Game: Rail Baron

Image

eevans24 — 2008-08-18T01:10:50+00:00

What You Get

Thread: Re: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

Brokenwindow — 2008-08-05T22:20:27+00:00

The game is most interesting when there's 5 or more players. It makes choice of purchases critical, as one player is almost sure to get locked out of the northeast and elimination is almost unavoidable.

Thread: Re: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

flapjackmachine — 2008-05-04T06:46:15+00:00

When I played Rail Baron (a lot) at University about 25 years ago I played with a gang where two regulars had MEMORIZED all the charts (I kid you not, both destination and payouts). Thats true fanaticism. I don't remember ever finding them wrong. As a result the game never dragged.

The 'expert' players claimed that going flat out and buying a Super-Chief train before any other purchases was the key to victory. They seemed to have a good, although not 100%, record of victory. I didn't have the nerves of steel to do it while the first routes get purchased. The one time I did follow this strategy (actually recently) I won in quick order. It also helps to know the odds of destinations and the vagarities of the payout charts to plan route purchases. They are not even or balanced as to distance.

There seemed to me a bit of kingmaking happens in the game as to which lines to travel on, and pay, and who had top priority to 'ram' during the very end game.

Compared to Monopoly I had more fun with Rail Baron, but I believe it has been outclassed by better games. The 'experts' have moved on to the 18xx games and/or crayon rail games like Empire Builder.

Thread: Re: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

Danny from Tower — 2008-05-04T06:00:53+00:00

I wrote a standalone executable Java program to do all the table lookup part of this game. I just uploaded it to the files section and hopefully it will be there soon. Just download the file and double click on it to run it (assuming you have a Java runtime on your system I guess, go to http://www.java.com if you don't).

I've played quite a few times with this and all the games have been quite zippy and fun. You spend your time doing the things like deciding which line to buy, which path to travel based on who gets paid and how much, and when is it time to run for home.

Thread: Re: Downloadable Full Copy of English Rules?

Hopalong — 2008-04-23T20:38:19+00:00

I thought that was the full rules - sorry
Try this link instead to a pdf of the rulebook
http://www.1stingames.com/rules/railbaron/index.pdf

Thread: Re: Downloadable Full Copy of English Rules?

rsolow — 2008-04-23T19:42:10+00:00

Hopalong wrote:
A copy of the rules can be found at the Rail Baron Fanatics website at http://www.insystem.com/rbp/

Thank you. I saw that in another thread and was under the impression that while there is a great deal of useful information there, that there is not a full copy of the rules to be found. What I found there was just this summary:

http://www.railgamefans.com/rbp/rbrules.htm

...but that is not the complete rules.

Thread: Re: Downloadable Full Copy of English Rules?

Hopalong — 2008-04-23T19:35:09+00:00

A copy of the rules can be found at the Rail Baron Fanatics website at http://www.insystem.com/rbp/

Thread: Downloadable Full Copy of English Rules?

rsolow — 2008-04-23T16:43:15+00:00

Anyone be good enough to upload a full copy of the English rules?

Thanks.

Thread: Re: Anyone tried the Canada or Mexico expansions?

anglotiger — 2008-02-26T19:26:52+00:00

Thanks Jon. I just saw these on eBay and was really thinking about it until I read this.

Image

MoraleCheck — 2008-01-20T22:51:52+00:00

Side of the box.

Image

MoraleCheck — 2008-01-20T22:45:00+00:00

Front of the box.

Image

MoraleCheck — 2008-01-20T22:38:24+00:00

Back of the box.

Thread: Re: Anyone tried the Canada or Mexico expansions?

jgbaxter — 2008-01-16T04:04:29+00:00

I've tried them both.

-Quality was really poor.
-"Graphics" (hand drawings) of rail lines were hard to see.
-New Game mechanics didn't provide for a smooth game.

It sucked.

Image

Meat — 2008-01-14T02:28:17+00:00

Box Front - 1977 Edition

Image

oberonsd73 — 2008-01-03T02:12:24+00:00

Making my way back to San Diego

Image

herman_the_german — 2008-01-02T18:07:40+00:00

Unpunched game contents.

