This is a really unique idea! Every time I think I understand how everything works, I seem to come across something new to discover. Great job!
In the "Build" step, it says that you cannot have more Mills than Shareholders in Recycling. Does this just apply when you are building a new Mill, or for all future turns (i.e. if I have 2 Mills on the map, does that mean I must always keep at least 2 Shareholders in Recycling)?
Thank you so much for your feedback!
Yes, sorry, I admit I left that rule a bit vague. From my perspective, it only applied during build. At one point, I considered requiring that it apply both during build step and throughout the game, so that if you removed a shareholder from the recycling sector, you’d have to shut down a mill. But that might be too restrictive. I was thinking that the “to the Director’s Office” step which comes second in the order of Birdsong actions and means that any shareholder you want to move spends a turn giving no bonuses before you can reassign them, would be a sufficient constraint. What do you think about that?
I did notice that timing, and it creates some interesting decisions. It makes me really consider how important a "transfer" is: am I willing to sacrifice this turn to do something different next turn? I do wonder if it makes the faction a little too slow to respond to a changing board state.
E.g. At the start of my turn, I see that I'm low on warriors. I would like to recruit a bunch this turn, but I don't have any Shareholders in Security. I would need to spend this turn removing Shareholders (thus limiting what I could do right now) to then reassign them next turn and take a big recruit.
This is probably a worst-case scenario (maybe I should've been planning better!). And design shouldn't be about hand-holding the player; they should be free to make decisions (or mistakes) and learn from the consequences (e.g. don't put 3 cards in the Build slot for the Eyrie). Maybe the long-term planning is a feature of the faction instead of a bug.
At first blush, I would say that Logistics seems significantly stronger than Security or Recycling, so I can't imagine many scenarios where you would want remove a Shareholder and reduce your action pool. So maybe it just becomes a bit of a swapping between Security and Recycling? But I'd defer to any actual playtests that you've performed ;-)
