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

1826

Expand Messages
  • Lars Achterfeldt
    hi all does anybody have a configuration for playing 1826 with the moderator program? lars
    Message 1 of 7 , Jul 1, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      hi all

      does anybody have a configuration for playing 1826 with the moderator
      program?

      lars
    • Nick Wedd
      We played 1826 for the first time yesterday, and all enjoyed it. We shall definitely be playing again. I have one question, which may indicate that we got
      Message 2 of 7 , Jul 3, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        We played 1826 for the first time yesterday, and all enjoyed it. We
        shall definitely be playing again.

        I have one question, which may indicate that we got something wrong.
        When the Etat formed, three of its shares were held by players, one was
        in the bank pool, and six were in its treasury. Therefore it had not
        floated, and could not operate until another share in it was bought.
        Therefore it missed two operating rounds, which was very bad for its
        principal shareholder.
        This could easily have been avoided if the companies that folded
        into it had sold some of their shares into the bank pool. None of us
        will make this mistake again. Therefore the rule that says "the Etat
        does not operate until five shares have been sold" seems to contribute
        nothing to the game, and just to be an irritating newbie-trap.

        Nick
        --
        Nick Wedd nick@...
      • Lawson Chris
        ... I will be reopening the gamekit distribution soon. The plan is that I will make 20 or so 1826 gamekits, once these are finished and ready to ship I will
        Message 3 of 7 , Aug 2, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          > From: Peter Jacobi [mailto:peter_jacobi@...]
          > I really like to have a copy of 1826!
          >
          > Chris, are considering re-opening the production?

          I will be reopening the gamekit distribution soon.

          The plan is that I will make 20 or so 1826 gamekits, once these are finished
          and ready to ship I will open distribution. Once the twenty have been sold,
          I will close distribution again and then get another 20 gamekits (but 1841
          for the second batch) ready for the next reopening.

          This way, I hope there won't be a big gap between ordering and receiving the
          gamekits. I will reopen, accept pre-orders and then close once I have enough
          orders to fulfil the available stock. I will then ask for payment for the
          order and post the gamekits when I receive the funds (I will see about using
          PayPal as a method to transfer the funds for International orders).

          Hope it won't be to long.

          Cheers
          Chris
        • zieskep@juno.com
          Hi Chris, I have now completed construction of my 1826 game kit and am trying to arrange a playing of it with my friends. I could not find the mounting board
          Message 4 of 7 , Oct 23, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Chris,

            I have now completed construction of my 1826 game kit and am trying to
            arrange a playing of it with my friends.

            I could not find the mounting board you recommended or similar, but I
            used 5 mm thick "Sturdy Board" which is a type of foam board. Seemed to
            work out nice.

            I was wondering why when you describe how many of an item there are you
            say "n off". Well, that's what I assume you mean - e.g. Station Markers
            (5 off).

            Thanks, Paul
          • Noel Leaver
            ... used 5 mm thick Sturdy Board which is a type of foam board. Seemed to work out nice. I use foamboard as well - it is strong but very light. ... say n
            Message 5 of 7 , Oct 23, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              >I could not find the mounting board you recommended or similar, but I
              used 5 mm thick "Sturdy Board" which is a type of foam board. Seemed to
              work out nice.

              I use foamboard as well - it is strong but very light.

              >I was wondering why when you describe how many of an item there are you
              say "n off". Well, that's what I assume you mean - e.g. Station Markers
              (5 off).

              Interesting, I use the phrase but I can't find it in any online
              dictionaries., other than in the term "one-off" = unique which is marked as
              "British".

              Noel

              _____________________________________________________________________
              This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
              delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
              information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
              Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
            • Charlie Wilson
              Pedantry rules ?? Chris, I had assumed that your use of 5 off was a typo for 5 of , viz a shortened 5 of them . As you found one-off is a vernacular
              Message 6 of 7 , Oct 23, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Pedantry rules ??
                Chris, I had assumed that your use of "5 off" was a typo for "5 of", viz a shortened "5 of them".  As you found "one-off" is a vernacular for, strictly, "unique item".  I have always assumed that "one-off" is a noun whereas "unique" is an adjective.
                 
