Game #71: Mafia of New York (jwalduck)

Well I guess that almost two years and 70 games later, it was about time a "better" version of an earlier GDW game would turn up. ;-))

My first entry into the Workshop, Warzone was the game, and the central idea of a limited pool of command counters on a relatively simple map is not dissimilar. There are more than enough differences, of course; most notably an additional money component to allow for upkeep, and they are all things that increase the interesting choices which is what games are about (see endless dicussions elsewhere :-)

I have to say that the one significant feature - the variable area value idea - is great. It's rather fiddly as described - a number of counters in a region with other counters of various types is going to lead to problems in tracking values, and I'd have thought using something like d6s to track value would be better and more immediately obvious.

Otherwise, I don't have much else to note. I know that the central concept works, simply because I've tried it, and it does :-) Resolving actions in player order concerns me a little; in Warzone I deliberately resolved actions in a territory order so that players would have to plan their moving and attacking based on the map, not on where they were in the play order.
(I'm working on another design atm in which one of the actions available is to change your player order position, so that next turn you can be sure of doing what you want to do. I wonder if that sort of element might work here? Although I can't think of an elegant way to integrate it...)

I don't have any really good feedback for you. It sounds like a really cool game to me. I don't see a need to play up the theme better than you have - you've got a nice ruleset that does match with the theme (you're ahead of Knizia!), and I don't think every game needs to exploit every theme to its ultimate potential. The actions seem to have a little thematic weight to them, they're not just abstract with sugar coating. I like all of the optional rules, though I think they're worded wrong - they all mention parol (sic) hearing spaces, when it sounds like the intent is that each of those spaces is a different type along the Don track. Also sounds like the Reported Crimes area is the same as the bank, until the optional rules come into play.

My only note is that it seems like support counters should be removed when they are activated, or are supporters able to support in any number of rumbles adjacent to them in a round?

As suggested above, a Cop token that moves around somehow could be fun. One of those things that every player can control to mess up the other players. Maybe another action counter like the Rebuild (why doesn't rebuilding cost any money? Greasing a few palms...), the Bribe. You play it and spend a grand to move the cop to any adjacent territory (he must be in the territory you Bribe). He prevents any action other than Bribe from working in the territory he is in (you can flip an action there, and have to if it's the only one you have left, but they have no effect). On the plus side, whatever territory he's in at the end of his turn gains 1 value even if it has guys in it. He could also prevent rumbles from happening in his space. So you may want him or not, depending.

Of course, I'm just adding complexity, but I do like the idea of cops being around somehow.

EDIT: Oh, one exception to liking the optional rules. I don't like the parole hearings. I don't think the idea of the game potentially ending early is that appealing, especially under the condition of too few crimes. It's just a little needless complexity, and I have a feeling people would be pretty clear on whether the parole was going to succeed or not in advance. That seems like a needless thing to expend player attention on.

I like the sound of this game in much the same way as I like the sound of Blood Feud in New York. In fact, it sounds like a very similar game to BFiNY.

I have been tossing around some ideas based on a computer game I used to have called Chaos Overlords, and last night Scurra pointed out that those ideas sounded just like your game... so I read your GDW entry and lo and behold, my game is like your game plus influence!

I'll think about it some more and see if I can come up with any specific feedback for you. I like the action selection mechanic. I think each player should get some Bluff tokens as well, and everyone should have to play a token into each area they have dudes in. May be even more interesting if you only have 1 bluff token.

- Seth

How expensive do you want it? One cool way to present this, I think, would be, if you could imagine, "Hero-Clix Buildings" -- Plastic molded buildings for each area that had a little dial to show the value. A cheaper version would be to use the "Edge Slider" that the newer Avalon Hill games use on a peice of cardboard (Betrayal at the House on the Hill, and Monsters Menace America both use these, I believe). So imagine a little stand up cardboard building with the values on the side of the building, and a slider that runs up and down the edge pointing to the current value.

Personally, I wouldn't sweat the theme too much by adding useless complexity just to add flavor. Ultimately, THOSE could just as well be themed to something different anyway. I think a good art package with nice special molded pawns and stuff goes a lot towards selling a theme than just adding a deck of event cards just for the sake of a theme.

Like others, I don't have much to add. I think that's probably a good sign! ;) Your rulebook is certainly presented well.

The only thing that really catches my eye as "iffy" is the fact that people don't die as a result of rumbles (except where no retreat is available). Specifically, a failed attack has no penalty whatsoever. I find that odd.

I like the rebuild alternate action rule.
I like the police idea mentioned previously.

Considering Roles:
An idea so you don't need a role for each player. (The cop fits into this scheme too.) Give each player a set of role cards. To use roles, players allocate money to those they wish to use. A player could attempt to bribe zero, one, or multiple roles. I'd probably do a totally blind wager. (I think I prefer the wager over 'keeping the role known and the amount unknown' or 'doing it straight up with no hidden info'.) All bribes are revealed (and lost) and high briber for each role gets use of the role.