A Companion to the

McKinsey PSG
Step-by Step Strategy Guide and Simulation Manual
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................3
2 The Basics of the McKinsey PSG .......................................................................................................................4
2.1 Constituent Mini-Games and Time Limits ..............................................................................................4
2.2 Flow of the Game........................................................................................................................................5
2.3 General Tips for the PSG ...........................................................................................................................6
3 Ecosystem Building – Learning the Basics .........................................................................................................8
3.1 Analyzing the Logic of the Game ..............................................................................................................8
3.2 Analyzing Key Elements of the Game .................................................................................................... 11
4 Ecosystem Building – Step-by-Step Strategy .................................................................................................. 16
4.1 Overall Approach .................................................................................................................................... 16
4.2 Step-by-Step Guide .................................................................................................................................. 17
5 Plant Defense – Learning the Basics ................................................................................................................ 24
5.1 Analyzing the Logic of the Game ........................................................................................................... 24
5.2 Analyzing Key Elements of the Game .................................................................................................... 26
6 Plant Defense – Step-by-Step Strategy ............................................................................................................ 32
6.1 Overall Approach .................................................................................................................................... 32
6.2 Step-by-Step Guide .................................................................................................................................. 35
7 How to Use MCP’s PSG Simulation .............................................................................................................. 37
7.1 Overall Practice Approach ...................................................................................................................... 37
7.2 Improving Intuition ................................................................................................................................ 37
7.3 Practicing with the PSG Simulation ....................................................................................................... 39
8 Appendices........................................................................................................................................................ 41
1 Introduction
Imbellus is an assessment company that builds immersive simulation-based assessments designed to evaluate
cognitive processes. They have partnered with McKinsey consultants and psychologists from UCLA Cresst to
create a new testing format for the McKinsey recruitment process.

The new format first entered testing on November 13, 2017, with 527 McKinsey & Company candidates based
in London, UK candidates as optional besides the traditional PST. As of May 2021, the new format, now called
the McKinsey Problem-Solving Game in the spirit of its predecessor, McKinsey’s proprietary Problem-
Solving Test, has been rolled out completely in all McKinsey offices. The test is mandatory for candidates
applying for vacancies in nearly all practices and functions – including networking events.

The main drive for this change is reportedly a widening of recruitment to non-business, and non-
privileged backgrounds, eliminating biases towards candidates familiar with standardized test formats
(GMAT, GRE, SAT) and business-context exercises.

To achieve such goals, the new test takes on a gamified format, with more dynamic objectives than the
simple “pick the right answer” of the PST. In addition - candidates are assessed not only by the end products,
but also by the process with which they delivered their products. Every mouse-click, every key-stroke, every
action of the candidate will be monitored, to paint a profile of skills and personal traits, which is then compared
to high-performing McKinsey personnel. Those with the most similar profiles to McKinsey’s “star consultants”
will be selected.

Given such a novel and dynamic test format, with most of the information remaining classified, the game poses
significant challenges for analysis and preparation. With that said, the most visible parts of the game - the core
game mechanisms - can be easily broken down into granular parts. After one year of gathering data and
interviewing actual candidates, I and my team at MConsultingPrep are now releasing the first-ever
simulation of the PSG, with end-to-end analysis and step-by-step strategy guides to the McKinsey
Problem-Solving Game.

This guide contains three modules, with one for the overall approach to the whole McKinsey PSG, while the
other two details the approach to each main mini-game. Use this in conjunction with the Simulation, and you
will nail the PSG to every last move.

Have fun practicing, and good luck!

2 The Basics of the McKinsey PSG

2.1 Constituent Mini-Games and Time Limits

The McKinsey PSG consists of two mini-games, played in a total of 71 minutes. You are free to decide how
much time to spend on each mini-game.

• The first mini-game is officially called “Ecosystem Placement”. The candidate is asked to build a
sustainable ecosystem out of a collection of given species. Its recommended time limit is 35 minutes.

• The second mini-game is officially called “Invasive Species”. The candidate is asked to defend a native
plant from attacking invasive species for as long as possible across three consecutive rounds. Its
recommended time limit is 12 minutes per round.

To better reflect the logic of these mini-games, in our guides, we call them by the names “Ecosystem Building”
and “Plant Defense” respectively.
In the past, beta-testing of new mini-games, such as Disease Management, Disaster Management, and most
recently in May 2021, Migration Management, have been reported. These mini-games have always taken the
place of the Plant Defense, leaving Ecosystem Building the continuous staple of the PSG. Even in 2021,
however, Plant Defense are also present in nearly all field reports.

We detail the alternative scenarios on our free article here, since the current information is insufficient to write a
full module of detailed strategy guide.

2.2 Flow of the Game

The flow the McKinsey, from start to finish, is as follows:

Part 1: System checks and login

• If your resume is accepted for the PSG, you will receive an email from McKinsey containing the link to
your own personalized PSG test. This link is used to schedule a one-hour time slot to start the test, and
also to actually start the test at the scheduled hour.

• After logging in, the game will brief you of the terms and conditions, then give you a tutorial of the
main menu and interface. This whole part is untimed.

Part 2: Ecosystem Building

• From the main menu, you access the Ecosystem Building mini-game.

• The mini-game will first give you an interactive tutorial of its rules and interface, where you will build a
trial ecosystem with one species only. Again, this tutorial is untimed.

• After the tutorial, you will jump straight into the actual test. When the test is completed, you will see an
animated cutscene showing the ecosystem you have built. From field reports, this cutscene is merely for
cosmetics, and does not represent the success or failure of your ecosystem.

• Although the recommended time allocation is 35 minutes, you can finish this part is as little as 15
minutes, with all the necessary checks accounted for.
Part 3: Plant Defense

• After completing the Ecosystem Building mini-game, you will be taken back to the main menu where
you can now access the second “Plant Defense” mini-game.

• Like the Ecosystem mini-game, this Plant Defense also gives you an interactive and untimed tutorial.

• After the tutorial, you will play three consecutive rounds (or “maps” in PSG official terms). At the end
of each round, there will always be a popup saying you “gave the plant enough time to survive”, but you
can judge your product-wise performance by looking at the number of turns you survived.

• Although the recommended time allocation is 36 minutes with 12 minutes for each round, you can
finish this part in as little as 15 minutes (five minutes per round).

2.3 General Tips for the PSG

We will dive into the tips for each mini-game in their respective module, but here are a few tips you need to keep
in mind when taking the PSG:

Tip 1: Use good hardware:

The McKinsey PSG is dreadfully demanding in hardware terms for a recruitment screening test, due to its use of
3D animations and web-based nature. Entry-level laptops four to five years old, with screen resolutions at
1366x768 or below will likely encounter lags and performance drops obstructing your test progress.

