wrd@tekigm2.UUCP (Bill Dippert) (11/15/85)
******************************************************************************
Due to our computer apparently eating this reposting, I am re-reposting it.
******************************************************************************
From postnews Tue Nov 5 08:18:33 1985
Subject: REPOSTING OF "SEATTLE RULES" RAIL BARON
THIS IS A VERY LONG ARTICLE ON "SEATTLE RULES" CHANGES TO RAIL BARON
A few years after "Rail Baron" was first published, several individuals
in the Seattle, Washington, area came up with an alternate set of rules and an
alternate destination chart. The alternate destination chart was designed to
correct some of the inequities of the original, namely that of the NE positive
bias and the SE negative bias. The rules changes were designed to correct some
other things which were felt to be basic faults of the game itself. The game
as originally played did not seem to be enjoyable on a long term basis. The
changes were only incorporated after much trial and error in trying to find out
what was wrong with the original rules. We have also come up with an alternate
to the payoff chart, namely that of measuring the distance between the two
cities and paying off using a $ to cm relationship. (See optional rule no. 3.)
The alternate payoff method, the alternate destination chart, and the
optional rules are all independent of each other and each may be implemented
independently. However, all three together constitute the alternate "Seattle"
(or "Portland" *) rules and we feel should be implemented together for a much
more enjoyable game. Finally, credit must be given to Paul Vaughn of Seattle
who contributed the most to these revised rules. (* Paul says that his original
"Seattle" rules differ from these --"Portland"-- rules in one respect. Since
I no longer can remember which rule we disagreed on, technically these are
"Portland" rules, not "Seattle" rules.) These rules have had almost ten years
of practical experience in using them and seem to work out better then the
original rules.
SEATTLE RULES
_____________
DESTINATION TABLE
(Roll twice to find your DESTINATION. First roll and
consult the REGIONS chart to find the region, then roll
again and consult the chart for that region to pinpoint
the destination city.)
ODD EVEN ODD EVEN
REGION SOUTH CENTRAL
2 NORTHEAST 2 PLAINS 2 BIRMINGHAM 2 MEMPHIS
3 SOUTHEAST 3 NORTHWEST 3 DALLAS 3 SHREVEPORT
4 NORTH CENTRAL 4 SOUTHWEST 4 FORT WORTH 4 SAN ANTONIO
5 SOUTH CENTRAL 5 NORTHEAST 5 HOUSTON 5 NEW ORLEANS
6 PLAINS 6 SOUTHEAST 6 LITTLE ROCK 6 NASHVILLE
7 NORTHWEST 7 NORTH CENTRAL 7 LOUISVILLE 7 MEMPHIS
8 SOUTHWEST 8 SOUTH CENTRAL 8 MEMPHIS 8 LOUISVILLE
9 NORTHEAST 9 PLAINS 9 NASHVILLE 9 HOUSTON
10 SOUTHEAST 10 NORTHWEST 10 NEW ORLEANS 10 FORT WORTH
11 NORTH CENTRAL 11 SOUTHWEST 11 SAN ANTONIO 11 DALLAS
12 SOUTH CENTRAL 12 NORTHEAST 12 SHREVEPORT 12 BIRMINGHAM
NORTHEAST PLAINS
2 ALBANY 2 PITTSBURGH 2 DENVER 2 KANSAS CITY
3 BALTIMORE 3 NEW YORK 3 DES MOINES 3 PUEBLO
4 BOSTON 4 WASHINGTON 4 FARGO 4 OMAHA
5 BUFFALO 5 PORTLAND 5 KANSAS CITY 5 MINNEAPOLIS
6 NEW YORK 6 PITTSBURGH 6 MINNEAPOLIS 6 OKLAHOMA CITY
7 PHILADELPHIA 7 PHILADELPHIA 7 OKLAHOMA CITY 7 KANSAS CITY
8 PITTSBURGH 8 NEW YORK 8 OMAHA 8 FARGO
9 PORTLAND 9 BUFFALO 9 PUEBLO 9 DES MOINES
10 WASHINGTON 10 BOSTON 10 ST. PAUL 10 DENVER
11 NEW YORK 11 BALTIMORE 11 KANSAS CITY 11 OKLAHOMA CITY
12 BALTIMORE 12 ALBANY 12 OMAHA 12 DENVER
SOUTHEAST NORTHWEST
2 ATLANTA 2 TAMPA 2 BILLINGS 2 RAPID CITY
3 CHARLESTON 3 RICHMOND 3 BUTTE 3 SPOKANE
