18PA rules questions

[czar...@gmail.com]

My friends and I are trying to play 18PA.  We have downloaded and printed the game components on 110-pound white card stock, which has worked well.  However, we are having some issues with the rules posted on the Deep Thought Games Web site:

(1) The certificates file contains, in addition to the 9 local companies in the Start Packet, two certificates for income-only private companies P1 and P2, but they are not mentioned in the rules.  Are they purchased by bidding in the initial auction?  If so, are they auctioned after bidding for companies 1-9 is complete, intermixed with the bidding of companies 1-9 or are they purchased during a regular stock round? (We are assuming the first of these to be the case, with rules for bidding the same as for the local companies.)

(2) During a regular stock round the possible starting values for public companies is stated to be $70, $80, $90, $100 and $110 but there is no mention of how the starting value for a particular company is determined.  Is this set by the first purchaser like the par values in 1830 or are they predetermined as in 1853?  (We are assuming the first of these to be the case.)

(3) It is never stated that the initial purchase of a public company must be for the President's two shares, although that may be assumed to be the case.

(4) The token file show two x2 tokens with coal symbols, corresponding with images on the Scranton PA hex.  However, there is no mention of how these tokens are placed on the board; we have had to disregard these tokens pending further information on how to use them.

Further information on these rules issues would be greatly appreciated.

[David Hecht]

Ah. Apparently I've failed in updating the rules on the site...my bad! :-(

In all fairness, there has been so little message traffic lately that I've more or less let it fall fallow. Also, we are in the final stages of production readiness, so in that sense it's going to be superfluous in a short while.

However I will post the latest rules revisions, which address all your questions.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dtg-proto" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dtg-proto+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to dtg-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/dtg-proto.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[David Hecht]

Upon inspection of the site, I see that matters weren't quite as I thought. The ruels on the site, v3.3.1 dated 21 January 2014, are impeccably correct and up to date: it's merely that the components aren't quite so up-to-date.

However, you could have informed yourself regarding the component changes had you read the small text file entitled ReadMe.txt, whose contents I reproduce below in their entirety, for your convenience (in particular, I draw your attention to the section entitled "Cert and token changes"):

>>>>>ReadMe.txt BEGINS>>>>>

These notes apply to the map labeled v0.7.1 dtd 21 Jan 2014 and to the rules version 3.3.1 dated 21 Jan 2014. Most of the changes are minor. I believe at this point I am very close to completing the development and testing phase. Any comments should be forwarded as soon as possible to be considered. The target date for publication is June 2014 (Portland).

Map changes:
-Deleted the now-superfluous port symbols.
-Replaced the D&H herald with a second mine bonus token symbol.
-Added a clarifying note regarding the ferry status.

Cert and token changes:
Deleted the two remaining fixed-income private companies (P1 and P2). The two +$40 bonus tokens for the Scranton mining district remain and may be bought by public companies directly from the bank for $40 apiece.

Rules changes:
The rule allowing local companies to be sold back to the bank at face value ($110) once phase 4 starts has been deleted.

Stock Market change:
The stock market now has a steeper price gradient and a maximum of $300.

>>>>>ReadMe.txt ENDS>>>>>

[czar...@gmail.com]

Thanks for the reply. How is the initial stock price of a public company determined? Where are the two Scranton +$40 tokens placed. On the board or on the company charter? The latter seems most reasonable.

[David Hecht]

The stock price is determined by the player. The +40 tokens are placed
in the Scranton hex until they are bought, then they go to the charter
of the buying company.

[czar...@gmail.com]

Here is a complete listing of questions or concerns about the game and the rules.  The min unanswered question is that the certificate mix provides six 2-trains, five 3-trains and four 4-trains.  However, the game board specifies one fewer of each type of train.  Which is correct?

Rules:

Auctioning the Start Packet and Initial Stock round

(1) Minor omission: Does not state that the players randomly determine the initial holder of the priority deal marker, using the numbered certificates or some other method.

(2) Minor omission: Does not state that the first player to make a bid in each round designates which private company is being auctioned.

The Stock Market

Omission: The rules specify that the possible starting values for public companies are $70, $80, $90, $100 and $110.  The rules fail to state that the starting value is specified by the player purchasing the President’s Certificate.  (Previously answered)

Sequence of Play – Buying Stock

Omission: Does not specify that the first purchase of a public company certificate must be the President’s Certificate.  See comments on Forming the New York Central System (see below).