If you do not own a new, HD-screen computer, consider borrowing one from friends and family. Higher-
resolution screens with low scaling settings (125% or less) allows you to view more data simultaneously.

Tip 2: Allocate your time wisely, with spare time to correct mistakes

With a strategic approach and prior practice, it is possible to finish each mini-game in 15-20 minutes; however, I
would advise you to spend 25 minutes in the Ecosystem mini-game, allowing time to double check your
ecosystem using the given rules; for the Plant Defense game, spend 10-15 minutes on each round, to calculate
each move carefully.
Tip 3: Learn as much as possible in the tutorials

It is quite tempting to go quickly through the mini-game tutorials; this is a common and often fatal mistake. In
each tutorial inside the mini-games, some buttons will be locked up to force you into a linear tutorial; however,
there are certain gaps when you can access virtually every button on the screen. Use these gaps to read and make
senses of all the rules, as well as try a few other buttons before continuing into the main games. You can also use
the tutorials to prepare all the necessary equipment (mainly pen and paper for taking notes, or a light snack to
keep yourself energized and up-mood during the test). Remember, the tutorials are untimed.

Tip 4: Deliver meaningful actions in the game

The game tracks your actions, including mouse movements and keystrokes, so it is entirely possible that these
data can be used to assess your profile.

As such, act in line with the consulting culture. Try to make every action a step towards the objectives of the
game. Avoid fiddling around with the mouse, and plan ahead before taking actions (such as adding species to
the food chain in the Ecosystem mini-game). Going back and forth unnecessarily between windows and panels,
undoing-redoing actions too much might count against you.

With all that said, there is no need to be obsessed with the number of mouse clicks or tab swaps – as long as you
have a consistent, well-though strategy, you will naturally exhibit it through your actions.
3 Ecosystem Building – Learning the Basics

3.1 Analyzing the Logic of the Game

Objectives and gameplay flow of Ecosystem Building mini-game

To understand the core logic behind the Ecosystem Building mini-game, we must first go through the core
gameplay. I have covered that topic in my free videos and articles, but I will go through it here briefly.

The core gameplay of the Ecosystem mini-game consists of the candidate building an eight-species
“sustainable ecosystem” from a collection of 39 species on either a “Mountain” or a “Reef” (the two in-
game scenarios). To achieve that objective, the ecosystem must meet the following criteria:

• The ecosystem must contain eight species, no more and no less.

• Each species must be supplied with enough calories from food sources to survive.

• Each species must not be eaten into extinction by its predators.

• The chosen location must exhibit suitable living conditions for all species.

To help the candidate meet all four criteria, the mini-game provides the following information:
 • Detailed and complete rules for how species eat and get eaten within the mini-game

• Complete species specifications (henceforth referred to as “specs”) for all 39 species inside the game

• Complete living conditions or “terrain specs” for any location on the map.

The game is not played on a real-time or turn-based basis, as with most games on the market, in what my
Product Manager calls the “system building” genre.

To achieve these objectives, the candidate must first open the Guidebook and the Species Select panels, to
examine the specs for all 39 species in a structured and selective manner, then pick eight species into a
food chain – these species should ideally have similar terrain specs. Then, the candidate switches to Location
Select mode, turn on the relevant location specs on the World Monitor panel, and use the mouse cursor to pick
a location that matches the terrain specs of the given species.

The mini-game does not allow the candidate to submit without fulfilling both of these steps, and will warn the
candidate if he/she leaves either step unattended.
Analyzing the core logic of the Ecosystem Building mini-game

The Ecosystem Building game is first and foremost about making decisions in perfect-information settings
– that is, you have all the information you need to deliver the correct decisions. There is absolutely no
unpredictability, and no contingencies to plan for.

To make such decisions in this mini game, you have to absorb and process large amounts of data, including
the complex eating sequence rules, the specs of 39 species and of the locations on the map. This would be
impossible without an ability to filter noises (irrelevant data), as well as quick and accurate mental
calculations to assess the fitness of each species in the food chain.

Due to the amount of data given, it is also very tempting to make assumptions, such as “there is no right
answer”, or “the more calories you have in the system, the better”, or “the food chain in this game resemble a
real-life food chain”. These are the most common assumptions recorded in our field reports; however,
McKinsey explicitly states candidates should not base their decisions on any outside knowledge or
assumptions – the only information that matters, is the one provided in-game.

The most important takeaway of this information is the need to analyze the elements within the mini-game and
identify the parts candidates should focus on in their actual test, and parts candidates must ignore.

There is also no difference in core gameplay and logic between the two scenarios (Mountain vs Reef) – any
differences between them are only superficial and should not be taken into your decision-making process.
3.2 Analyzing Key Elements of the Game

Species specifications

Each species in the Ecosystem mini-game has six to eight specs:

• Two specs on their feeding relationships (Eaten By, Food Sources). The number of species in each
spec range anywhere from zero to nine.

• Two specs on their calorie input and output (Calories Needed, Calories Provided). They are always
exact numbers, ranging from 500 to 9,000, varying widely between species, and inversely correlates
with the position of a species on the food chain.

• Two to four specs on terrain (Depth/Elevation and Temperature are staples. Two other specs may
appear sometimes, confirmed to be Wind Speed and Soil pH in the Mountain scenario). These are
always in the form of ranges (e.g.: Depth 0-30m).

Of those specs, six are relevant to decision-making. The last two terrain specs are always “noise” – they stay the
same for all species, and you can always find a suitable location. As such, from this point on, the term “terrain
specs” always refer to the two relevant specs, unless stated otherwise.

From the six relevant specs, we can come up with two new key concepts: “species terrain range” and “species
food chain level”. These have important implications in creating the ecosystem.
Species terrain ranges

The 39 species of the Ecosystem Building mini-game are always divided into three equal groups of 13 species
each, using their terrain specs (Depth for the Reef scenario, Elevation for the Mountain scenario, and
Temperature for both). I call these groups “ranges”.

Species belonging to the same range always have the same terrain specs (for example, all species in range 1 have
Depth at 0-30m, and Temperature at 25-30C), and the three ranges are strictly MECE in their terrain specs,
making it easy to choose a suitable location for all species if they belong to the same range, and impossible to do
so otherwise.

As observed by our correspondent candidates, species almost always have feeding relationships exclusively
within their range (e.g.: a species Depth 0-30m almost never eats/gets eaten by anything from Depth 31-60m
and 61-90m). However, rarely does a “cross-range” feeding relationship appear. For the candidate, this means
less worrying about terrain specs of species in feeding relationship with another chosen species – however, you
do need to watch out for the rare exceptions.

