I still remember going through those agenda cards thinking I was some sort of genius, thinking I could control the room, thinking I had all the cards. I chose a trade-related law that seemed to help everybody a little and me more (since I was playing the Hacan). I thought this was a no brainer, who wouldn’t want a law that benefits everybody?
The next 12 minutes were some of the worst minutes I’d spent playing a board game. 5 other players eviscerated my “fair” proposal and suddenly acted like I was almost guaranteed to win if this passed. The vote wasn’t even close – just me voting yes and everybody else voting no. I sat there wondering what the heck just happened.
That was probably 15 years and 70 plus games ago now, and I think I’ve finally figured out what went wrong. I was totally mis-thinking the Politics phase — I was thinking about what I wanted instead of what everyone else was afraid of. The agenda cards themselves? That’s only about 30% of what’s important. The real game happens in people’s minds, all the things they’re assuming about who’s winning and who’s going to stop them.
Nowadays, I treat the Politics phase like I used to treat quarterly financial reports at work — you need to account for everything that can happen before you can forecast anything. Before I even take a look at the agenda cards, I’m mentally categorizing where everybody is. Obviously, victory points matter, but also, where people are located on the board, the size of their fleets, what their faction abilities are, and to be honest, what kind of person they are when they lose.
For example, my friend Robert — one of the nicest people you’ll ever meet — but if you attack his home system, he’ll spend the rest of the game finding ways to ensure you don’t win, even if it costs him. Knowing that about Robert affects how I weigh every political decision when somebody’s been messing with his territory.
I’ve come to realise that there are natural alliance patterns amongst players — players who should be working together because of their game position, whether they realise it or not. Players that are behind the leader(s) by a couple of points? Those players are likely to form a natural alliance with each other against whoever is ahead of them, even if they haven’t realised that yet. It’s my job to identify those hidden alliances and lead them toward agendas that help me.
I recall a game from 2016-ish where I was playing Sol and trailing behind this Xxcha player who was sitting pretty at 8 victory points. The agenda I drew gave a victory point to whoever controlled Mecatol Rex at the end of the game. Of course, I didn’t control Mecatol and I had zero chance of taking it from the player who did. Normally, I would vote against this agenda, right?
But instead, I got everybody else to vote against the player who controlled Mecatol, framing them as the real threat. “Hey, if this passes and they control Mecatol, that’s basically the end of the game for all of us.” The agenda passed and suddenly Mr. Mecatol had five angry players plotting against him while I worked quietly towards my true victory conditions. Sometimes the best agenda isn’t the one that helps you — it’s the one that causes all the other players to fight each other.
Linda in our group has this technique that I am absolutely a fan of. She never directly threatens anybody; she simply makes these innocent-sounding observations during voting. “It’s interesting that your home system only has two infantry protecting it” or “Wow, seven action cards — you have a lot of cards in your hand right now.” She’s not saying she’s going to attack or use cards against you, but the message is very clear. I’ve seen players flip-flop on their vote based on comments like that.
Being able to set the agenda is a tremendous amount of power, but most people squander it by only thinking about their own wish list. I keep mental notes about what each player appears to want most throughout the game — specific goals they are pursuing, resources they need, threats they fear. When it’s my turn for Politics, sometimes I will choose an agenda that gives another player exactly what they want… in exchange for their support on the next agenda.
“Let me help you get that military bonus you need,” I say, “but I need you to support my next agenda blindly.” That is an extremely effective way to position yourself. People place far greater importance on getting something they desperately want than they do on preventing you from getting something similar. It is basic psychology, but it works every time.
I have what I refer to as the Golden Rule of TI politics — never attempt to pass an agenda that does not already have the support of at least half of the table. If you are trying to persuade people to vote against their self-interest, you have already lost. Identify the agenda that people should want based on their position, and then shape the specifics to your advantage.
Using trade goods as bribes is okay, but I have found that they are far more effective as leverage than as inducements. Do not offer to pay for votes — that is a sign of weakness. Instead, provide someone with trade goods prior to the vote, with the expectation that if they vote against you, that relationship will be very difficult to repair. It creates a continuous obligation rather than a one-time transaction.
Dave is probably the top player in our regular group, and he has developed a habit of never proposing an agenda that obviously favours himself without also establishing a back channel to help potential opponents. The apparent agenda may favour Dave, but he has made quiet agreements with several other players, promising future consideration, providing them with trade routes, etc. At the time of the vote, everyone who is relevant has received something from Dave personally.
Action cards greatly influence the politics of the game. I have witnessed someone negotiating favourable arrangements with three other players solely based upon the fact that they said they had a Veto card — they never even used it; they just hinted at its existence. The perceived threat of an opponent is often more influential than the actuality of the opponent’s actions.
Timing plays a significant role in politics. In early stages of the game, players tend to vote on structural changes to the game. In late stages of the game, players tend to vote on direct victory manipulation or blocking whoever is leading. I have voted on Politics in Round 5, instead of Round 6, merely because I knew people would be less paranoid about certain agendas one turn sooner.
This may seem unbelievable, but room temperature affects how people vote. We have played in Jeff’s cold basement, in my hot dining room during the summer, at the game store when their air conditioning was busted… I firmly believe that people make more vindictive, hostile votes when they are physically uncomfortable. A hot dining room means more spiteful voting and less cooperative voting. I have begun to factor this into my agenda selections.
A psychological tactic I utilize is what I refer to as playing the reluctant beneficiary. If I recognise that an agenda will significantly benefit me, I will initially oppose it. “I’m not sure this trade law is going to help the Hacan that much — I think it may actually give you guys too many resources to challenge my routes…” While I’m thinking “PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PASS THIS AMAZING LAW!” I’m pre-emptively disarming the distrust that people naturally feel when you propose something.
Even the physical act of revealing the agendas is important. If I display both agendas at the same time as opposed to one at a time, people begin making comparative decisions as opposed to individual evaluations of each agenda. If one of the agendas is clearly terrible for everyone, showing both agendas at once will often cause the “less horrible” agenda to pass, even though it would fail in isolation.
Reputation plays a large part in politics after playing with the same group for years. I have intentionally built a reputation of being trustworthy with regard to explicitly stated voting commitments — I never go back on my word. That line of honour allows people to trust me enough to make deals with me. Linda, on the other hand, has cultivated a reputation of complete unpredictability. Nobody ever knows what Linda is going to do, which makes her the swing vote that everybody wants to make friends with.
With each passing year, I become increasingly confident that Politics is where games are actually won. Battles are visually exciting and loud, but a well-executed Politics phase can completely alter the balance of power without moving a single plastic spaceship. It is purely diplomatic — it involves knowing how to read people, understanding their motivations, and setting the stage where what you want and what others want to achieve converge.
So the next time you pull out the Politics Strategy Card, don’t just look at the agendas — look at the players. Determine what they want, what scares them, and what they believe about the current game state. Identify the existing alliances and nudge them toward agendas that advance your interests.
If all else fails, there’s always Linda’s approach — make a casual comment about your War Sun production capacity while maintaining eye contact with the undecided voter. You’d be surprised at how persuasive that can be.
Meeple Power is all about celebrating the joy of board games—great stories, clever mechanics, and big laughs around the table. We cover everything from easy-to-learn gateway games to deep strategic epics, shining a light on the creativity, community, and occasional chaos that make tabletop gaming so much fun. Whether you’re rolling dice, flipping cards, or arguing house rules with friends, we’re here to keep the game night spirit alive.