Recap of the two cards
The two Hostile Takeovers share the same principle: you pay 1 token of the target metal to the bank, then steal 1 token of the same metal from an opponent. Net for you: +1 token. Net for the opponent: -1 token.
- Hostile Takeover Silver: cost 1 Silver, gain 1 Silver. Total IP swing: 8 (you +4, opponent -4).
- Hostile Takeover Gold: cost 1 Gold, gain 1 Gold. Total IP swing: 30 (you +15, opponent -15).
Naively, the Gold takeover always seems superior: same card cost, swing 4 times bigger. But three factors counterbalance.
Factor 1: Veto risk
A Hostile Takeover Gold is the number-one target of all Vetoes. Statistically, about 60-70% of Gold takeovers are vetoed when a Veto is still available at the opponent's. For Silver takeover, this rate drops to 15-20%: the stakes aren't high enough to waste a Veto.
If the opponent vetoes: you lose your Gold paid as cost (-15 IP) without recovering the opponent's. Disaster: a 15 IP reverse swing to your detriment.
Conclusion: only play Gold takeover if you've counted the remaining Vetoes (discard pile + estimates). If the opponent is probably without a Veto, go for it. Otherwise, prefer a less risky Silver takeover.
Factor 2: opponent reserves
For a takeover to work, the opponent must have the target metal. You can't steal Gold from someone who has none. Before playing:
- If the opponent has 0 Gold, the Gold takeover is useless.
- If the opponent has 1 Gold, the Gold takeover is profitable but probably vetoed.
- If the opponent has 3+ Gold, it's a juicy target but they probably also have a Veto.
Practical case: a player has 4 Silver and 0 Gold. You have both takeovers in hand. Answer: Silver takeover (the Gold takeover is impossible). If you keep the Gold takeover, save it for when the same player has bought their Gold, it's more profitable.
Factor 3: your own stock
The takeover costs 1 token of the target metal from your pocket. If you have no Gold, you can't play Gold takeover, period.
If you only have 1 Gold, playing Gold takeover leaves you at 0 Gold temporarily. This exposes you to counter-attacks (if the takeover is vetoed). Better to have a cushion: play Gold takeover when you have at least 2 Gold, to absorb the eventual failure.
Timing within the turn
A takeover played mid-turn gives the opponent time to react. A takeover played as the last action of your turn changes nothing (the Veto is played in reaction, not during your next turn).
However, if you play two plots in the same turn, start with the smaller one. The opponent may veto the first, leaving you the second to execute freely. Ideal sequence: Minor Speculation (rarely vetoed) then takeover.
The Takeover + Bankruptcy combo
Bankruptcy targets a player who has no Bronze and forces them to downgrade their highest-value token. If the opponent has 1 Gold, 0 Bronze and is playing big, a Bankruptcy can transform their Gold into 2 Silver (or 5 Bronze), making them vulnerable to a subsequent Silver takeover. Two-turn combo:
- Turn N: Bankruptcy on the opponent without Bronze (Gold → 2 Silver), tempo gain and target profile change.
- Turn N+1: Hostile Takeover Silver on one of the new Silver.
Result: -7 IP from the Bankruptcy (value loss due to downgrade) + -8 IP from the takeover (4 IP swing in each direction) = about 15 IP of cumulative damage, for two plot cards. Less spectacular than a successful Gold takeover (30 IP), but much less risky (Bankruptcy is rarely vetoed, and only requires an opponent without Bronze to work).
Conclusion
Synthetic answer: Silver takeover by default, Gold takeover when the opportunity arises. The Gold takeover is the ultimate weapon but it attracts all retaliation. The Silver takeover is the everyday weapon: less spectacular but much more reliable. And never forget: the best attack is the one you don't play, because the opponent has already wasted their Veto on your previous one.