Species food chain level

Using feeding relationships, the McKinsey PSG divide the species into two groups: “Producers” and “Animals”.
I took one step further and divide animals into three sub-groups: “Apex”, “Predator”, and “Herbivore”. These
three subgroups, along with the Producers group, form the four levels in my Ecosystem mini-game analysis.
From bottom to top, their characteristics are as follows:

• Producers do not eat any other species – they are plants, fungi, and corals. Their Food Sources are
listed as “Sunlight” or “Waste”, but this is another noise data; their Calories Needed are always zero,
 meaning they will always have their calorie needs satisfied. Their Calorie Provided range often
fluctuates between 4,000 to 6,000.

• Herbivores eat only producers and are eaten by predators and apex animals. They correspond to
real-life small herbivores. Their Calories Needed can fluctuate from 5,00 to 9,000, while their Calories
Provided is often between 500 to 4,000; most figures are around 2,000-4,000 for both specs.

• Predators eat herbivores, producers, and other predators. They correspond to real-life medium-
large predators. Their calorie specs can vary as much as herbivores, but often sits lower at 2,000-3,000
to account for their higher position in the food chain.

• Apex animals can eat anything but is not eaten by anything. They often correspond to real-life
apex predators such as the Great White Shark or Killer Whale. Their calorie specs vary less than other
animals, and often sits between 1,000 to 2,000 – they can almost always survive in any food chain.

There are always three producers and at least one apex animal in any food chain – all of which has a certain/high
chance of surviving. This means in most cases you only need to be picky about the remaining four animals.

Location terrain specifications

Each of the infinite locations on the map has seven or eight terrain specs. They are:

• Depth, Water Current, Water Clarity, Temperature, Salt Content, Dissolved Oxygen, Wind Speed –
seven specs in total for the Reef scenario.

• Elevation, Temperature, Wind Speed, Humidity, Cloud Height, Soil pH, Precipitation, Air Pressure –
eight specs in total for the Mountain scenario

Of these seven or eight specs, only four can be displayed at any given time, using a checklist called “World
Monitors / Conditions / Monitors” on the upper-right corner of the screen. However, four is more than
enough, since if you have not already noticed, either set (for Mountain or Reef) includes both relevant terrain
specs for each species in their respective scenario, which are usually Depth/Elevation and Temperature.
Location terrain specs are always absolute numbers (e.g.: Depth 26.7m), instead of ranges like species terrain
specs – which combined with the MECE nature of terrain ranges, means it is easy to find a spot where these
terrain specs are suitable for all eight species.

With that said, there is almost no correlation between different location terrain specs (unlike species terrain
specs, where Depth/Elevation and Temperature ranges are “paired” in three ranges), meaning it is possible for
the location to fit the species in only one terrain specs but not the other. For example: if your species come from
a range with Depth 0-30m and Temperature 25-30C, and you choose a location with Depth 15.6m, it is still
possible for the Temperature to be 23.3C or 33.3C (your species die out in both cases).

Eating rules

Species in the McKinsey PSG Ecosystem mini-game take turns to eat in a strict and clearly defined order.
McKinsey does explain this in the game as “Eating Rules”, but the explanation itself needs some improvement
in terms of structure and clarity. Here is my version:

1. The species with the highest Calories Provided in the food chain eats first.

2. It eats the species with the highest Calories Provided among its prey (if the eating species is a producer,
you can assume it automatically bypass this step, as well as steps 3-5).
3. The eating species then “consumes” from the eaten species a number of Calories Provided that is equal
to its Calories Needed, which is at the same time subtracted a number to the Calories Provided taken
from the eaten species.

4. If there are two “top prey” species with the same Calories Provided, the eating species will eat from each
of them an amount equal to 1/2 of its Calories Needed.

5. If the Calories Needed has not been reduced to zero (i.e.: satisfied), even if the eating species has
consumed all the Calories Provided of the first prey the eating species will move on to the next prey
with the -highest Calories Provided and repeat the above steps; the prey that has been exhausted its
Calories second Provided will be remove permanently from the food chain and considered extinct.

6. After the first species have finished eating, the cycle repeats for the species with the second-highest
Calories Provided, then the third-highest, etc. until every species has already eaten. Note: in every step
where species are sorted using Calories Provided, it always uses the most recent figure (i.e., the one after
consumption by a predator).

7. At the end of this process, all species should have new Calories Provided and Calories Needed, both
smaller than the original figures. A species survives when its end-game Calorie Needed is equal to zero,
and Calorie Provided is higher than zero.
4 Ecosystem Building – Step-by-Step Strategy

4.1 Overall Approach

There are many ways to build the ecosystem in the Ecosystem mini-game; however, they have much in
common, so before we dive into each specific method, we should explore those principles first – those are the
basic logic that any Ecosystem strategy must include.

Principle 1: Remove all noise

The one biggest challenge in the Ecosystem mini-game, is the overwhelming amount of data given to the
candidate, and it deliberately limits the ability of the candidate to see the “big picture”. With a total of 241 to
320 data points (six or eight specs for 39 species plus seven or eight location terrain specs), the interface only
allows you to view 6-12 of them at any given time, depending on your screen resolution.

As such, it serves well for any candidate to identify and remove all irrelevant data or “noise” from the ecosystem-
building process. Ideally, after removing noise, you will be left with just 80-106 data points (13 species and
two location terrain specs) – a 70% reduction in just five minutes.

Principle 2: Plan ahead and structure

Going back and forth between various data points in no particular order would do great harm to your
performance – both in terms of process scores and product scores. Every action must count, and it must bring
you closer to the objective of the mini-game.

To ensure that, structure your approach right after you have familiarized with the interface, and before you
begin the actual game – use the untimed tutorial for that purpose. Prepare your notes, use them to through all
the data in a steady and orderly fashion, and to perform all necessary calculations before you make decisions
(e.g.: to add or remove species from the food chain).

Principle 3: Look out for red and green flags

Due to the complexity and randomness of the base species, it is virtually impossible to dictate which range
is the best for food-chain building right at the start; adding to that is the possibility of insoluble ranges (i.e.,
there is no correct answer). Both of these factors are uncontrolled risks. However, there are a few signs you can
use to make educated guesses; I call the negative signs “red flags”, and the good signs “green flags”.
With that said, the existence of “red flags” in a range does not mean it is immediately insoluble, and “green flags”
does not mean it must be the best one; as such, it is important to develop a sense about the solubility of a range,
and back out early should you stumble into an insoluble one.

Principle 4 – Prioritize high output and low input

The survival of each species in the Ecosystem mini-game depends on its calorie surplus – or “surpluses”, to be
precise. Each species must not be eaten into extinction (surplus of its own Calories Provided), and they must
have enough food to eat (surplus of its prey’s Calories Provided, to satisfy its own Calories Needed).

