On the other hand, if you are coming second it is certainly worthwhile going for it; the
only consideration that you might need to take into account is whether there will be enough time
left once you have the diesel for its extra revenue to wear down the lead. The only other reason to
go for a diesel is to force a bankruptcy, and in the ensuing share price chaos, to come out in
front.

In conclusion, 1830 is an excellent business game which requires considerable thought and quickness
of mind, and provides endless hours of enjoyment. I’ll leave you with a final recommendation:
do not play with the optional extra type 6 train; that version is for wimps!

(This article was originally published in “Games
International”, issue #5 (May 1989) and is reproduced here with the permission of
the author)

Strategy Seminar

Die Macher

by Brian Walker

As anyone who has played with me will tell you (all too loudly), I’m not the
world’s greatest games player. Nevertheless, there are a few games I’ve managed
to delude myself into thinking that I play well. One of these is Die Macher, a
game based on the German elections, and arguably one of the most sophisticated, in terms
of game mechanics, on the market. For the increasing number of owners of this game I
would like to share some of the pearls of wisdom I acquired on the hustings. Obviously
it’s impossible to suggest a definitive strategy in a game of such changing fortunes,
so I’ll suffice by concentrating on opening moves and the first election.

Preliminaries

The first thing you have to do is
to jettison two members of your shadow cabinet. This is one of the easier decisions to
make in the game. Generally I discard the Fraktionsführer and the Partieboss on the basis
that the junior ministers perform many of the same actions at cheaper cost. The Kanzler I
always like to keep for that +3 popularity. Expensive, sure, but worth the dough in a
crisis. Never get rid of your junior ministers. They offer tremendous value for
money.

The next step is to cast your freebies, starting with the votes. This is normally a
pretty tough choice, especially if you are going first. Ideally, you want to find a
region where you have at least two matching choices. But things are usually not that
simple so stay cool, and be patient. Above all try to avoid getting in a fight with an
opponent at this stage, wasting your valuable resources to possibly finish second in an
election is not a sound strategy. If you do go first and there is no obvious choice as to
where to place your first five votes, split them up between the four regions and wait to
see what your opponents do. By the time you get round to placing your media disc and
campaign days, you should have a clearer picture of the region where you want to mount a
serious campaign. Once this has been determined, plough all your resources into that
region and get ready to kick ass. But remember; fifty votes is the maximum you can
obtain, so don’t waste cash trying to get more.

Brighton, Brighton

Generally I like to keep my resources as long as possible until I see which way the
game is swinging, but this is not always possible with the conferences. If two of your
opponents are already agreed on a particular program then get in quick and hold a special
conference (cost: 500), grabbing the last remaining program card for that issue while
doing so, thus avoiding becoming an early victim of a three party squeeze (there are only
three policies of each type). Likewise, if there are two policies your opponents are
agreed upon, then hold a major conference (cost: 700). The only other justification for
making this move would be that it would enable me to change my program in such a way as
to win the first election, thereby getting an instant return on my investment.

If you have the cash to play them don’t hang on to your conference markers for too
long, especially the cheap ones. Always try to use them to obtain party bases rather than
change programs. Remember, this way they earn you money after every election.

Smear Those Reds

Time to send in the crooks. At this stage you
can’t really afford too much. In an area where I think I have a chance of winning and
getting control of the media, I’ll probably send in the Außenminister to boost my
popularity. Without media control this is a risky move as some sneak could bang you down
by getting hold of an unfavourable opinion poll.

If one of your opponents looks like he is running away with the first election then
send in the Generalsekretär to launch a smear campaign. He probably won’t have enough
dough left to buy an opinion poll. Watch the smug grin on his face disappear. A dirty
trick, I agree, but then that’s politics. It’s probably unwise to make this play
though against those tiresome vindictive types that one so often comes across.

Always try to get the debate marker onto one of your policies. This will give your
vote total a substantial boost and at little cost if you send in one of your junior
ministers.

Remember The SDP

If you can force a coalition and win an election on somebody else’s coattails,
great. Let them pay the bills. This is another reason for holding a major conference in
phase 1 (change two programs to match theirs), but only do this if they already have a
coalition card face up in the region. Also, make sure you have a media disc in the
region, otherwise your victory will be a hollow one.

Murdoch Mania

Media discs are undoubtedly one of your most important resources, so use them
sparingly. Again, try not to get locked in a media war early on when your reserves are
slender. Better to relinquish power to an opponent than waste cash trying to create a
stalemate. Your day will come. It’s always worth playing a disc into one of the lower
regions especially if you are trying to win the first election. At the start of the game
the floating opinion pool is pretty small, so even if you have the power to change
things, chances are the opinion you seek is not available. However, if you have media
control in one of the lower regions you may be able to switch opinions. Even going as far
as to replace a positive agreement with one you violently disagree with, simply to make
the former available for the election currently taking place (this tactic applies
throughout the game).

Campaign Trail

The campaign days represent the best value for money in the game. Always place as many
as you can afford though save some cash for the opinion polls. In the early elections
don’t fanny around. Stick them in a region you’re serious about, but always put
at least one in the current election, more if you have the dough as the votes they
represent will give you an instant cash return.

