Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

Tinners' Trail» Forums » Variants

Subject: Mining Efficiency VARIANT rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Stephen Stewart
United States
Visalia
California
flag msg tools
badge
It's sooo Hot out here...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Since it appears to be fairly irrelevant to either remove water or improve efficiency. (not a real HUGE difference as to one action or the other.) I propose a more stringent mining operation.


Water in an area determines 2 things.

1) the amount of Money it will take to mine the area

AND

2) the amount of extra action point beyond the 1st to mine it (you may consider halving (fru) the value if you so choose)

thus an area with 3 waters will take $3 and between 3 actions or 4 actions to perform.

Just a thought. That way the players with the areas with the most Resources don't simply end the game on turn 2 since there is no way of "stealing" those resources from them.

Once purchased, they can take their sweet time mining it (for 1 AP?? seems a little too efficient mining).



AND FOR actual player interaction for forcing a player's hand.

ALLOW 2 mines to be built in one area, THUS competition for the resources will be present.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Linneman
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ASLChampion wrote:
Since it appears to be fairly irrelevant to either remove water or improve efficiency. (not a real HUGE difference as to one action or the other.) I propose a more stringent mining operation.



I'm surprised you consider these actions "irrelevant". Did you forget that each Mine Ore action causes an additional water cube to be placed in the region, making all further mining more expensive?

If you are saving enough money from turn to turn to be able to pay $2-4 per cube you mine, you probably aren't getting a great return on the investment table--too much of your income is reinvested in your mining operation and not enough is invested externally for VPs.

Let's say I buy a province with 5 ore cubes and 3 water cubes. Unimproved, let's see how much it will cost me to mine it to depletion.

First Mine Ore action: $6 for 2 cubes
Second Mine Ore action: $8 for 2 cubes
Third Mine Ore action: $5 for 1 cube

So I spent $19 for 5 cubes. Which means I barely break even if they sell for $4 each, and I've spent 3 Time Points. Now let's see what happens with a Miner in the region

First Mine Ore action: $9 for 3 cubes
Second Mine Ore action: $8 for 2 cubes

I spent exactly the same number of Time Points, but saved $2. Neat.

What if, instead of the Miner, I put in a Port?

First Mine Ore action: $6 for 3 cubes
Second Mine Ore action: $6 for 2 cubes

Now we're talking...one extra Time Point, but now I spent $12 instead of $19! I saved the price of a decent mine ($7) by spending 1 Time Point. Cool.

There is not a lot to do with your Time Points other than take developments, once the good mines have been sold. And clearly they are useful. Why would you call them irrelevant?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Stewart
United States
Visalia
California
flag msg tools
badge
It's sooo Hot out here...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My comment didn't include ports so any example left that out. I meant to say strictly minors.

There are numerous what if statements. I simply stated that clearing a water or improving efficiency (FOR a mining action doesn't net much of a difference since you need multiples of $5 for VP)


To mine once...

If you reduce the water, you pay 1 less per cube.

ex 3 water( -1 for water reduction)....$4 for 2 cubes...for maybe an average of say $6 for the 2 different cubes for a net of $8.

Or make it more efficient by one ( 3 water at $3 for 3 cubes at an averabe of $6 per cube...hmm net = $9.

I would call that irrelevant. $1 is easily made up with a PASTIES action.

If you go off like you did on your example, if you wanted to mine a lot in one area starting at 3 water cubes, you'd be inefficient.

I'd rather mine in different areas to keep costs down.

3 areas with 3 water @ 2 cubes per each will cost $18.
Whereas mining one area 3 times for 6 cubes will cost $6 + $8 + $10 for a total of $24. I'd like to think the players aren't THAT dumb.

You should point out their mistake in case they are...or if they are new.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Linneman
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The game forces you to mine single provinces multiple times. There simply aren't enough provinces. Even if you build all 6 mines, I guarantee you will take more than 6 Mine Ore actions throughout the course of the game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bruce Murphy
Australia
Pyrmont
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It sounds like you haven't played the game with a board with lots of water and a relatively low market. Things get incredibly tight and there just aren't enough improvements to let you get the ore out of the ground.

B>
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Boote
United Kingdom
Virginia Water
Surrey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Also
ASLChampion wrote:

Just a thought. That way the players with the areas with the most Resources don't simply end the game on turn 2 since there is no way of "stealing" those resources from them.


They CAN'T end the whole turn - just THEIR turn (I assume you meant turn not game) as it would take all of your opponents to pass before your actions are limited to one more

I would be DELIGHTED if some of my opponents all passed at action 2, leaving me to pick up extra pumps, trains, ports , miners etc.
 
 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.