With this in mind, at all steps of the process, always prioritize species with high Calories Provided (to easily meet
the calorie demands of its eaters) and low Calories Needed (so its own calorie demands can be easily satisfied).

There is one caveat to this all-important principle, though – since Calories Provided decides the eating
order of species in the chain, it might lead to “eating conflicts” where one or a few species can be driven into
starvation. I will discuss this caveat in more detail in the section below.

4.2 Step-by-Step Guide

Step 1: Choose the right species range

Identify the “best” range right at the start of the Ecosystem mini-game can save you up to 50-70% of the time
you would otherwise spend if you went through all the species – all the noise irrelevant to the final decision.

In theory, there are two easy criteria to identify that range:

• Producer Calories Provided: the higher, the better. More calories from producer means animals –
especially herbivores – have higher chances to survive. A “good” range tends to have total Calories
Provided from producers in the upper 15,000, with most producers providing over 5,000 each. A “red
flag” in this case is a chain with less than 12,000 total producer Calories Provided (less than 4,000 each)
– it is extremely rare, but it does happen.

• Producer “Eaten-By” Number of Species: the more, the better. While having more eaters for each
species does make it trickier when resolving the food chain, it does create more flexibility, since you can
swap a non-working eater out. For a “good” range, its producers tend to have two to four eaters each.
A “red flag” is when a producer has no eater (Eaten By: None) – in that case, the producer is next to
useless since it cannot contribute its calories to the system; when this happens, consider the Calories
Provided of that species as zero.
There is no hard-and-fast rule to prioritize one criterion over the other. However, field reports have indicated
that the “Calories Provided” factor is often more useful in practice, except in red-flag cases (producers
with no eater); it is probable that high Calories Provided in producers precludes the need to have many eaters,
since even those few eaters can be easily satisfied.

Use a spreadsheet on a separate computer/tablet, or a scratch paper to note down the numbers and calculate.
When you have identified the best range, note down the Depth/Elevation and Temperature of that range (on
the species cards) – you will use those figures for the next step.

Step 2: Filter the animals

Carefully open all the animal info cards to check their Depth/Elevation and Temperature, then close the ones
incompatible with the chosen range, leaving only compatible animals for the food chain-building process. It
should take about two or three minutes. At the end of this step, you should be left with 10 animals.

Use this opportunity to also look for and note down the number of “flags” in each range:

• Red flags are species with extremely high Calories Needed (5,000-6,000 or more) since they cannot be
satisfied without driving one prey to extinction, and/or extremely low Calories Provided (1,000 or less,
unless it is an apex) since they have high risks of being eaten into extinction

• Green flags are species with remarkably high Calories Provided (at least 4,000), since these species can
feed two predators at the same time in some cases, and/or low Calories Needed (at most 1,000), since
they have much higher chances of survival.

Nonetheless, at this early stage, it is unwise to decide purely on the number of “flags”; they are only indications
that one certain range “might”, not “must”, be good or bad. As such, press on with the chosen range.

Step 3: Build the food chain

Since the first three slots in the eight-species food chain have already been filled by producers from Step 1, you
need only choose five animals to complete the food chain. There are actually two ways to build a food chain –
bottom-up and top-down:

• Bottom-up approach: fill the food chain from the lower levels (herbivores) first, moving gradually
upwards according to each species’ Eaten By.

• Top-down approach: select one apex predator (in many cases, there is only one apex in the whole
range), then move down according to the Food Sources of each species.
Between these two approaches, the “bottom-up” approach helps you minimize feeding conflicts (one predator
driving another predator into extinction by eating all of its prey). The top-down approach, on the other hand, is
more convenient for satisfying each species’ own Calories Needed. Both works in practice, so choose
whatever feels natural for you – but try to be consistent.

In either case, should you end up with fewer than the eight required species, look for gaps of Calories
Provided surplus in a bottom-up manner, then fill in those gaps with additional animals. Usually, a gap
needs to be 2,000-4,000 calories to work.

If you cannot seem to reach eight species within the chosen range, and there are many “red flags” in that range,
consider trying another range. It is extremely rare to have all three or even just two of the ranges being
insoluble, so if you find your chosen range difficult, it is likely that the other two will be easy.

At the end of this step, you should have something resembling this screenshot on your note, Excel spreadsheet,
or PowerPoint presentation sheet:

Step 4: Resolve the food chain

The only way to make sure your food chain works, is to work it out yourself. Use the rules described in the
“Eating Rules” section to resolve the eating cycles for all the species in the chain, then make necessary
adjustments if any species go extinct in the process.
One important part of this step is maintaining a strict order of resolution using the given rules – only
consider a species “Survive” after confirming that it meets both criteria (Calories Needed = 0, Calories Provided
> 0) – it is extremely tempting to assume a species survive after seeing its Calories Needed satisfied.

Another key part is note-taking – clear, structured notes will eliminate the possible confusion from all the
interlinking relationships and eating cycles. I will discuss it in detail after the final step, but below is what your
note should look like after Step 4.

Step 5: Choose the location

The final step is actually the easiest, because all the hard parts (selecting and assembling species) have been done
in the previous step. Simply tick the two relevant location terrain specs on the World Monitors panel
(relevant specs are the one mentioned on the Species Select panel) and move the mouse around until the
numbers matches the spec ranges of your chose species.

After you have selected the location, take a few big looks to see your achievements (and to make sure you did
not make any silly mistakes), then submit the Ecosystem.
Tip: Note-taking in the Ecosystem Building mini-game

Taking good notes is one of the most important aspects about the Ecosystem Building mini-game –
without clear and structured notes displaying the calorie input and output, as well as eating relations between
species, it would be extremely difficult to assess the quality of your food chain.

A good note should display all of the following figures:

• The short-form name of the species

• Calories Provided before the species is eaten

• Calories Needed before the species eats

• Calories Provided after the species is eaten

• Calories Needed after the species eats

• Survival status of the species at the end (after eating and getting eaten)

• The level of the species

• The eating relations of the species (what it eats, and what eats it)

Now, for the first three figures, most people would follow their first instinct and write in this order: “Species
Name – Calories Needed – Calories Provided”. This is very convenient when you first write the note, but then
you will feel clumsy when you actually get down to calculating stuff, because you will have to match the upper
number of the predator to the lower number of the prey, jumping over two numbers and one species name in
the process. A better alternative is to use the order: “Calories Provided – Species Name – Calories Needed”
– that way, the Calories Needed of the predator can connect directly to the Calories Provided of the prey –
much friendlier for mental calculations.
Then you will also need the “ending” figures of both Calories Provided and Calories Needed, as well as a
check/cross mark or a description for verifying the survival of a species – with these figures, it will be clear to
you which species you have resolved, and whether it survives or not.