Swingorama

Yes, it’s opinion poll time. Of course it’s
nice to have lots but you don’t have the cash so bid carefully. Do not bid in an area
where you have media control if your popularity is up, or if you can reach 50 votes any
other way, at least in the early stages. Save your money for a region where you can be
hurt. If you should obtain a poll that is unfavourable to your own prospects then try to
hammer the leader in that region. Stick the boot in, drop his popularity and raise that
of a no-hoper. Only employ this tactic if it does real damage. Otherwise you’ll be
catching vindictive fall-out for nothing.

The Hustings Hustle

To convert, or not to convert. That should be the question. As a rule of thumb I’d
say yes when your popularity is up, and no when it is down. An exception to the former is
when you want to go last in a turn, perhaps say, in the shadow cabinet phase when you
want to kick somebody’s media disc out without fear of instant revenge. If your
popularity is only at par, it’s worth converting if that will give you an overall
majority, and equally to stop one of your opponents obtaining the same.

If your popularity is down always convert at least one as fractions are rounded
up.

Flick Flack

Bribes are tricky things, as any politician will tell
you. When you see one of your opponents coining in the cash after an election victory
while you’re on your uppers, the temptation to visit Herr Flick for an illegal
donation is indeed great but must be resisted unless the situation is really
desperate.

The potential loss of party bases could be disastrous in the long term. Visit the bank
if you must and hit the manager for a plain brown envelope. If you’re okay for cash
just sit back and collect the 500 risk free, or simply do nothing.

General Tactics

When you contest an election pull out all the stops and aim to hit at least 50 votes.
Being a runner-up is nowhere, so be a winner. As someone once said of life in America:
‘Son, there are no second acts.’

Always stay in tune with what is happening in Bonn. Agreements count as a big modifier
at the end. Check in advance who is likely to win the election and what opinions he is
likely to place in Bonn. If he’s going to place two that look likely to stay there,
then hold a major conference and grab them from the program deck, if available.

Don’t underestimate the power of votes. In an election game this may sound
strange, but some players get so carried away with modifiers they forget about the nitty
gritty.

Try to get your media discs in early on the last election. Experience has shown that
this can often be the decider.

The above advice carries no guarantee of success, but follow it and you should be
there at the finish. If not, then take consolation in the words of a losing American
senator on the stump: ‘The people have spoken, the bastards.’

(This article was originally published in “Games
International”, issue #5 and is reproduced here with the permission of Brian Walker,
the former GI editor)

Britannia

Graham Staplehurst gives one man’s angle on a popular
historical game that is already regarded as a classic.

Britannia is a game for three to five players (but four is the most suitable) designed
by Lewis Pulsipher. It is based on the known history of Britain between 45AD and 1085AD,
but enables the players, together with a little help from the luck of the dice, to
recreate that history in their own manner.

Lew Pulsipher is well known for his scholarly devotion to history and, though an
American, evidently knows a good deal more about the origin of the ‘English’ and
other people of Britain than most people who live here (like me!). However, I’ll
leave the purely historical aspect of Britannia for now and describe the game in a little
more detail.

The game consists of a board depicting the island of Britain (including the Hebrides
and Orkneys) divided into 37 areas and surrounded by six seas. Lurking off the board are
the lands of Gaul, Scandinavia and Erin. Initially, the island is peaceful, with a
scattering of British Celtic tribes portrayed in confederations such as the Belgae, the
Welsh and the Brigantes. Suddenly, from Gaul, comes the fleet bearing four Roman legions
with their auxiliaries on the command of Emperor Claudius. Fifteen units land on the
southern shores of Britain…

The Destiny Of An Island

This is just the first of many invasions inflicted upon Britannia by successive
nations. Some are massive and sudden, like the Romans and Danes; some are slow and
insidious like the Irish. All affect the game to a greater or lesser degree as existing
inhabitants attempt to stave off the invaders or channel their lust for territory in
another direction. For this is a game of territory, and the trick of winning is holding
just enough to achieve your individual objectives. Stretch too far and you’re
vulnerable – pile your units up and watch them die from lack of supplies.

Each player controls four nations, a nation being a more or less coherent group of
people with a unified aim. The Belgae, for example (a quarter of the Blue faction),
represent the Celts of lowland England: the Trinovantes, Catuvellauni, Dobunni and Iceni
among others. The game notes delineate the aims of the nation in strict terms, awarding
victory points for achieving different aims. The Belgae must hold areas after the fourth
turn to score points, and also get points for destroying either Roman armies as they
advance north or Roman forts left behind. Meanwhile the Roman nation (the first of the
Purples, appropriately enough) gets points for invading all English, Welsh and southern
Scottish areas and for holding on to its forts, so the Belgae do well to make it through
the first turn in games I’ve played. Thus Blue is set against Purple and command of
territory crucial, for no matter how many battles you win, if you haven’t held enough
areas, you won’t win the game.