Forming the New York Central System

Clarification needed: Rules state “… until a player acquires a second NYC share during a subsequent stock round and is able to perform an exchange of presidency with the bank.”  The rules should state that the first purchase of an NYC certificate in that stock round can be a single share if the purchaser already has a single share and is not required to be the President’s Certificate as specified in Sequence of Play – Buying Stock (see above), inasmuch as the player now has two shares that are immediately exchanged for the President’s Certificate.

Bonus Token Step (Public)

Omission: Should specify that in the initial game setup the two +$40 bonus tokens are placed on the Scranton hex and when purchased are moved to the charter of the purchasing company. (Previously answered)

Certificates:

(1) Inconsistency: The certificate mix provides six 2-trains, five 3-trains and four 4-trains.  However, the game board specifies one fewer of each type of train.  Which is correct?

(2) Inconsistency: It is stated that the game is designed for three to five players.  However, the numbered certificates for the initial priority draw are only 1 through 4.  Another certificate with number 5 should be provided.  Alternatively the certificates with numbers 1-4 should be deleted.

(3) The certificates provided for two fixed-income private companies (P1 and P2) should be deleted. (Previously noted)

Tiles:

Clarification needed: A number of green and brown tiles have the character Y on them.  However, the table provided in the rules listing the Start Packet, the public companies and tile placements and upgrades mentions other tile character designations but not Y.  If Y is not significant it should be removed from the production tiles.

[David Hecht]

Sorry not to have responded sooner. All of your queries are good ones and i apologize if I may have a bit short with you in the earlier exchanges. I used to have a cumulative ReadMe.txt file in which all of the updates were enumerated, including various changes to the components. At some point it became a bit unwieldy and I trimmed it, alas thereby omitting some important information.

As a general rule in my prototypes, ReadMe files trump rules which in turn trump components. This is for obvious reasons of which is easier to change. But that is the way to assume in any given situation: if there appears to be a discrepancy between rules and bits, generally speaking it's the rules that are correct.

I've placed answers beneath each query below.

Question for you: as we are in the final stages and I will--assuming I can ever bestir myself to do so--be finalizing the rules...would you be willing to read through the final cut with the same gimlet eye you have used thus far, as a service to me and the hobby? I'd be very much in your debt.

Also, we are in the final stages of a significant rewrite of the 18West rules: would you be willing to read those with a critical eye as well?

In either instance you would earn credit for editorial assistance, though it would be helpful (but not actually necessary) if I knew your actual name... :-)

I'm taking the liberty of passing on a copy of my response directly to John Tamplin.

On 3/9/2015 5:00 PM, czar...@gmail.com wrote:

Here is a complete listing of questions or concerns about the game and the rules.  The main unanswered question is that the certificate mix provides six 2-trains, five 3-trains and four 4-trains.  However, the game board specifies one fewer of each type of train.  Which is correct?

Rules:

Auctioning the Start Packet and Initial Stock round

(1) Minor omission: Does not state that the players randomly determine the initial holder of the priority deal marker, using the numbered certificates or some other method.

One of the important additions to the rules will be a section on "Setting Up the Game" I didn't bother writing this section initially, as it would be subject to constant revision and therefore likely to induce small errors or inconsistencies into the rules. I've attached a current version, which, in the spirit of full disclosure, was silent on the subject you raise! This has now been corrected by the addition of the last sentence in it.

(2) Minor omission: Does not state that the first player to make a bid in each round designates which private company is being auctioned.

Actually, this is not an omission, but it is nevertheless extremely helpful that you brought it up. The auction mechanism in 18PA, like the one in 18Scan, is what I call "bidding for the right to buy." In other words, there is no antecedent knowledge of what any of the players are seeking to buy, and you don't actually find out until there is a winner of the auction ("Players continue to bid until all the players have passed consecutively. Once this occurs, the high bidder pays the amount of his bid to the bank and selects an available private company, for which he pays the face value of $110 to the bank.").

I can see how the somewhat awkward phraseology could be confusing: at one time, there were various different price levels for the private companies, and thus the limitation on bidding was also variable: now that all the remaining private companies have a face value of $110, I see that this section can be cleaned up some and made less confusing. Thanks! :-)

This, BTW, is why I have asked if you'd do a complete read-through on both these and the prospective 18West revised rules.

The Stock Market

Omission: The rules specify that the possible starting values for public companies are $70, $80, $90, $100 and $110.  The rules fail to state that the starting value is specified by the player purchasing the President’s Certificate.  (Previously answered)

Agreed, and the necessary changes will be made.

