$30.00
Mike Bazynski
Poland
warsaw
mazowieckie
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
it seems the rules' intention is for it to be impossible to remove resources from the market by buying more than you can store.

imagine player A buying 3 coal, with only storage for 1. 2 'single' coals enter the market. now imagine player B buying another 3 coal, with also only storage for 1. 2 resources disappeared. I have a feeling author's intention was for player B to have to purchase a 'single' coal instead of the 3-coal card, but I can't find where it actually says so in the rules.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fridjof B
Norway
Tranby
Norway
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I understand your question, but the premise doesn't make any sense. Why would anyone with a purpose of winning the game want to buy coal for anything else than it's lowest price? The game design also gives you a hint here, with only two single resource cards of coal.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Bazynski
Poland
warsaw
mazowieckie
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
your group must be very friendly to each other... in my groups if someone can pay a little more to screw over the following player they will.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nikolas Co
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bazik123 wrote:
it seems the rules' intention is for it to be impossible to remove resources from the market by buying more than you can store.
Agreed.
bazik123 wrote:
I have a feeling author's intention was for player B to have to purchase a 'single' coal instead of the 3-coal card, but I can't find where it actually says so in the rules.
I can think of 3 possibilities:
a) The 2 excess coal is removed from the game
b) Or you're supposed to use substitutes to represent the 2 coal
c) Or you're required to purchase single resources if you don't have room for larger quantities

It's worth noting that (b) does not imply (c), even assuming rational play. Extending the original example, if player C also wants coal, then player B buying the 3-coal for $2 (and adding 2 substitute single-coal cards) may increase prices for player C: if they want 3 coal, they must now buy 3 single-coal for $1 each instead of the 3-coal for $2.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nikolas Co
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
NikolasCo wrote:
I can think of 3 possibilities:
a) The 2 excess coal is removed from the game
b) Or you're supposed to use substitutes to represent the 2 coal
c) Or you're required to purchase single resources if you don't have room for larger quantities
After thinking some more, option (c) is an incomplete solution. For example, all of the "single"-resource cards might be owned by player X when player Y purchases more resources than they can store.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fridjof B
Norway
Tranby
Norway
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bazik123 wrote:
it seems the rules' intention is for it to be impossible to remove resources from the market by buying more than you can store.

imagine player A buying 3 coal, with only storage for 1. 2 'single' coals enter the market. now imagine player B buying another 3 coal, with also only storage for 1. 2 resources disappeared. I have a feeling author's intention was for player B to have to purchase a 'single' coal instead of the 3-coal card, but I can't find where it actually says so in the rules.


OP has a better question than at first glance, of course! We had a similar situation the other night, where one player (me) spent the multiple resource cards before the singel ones in phase 3, causing a lack of singel resource cards for the other players with excess resources.
The rules says "There is no limit for the number of 'single'-resource cards in this first column". We interpreted "limitation" as not only in the meaning of a column length of 4/5/6 in a 2-3/4/5-6p game, but also in the sense of number of these cards included with the game. We used substitutes, as Nikolas suggests in (b).
1 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nikolas Co
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
NikolasCo wrote:
a) The 2 excess coal is removed from the game
b) Or you're supposed to use substitutes to represent the 2 coal
c) Or you're required to purchase single resources if you don't have room for larger quantities
I wrote to 2F-Spiele. Henning replied that the answer is (b) use substitutes. He also noted that the included cards should be adequate for "99.9%" of games.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Pi Radius³
United States
Lombard
IL
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
NikolasCo wrote:
NikolasCo wrote:
a) The 2 excess coal is removed from the game
b) Or you're supposed to use substitutes to represent the 2 coal
c) Or you're required to purchase single resources if you don't have room for larger quantities
I wrote to 2F-Spiele. Henning replied that the answer is (b) use substitutes. He also noted that the included cards should be adequate for "99.9%" of games.


When I first read the rules, my primary detour was the number of single-surplus resource cards; and the possibility of where three players can cause both coal-surplus cards to be obtained, leaving no coal-surplus cards to use for any/all of the remaining players.

I was searching a lot in the rules if that was the case, only to find the aforementioned "no limit of single-resources in the first column" and especially also the Buy Resources phase's final round exception: "players are not allowed to buy excess resources to store them in their central storage!...They must place all excess resources as "single"-resource cards in the first column of the resource market."

Especially come the final round, there's bound to be a lot of partial purchases. With max (six) players, I find it very hard to believe the included cards are adequate for "99.9%" of the games. Yet, I haven't played the game to find out.

So I see that using substitutes is a work-around.

I would suggest during the Purchase Resources phase, if a player buys single-resource card(s), they must be able to use it in the Bureaucracy phase of the same round and must do so during that phase.

I would also suggest if, after a player (1) buys a single-resource card and (2) already has or buys a NON-single-resource card of the same type with a partial amount, they can combine the two cards, and put the single-resource card(s) back to the single-resource pile (and/or back to the first column if that player himself bought a partial amount of a resource).

e.g. Abbott has a 3-coal resource card with a current quantity of 1. There is a single-resource 1-coal card in the first column. He decides to buy that 1-coal card for 1E; he can now adjust his 3-coal resource card from quantity 1 to quantity 2 and put the 1-coal card back to the single-resource card pile.

Or enforce such a rule saying that in order to buy single-resource cards from the first column, you must already have or must buy a partial amount of the same resource type. (Which, now that I think about it, can open a can of worms.)


So long story short, the game should probably have come with more single-resource cards. That or extra resource cards (with 0-1-2-3) not used in and purchased from the market, used as an indicator for how many single-resource cards the player bought. Again, I have to play it a few times to find out.

Thanks for the information on the possibility of acquiring extra single-resources, and thanks for listening.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin B. Smith
United States
Mercer Island
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
To reduce (not eliminate) the chances of needing substitutes, I might:

- Require players to consume their single-resource cards first
- When a player buys a single and has an existing partially-used card of the same type, they must recharge their existing card and return the single

Both seem simple, and neither would have a big effect on the actual gameplay. In some cases, it would delay when a resource card gets discarded, but that seems minor enough.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.