- The concept of the game was fun. I liked the idea of a complex resource management game where players need to weigh the pros and cons of buildings, and balance costs and resources.
- We as players did not interact much. Players were a bit isolated, silently competing with each other. What really mattered was what building somebody built at the right time.
- The game took a while to learn. Many of the mechanics were vague and unexplained, which made it hard to interpret and learn. We had to adapt many of the rules and procedures to have a playable game.
- The rules and instructions were very vague. The images above show revisions we made to make the game playable. Many of the mechanics of the game are not explained and leave players questioning, like money, population, goods, etc.
- I liked the macroeconomy that the game was going for. The large amount of resources to manage makes the game enjoyably complex. With some polish, it could really become a cool strategy game.
- I wanted to understand more.
- I would enforce a rule to match building colors with zone colors. I would also make resource acquisition a priority, as it wasn’t mentioned much and did not even affect the buildings in the late game.
- Yes, I would play the game when the rules are tightened and the scope is reduced.
- Act 1: Players build their first residential zone and acquire resources. Act 2: Players make strategic investment decisions in which property to build to compete with others. Act 3: Players rely on the revenue they generate to pass the money limit and win.
- Players are competitive in that they fight for the same resources and must be the first to reach a wealth goal.
- The game has a similar metaphor to Monopoly but players are much less adversaries than they are competitors. Players need to find the right strategy to generate enough wealth to win. A player’s immediate actions rarely affect other players.
- Players must plan their approach. Players must balance their resources. Players must be the first to the top.