I have been running a game of Galactic, and after some thought, some number crunching with Excel, and making lots of mistakes in actual play, and some helpful suggestions from my players, I have some ideas on tactics for anyone who wants to GM Galactic.  These are primarily mechanics related, and don't get into the tactics involved in seeking the most interesting kinds of conflicts through the role-playing.  Those tactics are just too dependent on your knowledge of your players and what will get them excited.

For additonal info on our game, see this thread over at the Ashcan Front: http://www.ashcanfront.net/forums/comments.php?DiscussionID=62&page=1

Now, the ideas:

#1. Fortune is good: Every fortune the players gain eventually becomes hazard for you when they spend it.  You WANT them to have fortune, because you will typically gain more benefit from their spending of it then they will.  (Example: it costs three fortune to renew an edge, which will typically let them push one die back in or add a d6.  You will gain 3d6, 2d8, or 1d10 for that same expenditure.)  Never, ever act to minimize gains in player fortune.

#2. Apply just enough pressure: The best result from your perspective, regardless of who wins or loses or concedes, is almost all the dice involved in the conflict put out.  This maximizes both your own hazard and also player fortune (see #1).  It also likely means the conflict was as tense and interesting as possible.  Any time there are a large number of dice left in the conflict when it ends, the GM should consider the conflict an overall defeat, regardless of what actually happened on the aspects or in the story.  Therefore, try to put just enough pressure on the player to keep them in the conflict; too little and they will put you out too quickly, too much and you will put them out too quickly.

#3. The crew aspect takes the prize: If you have to pick between winning the crew or quest aspects, win the crew.  The long term gain of the doubt dice (and denial of trust to the player) is far superior mechanically to the adding of an additional scene to a quest.  This is especially true early in the game, and early in the life of a replacement crew member.  The crew aspect is also the only aspect you should consider conceding (unless you just have to have scene framing rights next scene), in order to deny trust dice to the player.

#4. The even split: There is a temptation to try to load most of your dice onto one side or the other of the conflict.  Resist it.  At best, the player will simply assign dice to match yours, and the conflict will proceed much as it would have if you had split evenly.  At worst, the player will pre-concede the side you have bet on heavily, a doubly bad outcome (see #2).  In general you should split your dice fairly evenly on the initial roll, and spend hazard later to heavily contest one side if you need or want to.

#5. Fight every scene: Never just "throw" a scene (spend no hazard).  The most hazard you can expect to gain strictly from dice in a conflict is 5 + doubt/2.  (Doubt/2 because half of your put out dice are liable to end up impaired).  That 5 and a bit points is, in the long run, simply insufficient to keep the game interesting.  See #2.  If you really don't want to spend any more hazard than you have to, at least spend hazard to pad out your initial pool of doubt and d6's with enough d6's to increase it to 10.  Then, play until all your dice have been put out.  You'll still gain the same fortune you would have, but hopefully make the player pay more during the process.

#6. Never push in: Note that the cost for pushing a die back in and adding a new die is the same.  However, the die that was pushed out will eventually net you a hazard point.  Therefore, it is ALWAYS better to bring a new die in than to push a die in.  The only time you should ever push a die in is if you have to concede, and then it should be the lowest die available.

#7: Which dice to buy on an aspect?:  On any given aspect, add up the total number of sides for each participant; the participant with more sides is almost always the one with the advantage, regardless of the actual number of dice.  (The pool with an advantage is the pool that would most likely win if both pools were rolled til one pool was completely depleted.)  In the case where the totals are exactly the same, the side with the higher die sizes has a slight advantage.  To maximize resistance on an aspect, buy enough die sides each round to ensure you have a die side total advantage, but pay as little as possible for those sides given the 10 dice total cap (e.g. pay 4 hazard for 2d6 instead of 4 for a d10 or 5 for 1d12). 

#8: Expect to lose: Even after all of the above, you should expect to lose far more aspects than you win as a GM, which is just fine.  It is your ATTEMPT to win that makes the game interesting, not the win itself.  When you see the writing on the wall, and know that you are going to lose, its fine to stop spending hazard on an aspect.  Play out the conflict for as long as possible to ensure the maximum hazard/fortune gains on both sides.

For anyone who has actually GM'ed Galactic, I'm interested in how these thoughts jibe with your own experience.  For anyone who is going to GM Galactic, please take and use them, or not, and tell us how they worked, or how your doing something different worked equally well, better or poorly.

Hans, that is a hell of an analysis. You guys are giving me tons of great feedback. Thanks.

I'm pretty happy that you came to conclusions 1-5, especially #2.

Curious to see how the split works out with other groups, and how much of a curve there is, how uneven can you get before they leap to concede. I commented over at the AF about consequences and making sure the game produces them. I hope that has some effect on your analysis next time you play.

6, 7 and 8 suggest the need for some tinkering, if other groups come to the same conclusions you did.

1. It should make as much sense to push as it does to add a new die.

2. The higher die types should be appealing as "big guns" when captains have a lot of weight to throw around.

3. I think it's okay for the GM to lose a greater percentage of conflicts. But maybe not as many as you have been.

Thanks again. I'll be thinking about all this stuff.

Matt wrote:
Curious to see how the split works out with other groups, and how much of a curve there is, how uneven can you get before they leap to concede. I commented over at the AF about consequences and making sure the game produces them. I hope that has some effect on your analysis next time you play.

Hi Hans:

Thanks for all this. I think I have a solution that might work.