Sequence of Play – Buying Stock

Omission: Does not specify that the first purchase of a public company certificate must be the President’s Certificate.  See comments on Forming the New York Central System (see below).

Agreed, and the necessary changes will be made.

Forming the New York Central System

Clarification needed: Rules state “… until a player acquires a second NYC share during a subsequent stock round and is able to perform an exchange of presidency with the bank.”  The rules should state that the first purchase of an NYC certificate in that stock round can be a single share if the purchaser already has a single share and is not required to be the President’s Certificate as specified in Sequence of Play – Buying Stock (see above), inasmuch as the player now has two shares that are immediately exchanged for the President’s Certificate.

Agreed, and the necessary changes will be made.

Bonus Token Step (Public)

Omission: Should specify that in the initial game setup the two +$40 bonus tokens are placed on the Scranton hex and when purchased are moved to the charter of the purchasing company. (Previously answered)

See discussion above regarding "Setting Up the Game".

Certificates:

(1) Inconsistency: The certificate mix provides six 2-trains, five 3-trains and four 4-trains.  However, the game board specifies one fewer of each type of train.  Which is correct?

There are five 2-trains, four generally-available 3-trains plus one that the NYC starts with, and three 5-trains. The number of train cards provided will be (have been) adjusted accordingly.

(2) Inconsistency: It is stated that the game is designed for three to five players.  However, the numbered certificates for the initial priority draw are only 1 through 4.  Another certificate with number 5 should be provided.  Alternatively the certificates with numbers 1-4 should be deleted.

Agreed, and the necessary changes will be made.

(3) The certificates provided for two fixed-income private companies (P1 and P2) should be deleted. (Previously noted)

Agreed, and the two certs will be (have been) deleted.

Tiles:

Clarification needed: A number of green and brown tiles have the character Y on them.  However, the table provided in the rules listing the Start Packet, the public companies and tile placements and upgrades mentions other tile character designations but not Y.  If Y is not significant it should be removed from the production tiles.

The "Y" designator is an artifact of an ongoing discussion regarding tile designations. I expect all that will be resolved in the production version...but thank you for the reminder! :-)

[Charles E. W. Ward]

Thank you for the response.  The issues I documented were highlighted during a full play-through of the game on Sunday; our group agreed that they enjoyed it and that 18PA is a game that will definitely be played here in the future.

 

I will be glad to review the 18West rules but without a play-through it might not be possible to catch minor rough spots.

 

One further item: Although the number of 3-trains is limited to four per your response as well as the game board, you will want to keep five certificates for them, with the fifth one reserved for the NYC when it begins operation in Phase 4 – the four regular 3-trains could possibly all be in use at that point.

 

Also, my real name is Charles Ward and I live in Columbia, Missouri.  I would appreciate hearing when the production version becomes available.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "dtg-proto" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/dtg-proto/bxl0w0kf1Zo/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to dtg-proto+...@googlegroups.com.

[David Hecht]

Great! And thanks again! :-)

Not to worry, we have a fifth 3-train reserved for the NYC...since it forms on the purchse of the first 4-train, well...all the generally-available 3-trains will be gone for sure! :-)

Understand your concerns about 18West, but we have plenty of guys with experience reading the revised rules. The problem we face is an insufficiency of fresh eyes! When you look at something long enough--especially after umpteen small rewrites--after a while you only see what you think is there rather than what is actually there. You may have observed this phenomenon at work in our own dialogue! :-)

One observation, if I may permit myself: I see that--like me--you have two middle initials. I have them for the best of reasons--I have two middle names, my maternal grandparents' patronymics (Gordon was my maternal grandmother's maiden name: she married a man named Dahlgren). This is part of a now almost completely defunct naming tradition among the WASP class: our 41st president, George Herbert Walker Bush, was similarly named, and it gave me great pleasure during his twelve years in the White House to be able to say to those who expressed surprise at my profusion of middle names, "Yes...just like our (Vice-)President!" :-)

But it's quite unusual, so much so that software that's supposed to be able to handle middle names or initials often chokes on two of them. So...if I may ask---how did you come about two of them, and what are they? :-)

Cheers,
David (Gordon Dahlgren Hecht)

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dtg-proto" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dtg-proto+...@googlegroups.com.

