Recommend
7 
 Thumb up
 Hide
20 Posts

Railways of the World» Forums » Rules

Subject: Questions on rules specifics rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Even after clarification posts and FAQ's, some discrepencies came up between how we've been playing and how a friend interprets the rules. I also have some "what's the reason for this rule" thrown in:

1. Major Lines. It says in the rules that cards with the green dot (which are Service Bounties and Major Lines) are awarded to the player who completes the objective "(after the card comes up)" (in parenthises in the rulebook). In the FAQ it seperates out rules for Service Bounties and for Major Lines. under SB it specifically says "after the card comes up", and under ML it does not. The ML section DOES say that if 2 or more people have the connection when the card comes up then noone gets the bonus.

To me this means that if I have a complete track from Atlanta to Richmond, and noone else does, and that card comes up... I get the 8 point bonus right away. A friend interprets that as "you have to complete the route after the card comes up" - so if I already have that route when that card comes up, then noone gets the bonus - even if I'm the only one with the route.

What is the intent of the rule? If it's other than my interpretation, then I'd be interested to know why.

2. Blocking track. In another thread I mentioned that my group had played as if the rules said you can't lay track that touches the end of a track already in play without connecting to it, and you can't connect to it if it belongs to someone else. Thus, if a player has track 1 hex away from the entrance to the city they want to connect to, it's impossible to block. If they are further than 1 hex away, an opponent could build out of that entrance, which might serve to block - or just force the first player to build more track and spend more money.

I believe we've got that one wrong. It seems like there's no rule that prevents blocking, nor should there be.

3. Scoreboard at 100+. The rules say that when you break 100 points, you overlap to the beginning of the score track. They also say that "though your income will drop, it will begin to rise again". However, there are spaces on the track for 100+ and for 0, so is the intention that you move your counter along the track, or that you skip to the correct number.

For example, if I'm on 98 and I make a 6 point delivery, do I move up exactly 6 points on the track... 99, 100, 100+, 0, 1, 2 and I'm on 2 points (102 at the end)? That seems odd, because I've lost out on points. Or do I add 6 to my 98 and go to 104 (space 4 on the track)? That's odd, because I've bypassed the 100+ space alltogether, making it superfluous.

In addition, skipping the 0 space seems potentially contradictory to the sentance in the rules about income dropping, because that sentance is in the section where it talks about lapping the board - though maybe it refers to a player's income over the course of the whole game.

Finally, the 100+ space has an income of $9, which implies one of 2 things (and we're not sure which, if either, is correct):
1) That once you are over 100 points, your points can increase, but your income is always $9 at that point, or
2) That your income should be $9 PLUS whatever you get at the other side of the track. So on space 4 the second time around, income would be $15

So that's three possible answers. If I'm on space 4 the second time around, is my income $6, $9, or $15?

4. End of Game question. The rules say that the endgame is triggered when the Nth empty city marker is placed, and when that happens the game will be over at the end of the next "complete turn," (even if someone un-empties a city between now and then). I have to assume that means Game Turn and not player turn (which would be called "round"), and that "complete turn" means that there will in fact be 2 Income phases between the game end trigger and the game end.

At first we misread that as the game ending at the end of the Game Turn in which the trigger occurred, which makes perfect sense to us. I see now that's not what the rules say. Why is this the case? I'm curious about the reasoning behind continuing the game another complete Game Turn after the point at which it seems natural to end the game. The difference in this case isn't very big, really, so I wonder why the rule wouldn't be the cleaner "finish the game turn and that's it." Just my curiosity there. After trying it the other way, my group prefers the incorrect rule in this case.

Thanks,
Seth
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sean T
United States
Tucson
AZ
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sedjtroll wrote:
1. Major Lines. It says in the rules that cards with the green dot (which are Service Bounties and Major Lines) are awarded to the player who completes the objective "(after the card comes up)" (in parenthises in the rulebook). In the FAQ it seperates out rules for Service Bounties and for Major Lines. under SB it specifically says "after the card comes up", and under ML it does not. The ML section DOES say that if 2 or more people have the connection when the card comes up then noone gets the bonus.


The FAQ also states under Major Lines "You win this card as soon as it shows up if you already satisfied the conditions." We all missed that last night. So it would seem clear from the FAQ that "after the card comes up" only applies to Service Bounties. Unless Eagle reps have something different to say.

