Game: E.T.I.: Estimated Time to Invasion

Thread: With semi-official variants

Prokonsul Piotrus — 2008-11-05T19:43:06+00:00

Not only I am a big fan of any space-theme games, but I love tech trees - so when I saw the game at GenCon, I knew I had to pick it up. Having played it 6-7 times in the past two months, I am certainly not disappointed.

Pros:
* well balanced: in all the games I've played, there were no balance problems: sure, a player can get ahead of others, but then he will be the primary target of the alien - in no game I've seen the "leading human" actually win. And the chance for running ahead are small, so it's not easy for the alien to do so. And if the alien does - well, it is supposed to win the game every few games, after all
* innovative mechanic - a game centered around a tech tree, after all, is pretty rare
* good quality components
* humor: flavor texts in this game is among the best I've seen; there are even jokes hidden in the legal text on the box
* decent price (that said, the developers are not making any $ from it - apparently for them, it's a hobby... so if you can, buy some T-shirts, or other game of theirs, so they can get their $ back and release the 2nd edition )

Cons:
* rulebook: funny, but confusing. I had to read it twice to even get an idea of how to play the game, and I needed to play the game twice to get a good grip on how it works. I bet it is a text book example (for a text book ) when the rules were compiled by people who already "knew how to play the game" and weren't betatested on some newbies
* the game is not the most intuitive (although part of the fault may be in the textbook) - expect the players to be confused UNLESS one of them is really experienced in the game and can explain what's going on
As a sidenote to the cons, they are rather serious: I've seen players "turned off" the game because after half an hour they still couldn't figure out what is going on Thus, advice to new players: get a mentor, or, before playing with others, make sure you REALLY know how the game works and can explain it.

Other:
* the updates and revisions, also available on BGG, tweak some elements and make them better; it is highly recommended to use them. I have played 3 games using the newest rules recently (with a developer at a local con) and the game went from good to excellent thanks to those tweaks!

Conclusion:
* now that I know how to play it, I do like this game, and I am unlikely to refuse an opportunity to play it. But if any developer is reading this - please, make sure your rules are easy to understand for the newbies!

Thread: Second edition promised

Prokonsul Piotrus — 2008-11-05T19:30:23+00:00

I met one of the designers at a local con, and we tested some ideas for the 2nd edition, which is scheduled "around XMAS 2009". Heads up

Thread: Re: Not perfect, but a lot of fun.

JohnnyRyce — 2008-10-16T20:12:33+00:00

Lancer4321 wrote:
Fully agree with your assessment, that ETI is fun but "not perfect."

The biggest flaw, in my opinion, is with the end game mechanism.... Regardless, it's an enjoyable romp and I too am looking forward to seeing what the rumored expansion will add.

Yes, we are working on a revamped endgame, based on player feedback. It'll end up being a little longer than the current version, but it sounds like people would happily take a longer endgame for some more control of the endgame events. We are pretty excited about it and we will be previewing it at GASPCON in Pittsburgh next month. If things go well, we'll make it look pretty and hopefully have it up here by Christmas.

So let us know what you like and what you don't like. We promise to make 2nd edition completely compatible with everything in the first edition box. Plus we'll be incorporating most of the variants introduced in the newsletters (available here for download).

As always, thanks for the review and the comments. We are working hard to get you from 'not perfect, but a lot of fun' to 'nearly perfect and a lot of fun.'

Thread: Re: Not perfect, but a lot of fun.

Lancer4321 — 2008-10-16T17:21:10+00:00

Fully agree with your assessment, that ETI is fun but "not perfect."

The biggest flaw, in my opinion, is with the end game mechanism. I think the designer missed out on a great opportunity to create a superb "semi-cooperative" game, where the human players would all trying to work together to defeat the aliens and save earth. Instead, the current version of the end game has each corporation fight the aliens individually, which comes off feeling a bit contrived and artificial.

Regardless, it's an enjoyable romp and I too am looking forward to seeing what the rumored expansion will add.

Thread: Re: A suggestion for future E.T.I. development - ameliorate the snowball effect a little

sdonohue — 2008-10-16T16:19:23+00:00

JohnnyRyce wrote:
Still, let the debate continue! And feel free to post any event card ideas that you have here... we'd love to see what you've come up with.

There are 25 event cards and only one (By Our Bootstraps) specifically benefits the company lagging behind. Others may decide that those falling behind would be good targets for some events.

On the flip side, there are 12 events which reward those who are leading in one field or another. Four are for most projects of one type or another and the other 8 are votes.

I recognize that the votes can move, but in my plays of the game, the same players tend to have higher vote totals, regardless of the type of the vote.

I think some cards that might be interesting would include:

Double-Secret Probation - keep until played, choose a company which can't participate in the current vote this turn.

Secret Ballot - no negotiations, must vote secretly. This could either be a new kind of vote or it could be a card you saved to modify an existing vote.

Government Bailout - the company with the fewest tech levels may draw and play one project of the highest tech level it's completed so far.

It came from the future - the company with the most tech levels in robotics gains 1 point in Security.

Absent-minded professor - play when another player is ready to submit findings to swap 2 adjacent cards.

Backups Fail! Play on another player to clear his databank.

Thread: Not perfect, but a lot of fun.

sdonohue — 2008-10-16T15:17:26+00:00

E.T.I.: Estimated Time to Invasion is the second game from Eye-Level Entertainment. It is considerably more ambitious than their card game. The basic idea of the game is that players are one of the leading research companies selected to help defend Earth from an alien invasion. The players research projects that will help defend the Earth, the tricky part is that one of the players is secretly the alien and will reveal himself once enough projects have been completed.

Components
]]>
The game has many components. There are 6 company boards, an alien board, 180 green tokens, 30 red tokens, a sand timer, an ISSA badge (start player marker), and 12 company logos. The game has many cards organized into various decks. In all there are 6 human endgame cards, 90 research cards, 40 project cards, 25 event cards, 4 alien endgame cards and 18 agenda cards.

The research cards are relatively standard and are of good quality. The other cards are square and are decent but not as nice as the research cards. Some of the edges feel more than a little rough. There is also an instruction booklet and a flow chart to help with the play of the game.

Overall, the components are of good quality and are fairly evocative of the late 60s theme.

Setting/Theme
The setting for the game is the mid-sixties and the players are the leaders of the top research companies in the world. They have been contacted by the International Space Security Agency to help prepare the Earth to resist a coming alien invasion.

The components have a nice retro-look and definitely help to evoke the late 60s. The game boards, with their simulated leds are sheer genius, there are way too many tokens, but it definitely adds to the feel when you look across your game board and see that string of green lights for things you’ve accomplished. Overall, I think the theme is entertaining and original and I believe the components help support the theme.

Rules
The rules are pretty straightforward, but the rulebook could be better organized in a few places. The game consists of three phases: set-up, research, and the invasion.

In the setup, each player chooses a company and then the players are randomly assigned endgame strategies. One of the players is always going to be one of the four alien endgames. The players then create their companies based on strength and weaknesses. They start with 1 in each of 4 attributes and are given 3 extra points to assign on their own.

The attributes are Staffing, which governs how many cards you draw during research; Creativity, which allows you to swap adjacent research cards; Analysis, which lets you look at some of your research cards; and Security, which allows you to ignore one or more threats. During this phase, the players also turn over 1 less project card than there are players (so 4 players puts 3 projects in the middle) and choose their starting project to research.