To display last two parts (relationships and level), simply arrange all the species in four clearly defined rows and
use arrows to indicate which species eats which.
And lastly, since time is of essence in the PSG, and writing all the names of columns and rows take away that
valuable time, you can just remove all those redundant parts once you are comfortable with this note-taking
method – resulting in something similar to the image below if you use a scratch paper:

Have fun practicing, and good luck! Now on to the next mini-game – Plant Defense!
5 Plant Defense – Learning the Basics

5.1 Analyzing the Logic of the Game

Objectives and gameplay flow of the Plant Defense mini-game

The Plant Defense mini-game of the PSG is a turn-based tower-defense game, where your main objective is to
defend a native plant (henceforth referred to as “Base”) from invasive species (“Invaders), using defensive
Resources (“Defenders” and “Terrain Transformations/Terrains”) for as long as possible.

The mini-game is played across three consecutive stages called “Maps”, which correspond to one unique
physical map in square-grid format, with size ranging from 10x10 to 12x12 (when I capitalize the word “Map”
like this, I am referring to the “stage”, while the lowercase “map” refers to the physical map).

Each Map is further divided into two phases – the “Planning” phase with recommended time allocation of 12
minutes each, and the “Fast Forward” phase, which is untimed and lasts only a few seconds. In reality, the time
limit of the Plant Defense mini-game is whatever left after you play the Ecosystem mini-game.
The Planning phase of each Map consists of 15 turns, grouped into three “Waves” of five turns each.
Immediately at Turn 1, Invaders will start coming from a random square on the borders, as “stacks”
occupying one square each, and advance towards the Base (often located at the map center) at the speed of one
square per turn.

The candidate must use Terrains to block or delay the advance and use Defenders to eliminate these
Invader stacks for good; if just one stack reaches the Base, the candidate loses immediately; at the beginning of
each wave, the candidate can assign five Defenders and/or Terrains to that wave’s five turns (one
Defender/Terrain per turn). Each Defender and Terrain can only take effect, i.e., activates starting from its
assigned turn; before a Resource is activated, the candidate can remove and replace it.

If the candidate survives after Turn 15 of the Planning phase – which is the primary objective of the mini-
game, the Fast Forward phase begins. During this phase, the candidate loses all abilities to add or rearrange
Terrains and Defenders, while Invaders will keep coming in even greater numbers until the Base is destroyed –
in other words, you cannot survive this phase, the objective is to fight for as long as possible.

Analyzing the logic of the Plant Defense mini-game

The Plant Defense mini-game of the PSG is all about making decisions with limited information,
planning for contingencies, and maintaining a big-picture mindset for multi-layered objectives. This
is virtually the exact-opposite of the Ecosystem Building mini-game (which offers lots of data, fully controlled
setting, and one single objective).

To overcome this challenge, there are two things a candidate should do:
 • Have a basic understanding of what unexpected events might be – to make appropriate
preparations. In this guide I will tell you “what to expect” but should the mini-game change in the
future, you can still figure out yourself by reading the instructions carefully and pay attention to the
patterns. Most successful candidates can detect the patterns within the first round.

• Design low-risk, all-round solutions to cope with unpredictable, uncontrolled factors. In the
context of this mini-game, such solutions are often balanced and consistent in terms of Resource
choices, placement, and activation.

• Balance between long and short-term objectives. It is extremely tempting to focus on one or the
other, either consciously or subconsciously, leading to your plan failing the key objectives quickly. It is
most dangerous to overlook the short-term objectives in favor of the long-term ones since that can
cause you to lose the game right within the first few turns.

This logic stays the same across all three rounds of the Plant Defense mini-game – I might even argue that the
mini-game becomes easier, the longer you progress, since you can expect what is in store, and you have
more time and more Resources to react.

With all of this in mind, let use proceed to the next section to analyze in detail each element of the mini-game.

5.2 Analyzing Key Elements of the Game

Map

The physical maps used in the Plant Defense mini-game are rectangular, square-based grids of varying sizes.
The common confirmed sizes are 10x10, 10x14, and 12x12 for Map 1, Map 2, and Map 3, respectively. On the
grid, the Base is located in the center, surrounded by a few dozen Terrains, but no Defender. Usually, the
space around the Base is quite empty, with most pre-arranged Terrains distributed randomly on the
“outskirts” of the grid, leaving the Base vulnerable without the candidate’s interference.

Inferring from the grid size and Base location, the incoming Invaders will take a maximum of 14 turns and a
minimum of 4 turns to reach your Base. This determines how urgent it is to eliminate it, and whether to
change the long-term plan to cope with it; some Invaders (the 14-turn ones, for example) can be ignored, while
the 4-turn Invaders if not blocked will give you an unpleasant early defeat.
Base

The Base in the Plant Defense mini-game is visually presented by a flowery plant (“native plant”). It is nearly
always placed in the center of the map (in one of the 4 center squares, because the even number of squares on
each side of the grid means there is no exact center square).

You have to defend the Base at all costs – once an Invader touches the Base, you lose.

Invaders

There are two types of Invaders – the Fox and the Groundhog. They are fundamentally the same, and each
have an equal chance of spawning although you might stumble on a map where Foxes appear more than
Groundhogs (or vice versa). The only difference between the two is the kind of Terrain slowing them down -
Foxes are often slowed down by Rockies, and Groundhogs by Forests.

Invaders always appear at Turn 1 of each Map, and from then on appear every two to five turns. There will be
three to four Invader stacks in total throughout the Planning phase.

Each Invader stack has a “population” specification acting similar to health points in other games – the
stack disappears once the population has been reduced (by Defenders) to zero. The first Invader stack often has
a population of 120; each stack after that usually increases their population over the previous one by 15-25, so
by the end of the Planning phase, the last stack is usually 160-to-200-strong, and by the end of the Fast Forward
phase, some candidates have reported stacks up to 400-strong.

Once an Invader have appeared, it will take the shortest possible path with the fewest angles to your Base.
The path will be displayed to you as a yellow arrow. The Invader will stay on this path regardless of the addition
of Defenders and Terrains, except when a blocking Terrain is placed on the path – in such cases, the Invader
will try to stay as true to the original path as possible while keeping path length unchanged.

Terrains

There are four types of Terrain, three of which the candidate can add to the map grid. The four types are:

• Grass: the “blank” Terrain type and the most common on a map. Invaders move freely here. Due to
lack of access from the candidate, and its “blank” nature, when I write “Terrain” without any further
description in this guide, that term does not include Grass.
 • Forest: a “slow” Terrain type, effective against the Groundhog. Groundhogs lose 50% of their
movement when entering a Forest (i.e.: it takes two turns for a Groundhog to move AWAY from a
Forest square, compared to one turn as usual).