I was the "friend" with the different interpretation mentioned in the original thread,due to the comment in the rulebook that green circle cards pay "after the card comes up."
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
SeanT wrote:
I was the "friend" with the different interpretation mentioned in the original thread

It's OK Sean, you don't need to use quotes... you're my friend for real
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Etherton
United States
Carlsbad
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
(I'm not official either)

1. I'd say you get the bonus. ML is rewarding you for the state of your network. SB is rewarding you for an action (which therefore ought to occur after the card shows up).

2. I believe the cross-over tracks exist so that people can cross each other's track. But correct ownership must be obvious at all times, so if you were going to head straight into a city (one hex left) somebody else could play a curve coming out of that entrance. You could still play on that hex by swapping in the appropriate crossover, but the city entrance is clearly blocked even though the hex is not. They could not block you by playing a straight piece, because that would join your link and leave ownership ambiguous.

3. I believe the 100+ space is totally superfluous, but you could incorporate it however your group sees fit. It's never been an issue for me yet (sigh), although losing all income seems a little rough to me. Personally I like the "Always get +9" interpretation myself.

4. I think there's a one turn delay to give everybody a chance to make one last push for points in case it caught them by surprise. Again, play it however you prefer.

-Dave
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mik Svellov
Denmark
Copenhagen N
EU
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Seth Jaffee wrote:
1. Major Lines. It says in the rules that cards with the green dot (which are Service Bounties and Major Lines) are awarded to the player who completes the objective "(after the card comes up)" (in parenthises in the rulebook). In the FAQ it seperates out rules for Service Bounties and for Major Lines. under SB it specifically says "after the card comes up", and under ML it does not. The ML section DOES say that if 2 or more people have the connection when the card comes up then noone gets the bonus.

To me this means that if I have a complete track from Atlanta to Richmond, and noone else does, and that card comes up... I get the 8 point bonus right away. A friend interprets that as "you have to complete the route after the card comes up" - so if I already have that route when that card comes up, then noone gets the bonus - even if I'm the only one with the route.

What is the intent of the rule? If it's other than my interpretation, then I'd be interested to know why.


"After the card comes up" is an unnessessary sentence. Like Poker stating that you can only win with an Ace "after it comes up".

If only one player has built the link before the card comes up then he is awarded the bonus. If no-one has built the link yet, then bonus will be awarded to the first player doing it. If several players had built the link before the card appears, then the card is void as it would be too impractical to keep track of who is the correct beneficiary.


Quote:
b]2. Blocking track.[/b] In another thread I mentioned that my group had played as if the rules said you can't lay track that touches the end of a track already in play without connecting to it, and you can't connect to it if it belongs to someone else. Thus, if a player has track 1 hex away from the entrance to the city they want to connect to, it's impossible to block. If they are further than 1 hex away, an opponent could build out of that entrance, which might serve to block - or just force the first player to build more track and spend more money.

I believe we've got that one wrong. It seems like there's no rule that prevents blocking, nor should there be.


The only limitation is that you cannot extend another player's track, which it would be if you continued your own track directly into an opponents' track.

It is perfectly legal to build out from any city - and if that happends to be the intended entry point for another player's track - then so much the better!

Quote:
3. Scoreboard at 100+. The rules say that when you break 100 points, you overlap to the beginning of the score track. They also say that "though your income will drop, it will begin to rise again". However, there are spaces on the track for 100+ and for 0, so is the intention that you move your counter along the track, or that you skip to the correct number.
For example, if I'm on 98 and I make a 6 point delivery, do I move up exactly 6 points on the track... 99, 100, 100+, 0, 1, 2 and I'm on 2 points (102 at the end)? That seems odd, because I've lost out on points. Or do I add 6 to my 98 and go to 104 (space 4 on the track)? That's odd, because I've bypassed the 100+ space alltogether, making it superfluous.

In addition, skipping the 0 space seems potentially contradictory to the sentance in the rules about income dropping, because that sentance is in the section where it talks about lapping the board - though maybe it refers to a player's income over the course of the whole game.


Exactly. Your income increases steadily to $25 whereafter it drops to $9.