At this point, the game goes into the research phase, which is the majority of the game. Players resolve an event, then simultaneously take one of three actions each turn; they can conduct research, submit findings, or switch projects.

The events change things in the course of the game. Most will give a benefit to the player who wins a vote. The votes are based on completed projects, with each tech level counting as one vote. Some votes are based on stats and projects which helped that stat will get a bonus.

Each project has several attributes, a tech level, a field of study, a fame score, a defense score, a cost, and possibly one or more attribute bonuses. The surviving player with the highest fame will win the game; the defense value is used to stave off the alien invasion.
]]>

Players who conduct research receive a number of cards face down around their gameboard, which has numbered spaces (called dataports) for 14 cards. The basic number of cards is based on Staffing, but you also get one extra card for every completed project in the same field. Depending on his Analysis rating a player may be able to look at some of these cards.

Players can also Submit Findings, which means they are attempting to complete a project. When findings are submitted, they can either be scored the “safe” way, producing 10 points per card, or the “standard” way, which involves flipping the research cards. The cards come in 3 types: numbers, multipliers, and threats. Numbers range from 10 – 50 and provide that many research points towards the project. Multipliers multiply the value of the number before them. If there isn’t a number before them, they have no effect. Threats wipe out the highest number card AFTER them in the sequence.

The player counts up his points and if he has enough points between his findings and databank, he finishes the project. If he doesn’t’ have enough points, the points are put in the databank. The successful project is put into either his top secret (counts for more defense in the end game) or Public Domain (counts for more fame if you survive). If the project provides a bonus, then the company track for that stat is updated.

If two players complete a project on the same turn, whoever has the highest research total wins (in case of a tie, the president decides). The other player can keep up to 100 of his points.

The last thing a player can do is switch projects. This lets you change your current project and save at least some of your research.
If any projects have been completed, the player who finished them then puts out a new project and any players who are not currently on a project can choose a new one.

Play continues like this until a number of projects have been completed (3 per player in the standard game). Once that happens, the alien may reveal himself – he can also hold off, but must reveal himself when the number of projects is at the next level (4 per player in the standard game).

Once the alien is revealed, the players have a limited number of turns left to play and then the invasion begins.

During the invasion, the alien player uses research cards to attack the other players. This is done by dealing them facedown. There are some manipulations and the alien can also play one additional card for every 2 projects he completed. Once all the attacks are in place, the cards are revealed and totaled. The humans must sacrifice projects with defense equal to or greater than the alien’s attack or else his company is destroyed. If all the companies are destroyed, then the alien wins. If one or more survives, the one with the highest fame will win.

Observations
The biggest problem with the game is that there is a bit of a “rich get richer” mechanic. Because most events are resolved by votes and votes are based on completed projects, players who have completed more projects tend to win the votes which give them more projects or attributes. There are some events in place to help thwart this, but I don’t think there are enough.

Conversely, if there isn’t a runaway leader, it can be very difficult to catch up once you fall behind on projects.

The endgame is a bit tricky and puts the alien player as a bit of a kingmaker. He gets to put 3 cards per player in the standard game and can then look at them or move them around, but typically he can’t see many of them. He is basically attacking at random. He then gets to add extra cards based on his mashups. The net effect is that often the strongest human player will get many more attacks and will get blown out while the second-strongest will win. This mechanic can alienate some players.

Recommendation
Despite the problems, I really like this game. The theme is fun and once players see what can happen, they can be on their guard to help prevent it. There are rumors of an expansion and I believe this game could benefit with an expansion that allowed more chances for players to catch up if they fall behind.

Thread: Re: Events question

JohnnyRyce — 2008-09-17T23:38:57+00:00

One Fat Pug wrote:
...and what if no one has any attribute x? Is it a tie with 0 on each side, or does no one qualify?
If no one has the attribute then the card has no effect. We noticed this does happen sometimes at the very beginning of the game as you've noted. We've solved this with a 'quickstart' variant of the game that we will post here in the future. Here is a summary of it:

The basic premise is that ALL players draw a level one project before they upgrade their company at the beginning of the game. They place it in either their top secret or public domain vault and gain any upgrades. Since level I projects are worth either 140 or 90, if they draw a 90 point project then they also get to start with 50 points of research in the bank.

This will almost completely eliminate those null events among other wonderful benefits.

Thanks for playing ETI!

Thread: Re: Events question

One Fat Pug — 2008-09-17T00:46:45+00:00

SapphireWyvern wrote:
When the ISSA Pres picks up an event that states "the company with the highest score in attribute x gets bonus y", how do you handle a tie?

...and what if no one has any attribute x? Is it a tie with 0 on each side, or does no one qualify?

(this came up especially often early in the game when no one had any projects and the events called for the highest project yadda yadda)

Thread: Re: Research Multipliers

GaryP — 2008-09-11T16:39:21+00:00

Cinnibar wrote:
In short, apply the multipliers as they appear, in order.
Or in any other order, thanks to the commutative property of multiplication!

But, yes, getting back to the original question, subsequent multipliers also affect the previous value card. I also noticed that the rules do not specifically mention this. However, there is an example in the rulebook that demonstrates it.

Thread: Re: Research Multipliers

Cinnibar — 2008-09-06T17:22:48+00:00

A situation of multiple multipliers would calculate as in this example of a 40, a x2, a x3 and a x0:

[c]
+--+ +--+ +--+ +--+
|40| |x2| |x3| |x0|
+--+ +--+ +--+ +--+

=40 =80 =240! =0 [/c]

In short, apply the multipliers as they appear, in order.

Thread: Research Multipliers

dodonna — 2008-09-06T07:00:25+00:00

Played my first game of E.T.I. tonight. I enjoyed it, but I think the rest of my regular board game group was disappointed in the endgame, probably because four of them were knocked out by my meager attack and the sole survivor (who used the "Judas" card to redirect my sole attack card) won with only one project. Hopefully I can talk them into it again; I think the game is rather clever and certainly well-produced for a small press offering.

Anyway, on to the question. What happens when two or more multipliers line up during a "standard" research submission? We had a situation in which a number card was followed up by a x2, then a x0. I would assume that the result for the three cards would be zero, but I couldn't find anything in the rules to support that. Would adjacent x2 and x3 cards multiply by six?

Thread: Re: Basic Research (a trade stockpile mechanic)

SapphireWyvern — 2008-08-25T14:56:58+00:00

Yes, I had thought about the problem where stockpiles would allow lucky large surpluses to be retained. That's why in this variant, you must announce how much you intend to stockpile before you see the cards, and if you announce more than you actually get, you get smacked on the wrist by losing the points that were generated - it should discourage over-declaring.

I'll let you know how it goes next time I play.

Image

staremperor — 2008-08-24T22:10:00+00:00

Promotional button

Image

staremperor — 2008-08-24T20:57:46+00:00

Game components

Thread: Re: Basic Research (a trade stockpile mechanic)

JohnnyRyce — 2008-08-24T19:18:30+00:00

Yes, cleaning out the data bank after the successful completion of a project was a very intentional design decision for two reasons:

Reason one: It speed up gameplay. Players don't have to waste time figuring out how much 'change' they are due. They don't even have to calculate their exact research total if they clearly surpassed the project difficulty and aren't competing with anyone else.