                On a different issue - that of copyright, etc. - and I hasten to add that I am not a lawyer - I wonder whether we (the gaming community) have not shot ourselves in the foot with our insistence in acknowledging Francis Tresham's ground-breaking idea with 1829.  By doing this have we set the precedent for where the copyright element in the 18xx series actually lies?  I would hasten to add that I believe it would be morally reprehensible not to acknowledge Francis's work when producing our own game kits, however.  There may be a lawyer in the group who could, unofficially, shed some light on this?  Again I realise that the situation may differ in different countries.
                 
                Take care
                Charlie Wilson [the bearded one] (:-{)}
                ----- Original Message -----
                Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 5:10 PM
                Subject: RE: [18xx] 1826

                >I could not find the mounting board you recommended or similar, but I
                used 5 mm thick "Sturdy Board" which is a type of foam board.  Seemed to
                work out nice.

                I use foamboard as well - it is strong but very light.

                >I was wondering why when you describe how many of an item there are you
                say "n off".  Well, that's what I assume you mean - e.g. Station Markers
                (5 off).

                Interesting, I use the phrase but I can't find it in any online
                dictionaries., other than in the term "one-off" = unique which is marked as
                "British".

                Noel

                _____________________________________________________________________
                This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
                delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
                information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
                Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.


                This is a message from the 18xx mailing list.

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
              • Beard, Bruce D.
                David, I agree. If I start the Belge undercapitalized I hurt 1 share of someone else s RR but I I hurt my own capitalization 2 ways. The shares I buy put
                Message 7 of 7 , Mar 25 7:59 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  David,

                  I agree. If I start the Belge undercapitalized I hurt 1 share of someone else's RR but I I hurt my own capitalization 2 ways. The shares I buy put less money in the RR and I am less likely to have unsold shares paying into the company for a while.

                  On the other hand, I can buy more total shares myself and the Belge will start rising in stock value. So starting the Belge at $75 is fine, but if the only reason you are doing so is to "hurt" the player who bought the P4, it is probably short-sighted.

                  -Bruce

                  ________________________________

                  From: 18xx@yahoogroups.com on behalf of David G.D. Hecht
                  Sent: Wed 3/25/2009 10:44 AM
                  To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games



                  You know, I've never understood this argument about starting the Belge at F75 "to kill the Belge private."

                  It reminds me of the story back in the 1970s when the US had just gone off the fixed-parity system and the dollar was suddenly trading much lower against foreign currencies. The story goes that the President of France Valery Giscard d'Estaing, complained to Nixon's Treasury Secretary, John Connally, about how much less their dollar holdings were worth. Connally is said to have stared at Giscard and responded, "H***, what are you complaining about, Valery? We got a LOT more dollars than you do!"

                  To start the Belge low in order to deprive the private company guy of F15 in value strikes me as much the same: it's not even cutting off your nose to spite your face, it's cutting your own throat to spite your face. You're inviting players who couldn't afford your stock (or at the very least, less of it) at a higher starting value to buy out the company, thus (1) negating your attempt to reduce the other guy's stock value, and (2) ensuring that the now-woefully undercapitalized Belge spends the rest of the game with one foot in a bucket of cement. If that's how you want to play, bring it on! I'd be happy to be the guy with the Belge private in that scenario.