Thread: Re: Rip off of Pirate and Traveler

railgamefan — 2007-12-28T17:59:09+00:00

This general gaming mechanism dates back to the 19th century: see Across the Continent.

Thread: Re: Rip off of Pirate and Traveler

Robrob — 2007-12-25T22:48:18+00:00

BergBROG wrote:
E.g., as I have mentioned elsewhere, CARCASSONE is dominoes with better graphics. Doesn't seem to have hurt it's sales much, eh wot?RHB

Haven't played dominoes before. Do you "bet" on making connections in dominoes as you do with your meeples in Carcassone?

Thread: Re: Rip off of Pirate and Traveler

BergBROG — 2007-12-25T21:19:38+00:00

Most games have mechanics that are similar to others; there's not that much new under the sun. Creativity is not Innovation, for the most part . . . it is making the best use of what is available. It is often just takiong the same car down a different road.

E.g., as I have mentioned elsewhere, CARCASSONE is dominoes with better graphics. Doesn't seem to have hurt it's sales much, eh wot?

RHB

Thread: Re: Rip off of Pirate and Traveler

Robrob — 2007-12-25T20:55:41+00:00

Barticus88 wrote:

1) Draw/roll a destination.
2) Spin/roll dice.
3) Move that many spots toward destination.
4) When you reach destination, collect booty/money. (The destination card becomes the booty. In RB you look on a chart to determine how far you just went to know how much you are paid. RB is fairer in this respect.)
5) When you have reached enough destinations, there's a brief period when other players are trying to bushwhack the leader while he takes his booty/money home.

Interesting this mechanic (substituting dice combat to acquire booty) is also almost identical to TSR's Dungeon game.

Thread: Rip off of Pirate and Traveler

Barticus88 — 2007-12-25T19:52:06+00:00

When I was a child, one of my favorite games was Pirate and Traveler. I was not very discerning then. It plays very much like Rail Baron.

1) Draw/roll a destination.
2) Spin/roll dice.
3) Move that many spots toward destination.
4) When you reach destination, collect booty/money. (The destination card becomes the booty. In RB you look on a chart to determine how far you just went to know how much you are paid. RB is fairer in this respect.)
5) When you have reached enough destinations, there's a brief period when other players are trying to bushwhack the leader while he takes his booty/money home.

Rail Baron adds buying railroads and transfer of money from rail user to rail owner. Both P&T and RB do teach some geography: Before you can get to Perth/Louisville you have to learn where in the world/USA it is located. (In contrast Power Grid (a fine game) has cities, but you can just say "I'm building here", without ever learning the city names.) That is not a justification for playing either of these turkeys.

Thread: Re: Early Declare Variant - Rail Baron in Half the Time

railgamefan — 2007-12-19T16:45:05+00:00

Togu - yes, this is a more refined version. I think it really boosts strategy and excitement since declaring is possible as soon as the railroads sell out,

Image

cdefrisco — 2007-10-23T20:22:59+00:00

The Three boards scanned and combined into one map.

Image

DCosby — 2007-10-07T03:36:22+00:00

Share and other cards.

Image

DCosby — 2007-10-07T03:34:58+00:00

Shares 19-27

Thread: Re: Another variant question: Gygax end-game

toguopp — 2007-09-27T17:26:59+00:00

A BIG thank you, Charles. People had mentioned the Gygax variant in the past, but no-one mentioned anything about the lock-on scoring or about the no home-city route penalty. These should make the variant much more interesting.

...now we just need somebody to post what those city values are...

Thread: Re: Early Declare Variant - Rail Baron in Half the Time

toguopp — 2007-09-27T17:21:50+00:00

Thanks, Steve. I remember you put out a "Rail Baron in Half the Time" variant some years ago. You seem to have developed your ideas some more, is that so?

