Galactic Magnate logo  
   
 
Forums Home Register FAQ Website  
 
 

Forums home Galactic Magnate General Discussion Trade scenarios
Display posts from previous:   
      All times are GMT  
Post new topic  Reply to topic

Sat Sep 10, 2011 6:04 am
Author Message
fingerbun
Planet


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 769
Location: Sydney

Post subject: Trade scenarios Reply with quote

Lets say your in a 3 player game, below is the scenario:

Game is at +50

Player 1 has $6000+ 1000 credit
1 extractor, 1 utility, 1 green, 1 blue

Player 2 has $1200+ 1200 credit
Reds fully upgraded, 2 utility, 1 extractor

Player 3 has $15 + 2350 credit
Purples- not upgraded, 1 utilities, 2 extractors, two greens, two blues

All other squares for the sake of this scenario are brought between the players.

At this point if no trades are made player 2 is looking good, player 1 will come second and player 3 will be gone soon.

If player 3 can upgrade his purples his a chance of not finishing last.

Player 3 gives player 1 two blues and two greens for $1500. He has to throw blues in to get a bit more money. But also has to make it worth while for player 1.

Essentially, Player 1 has been promoted into the top spot. Player 3 has given themselves a chance for second and player two has been screwed.

Player 1 received $2200 of property for only $1500. Player 1 has defiantly improved their position. Player 2 needs some luck, but in a lot better chance to finish 2nd. Arguably, both players have improved their position at the cost of player 2.

Is this a cheat trade? I say no its not.

Defiantly player 2 feels ripped off, but in a three player game there is always going to be a loser since a trade can not possibly be positive for all three players. Someone is going to get traded out of the game. Interested to hear peoples perspective on this scenario.

Another one. A four player game.

Start is -$790

Player 1 $4500 fully upgraded light blue + 4 extractors, owns one purple
Player 2 $3400 fully upgraded dark blue + 4 utilities
Player 3 -$800 (830credit) has had to sell upgrades for brown and yellow. Owns 2 purples
Player 4 -$980 (1500 credit) has also had to sell upgrades for orange and red.


Player 3 & 4 are both approaching the final stretch. Player 3 is five spots away start. Player 4 is on the red set. The next to pass start is gone!

Player 1 & 2 are fighting it out. But you would say player 2 has the advantage.

Player three needs some cash before he passes start. He sells 2 purples for $800 to player 1. Player 3 has given himself 3rd spot because he can pass go one more time, and promoted player 1 to a definite 1st. Is this a cheat trade?

Again, I say no.

Something that people need to realize is this saying which I just made up now.

“It is impossible for a player to gain an advantage without another player incurring a disadvantage”

I dare anyone to argue with this.
_________________
I am the artist formally known as FINGERBANG!
      Back To Top  

Sat Sep 10, 2011 5:22 pm
Author Message
MrCrabbs
Guest





Post subject: Reply with quote

First example
In the first example, I would say it is a very very poor trade, since I would judge player 3's chances of dodging last place as even worse after the trade, than before.

His chance of finishing ahead of player 1 falls from about 1 in 5, by my crude estimate of the likelihood of bonuses coming to the rescue, to around zero, and his chance of beating player 2 is probably not improved, since the board with greens and maybe some blues upgraded becomes too cruel for him to be able to upgrade his pinks without catastrophe, whereas player 2 retains his $1200 cushion, and also post-trade has more credit.

Would I call it a cheat trade? If I could see a track record in the game of the players collaborating, or of player 3 being "anti-" player 2, I would read this as another act of teaming. However, without that, I would put it down to stupidity, or exceptional bargaining skills by player 1.

Second example
Definitely not a cheat, no.
      Back To Top  

Sun Sep 11, 2011 12:27 am
Author Message
fingerbun
Planet


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 769
Location: Sydney

Post subject: Reply with quote

In the first example, player 3 has raised their potential income above player 2. After he upgrades he will still have a couple of hundred. I still believe he is in a better position. He has now upgraded pink level two and the same amount of cash. He has created a liability too, but player 2 has the same liability.

Both these trades I have been apart of, I think they were brilliant trades.

In the first scenario I actually came from the clouds and won. After player 1 was given blue and green by me, he upgraded straight away. After paying for my squares he went from $6000 to $4500. He upgraded green taking him to $3000. He upgraded blue surprisingly to level 5 taking his cash to -$500 or so. (these are not the exact figures but are close). He then rolled on red, then hit my purple twice! So now his forced to sell two upgrades. From memory he sells one green and on blue.