                  As to the Nord (and don't forget the Paris) being hostages to the Belge's good will: again, to do that, you have to willingly cut your own dividend...by a lot. I also think that if someone is so imprudent as to start the Nord as their first company (or to start the Paris) and build toward Belgium without at least discussing it with the Belge President, they deserve all they get. As Steve Thomas rightly puts it, if you put your testicles in front of my boot, my leg just might twitch! :-)

                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: allen stancius
                  To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 9:29 AM
                  Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games

                  well, playing the game "as written"
                  typically in a 4 player game starts off with one
                  person avoiding most of the privates, and those
                  with privates starting a minor if possible.
                  then that one player starts the Belge at 75 to
                  kill the Belge private since it's the only share owned
                  by a private that has no starting value.
                  thus, that owner of the private automatically loses 25
                  from their net asset value at the start.

                  furthermore, the nord must rely on the Belge not
                  to lay unfriendly track, otherwise it's rendered helpless until green tiles
                  become available.

                  so, is this how the game IS meant to be played?
                  or is this NOT a typical start?
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "David G.D. Hecht" <Barzai@... <mailto:Barzai%40earthlink.net> >
                  To: <18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> >
                  Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 5:54 AM
                  Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games

                  > Well Allen, when YOU design a game, YOU can do it that way. This is MY
                  > game and I designed it MY way.
                  >
                  > You can play by any rules you like among your circle of friends, but
                  > frankly it annoys me when people redesign my games without the slightest
                  > idea of why certain decisions were made in the first place.
                  >
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: allen stancius
                  > To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com>
                  > Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 8:44 AM
                  > Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games
                  >
                  >
                  > also, it gives the choice to float the company with
                  > 4shares only to the private owner
                  > in which gives the owner more power, just as
                  > the bridge does in 1870 for example.
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: "allen stancius" <astancius@... <mailto:astancius%40verizon.net> >
                  > To: <18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> >
                  > Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 5:39 AM
                  > Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games
                  >
                  > > not really if it's traded in for the share after
                  > > the Belge presidency has been purchased
                  > > during that same stock round.
                  > > thus, giving that private owner a choice.
                  > > ----- Original Message -----
                  > > From: "David G.D. Hecht" <Barzai@... <mailto:Barzai%40earthlink.net> >
                  > > To: <18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> >
                  > > Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 5:18 AM
                  > > Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >> The "cure" you propose defeats the purpose of having the Belge private
                  > in
                  > >> the first place, which is to make it possible for someone to open the
                  > >> Belge with only four shares.
                  > >>
                  > >> If you think the Belge private is overvalued, allow it to pay its
                  > >> dividend
                  > >> until the Belge pays out for the first time (effectively making it $20
                  > >> cheaper on net).
                  > >>
                  > >> ----- Original Message -----
                  > >> From: allen stancius
                  > >> To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com>
                  > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 12:41 AM
                  > >> Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games
                  > >>
                  > >>
                  > >> well bruce,
                  > >> 1826 ain't any worse than 1846, except for
                  > >> having to pay for track placement in 1846.
                  > >> the worst private in 1826 is the one for the Belge.
                  > >> the suggested improvement is to allow it to
                  > >> pay the dividend until it's exchanged for a share
                  > >> of the Belge at any time during the stock round.
                  > >>
                  > >> the loans in 1826 do make it hard to go bankrupt,
                  > >> but it's not impossible!
                  > >>
                  > >> the pushing of trains in 18US & 18west
                  > >> has been hampered by design, but not entirely
                  > >> stomped if someone STILL desires to PUSH them along!
                  > >> it may take a bit more effort, but no company is ever
                  > >> train locked in either game.
                  > >> ----- Original Message -----
