Here is a brief description of two quick playings of the introductory Scenario #1 "Coup 2001."

The first turn is given in detail because it seems that, in this scenario at least, the first turn pretty much determines the rest of this short, five-turn game.

Setup:

The rebel player having seen earlier failed assaults on Washington DC, decides on a Western approach. The Government unknowingly facilitates this strategy by leaving several Western territories open.

Turn 1:

Rebels boil out of the Pacific Rim onto the west coast. Thanks to massive use of detention camps, Government forces in California are destroyed. Vigilantes in the Pacific Northwest turn against the government and aid the Rebels in destroying government infrastructure there. In the Heartland and Midwest, unprotected Government infrastructures hold firm against armed attack. The rebel army in NATO stays put, hoping to absorb any Government attack.

The government mobilizes the Internet Cybernauts and the media elite. European gangs turn out to aid an offensive against the Rebels in NATO, but are only partially successful. An offensive into the Heartland and Midwest turns into a fiasco as Rebel armor counterattacks and annihilates Government forces.

In the following turns, the Rebels sweep east and annihilate the government. However, they don't manage to recruit or convert much infrastructure there. Although the Government loses every area except Greater New York (where an unprotected infrastructure miraculously survived two turns of data and armed conflict), the result is a draw, which in this game means anarchy and ruin! Both sides got up from this game and called to see how the wife and family were doing. One thing's for sure: Crisis 2000 hits closer to home than most other games!

Originally, But...

We had originally planned to play two different scenarios, but because this one came out so differently from those reported by the other players, we decided to give it another whirl. We did not reverse sides, because I wanted to teach the Rebels alesson.This time, I piled a hunk of data and armed strength into California and Washington, hoping that, if the Rebels made a major attack, they would at least lose a lot of Crisis markers if collateral damage came up. Ialso expected that my Cybernauts would be a thorn in his side.

The Rebel generals decided on an invasion with Cybernauts from the south into the Heartland and Midwest, with armed attacks of 9+ strength on the two Government strongholds in the hopes of eliminating them. The Rebels resolved to build only units with good data ratings, because it was the shortage of these in the late turns that prevented a clear Rebel victory in the first game.

They also made sure to keep their good data units spread out in the set-up in order to make as many data attacks as possible, regardless of their low strength. The Rebel player suddenly developed the inspiration of placing Cybernauts right in among built-up Government forces in California and Wshington. That made the Government feel dumb!

In data combat, Rebel attacks on California and Washington are thoroughly successful. The Rebel California Cybernaut neutralizes a Government strike force before the opponent can do anything about it. The Rebel plays a "Surveillance" marker in DC and takes out a Cybernaut. This event causes collateral damage, however; and causes the Rebel to lose its four remaining markers and permits the Government to pick up one besides because the Rebel was supposed to lose five.

The defenders of Texas stage a riot that recoups Government fortunes somewhat. The California cybernaut rolls a Defect result and flips over the Rebel Cybernaut. In Texas, rioters and a police strike force destroy the invading Rebel armor and Special Forces commandos. Elsewhere, net results have no effect.

The Government returns a neutralized force to New York in order to put Mr. Rebel in a collateral damage risk situation if he wants to take out government infrastructure there swiftly.

Despite a more hopeful start, the Government was not able to recover from its early losses in California and Washington. Perhaps the lesson is to stay spread out, especially when not massing for an attack. More prudent play by the Rebel netted 18 VPs at games end, worth a Marginal Victory The struggle for America is by no means over!

Both sides played much better the second time. The tempo of the game was very different with the slightly revised rules about Infrastructure elimination and gaining/losing Crisis markers. There was still armed conflict, but now at least there was a lot of data conflict to go with it. And both sides did a better job of positioning data units with an eye towards both recruitment and subversion.

As the game went on, strong data units spread out into nearly every region. This game was a lot more fun with Cybernauts running around making mischief Neither side, however, could resist the temptation of going after DC. No fewer than 25 Crisis markers were lost or gained as a result of Collateral Damage. There's a lesson in that, for sure.

The rule changes work very well and add a bit of stability and calculation to the game that wasn't there before. Also, it makes the Crisis marker balance a little less volatile. Because players are less likely to zero out, one player (the Government in this case) can maintain a superiority in markers by playing more prudently than the foe.

If I play this side again, I would probably try claiming a solid block of territories and keep my units inside the block so that they could not get hit so badly on the first turn. The combat system is skewed enough towards the attacker that units are targets rather than protectors.

All in all, a fun little game. It was quite easy for us to learn, but with plenty of strategies and tactics to figure out. We didn't start to get the hang of it until the second game; but, with each game taking about an hour or less, that's no problem at all.