Thread: Early Declare Variant - Rail Baron in Half the Time

railgamefan — 2007-08-27T22:07:42+00:00

Early Declare Variant - "Rail Baron in Half the Time"
by Steve Okonski

When Rail Baron was published in 1977, few people questioned the length of the game (about an hour per player). These days, the influx of new, shorter, faster-paced games has some time-pressed people sometimes leaving their copy of Rail Baron on the shelf. If this includes you, try the simple variant described below. It preserves all the elements and flavor of the original game, but plays in about half the time.

GOALS

I had several design goals while inventing this variant. I wanted to reduce the part of the game which many people find dull and/or sluggish: the time between when all the railroads sell out and when someone manages to accumulate the cash needed to go for the win. I wanted to reduce the luck of the start of the game, in which the first player to afford the Pennsylvania railroad gets a big advantage. If possible, I wanted to increase or add to the play strategy. I tried to avoid adding random factors or changing the basic flavor of the game. Finally, I wanted to keep the modifications simple so they would be easy to learn.

THE EARLY DECLARE VARIANT

Here's what I came up with. Play the game by normal rules, with the following four changes:

1) Reduce the price of all railroads and engine upgrades to half. (Pennsylvania RR becomes $15,000, Express engine becomes $2,000, etc.)

2) After all unowned railroads have been sold, any player can "Early Declare" and run home if he has less than $200,000. However, a player may not Early Declare when he is in the region that contains his home city.

3) When an Early Declared player is caught via the rover play, if he has less cash than the rover fee ($50,000), he is immediately bankrupt and must give his cash AND railroads to the player that rovered him.

4) When an Early Declared player returns home safely, as a reward he collects the payoff for that trip. The game continues until the round is completed so that all players get an equal number of turns. After arriving home, the Early Declared player is immune to rover plays. At the end of that round, the game ends, and the winner is the person with the most cash.

FAQ

Q. Can I win via a normal declare too?
A. Yes, if you have over $200,000, you can declare normally. If you arrive home safely, the game ends immediately and you win, even if you don't have the most cash. All original declaration and rover rules apply without modification when you declare with over $200,000.

Q. Can I Early Declare if I have $200,000 cash or more?
A. No.

Q. Can I Early Declare in my home city?
A. No, because you are not allowed to Early Declare from within the region that contains your home city.

Q. I was riding a railroad owned by a player who was rovered and bankrupted. What happens?
A. You are established on the line per original rules, and pay subsequent railroad fees to the new owner.

Q. Must I reveal exactly how much cash I have when I Early Declare?
A. No, unless you have $150,000 or more. Otherwise you must state you have less than $150,000.

DISCUSSION AND STRATEGY

Since the Early Declare makes the player with the most cash the winner, cash is king, and should not be spent too easily. To counter the effect of players holding cash and not buying railroads, the price of railroads is halved to make them more attractive. This price change has the added benefit of reducing the amount of cash that goes back to the bank, and this contributes to shortening the game. It also makes powerful railroads like the AT&SF and SP affordable upon first arrival, thereby providing a way to compete with the person who is lucky enough to arrive first and claim the PA.

Since players can declare before they have to announce how much cash they have, it becomes more important to try to track roughly how much cash each player has. You don't want to declare, run home and trigger the end of the game only to discover someone else has more cash. The burden of risking the declare is appropriately placed upon the player who believes he has accumulated the most cash. Awarding a payoff for the trip home is a bonus, albeit small, for the player who takes the risk.

As the railroads grow close to selling out, if one player is clearly the cash leader, the others should avoid buying railroads. If he wants to be able to declare and run home, the richest player will have to spend his money acquiring the remaining railroads. Declaring with less than $50,000 is allowed, but very risky: if you get rovered, you're out of the game. All these items add some new strategic elements.

But the real time savings comes from cutting out the $200,000 declaration requirement. With this variant, the interesting "railroad purchase" phase of the game is immediately followed by the suspenseful "is he going to declare yet?" phase. If you enjoy Rail Baron, but don't have 3 or 4 hours to devote, give this variant a try, and finish in about half the time.

