Board Game Designers Forum

I haven't been posting here as much as I have been in my game design blog, so I though I'd try to get this thread up to speed on my current thoughts on Eminent Domain.

I have played the game a number of times now, mostly 2-player, but a couple multiplayer games as well. After experiencing the game, and hearing comments from players as well, I've made a few tweaks to some of the rules, and I've got plans to change a few systems (some of which have already been mentioned int his thread).

I made player aids (which it would be cool to post, huh?) with the current Action, Role, and Follow effects for each of the 6 actions in the game:
The current actions
Survey
Action: Draw 2 cards
Role: Draw 1 Planet card per Survey icon, keep 1 and put the rest on the bottom of the deck
Follow: Draw 1 Planet card per 2 Survey icons, keep 1 and put the rest on the bottom of the deck
Research
Action: Remove 1 card in hand from the game
Role: Draw 1 Technology card per Research icon from a deck for which you have a face up Planet, keep 1 and put the rest on the bottom of the deck
Follow: Draw 1 Technology card per 2 Research icons from a deck for which you have a face up Planet, keep 1 and put the rest on the bottom of the deck
Colonize
Action: Flip a Planet card face up OR add 1 Colony to a face down planet
Role: Flip a Planet card face up OR add 1 Colony per Colonize icon to a face down planet
Follow: Add 1 Colony per Colonize icon to a face down planet
Warfare
Action: Collect 1 Army
Role: Flip a Planet card face up OR Collect 1 Army per Warfare icon
Follow: Collect 1 Army per Warfare icon
Harvest
Action: Produce 1 resource on an open harvest spot on a planet
Role: Produce 1 resource per Harvest icon on an open harvest spot on a planet
Follow: Produce 1 resource per Harvest icon on an open harvest spot on a planet
Trade
Action: Collect 1 VP from the supply
Role: Trade 1 resource per Trade icon for 1 VP from the supply
Follow: Trade 1 resource per Trade icon for 1 VP from the supply

The player aid also lists across the top what you do on your turn (1. Action, 2. Role, 3. Cleanup) with a brief description of each.

Physical design
I like how the cards work, how the piles of Action cards will be in the center of the table - like dominion but only 6 piles. I also like how there will be 3 piles of Technology cards (with the new scheme, these could theoretically be combined into 1, but probably easier if separate) and 1 deck of planets (in theory could split into 3 decks, and sort of mirror the new Research action - read on). What I don't like is the mass of tokens. I currently have 6 or 8 tokens in each of 4 different colors for resources, as well as 24 white VP tokens and 24 black Army tokens. I think it would be nice if the number of tokens were reduced considerably. I may eventually make cards to replace the tokens, so the game is entirely cards, but for now tokens are OK. I think I will consolidate them into a single color for all the resources (and armies I guess) - then I only need about half as many. the card can indicate which type of resource it is.

Planned changes
Technologies: As discussed, I am still planning on changing the Research action and technology system. I would like there to be Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 technologies, where the L1 techs cost 3, L2 costs 5, and L3 costs 7. A problem with that is that a player who does a lot of research (especially from the Advanced deck, taking Research icons) can then swoop in and take all the level 3 techs without doing any extra work. Sure, they have to Colonize or Attack a planet of each type before accessing the top techs of that type, but that's pretty easy. The new plan is t require 1 planet of the appropriate type for each level of tech - in other words to get the level 3 Fertile tech, you have to not only have 7 Research icons at a time, but you also must have 3 face-up Fertile planets in front of you. I like how that should make a player invest in a particular type of planet in order to reach the high end techs, and it will naturally drive Survey actions as well, giving more weight to choosing a planet for its type. Though if I make the planets more homogeneous (see below) then that might not be a big deal.

Planets: I would like to remove the abilities that I currently have on the planets and have them be more just "+1 Warfare icon" or "+1 Survey icon" or "+1 Hand size" - I think that will make the actions and following actions more interesting, create more player differentiation, and will put more weight on the Research action to get the awesome abilities in play. Some planets have abilities that are really good, like "play an additional Action each turn" or "draw an extra card when not following a role" - these planets are low VP planets, but it's possible the extra action one is still 'too good' at 2vp (when planets range up to a max of 6vp). That could be a good level 3 technology.

Specifically, I think I'll make 7 or 8 of each planet card, with 3 being [+ icon], 3 being [+ other icon] (remember, each planet type is associated with 2 icons), and 1 or 2 being [+ hand size].

I'm also considering splitting up the Planet deck similar to the Research decks... into Level 1 planets, level 2, and level 3. Level 1 planets would cost 3 Survey icons, have 1 icon on them, and be worth maybe 2 points. Level 2 planets would cost 5 Survey icons and might have 2 icons or + hand size on them. Level 3 planets would cost 7 Survey icons, and might have bigger scoring opportunities, like Puerto Rico's Big Buildings ("1vp per Planet" or something).

Under this scheme when choosing a Survey role you would draw a standard number of cards (maybe 3) from the appropriate level deck, and choose from among them. This also opens up a Survey technology possibility to increase the number of cards you look at when Surveying, which could help make sure you get the planet that you want.

Setup: For starters I think I'll put maybe 1vp on the starting planets, so a player that goes through the effort of flipping it over will be rewarded a little compared to a player who ignores it.

It's been pointed out that Warfare is better than Colonize for a couple of reasons (mostly that you can accumulate Armies via Warfare action slowly over time, without filling your deck with Warfare icons, and that you have to take more Colonize actions to colonize the same planet as you could warfare). I'm not sure how true this is, because the Colonize guy was doing something else with his turn actions while the Warfare guy was just getting armies one at a time. But it's probably true to some extent. As a 'fix' for this there are a number of options. First I could try making the Action on Warfare simply "attack a planet," so you cannot use it to just get 1 army. I don't love that, because I like the idea of using your action to get 1 army, then your role to attack if you are otherwise 1 army short.

Another option is to make the Colonize costs cheaper than the Warfare costs. If using the 3 Levels of planets idea above, I could have the Level 1 planets cost 3 to colonize, the level 2 cost 5, and the level 3 cost 7, to mirror all the other costs, while each of them could cost a flat 5 armies to attack, meaning Warfare is better than Colonize for the high level planets and worse for the lower level ones. That could be interesting.

But an easier option which I think I'll try for now is to go back to my original idea of simply not having Warfare cards in the starting deck. Instead I'll put the trade cards back in (and I'll probably change the Action on Trade to be 'Trade 1 resource for 1 VP' rather than "get 1vp' - though I'm not sure which of those I like better yet). This way you don't start with 2 Warfare cards in your deck, and so the Colonize action has a head start, effectively reducing Colonize costs relative to the Warfare costs, no? I will try that next time I play, because it's really easy to do.

Though I might like to make the starting decks a more simple "2 of each card" ... maybe I'l end up doing that in the end.

If I understand right, I don't get to look at my Surveyed Planet until I have paid the Colonise cost? Then presumably the back of the Planet card must show its Colonise cost?

This seems like it would give a significant advantage to rote learning the Planet cards, so that one can more-or-less identify a Planet from its back. Personally I don't find rote learning much fun - I imagine I'd prefer it if the Colonise cost was only on the front of the Planet card, but that requires me to get to look at it before it's Colonised.

..in fact sounds more appealing than dominion to me. Only problem I have, is the same problem I have with dominion, I'm useless at shuffling and this game is going to involve a shed-load of shuffling