4 CHARLOTTE 4 NORFOLK 4 CASPER 4 SALT LAKE CITY
5 CHATTANOOGA 5 MOBILE 5 POCATELLO 5 SEATTLE
6 JACKSONVILLE 6 ATLANTA 6 PORTLAND 6 SPOKANE
7 KNOXVILLE 7 JACKSONVILLE 7 RAPID CITY 7 PORTLAND
8 MIAMI 8 KNOXVILLE 8 SALT LAKE CITY 8 POCATELLO
9 MOBILE 9 NORFOLK 9 SEATTLE 9 CASPER
10 NORFOLK 10 CHARLOTTE 10 SPOKANE 10 BUTTE
11 RICHMOND 11 MIAMI 11 SALT LAKE CITY 11 BILLINGS
12 TAMPA 12 ATLANTA 12 PORTLAND 12 SEATTLE
NORTH CENTRAL SOUTHWEST
2 CHICAGO 2 CLEVELAND 2 EL PASO 2 SAN FRANCISCO
3 CINCINNATI 3 CHICAGO 3 LAS VEGAS 3 TUCUMCARI
4 CLEVELAND 4 ST. LOUIS 4 LOS ANGELES 4 SAN FRANCISCO
5 COLUMBUS 5 MILWAUKEE 5 OAKLAND 5 SAN DIEGO
6 DETROIT 6 INDIANAPOLIS 6 PHOENIX 6 SACRAMENTO
7 INDIANAPOLIS 7 DETROIT 7 RENO 7 LOS ANGELES
8 MILWAUKEE 8 COLUMBUS 8 SACRAMENTO 8 PHOENIX
9 ST. LOUIS 9 CLEVELAND 9 SAN DIEGO 9 OAKLAND
10 CHICAGO 10 CINCINNATI 10 SAN FRANCISCO 10 RENO
11 CINCINNATI 11 CHICAGO 11 TUCUMCARI 11 LAS VEGAS
12 MILWAUKEE 12 ST. LOUIS 12 LOS ANGELES 12 EL PASO
CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL RULES
NOTE: deletions will be shown thusly -- {delete}
changes or additional material will be shown thus -- [xxxxx]
First page:
No changes.
Second Page:
The Bonus Roll: ....
3) He owned a SUPERCHIEF when he rolled the dice during his normal turn. (So
a player with a SUPERCHIEF gets a Bonus Roll every turn.) {deleted}
The [white dice are] rolled once for a bonus Roll. The player must move
his pawn the number of dots he rolls on the [white dice] and he must abide by
all of the normal rules for movement--he may not move along a section of rail
line he has already used this trip, he must move the full number of dots he
rolls (unless he arrives at his destination), and so on. {deleted} If the
Bonus Roll brings him to his destination, he immediately collects his PAYOFF
and has a chance to buy from the Bank.
A player can get no more than one Bonus Roll per turn, no matter what he
rolls and what he owns. If he is entitled to a Bonus roll he must take it. [A
player is not entitled to a Bonus roll once he arrives at his destination.]
.....
USER FEES: ....
1) You must pay the Bank $1000 if your pawn moved along any rail lines that
{deleted} the Bank owns. You pay only $1000 per turn, no matter how many of
{deleted} the Bank's rail lines you used that turn. If you do not use any of
{deleted} the Bank's rail lines, then you do not have to pay the $1000.
.....
3) As soon as all of the rail lines have been bought, the $5000 penalty goes
up to $10,000 {deleted}. After all the rail lines have been bought, you must
pay $10,000 to a player if you used any of his rail lines that turn. (This
$10,000 penalty remains in effect [until a rail line is sold back to the Bank
later in the game. Once a rail line is sold back to the Bank, the penalty is
$5000.])
.....
Example B, last paragraph:
You must pay all your penalties. If you do not have enough money, you must
sell a rail line (see SELLING below) and keep selling until you have enough
money. If you don't have any rail lines and cannot pay your penalties, you are
out of the game. [You are no longer "established" once your pawn arrives at
its destination.]
.....
[OPTIONAL RULE NO. 3]
[In order to aid in making payoffs to players reaching their destinations, a
metric rule may be used. One centimeter = 500 dollars. For example: 42
centimeters = $21,000, 20 centimeters = $10,000.]
[Explanation of optional rule no. 3 -- measure the distance in centimeters
from the city that your trip started to the your destination city (to the
nearest centimeter) and convert to $.]
