From: mcgrew@ichthous.Eng.Sun.COM (Darin McGrew)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Junta: house rules
Date: 2 Oct 1992 23:11:05 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: ichthous

bret@HQ.Ileaf.COM (Bret Pettichord) writes:
> > >5. Winning. If the rebels hold three red areas at the end of any turn
> > >   (not just the last), they have won the coup.

Daniel Shoham writes:
> > No. This would be too easy. One could say that holding four is an
> > instant win. 

bret@HQ.Ileaf.COM (Bret Pettichord) writes:
>Or maybe if they hold them for two turns in a row. I really want to
>make it so that the coup game can finish sooner and encourage a quick
>coup.

The coup game is already pretty quick, once everyone understands
the game.  Seven turns, where each player can move only one stack
of tokens per turn, isn't very long.

>       Some thoughts: (1) This gives an advantage to the air force,
>who may now parachute into an unguarded location and get the third
>area. (2) Advantage also goes to the minister, who is closer than the
>rest. 

The airforce already has the advantage of being able to parachute
into an unguarded location in the last turn of the coup.

The minister has the problem that the police are scattered and he
can only move one at a time, unless he has been able to
consolidate the police for whatever reason.

> > >7. Order of Play. Each player moves and then resolves combat, in turn.
> > >   Allied players may move and fight together.
>I find it really confusing having everyone move and then keep track of
>the ensuing fighting round.

I like the "everyone move, then resolve conflict" approach (I'm
used to it from Civilization), as well as the simultaneous combat
volleys.  These mechanisms help avoid the idea that you're taking
turns attacking each other; they make it feel more like
everyone's doing everything at the same time.

> > >8. Transfer of Control. Military units may not move in the turn in
> > >   which their control is transferred between players.
>The transfer rule is motivated by (1) preventing units from being
>transferred back and forth willy nilly, which slows down the game and
>didn't seem "realistic" to me and (2) making it easier to enforce the
>rule that a unit can't move twice in one round.

I haven't seen a problem with (1) since I expect coups to be
rather chaotic, and we haven't had problems with (2).

>All in all, i think my rules will make it easier to have a successful
>coup,

To me, they seem to put extra emphasis on the coup as a wargame.

>      or, in effect, they force the president to divide the spoils
>more broadly to prevent such a coup (assuming that people start coups
>for profit and not just for fun).

What a silly assumption...  ;-)

>        Or can the fortifications rule, but allow the guards to get
>two dice (or whatever) anywhere.

But why do you want to do this?  I like El Presidente having a
pretty good hold on the palace (unless all the incoming fire is
directed at the palace ;-), but having to negotiate for anything
else.  The point isn't for El Presidente to be able to hold off a
coup, but for him to have to convince his loyal followers to hold
off the coup for him.  That's also why players can switch sides
at the end of the coup; coups are diplomatic exercises, just like
the rest of the game.

Darin.McGrew@Eng.Sun.COM            He is risen!
    Soli Deo Gloria!                              He is risen indeed!

Newsgroups: rec.games.board