• Rocky: another “slow” Terrain, this time effective against the Fox, with the same “-50% movement”
effect (hence the statement that the two “slow” Terrains are logically similar).

• Cliff: the “blocking” Terrain type – if placed on the path of an incoming Invader, the Invader must
change directions, and if all possible paths are blocked, the Invader stand still indefinitely.

On the starting map grid, there are usually around five to ten Cliffs, and double that number for Forests
and Grass (10-20). These are placed in big clusters near the borders of the grid, although some “stranglers” do
appear around the Base in the center. This has two implications – firstly, some areas will be naturally difficult
for some Invaders (e.g.: a whole patch of 5-7 Forests acts as a huge speedbump for invading Groundhogs) which
you can use as deadly chokepoints; secondly, the area around the Base itself is relatively weak and vulnerable,
hence the need to reinforce this area with Terrains and strong Defenders.

In each Map, the candidate is provided with around four to nine Terrains from each of the latter three
types to add to the grid, with Cliff again having the lowest number (usually four or five, compared to six to nine
for the other two) to prevent the candidate from surrounding the Base with Cliffs. Each Terrain occupies one
square and can only be placed next to another Terrain of the same type (being diagonally adjacent does not
count); they can also be placed on top of an existing Terrain, replacing it. However, Terrains cannot be placed
on a square with an existing Defender, even if they are compatible.

Here is the quick recap of all the usable Terrains as they appear in the Plant Defense mini-game

Defenders

Defenders are Resources that attack incoming Invader, eliminating them permanently. To do this, each type
of Defenders has two specifications: range and damage:
 • Range: Each Defender’s effect covers a clearly-defined area, marked by the cyan (inactivated) and pink
(activated) colors on the map grid. As long as the Invader remains inside the range of the Defender, it
will be attacked every turn. There are three different ranges, each comes with a different shape: range 1
is one square, range 2 is a five-square cross, range 3 is a 13-square diamond.

• Damage: Each turn an Invader spends within the range of a Defender, an amount of its population
equal to the damage of the Defender will be removed, until the Invader moves out of the range or is
entirely eliminated. The damage of a Defender ranges from 20 to 60; generally, the higher the damage,
the shorter the range.

One Defender can attack multiple Invaders in one turn, and likewise one Invader can be attacked by multiple
Invaders. This means an overlapped section with four or five Defenders is almost bullet-proof, eliminating big
stacks of Invaders in just two to three turns.

Here is how I classify Defenders using their range and damage:

• Short Range Defender: This type of Defender has range 1 and damage of 40 or 50. Around five to
seven of them are available immediately at the start of every Map. It is presented in-game as the Python
or the Bobcat.

• Long Range Defender: This type of Defender has range 2 or 3, and damage of 30 or 20, inflicting a
maximum of 90-100 damage on an Invader – meaning they are stronger than the short-range ones if
used appropriately. Around five to seven of them are available immediately at the start of every Map. It
is presented in-game as the Coyote or the Falcon.

• End Game Defender: This type of Defender has range 2 or 3, and damage of 60 or 30, inflicting a
maximum of 180 or 150 on an Invader – vastly more capable than the previous types. Five of them are
available, but only from Turn 6 of Map 3 (the final map), hence the “End-Game”. In-game, they are
presented as the Timber Wolf or the Peregrine Falcon.

Defenders appear to come in fixed “sets” of three, with one type of Defender for each class.

Each of the six aforementioned Defenders has its own placement rules – that is, they can only be placed on
certain types of Terrain (Grass included). Most cannot be placed on Cliffs and can be placed on Grass except
the end-game Peregrine Falcon (which can be placed on Cliff but not on Grass). Each Defender occupies one
square (the surrounding range is considered unoccupied). Defenders cannot be placed on existing Defenders
but can be placed on existing Terrains if compatible.
Here is a quick recap of all the Defenders I have mentioned so far (from left to right: Short Range, Long Range
and End-Game Defenders)

Order of action

“Order of action” is a term I use in this guide to explain how each turn of the Plant Defense mini-game is
resolve. There is a certain order to Invaders moving, Defenders attacking, etc. which McKinsey explains in the
Guidebook section of the mini-game, but I feel I could give you a more structured, easy-to-understand version:

Here is what happens when you click on the “Next Turn” button:

1. The Resource assigned to that turn activates.

2. Invaders move forward (by one square if they are not delayed, and by half a square if they delayed by
Terrain – in such case, the first half-square movement will leave the Invader within the starting square
and subject to attack if a Defender covers that square, while the second half-square movement will
 bring the Invader onto the next square). If an Invader is blocked partially, it recalculates the path before
moving, and if it is blocked completely, it stays still.

3. If an Invader reaches the Base after movement, it attacks the Base (the candidate loses immediately).

4. If no Invader reaches the Base, Defenders attack any Invaders within their range – which disappear
from the map grid if their population is reduced to zero after the attack.

This has two implications for the candidate:

• If one part of the range of a Defender overlaps the Base, that part is useless since an Invader reaching
the Base will attack the Base before itself gets attacked by the Defender.

• You can wait for the Invader to come one step closer before setting up a Resource, since the Resource
does not need to activate “before” the Invader arrives within its range, but “when” the Invader arrives.
This might come in handy when multiple Invaders attack in quick succession.

With all of this information, we are ready to move on to the next section on strategy.
6 Plant Defense – Step-by-Step Strategy

6.1 Overall Approach

Like the preceding Ecosystem mini-game, there are many strategies and variations to overcome the challenges in
the Plant Defense mini-game, but they all share the following principles:

Principle 1: Prioritize Defenders over Terrains

Defenders should be the backbone of your defensive plan, since they can eliminate invaders for good and
they affect all Invaders. Terrains, on the other hand, except for the rarest cases, can only delay the inevitable by a
few turns at best, and then is only effective against certain types of Invaders – as such, they should only be used
to complement and boost the damage of Defenders.

In practice, out of 15 turns/resources, about 12-13 should be spent on Defenders. The rest are used on Terrains
to help amplify the effects of Defenders.

Principle 2: Block all possible paths

I have both good news and bad news for you.

Bad news first: Invaders in the Plant Defense mini-game literally come from all directions. As a result, any
good defensive plan must provide 360 degrees of protection for the base, leaving virtually no weak spots.

However, there is good news: regardless of their spawn locations, they always head towards the vertical and
horizontal axes of the grid (assuming the Base is the center), meaning if you can cover these axes with
Defenders, you can be sure to tackle 90% of incoming Invaders. Invaders cannot move diagonally, so they will
always pass one of the four squares horizontally or vertically adjacent to the Base.