ADDITIONAL SUGGESTION FROM OTHERS: (NOT INCLUDED IN SEATTLE RULES)
[OPTIONAL RULE]
If a player reaches a destination with $250,000+, then they must declare.jeff@hpcnoe.UUCP (12/03/85)
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_wuwrd@tekigm2.UUCP (Bill Dippert) (12/09/85)
> 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: > > -- Jeff Wu > ihnp4!hpfcla!j_wu TO KEEP THIS SHORT, I HAVE DELETED ALL OF JEFF'S REMARKS, SEE HIS POSTING IF YOU WANT TO READ HIS TEXT, THANK YOU. Re: Re: "Seattle" Rules Rail Baron Taking your arguments in order (more or less): I am not sure how you calculated your destination odds, but they are not correct. Remember, it in essence is: "what is the odds of rolling an odd (or even) red die along with rolling (various) combinations of white dice, realizing that there may be more than one way to reach a particular region and that for each way to reach that region, there may be more than one combination of dice that will get the correct number." As it turns out (deliberately, I might add) there are 3 possible ways to pick each region out (out of 21) in the even column and 3 possible ways to pick each region out (out of 21) in the odd column. (I.e. there is one way to get a 2, one way to get a 3, two ways to get a 4, etc.) Figure it out for each number and then notice where the regions are, add up the possible combinations and you will see that there are 21 possible combin- ations to get odd regions (or even regions). Similarly later on when you quote odds for reaching specific cities, remember that to reach that city, you must first go thru the odd calculations above, then starting with the region odds calculate the odds of reaching the city by the same method. Thus the odds for reaching Seattle are not anywhere near 12.5%. (The odds of getting NW is only 14.3% in the first place.) By the way, unlike the Regions, the Cities are not balanced as to odds of picking, so on a city by city level, you get varying odds. I do not know what you mean when you say that the original Rail Baron corresponded to the "real world" popularities. Were you referring to passenger trains or freight trains. The Seattle Rules attempted to balance out the destinations by the popularity of cities for freight trains. I am not sure what the original rules intended, but as been previously pointed out by another poster, how realistic is it to pay as much run trains down a track if you pay as much to run the trains as it cost you to buy the railroad? It's only a game for crying out loud! Other rule changes: 1: yes, use two white dice instead of one red die. Speeds up the game as you get to destinations quicker. (Regardless of length of trip.) 2: what good does it do you to get a bonus roll when you are there? This rule merely spells out what was implied in the original rules. 3: yes, this also speeds up the game. And yes, it gets rid of the annoying part of the game of having to continuously pay for trip. 4: again, this speeds up the game. Anything that allows you either to not pay out as much or allows you to get more money speeds up the game. 5: again, why would it do you any good to be established when you are at your destination. This is an attempt to clarify a situation caused by the origninal rules, that really is impossible. Once you reach your destination, by definition you are no longer on a railroad, there- fore, how can you be "established"? Thus, two of the rule changes were to clarify the original rules and three were to speed up the game. Which brings us to the use of the ruler. It also was to speed up the game, the orginal chart was hopeless. If you have the use of a computer, fine. The ruler in most cases gives you either the identical $ or close enough that in the long run it does not matter. While most of us have computers now, they usually are not in the same room where we have social activities (such as Rail Baron) thus their use is negated. However, if you have a terminal nearby, use it! Again, the ruler is simply to speed up the game. Which brings me to my final point, for *** sakes, if you like a game that can be longer than even Monopoly then do not use the rule changes designed to speed it up! But from over 10 years experience, we have found that it makes a much better game if speeded up (it still can take up to 7 hours, for heaven sakes!). The other factor of the game time is obviously how many players that you allow. We sometimes have up to 8 players (red, yellow, black, white, blue, green, orange, yellow/black) -- the orange and yellow/black were added deliberately to allow more players at times. Normally we play 4 - 6 players and anything that can be done to speed up the game is welcome. With only 2 - 3 players the game will go fairly fast no matter how you play it. (To get extra tokens, we ordered an extra set from A-H and painted up markers, etc. and photocopied the white cards and colored them in for Express and Superchief.) Would be interested in hearing from other players who have been trying our modified "Seattle" Rules to see how they feel about them. As I said in the original postings, they have been played for over 10 years and we think we have more or less perfected them. I wonder how long A-H tried the original rules? --Bill-- tektronix!tekigm2!wrd Bill Dippert c/o Tektronix, Inc. M/S C1/775 P.O. Box 3500 Vancouver, WA 98668-3500 or Bill Dippert 2650 N. W. Robinia Lane Portland, OR 97229-4037 white, blue, green,
srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (12/12/85)