This aspect of the victory criteria is essential for balance and to ensure that
players must mix outright warfare with judicious diplomacy. The Brigantes, Welsh and
Picts can all choose to submit to the Romans rather than be wiped out, safe in the
knowledge that the collapse of Rome will call all the legions home after Turn Five,
leaving behind only the weakened civil population to defend against the waves of Germanic
invaders.

In addition to the simple equation of areas held = support and victory points, there
are two other basic rules. The first is that only one nation can occupy an area: if
another enters they must fight until one withdraws or is eliminated – even if the units
belong to different nations of the same player. The second is the way that combat is
dealt with. Each side rolls one die for each army present and kills an opposing army on a
5 or 6 – modified for terrain and special ‘enhanced’ armies such as cavalry and
Roman legions.

Thus far the game is simple – so what makes it exciting? The re-creation of the
history of the land we live in is a lively subject and one which continues to enthral me
after many games. It’s the eternal ‘What if?’ historians like to ask: what if
Harold was defeated at Stamford Bridge or won at Hastings? What if Arthur drove back the
Saxons for good? What if the Great Army of the Danes pressed its attacks on Wessex? All
these points are elegantly handled in the game through three mechanics (none of which
detract from its essential simplicity). There are the specially designed victory
objectives mentioned earlier; there are leaders to gather great armies and enhance their
fighting power; and there are special rules for particular situations.

The victory point objectives can be great motivators. Take the Welsh, for example.
They score 8 points for holding all of Wales (and this includes Devon and Cornwall) in
Turn Seven; they can also score a massive 6 points for taking York at any point in the
next two turns. Consequently, the Welsh always make a big effort to sack York and end up
dividing the Angles. But then what do they do with their army in York – send it home to
defend against menacing Irish and Saxon armies, or maintain it as a field army to keep
the nations in England from getting overly powerful? And how should the Angles plan – to
defend York heavily and deny the Welsh the points, at the risk of losing perhaps 30%-40%
of their population, or concentrate elsewhere and let the Welsh take it easily?

Leaders can be very useful. Allowing nations to stack up armies for invasions, giving
50% extra movement and adding one to the die roll in battle, they are scattered thinly
for the most part and must be used carefully, particularly by smaller nations. King
Arthur, for example, will lead the Romano-British against the Saxons, Angles and Jutes,
gaining points for every enemy killed. But if he leaves himself exposed and gets killed,
the victor wins 3 points for themselves. At the end of the game, 5 points are at stake
between Harold, William and Harald Hardrada the Norwegian for being King of England.

Finally there are the additional rules. These cover everything from raids, when armies
can attack and then return safely from whence they came, to the election of Bretwalda or
overlord of England before the strong Kings arose. Trying to remember all the rules,
together with all your own victory point objectives, and your opponents’, and
thinking ahead to where the next invader is going to appear all make for a game where
you’re never really sure what’s going to happen next.

An Anvil Of Blood And Terror

So, now you have an idea of how the game is played, let us progress to your first
game. How do you win? I hope that the general maxim given above will be a start, but
there are four different factions in the game all requiring a slightly different
approach. Here are some hints which might just help you do a bit better.

THE PURPLE FACTION

• Romans
• Romano-British
• Scots
• Dubliners
• Norwegians

The Romans have perhaps more decisions to make than any other nation in the game. They
get the most points-per-area for penetrating to the heart of Albion (that’s Scotland,
except the Scots haven’t got there yet) but this will generally mean they have to
by-pass Wales and it can also leave them with too few defences down south. Despite the
fact that Romans move further each turn than other armies, their mobility is not
unlimited and to get additional points when the legions withdraw the Roman player must
protect southern England, Cheshire and York.

If you plan on going north, you must reach York in the first turn while eliminating as
many Belgae as possible. Try to take out the Brigantes in March and Cheshire as well, and
defend the western flank against an early Welsh raid. Don’t despair if you lose two
or three armies early on through others’ lucky die rolls. An alternative strategy is
to go for Welsh submission, since getting all of Wales will net you 3 points anyway –
more than risking going against the Highlands in Scotland. Welsh mountains are a good
defensive base for the Romano-British to take over.

If you go north, this should weaken the Picts and assist your Scots somewhat,
especially if you can wear the Brigantes down to a token presence. It sometimes pays to
make a deal with the Welsh regarding the latter. The Scots’ invasion with King Fergus
must push the Picts back after their raiding. Skye is the hinge of Scotland since it
borders both western seas, but Dalriada remains the centre of the kingdom. If the Scots
look doomed through ill luck, use them to try to eliminate the Brigantes completely.

The second two Purple factions can also help each other. The Dubliners’ big
advantage is moving after the Norsemen, so they stand every chance of getting both York
and Cumbria on their big invasion turn. It is often advantageous for both Scots and
Dubliners to bide time at sea when small numbers of invaders are introduced, landing them
only in the major invasion. Obviously, empty spaces are often worth taking to get a
foothold and start to build population.

After their invasion, the Dubliners should attack Angles and Danes in the area to
weaken the north for Harald’s forces, and aim to retreat into Lindsey and Pennines.
They can emerge in the last turn to retake York and Cumbria while keeping out of
Harald’s way when he needs to score points. The Angles are a problem since they will
try to eliminate or weaken Harald at any cost, in order to assist Duke William’s
chances of becoming King.