[Charles E. W. Ward]

I had two grandfathers named Charles so I got each of their middle names.  When I was in Naval ROTC in college I realized I had to always use the same form of my name and decided then to consistently use both middle initials (E. W.) and not just the E.  The initials stand for Eugene Willoughby.

 

BTW, our text file on the game setup states that there is a “4-train marked "Reserved for NYC“”, but the game rules and your email both say a 3-train.  I will take it that your text file should be updated to specify a reserved 3-train.

[David Hecht]

Yep...sounds like you've got that WASP thing going too! :-)

...And...thanks for the good catch on the text file as well! Crikey...I must be getting senile! :-)

[John David Galt]

On 2015-03-10 10:00, David Hecht wrote:
> Understand your concerns about 18West, but we have plenty of guys with
> experience reading the revised rules. The problem we face is an
> insufficiency of fresh eyes! When you look at something long
> enough--especially after umpteen small rewrites--after a while you only

> see what you /*think */is there rather than what is /*actually */there.

> You may have observed this phenomenon at work in our own dialogue! :-)

I'll give it a look-over too. Whether you take the advice is up to you.

[David Hecht]

All advice is useful, JDG: it's just not all useful in the same way. :-)

As one of my friends used to say, "If you can't be a good example you'll
just have to settle for being a horrible warning."

Not to say that I think you necessarily fall into the latter category! :-D

[Steve Thomas]

David Hecht wrote:

> As one of my friends used to say, "If you can't be a good example you'll
> just have to settle for being a horrible warning."

That's been my maxim for years. I note that the new setup section reads, in
part:

Put all the charters except for the NYC somewhere convenient to hand.
The NYC charter should be separated from the rest.

Putting the NYC charter somewhere where it's not convenient to hand seems
odd...

Once of my former bosses had been saddled with the forenames Michael Rowan
Hamilton John. He didn't use the latter two normally--his signature was
just M.R.... He was enormously excited one day when he came into the
office--he had applied for a mortgage, and felt that the occasion demanded
the use of all his forenames. They had replied with a letter addressed to
Mssrs MR & HJ ...]

--
Steve Thomas maisn...@btinternet.com

[David Hecht]

Well, Steve, think of it as the slightly loose strap or
not-quite-polished button that the well-informed plebe incorporates into
his uniform for inspection: that way the master chief has something to
scream at him about, and won't look too closely at the rest of the
uniform...

I think it safe to assert that you'd find something to criticize in any
document I (or anyone: I don't mean to suggest there's anything personal
about it) produce: the fact that this is what you came up with suggests
that--on balance--it's reasonably lucid.

But thank you for the observation nevertheless, and I shall endeavor to
find a more felicitous phraseology! :-)

[Charles E. W. Ward]

Dave:

 

I am having a major problem with your new setup rules regarding the placement of station markers: “Place a station token marker from each company other than the NYC on the map in the city circle labeled with the company's number (for pre-NYC and local companies) or herald (for stock companies).  Place the four doubling ("x2") station tokens in the city or off-map area circles with the corresponding company herald.”

 

In every other 18XX game I have played, the initial station token is placed only when the company floats.  That is why there are spots on the company charters for the free home token (and in 18PA for the four free doubling station tokens).  In 18PA the pre-NYC and local company tokens 1-9 should similarly be placed when the companies are purchased from the bank and begin operating.  Otherwise, routes through cities will be blocked by the tokens of companies that are not operating and may never operate.  The free doubling tokens would only be placed when the company has a route reaching the destination city.

 

I strongly urge that your language quoted above be deleted from the new setup rules.

 

Thanks for your consideration of this suggestion.

 

Charlie

 

P.S.  If you do include my name in the credits, leave my initials out – thanks!!

 

From: David Hecht

Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 6:59 AM

To: dtg-...@googlegroups.com

Cc: John A. Tamplin

Subject: Re: [dtg-proto] 18PA rules questions (CORRECTION to original response)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "dtg-proto" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/dtg-proto/bxl0w0kf1Zo/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to dtg-proto+...@googlegroups.com.

[Chris Shaffer]

18West had the same rule, and the token blocking was intentional. I'm not sure if that's the case here, but there can be very good reasons for blocking the cities from the start.

I certainly don't think "all the other 18xx games do it a different way" is a compelling argument. That's why we have the 18xx rules differences list, after all.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dtg-proto" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dtg-proto+...@googlegroups.com.

[Charles E. W. Ward]

In that case, why provide spots on the company charters for the free tokens?  And I said all the other 18XX games I have played, not “all the other 18XX games”.  Removing the blocking in this game makes it much more playable.