Below is a chart displaying the chance of an Invader crossing each square on a 12x12 map grid – with the
assumption that Invaders always head towards a main axis right after spawning (with 50% chance for either
possible axis), there are absolutely no obstacles on the map, that the chance of invader spawning on each border
square are equal.

As you can see, squares on the main axes are six to twelve times more likely to see an Invader than a non-axis
square (barring the spawn zone – which I will tackle in Principle 3). Covering these axes with Defenders and
Terrains is by far the most cost-effective and low-risk means of defense.
Principle 3: Build inside out

The nearer a Resource is to the Base, the higher its coverage in regard to the possible invading directions – as
such, focus your defensive plan right around the Base, and ignore the outer rings of the map grid.

In practice, it will be tempting to intercept an Invader early by placing a strong (usually long-range) Defender
near the spawn point of that Invader – but this will often lead to a gap in the final defensive plan. You must
resist this temptation and focus on building the long-term plan until the Invader has come close enough – that
is, when it reaches the outer layers of your intended plan.

Below is a comparison of building a defensive plan close to the base with trying to intercept Invaders at their
spawn points on the borders, using four Range 2 Defenders. The “inside out” plan leaves no gap at all – any
incoming Invader will be attacked regardless of their path, while the “outside in” plan leaves large gaps (20
squares out of 44 border squares) where Invaders can spawn and attack the Base without meeting any resistance
from the candidate’s Defenders.
Principle 4: Build it like a castle

Real castles from the Middle Ages have multiple overlapping layers of defenses, with long-range towers on the
outside, and short-range obstacles on the inside, forming “kill-zones” where firepower is most focused. The
same principle applies to tower-defense games such as the Plant Defense mini-game.

The application in Plant Defense is fairly simple – build two-layer or three-layer defensive plans, with
Range 1 Defenders on the innermost ring, Range 2 Defender on the middle ring, and Range 3 Defenders on the
outer rings. I will give you the end-game version (for Map 3) below.

This basic layout (see in the chart below) takes 12 turns/resources to building, leaving 3 spare turns for you to
complement your defensive plan with further Terrains and Defenders, depending on the situation. Depending
on the kind of Defenders available, this layout can deal at least 290-320 damage to invaders travelling along
the main axes.

Also keep in mind that this is an ideal layout. Actual, in-game layout can vary depending on the size of the
map, available resources, as well as the specifications of each Defender, existing Terrains, and interference from
Invaders. With that said, stay with this approach and you will survive at least 35-40 turns.
6.2 Step-by-Step Guide

Step 1: Examine the map grid and resources

The map grid and available resources at the start of each Map influence how viable the ideal plan is, and what
adjustments you must make. For example, in some Maps you might encounter a shortage in Range 2
Defenders, while in others the Terrains near the Base are unsuitable for the plan.

One important note here is about Map 3 – at Turn 6 the “End-Game” Defender will become available, so try to
make room for its appearance. Map 3 is usually 12x12, so most often you would not have to worry about
Invaders taking your Base before the End-Game Defender appears (which is powerful enough to take down the
first stack of Invaders).

Step 2: Draft the long-term plan

Take out a scratch paper a scribble the defensive layout for 15 turns, including the necessary Terrain
changes. Quickly and mentally calculate the damage in each square, considering the overlapping Defenders.
This step should give you a rough idea about what you should do in the next turns and waves.
With that said, this plan represents the “final” layout, and not the particular steps you would take. My
recommendation is to build inside out, and counter-clockwise/clockwise – unless you need to tackle incoming
Invaders, which brings us to the next step.

Step 3: Execute and adjust for immediate threats

This whole Plant Defense mini-game is about preparing for and coping with unexpected changes in
circumstances in problem-solving, so expect to balance between your long-term plan and short-term
issues. Specifically, Invaders that threaten to take your Base with a short, undefended path of advance.

Let us say you are using my recommended steps and building the defenses for the twelve o’clock direction,
when suddenly a stack of 120 Foxes come from your six and threatens to take the Base in 5 turns. The logical
next step here is to postpone the long-term plan, and immediately lay down one Range 1 (Damage 50) and one
Range 2 (Damage 30) Defender towards the six o’clock. Then, using the in-game damage calculator that appears
when you hover a square covered by a Defender, you make sure the Fox stack would take at least 140 damage
before reaching your base – and since that is enough to eliminate the stack, you can come back to twelve o’clock
and continue executing the original plan.
7 How to Use MCP’s PSG Simulation
7.1 Overall Practice Approach
When you practice for the McKinsey PSG, you need to practice both for things currently used in the PSG,
and for things NOT used by the PSG. This is because unlike the PST with its fairly established and rigid
format, the PSG has proven quite flexible, with at least three beta-stage mini-games used in real recruitment
testing; as long as the logic remains the same, the PSG can take any form, making it somewhat unpredictable.
This means when you practice for the McKinsey PSG, you take same approach as you should for case interviews
– as described in my Case Interview End-to-End Secrets Program – by improving on both problem-solving and
analytical intuition, as well as test-taking strategies and tips.

7.2 Improving Intuition

To improve the problem-solving abilities for the PSG, focus your efforts on three main areas: analytical
problem-solving skills, mental math, and “game sense”. Part of these areas are in line with case interview
practice, but there are specific niches more relevant to the PSG that I will explain right now.
Analytical problem-solving skills

There are three main subsets of problem-solving skills to train for the PSG:
• Firstly, any candidate applying for MBB firms should be training themselves on general consulting
problem-solving – the all-too-famous hypothesis-driven problem-solving approach. In the
McKinsey PSG, lots of strategies and tips rely on segmenting the problem into granular parts, then
using data to test each part, identify “root causes” and decide on the most impactful courses of action.
Examples include using producers’ Calories Provided to identify the easiest range to build the food
chain or looking at Invaders to identify their most frequent paths. This is not to say you should be
drawing issue trees to solve the game problems. Consulting problem-solving needs efficiency –
only use issue trees when they are necessary; I want you to understand the spirit and have that mindset
when practicing for and attending the PSG.
• Secondly, you should train for decision-making in fully-controlled situations, and more
specifically, the skill to filter and analyze data. This skill is relevant for the Ecosystem Building mini-
game, and all future/past mini-game sharing the same logic (coincidentally, all three reported beta-stage
mini-games share this logic with the Ecosystem Building staple).
• Thirdly, you train to make decisions with limited information, to deduce meaningful patterns,
maintain strong situational awareness, and plan against unexpected contingencies. This skill is relevant
for the Plant Defense mini-game and others sharing the same logic (the Migration Management mini-
game has an unpredictable element – it is a combination of the logics from both staple mini-games).
Now the question is how do you train on all of these things?
• Over the long run, it is a good practice to read the news frequently, preferably from consulting
publications, as well as other publications on business or political issues, and try to understand
events through the lens of the decision makers. Put yourself in their shoes and make educated
guesses about the data they could have access to, how they came to final decisions, how things turn out
in practice, and how it could have been done better.
• In the short run (because not many people have time), complex strategy games with similar
gameplay mechanisms to the PSG are a good alternative. Many of these games train you on both
kinds of decision making at the same time. I will talk about this more in the “Game Sense” section.