Quote:
Finally, the 100+ space has an income of $9, which implies one of 2 things (and we're not sure which, if either, is correct):
1) That once you are over 100 points, your points can increase, but your income is always $9 at that point, or
2) That your income should be $9 PLUS whatever you get at the other side of the track. So on space 4 the second time around, income would be $15

So that's three possible answers. If I'm on space 4 the second time around, is my income $6, $9, or $15?


The only good thing about this mess is that you can play it whatever way you like: stop at 100+ or continue from start again. I 99.99 of all game situations it won't make a differece as no-one is going to make it that far.

Personally I would give that player $15 - but I regard the question as purely academic as I have never seen anyone getting more than halfway down the right side of the score track.


Quote:
4. End of Game question. The rules say that the endgame is triggered when the Nth empty city marker is placed, and when that happens the game will be over at the end of the next "complete turn," (even if someone un-empties a city between now and then). I have to assume that means Game Turn and not player turn (which would be called "round"), and that "complete turn" means that there will in fact be 2 Income phases between the game end trigger and the game end.

At first we misread that as the game ending at the end of the Game Turn in which the trigger occurred, which makes perfect sense to us. I see now that's not what the rules say. Why is this the case? I'm curious about the reasoning behind continuing the game another complete Game Turn after the point at which it seems natural to end the game. The difference in this case isn't very big, really, so I wonder why the rule wouldn't be the cleaner "finish the game turn and that's it." Just my curiosity there. After trying it the other way, my group prefers the incorrect rule in this case.


It quite normal for games to have an "end game" situation. This is to even out the chances of winning the game. 6 players could in principle empty 18 cities! during a single turn. Or more likely and even worse: 5 players could empty 5 cities after the first player have had his last action. Thus depriving him of a chance to fight back.

By adding one final turn will all players have at least 3 chances to improve their situation.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Keith Blume
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Just wanted to add a comment to point 4. We felt that the game was involved enough that we did not want to create an end game that occurs too fast. It can be a little frustrating if you have a good long term strategy that is coming to fruition and then on round 3 the end game condition is met and the game is over. By having one more full turn (as Great Dane pointed out) it give the players some time to execute at least part of their plan and I believe rewards players that have a multi-phased strategy (beginning, mid and end game) which is what we were trying to achieve.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Hudson
United States
Los Angeles
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hope I don't sound too rude, but if that was the intent, then why for crying out loud wasn't that intent expressed in the rules?

It is so frustrating to hear time after time questions like this coming up that seem to be caused by the rules being too "terse." shake
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
keithblume2 wrote:
We felt that the game was involved enough that we did not want to create an end game that occurs too fast.

Keith, thanks for posting. I had hoped you'd answer some of my rules questions as well.

Regarding the end game... I can see your point, and I don't disagree. My group tends to think the whole extra turn is unnecessary, and it feels odd to trigger the endgame and then go on longer than the end of that turn, and that it's not really necessary. Couldn't the same effect be acheived by increasing the number of empty city markers needed to trigger the game end? Since there's already this arbitrary endgame trigger (the empty cities) over which players have some control, it seems fiddley to also have a protracted end game once the trigger hits.

Another, minor, question that I wonder about - not a complaint mind you, just a question... what was the reasoning behind this:
Once the game end is triggered, the game will end (after another turn), even if at the end of the game there are fewer than 18 (or however many) empty cities? In other words, why can a player prolong the game by Urbanizing or City Growth BEFORE the game end trigger, but not AFTER?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
One more question on rules specifics
One more question came up the other night, and again yesterday...

The New Industry card rules in the rulebook indicate that the card changes the color of a city. It does not indicate that the city gets random cubes (like the Urbanize action). In the faq however, it says that the New Industry card is "identical to the Urbanize action", implying that the city gets cubes on it.

Which is the intent of the designer? Does this make the card much better than City Growth - or maybe not because it has to be a gray city? Maybe this helps a player potentially play in the Southwest, as they could New Industry several cities and deliver a bunch of cubes.

- Seth

P.S. I still think the SW gray cities need 1 more cube each or something, so someone might try to play down there.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rob Davidson
United States
Orland Park
IL
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
sedjtroll wrote:
keithblume2 wrote:
We felt that the game was involved enough that we did not want to create an end game that occurs too fast.

Keith, thanks for posting. I had hoped you'd answer some of my rules questions as well.

