Battle of Seattle Review by Michael Erwin "Battle of Seattle," by Brian Train, is an introductory game of the WTO protests in 1999. Opposing players represent the Police and various Protesters. Units may represent police/national guard platoons, groups and crowds of protesters. Turns represent several hours, and though the map includes no scale, points appear to be several blocks apart. The system is fairly straightforward. It centers on each side's "exposure," giving points for successes and penalties for failures (or unpopular actions, like using tear gas). This will determine reinforcements, victory, and reaction movement. Units move and fight with relatively conventional mechanics, but three things stand out: First, the protesters have little or no reason to attack. Second, units can move into areas without attacking. Third, the protesters gain exposure points for each point they occupy at the end of the police turn, regardless of the presence or absence of police. So, protester strategy involves moving units into high-value points (the convention center, the hotels, etc.; representing the street blockades), and hanging on; the rest are details. And police strategy involves driving protester units off the board (by dispersal, arrest, or failed morale checks), keeping protester reinforcements from entering, and not losing too many points to tear gas, overcommitment, etc. The ideas are very interesting but the play can get stereotyped. The protesters control the area (Downtown Seattle) by the end of turn one (N30 morning) and can usually maintain their presence through turn seven (D1 afternoon); on turns eight through eleven they will either continue their presence and extend a massive exposure lead (sometimes going well over a hundred points) or slowly concede more of the city and let the cops regain a few points (sometimes ending only twenty or thirty points behind). Yeah, it's unbalanced. The history is, as usually, more complicated than the game. The game highlights the strategies of the DAN and SPD but not of the other participants (notably the AFL-CIO march and the "BB" actions) and not the detailed chronology of events. For those seeking a more literal representation of history (and a more balanced game): The game exaggerates police unreadiness. The SPD had about 200 officers at the Seattle Center and 200 officers at the Convention Center. Start with 4 SPD units in each (8 total). The game understates police willingness to use tear gas. I suggest ignoring the current escalation rule, banning the police from using special munitions or emergency reinforcements on turn one, and allowing the police to do so on turns two and after. The game focuses on protester groups on day one, a mix on day two, and protester crowds on day three. This does not match the accounts I have studied. The AFL-CIO march, or breakaways thereof, fed the crowds on day one (N30). This did not happen on days two or three. I suggest changing the reinforcement rates. The protesters could get 1d6 crowds and 1d6 groups per turn on N30; 1 crowd and 1d3 groups per turn on D1-D2, and simply receive a few extra crowds for higher exposure (21-40, +1 per turn; 41-60, +2 per turn, 61-80, +3 per turn, 81-100, +4 per turn, etc.). Also, to represent the lockdowns and their moral effect, I suggest allowing the protesters to build barricades from turn one, but not allowing reinforcements to build barricades the turn they arrive. A more detailed model of protest strategy, weighing the approaches of petition (AFL-CIO), passive resistance (DAN), and property destruction ("BB") might be worthwhile, but would probably require a new game.