I have two exactors that get hammered, we hit don’t hit bonus much, maybe once before recession. Player two gets stuck in jail on some key parts where we hit red. My purples get pounded every lap. I skip around most rents. By the time I hit green its only worth $100. Player 1 is getting rent but cant upgrade any further.

Recession comes so fast, we land the meteor square and mystery squares which brings it in a couple of minutes. When recession hits, every one is barely above a positive balance, but I have purples at level 3. Player 2 has his reds still at level 5, player 1 has minimum upgrades on both blue and green. I think they were worth $100 and $150.

Now this was an extreme circumstance, but I knew player 1 would upgrade himself in near dept. I just needed to avoid his greens a few rounds and I was sure he would be forced to downgrade.

But I believe if I done nothing I would have been gone very soon.
_________________
I am the artist formally known as FINGERBANG!
      Back To Top  

Sun Sep 11, 2011 12:41 am
Author Message
fingerbun
Planet


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 769
Location: Sydney

Post subject: Reply with quote

toonz wrote:
Any trading or auctioning done in game should only be done if it improves your own rank and is fair to the other players.


This is what I am talking about! This doesn’t make sense.

Now this is a quote I found whilst digging through the complaints section. Don’t get me wrong, Toonz is a good kid but I don’t understand this. Remember my saying?

“It is impossible for a player to gain an advantage without another player incurring a disadvantage”

If two players trade and improve their position, naturally the other player(s) will be demoted in position. Trading will never be fair to every player on the board. Someone has too lose. If a player isn’t prepared to take the initiative before someone else does, its their fault…
_________________
I am the artist formally known as FINGERBANG!
      Back To Top  

Sun Sep 11, 2011 12:54 am
Author Message
fingerbun
Planet


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 769
Location: Sydney

Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, I just remember another trade I was apart of. Now I wont go into the boring details and it was a while ago so I don’t remember the exacts.

I was in clear first, but I felt threatened that the other two players would trade me out of the game. I looked to target the player in the worst position. I figured he would be keen to trade.

I had loads of cash (5 or 6k from memory) 4 utilities and 3 extractors. No other sets were owned. However, I didn’t have a piece of any good set. Red, Green and purple were owned by the other players. Start was about +90.

One player had little cash but owned two light blue. Even if he upgraded I felt my income was stronger. So, I offered him the last blue for his red, purple and green. I also gave him around $3000 in cash. He accepted this trade as I couldn’t build on red, purple, or green. Those squares were now divided with all 3 players.

What this did do was put a lock on these sets. Now no one could get them without going through me.

The other player was furious and said he would report me. After I explained he seemed to understand.

Some may argue that this only benefited one player, what do you think? In the end I won this game and the player who had light blue came second. I basically owned a share of any liabilities against me. Is this a cheat trade? At first glance I am sure most moderators would punish this.
_________________
I am the artist formally known as FINGERBANG!
      Back To Top  

Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:53 am
Author Message
MrCrabbs
Guest





Post subject: Reply with quote

In that last example you give, that's an excellent trade to have made. It's game, set and match to you, and guaranteed 2nd to your trade partner. A perfect trade.

As for the quote from Toon, well I think he has just been a bit vague with his choice of words: "fair to the other players" could mean a few things, without the context I can't tell what Toon meant.

But sticking to the rules as written by Kreso is really the safest long-term strategy, for consistent and clear decisions. Rewording them should be avoided wherever possible.
      Back To Top  

Mon Sep 12, 2011 12:59 pm
Author Message
toonz
Ex Moderator


Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Posts: 332
Location: Detroit

Post subject: Reply with quote

Because you're taking it too literally "Fair" as in having good sportsmanship. Winning should not be the main goal, it should be having fun. If you rob someone of their fun then it's not only unfair, but unjust.

I can accept loss as long as I feel I had a chance, some form of outcome on the ending. If not, then what's the point of playing?
_________________
I am the Tory Steller!
      Back To Top  

Mon Sep 12, 2011 10:26 pm
Author Message
theunknownamus
Guest





Post subject: Reply with quote

fingerbun wrote:


“It is impossible for a player to gain an advantage without another player incurring a disadvantage”

If two players trade and improve their position, naturally the other player(s) will be demoted in position. Trading will never be fair to every player on the board. Someone has too lose. If a player isn’t prepared to take the initiative before someone else does, its their fault…


Couldn't have said it better myself.
      Back To Top  
Post new topic  Reply to topic

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


      Back To Top  

Page 1 of 1
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Avalanche style by What Is Real © 2004