Ah yes, I neglected to mention that she drove the Leeds line up to Edinburgh, in anticipation of thundering the game to a close.

Ahh, that makes sense! Usually the NER is used for that particular trick as it is almost always connected early in the game.

Yeah I got bit by this on more than one occasion, capitalizing a share I really didn’t want/need, in hopes of luring in external financing and gaining tempo. I start the bidding low, she deadpans “Pass.” Howling ensues.

There’s an oddness there is how little the first share of a secondary company is worth and how very much the second share can be worth. Once you (hopefully safely) have 100% of a company, it can be an interesting place to sock away money in order to compete for turn order.

Short reason why I lost: more tactical play than strategic play. I won’t approach it the same way next time.

I look forward to your next report!

Ah yes, I neglected to mention that she drove the Leeds line up to Edinburgh, in anticipation of thundering the game to a close.

No, they may not raise their own bid. Thanks for the catch. I’ve changed the language in the Capitalise section to match that in the Game Start section: when all but one player has passed. Thanks again.

Yeah I got bit by this on more than one occasion, capitalizing a share I really didn’t want/need, in hopes of luring in external financing and gaining tempo. I start the bidding low, she deadpans “Pass.” Howling ensues.

Sometimes it is better to sit back and let someone else do the deed, even if you lose short-term position, while you setup tempo and position in another portion of the board to your longer-term advantage.

Short reason why I lost: more tactical play than strategic play. I won’t approach it the same way next time.

One rules question: if a player bids on a share and everyone else passes, can that player increase their own bid? The rules imply this (”until all players have passed”) but I thought I’d ask for confirmation.

No, they may not raise their own bid. Thanks for the catch. I’ve changed the language in the Capitalise section to match that in the Game Start section: when all but one player has passed. Thanks again.

The decisions are clearly non-obvious, which I’m positive is intended.

Yup!

We briefly forgot the limits on expansions out of a city and had to roll an action or two back.

I wish there was a more natural form of the rule, something a little more automatic, but there has to be something to make it hard to entirely prevent potential mergers. I’ve thought about putting a little thematic chrome into the rules there, A requirement of the British Government in order to stimulate competition, but in truth there was no such law. Ahh well.

We were similar in cash holdings after the third dividend, but the northern railways were more highly capitalized.

You should have been raking in the money as London was maximally developed and all your companies had soaked up every link out of London. London is big that way.

Leeds drives into Liverpool allowing the wife to take a 5 to 1 share lead in the now 79 income company.

A cute thing that can be done here as the minor investor is to build track such that the main merger routes either violate the all-exits rule or there’s just not enough money left in the treasury for a double-Expand-based merger.

She takes a share in the Edinburgh, cheaply. I drove the Brighton line to Liverpool to even out the holdings in the now 118 income company, make the mistake of sinking 55 into a share of the Swansea. She drives it into Ipswich, caps the second share of Edinburgh and forces (with her tenth month) the game to the fourth dividend and the finish. She wins, 360-315.

And of course you lost your entire investment in the SWR while she recovers all the money she invested in the CR. Oooof! The secondary companies are tricky that way.

Did you miss a step there?

• LMR merged into the L&SR — CR Capitalised
• B&BR merged into L&SR — SWR Capitalised
• L&SR merged into EUR — CR Capitalised and now floats

That should leave the EUR, CR and LB&SCR in the game. If that’s accurate, then with three companies in operation the game is not yet over. Or did the LB&SCR merge into something? You need one more merger to reduce the set to two companies before the game can end.

Her comments: very well balanced, slightly long (it took about two hours but I see no reason why this won’t shrink considerably for two on subsequent plays).

Cool. It sounds like you have a fun game.

It was slightly disconcerting to see the game end so rapidly after the third dividend but this may change as knowledge of the game progresses.

Frankly, a great many of the newbie games here looked much like that. Then during the post-game discussions there was a whole lot of Oh! and Ah! going on and later games were rather different. Without trying to prejudice your games, I find that most games with modestly experienced players will end in the 5th or 6th round, and that the more experienced the players are, the closer it often gets to the 7th round.

I will have to identify how to exploit the expand limitations to prevent mergers.

Foreign Ports can be good for that too.

I suppose ending early isn’t necessarily a problem, but the game feels as if the first three rounds are setup for the good bits, so it was anticlimactic when there was only a short taste of them. I’m pretty sure there was another comment along these lines on the previous post, so this may be primarily a first game, unfamiliar with mergers and how to block them phenomenon.

At a gross level there are four ways to prevent mergers:

1. Suck the treasury dry so that there’s not enough money left in the treasury for the requisite Expands (ports are especially good for this)
2. Build track so that mergers are either directly blocked or can’t happen without violating the all-exits rule (especially easy to do with the LB&SCR, not hard with the L&MR and EUR, a little tougher with the rest)
3. Arrange the share distribution so that it is not to their advantage to merge
4. Arrange turn order so that you act first and can thus control whether there is a merger or not, and in what direction

I’m eager to get this to the table again sometime this week and will gauge interest in it at next Saturday’s group meetup.

Excellent! There’s some commentary in the prior thread regarding the comparative advantages of mergers versus ports as well as the positional implications of the 5 secondary companies that may be helpful. I suggest stressing the possibility for a very fast surprise finish when you teach your group this weekend. Players have to keep in mind how their actions in the early rounds setup and control potential game-length (this is is admittedly quite hard). There’s a natural (and usually misguided) tendency to think that because mergers are big and dramatic, then they must also be good. Well, they are good for some people and they’re less good for others and it is worth thinking hard as to where you fit in that space. There are also some big opportunity cost questions involved with both foreign ports and mergers. Sometimes it is better to sit back and let someone else do the deed, even if you lose short-term position, while you setup tempo and position in another portion of the board to your longer-term advantage.

Wife made a plan, executed it; she grabbed up Liverpool and Leeds with bids of 35 and 40. I was left to run the southern three systems, which in retrospect I undercapitalized at 20 each. My plan was to use the extra cash for double develops, which I did, along with expanding all three into London for decent income on all three. Managed to buy into the Liverpool but blocked out of Leeds, which she then focused all her energy on. We briefly forgot the limits on expansions out of a city and had to roll an action or two back.

We were similar in cash holdings after the third dividend, but the northern railways were more highly capitalized. Leeds drives into Liverpool allowing the wife to take a 5 to 1 share lead in the now 79 income company. She takes a share in the Edinburgh, cheaply. I drove the Brighton line to Liverpool to even out the holdings in the now 118 income company, make the mistake of sinking 55 into a share of the Swansea. She drives it into Ipswich, caps the second share of Edinburgh and forces (with her tenth month) the game to the fourth dividend and the finish. She wins, 360-315.

Her comments: very well balanced, slightly long (it took about two hours but I see no reason why this won’t shrink considerably for two on subsequent plays).

It was slightly disconcerting to see the game end so rapidly after the third dividend but this may change as knowledge of the game progresses. I will have to identify how to exploit the expand limitations to prevent mergers. I suppose ending early isn’t necessarily a problem, but the game feels as if the first three rounds are setup for the good bits, so it was anticlimactic when there was only a short taste of them. I’m pretty sure there was another comment along these lines on the previous post, so this may be primarily a first game, unfamiliar with mergers and how to block them phenomenon.

I’m eager to get this to the table again sometime this week and will gauge interest in it at next Saturday’s group meetup.