Thread: Re: rules question

railgamefan — 2007-08-27T21:53:23+00:00

Paul - I've not heard of the exception for spurs... where are you getting that from?

Thread: Re: A Great Train Game

dagibbs — 2007-07-05T01:40:38+00:00

roman1967 wrote:

You only pay the fees when you get on the railroad, not each turn.

This is incorrect. The first sentence of "User Fees" in the rules says, "At the end of your turn, you must pay for the rail lines that your pawn used that turn." Further, under "User Fees", it talks of the concept of being "established" on a line -- which would be meaningless if you paid but once.

Thread: Re: Which to you prefer and why- This game or Empire Builder

wkusau — 2007-06-27T00:56:49+00:00

I like Rail Baron better.
Why - because I learned it first.

Though many long discussions about this subject, I came to the following conclusion.
Most people like the game they learned first.
This is not a scientific sample and not everyone agrees but it has held true through my contacts over 30+ years. I would say about 65% of the people have agreed.

Thread: Re: rules question

paulbean — 2007-06-04T00:22:55+00:00

The only restriction on the pursuer is that they can not use track they have already used in the run to their active destination, a restriction that is effect anyway. The only exception to this is the spur tracks that go to Miami, San Diego and Portland, ME. You are allowed to pursue someone on these tracks if they wind up just short of these home locations and then you may reverse course and head for your own destination and the caught player can also reverse and head for their alternate destination.

Thread: rules question

keel — 2007-06-03T23:44:23+00:00

Near the game end in what's called the 'Rover play', can an opponent change his current course, to go after the winning player who is returning to his home city, and then return to his existing course?

Thread: Re: Another variant question: Gygax end-game

gamer-stu — 2007-06-01T21:55:07+00:00

Thanks Charles! So it looks like there is a little more to the variant than I thought, i.e. locks on cities.

If I am understanding the "average" die correctly...

1 = 3
2 = 2
3 = 3
4 = 4
5 = 5
6 = 4

Or, put another way, 1/6 of getting a "2", 2/6 of "3", 2/6 of "4", 1/6 of "5".

Thread: Re: Another variant question: Gygax end-game

wkusau — 2007-06-01T21:38:29+00:00

From Dragon Magazine #20
"Rail Baron A Short Course for Empire Builders" by Gary Gygax

Page 20
"After each player has moved once after the last line has been bought, roll an “average” die, counting 1 as 3, 6 as 4; the result being the total number of complete turns (movement around the board from first to the last moving player) which can take place. When these turns are completed, each player totals his or her cash, adds the face value of the railroads he or she owns, adds the value of EXPRESS or SUPERCHIEF ownership, if any, and"

HERE IS THE TRICKY PART BECAUSE YOU NEED THE REST OF THE ARTICLE TO HAVE THESE PERCENTAGES AND HOW HE COMES UP WITH THEM.

"finally adds in the percentage value of each and every city his or her network has a lock on, rounding decimals to the nearest 5, expresssing whole percentage points as thousands of dollars. A lock on Miami is
worth 1.8% or $2,000, Rapid City is worth 7% or $500. From these totals must be deducted $10,000 by each player who does not have a route into his or her home city. The highest final total is the winner, and a new game can be started!"

Definitely would make for a shorter game.
Thanks for bringing this up. I had never seen this article. It is pretty interesting and has a lot of details that most people would never know.

Thread: Re: Another variant question: Gygax end-game

ironcates — 2007-06-01T21:07:55+00:00

I haven't heard of the variant but I've played Rail Baron through about ten times. The weakness of the game is the middle game. Too many rounds of just rolling dice. The end game is pretty cool though race home and if you're tagged you lose $50,000.

I don't know if the variant will help with the middle game problem while losing the cool endgame. I'd say that 3-d6 would make the most sense at an average of 9-10 but 18 would drag and 3 wouldn't be interesting.