Reason two: More importantly, it prevents players with good card draws from building up a large research surplus and 'snowballing' less successful players... a worry you expressed in your prior post. (See, we are looking out for the little guy! )

But onto your main point, there has been some talk among us and some of the players at the summer conventions about some kind of stockpiling mechanic, so it is interesting to see your ideas and opinions on this. It would be nice to see if a fair mechanic for skimming off some research for trades (or even one's own research) can be developed.

Let us know how your variant works! We'll be fooling around with some ideas and we'll try to throw them up here also. Thanks again for posting. When we get around to a reprint of ETI, it should be an even more interesting and fun game.

Thread: Re: A suggestion for future E.T.I. development - ameliorate the snowball effect a little

JohnnyRyce — 2008-08-24T05:00:40+00:00

SapphireWyvern wrote:
so many game mechanics, especially the event cards, are designed to further advantage players who are already winning. Other snowballing mechanics include the card-drawing bonus for completion of related projects and the fact that players without any projects don't even get to draw an Event card.
Thanks for the post and I can address these in reverse order!

NO PROJECT, NO EVENT: We agree! We have been test driving a new variant called 'The Quickstart' where each player starts will a level I project. This allows all players to vote and pull events immediately. We've enjoyed The Quickstart so much that it will probably become the status quo in an eventual second printing. I'll try to get this out in an ISSA Newsletter before too much more time passes by.

BONUS CARDS FOR SAME FIELD OF STUDY: This is a double-edged sword. You do gain research bonuses, but you're stuck collecting whatever upgrades and defense/fame they give. This allows less customization of your company. Plus if you focus on one field of study, there are seven other fields of study that someone else is getting bonuses for, so I'd say this one is more of a wash.

EVENT CARDS FAVOR THE WINNERS: I'm not sure I agree that most event cards favor the players 'who are already winning'. They DO often favor the player that is the BEST at something (i.e. most levels of public domain, top secret, highest fame, highest defense), but these are often not the same player. Even the number of votes a player gets is going to shift depending on the type of vote.

And remember, winning means surviving, not building up the most defense. I've seen many defensive front-runners destroyed in the alien invasion because the end up bearing the brunt of the alien attack cards. I've seen many weaker companies sneak out a victory by flying under the radar and pulling out a victory through a clever use of their endgame strategy cards.

Still, let the debate continue! And feel free to post any event card ideas that you have here... we'd love to see what you've come up with.

Thread: Re: A suggestion for future E.T.I. development - ameliorate the snowball effect a little

Cinnibar — 2008-08-24T04:21:58+00:00

The designers do respond to such comments, I've found. The existing Event cards that give projects to those with the least projects are directly from feedback from myself, at least.

Thread: Basic Research (a trade stockpile mechanic)

SapphireWyvern — 2008-08-24T03:51:41+00:00

In the games I've played, stored data is by far the most popular asset for trading or bribing. However, your databank always get completely emptied whenever you complete a project - no matter how much you overkilled it! This means that players are often bereft of this very fungible currency.

So: here is a proposed Rules Variant, "Basic Research". The idea is that companies can dedicate some portion of their effort into conducting various experiments, not directly related to the project at hand. The data that these experiments generate is not useful to the company's current research focus - but it could have far greater value in some other context, such as a competing company's project! The intention here is to create a stockpile of tradable data, with the advantage of not being purged whenever you complete your current project.

When resolving a Submit Findings action, before revealing any cards, a player may specify an amount of research points to be allocated to "Basic Research". Then reveal the cards, or do a Safe Submit, and figure out the total number of research points as normal. If the total amount of research is less than the amount of Basic Research the player specified, the player forfeits all research from that set of cards, as the lab's efficiency is ruined by the competing needs of the scientists' pet projects. When the total amount is higher, the player receives the amount they declared as "Basic Research" points (which can be shown with red tokens on the Company's Data Bank), and the rest of the research is added to the Data Bank and applied to the current project as normal.

Basic Research is never counted towards your own project's completion. In particular, research points allocated to Basic Research are not counted when determining who gets scooped when multiple players reach a project's research target on the same turn. When a project is completed, accumulated Basic Research points are not removed from the Company's Data Bank. When Basic Research is transferred to another player, it always turns into conventional research points that are applied to that player's current project as normal, and may not be kept as Basic Research.

Thread: A suggestion for future E.T.I. development - ameliorate the snowball effect a little

SapphireWyvern — 2008-08-24T03:10:22+00:00

I know you E.T.I. developers hang about here, so I thought this would be a good way to give you some feedback on the game.

I've now played this game 5 or so times, and you've already used the ISSA Newsletter to provide some variants on rules that bugged me a bit. I will certainly use the reduced invasion randomness variant next time I play.

However there is one criticism I have of the game that can't be rectified by a quick tweak of a rule: the way that so many game mechanics, especially the event cards, are designed to further advantage players who are already winning. Other snowballing mechanics include the card-drawing bonus for completion of related projects and the fact that players without any projects don't even get to draw an Event card.

Given how extensive the snowballing is, I can only assume it's a very deliberate design decision. However, it tends to mean that an unfortunate start (eg, being forced to compete on some of your first projects and losing them, plus a bad standard submit or two) can really cripple a player for the entire game, as they are never candidates for most of the beneficial events and don't have much sellable influence for the voted events. Since the game doesn't have an elimination mechanic prior to the endgame, players can be trapped in an extremely un-fun position where they are not only losing, they are falling further and further back with every turn.

So: the suggestion is, if you are contemplating an expansion pack for E.T.I., please consider creating an extra deck of Event cards that give a hand-up to the players who are suffering the most, rather than the ones who are already doing well! This kind of handicapping works extremely well for generating good fun and competition in Power Grid, and for a fairly random game like E.T.I. where a player can get hammered through no fault of their own, it would be even better.

In this hypothetical Event deck, I would also like to see more "hold to use later" Event cards, because the addition of extra tradeable assets to the game will make the voting/bribing segments much more entertaining.

Thread: Re: A American Euro Cross over.

Trump — 2008-08-16T12:32:18+00:00

I don't tend to like games that have you playing around for a few hours only to have a big slugout at the end to see who's won the game. It usually feels like the first few hours were mostly pointless. I like ETI though. First of all, you can play it fast enough that you won't feel like you've been wasting time to see who's won. Secondly, building your company up DOES matter. As already mentioned, there's a variant to reduce endgame randomness if you like, but I haven't used it yet.

If you're playing with people who are far more into mechanics than theme, then avoid this game. They'll just gripe and grummble the whole time because they'd rather be building an indigo plant. I have room for both in my life though, so ETI works for me.

Thread: Re: A American Euro Cross over.

masaakunokouchi — 2008-08-14T16:23:48+00:00

Well it is a bit random, and the company has already put out a varient for it, posted here under files. It is the second 'news letter' I think. I personally have very little problem with it as it matters how well you do during the game.
You basically have it right, play x cards were x is a number of cards based on the length of the game, get any bonus cards, like spending two completed projects to make 1 extra card (max one per player) and then you can either move, or flip x cards, which is equal to your former creativity rating, called Intel. This is very useful, and has the player moving cards from low defense to higher defense. With out a lot of creativity though, its not great, but every little bit helps.
After that it's just a total compare of the values of the cards vs the values of the defense, higher wins. End game strategies come into play before they are flipped most of the time.