In article <304@tekigm2.UUCP> wrd@tekigm2.UUCP (Bill Dippert) writes: >...one >way to get a 2, one way to get a 3, two ways to get a 4, etc.) In this and your other posting you've said that people should count the permutations and not the combinations in figuring out the odds for throwing into the regions. I believe you're wrong on this, though this sort of thing was never my long suit. Let's say that Plains comes up on even-7 and even-4 (just making these up; I don't have charts with me). Then the odds of throwing the Plains are 1/2 * ( 6/36 + 3/36) The one-half comes from the even/odd die. > >Other rule changes: > >1: yes, use two white dice instead of one red die. Speeds up the game as > you get to destinations quicker. (Regardless of length of trip.) And gives a bigger advantage to the players who get Superchiefs first. Also makes luck much more important in the early game, when rolling doubles becomes a huge advantage. >2: what good does it do you to get a bonus roll when you are there? This > rule merely spells out what was implied in the original rules. A bonus roll can be CRUCIAL after you get to a destination!! It lets you get in and out in one turn. Do we play the same game? I don't have the rules with me, but I'll be very surprised if I find your "implication" in there. >5: again, why would it do you any good to be established when you are at > your destination. This is an attempt to clarify a situation caused > by the origninal rules, that really is impossible. Once you reach > your destination, by definition you are no longer on a railroad, there- > fore, how can you be "established"? No, no, no. Suppose you are sitting at a junction of two railroads when one of them gets bought. You'd just finished riding the other one. Are you established on the one that was just bought? Yes! Likewise, you are established on a railroad until you ride another railroad. It doesn't matter whether or not you go to your destination. Again, this can be crucial if you are going in and out of a destination on someone's railroad. > Which brings us to the use of the ruler. It >also was to speed up the game, the orginal chart was hopeless. If you >have the use of a computer, fine. The ruler in most cases gives you >either the identical $ or close enough that in the long run it does not >matter. I don't think the ruler is that close. First of all, the charts take into account crossing the mountains. Secondly, the scale changes across the map. Though Oakland to Denver and Pueblo to Cinncinati are the same number of dots apart, Pueblo to Cinncinati is actually several inches longer (but pays $1K less according to the charts!). Finally, the charts also take into consideration the number of railroads in and out of a city. San Diego to Miami, for instance, pays more than it "should". Regardless of the fact that you've been honing them for "ten years", these rules don't seem well thought out or particularly playable. -- Scott Turner
franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) (12/16/85)
In article <304@tekigm2.UUCP> wrd@tekigm2.UUCP (Bill Dippert) writes: >I do not know what you mean when you say that the original Rail Baron >corresponded to the "real world" popularities. Were you referring to >passenger trains or freight trains. The Seattle Rules attempted to >balance out the destinations by the popularity of cities for freight >trains. I find it hard to believe that Chicago is so far down the list as a freight destination. >Other rule changes: > >2: what good does it do you to get a bonus roll when you are there? This > rule merely spells out what was implied in the original rules. >5: again, why would it do you any good to be established when you are at > your destination. This is an attempt to clarify a situation caused > by the origninal rules, that really is impossible. Once you reach > your destination, by definition you are no longer on a railroad, there- > fore, how can you be "established"? > >Thus, two of the rule changes were to clarify the original rules and three >were to speed up the game. Your clarifications would be more accurately called misinterpretations. If you have a bonus roll coming when you are at your destination, you make your purchase if any, then roll a new destination, and use the bonus roll to move towards it. By definition, you remain on a railroad as long as you never move off it. So if you are established on a railroad at a destination, you are still established on it starting your next trip. As soon as you move on another railroad, you are no longer established. I suggest you use the original rule as written for number 2; it adds an element of strategy to the game. The other is of minor import, but I think the original is slightly better. >Which brings us to the use of the ruler. It >also was to speed up the game, the orginal chart was hopeless. We never had any problem using the chart. It was at least as fast as using a ruler would have been. Frank Adams ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka Multimate International 52 Oakland Ave North E. Hartford, CT 06108
wrd@tekigm2.UUCP (Bill Dippert) (12/17/85)