[Chris Shaffer]

How does it make it more playable? What does the blocking do that makes is unplayable?

I like having the home token on the charter whether it is placed during setup, on purchase of the president's share, on floating, or at the start of the first operating turn of the company. It lets players tell at a glance how many tokens each company has.

[David Hecht]

Well, while I was out, Chris has spoken for me, with--as it turns out--impeccable correctness.

While I can appreciate the attractiveness of an open map, it's contrary to my preferred approach. If you look over my published designs, I think you'll find that--with the exception of the first, 1826, which is silent on the subject--each and every one uses the "tokens go down as part of the setup, and block throughout the game even if that company never opens" rule.

All 18xx games are about resource management. And because they're games and must complete within a reasonable timeframe, not all the resources can be put in play. To make a deliberate contrast, there are no tile shortages in my games, at least none that are intended: plain yellow track is considered unlimited, and I diligently try to make sure there's enough of each track tile to go around.

Conversely, in some of those more open games where tokens don't go down until the company floats--I'm thinking in particular of the Big Three: 1830, 1856, and 1870--there are often track tile shortages that require people to race for tiles, and that provide incentives for what I call "track-eating", where a player deliberately lays a tile (generally an upgrade) that doesn't actually improve his run, but denies the tile to an opponent. I find this sort of thing petty and loathsome--to say nothing of an immense time-waster--so i don't allow it.

I don't know how many of my games you've played thus far--if you haven't seen this approach to station tokens before, I'd have to guess not many--but you'll also observe that the station token density is quite high. There are many games where there are relatively few tokens compared to places to put them (or if you prefer, many more city circles than tokens), and those tend to lead to an open map. Of course, even those games have bottlenecks and that's where the tokens tend to go. This sometimes leads to companies putting a token in a space far outside their network simply as a blocking play: I prefer to give people the incentive to place "constructive" tokens (that help them directly) as opposed to "destructive" tokens (that mostly hurt one or more opponents).

In a game such as 18PA, there are two incentives to keeping your tokens on your own route: the obvious one...the token bonuses; and the less-obvious one that most of the city circles on the board will presently be occupied, and using your token to mess up someone else will more or less guarantee that someone will mess up your life, even if that's not his intent.

So...I respect your thinking, but I politely decline the suggested change, for all the reasons delineated above.

[Ian D Wilson]

David wrote:

"Conversely, in some of those more open games where tokens don't go down until the company floats--I'm thinking in particular of the Big Three: 1830, 1856, and 1870--there are often track tile shortages that require people to race for tiles, and that provide incentives for what I call "track-eating", where a player deliberately lays a tile (generally an upgrade) that doesn't actually improve his run, but denies the tile to an opponent. I find this sort of thing petty and loathsome--to say nothing of an immense time-waster--so i don't allow it."

There is a famous quote: "never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence". In the case of those old games, I suspect it was either insufficient playtesting and/or an economy measure, rather than a deliberate design to encourage competitive track-laying.

I, for one, much prefer your approach. One key thing in your designs is tempo - if you waste time laying negative/blocking track, your own routes suffer, and having good routes is important.

[Charles Ward]

Well, you are the designer so perhaps we will try playing it that way next time, which may be a month or two from now.  I will reserve judgement until then and let you know our evaluation of this one way or the other.

[Charles E. W. Ward]

That raises a related question: When a public company purchases a local company for $220 it is supposed to replace the local company token with one of its own for no cost.  Does that need to be one of the $100 tokens from the company charter or is it an extra token?  We were assuming the former but I did want to check to make certain.

[Mark Geary]

On Wed, 11 Mar 2015, Charles E. W. Ward wrote:

> In that case, why provide spots on the company charters for the free tokens?

Good point.

What would be useful, if a spot is provided on the charter for the
home token, is some sort of annotation indicating that the token
should never actually occupy that spot.

Mark

--
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination.

[David Hecht]

I realize that I never actually answered this. Among the many reasons I
would give are:

1. Tradition.
2. A visual reminder of the total number of tokens, as one of the
respondents has suggested.
3. A place to put the home token during the initial unpacking of the
game, before you put all the tokens in their places.

In truth, I'd give pride of place to #1. The entire layout of the
charters in most games follows a pattern that goes back to 1830 and 1835
at the least. There have been some experiments in changing the
layout--my own publisher, John Tamplin, is among those doing so--but I'd
say that mostly this comes from a "If it ain't broke, why fix it?"
sensibility.