I'd probably say d6+6 at 7-12 turns and then the player with the most money has to make it home or lose 50,000. If they drop down in rank the next highest player has to get home, until only one person isn't left bankrupt or there's an outright winner.

Thread: Another variant question: Gygax end-game

gamer-stu — 2007-06-01T20:34:01+00:00

I've heard about an end-game variant that Gary Gygax of AD&D fame published in Dragon Magazine. Basically it does away with the rover play. After the last rail deed is sold, dice are thrown, and X number of rounds are played. Once the game ends, the players tally their money and real value of property and trains. Highest wins.

Seems straightforward to me, but I have no idea how many dice are used to determine the number of roulds played. Anyone know? Is the variant worthwhile?

Thread: Re: Anyone tried the Canada or Mexico expansions?

railgamefan — 2007-06-01T19:39:36+00:00

Anyone willing to invest that much work must be dedicated, and therefore has probably produced something good. I have not seen his map in person, but it looks like fun. It appears that he did not use the RB Player map editor ( http://www.railgamefans.com/rbp/rbpe2.htm ) even though it would have made his task much easier.

Thread: Anyone tried the Canada or Mexico expansions?

gamer-stu — 2007-06-01T14:15:59+00:00

There is a guy on eBay selling his homemade Canada and Mexico expansions for Rail Baron. Looks neat. Has anyone actually tried them? If so, what are your impressions?

Thread: Re: Which to you prefer and why- This game or Empire Builder?

fuzzyfife — 2007-03-12T16:48:13+00:00

Except for their length I also don't see much similarity. I like both games just about equally as long as the variant in Rail Baron that allows you to switch your home city with your destination city on the first turn is in force. And yes there is nothing better than buying a RR that an opponent needs on the turn just before he/she has the chance to buy it, Especially one that ups the fees to 5 grand for using a RR.

Thread: Re: Which to you prefer and why- This game or Empire Builder?

alturniansky — 2007-03-12T16:19:22+00:00

I've played both of them a lot, but I'm afraid that I don't see the similarities that you do.

Thread: Re: Copy of the rules?

Midori — 2007-02-20T23:34:26+00:00

Translation done, should be shortly available on the BGG's Game entry...

Midori...

Thread: Re: Why RB is broken and how to fix it

Midori — 2007-02-20T23:32:33+00:00

That is a very interesting post, so interesting I made the french translation. Here it is if you are interested:

Pourquoi Rail Baron est cassé, et comment le réparer...

"J'ai joué à Rail Baron des années durant avant de réaliser à quel point il était cassé. Tout le monde mentionnait qu'il dépendait lourdement de la chance, mais la plupart pensaient qu'il s'agissait de la chance des dés où il fallait faire un résultat élevé pour le déplacement, et le lancer pour obtenir des destinations pour lesquelles le joueur ne soit pas en difficulté. Le vrai problème de ce jeu n'est pas à quel point cette sorte de chance importe, mais à quel point elle n'importe pas. Chacun sait que la chance de vos premiers jets (avec votre stratégie) déterminera à quel point votre réseau ferroviaire sera bon à la fin du jeu. Ce que peu de gens réalisent, c'est la faiblesse de la relation entre votre réseau final et la possibilité de gagner.

La seule chose qui importe au début du jeu et d'être sûr que votre position ne soit jamais si mauvaise que vous soyez ruiné. L'équilibre du jeu aide à faire en sorte que ceci n'arrive pas. Si votre groupe tend à avoir une attitude "équilibre des forces" – c'est-à-dire que lorsqu'ils ont le choix des rails adverses à utiliser, ils vont avoir tendance à utiliser ceux du joueur le plus faible – ce qui rétabli l'équilibre (il est actuellement plus intelligent de payer l'adversaire le plus fort, puisque aider un adversaire plus fort ne va pas vous causer de torts à long terme, alors que conduire un adversaire à la ruine améliorera vos chances de gagner). Le nombre de joueur fait une grande différence. Dans le jeu à trois joueurs, il est presque impossible pour un joueur d'être hors jeu; même si un joueur est un grand malchanceux, il ne sera pas dans un état vraiment pire à la fin à cause de cela.

