Not really. Maybe on the first go, but not so much since then. Things are...somewhat more complicated. You have to really think about the incentive structures occurring. Being "spread thin/diversified" is NOT a bad thing. If player 1 has 1 share of the first four, player 2 has 2 yellow, 2 blue; player 3 has 2 red, 1 green, player 4 2 green, 1 blue, player 5 has 3 yellow, then anything you do directly helps them more than it helps you. However, you are likely getting a better return from each dividend than any of the other players (excepting, perhaps, 2 red, 2 green). This situation is a late-game one. What one wants to do in this situation is to determine your big competition, who is the biggest threat for the win. What rail does s/he have a good deal of stock in? Tank that line. Destroy it by any means necessary. You have 3 other shares giving you income, they do not. Help out every line they don't have interest in.
I don't necessarily see it as having to manage more people. The way the game is set up, there are a fixed number of shares to keep track of. In any game, one must properly manage these shares and when one must either take a share, let it go, put it up for auction, or null cap. In my last game (4p), in the early-game, we had the following setup: Eric: 1 Green, 1 Yellow, very little cash Wystan: 1 Blue, 1 Yellow, very little cash Harald: 1 Blue, 1 Red, very little cash Sofia: 1 Red, a lot of cash It was my move. I was concerned about the amount of cash Sofia had on hand, so I null capped her. She is somewhat new to the game however. I didn't see what would inevitably happen next. Wystan, being afraid to help me out in Yellow while I maintained a sole Green, improved Blue. Harald alternated between Blue and Red. Sofia had no choice but Red. Sofia is relatively new to the game, and didn't understand that she was helping Harald immensely with her builds. Wystan also didn't see his actions as directly benefitting Harald, due to fear of my play style (admittedly, I do usually win). In the end, Harald won by $6. If I hadn't null capped Sofia, I could have provided her with incentive to help drive the yellow line. Instead, it sat there motionless for 3 rounds before chugging out to the mines in the last two rounds of play. Sometimes, what seems beneficial leads to incentives you hadn't considered. In hindsight, it seems like such a bad move - at the time, it seemed perfectly logical. Finding and analyzing your mistakes is one of the best parts of the game. On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 8:14 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]>wrote: > > I've played probably 5 times now, mainly 4 players. The only time I > didn't really like it was with 5p. It just felt like I had very > limited capability to influence anything with that many players > dluting the board. > > Have others felt this way too? > > On Dec 30 2008, 9:37 am, EyesOnThePrize <[email protected]> > wrote: > > We played it twice last Saturday with 4 players. The first game > > (everyone's first) was a mad dash for Chicago, no screwing over the > > other guy. Exciting and fun, and I don't think it gave us the flavor > > of the game. In the second game the Penn cut off the B&O and C&O in > > the mountains and while it never made it past Pittsburgh, was still a > > very good railroad by developing the mountains. The B&O and C&O were > > still profitable, just not at the same levels. I liked the game, I > > look forward to playing it more to find out more strategies. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BGG Down" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/BGG_down?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