[David Hecht]

You replace it with whatever token is on deck: if you haven't previously placed your $40 token, that's the first one to go.

Since nothing obliges a company to convert from 5-share to 10-share, it is thereby possible for a 5-share company to own a single local company, and for its president to own a fourth share (80 percent vice 60 percent).

[David Hecht]

Well, given that it's going to print that way, I fervently hope you enjoy the experience! :-)

[David Hecht]

Well, of course I am very aware of this sensibility--Jerry Pournelle quotes that all the time, attributing it to Napoleon--but in some instances at least, i think there's deliberate tile shortages at work, e.g. in 1870, there aren't enough #14 and #15 tiles to go around, and they surely can't have missed that during development.

And of course there's the whole business involving the yellow city tiles in 1856, and the effect that can have on the Welland's goodness as a company...and sometimes the LPS as well: it strains credulity that they didn't observe these things during development.

But of course a lot of that is just an artifact of the incredible profusion of tile types under the classical tile dispensation: there's only so many tiles you can put in the box, so--necessarily--you have to decide which are the most significant based on their use (e.g. #23/24; #43; and #47). Often this means that there's only one or two tiles of any given type and it's therefore very easy for those tiles to get consumed ("eaten") by a malevolent party.

This, BTW, is one of several reasons I very much like the Chris Lawson tiles that first made an appearance in 18EU, for which I will forever be grateful to Chris for: they eliminate many of these issues.

[John David Galt]

On 2015-03-11 16:09, David Hecht wrote:
> But of course a lot of that is just an artifact of the incredible
> profusion of tile types under the classical tile dispensation: there's
> only so many tiles you can put in the box, so--necessarily--you have to
> decide which are the most significant based on their use (e.g. #23/24;
> #43; and #47). Often this means that there's only one or two tiles of
> any given type and it's therefore very easy for those tiles to get
> consumed ("eaten") by a malevolent party.
>
> This, BTW, is one of several reasons I very much like the Chris Lawson
> tiles that first made an appearance in 18EU, for which I will forever be
> grateful to Chris for: they eliminate many of these issues.

That's odd: I very frequently encounter both tile shortages and
successful "defensive track laying" (building to block others) in 18EU.
The green and brown dits and junctions all frequently run out.

[David Hecht]

On 3/11/2015 7:55 PM, John David Galt wrote:
> That's odd: I very frequently encounter both tile shortages and
> successful "defensive track laying" (building to block others) in 18EU.

Defensive track laying, sure: defensive track eating, not so much.

> The green and brown dits and junctions all frequently run out.

Hm. Your group's playing style must be quite different than the one I'm
used to seeing elsewhere and consider normative.

That being said, EU--being only my second design--is probably not as
well tuned in that regard as the later designs. Though we did work hard
to avoid tile shortages. Oh well: can't cover every contingency, can't
please everyone.

[czar...@gmail.com]

Dave has stated that the X2 doubling tokens are to be place on the map during setup.  In that case the following section of the rules will need to be changed as it assumes the X2 token is placed only when the owning company makes a connection to it.

"If the B&A destination—Albany (D17)—or the Erie destination—Buffalo (C2)—are still yellow when the company connects to it, the destination (“x2”) token is placed in the dotted city tile containing their destination (“x2”) token symbol, which is considered conterminous with the existing city circle: it is then placed in the second city circle as soon as the tile is upgraded to green. Note that the second city circle is reserved and no other company may place a token there."

[czar...@gmail.com]

Here is another part of the rules in contradiction to Dave's new setup rules:

"Four of the public companies in the game have a destination, which is a city or off-map area that the company may count for double value each time it runs to or through it. In addition to the free base station token and the $40 station token, each of these companies starts with a destination (“x2”) station token, which it places during the track placement step as soon as they have a route unblocked by enemy tokens connecting their home station token to the destination."

??????

[David Hecht]

Indeed, those are both legacies of previous versions of the game, in which the x2 token was used in slightly different ways, and thus could not be placed at the outset. As the game evolved and those other functions dropped off, I decided it would be just as easy to have the tokens start on the map, and would eliminate a potential ambiguity about what happened when either Albany or Buffalo were upgraded to green (obviously for Pittsburgh and Cincinnati the question does not enter).

Thank you for picking both of those up...that's exactly why I need fresh eyes! :-)

--