The Norwegians should be able to score most of their initial invasion points with
Dubliner help. Try to push well south on the first stage of the invasion so that Harald
can retreat further north and stay out of others’ reach. His only real hope for King
is that Harold and William kill each other, but a small force in North Mercia sometimes
has a chance of catching one or other off guard.

Avoiding putting more than one man in areas the Dubliners want; there’s a good
chance he’ll be able to retreat out. However, the areas are worth holding to get
reinforcements. If you do plan to let the Dubliners take York, remember the
reinforcements can’t land south of it, so ensure your armies aren’t concentrated
in the north.

THE BLUE FACTION

• Belgae
• Picts
• Angles
• Normans

The Blue faction is hard to play well, but don’t despair! It can win, and does so
more often than you might imagine. It starts by watching the Belgae being annihilated by
merciless waves of Roman invaders. All you can do is pray to roll some sixes and slow the
Romans down. Always retreat immediately you get the opportunity, preferably to hiland
(Downlands or Lindsey). Then attack any undefended fort or, failing that and if you are
caught in open terrain, forts with single armies. Always attack the forts of greatest
worth to the Roman, even if this leaves you in a worse defensive position (as the Belgae,
you couldn’t have a worse defensive position). Just go for kill points.

The Picts however should do everything possible to survive as widely spread as
possible. Don’t retreat from Dunedin until you have to and build in the north, ready
to squeeze the Caledonians before they start to double up their armies in areas.
Don’t hold back against the Caledonians if you can put three or preferably four onto
one. Turns Four and Five are especially useful and you can often eliminate the
Caledonians by sending in every single piece to raid and leaving just one behind. The
Picts and Angles can often help each other across Dunedin/Lothian/Strathclyde. If the
Picts do get control of the islands, remember to garrison them later against the
Norsemen. Do remember, it’s better to stay alive and make a deal with the Brigantes
or Scots than to be reduced down to a miserable couple of units; and also ensure you get
the most points in the last turn.

The Angles have a hard time. Lacking a leader with which to invade, their only
advantage is moving last, and even this means they tend to have their breeding cut down
by others, especially Saxons. However, it is still possible to score lots of points and
survive, despite being assailed by Romano-British, Welsh, Saxons, Irish, Danes, Dubliners
and Norwegians. Try to hold the balance of power in England and deprive the Saxons of
Bretwalda and Kingship as often as possible. Strike at weak Saxon points to deprive him
of victory points as well, for example Essex in Turn Seven. Take any hiland areas as soon
as you get the chance and don’t risk big attacks except perhaps to take out Arthur
with an army or two -that’s four or five points’ worth.

Finally, the Angles have a good points-per-area score late in the game, so they are
worth preserving rather than throwing away. They can also help Duke William (the
traitors!).

The Normans get the chance to move and act last of all in the game. Be prepared to
face Saxons, Danes, perhaps even some Welsh or Irish in the west, all intent on murder.
It is absolutely essential to get maximum points from the first invasion turn and to
protect William, for reinforcements will be worthless without him alive. The best points
come from an east-side attack but except in very unusual circumstances you should always
endeavour to kill Harold as soon as you land. Don’t bother to spread out after Turn
15; stay compact and harder to attack. Encourage everyone else to harry the Norwegians!
Mix your cavalry and ordinary armies to give the latter best protection and leave William
behind at least one rank of defenders.

THE RED FACTION

• Brigantes
• Irish
• Saxons
• Norsemen

The Red faction is big, bad and thoroughly mean. At least, that’s my unbiased
opinion. To be honest, any of the factions can be played as ‘spoilers’ to some
extent; it’s just that often the Red faction seem to be better at it than others.

As enduring as the Picts (with luck) are the Brigantes. By the time the Roman reaches
the Brigantes’ real heartland of Galloway and Strathclyde, he should be struggling a
bit, and the Red player should certainly encourage the Roman to go for the big points in
Dunedin, Alban and Dalriada.

If necessary, submit to the Romans. Fighting it out is usually not worth it: although
you gain perhaps 6 points for luckily killing a couple of armies, it would be much better
to preserve your integrity and pick up more points later on. Try to submit with maximum
population (6 armies in three areas) and remember that you move after the Roman so when
he counts Limes on Turn Five, you can try to vacate point-scoring areas. With five or six
armies, you should be able to hold the heartland and progress from there, especially with
the early leaders. Do any deal to stay alive and help the Saxons and Norsemen later:
Saxons by voting for them in Bretwalda elections; Norsemen by clearing Cumbria.

The Irish have a hard time of it. As suggested for the Scots and Dubliners, don’t
always land armies the turn they arrive at sea. Wait until you have a couple to be more
use, unless you want to risk the odd Roman fort in Avalon or Hwicce, for example, or
occupy an empty area. With a few armies on the board and the Welsh busy elsewhere, a
useful attack is one focusing on Devon then Cornwall. Although harder to penetrate, they
also offer better long-term security and will be hard for the Welsh to retake. Even
better, it could well distract the Welsh from attacking Norsemen or Saxons elsewhere, and
strengthen your faction as a whole. An alternative Irish kingdom to aim for stretches
from Cumbria to Gwynedd; again this is quite hard for the Welsh to attack, however it is
more vulnerable to later attacks from Danes and Dubliners.