Thread: Re: A American Euro Cross over.

TrekkerMJ — 2008-08-14T16:03:19+00:00

Nice review. One thing I'd like to hear from you about is the actual invasion action. That's one thing that's bugged me about this game. There's a lot of build up and suddenly the alien invasion comes down to random card draws. It seems a bit anti-climatic (though very tense). The alien player can throw four to five cards at a player and only come out with a 50 total attack. That makes it seem tough to win as an alien. Could you offer your experience on this side of the game?

Thread: A American Euro Cross over.

masaakunokouchi — 2008-08-14T09:03:31+00:00

This is what I would call a crossing the line Ameri-Euro. It uses American Style production values of Ameri-trash style games, like plastic bits, and shinny boards, but plays kinda like a euro, expect the theme is all about aliens, and FUNNY. The games is, if you don't read descriptions of games, about cooperations doing research upon an impending alien invasion. The kicker is, that one of the cooperations is a betrayer and working with the aliens.

Components:
Plastic and sturdy shinny card boards. The cards are of decent quality, and seem to hold up well. HOWEVER!!! None of the cards are playing card size, the research are smaller, and the others are larger, making it almost impossible to card sleeve them, an annoyance. The plastic bits are nice, and represent lights lighting up on a control board. And the player mats are of thick, glossy finish plastic. Everything else is good quality.

A- (cards, and just not perfect mind you!)

Rules:
A big bite here, they are unclear, and many times you have to deduce the results of rules. It only took us one real play, but I think we got it all right. We had some problems the first play. There is a handy dandy flow chart, but it's not perfect either. Over all, a little bit more thought could of gone into the righting of the rules... HOWEVER, the fluff is amazing. FUNNY FUNNY STUFF... just reading the cards is a vital part of the game, even if it has very little bearing on play.

B (clarity needed, but funny stuff!)

Game play:
Well the first thing to note, is that this game has many variable settings. The game length is variable, and so is the power of the person playing the aliens. Once these are set, players take one random end game strategy card for each player - 1, and add the correct level alien card. Mixing them all up, they secretly hand them out to each player. Each player is allowed to look at theirs, and not allowed to reveal it to others. (if they did it would be too easy to figure out the alien!) Each end game strategy gives some kind of bonus at the end. The alien one simply tells you that your the alien, and what bonus you get, (the easiest alien gets nothing).
Once that's all sorted, players set up their cooperations. There are 4 traits of each corporation. As follows:

Staffing: This is raw research power, the higher, the more research cards one gets to draw when conducting research. 3-8 or so.

Creativity: Once you submit your research, this allows you to do some swaping, moving bad things out of the way, and good things into position. (More on this later) 0-8 or so.

Security: goes up slowly, and only too 4, but each level protects you from 1 type of sabotage, all are equal, so its just fluff which one you pick.

Analyze: The ability to peak at your research cards. 0-14.

Each player, gets 1 point in each (which gives them 0 in everything expect staffing, which gives them 3) and gets 3 points to spread how they like.

Once set, some one is the ISN president, who decides ties, and is 'first' player, which matters little. Every turn this is passed to the left, and if that player has completed at least one project, then they will draw an event card at the start of their turn. These even cards can do all sorts of things, like increasing a sat, or even giving projects away. Sometimes it is up to the president to decide (if so, they can never choose themselves) or a vote of some sort, based on a stat specified on the card.

Then each player decides there action for the turn, secretly by playing one of this three action cards face down. THIS is SIMPLE because there are only 3 actions:

(A quick note on the research cards: they are valued 10-50, with equal portions of the 4 types of sabotage, 0x, 2x, 3x)

Conduct Research: draw research cards equal to staffing value, and place them around your board, in order, with out looking at them. You top out at 14 cards, any extra are wasted.

Switch Projects: Remove your cooperations marker from your current project. Any research cards you have spent, are immediately banked at a value of 10 per, with out looking at them. So if you had 6 cards already ready, you would get 60 points banked.

Submit findings: In player order, the players who submitted findings have two options:
SAFE: Gain 10 points for each card towards the project
NORMAL: Flip all cards in order, then if you have any creativity you can swap cards in the order. Once done, value the cards: Heres were it gets interesting; You have sabotage cards that go off first. They take out the biggest research card that follows them, if you have security and have choosen that sabotage then you ignore that card. Then apply all multipliers, to the closet number behind them. This can add up if you have multiple in a row, after a big number like 40 or 50, of course a single x0 ruins it!. Add up all cards and this is your total.

In either case, if your total value of your cards + any research in your data bank => the difficulty of the project you are working on you completed it. If two or more are working on the same one and submitted on the same turn the person with more total data gets it. Ties, well you should know. If you fail, you bank your data, and can continue next turn.

A little bit about the projects, considering these are the focus of the game. There are 5 levels. There are always projects available to be researched equal to the number of players - 1. This ensures competition for at least one project. Once a player completes a project, they can choose to start a new project of equal or lesser value, or one 1 level higher then the highest project they have completed.

Each project has several parts: The name and type. The type is important, as if you work on a project that you already have completed a type for in your vault, you get a +1 card draw bonus, while working on that project. So if you already finished a physics project, all future projects give you a +1 card draw for researching, BONUS!
A project also has a defense and fame value. Defense is what you need to fend of the aliens, and fame is for if you survive the alien attack. When you complete a project, you can place it in either your Private or Public Vault. Private gives you +5 to it's defense value, public +10 fame. Some events allow you to shift (to public) for some sort of bonus.
A project will often also (but not always) give you a point in stat. Not all points actually increase your ability, like it takes 2 points to go up from the first 4 staffing to 5. Some increase you a lot, like analyze goes up like 2 a point. Some (IV-V level projects) give you 2-3 points in varied or the same category. So completing projects helps you complete more!
The difficulty of a project ranges from 90-500, depending on the level. Going after 500 difficulty, often requires 2 or so attempts, of 10 or more cards, but sometimes you can get lucky. I've only seen one level 5 project in 6 games, and it was not completed.

Players who were working on a project completed by another player get hosed. They turn their cards in for 10 a piece, and can not store more than 100 points, any excess is LOST! This is different from intentionally switching were all research is kept, at the value of 10 per card, and any bank. So switch, when you know your going to loose!

The game ends when at the beginning of a turn, the alien reveals themselves, he can only do so when a predetermined (based on desired length) of projects are completed, and must do so when that threshold is reached at a higher level. The game then becomes locked, with the alien player sitting out for a couple of rounds. New projects are not revealed, and players have a limited time to finish. This goes rather fast as players quickly complete the last projects. Any projects not completed are given to the alien!

The invasion is simple, the alien takes all the research deck cards, and shuffles them all together. He places cards onto other players face down, based on the length of the game. He then can do a bit of re-arranging, and spending two of his completed projects on placing extra cards down, 1 per pair. It is encouraged to describe the weapon based upon the pairing of cards that are played. One note, the better the alien player does as a cooperation the better his invasion will be! He then flips up the cards, and compares them to the players defense totals. Any end game strategy cards can be played to do all sorts of things. If a corporation does not have enough defense, then it is destroyed, and if all humans are destroyed, ALIENS WIN!, if not the surviving human with the most fame wins. Of course, if only one survives they natural win. This is tense moment, and can come down to the wire.

