I think that some of the best games are the ones that afford many different paths to victory. Deciding on the best strategy is often equal parts blind luck and sheer cunning. In games that afford different ways to win, being able to pick a winning strategy and minimize the luck factor is one of the the fun things about gaming. I think that is why Puerto Rico is such a fun game. It is never the same game twice. The same can be said about Power Grid.
Before I get too far here, let me define a few things. In gaming, I define strategy as the over all plan of action one uses to reach a specific goal. I define tactics as the actions one implements to achieve the goal of one's strategy. For example, in table top miniature games, my strategy could be to flank my opponent and get my army into his back field. The tactics I would use to do this would be to deploy my fastest units on one side of my battle line and move them as fast as possible into his back field while using my ranged units in the center to concentrate fire where my fast units will be going.
Now that we have had a chance to get several games of Power Grid under our belts, it has risen to the top of the list of our favorite games to play. Last night I think I played my best game of Power Grid ever. It was also the first time I won! I have noticed certain play styles emerging among my game group. So there is a little local meta factor involved, but that is one of the great things about gaming. Being able to recognize the strategies of your opponents and adapt accordingly. For example, in my game last night I noticed how one of the guys likes to get into a bid war over a power plant he really does not want just to drive the price up. We went back and forth bidding when I finally passed after his last bid. He just had this "look" about him while he was bidding (in poker I think this is referred to as a "tell") and the plant did not seem to fit in with his current power plant selection. After winning that power plant, I don't think he fueled it the whole game.
So some of the strategies I have seen in Power Grid have had varying degrees of success. However, many do share a few things in common. The simplest tactic so far is kind of a no brainer: purchase the most efficient power plant you can get. This tactic has now been immortalized by Jason's statement in an email "Buy Wind!" While it is true purchasing wind power plants is often advantageous, knowing when to ditch them is equally important. While free to fuel, they usually can only power 2 to 4 cities. This is a huge advantage until you have more cities than your plants can power. So it is better to dump a wind power plant for a 2 for 6 or even a 3 for 7 (read that as fuel to city ratio). Another strategy is focusing on the hybrid power plants. By using all hybrid plants, this allows you the ability to adapt to the fuel market. Oil too expensive? I'll go with coal. Coal in short supply? I'll stock up on oil. This allows you to use the cheapest fuel available to power your cities.
One aspect of the game we explored more in our last game session was strategic use of the game map. Deciding which cities to start in and move into can be a game changing tactic. The easiest tactic here is to select cities that have the cheapest routes connected to other cities. As with using the efficient power plants, this gives you the most bang for your buck. By purchasing the cheaper routes you have more cash on hand to do other things, such as buy into more cities. However, a more meta tactic in city placement is denying your opponents cities. Buy buying into cities before your opponent can, depending on the phase of the game, you can block his access to cheap cities thereby driving up his purchase costs or even "box" him in forcing him to wait till until later in the game before he can branch out into other cities, denying him income.
I have also seen what I can term as the "burst" strategy. This involves using efficient power plants to power just enough cities as you own, which are usually very few. This allows you to maximize your income each turn. By spending the exact amount you need to get your income, you essentially are hoarding cash. Over the course of several turns a substantial cash reserve can be built up and when the game kicks into step 3, you are poised to move into several cities all at once and to purchase all the best plants to power them. This can quickly shoot you into the leader position. The catch is, since it is a late game strategy, it relies heavily on the auction step of the turn. You simply must get those power plants, and a canny opponent will get into a bid war with you to drive the price up or deny you the plant all together. If that happens, your sunk, as the game is almost over. However, with that much cash, odds are you will be able to weather this.
Cornering the resource market is another viable strategy. One way to do this is to purchase multiple power plants of a single fuel source with high fuel costs. This allows you to store the most fuel sources on each plant. Over the course of the game you buy as many fuel sources as you can store each turn, eventually owning all of your chosen fuel source. As with happened to me one game, not realizing what my opponent was doing, I was stuck with power plants that were unable to produce power because my opponent owned all the fuel needed to power them. This was a bad thing! The hybrid power plants are good for this strategy as they allow you flexibility in choosing your fuel.
Now the strategy I used and won with was one of parity. By this, I mean I tried to maintain a balance of purchasing plants, fuel and at least one city each turn. Inherently, the game makes it difficult to do everything you want to do each turn. However, the goal here is to always be able to power the exact number of cities you own. So if I purchased a new power plant I was sure to be able to fuel it and buy enough cities to reach my power capacity quota. I rarely stocked fuel and always had to pay a premium for my fuel (which meant I was always in first place, a position we deemed undesirable previously). This lead to aggressive city purchasing early on in the game, which in turn lead me to maximize my income each turn, which in turn let me always buy fuel or buy into new cities. Now, I was usually broke by the end of the build step, but I did always make a return on my investments. Picking up a free for 4 wind power plant mid game and moving into several cities each turn late game all but sealed the victory. By the time I reached my 17th city, thereby ending the game, my closest competitors were in their 14th cities.
I am sure there are more complex and in-depth strategies out there. I imagine being able to manipulate where you are on the leader board with impunity as very handy. I need to buy fuel first, bam! I need to buy a power plant first, bam! Also, I imagine being able to calculate your income/purchases two or three turns in advance as viable.
I really found playing with four people more enjoyable than playing with three. It made for a more competitive auction step and made city purchasing crucial (cities can only sustain three players max). The fuel resources was spread fairly thin early game so cash management and plant selection seemed more critical. I guess just in general the game seemed overall more competitive than in previous games. I can only imagine how playing with five people is going to be like.
While strategies and tactics are fun and cool to pull off, even the best laid plans can end in disaster when your opponent does something to upset them. And this is the fun of gaming. Player interaction and participation adds to the sense of competition and challenges us to play better. As a friend of mine once said "The point of the game is to have fun. The objective of the game is to win."
I often try to do both.
Enjoy!
-Wicked