                  > >> From: "Beard, Bruce D." <bruce_d_beard@... <mailto:bruce_d_beard%40mcpsmd.org> >
                  > >> To: <18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> >
                  > >> Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 5:01 PM
                  > >> Subject: RE: [18xx] David's games
                  > >>
                  > >> > My PBEM games have all mysteriously stalled so I think I will start
                  > an
                  > >> > argument--er, a discussion.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > My friend Spencer Hamblen, an outstanding 18XX player, says he
                  > prefers
                  > >> > games with a catastrophic event in the middle. Among his favorites
                  > are
                  > >> > 1856, 1841 and 1830.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > David's career, to some extent, is an effort to get away from games
                  > >> with
                  > >> > catastophic events in the middle. All of us old farts have had 1830
                  > >> games
                  > >> > where our stock price was totally trashed, trainless railroads were
                  > >> dumped
                  > >> > on us or the train rush caught us by surprise and we were suddenly
                  > and
                  > >> > severely mauled. I think perhaps David was attacked by a large game
                  > of
                  > >> > 1830 in his formative years. The rest, as they say, is history.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > 1826: 26 offers a number of innovations. Private companies are
                  > >> utilized
                  > >> > rather than bought in. This prevents the "strip and dump" tactic of
                  > >> games
                  > >> > where privates can be bought for 200%. It also changes the approach
                  > to
                  > >> > the private auction. Whereas all privates have value in 1830 or
                  > 1870,
                  > >> an
                  > >> > argument can be made that in 26 (or its American cousin, 18GL) the
                  > >> object
                  > >> > of the auction is to spend as little money as possible in the
                  > auction.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > In addition, H trains and TGV both work unlike traditional trains.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Starting most companies as 5-share and all companies as "finance by
                  > >> the
                  > >> > share" prevents early train rushes.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Loans make dumping less dangerous and bankruptcy unlikely.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > (I believe this is the only one of David's designs that has a yellow
                  > >> > zone).
                  > >> >
                  > >> > On the other hand, the forced conversion to government gives players
                  > >> the
                  > >> > risk of having all their assets halved if they guess wrong on first
                  > >> 10H
                  > >> or
                  > >> > the first E. My friend Andy Roosen says it is worse than going
                  > >> bankrupt
                  > >> > because you cannot get in your car and drive home. You have to keep
                  > >> > playing and lose by $5000. In other words, the catastrophic event is
                  > >> > still looming in the midgame.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Also, some companise are far stronger than others so they tend to
                  > open
                  > >> in
                  > >> > the same order.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > 18VA: VA offers 3 kinds of cities and two kinds of trains. Early
                  > train
                  > >> > rushes and dumps are unlikely but late train rushes and dumps can be
                  > >> > devastating. The capitalization rules are both unique and offer a
                  > >> > tactical option.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Still, VA is really only good as a 3-player game. Three RRs (B&O, NW
                  > &
                  > >> > VGN) are clearly superior to the other 4. So the game can take on a
                  > >> > sameness after awhile.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > EU: EU is, I think, the most popular of David's games and the one I
                  > >> like
                  > >> > least. This shows how out of touch with the rest of humanity I am.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > SCAN: Scan is another three player game. It has minor RRs, major RRs
                  > >> and
                  > >> > a governemnt RR. Of the 4 major RRs, one is good early, one is good
                  > >> late
                  > >> > and the other two are not very good at all. The government is very
                  > >> good.
                  > >> > There is a huge train rush for the cheap permanent trains. Again,
                  > >> David
                  > >> > has not avoided the catastrophic event.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > WEST: West has a linear stock market (no trashing), 3 kinds of RRs
                  > and
                  > >> > rules that it make it easy and common for a player to own 80-100% of
                  > >> his
                  > >> > own company. There are NO private companies and strict limits on
                  > where
                  > >> > you can place track. But you have lots of early choices. You can
                  > adopt
                  > >> > an all granger strategy (which I do not recommend--since it can be
                  > >> crushed
                  > >> > by a train rush), an all land grant strategy (which works) or a
