Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [18xx] Re: Stock Round Ordering

Expand Messages
  • Chris Shaffer
    ... Different people play games different ways, and expecting them to conform to your system is a good way to make people not want to play games with you
    Message 1 of 39 , Apr 1 3:33 AM
      > >I also believe that the calculating of total assets in a
      > >face-to-face game will be too time-consuming
      > >and won't work very well.
      >
      > not so, when there's people out there that
      > actually calculate what to do for their next
      > move on PAPER during their turn that takes a lot
      > of time without consideration for other players.

      Different people play games different ways, and expecting them to
      conform to your system is a good way to make people not want to play
      games with you again.

      I have a hard enough time convincing people in eastern Iowa to even
      put 18xx on the game table. If I told them they had to track their
      net worth on paper (and bluntly!!! stated that not doing so would be
      inconsiderate!!!) then I would never get the chance to play 18xx
      face-to-face except at conventions.

      Simply declaring that it is easy does not make it so! I would
      estimate that *for groups with which I play* it would add at least an
      hour to the play time. That may not be true for your group, but
      please don't tell me what is "not so" for my group.

      --
      Chris

      Keep the flying car. I want the future where "resurrection" is a
      medical specialty.
    • allen
      at least i can agree with that aspect. as 18xx is a strategic game, not a game of calculated warfare. ... From: Beard, Bruce D.
      Message 39 of 39 , Apr 1 8:44 PM
        at least i can agree with that aspect.
        as 18xx is a strategic game, not a game of
        calculated warfare.
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Beard, Bruce D." <bruce_d_beard@...>
        To: <18xx@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 8:05 PM
        Subject: RE: [18xx] Re: Stock Round Ordering


        > Although the variations to stock round ordering are intriquing, I agree
        > that nothing that slows the game should be used. Making 18XX 2% fairer at
        > the expenese of making it 50% longer is a bad trade-off. Fun is the
        > number 1 consideration.
        >
        > ________________________________
        >
        > From: 18xx@yahoogroups.com on behalf of mpcoyne@...
        > Sent: Tue 4/1/2008 10:09 PM
        > To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [18xx] Re: Stock Round Ordering
        >
        >
        >
        > Granting that you are correct, that it is no MORE annoying than that,
        > isn't that still pretty annoying, Allen? It doesn't sound any more painful
        > than a root canal, either, but I don't often have root canals for fun on a
        > Saturday afternoon. I would not seek out games with a person who is always
        > doing that. Occasionally, maybe, but not as a regular thing. I think that
        > proposing the "total assets" rule would need to be accompanied by
        > supplying the program that tracks it, and volunteering to do all the input
        > (quickly) or I wouldn't agree to it.
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: allen <astancius@... <mailto:astancius%40verizon.net> >
        > To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 10:06 am
        > Subject: Re: [18xx] Re: Stock Round Ordering
        >
        > at least bill dixon's approach is a modest
        > solution without any more complications than
        > what everyone else proposes!
        >
        > as for chris's remark, keeping track of one's total assets
        > is no more annoying than waiting for someone
        > that takes their time calculating what their move
        > would do ON PAPER on their turn.
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Ray Mulford" <ray.mulford@...
        > <mailto:ray.mulford%40gmail.com> >
        > To: <18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> >
        > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 4:32 AM
        > Subject: Re: [18xx] Re: Stock Round Ordering
        >
        >> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:19 PM, W.R.Dixon <WRDixon@...
        >> <mailto:WRDixon%40telus.net> > wrote:
        >>
        >>> Ray Mulford wrote:
        >>> > Agreed. In fact, I'd go a step further:
        >>> >
        >>> > The 18xx Priority deal mechanism is fine as is and does not need to
        >>> > change to accommodate the playing styles of certain people in certain
        >>> > gaming groups.
        >>>
        >>> So how about the Priority Occupies a certificate space.
        >>>
        >>> It starts in its normal position (determined by last to do an action)
        >>> and if there is no space for it with that player, it moves clockwise
        >>> around the player positions until it finds a home or comes back to the
        >>> starting location.
        >>> If everybody is full up then it rests in the normal position otherwise
        >>> it goes to someone who is not full of shares.
        >>>
        >>> Bill Dixon
        >>
        >> This will have zero effect on the game until someone reaches their
        >> certificate limit, so I like the idea until that point.
        >>
        >> But I see no reason to penalize the player who is at his limit (but
        >> maybe not doing better than his opponent with "Limit -1" shares) and I
        >> do not see how this makes the game any better.
        >>
        >> ------------------------------------
        >>
        >> This is a message from the 18xx mailing list.Yahoo! Groups Links
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > This is a message from the 18xx mailing list.Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > This is a message from the 18xx mailing list.Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.