B+

Overall:

The game is good. Down time is minimal, as all actions are simul, and turns can go fast, just draw an event, choose your actions, and go. Since actions are simple, there is very little time spent thinking to hard, but hard decisions are still made. They can be made quickly how ever, and some times you just have to go for it. Its a game of risk management.
Also its a bit of deduction. As the events allow some choice and voting, figuring out who the alien is allows you to keep from giving them any bonuses! Also you know who to fight for a project, if you have a choice (the alien of course!) Hints are like, how they vote (always for themselves, no diplomacy) and whether, when completing a project, they up the level of the replacement project they choose. An alien wants them all to be low level, because that keeps the defense level down. Humans want to go after bigger projects, while they are harder to complete, the game length is determined by the number of projects, not their size, so if all the humans up the projects, then they will get better return on their total projects (it just takes a little longer to play out!)
The game plays fast, with a 4 player medium length game of barely experienced players takes about 45 mins - 1 hour. Simple but important choices, fun results, and FUNNY cards, make for a great filler game.

Over all grade: B+ (not to hardcore, but really fun)

Thread: Re: Reassessment

Cinnibar — 2008-08-02T07:47:01+00:00

Put down your choice of agenda.

Note: this is Agenda, not End Game Strategy.

Image

unittype — 2008-07-28T00:45:35+00:00

The paper components. If you are used to the european standard you will find that these tiles feel different as they are sort of laminated and shiny.

Image

unittype — 2008-07-28T00:43:52+00:00

The alien board which is used while the invasion takes place.

Image

unittype — 2008-07-28T00:40:55+00:00

All components coming with this game.

Image

unittype — 2008-07-28T00:34:20+00:00

The box as it comes, fresh from the States. Delivering to Germany took about 2 weeks and paying some duty for ot while visiting the customs.

Thread: Re: so little buzz!

JohnnyRyce — 2008-07-10T18:45:08+00:00

Veles wrote:
I can't find it in any UK shops, it really interests me but I can't find it on any of the big UK online shops that stock games like this

If you can't find it in any of the online shops, we do offer $10 international shipping if you order straight from our web-site. (www.eyelevelentertainment.com) Hope you get a chance to try it one way or the other...

Thread: Re: so little buzz!

Veles — 2008-07-10T10:32:30+00:00

I can't find it in any UK shops, it really interests me but I can't find it on any of the big UK online shops that stock games like this

Thread: Re: Taming The Endgame!

JohnnyRyce — 2008-06-23T04:29:54+00:00

We're glad you like the look of it. I think it will go a long way to quenching the thirst of those who wanted a little less luck in the endgame. Let us know what you think when you get a chance to try it.

Thread: Re: Taming The Endgame!

Zeromus — 2008-06-20T22:48:20+00:00

This looks like a really great variant! I particularly like how the four alien threats remain the same and are now potentially the most dangerous attacks! I've always thought that security was the weakest trait, but I think this will help out with that a lot. I've played with my group a bunch of times now and we all like it. While I think the end is fine the one complaint I've heard is how random the endgame is. So, I'll definitely suggest this variant next time we play. =-) Thanks!

Thread: Taming The Endgame!

JohnnyRyce — 2008-06-20T21:52:44+00:00

We just wanted to let you know that the new ISSA Notebook has finally been posted here on BoardGame Geek. It contains a very simple variant to tune down the spread of the endgame for players who prefer a little less wild in the alien invasions.

Try it out and let us know what you think.

If you're going to be at Origins next week, please stop by our booth. Last time I checked we were 1020, I think. Brisk sales have already moved about half of the first print run, but stop by our booth and I'll cut you a good deal on one of the remaining copies (or Nature of the Beast... that's a good game too!).

Thread: Brace yourself for the galactic probe, human swine!

Norbert Chan — 2008-06-16T00:48:40+00:00

Greg had bought a bunch of games, including Estimated Time to Invasion. In this 3-6 player game, there is one secret alien player, and everyone else is human. Each player has a mat, which keeps track of four attributes: 1) Staffing: this is the number of data cards a player can draw to conduct research. Each player starts with a default draw ability of 3 cards. 2) Creativity: this is the number of swaps a player may make when submitting their research, 3) Security: the amount of immunity to alien threats (there are 4 possible threats), and 4) Analysis: this is the depth of cards a player can look at on their player mat.

The mat has 14 notches, for cards. An "ISSA President" card is used to denote the start player in a round. A number of projects, level I to V (the game begins with level I projects) are up for competition. Players choose they project they wish to try to complete. Projects have a number associated with them to complete such as 90 or 140 for level I projects. Completed projects grant the player a defence number, fame number and/or improved attributes.

Each player chooses from one of three actions: 1) Conduct research, which is draw face down from the data deck, a number of cards equal to their staffing level. The data deck has cards ranging from values 0 to 50, multipliers X0, X1, X2, X3, and alien threats. 2) Submit Findings: when the player feels they have enough cards, this action allows them to flip over all their cards, sum their values, and see if it matches or exceeds the number on the current project they are attempting to complete. Alternatively, a player can simply not reveal the cards and get 10 pts per card. Cards are summed from the first notch position. Multipliers only work on the card on the prior notch. Alien threats remove the largest valued card after it. Players with creativity attributes can do swaps, and players with security attributes may be immune to the alien threats. If a player does not have enough for the project, the running total is put into a bank for use in the next project, 3) Switch projects: a player can give up on one project and try another, subject to some minor penalties.

When a player has at least a level I project completed, when they are the ISSA president, they draw an event card which generally grants bonuses to a player (gain attributes or gain projects). Players vote with their project levels to see which player gets the bonus.

After a total number of projects has been completed, the alien can reveal themselves. (No, not undress themselves, but declare they are the alien, and make some reptile noises.) The alien player then trades in their player mat for an alien mat, which has attributes for "brutality", and so forth. Essentially what happens is that the alien player will attack each human player by drawing a number of data cards (in a standard game, it is 3 cards). Players then add whatever modifiers they have, and if the alien attack number exceeds the player defence, the human is defeated. If all humans are defeated, the alien wins. If there are a number of surviving humans, which ever human has the most fame is the winner.

In our game (Greg, Jean and myself), the standard game, and the alien has no special abilities, I drew a human card, "The Hero", which lets me switch an attack card from the alien to one player , to me, and if I survive it, I get an extra 30 fame. I saw Greg read over his card, so I suspected he was the other human.

Greg was going first, there were two level I projects up, a 90 and a 140. Greg chose the easy one, Jean chose the harder one, and I decided to compete with Jean. I decided to put my 3 starting attribute markers on creativity, security and analysis. In retrospect, this game runs on volume of cards, so I probably should have chosen staffing. We all conducted research, and since I had analysis, I saw my first two cards were X0 and X2, which meant they were useless in those positions. So I decided to conduct research one more time to get 6 cards, and then submitted findings for 60 pts. Greg made 90 pts for the first project, while Jean also made the desired 140 pts. So they were both ahead of me in projects now.

They then drew event cards, and since the ISSA president broke ties, Jean got some more special attributes, and was completeing more projects quicker. In fact, he was at 4 projects before I got my first one. Since I didn't have a vote, I was watching Jean pull ahead. Soon, Jean had 5 votes to Greg's 2 votes and my 0 votes. So the only thing left to do was to play out the string, and see how the alien attack worked. I did complete a level II project, and was starting another level II, when our combined total was 9 projects. Jean, to no one's surprise declared he was the alien. I managed to finish another level II project, one had a defence level of 30 and the other had a defence level of 20, and both were in my top secret vault (which gives an additional 10 bonus for each project).