Mental math

The math in the PSG is not as hard as in the PST, but it does need to be fast and accurate – you do not have a
second try. One wrong calculation can ruin your entire ecosystem, or send you to an early defeat at Turn 4 in
the Plant Defense mini-game.
To enhance your mental math abilities, you can read this article on my website, and use the Mental Math Tool
that comes as part of the Comprehensive Math Drills. Have fun practicing!
Game sense

Candidates who regularly play video games – especially strategy games – are reported to have a flattened
learning curve when attending the PSG, due to what the gaming community call “game sense”.
In essence, people with “game sense” are much quicker at finding out “when to do what” in a gamified
setting. Their game sense is generally better in familiar genres – which is why I recommend strategy games when
practicing the PSG, because unlike most other gamified tests relying on arcade-style games, the PSG is heavily
based on the strategy genre.
The maxim “hard practice makes an easy game” holds true (literally) in this case. Be selective about what you
play; generally, the more difficult/complex and the more similar a game is to the PSG, the better it is as a
practice ground. Based on those aspects I would divide the possible choices into three groups:

• The simulation group consists of realistic strategy games whose gameplay involves extensive data
processing, and/or dealing with risks – so much that once you have gotten used to it, the PSG would
feel like a walk in the park. This group include grand strategy games, city-building simulations, tabletop
wargames, among other genres. These games are the best for training the skills needed in the PSG; on
the other hand, similarity to the PSG is the weakest here, and they are also the most time-consuming,
taking weeks to learn effectively.
• The arcade group consists of simple strategy games with gameplay mechanisms similar to the PSG;
they are most effective if you are merely interested in familiarizing yourself with the genre. There are
often not much problem-solving involved, and they rely more on gut feeling than any calculations.
While simulation games can take weeks or months to learn, these games may take just a few minutes, or
a few days at most.
• The middle group are games with a nice blend between the realistic and arcade styles, and as such they
are also “average” in nearly every aspect of PSG practice.

Depending on your available free time and your taste, choose a few games to play when you relax, and do
not let them obstruct other activities – it is not a substitute for serious practice, just think of these games as a
way to have fun productively. I have a list of video games recommended to me by my team and correspondents
in the Appendices section. Feel free to send me an email at kim.tran@mconsultingprep.com if you have any
other recommendations.

7.3 Practicing with the PSG Simulation

For all the things I said about practicing this and that, the best practice platform is a replica of the PSG
itself. As such, I have created this PSG Simulation, and here is how it should be implemented into your PSG
practice plans (see the flowchart below).
Step 1: Read the free introductory article here. This should give you enough information not to be surprised,
and put you on the same level as most candidates.
Step 2: Play the Full Simulation mode once.
Step 3: Review your performance in the first Full Simulation. This shall be your baseline performance, without
any prior knowledge in terms of strategy or tips. Identify your specific weak points (e.g.: struggling with the
interface, or with resolving the food chain, or strategizing the defensive plan, etc.)
Step 4: Start improving your problem-solving skills, read this strategy guide, and use the Practice Mode to
gradually perfect your approach, focusing on identified weak points first.
Step 5+: Play the Full Simulation again, review your performance, assess progress and repeat.
8 Appendices
Appendix 1: Example of eating rules in Ecosystem Building

Original Food Chain

(see steps to resolve on the next pages)

Step 1

Step 2
Step 3

Step 4
Step 5

Step 6
Step 7

Step 8
Appendix 2: Example of order of action in Plant Defense mini-game

Planning for Turn 1, 2, 3:

• Cliff 1, Cliff 2 are Terrains with Blocking effect
• R2 is Defender with Range 2, Damage 50

(see next page for turn 1)

Turn 1:
• Defender R2 activates
• Fox 1, 2, 3 all move forward by one square
• Fox 1 has now moved into R2’s range, its population is reduced by 50

(see next page for turn 2)

Turn 2:
• Terrain Cliff 1 activates
• Fox 1, 2, 3 all move forward by one square
• Fox 1 has now moved out of R2’s range, its population is no longer reduced
• Fox 2 has been blocked by Cliff 1, it changes path
• Fox 3 move onto Cliff 2’s square, but since Cliff 2 is inactive, Fox 3 is not affected

(see next page for turn 3)

Turn 3:

• Terrain Cliff 3 activates

• Fox 1, 2, 3 all move forward by one square
• Fox 3 reaches the Base. The candidate loses.
Appendix 3: List of video games similar to the PSG

Note 1: Similarity (Similar) is rated on a scale of 1 to 5. As there are no game in the market completely
resembling the PSG mini-games, Similarity 5 represents the “best choices” at about 60-70% similarity.
Note 2: Complexity (Complex) is rated on a scale of 1 to 5. For reference, the Ecosystem Building and Plant
Defense mini-games are rated by our team at Complexity 2 (equal to a slightly complex arcade game).

Group Game Similar to? Complex Similar Price

Simulation Zoo Tycoon Ecosystem Building 4 5 $20

Simulation Planet Zoo Ecosystem Building 4 5 $45

Arcade Kingdom Rush Plant Defense 2 5 $10

Simulation Roller Coaster Tycoon Ecosystem Building 4 4 $6

Simulation SimCity 4 Ecosystem Building 4 4 $20

Simulation Cities Skylines Ecosystem Building 4 4 $20

Simulation Planet Coaster Ecosystem Building 4 4 $45

Middle Anno 2070 Ecosystem Building 3 4 $20

Middle Civilization 6 Both 3 4 $60

Middle Emperor: RotMK Ecosystem Building 3 3 $3

Middle Caesar 4 Ecosystem Building 3 3 $6

Middle Dawn of Man Ecosystem Building 3 3 $10

Arcade Plants vs Zombies Plant Defense 1 3 Free

Simulation Crusader Kings 2 Both 5 2 Free

Simulation Victoria 2 Both 5 2 $20

Simulation Europa Universalis 4 Both 4 2 $20

Simulation Field of Glory 2 Plant Defense 4 1 $30

Middle Diplomacy Online Plant Defense 3 1 Free

Arcade Risk: Global Domination Plant Defense 2 1 Free