Comments on: Selling souls on the bayou http://kanga.nu/~claw/blog/2009/01/24/game-projects/muck-and-brass/selling-souls-on-the-bayou/ Wed, 25 Apr 2012 06:58:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: J C Lawrence http://kanga.nu/~claw/blog/2009/01/24/game-projects/muck-and-brass/selling-souls-on-the-bayou/comment-page-1/#comment-133 J C Lawrence Sun, 25 Jan 2009 07:59:35 +0000 http://kanga.nu/~claw/blog/?p=299#comment-133 <p>I'm mostly convinced by the buyer-pays rule change. The set pieces and simulations I've run through so far are intriguing. My only real questions with it regard the increased opacity of the bidding process (which is already pretty opaque), the effective time-injection into a round if players already past the time-threshold win shares (their extra three months do nothing to accelerate the end of the round) and a general unease that the entire choice among all three actions may be so ambiguous as to make the choice either unimportant (it doesn't make a significant difference which is chosen) or unnecessary due to being obvious (once the opacity blows away) and thus a non-decision.</p> <p>I also thought about a mixed duration rule, though more along the line of mixing cash and duration rather than splitting just duration. It had attractive factors but I was unable to justify the complexity and fiddle-factor of such a detailed rule. It was just too fine-grained for my sensibility.</p> I’m mostly convinced by the buyer-pays rule change. The set pieces and simulations I’ve run through so far are intriguing. My only real questions with it regard the increased opacity of the bidding process (which is already pretty opaque), the effective time-injection into a round if players already past the time-threshold win shares (their extra three months do nothing to accelerate the end of the round) and a general unease that the entire choice among all three actions may be so ambiguous as to make the choice either unimportant (it doesn’t make a significant difference which is chosen) or unnecessary due to being obvious (once the opacity blows away) and thus a non-decision.

I also thought about a mixed duration rule, though more along the line of mixing cash and duration rather than splitting just duration. It had attractive factors but I was unable to justify the complexity and fiddle-factor of such a detailed rule. It was just too fine-grained for my sensibility.

]]> By: GamesOnTheBrain http://kanga.nu/~claw/blog/2009/01/24/game-projects/muck-and-brass/selling-souls-on-the-bayou/comment-page-1/#comment-132 GamesOnTheBrain Sun, 25 Jan 2009 03:44:47 +0000 http://kanga.nu/~claw/blog/?p=299#comment-132 <p>In my own attempts to implement a Neuland/Thebes style track in one of my trains games, I use a mix of the two. The player that capitalizes pays half of the AP cost and the player who purchases the share pays the rest.</p> <p>It works pretty well.</p> In my own attempts to implement a Neuland/Thebes style track in one of my trains games, I use a mix of the two. The player that capitalizes pays half of the AP cost and the player who purchases the share pays the rest.

It works pretty well.

]]>