The Saxons are quite simply the biggest nation (potentially) on the board. Only the
Danes with 18 armies approach the Saxon total of 20, and the Danes are unlikely to grow
like the Saxons do. The initial Saxon advantage is the early invasion against a
relatively empty southern England, with Hengist as leader. This should enable you, with
luck, to score a good few points killing Romano-British as well as wiping out the Jutes
(this is highly recommended). Then spread out and maintain a few two-army stacks in the
midlands, gradually swelling in size -you should quickly get two, then three builds a
turn – and taking out Angles in the Midlands and East Anglia, pushing back stray Welsh
and even making room for the odd Irishman if it scores more points. Use boats to catch
the Angles off guard. If Hengist is unopposed in landing, an early foray to secure Devon
is also useful, but follow up in Cornwall sooner rather than later. With Irish and
Brigante help, the Red faction should make the Saxons Bretwalda and King more often than
not. Once you gain momentum, you will roll on until the Danes strike. The answer is to
secure your back (the West) so that you can fall back in good order and keep punching
back in any weak spot. Tell the Danes if they weaken you too much, it’ll be a
walkover for William later. Do deals on non-aggression to get Bretwalda votes. Most of
all, bulk up your front line to make it sufficiently unattractive to attackers, even if
you don’t want to attack anywhere yourself.

At the end of the game comes the hardest part – defending against Duke William and
Harald. With any luck, the Angles and Danes should be Harald’s main opponents and may
well prevent him from reaching Harold. Keep Harold as well defended as possible, such as
with the maximum four armies in hiland, and scatter troops around to give you the best
chance of survival and a retributive strike against the Norman invaders.

The Norsemen present a task of flowing where it is easiest. The initial strike must be
against Hebrides and Orkneys and holding them in Turn 13 for the best points opportunity.
If you can end up with the ideal of two or three armies in Hebrides after Turn 12, these
can join with the fresh invaders next turn to go for Skye and a solid base for reaching
all of Britain’s west coast; otherwise get points in Cumbria and annoy the Welsh or
Dubliners, whoever looks the stronger. Don’t be too worried about getting every last
half point for visiting – the Norse are one example of where the armies are best used
preventing others from reaching juicy objectives, such as the Picts on the last turn with
their three 3-point areas.

THE BLACK FACTION

• Welsh
• Caledonians
• Jutes
• Danes

At first glimpse, you might be forgiven for thinking you’d been dealt a dud hand.
The Caledonians can only get six armies on the board and stand fair to be wiped out by
Picts and Norsemen, but this seems an easy life compared with the Jutes’ five armies
and not even hilands to defend them.

The Caledonians have little to do except sit there and try to resist the inevitable.
Just try to exist; honey the Pict with kind words and hope you get a build soon. As for
the Jutes, their best chance for points lie in destroying Roman forts and stealing Kent
on Turn Four. If Kent is defended by a Roman army and fort, go for any open Roman fort
you can reach and raid it, then try for another on Turn Five with all units. If possible,
delay landing the final Jute until after Hengist’s invasion; that way you might just
get Kent or somewhere adjacent on Turn Seven. Remember, if you land in a coastal space
you can probably reach Kent by boats later, so stay out of the way of the Saxons.

The Welsh are more complicated and offer a good possibility for long term strategy. As
with the Brigantes, submission to the Romans is, in the final analysis, better than being
smashed to (practically) nothing. Don’t let that stop you taking any chance to raid
Cheshire, York or Essex, should the chance arise: by building your first armies in Powys
and Clwyd this is often easy to accomplish. When the Romans withdraw, Romano-British
forays may leave areas to York open. Seize these early (especially Pennines) to make it
easier to get your 6 points in Turn Eight or Nine.

Your main opponents are the Red faction, so ruthlessly quash any Irish settlers and
take the opportunity to nibble at the Saxon kingdom and slow its expansion. Devon and
Gwent are worth defending. In the mid game, occupying one or two English areas can make
all the difference in Bretwalda elections. However, the main concentration must be on
maintaining the integrity of Welsh territory and reaping maximum victory points every
three turns.

Finally, the Danes also call for careful consideration. In the initial raid, look for
open areas you won’t have to fight over and be careful to preserve maximum numbers of
units for the Turn 12 invasion. Raid Angles or Saxons depending on who holds the stronger
hand and then follow this up with a good invasion (at least 16 points worth). Try to end
the invasion concentrated either north or south of York – if north, aim to eliminate the
Angles entirely – so that you can hold a sensible kingdom.

Use the Welsh to soften opponents and take the odd area so the Danes get a chance to
be King, but don’t let them get in the way of scoring points during the invasion.
Later hang on as well as possible and press the advantage wherever you can. You should
make deals with the Saxons and Angles if necessary at the end of the game in order to
stand off the Normans and Norwegians wherever possible.