Cependant, après le début du jeu et le milieu de partie, il va rester une proportion de trois "survivants" sur cinq, chacun avec un réseau à moitié décent. Certains réseaux seront mieux que d'autres, mais cela n'a que peu d'importance. Une fois les routes ferroviaires toutes achetées et tout le monde avec un SuperChief, chacun va commencer à collectionner l'argent à la même vitesse. Encore une fois, la stratégie ”Équilibre des Forces", va soulager les désavantages d'être dans une position plus faible. Avec un jeu intelligent de chacun, les joueurs vont tous atteindre 200'000 $ à quelques tours de distance les uns des autres. Même ceux qui semblent vraiment en retard au milieu du jeu n'auront que quelques courses de retard à la fin.

À cause de la règle de mouvement vagabond, un joueur avec assez d'argent pour gagner ne peut pas le faire de manière sure tant qu'il n'a pas obtenu une destination suffisamment proche de sa ville de départ. Ceci est la chance qui détermine l'issue du jeu. Si vous êtes le premier à réunir 200'000 $, vous ne gagnerez cependant pas avant d'avoir une destination qui vous assure un retour en sécurité à votre ville de départ. Si vous n'obtenez pas ce jet dans les deux premiers tours suivants, les autres joueurs vont aussi atteindre les 200'000 $, et le fait que vous avez maintenant 250'000 $ ou même 300'000 $ ne fait aucune différence. Le gagnant est celui qui obtient une route sécurisée jusqu'à sa ville de départ le premier, et cela dépend entièrement de la chance du jet de destination durant les derniers tours – plus l'immense avantage d'avoir une ville de départ centralisée (si votre ville de départ est dans un des coins, vous pouvez directement laisser tomber).

Une fois que vous avez réalisé ceci, cela enlève tout amusement du jeu parce que durant les deux premières heures de jeu, vous savez que toute votre stratégie et toute votre chance n'ont qu'une influence minimale sur les possibilités de gagner le jeu. Cela ressemble à une perte de temps.

La seule raison pour laquelle ce jeu reçoit un 3 et non un 2 de ma part est la possibilité de "réparer" cela. Le corps principal du jeu est bon; ce qui est cassé c'est le mécanisme de fin de jeu. La condition cash + ville de départ doit être entièrement oubliée. Une meilleure approche, je pense, serait d'avoir un évènement du jeu – l'achat de la majorité ou la totalité des lignes est un choix évident – qui débloque un mécanisme qui retire de l'argent aux joueurs de manière égale. Proprement calibré, cela voudrait dire qu'au lieu d'avoir une fin du jeu qui soit juste une phase où les joueurs amassent de l'argent, ce serait une phase où l'argent se ferait de plus en plus rare, et où les joueurs devront terminer des voyages simplement pour rester en jeu. Cela forcerait les joueurs les plus faibles é la ruine, et le dernier joueur restant en jeu serait le vainqueur.

Sans avoir véritablement testé (mes amis ayant perdu leur intérêt pour Rail Baron il y a des années...) je ne peux dire exactement quelle est la meilleure solution, mais je proposerai cette simple règle:

À tout moment lorsque toutes les lignes ont été achetées par les joueurs, les PRIMES ne sont plus payées par la banque, mais par les autres joueurs qui contribuent tous de la même somme pour payer (arrondir, puis donner le supplément à la banque). De cette manière, une fois toutes les lignes achetées, les traînards vont perdre leur équilibre financier, et rapidement devoir vendre. Utiliser la valeur des lignes non achetées comme référence devrait fournir un bon équilibre, puisque si l'argent devient trop rare pour tout le monde, certaines lignes vont être revendues à la banque et soulager la pression jusqu'à ce qu'un riche joueur soit prêt à acheter et remette la pression.

