The Token Distribution system was, once again, criticized. The players thought that there was no real reward behind distributing them and fighting to earn them in the first place. There was also confusion in terms of whether or not they represented currency or not.
Suggestion: "successful propaganda makes a lot of money", therefore the Soldier Tokens could be turned into a monetary currency of sorts.
The first playtest where players were unsure about the mix of collaboration and competition - this is due to the fact that they thought there was a "lack of competition element". More possibilities to strategize were needed in order to improve the game in this aspect.
Cards are quite text heavy, especially for people with dyslexia or other reading impairments. Providing a summarized version would help aid accessibility.
It needs to be clear that the Crisis Prompt cards do not influence the combinations themselves, or ensure that players understand that whoever initiated the round keeps the cards and deals with the consequences of the combination being potentially wrong. An alternative pathway is that the Crisis Prompt cards relate to the player decks.
A lexicon needs to be made in order to define historical terms and elaborate on the visuals found within the game.
Press Keep Reading to dive into the full insights, notes, transcripts and more related to this testing session!
Color separation between roles was appreciated, and so were the lanyards - made the impact of the character ID cards much more effective (“You usually just have your card like next to you, [b]ut the lanyard actually works super nice”);
Hierarchy of the text on the Crisis Prompt deck is to be improved (“In Magic the Gathering, [...] on the cards they have the important parts of the effects [...] on the top and underneath in small text they have the story. So if you can keep the stories but make them small [...] or like in italics [...] then it adds to the vibe but it doesn't distract from the game. Because I like the stories.” and “I like the stories but hierarchy wise they're just not working on the card [...] even though [they] added to the lore.”);
Crisis Prompt deck card scenario took priority over the practical instructions, which led to confusion during gameplay on whether or not the scenario is meant to be included within the creation of the poster combinations (“[...] a little story like with the library or something. I was like oh how do I make a poster that represents the struggle of the library[?]”);
Suggestion: “[...] instead of [having the instruction] on the bottom just mention it in the [scenario] text somehow, like <they cannot participate> bolded or something so [...] you know it immediately”
Suggestion: the cards can even be titled “Archive Crisis” or something in a similar vein, to make this aspect of the research behind the game more obvious to the players.
Some of the Crisis Prompt deck cards were more appreciated than others and the Disruption cards can be more integrated within the deck so as to not make them too obvious (“I think the ones that are about who's starting are not that entertaining [...] I think when there are stuff like the secret ones then it's [...] a giveaway that I'm not reading anything, because when we were taking them out we would read everything.”);
Suggestion: “[the Disruption cards can be] a different color and [have] Disruption on [them] so you kind of know that it's a Disruption, because I was worried that I'm gonna read something out loud by mistake. [...] it maybe could be nice if you pick it out and you immediately see if it's just an event [...] or a disruption and then you know you have to put on your poker face [on].”
Reference: “Monopoly” Chance & Community Box cards
Suggestion: Disruption cards can dictate the entire game instead of only a singular round - “[...] so we draw a card before we start, and let's say that I [as the Designer] am working with corrupt files, so every third turn I cannot participate because my laptop is glitching or something like that” - this will contribute to emphasizing the faulty archive aspect of the research as well as to the replayability of the game.
Shorten text on cards to make them more easily digestible yet comprehensive in their intent (“There are two cards with a lot of text already in the game and then the event card also has a lot of text so I was a bit like whoa.”)
Pick a single color for the Designer’s deck of cards that does not clash with the rest of the cards or creates confusion/sways the player in a certain direction/is perceived as a hint (“the colors of your cards, the designer cards, [...] I was like oh, maybe the colors mean something then. [...] It was a bit confusing, [...] it felt like they were suggesting something. [M]aybe you can disclose it in the game rules [...] or make all of them white or yellow or colors that are not on the other cards. [...] Because for example communism is super red. But I think yellow is quite neutral propaganda wise.”)
A balance between collaborative and competitive elements was noted and appreciated by the playtesters, and noted as an element of novelty compared to other tabletop/board games (“I like the balance between collaboration and competition. [...] I haven't played games like that, I think, where you really have to work together but also there's a competition at the same time. Like, there are like Dixit kind of things. But yeah, you cannot fuck [anyone else] over unless you have the disruption which works nicely I think.”)
The Graphic Designers in the group, due to the nature of their profession/study and their nationality (Eastern-European), were already familiar with the content showcased within the cards, therefore not learning many new things (“I think there was some new info but since we are already designers we kind of know things”)
Dates on context cards seemed like an afterthought/design artifice and not an intentional hint/context piece meant to be used within the gameplay - can be improved by shifting placement of elements within the cards? (“[...] you also have the dates on [the General’s] cards. They right now, in design, seem like an afterthought, so we weren't really paying attention to them, even though when I saw them I [really] noticed them. [...] Because they were so small [...] it seemed like a context for fun or something.”)