Step Back Into Those Dark Ages

One of the attractions of Britannia is that it does not exactly simulate the history
of Britain. After all, this would be very tedious and unrewarding, and we would all know
who was going to win. (Actually, portraying history with the game is impossible in places
– for example, Harold cannot defeat Harald Hardrada at Stamford Bridge (in York) and then
reach William in Sussex next turn.) However, the game must of necessity simplify things
somewhat and leave out some rather interesting bits of British history.

Generally speaking, the only units in the game are armies, and only armies are deemed
to control areas. There are no civil populations to hold an area peaceably (although a
leader can control an area on his own) and thus every part of the realm must be
garrisoned – and this is not an accurate reflection of the settlement of Britain other
than in Roman and late Saxon times. Additionally, it means that the Normans, with their
relatively small band of men, cannot win control of the land by placing a few men in
command over a subject population.

Additionally, a dimension of historical realism is lost by the amalgamation of many
peoples into different nations. The many tribes constituting the Belgae, for example,
were belligerent towards each other – often more than the Romans, and some actively
submitted to the Romans (whom they knew from Julius Caesar’s invasion and withdrawal
ninety years earlier) and attacked their ‘fellows’. The Welsh were related Celtic
tribes: Ordovices, Silures and Deceangli for example, who were led by the fleeing Belgae
leader and hero Caractacus (or Caradoc) in defiance of the Romans.

Throughout the rest of history, nations were split by internal strife on a regular
basis as successions were disputed and lesser nobles tried to seize power. There were
also rebellions by peoples who had been subjugated and effectively ‘wiped out’
but who nevertheless regained a national identity and rose up. The first example of this
was Boudicca and the Iceni who had been semi-Romanised; they took up arms when greedy
administrators raped their lands and daughters and drove a path of destruction to
Colchester, St Albans and beyond before being utterly defeated by Suetonius.

There are a few historical inaccuracies which are easy to correct. Two of these
concern the provision of boats – a very useful commodity in the game. I would certainly
allow the Saxons boats under Alfred, who was the constructor of the first English navy
(one might even think about rules for naval combat).

I would also give boats to the Norwegians in Turn 16, enabling them to land forces
further south than York. Turn 16 could be further enlivened by the addition of a Danish
leader King Swein (also with boats and a few boatloads of troops) who raided the east
coast of Britain and, assisted by Hereward the Wake, laid up in the Wash during 1070-1. I
am also tempted to add other leaders, such as Caractacus, Boudicca, Hereward, other Welsh
and Scottish princes down to Macbeth and so on, but this side of the game is more
dangerous to tamper with, as one might upset the game’s innate balance.

There are some nations I feel have been treated a little harshly – the Jutes for
instance, unable ever to score any points except for areas in the south-east of England
when, given the opportunity, they might have settled in any convenient spot and survived
with a greater cultural identity. I believe there is also room for more rules covering
submission, a Scottish King and so on.

The Wider World

Britannia is a good game, destined to become a popular favourite with boardgamers and
wargamers alike. However, as a games designer, I’m not content to let it stop there,
and neither are other busy inventors I know.

Already existing as a prototype are Britannia variants covering the whole of Europe,
from Persia to Britain (a six player, 36-faction game taking about 12 hours to play) and
also a Middle-earth variant of my own design. This latter has some 20 factions and a
rather longer time span than Britannia – it starts with the war of the Elves and Sauron
in the Second Age and ends with the War of the Ring over 5000 years later!

In addition I have devised some alternative historical scenarios to add to the
original game. These start with the Huns under Attila reversing their defeat by the
Franks at Chalons and sending a raid against England. The Huns are followed by a possible
resurgence in Roman fortunes, then later by Arabs spurred on by victories in France and
Magyars raiding beyond their battles in the Low Countries. Finally there are ex-Danish
Vikings who can choose either to settle in France and become the Normans, or land early
in England – but this will indubitably let in the Franks, now French, under Philip
I…

I also have plans for introducing some fantasy elements to the game, with Merlin,
giants, dragons, faeries, goblins and all the other traditions rife across so many parts
of the country that to leave them out would do serious injustice to the tale of Britain
that Britannia tries to tell. But in the meantime, I hope you enjoy playing Britannia,
one of the best new games for a long time. There are thrills enough in just getting to
grips with a game where hidden danger or success can be revealed with every new turn,
every surprise move, and every roll of the dice.

A Final Note

The first edition rules published by Gibsons were atrocious. Most of the ambiguities
were cleared up in the second edition, though there are still some anomalies.

A copy of the second edition rules can be obtained by sending an SAE to Gibsons.
Avalon Hill, who licensed the game from Gibsons for the American market, corrected all
the errors in their set of rules.