Si quelqu'un veut essayer ces règles, n'hésitez pas à ajouter un rapport de partie au BoardGameGeek et à poster sur la discussion. Au fait, j'aime bien ces variantes de règles mineures:
1. Aucun coût pour les lignes appartenant à la banque ou à vous-même (pour diminuer la complexité et la durée).

2. Une double chance pour la position de départ et / ou destination: si quelqu'un considère que ses lancez de départ sont trop mauvais, il peut les relancer, les deux et avec l'obligation de prendre les nouveaux résultats (pour minimiser le risque d'avoir un joueur bloqué dès le départ).

3. Augmentez le prix du Pennsylvania Railroad à 35'000 $ (parce que son prix irrationnellement bas en fait un achat inévitable du Northeast)."

Thread: Re: Why RB is broken and how to fix it

Danny from Tower — 2006-12-07T13:33:13+00:00

The end game rove always gave us an incentive to buy rail lines connecting to our home town, pave the way as it were.

On the other hand we never liked the chase and bump so we just changed the ending to "If you have at least $X then you can declare and head to your home town. If you get there with at least $X still in hand before anyone else achieves this, you win."

We varied X from the official 200,000 to 100,000 for a zippier game. It also put more pressure on the decision about upgrade or rail line purchase at the end of a trip. An early purchase of a superchief could be good or it could allow another player to get home with the money much earlier than you.

Thread: Re: Copy of the rules?

Midori — 2006-11-28T18:46:45+00:00

I sent you a mail...

Thank you so much :-D

Midori...

Thread: Re: Copy of the rules?

Robrob — 2006-11-28T18:22:40+00:00

I can help, let me know a good email address.

Thread: Re: Copy of the rules?

Midori — 2006-11-28T17:50:41+00:00

Hello there,

Jeff > these are alas not the "full" rules. Though helpfull in a general way, it is not so in my case.

Kevin > did you get a"true" copy ?

We have two copies of the Avalon Hill game, but BOTH missing the original rules. Would someone be kind enough to send me a scan of the original rules ? I intend to translate them (to french), so I need a "full" rule...

Thanks to everyone for help.

Midori :-)

Thread: Re: Copy of the rules?

Lemming — 2006-10-26T17:56:37+00:00

http://www.insystem.com/rbp/rbrules.htm

...and of course, check out

http://www.insystem.com/rbp

-JL

Thread: Copy of the rules?

kerg — 2006-10-25T00:59:27+00:00

If anyone has any links to a copy of the rules, I would appreciate.

Thanks in advance

Thread: Re: Do you think the RB RRs should be repriced based on serv

railgamefan — 2006-10-23T15:59:25+00:00

When you register the RB Player computer version you get a map with the RR prices rebalanced to match their true contribution to a winning network. The prices were determined by many thousands of games the computer played vs. itself.

Some of the new prices:
PA $56000
AT&SF $46000
SP $43000
NYC $42000

and from the cheap end:
NYNH&H $7000
D&RGW $6000
IC $5000
RF&P $2000

Thread: Re: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

railgamefan — 2006-10-23T15:48:50+00:00

There's an improved lookup chart you can download and print yourself, or just ask and you can get one printed on card stock for free:

http://www.insystem.com/rbp/rbpchart.htm

Also, the computer version at the same site has a Game Conductor feature that does all the table lookups for you while you play the board game.

Thread: Re: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

GameCloset — 2006-09-27T19:58:53+00:00

Ken Waido wrote:
Years ago (20?), I wrote an article in the former Avalon Hill publication "The General" presenting a Rail Baron variant called “Freight Train” well before Alan R. Moon made a game of the same name. In my variant, the charts were used to determine a starting point and ending point for a “freight delivery contract” that paid twice the amount of the standard Rail Baron pay-off chart. The number of available contracts was one higher than the number of players. Players then secretly bid on all the contracts. The contracts were awarded in a random order with the highest bidder being awarded the contract. A player could only purchase one contract so once they had one they were not in competition for any other contracts. The process continued until all contracts were awarded and each player had a contract. If two or more players made the same bid amounts for a contract, an auction was held. Players had to consider where they were on the game board and how many turns and what the cost would be to get to the starting point then consider the costs to make the delivery to the ending point and what the contract amount was. This added a lot more decision making for the players. The game lasted a pre-determined number of rounds and the player with the most value, cash and rail lines, was the winner Rail line purchases, train purchases, etc. were the same as in a regular Rail Baron game.

