Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

Leaving Earth: Stations» Forums » Rules

Subject: Joint Ventures and money. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Gustav Åkerfelt
Finland
Turku
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Having read the rule book the first time now, i was wondering about Joint Ventures and financing.

JV's can hold money, but does that money expire at the end of the year if not used? Is it "budget" money or used when moved to the JV? Could we set up an off-shore bank account as JV, 50/50 owned, and just use that to bank money from turn to turn?

Naturally, we are all gentlemen here, but could you not just also be a massive dick and buy a single share of a JV and then just veto EVERYTHING from that point forward. Just to lock up the assets the other owners have already put in?

I suppose this is easily avoided by not playing with an active PvP mindset, but it does seem like a move a player behind in the race could well do to slow down his competitors. (And then blackmail the other JV owners to buy his share at a silly cost. Muahahahaha)

Not that backroom dealings and political backstabbing have anything to do with a space race, of course. ^^


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Samuel Argento
Spain
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We have the rules of LE: Stations?
Where they can be read or download.

Thank you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nicolás Mutis Mesa
Australia
Melbourne
VIC
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
@kalesin: https://lumenaris.com/docs/Leaving%20Earth%20Stations%20-%20...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Colby Brown
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I had the same thought. I also thought that a possible house-rule solution, if I have any players who try to pull this move, would be to say that a shareholder who holds a higher percentage of the shares may veto any action you take.

Unfortunately, I think that this move would be a sound strategy. If I own 10% of a JV, and the leading player owns 50%, then they are receiving 5x the points I am. The only sound move to make would be to veto, especially in the late end game.

I'm going to keep my eye out for the first few session reports to see if this is a problem or if we're just imagining things that aren't actually there.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gustav Åkerfelt
Finland
Turku
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You Sir, speak the truth.

Might well be a non-issue.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Fatula
United States
Blue Tent
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
National agencies have their funding reset every year. Other types of agencies (like joint ventures) do not. This is deliberate.

If you want to use a joint venture as an off-shore bank account, you're welcome to, but keep in mind that all use of that money is subject to a veto by any shareholder.

Vetoing the joint venture actions of someone who's in first place is definitely part of the game. If you're in first place, what are you doing putting your assets into a joint venture where other players can veto your use of them?

Usually I've seen joint ventures get used for more limited purposes, like joint ownership of a medical station for healing astronauts who get sick on launch, or jointly attempting a single large mission. Joint ventures aren't really meant to be places to store your national agency's assets long term, though you're welcome to take that risk if you like.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Colby Brown
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
buffalohat wrote:
Usually I've seen joint ventures get used for more limited purposes, like joint ownership of a medical station for healing astronauts who get sick on launch, or jointly attempting a single large mission. Joint ventures aren't really meant to be places to store your national agency's assets long term, though you're welcome to take that risk if you like.


I like this. A lot.

Can't wait to start playing and explore these dynamics!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh Zscheile
Germany
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Apart from what Joe said, from what I understood that you cannot own a joint venture alone. The 'best' you can do is have one of its shares in the bank and the others belong to you. As soon as you own all 10 shares, you get all the assets and the joint venture ceases to exist.
So if you were to use a joint venture as off-shore bank, you would need the approval of at least one other member to do so or risk open shares to be bought by others and your money being effectively frozen.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gustav Åkerfelt
Finland
Turku
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you leave 1 share in the bank, first the JV would have to have points or the bank won't even buy them. Second, this would also leave the door open for everybody to simply buy that lone share and lock you down. So, not good.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pawel Garycki
Poland
Gdansk
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
According to the game theory collaboration in competetive games happen with 3+ players. In a 2p game there is only a brutal rivarly because each agreement either favour one side or changes nothing. In 3+ player games two players doing an agreement are usually acting agains other players, therefore everyone is invited to cooperate with everyone. In 4+ player games we can see alliances to appear.
So joint venture rules are mostly for 3+ player games with incentives from the game theory. I LE, however, players not only want to win but also want to write a good s-f story (like Man of Titan and back) so sub-optimal behaviours may also appear with trade.
Introduction of hidden goals (missions) would help increase cooperation a lot. Another way to make 2 player cooperating is a cooperative run against AI.
The author of the game has still some expansions left in mind. If Asteroids is ever out, such AI antagonist or secret missions mechanics could be added there.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Colby Brown
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
improove wrote:
In a 2p game there is only a brutal rivarly because each agreement either favour one side or changes nothing.

Yes, although this is assuming perfect information, which LE does not have, especially if there are hidden missions. If not players think that an agreement strictly benefits themselves, then they may cooperate. Only one is them would be right of course, but it is possible to see a JV used in a 2 player game in a strategically sound manner.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pawel Garycki
Poland
Gdansk
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
brobo wrote:
improove wrote:
In a 2p game there is only a brutal rivarly because each agreement either favour one side or changes nothing.

Yes, although this is assuming perfect information, which LE does not have, especially if there are hidden missions. If not players think that an agreement strictly benefits themselves, then they may cooperate. Only one is them would be right of course, but it is possible to see a JV used in a 2 player game in a strategically sound manner.

I can see use of JV when players know who is going to win with a considerable probability, the losing player admits the loss and instead of interrupting a very interesting endgame, they form a venture to beat the system by doing all the remaining missions together without later comparing their scores with each other - rather comparing total score with previous games to see if mankind as a whole performed well.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Scheiderich
United States
Liverpool
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have only a ship notice but this thread piqued my interest.

From having been through the rules a couple of times this is some firm info (that I am doing from memory...now where did I put that?whistle)

1 2P minimum for a Joint venture

2 $10 investment to float

3 ALL shares are distributed (presumably equally on a cost basis); if a 3P JV then impossible to "evenly" divide.

4 The money stays in the JV and does not clear at the end of the year. So one funding source would be the odd 2-3$ you previously had left over at turn end so you bought Supplies a/o Probes.

5 Presumably (it's not prohibited), players can transfer assets into and out of the JV. This would include beside money, rockets, astronauts, various "equipment" etc.

A JV's purpose would try to cash out VP at the end of the game at a rate higher than you could have done yourself. Note that any bank shares (if some player sold them back are lost as in any VP shares are ignored). Players get VPs even at fractional level at the end of the game. Prior to the end, a share's valuation is 10% of the VPs earned so far (which could be negative if you have a trail of dead astronauts)

6 Each player, even one with a single share, may perform actions with the JV they are in. However, this is subject to veto by any other shareholder. So a JV without some common purpose amongst the Players would seem to be sort of useless.

7 This is where a question arises: the new rules state that Agencies (the national ones like NASA) are non-trading entities. JVs, however, are trading entities.

It appears that the prior ability to trade amongst Agencies has been restricted (see p.21) and membership in a JV is needed to facilitate trading if nothing else. Given that JV members can veto any other member's action WRT that JV, Joe pointed out that JVs won't likely be a good investment for a player that is ahead in VP, the implications are maybe early formation of JVs to ensure you can trade!

8 It would seem that if you are actually trying to do "space things" and gain VP, that JV members may consider how to contribute: a fully vetted rocket or one with outcomes on it as in the latter case, Outcomes need to be drawn and cleared...

The JVs certainly add another dimension to the game. Even if they only facilitate being trading partners. I am not good at financial shenanigans (such as occur in 18XX games) but don't see that happening here due to the ability to veto any action. They may force some more transparency as to what missions are being undertaken - our group generally plays close to the vest until a player's goal is more obvious...

One other route comes to mind: players agree to dump most/all their annual budget (now $30) into a JV allowing for more efficient use of resources. They better be good friends...
 
 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.