                  > >> > combination land grant/ granger strategy (which also works).
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Criticism of West in the US has been that the T&P is too strong and
                  > >> the
                  > >> NP
                  > >> > is too weak. However, in Britain, I understand, West is popular and
                  > >> the
                  > >> > ATSF is considered to be the best RR.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > There is no real catastophic event in the midgame. Unless you start
                  > >> all
                  > >> > grangers and the first 4 comes quickly, you will probably make lots
                  > of
                  > >> > money. You may lose by $2000, but you will still get to sit at the
                  > >> worst
                  > >> > table in the country club.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > West is very much a game where you are playing the game as opposed
                  > to
                  > >> the
                  > >> > other players. Your track and tokens do not interact early and there
                  > >> is
                  > >> > no real opportunity for trailing players to attack the leader.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > US: I have only played it twice. It could be called East and West
                  > >> > because the 2nd half is like West. There are two private auctions
                  > and
                  > >> two
                  > >> > distinct phases. Stock trashing is impossible (a linear board),
                  > >> > bankruptcy is unlikely (a cash rich environment and cheap permanent
                  > >> > trains) and there is no train rush. The catastrophic event does not
                  > >> > exist. As in West, any competent player should end up in the country
                  > >> > club. If you lose by $2000 it will be a comfortable $2000.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > US has moved about as far from 1830 as one can. I suspect it is
                  > >> David's
                  > >> > favorite game.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > If I were ranking them I would rank them: 26, VA, West, Scan, US,
                  > EU.
                  > >> I
                  > >> > am glad they exist. The first year I went to Origins, they only
                  > played
                  > >> > 30, 70 and 56. But for the last 4 or 5 years it has been easy to
                  > play
                  > >> 10
                  > >> > games without playing the same design twice. David has helped make
                  > >> that
                  > >> > happen.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Don't get me wrong, I like 56, 30 and (especially) 70. But I also
                  > like
                  > >> > having lots of choices.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > -Bruce
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> > ________________________________
                  > >> >
                  > >> > From: 18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> on behalf of David G.D. Hecht
                  > >> > Sent: Tue 3/24/2009 8:58 AM
                  > >> > To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com>
                  > >> > Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> > True enough, but the point is that 18xx has a sufficiently broad
                  > >> spectrum
                  > >> > of subsystems that once can develop radically different games and
                  > >> still
                  > >> > plausibly consider them within the system. Leaving out 1830BC and
                  > >> > 2038--both of which are arguably 18xx games, but at the extreme
                  > ragged
                  > >> > edge--1825 and 1841 are both 18xx games, yet they are, I assume you
                  > >> will
                  > >> > agree, quite different.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > I'm fairly happy with how my designs have turned out. Obviously
                  > there
                  > >> are
                  > >> > some things one would tweak at the margins, but "a lot differently"?
                  > >> Nah.
                  > >> > Closest I am to that is with 18Ardennes, which is in some measure a
                  > >> > redesign of 1826 (though in practice it will feel a lot more like a
                  > >> blend
                  > >> > of 18EU and 18West).
                  > >> >
                  > >> > ----- Original Message -----
                  > >> > From: Ian D Wilson
                  > >> > To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com>
                  > >> > Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 2:14 PM
                  > >> > Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games
                  > >> >
                  > >> > David,
                  > >> >
                  > >> > We all design games we enjoy playing - how else can we judge whether
                  > >> it's
                  > >> > any good?
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Are there any of your early titles which you think "I would have
                  > done
                  > >> that
                  > >> > a lot differently now"?
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Cheers,
                  > >> > Ian D
                  > >> >
                  > >> > --- On Mon, 23/3/09, David G.D. Hecht <Barzai@... <mailto:Barzai%40earthlink.net>
                  > >> > <mailto:Barzai%40earthlink.net> > wrote:
                  > >> >
                  > >> > From: David G.D. Hecht <Barzai@... <mailto:Barzai%40earthlink.net>
                  > >> > <mailto:Barzai%40earthlink.net> >
                  > >> > Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games
                  > >> > To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com>
