headers
mpcoyne | 1 Aug 2008 06:52
Picon
Favicon

Re: 1830 PC game


 That is a very good score for anyone's game. I will say, it is more likely when you expand the game with extra
trains and a larger bank, simply because whoever is winning has more time to pile up a better score with a
bigger bank to go through. Still, I'd be proud of that score in any game vs. the computer.

-----Original Message-----
From: christopher.boote@...
To: 18xx@...
Sent: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 6:20 pm
Subject: [18xx] 1830 PC game

As those of you have played against me know, I'm pretty crud at 18xx, 
usually scoring low third or fourth in a four player game, and every now 
and then winning (which is as much as surprise to em as to my opponents)

I play the 1830 PC game quite a bit, with random maps, and usually come 
second or occasionally first, with final scores in the 1600-1800 range

But this evening, I scored 2727!
I even got a message that was new to me about crushing my opponents 
beneath my iron heel and becoming a Robber Baron - I've never been lauded 
above Tycoon before

As I know that some of you play far games than I, is this an exceptional 
score, or the sort of thing that good players achieve regularly?

Thanx

Chris
(Oh, and if anyone wants to play the same map it's 899696239, four player,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
James Blight | 1 Aug 2008 21:08
Picon
Favicon

Re: 1830 PC game

As Mr Coyne said, expanding the game can lead to bigger and better wins.
The other thing to remember is: the "AI" computer player isn't adept at adapting to different(random)
maps, where you are smart (all 18XX players are, right ;-) enough to change strategies when needed.

-Jim B

--- On Fri, 8/1/08, mpcoyne@... <mpcoyne@...> wrote:
From: mpcoyne@... <mpcoyne@...>
Subject: Re: [18xx] 1830 PC game
To: 18xx@...
Date: Friday, August 1, 2008, 12:52 AM

 That is a very good score for anyone's game. I will say, it is more likely when you expand the game with extra
trains and a larger bank, simply because whoever is winning has more time to pile up a better score with a
bigger bank to go through. Still, I'd be proud of that score in any game vs. the computer.
-----Original Message-----
From: christopher. boote <at> orange. net
To: 18xx <at> yahoogroups. com
Sent: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 6:20 pm
Subject: [18xx] 1830 PC game

As those of you have played against me know, I'm pretty crud at 18xx, 
usually scoring low third or fourth in a four player game, and every now 
and then winning (which is as much as surprise to em as to my opponents)
I play the 1830 PC game quite a bit, with random maps, and usually come 
second or occasionally first, with final scores in the 1600-1800 range

But this evening, I scored 2727!
I even got a message that was new to me about crushing my opponents 
beneath my iron heel and becoming a Robber Baron - I've never been lauded
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Steve Thomas | 1 Aug 2008 21:34

Re: 1830 PC game

Jim Blight wrote:

> As Mr Coyne said, expanding the game can lead to bigger and better wins.
> The other thing to remember is: the "AI" computer player isn't adept at 
> adapting
> to different(random) maps, where you are smart (all 18XX players are, 
> right ;-)
> enough to change strategies when needed.

It's worse than that.  The score you get is dependent on your value at the 
end of the game, rather than on your proportion of the total assets.  It is 
therefore poorly correlated with your actual level of success by any sane 
measure.  To get a large score you need to manoeuvre yourself into a 
position where you have a large proportion of the shares and as many trains 
as possible in the companies you have shares in, and the bank is almost 
broken going into a stock round.  Getting to more or less the same state 
with the bank just broken will lead to a much lower score.  There's a degree 
of skill in achieving high scores, but it isn't the same sort of skill that 
leads to victory against sensible opponents.

--
Steve Thomas  maisnestce <at> b...

------------------------------------

This is a message from the 18xx mailing list.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/18xx/
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
James Blight | 1 Aug 2008 21:42
Picon
Favicon

!870/1825 questions

1870:
When my group got together and played 1870, usually the following companies are always started first:

- Frisco (starting packet)
- Missouri Pacific
- AT&SF or the KATY
- Southern Pacific

Starting the Burlington Route early looks like a bad idea.

- Has anyone had success starting one of the others (Texas & Pacific, GM&O, St Louis-Southwestern,
Illinois Central) early?  

- There is an obvious opportunity for two players to start early with GM&O (destination St Louis) and
Illinois Central (destination Chicago) to work together to make their destination runs.  Has anyone
tried this or seen anyone else try this?

1825:
As far as I can tell, 1825 is the most expensive 18XX game I know of.  My old group considered buying it, but
always chose a less expensive alternate.  I am sure the 1825 fanatics would say the extra cost is worth
paying.  But what characteristics does the game have that makes it worth the expense versus other 18XX games?

-Jim B

------------------------------------

This is a message from the 18xx mailing list.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/18xx/
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 14 comments |
headers
Lou Jerkich | 1 Aug 2008 22:08
Picon
Favicon

RE: 1825 plus regions

> [Original Message]
> From: geoffac1954 <geoffac1954@...>
> To: <18xx@...>
> Date: 7/30/2008 3:39:27 PM
> Subject: [18xx] 1825 plus regions
>
> I was thinking of suggesting my next 1825 game as Unit 1 with the 
> Regional  expansions 1 to 3 ( Wales , SW England , North Norfolk ) 
> plus K7 - the Tilbury minor .  However the Welsh board extends  
> beyond the northern most edge of Unit 1 giving the game area a very 
> artificial look – and compromising the Cambrian Railway to boot.  
> Moving to a complete U1+U2 plus R1 to 3 is not ideal due to likely 
> game length.
>

I played the exact combination which you are contemplating just a month
ago.  To shorten the game we dropped the player cash from the 14,000 we
might normally use down to 12,000.  The top of the market was 340 as in the
original Unit 1 game (rather than Unit 2's 500) and that too kept the game
within the time limits we had available.  In addition, we added my Port
variant, which worked quite well in the context of our game.  There were 8
share dealing rounds and 14 operating rounds before the game ended with the
LSWR reaching the upper market limit of 340.  We found the game to be quite
enjoyable.  The only companies that did not come into play were the GER and
the Cambrian.    The latter was not unexpected given that the Cambrian
would be located at the fringes of an area that is not very profitable when
the board ends without continuing into Unit 2.

