Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site hpcnoe.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!hpfcdc!hpfcla!hpcnoe!jeff
From: jeff@hpcnoe.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.games.board
Subject: Re: Re: Seattle Rules Rail Baron
Message-ID: <37800017@hpcnoe.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Dec-85 14:55:00 EST
Article-I.D.: hpcnoe.37800017
Posted: Tue Dec  3 14:55:00 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Dec-85 03:41:20 EST
References: <270@tekigm2.UUCP>
Organization: 03 Dec 85 12:55:00 MST
Lines: 62

Re:  "Seattle" rules Rail Baron.

I think the  Seattle  Rules  would ruin Rail  Baron.  Looking at the new
destination chart, the region probabilities break down as:

    NE, SE, PL, SC, SW  -- 10/72 = 13.9%
    NC, NW              -- 11/72 = 17.3%

While this looks more  equitable  than the  original  rules, it actually
unbalances  the game.  The NE  railroads  (PA,  NYC,  B&O, C&O) are very
expensive as compared to the SE railroads  (SOU, L&N, ACL, SAL) by about
$10,000 per railroad.  Yet the NE railroads are about the same length as
the SE railroads.  The reason that they are more  expensive is that they
are used  more  often.  If you make SE the same  probability  as the NE,
then the SE railroads should cost slightly more than NE railroads (it is
more of a pain to get stuck in the SE than NE).

The  original  rules  destination  chart was  designed  so that the most
popular cities and areas  corresponds to the "real world"  popularities.
The Seattle rules does not have any consistency.  For example, Pocatello
has the same probability as Seattle (12.5%) but Billings has a much less
(4.2%).  This boosts the importance of UP and lessens that of SP.

I think this rule change is  equivalent  to noticing  that the rents are
not the same in Monopoly and making them all the same.

The game of Rail Baron has fairly  balanced  price/performance  ratio on
all their railroads (N&W excepted).  People will have different opinions
on  each   railroad,   and   what   they   perceive   to  be  a   better
price/performance  ratio will become their favorites (mine are D&RGW and
PA).

On the other rule changes (which I think they are):

    1.  Bonus roll uses two dice instead of one.
    2.  Bonus roll not allowed if you reach your destination.
    3.  You don't pay the bank for traveling on your own rails.
    4.  The fee goes back to $5000 if someone sells a railroad 
	back to the bank.
    5.  You are no longer established once your pawn arrives at
	its destination.

Rule three is fairly minor change.  We do this to speed up the game.  It
speeds up the game in that players buy up railroads  faster because they
do not need to keep as much in reserve  (actually  this is a  drawback).
The main savings is the hassle of paying each and every turn.

Rule four and five are fairly  minor--they don't occur very often.  What
is the reason that this rule is added?
    
Rule one and two seems to favor long trips.  Short  trips are  agonizing
enough  (at  end  game)   without   adding  these  rules.  What  is  the
justification for adding these rules?

On optional rule using the ruler to measure  payoffs, this probably does
not make that much  difference  except that the Western  routes seems to
have an  advantage.  Why was this  rule  added?  Is it to save  from the
hassle of the payoff chart?  We use a computer to do our destination and
payoff so it is relatively painless.

-- Jeff Wu
   ihnp4!hpfcla!j_wu