Slowing Simultaneous Play

Tom,

One minor point of terminology: I think I'd tend to call what you're describing "real-time" rather than "simultaneous". To me, "simultaneous" implies that actions are being taken by all players at the same time, but this doesn't necessarily mean they are being taken "on the fly" -- games like Wallenstein or Robo Rally, for example, have simultaneous selection of actions, but these are revealed and evaluated "slowly". A minor point.

As to your game itself, this might not be helpful, but perhaps you don't even have a problem? There's a great game called Chinatown in which players are wheeling and dealing, trying to negotiate real estate deals on the fly. The game can bog down when people try to spend too much time calculating their payout and making sure they're getting a "good" deal, and when this happens, the game loses a lot of its appeal. So, in a wheeling and dealing game, I think a lot of on-the-fly seat-of-your-pants chaos is highly desirable!

If you don't want that, though, you might try restricting the number of players who can negotiate at any one time; for example, in Bohnanza, anyone can trade, but all trades must involve the active player. Another option might be to impose a phased structure where dealmaking happens "on the fly" but the other actions must take place at certain times, or in certain rounds, or whatever. The other thing to think about is limiting the scope of what can happen in a round, so that someone who can take turns really fast doesn't run away with the VP accumulation, or, conversely, is subject to additional penalties as well; or, that someone who moves a little more methodically can get a better payout by waiting. For example, if the game was about "stock trading", the "day trader" approach can give big payouts but also big losses, whereas the "long term investment" gives slower, but steadier progress. Not sure if that kind of model would work here.

Speaking only for myself, I don't typically like "real time" games because I think I'm more of a "planner" than a "reacter". But, deal-making games like Chinatown, paradoxically, I do enjoy. I think it's because I find "who can negotiate a better deal quicker?" to test a more interesting skill than "who can size up the game state and react to it most quickly?", but that's probably highly subjective. So for myself, I would seek to beef up the realtime elements of trading, but diminish the runaway scoring potential of being able to take more turns than everyone else by virtue of being faster. But, it's highly likely I'm not your target audience, so take that with a grain of salt!

Sounds very interesting, though, and I hope to hear more about it (or playtest it!) at some point!

Good luck!

-Jeff