If you’re using the second edition rules you may find some eventualities which are
not covered, or which seem confusing. As with any game, these are not difficult to come
to agreement over after careful assessment of all applicable rules. There are some
suggestions in this article which may seem contrary to the rules, and the latter should
be always be taken as relevant to your games, until or unless you agree otherwise.
Unfortunately, the author cannot let well alone and will always tamper with things…

(This article was originally published in “Games
International”, issue #2 and is reproduced here with the permission of Brian Walker,
the former GI editor)

KREMLIN

The object of Kremlin (reviewed last issue), is to
manipulate mythical politicians in the Soviet Politburo with the aim of becoming Party
Chief and waving at the October Parade in Red Square. In its first life Kremlin was
designed by Urs Hostettler (pictured above) and published by his company Fata
Morgana, in Berne, Switzerland. In this short feature, Urs describes how he got the idea
for the game, and his opinion of the newly released Avalon Hill version.

How does one go about designing a game like Kremlin? It’s a question I’ve been
asked on more then one occasion.

Well, it all started one night in March 1985, as I was watching TV at home in Berne.
Tschernenko had just waved the long goodbye a few days earlier, and already the silver
screen was awash with speculating specialists attempting to predict his successor.

Old man Gromyko was Foreign Minister at the time, and as such, was able to nominate
the new Party Chief. The hot money was on Marshal Ustinov who was just approaching the
peak of his career at 80. In the background were two young turks, Gorbachev from Moscow,
and Romanov from Leningrad. Both were in their late fifties and thus had a lot to lose
should their bid for power fail (you don’t get a second chance).

As I was listening I played around with some cards and decided to create my own
Politburo, and work out a mechanism that would respect the principles of gerontocracy
(the rule of the old), but allow a hidden strategy whereby younger members also stood a
chance of gaining power.

I worked on the game system for Kremlin for about one year. Both Sigma
File (Gibson’s), and Down With the King (Avalon Hill) were strong
influences in terms of game mechanics. At one point we thought of changing the setting to
the Vatican, with the Pope taking the place of Party Chief, and visiting foreign
countries instead of waving. But then the situation in Moscow changed so dramatically
that we wondered if some evil Russian game developer had stolen our ideas; Ustinov died,
Romanov was demoted to candidate status, and Gromyko got the heave from the foreign
ministry. Thus, Kremlin was born.

One of our objectives when designing Kremlin was to produce a simulation of
Soviet political culture, which is why we place so much emphasis on controlling
characters in secret. Thus a player who has been playing very aggressively and dominating
the game, can find himself rudely upstaged at the climax when he discovers that the
character he thought he was controlling and who has been waving like a Queen, was really
controlled by somebody else!

So in this sense it can be seen that our version is much more of a psychological game
than the Avalon Hill one; a player can win by simply doing nothing the entire game.

This is not a criticism of the AH version which I know went through a lot of rigorous
playtesting. My main qualms were about re-situating the game in the eighties. Originally
the game was set in the fifties – the grey era of Soviet politics. My intention was to
satirize this period. I don’t really think many aspects of the game apply to what
Gorby is currently trying to achieve, though this is something of a political point and
does not affect play in any way.

As to the game itself, I am inclined to think that their version is more suitable for
the American market with its emphasis on action. It can be quite boring to sit around for
two hours doing nothing, except revealing victory at the conclusion. But being perverse
by nature, how I like to win this way!

But what of the American version? Better? Worse? or merely different? Our editor,
who was partially responsible for AH’s decision to take the game, describes the
Kremlin campaign.

My brief from Avalon Hill was simply to write the character cards for their version.
However, their head of development Don Greenwood knew I’d played the game several
times in its original form, so sought my advice on some of his proposed rule changes.
When I read the first draft for these changes my heart sank. My American colleague Alan R
Moon had already seen the changes and had inevitably chimed in with his
two-penn’orth. Even so, I wasn’t prepared for the changes that Don had wrought.
Rightly or wrongly, Avalon Hill had acquired a reputation for making games more complex,
merely for the sake of it. At first glance, Don’s changes seemed to confirm this
view. How wrong can a comrade be? My initial reaction was along the lines of ‘why
change a winning team?’ After all, the game had sold very well in Europe, even with
minimal production standards and limited distribution. Some of the changes seemed petty,
like changing the ‘Kremlin Wall’ (under which Soviet heroes are buried) to the
‘Graveyard’. To his credit Don later admitted that this was ‘dumb’ and
reinstated the unique Soviet structure.

Like many who had played the original game I was
disappointed to see Anatol Fuckoff and Andrei Pissin purged, but this was expected so no
resistance was offered. Don also asked me to come up with some alternative names for the
characters as it was felt that the Teutonic humour of the originals would be lost on the
English speaking market. I demurred; apart from having a sentimental attachment to Tigran
Zenjarplan et al, I felt that they added atmosphere to what was already a
‘foreign’ game. Attempting to change the names into jokey English ones seemed
unnecessary, though I did agree to come up with two to replace Anatol and Andrei. As I
didn’t hear from Don again on this point I assumed that the originals were to be
retained. It wasn’t until I saw the finished product that I was aware the names had
been changed. My own afterthought contributions had missed the deadline anyway, but who
knows, perhaps Betty Boobsky might turn up in a future edition?

As to the rule changes, my main concern was the removing of the hidden influence
points and being able to win with three different wavers. I felt the effect of
this would be to produce a more muddled game, lacking the clarity and the psychological
elements of the original. The crux of the argument was that I felt Kremlin was
essentially a fun game, while Don seemed to be trying to turn it into an altogether more
strategic affair via increased rules.