Jean, the alien, had 6 completed projects (to three for Greg and two for myself). In the standard game, he attacked us with 3 data cards each. But his ability allowed him to manipulate cards, so he put 2 attack cards on Greg (since his defence was 40), and he put 4 attach cards on me (my defence was 70). Since every 2 completed projects allows the alien to add a maximum of one card. So I looked at my "Hero" card, and said no thanks, I asked what my options were with the card, and I could potentially play kingmaker by switching an attack card from Greg to myself. So I swallowed the card. Greg then revealed the "Judas" card! He could switch an attack card from himself to another player! So now the alien had 6 attack cards on me, and two attack cards on Greg.

We flipped Greg's cards first, a 20 and 20. Greg's defence was 40. But wait, Jean had a brutality of 10, so his attack total was 50, so Greg died.

We then flipped the alien's attack cards on me: a threat (counts for 25 pts), a multiplier (counts for 10 pts), a 50, 40, 30, 20, summing to around 180 or so. My defence was 70. Jean's attack was like clubbing a dead fly with a baseball bat. At least he was quick and merciful, like the episode in which the Gorn promised Captain Kirk to be exactly like that. Jean ever the alien said, it felt good to kill me a few times over.

As you can see, there was a ton of luck in the game. It didn't help that Jean ran away with the game, and neither Greg or I could stop him. If Jean was a human, he would have won easilty. If I was an alien, Jean still would have won. Greg mentioned the game probably plays better with more than 3 players. I would be willing to try again with more players. I see there is a variant to lower the variability of the alien's attack cards, so that may make it better.

Thread: Re: E.T.I. - Session Report

JohnnyRyce — 2008-06-14T00:16:47+00:00

Thanks to Greg for the review of ETI.

As fate would have it, our latest ISSA Notebook deals with reducing the spread of possible attack card values in the endgame. It is a very simple variant and should make people more happy if they want a less wild endgame.

It should be available here soon, but in the meantime feel free to download it directly from our website.

http://www.eyelevelentertainment.com/etidownloads.htm

See you at Origins and GenCon!

Thread: E.T.I. - Session Report

gschloesser — 2008-06-05T19:46:53+00:00

NOTE: My full review of E.T.I. will appear in the Fall issue of Counter magazine. What follows is an abbreviated version.

The year is 1965, and the International Space Security Agency has detected a hostile alien presence that has targeted earth for invasion. Worse, irrefutable evidence has been assembled proving the aliens have already gained a foothold on earth, and seem to be infiltrating the companies that have been charged with the task of developing weapons and technology to repel the impending invasion.

The companies charged with the task of developing technology that can thwart the impending invasion work feverishly to achieve results. Research is conducted on a variety of technologies, increasing in sophistication as time passes.

One would think that at a time of unimaginable crisis, capitalism and profit motives would be set aside, and companies would work together to save the planet. Sadly, this is not the case. Each company is out to garner their own fame, which they hope will lead to more contracts and greater financial rewards once the invasion is repelled; IF the invasion is repelled. All of this fame and potential fortune won’t be worth a dime if the company does not survive the invasion. Thus, they must balance their research and technological achievements between defense and fame. It is a delicate balance.

Suddenly, and to the horror of everyone, the news breaks: one of the companies charged with the defense of the planet is revealed to be a pawn of the aliens. Their research is turned against humanity, and carefully laid plans are now in jeopardy. The aliens attack, targeting each company with ferocious firepower. Will the defenses be enough? Will the companies survive? Will earth?

That is the storyline of E.T.I. – Estimated Time To Invasion – a clever new game from Eye-Level Entertainment, the folks who brought us Nature of the Beast. This time, the Anticole boys – Matt, Mark and Anthony – have tackled warfare of a different kind: alien invasion. However, unlike most space warfare games, the emphasis here is on the preparation for the battle, with the battle itself being very brief and only occurring at the end of the game.

There is a lot to like in E.T.I. First and foremost, the game is highly original. The game is well themed, and is radically different than most space or alien themed games. There is great atmosphere, from the details on the projects to the technological advancements on the player boards. The method of tallying research points is also quite clever and original, and the luck in this aspect is somewhat mitigated by the ability to peak at cards and swap their positions. Of course, players must properly plan in order to increase their control.

Sadly, there are also elements I don’t particularly care for. Actions seem too limited. On a player’s turn, he has three options, of which two are used the vast majority of the time. These two actions simply involve being dealt cards (research) or revealing cards (submit findings). There aren’t a whole lot of choices here, and the options available to players are simply too constrained. The game needs to offer players a greater array of possible actions and choices.

Where the game completely falls apart is in the endgame. The alien attack is one of pure luck. By randomly dealing research cards in front of each player, it is quite possible that one player may get all low-valued cards, while another player is blasted with a bevy of high-valued cards. Indeed, this has occurred in every game I’ve played. The presence of virus cards simply increases this massive dose of luck. So, after playing the game for 1 ½ hours or so, victory is ultimately determined by who gets lucky with the final attack cards. Get lucky and you survive. Get some high valued cards, and you are destroyed. There really isn’t anything one can do to alter this situation, and that is truly a shame. Indeed, this endgame situation has been disdained by just about everyone with whom I’ve played, and has caused the game to receive mediocre to poor ratings. Many players have confessed to enjoying the game up until the end, which soured them on ever playing it again.

I’m not one who usually tinkers with a game’s design in an attempt to improve or adapt it to my tastes. This one might be the exception, however, as I truly do enjoy most of the game. It is refreshingly different, and has great atmosphere. If a satisfactory ending to the game that gives players a bit more control could be devised, it may well salvage the game from the trade pile. With so many other games to play, however, I’m not sure it is worth the time and effort.

Alison, Mark Sliwoski, Ryan, Rhonda and I led the mega-corporations in our frantic efforts to acquire the necessary technology to thwart the impending alien invasion. Competition was fierce, but we managed only to get to the 4th level of technology. I concentrated on defense, placing most of my acquired projects in my Top Secret vault. Others were more concerned with fame.

Accusations as to who was in league with the aliens flew throughout the game. I was a prime suspect, but ultimately, it was the lovely Rhonda who had cast her fate with the invading beasts. Once this was revealed, for the remainder of the game she was forced to wear a hideous, multi-tentacle octopus hat that looked suspiciously like an alien.

When the attack fell upon us, the cards were dealt and then revealed. Alison, whose defense value was a measly 70, was destroyed with the brute attack force of 110. Ryan was stronger, having amassed a defense strength of 95. The attack against him, however, was a smidgen stronger – 100. He, too, was annihilated. Mark had a lower defense – 80 – but the attack against him was weak, only a 40. So, Mark survived, and had remaining fame of 40. If I was defeated, Mark would save humanity and be the hero. Alas, my defenses were a formidable 145, and the alien assault against me was only 50. I, too, survived, and my accumulated fame was worth 60. So, while Mark and I both helped save the earth, I was recognized as the true savior.

