Hey everyone,
I’m preparing for the McKinsey Environment Solve Game and have gone through multiple posts here as well as a few YouTube tutorials. I’m still a bit unsure about the best starting approach and was hoping to hear from people who’ve actually played it.
My main question:
Do you find it more effective to
1. First choose the terrain/location (e.g., mountain, reef, etc.) and then select producers and animals that fit well with it,
or
2. First design a strong food chain (producers → herbivores → carnivores) for maximum sustainability, and only afterwards decide on the best terrain to match it?
I can see the logic for both:
• Starting with the terrain might help narrow the options and ensure compatibility.
• Starting with the food chain might let you optimise calorie flow and survival rates first.
If you’ve done the game: what worked better for you in practice? Any pitfalls to avoid in the first few steps?
Thanks!
Thanks for your comment and the detailed reasoning. As a starting point for building the chain, my approach would be to focus on the providers and their stats first. Specifically, I’d first look for a constellation where the calories provided by the producers are maximised, and then, based on this foundation, introduce suitable animals that fit into the chain sustainably.
What’s your take on this strategy?