Regarding the end game... I can see your point, and I don't disagree. My group tends to think the whole extra turn is unnecessary, and it feels odd to trigger the endgame and then go on longer than the end of that turn, and that it's not really necessary. Couldn't the same effect be acheived by increasing the number of empty city markers needed to trigger the game end? Since there's already this arbitrary endgame trigger (the empty cities) over which players have some control, it seems fiddley to also have a protracted end game once the trigger hits.

Another, minor, question that I wonder about - not a complaint mind you, just a question... what was the reasoning behind this:
Once the game end is triggered, the game will end (after another turn), even if at the end of the game there are fewer than 18 (or however many) empty cities? In other words, why can a player prolong the game by Urbanizing or City Growth BEFORE the game end trigger, but not AFTER?


A lot of the endgame decisions revolve around the point situation at the time. A player that has a significant point lead will be trying to empty cities to trigger the endgame before the others can catch up; while the others will either be urbanizing empty grays to delay the end, or making deliveries to catch up.

So, the auctions in the end game can be critical. Say that there was one city to go to the endgame trigger. The ideal situation is for the trailing players to have the player to the left of the leader win the auction, giving them the most opportunities to urbanize empty cities before the leader could empty that last city and trigger end of game.
If they fail in this, at least they have one full turn to try to make some deliveries to catch up in the point standings

As to prolonging the game after it has been triggered, it only makes sense, as otherwise you could have an EXTREMELY long game, as the trailing players would constantly be urbanizing empty grays, as long as possible to keep the game going; up to the limit of the counter mix and/or empty gray cities. This forces the trailing players to make decisions before the triggering event, if they have the foresight and willingness to do so.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
I agree with Mik that the RRT rules are very well done, especially for a new game. The end game rule was very clear and Keith's explaination is what we all assumed after the first couple of plays.

When we play RRT with no new players a 5 or 6 player game lasts perhaps an hour and 10 minutes. I'm at the point with the game that I'd like to see it go a bit longer and allow for some rarely used strategies to be employed ~ Western Link and building into the SW. Here's what we're going to do with out next 5 or 6 player game:

* add two extra cubes to the SW cities with only one cube
* add 2-4 extra empty city markers

One thought that occurred to me is that Eagle might look at enhancing the rules in a future edition. Since a number of their games have basic and advanced rules (Attack!, etc.) or seperate games using the same board and pieces (CotE), I'd suggest they offer an Advanced variant where they extend the game's duration, add more product cubes in the SW and perhaps even make Dallas a red city. I've also suggested they playtest and produce expansion "decks" for the card draw and it seems the game might be improved by adding Tycoons and then dealing two out with the player choosing one as opposed to a blind draw.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tabpub wrote:
A lot of the endgame decisions revolve around the point situation at the time. A player that has a significant point lead will be trying to empty cities to trigger the endgame before the others can catch up; while the others will either be urbanizing empty grays to delay the end, or making deliveries to catch up.

So, the auctions in the end game can be critical. Say that there was one city to go to the endgame trigger. The ideal situation is for the trailing players to have the player to the left of the leader win the auction, giving them the most opportunities to urbanize empty cities before the leader could empty that last city and trigger end of game.
If they fail in this, at least they have one full turn to try to make some deliveries to catch up in the point standings

As to prolonging the game after it has been triggered, it only makes sense, as otherwise you could have an EXTREMELY long game, as the trailing players would constantly be urbanizing empty grays, as long as possible to keep the game going; up to the limit of the counter mix and/or empty gray cities. This forces the trailing players to make decisions before the triggering event, if they have the foresight and willingness to do so.

You talk about having forsight and willingness to make descisions about the endgame once there's only 1 empty city to go... but you suggest that the game continue for an extra turn after the trigger in case people don't. I don't get it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Al Johnson
United States
Arlington
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Tripp,

Come on - you got to be kidding - an hour and 10 minutes! Is anybody putting out 2 new cubes in an empty city to buy time? It seems like everyone is playing to end the game quickly. I can't even fathom a game going that short.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Biggar
United States
Mountain View
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
sedjtroll wrote:

You talk about having forsight and willingness to make descisions about the endgame once there's only 1 empty city to go... but you suggest that the game continue for an extra turn after the trigger in case people don't. I don't get it.