Ratings: Mark 7, Rhonda 6.5, Ryan 6.5, Greg 6, Alison 5.5

Thread: Re: Evaluating research, being scooped, and switching projects

JohnnyRyce — 2008-05-30T01:33:56+00:00

Chris__M wrote:
I originally misread the rules to mean that switching projects to an unrelated field of study reduced research by 50% - which made it very similar to being scooped anyway, and left us thinking that switch projects only had marginal use. I realize now that it is reduced to 50% of the new project's difficulty and that this is not a problem if you are moving to a high-value project.
Right, the only penalty from switching is that you must limit the amount of data you have on the new project to no more than half of its difficulty (and that is waived if it is in the same field of study).

And it is a great strategy to switch to higher value projects since more data can be transfered, especially in the same field of study.

Chris__M wrote:
Another thing we were not 100% sure of was whether you *had* to use the safe method when being scooped. We played as if you did, and rereading the rules, it looks like I had it right - this also appears to be the case when switching projects.
If you get scooped while conducting research, you safely bank your research before picking a new project. If you get scooped while submitting, you can choose either method.

When you switch projects, you safely bank research, but there is no 50% data loss penalty. (We are going to run under the assumption you are using the revised scoop rules posted in the ISSA Notebook).

Chris__M wrote:
1) If you use "Submit Findings" and complete the project, your research and data bank are reduced to zero, even if they exceed the difficulty requirement.
Right. No matter how much extra you had, you start off at zero after you complete a project.

Chris__M wrote:
2) If you use "Submit Findings" and do not complete the project, you get to bank 100% of your research, however it was calculated.
Right, as long as you weren't scooped.

Chris__M wrote:
3) If you use "Submit Findings", but are scooped in the same turn, you bank your research, however it was calculated, but then reduce your databank (including the new research) by 50%.
Right. (Again using the revised rules.)

Chris__M wrote:
) If you use "Switch Projects" and the new project is in the same field of study as the old project, you must bank your research using the "safe method (10 points per card), but you get to keep 100% your research.
Right. Very powerful option.

Chris__M wrote:
5) If you use "Switch Projects" and the new project is not in the same field of study as the old project, you must bank your research using the safe method, but your data bank cannot exceed 50% of the difficulty of the new project - it is reduced to this figure.
Right.

Chris__M wrote:
6) If you use "Conduct Research", but are scooped, you bank your research using the "safe" method, but then reduce your databank by 50%.
Right.

Thanks for asking the questions. As I've noted before, we will be combing over these forums to see what questions people have about ETI. We plan to make a version 2.0 edition of the rules available before the end of June. So keep your concerns coming. Glad you like the game.

Thread: Evaluating research, being scooped, and switching projects

Chris__M — 2008-05-29T11:31:24+00:00

As I mentioned elsewhere, we played a three player standard game on Tuesday, and everyone enjoyed the game. Our only query was regarding the value of research when being scooped and switching projects.

Part of this was my fault, as I originally misread the rules to mean that switching projects to an unrelated field of study reduced research by 50% - which made it very similar to being scooped anyway, and left us thinking that switch projects only had marginal use. I realise now that it is reduced to 50% of the new project's difficulty and that this is not a problem if you are moving to a high-value project.

Another thing we were not 100% sure of was whether you *had* to use the safe method when being scooped. We played as if you did, and rereading the rules, it looks like I had it right - this also appears to be the case when switching projects.

I think I have it right in my mind now, but before I post a clarification to my game-group's website, can I check that I am correct with you guys? Note we are using the new way to get scooped.

1) If you use "Submit Findings" and complete the project, your research and data bank are reduced to zero, even if they exceed the difficulty requirement.

2) If you use "Submit Findings" and do not complete the project, you get to bank 100% of your research, however it was calculated.

3) If you use "Submit Findings", but are scooped in the same turn, you bank your research, however it was calculated, but then reduce your databank (including the new research) by 50%.

4) If you use "Switch Projects" and the new project is in the same field of study as the old project, you must bank your research using the "safe method (10 points per card), but you get to keep 100% your research.

5) If you use "Switch Projects" and the new project is not in the same field of study as the old project, you must bank your research using the safe method, but your data bank cannot exceed 50% of the difficulty of the new project - it is reduced to this figure.

6) If you use "Conduct Research", but are scooped, you bank your research using the "safe" method, but then reduce your databank by 50%.

Any comments/corrections appreciated.

Thread: Re: Projects gained by event cards

Chris__M — 2008-05-27T22:48:11+00:00

Thanks.

We played this for the first time tonight, and found it made a good pub game (in a pub that had nice big tables!) There was only 3 of us, so we decided to play a standard length game, as a 6 project game would be over in a blink (we thought).

We welcomed our new alien masters, of course, who conquered us easily. There was some less than optimal play - particularly on my part - but everyone enjoyed the game, and we looked at it as a learning exercise for when we got more players involved.

Thread: Re: Projects gained by event cards

Cinnibar — 2008-05-27T18:00:30+00:00

Yes, it does count against the threshold.

"O Mighty Gh'romweedler, the humans have discovered plastic aluminum!"
"What?!!!! They were years away from that!"
"I abase myself, your hydaxillian wassan! We could not predict this breakthrough."
"Never mind, you lowly throndypew! Invade now! Invade! Invade!
INVADE!"

Ready or not, here they come.

Thread: Projects gained by event cards

Chris__M — 2008-05-27T13:49:35+00:00

Some event cards cause a brand new project to be taken and awarded to one of the players, without the need for it to be researched.

Do these projects also count against the project threshold? I think they probably do, but wasn't completely sure from my reading of the rules.

Thread: Re: Obsessed Board Gamers Episode 18: Video Introduction and Review of Estimated Time to Invasion

PimpMC — 2008-05-20T14:55:11+00:00

Huh, the game designers sent me an email telling me how happy they were with the video and correctly one rule, but it wasn't that one. Evidently the bonus cards when you are working on a project that you already have some completed projects in... is not based on the little icons, but instead the name of the projects. I did not realize that.

I'll email them and verify that I have the other rules correct and change it if necessary.

Thanks,
Colin

Thread: Re: Obsessed Board Gamers Episode 18: Video Introduction and Review of Estimated Time to Invasion

Chris__M — 2008-05-19T09:01:23+00:00

Fortunately, I don't think it would be too difficult to correct with an audio dub at that point.

I didn't think the game was too difficult to understand - having said that, I haven't tried to teach it yet!

Thread: Re: Obsessed Board Gamers Episode 18: Video Introduction and Review of Estimated Time to Invasion

JadedGamer — 2008-05-18T21:35:00+00:00

Chris__M wrote:
However, I think you got a rule wrong, when discussing the Alien Threat cards
Well, that only proves his point about the game being hard to teach: He had problems even teaching himself...

Thread: Re: Obsessed Board Gamers Episode 18: Video Introduction and Review of Estimated Time to Invasion

Chris__M — 2008-05-18T18:18:19+00:00

I've only recently got this game myself, and have not yet played it. However, I think you got a rule wrong, when discussing the Alien Threat cards (06:30 approx).

You say that when you get a "bad card", you "take every card after that and discard them".

My copy of the rules say that you only discard the highest value card following the Alien Threat card.

So in the initial scenario, with the Data Virus card being the last but one card, before the 50, the result would have been the same - you would lose the 50. However, in the second scenario you described - "if the Data Virus had been my second card, I would have basically lost all this time I had spent researching" - you would have lost only the 50 card, again.