The rulebook could include an example round explanation that could aid in players understanding the gameplay/what clues they’re supposed to look for and how they can be hidden within the cards. This would also, consequently, require providing clarity on the player roles and their impact on the game in the rulebook, not just on the ID cards (“[...] maybe you can also, in the game rules, give an example of how you would match cards [...] we were confused because in some games there is a narrator. I thought at first that one person was the narrator [...] so only one person gives the cards and the rest [have] to comply. It might also be because of the name [of the General]”).
Game starting mechanic can be more tied into the lore of the game, has to be explained in a less convoluted way and can be more engaging/fun, doubling as an ice-breaker for the players - especially useful during situations where players do not know each other (“I don't know why you chose the like youngest [for this] [...] we spent a lot of time in the booklet on that, like it was four sentences or something, which is a lot; in instructions it's usually one sentence. [...] For example, I played a mountain climbing game [...] and it was like the person who was last in the mountains [starts the game].”)
Suggestion: “[...] the person who last read propaganda starts or [...] whoever last sent a meme [...]. [This is] more dynamic than [...] who's the youngest”
The cards being indexed on the back was appreciated and made it easier for players to identify their combinations in the leaflet at the end of the game (“I really like that there are numbers on the back of the cards [...] it worked great that you don't know before, but you have a way and a very simple system to figure it out at the end and give away points. [...] I think that was really nice. I've never seen it before.”)
The Token distribution mechanic can be implemented within the gameplay instead of being left at the end, would make the game more competitive and build suspense (“I like the idea of amassing soldiers and that one coin is like a soldier. [...] I'm just thinking [that] if you do it at the end, the coins might not be that useful because you get them and then you put them back in the box.”)
Suggestion: instead of coins/tokens, there can be three sets of small soldier figurines painted in the colors respective to each player “to make it a bit more visual and you have an actual tiny army. [...] it would make it more competitive.”
Suggestion: “I wouldn't necessarily mind if [...] the points are at the end, but maybe then, if you want to spice it up a bit, you can have an equalizer around the end [where] all the points are double so you still have a fight”
Reference: “Ticket to Ride” has a similar distribution mechanic where, at the end, points are split. Useful to research?
Timed Crisis Prompt cards were really appreciated! In order to not need an external device for the timer, a suggestion was to include a small hourglass in the game as a time measure.
Instead of using the Crisis Prompt deck cards as the dividers between the card combinations, rendering them obsolete, there can be “a little 3D printed divider if you're worried that people will put them together on each other”
The term/double entendre of “Cardstacking” can/should be explained in the rulebook/introduction of the game to familiarize the players further. Upon explaining the choice of name, players immediately pointed out that this is a very interesting aspect of the game’s construction that should not be neglected.
The rulebook can also explain that you are reconstructing actual propaganda posters and not playing within a fully fictional universe. (“I was like <oh, I'm just creating a fictional propaganda poster> [...] that's super interesting, that's why I thought I didn't learn much when you asked [...]”)
Other types/eras/themes of propaganda can be included as expansion packs to the base game, in order to improve its scalability, reach and appeal
Expansion pack suggestions: memes, Ancient China, 20th Century, anarchist graffiti, Nazi symbolism over the years, etc.
Suggestion: if leaning into the inclusion of memes, do not make it very obvious within the box design/promotional material; this seems to be a deterrent to many young players due to the ephemeral and quick passing nature of memes.
Suggestion: if keeping the base game focused on 19th-20th century European propaganda, the symbols within can be “highlight[ed as] the building blocks of even modern propaganda online”
The overall design of the game can be shifted into a more generally applicable direction, that can/should fit different types of propaganda coming from different eras/ages/spaces, since it has to be a consistent design across any and all cards, regardless of whether they come from the base game or an expansion pack. (“If we're going a bit more modern, how does that match the aesthetic that you already have, which is quite like knightly and Medieval? I understand [this] in the context of your practice, but not necessarily in the context of the game”)
The game can be grounded into an overarching POV kind of narrative, where the player roles and past/current forms of propaganda are better explained and linked in a generally understandable manner. For the impact of the game to be even stronger, the game has to have an element of current relatability that will help players truly understand the impact of propaganda.
Example: “[...] most people know Pepe the Frog, but [not many] know that it's from 4Chan. [...] I would love to learn why [it’s been reappropriated as a Nazi symbol] and I'm never in a mood to google <Why is Pepe the frog Nazi?>”)