                  > >> > Date: Monday, 23 March, 2009, 3:37 AM
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Interesting analysis.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > As to the bug or feature/costs and benefits issue, I've made it
                  > >> perfectly
                  > >> > clear that I design these games to please myself. It's all of grace
                  > >> that
                  > >> > they have some popularity with others. But don't expect me to
                  > suddenly
                  > >> > start designing games that are all about token dropping or stock
                  > >> market
                  > >> > manipulations.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > ----- Original Message -----
                  > >> > From: J C Lawrence
                  > >> > To: 18xx@yahoogroups. com
                  > >> > Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2009 11:31 PM
                  > >> > Subject: Re: [18xx] David's games
                  > >> >
                  > >> > On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:23:48 -0400
                  > >> > David G D Hecht <David> wrote:
                  > >> >
                  > >> >> Not sure what the rule of seven is...care to unpack?
                  > >> >
                  > >> > http://en.wikipedia <http://en.wikipedia/> <http://en.wikipedia/ <http://en.wikipedia/> > .org/wiki/ The_Magical_
                  > >> > Number_Seven, _Plus_or_ Minus_Two
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Quoting:
                  > >> >
                  > >> > The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our
                  > >> > Capacity for Processing Information" is a 1956 paper by the
                  > cognitive
                  > >> > psychologist George A. Miller of Princeton University's Department
                  > of
                  > >> > Psychology. In it Miller showed a number of remarkable coincidences
                  > >> > between the channel capacity of a number of human cognitive and
                  > >> > perceptual tasks. In each case, the effective channel capacity is
                  > >> > equivalent to between 5 and 9 equally-weighted error-less choices:
                  > on
                  > >> > average, about 2.5 bits of information. Miller did not draw any firm
                  > >> > conclusions, simply hypothesizing that the recurring sevens might
                  > >> > represent something deep and profound or be just a pernicious,
                  > >> > Pythagorean coincidence.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > In short there seems to be a natural boundary to human thinking
                  > >> > processes somewhere close to 7 items. In a game design senze, more
                  > >> than
                  > >> > 7 items/factors/ resonable decisions rapidly leads toward overwhelm
                  > >> and
                  > >> > less to a subjective lack of challenge.
                  > >> >
                  > >> >> The fact that shorter trains make it harder to play the token-drop
                  > >> >> game is a feature, not a bug.
                  > >> >
                  > >> > It is very much a feature but it comes with implications and whether
                  > >> > those are costs or benefits is a personal preference. I greatly
                  > >> > appreciate that the 18XX can emcompass such variability across game
                  > >> > designs as I find both styles have their charms (and fans).
                  > >> >
                  > >> >> Think of it this way: how many hours are added to the typical 1870
                  > >> >> game by (1) people trying to increase their 10-train (or 12-train!)
                  > >> >> run by adding another dot town, or by (2) people dropping a token
                  > in
                  > >> >> the middle of someone else's run, so they have to spend ages
                  > building
                  > >> >> a bypass? And how often do either of these tactics actually affect
                  > >> the
                  > >> >> outcome?
                  > >> >
                  > >> > Yeah, that's a couple aspects of 1870 I really don't like. At one
                  > time
                  > >> > we took to calling a track-building moratorium, I think around the
                  > >> > second 10 train or so. No more track could be laid!
                  > >> >
                  > >> > --
                  > >> > J C Lawrence They said, "You have a blue guitar,
                  > >> > ---------(*) You do not play things as they are."
                  > >> > claw@... <mailto:claw%40kanga.nu> <mailto:claw%40kanga.nu> The man replied, "Things as
                  > >> they
                  > >> > are
                  > >> > http://www.kanga <http://www.kanga/> <http://www.kanga/ <http://www.kanga/> > nu/~claw/ Are changed upon
                  > the
                  > >> > blue guitar."
                  > >> >
                  > >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >> >
                  > >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >> >
                  > >> > [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
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >> >
                  > >>
                  > >>
                  > >>
                  > >>
                  > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >>
                  > >>
                  > >>
                  > >> ------------------------------------
                  > >>
                  > >> 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]
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------
                  >
                  > 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]
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.