Re: [18xx] 1830, 1856, 1870: OO tiles
- Lou Jerkich wrote:
> In 1830, 1856, 1870 and other games, I have always understood that tileThat's correct. Each of the exits on the original green tile must remain
> #59, the green OO tile, cannot be ugraded to a brown tile such that the
> two original track segements of the green tile are directly united in
> the brown upgrade, thereby displacing one of the two cities so that it
> no longer connect to its original route.
connected to a different one of the two cities on the brown tile.
> For example, in 1830 hex H18 east of Philadelphia (the Cambden & AmboyCorrect.
> hex) is one of the locations for a green OO tile. Suppose the green OO
> tile is originally placed such that one city connects due west to
> Philadelphia and the other city connects in a northeast direction to the
> southern part of New York City.
> My understanding is that this tile cannot be upgraded to brown tile 67
> such that Philadelphia and New York City would be directly connected via
> one city on tile 67 because that would displace the other city to run on
> track running NW to SE.
> In 1856 the rules (bottom of page 15) say "When a tile is replaced, all[snip]
> track segements on the replaced tile must be represented in the same
> orientations on the replacing tile."
> In 1870 on page 20 of the rules it says "When a tile is upgraded, allThe "orientation" wording is a little unclear, because the orientation
> track segments on the upgraded tile must be represented in the same
> orientations on the tile being placed. When a tile is replaced, all
> station markers and other tokens on the tile must be placed in the same
> locations as before."
(which way the tracks bend between the tile edge and each city) CAN be
changed as long as the connections are maintained. You got it right the
> Suppose each city on the green OO tile had contained the tokens of two[snip]
> different companies. In such a case in the example I cited above,
> permitting the two separate cities to be merged into one would
> inevitably create the dilemma of which token should remain in the single
> city now connecting Philadelphia and New York City, while the other
> token would suddenly be disconnected from its former track line because
> the city it is on had been moved. To me this inevitable problem is
> avoided by including the cities as part of the track segement.
> Is my interpretation faulty or is it the norm among 18xx players? IfAny other view is insupportable because it leads to that dilemma.
> you know of more specific rules on this matter please let me know, even
> if they occur in other 18xx games as well.