Disclaimer:I was an independent playtester for Pax Em and had a hand in tweaking bits and pieces of the rules towards the final product. I've worked on other Pax games, and Bios:Megafauna II as well. For my efforts I was given a free copy of the game.
Addendum:While I own and have played most of the S-M line, and all of the Pax, I feel I appreciate the history and simulation aspects while being able to honestly critique the mechanical apparatus that come with the priorities the Designer has in his games. I don't touch the political side of things, and sometimes marvel at how he and I can agree on simulation outcomes with totally different justifications.
What this is not: An in depth review of the intricacies of all of the mechanics in Pax Em. Pax games, indeed any Sierra Madre game, comes at gaming from a consistent and flavorful angle. There are plenty of deep divers who have reviewed previous Pax games and you can get enough from them to understand the overall complexity and thrust of any new Pax game. It also won't tell you what the game is about, you're on the game's BGG page, what more do you need? That said, I DO think Pax Em is a good jumping in point for many(or maybe the only toe in the water for others) for reasons I'll explain below.
What this is: A quick overview of what I think makes Pax Em stand out among the other Pax games. If you've already got a stack of Pax on your shelf, or just a shelf full of games I'm hoping this will tell you why THIS one is(or is not!) worth your cash.
From a pure 'I've played too man darn games, show me something new!' standpoint Pax Em does the dreaded Semi-Co-op outstandingly well. I generally don't like Semi-co-ops at all. They are rife with Prisoner's dilemmas, extortion, and recriminations. I've only come up with one other game that did a decent job of handling the mechanic and I do think Pax Em tops that one in handling it.
So how does it work? The first part of the game is a variable number of rounds of 'purely(heh)' co-op play. The players generally have control of how many rounds this part is, but it's not fixed per-se by the game. During this time every player has a goal based on their faction. 504
IF they cannot complete this goal they will not count points towards the endgame threshold for joint victory. This is supported neatly by the fact that the things you do to achieve those goals also get you points. You want to do them anyway, but you need to do enough of the right KIND of points-garnering things. Everyone needs to be mindful if anyone is falling behind because in general if anyone misses their goal the whole group sinks and everyone loses(boo!) BUT this isn't your usual prisoner's dilemma. The game doesn't stop at this endpoint so you can't sit back, look at the board and think 'Well poot. I'm gonna lose anyway, time to light the torches and burn this sucker down!' The second phase of the game plays just like the first(though shorter!) but there's no requirements and at the end all points are points and the faction in the lead are shepherds of the modern era, huzzah for them!
All of that you can get from the rulebook, but what isn't at first clear is the dynamic that revolutions throw into the game. Without them this would be a somewhat creative 'all hold hands until the long knives come out' two-games-in-a-game. Revolutions (mostly) cement each of the 10 spheres into a fixed position once they've succeeded. This means that over the course of that first part of the game you're collectively shrinking the margins for that eventual squabble over king of the hill. It doesn't behoove you as a player to try and Dominate someone out of the running in the early game because you need them to get over the hurdle of counter-enlightenment and have anything recognize your efforts at all. Simultaneously You need to be mindful and positioning yourself to take advantage of the shrinking opportunities left once the race for the glory can begin in earnest. All of this sits atop an interconnected series of actions, requirements, and supports that offer lots of room to explore and vie for position.
For the Euro Gamer looking at Pax: There's points! Previous Pax games generally had narrow Teetering win conditions full of opportunism and swings. These rock for political intrigue and infighting games, but I've had more than one euro friend(and myself now and then) go 'ugh, what just happened? That's it? It's over?' We're used to our happy ever increasing barometers of success. Pax Em replaces that with something much more easy to observe and process. 237