The problem is that in a game with 5 or 6 players, it's not at 1 city to go you have ot worry about it when there are 4-5 citis to go, as that many can empty between one of your actions and the next. And that's half the ending condition. In a two player game you have more warning, so the rule is strictly only necessary in games with 4 or more, but it would be too much trouble to have a diffferent rule for fewer players.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mark_biggar wrote:
sedjtroll wrote:

You talk about having forsight and willingness to make descisions about the endgame once there's only 1 empty city to go... but you suggest that the game continue for an extra turn after the trigger in case people don't. I don't get it.


The problem is that in a game with 5 or 6 players, it's not at 1 city to go you have ot worry about it when there are 4-5 citis to go, as that many can empty between one of your actions and the next. And that's half the ending condition. In a two player game you have more warning, so the rule is strictly only necessary in games with 4 or more, but it would be too much trouble to have a diffferent rule for fewer players.


True, but it's not as if all 4 or 5 other players want the game to end. Usually it's just 1, or at most 2 people who are trying to usher in the game end. If you can't tell which those people are, by their position and their actions, then frankly I don't know if discussion of the game end conditions is relevant.

However, that wasn't my point. And also, I don't mean to harp on anyone in particular, but it seems several posts are arguing both sides of the fence. It's just like my post quoted above, either people should have foresight and willingness to affect the game end, or not. The posts in this thread seem to indicate that people should have such foresight, but not until the final turn or two.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mik Svellov
Denmark
Copenhagen N
EU
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sedjtroll wrote:
The New Industry card rules in the rulebook indicate that the card changes the color of a city. It does not indicate that the city gets random cubes (like the Urbanize action). In the faq however, it says that the New Industry card is "identical to the Urbanize action", implying that the city gets cubes on it.
Which is the intent of the designer?


Don't know about Glen Drover, but I am pretty sure Martin Wallace would play it exactly like an Urbanization (ie. adding two random cubes.

Quote:
Does this make the card much better than City Growth - or maybe not because it has to be a gray city?


New Industry saves you 2 Shares. That can be worth a lot of points at the end of the game. No reason to let another player have that benefit.

City Growth works very differently from Urbanization: you add two Goods to any City of your choice. This is the only way you can get more cubes into your old network of colored cities. While not that powerful it can still be worthwhile if you have a few cities of different colors.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Boote
United Kingdom
Virginia Water
Surrey
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Great Dane wrote:

Don't know about Glen Drover, but I am pretty sure Martin Wallace would play it exactly like an Urbanization (ie. adding two random cubes.


That's not the way we (Martin, two others and I) played at Stabcon a few weekends ago
We played;
Urbanisation, one action, cost $10, gives you a grey upgrade AND two cubes
City Growth, one action, gives you two cubes
New Industry, one actio, gives you a grey upgrade

Otherwise, New Industry would be markedly better than both City Growth and Urbanisation - a real no-brainer
Played as we did, it means that players must make a decision
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Biggar
United States
Mountain View
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Chrisboote wrote:
Great Dane wrote:

Don't know about Glen Drover, but I am pretty sure Martin Wallace would play it exactly like an Urbanization (ie. adding two random cubes.


That's not the way we (Martin, two others and I) played at Stabcon a few weekends ago
We played;
Urbanisation, one action, cost $10, gives you a grey upgrade AND two cubes
City Growth, one action, gives you two cubes
New Industry, one actio, gives you a grey upgrade

Otherwise, New Industry would be markedly better than both City Growth and Urbanisation - a real no-brainer
Played as we did, it means that players must make a decision


Umm... you point is? All the cards makes some action better then the base action. "Government Land Grant", "Perfect Engineering" and even the major line cards make a build action better then normal. Service boundy and Hotels and the two "S" delivery cards make a delivery action better then normal. So why should "New Industry" be any different.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mik Svellov
Denmark
Copenhagen N
EU
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, one point Chris got through was that I was obviously failed to judge how Martin Wallace would prefer the card played.

However this doesn't mean the FAQ is wrong.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Keith Blume
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Great Dane is correct on the New Industry and Urbanization being the same things. We called it New Industry for flavor but unfortuantely this question has come up in other threads so it created more confusion than flavor I think.

The idea is that a new industry has come up and is now producing goods in that city as well as creating a demand.
2 
 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.