Thread: Re: Obsessed Board Gamers Episode 18: Video Introduction and Review of Estimated Time to Invasion

Yokiboy — 2008-05-17T00:57:36+00:00

The game seems a bit too fiddly for my taste, and I don't see a chance of getting this on the table much. However, I enjoyed the review as always.

Keep 'em coming!

Thread: Obsessed Board Gamers Episode 18: Video Introduction and Review of Estimated Time to Invasion

PimpMC — 2008-05-16T15:31:12+00:00

This video is our introduction and review of Estimated Time to Invasion.

To date, this is my favorite video that we have done. I was initially concerned about the "how to play" section, but it came out great and we were able to have some significant fun with.

Higher Quality (download):
http://m.podshow.com/media/15871/episodes/112587/obsessedboa...
Lower Quality (streaming): http://www.mevio.com/shows/?mode=detail&episode_id=112587

or, as always, you can find us on iTunes.

Enjoy and let us know what you think!

Thread: Re: bonus staffing improvements from technologies...

EyeLevel — 2008-05-13T04:14:11+00:00

Thanks to YOU for playing ETI!

Thread: Re: bonus staffing improvements from technologies...

yegods — 2008-05-12T07:58:13+00:00

thanks for the clarifications

Thread: Re: bonus staffing improvements from technologies...

EyeLevel — 2008-05-09T21:59:34+00:00

If you have the Project, you get the Facility Upgrades associated with it no matter how you came about it (research, trade, event, or bribe).

Be advised, though! If you ever remove a Project from your Facility (usually to give it to another player in a trade/bribe/event), you lose any Upgrades that were associated with it as well! Keep your fellow I.S.S.A. members honest!

Thread: bonus staffing improvements from technologies...

yegods — 2008-05-09T17:32:13+00:00

some technologies give improvements to your staffing and other traits. do you only receive these improvements when you've actually researched the technology, or any time you receive a technology. for instance, if you receive a free technology from an event or trade, do you get the bonus improvements?

Thread: Re: Events question

JohnnyRyce — 2008-05-07T02:24:18+00:00

SapphireWyvern wrote:
I played this game last weekend and had a ball....I'm planning to buy it, and have already given the game a "9" ranking IIRC.
Thank you!

SapphireWyvern wrote:
I'm interested that that card's tradable; when we came across it, the lack of any wording about keeping it to use later meant that we concluded it automatically took effect that turn and there wasn't really any "shenanigan" potential. If all such cards are supposed to be stockpilable & tradable resources, that could use clarification in the manual.
The rules do mention that held event cards can be used in bartering, but we certainly plan to clarify this in the second edition rules. There are only four cards that aren't played immediately... "Hired Guns, "The Hot Hand", "Flash of Insight" and Reassessment". These can be stockpiled (though "Flash of Insight" and "The Hot Hand" are played automatically in the future should their situations arise) and traded.

SapphireWyvern wrote:
When the ISSA Pres picks up an event that states "the company with the highest score in attribute x gets bonus y", how do you handle a tie? A brief flick through the rules by the game's owner didn't turn anything up but it's entirely likely we missed something. We just quickly houseruled that in such a situation, the ISSA Pres chooses the recipient from amongst the tied candidates (with suitable opportunities for blandishments, of course!). That rule worked pretty well for us, but is there an official rule that we missed?
You are right. On the bottom of page 4, the rules states that the president breaks ALL ties. So if there was a situation that two or more companies qualify for the same event, then the president gets to choose. This means, of course, that companies can try to persuade the president their way.

Hope you keep enjoying it. Keep those clarification questions coming.

Thread: Re: Events question

SapphireWyvern — 2008-05-06T12:47:07+00:00

I played this game last weekend and had a ball. Since I'm a huge fan of X-Com, the theme really hit the spot - although in my head, it runs modern day/near future rather than starting in the '60s . I'm planning to buy it, and have already given the game a "9" ranking IIRC.

I'm interested that that card's tradable; when we came across it, the lack of any wording about keeping it to use later meant that we concluded it automatically took effect that turn and there wasn't really any "shenanigan" potential. If all such cards are supposed to be stockpilable & tradable resources, that could use clarification in the manual.

Anyway, I have a question. When the ISSA Pres picks up an event that states "the company with the highest score in attribute x gets bonus y", how do you handle a tie? A brief flick through the rules by the game's owner didn't turn anything up but it's entirely likely we missed something. We just quickly houseruled that in such a situation, the ISSA Pres chooses the recipient from amongst the tied candidates (with suitable opportunities for blandishments, of course!). That rule worked pretty well for us, but is there an official rule that we missed?

Thread: Re: Simultaneous Submits...

JohnnyRyce — 2008-05-03T01:14:50+00:00

Zeromus wrote:
If two players on the same project both submit findings at the same time, what is the ordering? I assume the player closest to the president must declare safe or standard method first. But, can the other player wait until the first player has calculated their total before deciding, or do they both have to decide before calculating? Thanks!
This is not something that is addressed in the first version of the rulebook. Officially, the declaration of safe or standard would start with the president and work around the table. Then all players can simultaneously determine their research totals.

So if you really want to, you can wait to see how players choose to submit their research, but you cannot wait to see how successful they were.

Thanks for asking. We hope to have an edited version of the rules up on the website by the end of June. If you run into any other questions or concerns, please let us know.

Mark

Thread: Simultaneous Submits...

Zeromus — 2008-05-02T23:01:17+00:00

If two players on the same project both submit findings at the same time, what is the ordering? I assume the player closest to the president must declare safe or standard method first. But, can the other player wait until the first player has calculated their total before deciding, or do they both have to decide before calculating? Thanks!

Thread: Re: Things the Alien should know their first time out?

EyeLevel — 2008-04-25T01:05:53+00:00

Excellent questions and excellent replies!

Neil, you can download the directions from our website (http://www.eyelevelentertainment.com/etidownloads.htm) and get jazzed up and ready to play, though Jeff gave you an excellent overview of the main ideas.

One thing I would add is that any Projects that are in the 'research pool' but are still unclaimed when the enemy fleet arrives on Earth are automatically claimed by the Alien Co-conspirator as well. This is a nice little bonus and gives the Human players extra reason to work together at the end to try and clear as many projects as possible. For this reason, I would not underestimate the value of a high ETI (Staffing) value for an Alien. The less time you give for the pitiful humans to scramble and claim projects, the more you get!

I played the other weekend and the Alien Co-conspirator (who happened to be my brother Tony) managed to max out his ETI and Brutality traits and just pounded us into dust. We had almost no time to rally and Tony walked away with a nice bounty of extra projects on the eve of mankind's destruction.

Security/Tactics is a gamble for the Alien Co-Conspirator. You could end the battle with no advantage, but when the cards fall your way, your attack strength is significantly increased - usually in a manner that is impossible for the puny humans to counter.

Thanks again to Jeff for some really good advice. We may have to come up with an ISSA Notebook focusing on 'Being the Alien'...

Image

Aljovin — 2008-04-13T04:40:21+00:00

Each player has it's own board

Image

Aljovin — 2008-04-07T00:18:29+00:00

There will always be a struggle to get the projects!

Image

Aljovin — 2008-04-07T00:14:20+00:00

Game in progress

Image

Aljovin — 2008-04-07T00:11:57+00:00

Game in progress