> In article <304@tekigm2.UUCP> wrd@tekigm2.UUCP (Bill Dippert) writes: > > In this and your other posting you've said that people should count the > permutations and not the combinations in figuring out the odds for throwing > into the regions. I believe you're wrong on this, though this sort of thing > was never my long suit. In reality I said the reverse, but so far about 14 people have told me that I was wrong, that you should calculate using permutations and not comibinations. > Let's say that Plains comes up on even-7 and even-4 (just making these up; > I don't have charts with me). Then the odds of throwing the Plains are > > 1/2 * ( 6/36 + 3/36) > > The one-half comes from the even/odd die. Apparently, this is correct. > >Other rule changes: > > > >1: yes, use two white dice instead of one red die. Speeds up the game as > > you get to destinations quicker. (Regardless of length of trip.) > > And gives a bigger advantage to the players who get Superchiefs first. Also > makes luck much more important in the early game, when rolling doubles > becomes a huge advantage. Debateable. > >2: what good does it do you to get a bonus roll when you are there? This > > rule merely spells out what was implied in the original rules. > > A bonus roll can be CRUCIAL after you get to a destination!! It lets you > get in and out in one turn. Do we play the same game? I don't have the rules > with me, but I'll be very surprised if I find your "implication" in there. Try reading the section entitled "ENDING A TRIP": "Whenever a player's pawn moves onto the destination city it is heading for, the pawn must immediately stop (the player does not have to roll the exact number of dots to move onto the destination city--if he rolls higher he just moves onto it and loses the rest of that roll)." To me this and other portions of the rules means that your turn ends when you reach your destination. There is no way to go in and out of a city on one roll! I would suggest that we are not playing the same game and that you are incorrect in allowing this variation. > >5: again, why would it do you any good to be established when you are at > > your destination. This is an attempt to clarify a situation caused > > by the origninal rules, that really is impossible. Once you reach > > your destination, by definition you are no longer on a railroad, there- > > fore, how can you be "established"? > > No, no, no. Suppose you are sitting at a junction of two railroads when one > of them gets bought. You'd just finished riding the other one. Are you > established on the one that was just bought? Yes! Likewise, you are > established on a railroad until you ride another railroad. It doesn't matter > whether or not you go to your destination. Again, this can be crucial if you > are going in and out of a destination on someone's railroad. > I have forgotten what I had originally written, however, as far as you go, I agree with you. If you are at the junction of two railroads you can be said to be established on both of them, altho this is debateable. But, when you reach your destination, you are not established on any railroad. This goes back to what I said above, once at your destination, your turn ends. You cannot go in and out on one roll or turn. > > Which brings us to the use of the ruler. It > >also was to speed up the game, the orginal chart was hopeless. If you > >have the use of a computer, fine. The ruler in most cases gives you > >either the identical $ or close enough that in the long run it does not > >matter. > > I don't think the ruler is that close. First of all, the charts take into > account crossing the mountains. Secondly, the scale changes across the > map. Though Oakland to Denver and Pueblo to Cinncinati are the same number > of dots apart, Pueblo to Cinncinati is actually several inches longer (but > pays $1K less according to the charts!). Finally, the charts also take > into consideration the number of railroads in and out of a city. San Diego > to Miami, for instance, pays more than it "should". I did not say that in all cases it was exactly the same. The ruler gives you about the same amount on the average. It is not quite exact. All I was trying to indicate was that if you double checked the each amount per the chart with each amount per the ruler, that the average difference approaches zero, but it is not zero. > Regardless of the fact that you've been honing them for "ten years", these > rules don't seem well thought out or particularly playable. > --Scott Turner Until you follow the original rules, how can you say that the modified rules are not playable? I still question some of the things that you seem to do with the original rules. I would be interested in seeing how many agree with each of our interpretations. How many agree that play ends when you reach your destination (other than buying something)? How many agree that play does not end when you reach your destination but rather then you can go in and out on one turn per Scott? n
jeff@hpcnoe.UUCP (12/20/85)
I posted the following: > 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 should have clearified, the probability quoted is the probability of getting that destination once the Region has been chosen. The reason that I didn't post "full probabilities" is that I believe that the idea of P(region)*P(city given region) is inaccurate. The above formula ignores that if the region thrown is the same as you are in, then you get to pick a region. When you get to pick a region, than it screws up the probability because what you really want to know is what is the probability when you have no choice in the matter. A second order approximation would have the formula: (P(region) - P(in region)*P(region)) * P(city given region) It subtracts out the number of times when you get a choice. Which is the probability of being in a region (approximate P(region)) times the probability of throwing that region (P(region)). You can refine this more by saying that the probability of being in a region is not P(region) because of the choice factor, and so on and so on... -- Jeff Wu