> But has anyone tried using U1, Wales , South West England and North 
> Norfolk plus the U2 board only ? . No companies from U2 would be in
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Beard, Bruce D. | 1 Aug 2008 22:32

RE: !870

The GMO is a more typical starter than the SP.  It can use up to 4 trains out of the port in Mobile and does not cost
$80 (like the SP). 

Probably the IC and the 3 TX RRs are the least likely to start.

________________________________

From: 18xx@... on behalf of James Blight
Sent: Fri 8/1/2008 3:42 PM
To: 18XX yahoo group
Subject: [18xx] !870/1825 questions

1870:
When my group got together and played 1870, usually the following companies are always started first:

- Frisco (starting packet)
- Missouri Pacific
- AT&SF or the KATY
- Southern Pacific

Starting the Burlington Route early looks like a bad idea.

- Has anyone had success starting one of the others (Texas & Pacific, GM&O, St Louis-Southwestern,
Illinois Central) early? 

- There is an obvious opportunity for two players to start early with GM&O (destination St Louis) and
Illinois Central (destination Chicago) to work together to make their destination runs. Has anyone
tried this or seen anyone else try this?

1825:
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
David G.D. Hecht | 1 Aug 2008 22:38
Picon
Favicon

Re: !870

That overlooks the classic strategy of buying the bridge company, then 
sitting on it while opening the Burlington. You can destinate on a *2* train 
with the Burlington! Though of course you're more likely to do it with a 3 
train. Meanwhile, all those folks on the eastern shore of the Mississippi 
are sucking wind...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Beard, Bruce D." <bruce_d_beard@...>
To: <18xx@...>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 4:32 PM
Subject: RE: [18xx] !870

> The GMO is a more typical starter than the SP.  It can use up to 4 trains 
> out of the port in Mobile and does not cost $80 (like the SP).
>
> Probably the IC and the 3 TX RRs are the least likely to start.
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: 18xx@... on behalf of James Blight
> Sent: Fri 8/1/2008 3:42 PM
> To: 18XX yahoo group
> Subject: [18xx] !870/1825 questions
>
>
>
> 1870:
> When my group got together and played 1870, usually the following 
> companies are always started first:
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
wmikebennett | 1 Aug 2008 22:45

Re: !870

Frequently the Cotton Belt gets started instead of the MoPac.  It 
gets to its destination quickly while the MoPac often struggles.  It 
seems to be a tradeoff between a large early cashflow (MP) or ease of 
reaching the destination (CB).  Of course if the bridge company is in 
the hands of someone unwilling (StL&SF) or unable due to a lack of 
cash, neither gets started.

Mike

--- In 18xx@..., "Beard, Bruce D." <bruce_d_beard <at> ...> 
wrote:
>
> The GMO is a more typical starter than the SP.  It can use up to 4 
trains out of the port in Mobile and does not cost $80 (like the SP). 
>  
> Probably the IC and the 3 TX RRs are the least likely to start.
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: 18xx@... on behalf of James Blight
> Sent: Fri 8/1/2008 3:42 PM
> To: 18XX yahoo group
> Subject: [18xx] !870/1825 questions
> 
> 
> 
> 1870:
> When my group got together and played 1870, usually the following 
companies are always started first:
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Beard, Bruce D. | 1 Aug 2008 22:55

RE: !870

One of the nice features about 1870 is that anyone of the 10 RRs can end up being the best performer in the game.

________________________________

From: 18xx@... on behalf of David G.D. Hecht
Sent: Fri 8/1/2008 4:38 PM
To: 18xx@...
Subject: Re: [18xx] !870

That overlooks the classic strategy of buying the bridge company, then 
sitting on it while opening the Burlington. You can destinate on a *2* train 
with the Burlington! Though of course you're more likely to do it with a 3 
train. Meanwhile, all those folks on the eastern shore of the Mississippi 
are sucking wind...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Beard, Bruce D." <bruce_d_beard@...
<mailto:bruce_d_beard%40mcpsmd.org> >
To: <18xx@... <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> >
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 4:32 PM
Subject: RE: [18xx] !870

> The GMO is a more typical starter than the SP. It can use up to 4 trains 
> out of the port in Mobile and does not cost $80 (like the SP).
>
> Probably the IC and the 3 TX RRs are the least likely to start.
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: 18xx@... <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com>  on behalf
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Charlie Wilson | 1 Aug 2008 22:59
Picon

Re: !870/1825 questions

> 1825:
> As far as I can tell, 1825 is the most expensive 18XX game I know of.  My 
> old group considered buying it, but always chose a less expensive 
> alternate.  I am sure the 1825 fanatics would say the extra cost is worth 
> paying.  But what characteristics does the game have that makes it worth 
> the expense versus other 18XX games?
>
> -Jim B
>

I beg to differ, Jim:  e.g. 1825 - £24.99 per unit (bearing in mind that 
each unit is an independent game and it is only the (very) mad fools who 
play all the units together); 1856 & 1870 - £34.99 each; 1861 - £35.00.

Take care
Charlie Wilson [a bearded one]  ;-{)} 

------------------------------------

This is a message from the 18xx mailing list.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/18xx/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/18xx/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 9 comments |

Gmane