Then there were the political problems inherent in re-situating the game in the
eighties and sticking Gorbachev on the cover. Urs and I were adamant that the game was
meant to reflect the Cold War period under Stalin, and was in no way representative of
Gorby and perestroika. Don countered this by stating that having a recognisable
and topical figure on the box would help increase the game’s ‘saleability’:
an assertion with which I could never agree.

By now letters were flying backwards and forward across the Atlantic on a daily basis.
Superficially it was almost a Hollywood scenario; the creative artists seeing their
masterpiece disfigured by a monolithic corporation. But that’s a rather pretentious
notion; in truth we both knew that Don was working very hard to produce the best possible
result for all parties.

Eventually though, our persistence paid off; Don agreed to reinstate the original
rules, albeit in a shaded area in the rulebook, a move that had the faint whiff of
tokenism, a feeling compounded by the somewhat less than complete rules in this section.
In addition there were also to be basic and advanced rulebooks which mollified us
somewhat. By this time though, my guns were firmly trained on the cover. I felt more
strongly about it than Urs, who was more philosophical, remarking that the ‘Americans
probably understand then-market better than us’. Be that as it may, the Gorby cover
has now been ditched in favour of a colourful collection of Soviet iconography, making
the game appear less serious. Little wonder Don was to remark later: ‘This was the
toughest game I’ve ever worked on’.

But to return to the original question; is Kremlin now a better game?
After all the static I gave Don he’ll probably kill me when I say, yes, I believe it
is. In retrospect, I think I probably suffered a knee-jerk reaction to the changes per
se, rather than the effect of these changes, in my mistaken desire to retain the
‘purity’ of the original. Ugh! these words taste awful.

The Kremlin Reshuffle

Declared Influence

The main change from the original is the removal of secret influence; in the original
a player could win if he had as much or more undeclared influence points in the
Party Chief as the player controlling him openly. It is still possible to have the
best of both worlds here by adopting the rule that a player can still claim a wave for
his faction by declaring influence points equal to, or in excess of the player
controlling that politician, immediately prior to phase 8 (Waving at the October Parade).
Of course it is also possible to play the game as per the original rules, but bear in
mind that in this version declared influence points are not lost if the politician is
dispatched to Siberia, something the American rulebook fails to point out.

Three Time Wavers

The second major change is the ability to win if your faction has waved three
times, irrespective of who did the waving. In the original, the same politician
had to wave three times for victory to be claimed. The effect of this is to make the game
more fluid. In the Swiss version it became very difficult to become a three time waver,
especially in a five or six player game.

Siberia I Declare

Losing declared influence points on politicians dispatched to the icy wastes is, at
first glance, a fairly radical change. The effect of this should make players more
circumspect in their bidding. But in reality players become power crazed and go the whole
hog anyway, thus rendering this change rather less radical than it appears initially.

Tie Breaker

This has to be one of the best changes Don came up with. Ties are now broken by the
player with the third highest declared influence points on a particular politician,
rather than simply by the player who declared first, though this method is still used in
the event of ties unresolved by the first method.

The effect of this is to involve more players in decision making which is always a
good thing in any game, but especially this one.

The Options

Optional rule should there be no Party Chief at the end of phase 5 in year
eleven: Although this situation does not often occur it can be a problem when it
does, as it means that a player controlling the Foreign Minister decides who will win the
game by announcing the next Party Chief. Clearly not a satisfactory solution. To resolve
this, we suggest that the winner is the faction with the most recorded waves. In the
event of a tie then the player controlling the highest ranked politician wins the
game.

Jobs For The Boys

The plus and minus signs on the politician cards refer to their suitability for
certain offices. We seldom used this in the original but that was more due to the
fiddliness of constantly changing ages, but more relevantly it was so difficult to get
anyone to wave three times, let alone make sure that your men had the jobs. Now both
these factors have been eliminated this option seems a good one since it makes the
promotion phase considerably more strategic.

Adding Influencing Points

Should be considered mandatory rather than optional.

The Intrigue Cards

Difficult to decide about the usefulness of these. Certainly they add uncertainty and
make for a more fluctuating game, but rather at the expense of planning. The blackmail
cards are not my cup of vodka at all, though this is more to do with my distaste for
games where you have to strike bargains with players.

Historical Revolutionary Variant

This is the new expansion kit released by Avalon Hill featuring historical
politicians. So a big hello to Josef Stalin. The concept of having real politicians who
are replaced by mythical politicians when they die is indeed a wonderful one.
Unfortunately it simply doesn’t work. The main problem is one of age. Uncle Joe
checks in at 44, so no matter how much purging he does you can be sure it will be a long
time before he checks out.

Likewise Leon Trotsky (45), and Nikita Krushchev (30). The suggestion I would make is
that you add 30 to the ages of the ‘real’ politicians.

Let’s hope I don’t end up eating these words as well.

(This article was originally published in “Games
International”, issue #1 (October 1988) and is reproduced here with the permission
of Brian Walker, the former editor of GI)