Now that sounds like a fun variant!

Thread: Re: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

Ken Waido — 2006-09-27T19:22:20+00:00

Years ago (20?), I wrote an article in the former Avalon Hill publication "The General" presenting a Rail Baron variant called “Freight Train” well before Alan R. Moon made a game of the same name. In my variant, the charts were used to determine a starting point and ending point for a “freight delivery contract” that paid twice the amount of the standard Rail Baron pay-off chart. The number of available contracts was one higher than the number of players. Players then secretly bid on all the contracts. The contracts were awarded in a random order with the highest bidder being awarded the contract. A player could only purchase one contract so once they had one they were not in competition for any other contracts. The process continued until all contracts were awarded and each player had a contract. If two or more players made the same bid amounts for a contract, an auction was held. Players had to consider where they were on the game board and how many turns and what the cost would be to get to the starting point then consider the costs to make the delivery to the ending point and what the contract amount was. This added a lot more decision making for the players. The game lasted a pre-determined number of rounds and the player with the most value, cash and rail lines, was the winner Rail line purchases, train purchases, etc. were the same as in a regular Rail Baron game.

Thread: Re: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

Robrob — 2006-09-27T18:00:30+00:00

We loved this game - 25 years ago. By today's standards it's really hard to justify pulling it out (3+ hours). Frankly I'm sorely tempted to eBay it and buy three more games I might actually play.

Thread: Re: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

Throknor — 2006-09-27T17:11:07+00:00

How many players did you play with? Overall I don't disagree with your assessment, but it does depend on the group and how many are in it how this plays. When you have more players the path decision becomes even more important as you decide who you want to pay, or that you want to take a long route to avoid paying. Conversely it can drag out as it takes that much longer. I'd consider this more of a socializing-for-fun game than a game to try and win-for-fun.

We haven't broken this one out in a while - mostly for players moving away, but also because of newer games. While there are better train games, this is a nice simple one that does work as a stepping stone from Monopoly if need to slowly move someone towards a broader world of gaming than they may already know.

Thread: Re: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

Dweeb — 2006-09-27T11:23:48+00:00

I kinda like this game up until the point when all the railroads are bought and it becomes a "roll to see who wins" game. I despise the "Rover" rule.

There are "better" charts available, or at least used to be, and it might be possible to find a player who actually enjoys doing the chart lookups.

Thread: Review - Rail Baron = Crappy Rail-opoly?

GameCloset — 2006-09-27T00:35:21+00:00

Rail Baron is a game of purchasing rail lines and collecting delivery payoffs. There isn't a lot of deep strategy to this game.

Rules overview
Basically you take two dice, roll them and then move your train, but it will cost you money to use the rails. If the rail line is owned by you or the bank the charge is small, if the rail is owned by an opponent then it will cost you much more. When your train makes it to its destination you collect your money and you have the option to purchase a rail line or upgrade your train.

The rail lines vary in price. Each line connects different cities in various locations of the country and varies in length. The large rails in higher traffic areas are more expensive.

In order to determine the new destination for your train you have to have to roll 3 dice twice and use a table to find your destination. Once you get to your destination you have to lookup (on another table) the payout.

Once a player has collected a certain amount of money they declare that they are trying to win and now must head to their initial starting city. If other players ram the train then that player takes a large sum of cash from the other player which is enough to not allow him to win.

Thoughts
While this game may have been good in its day, it pales in comparison to the more modern train games. The game really plays it self. Roll the dice for destination, then roll them again to see how far you can go. There really isn't much choice in the game.

You do have some choices in the game since you can chose your route and purchase rail. The route choice is pretty straight forward since you know where you have to go, where you are coming from, and how much it costs. Purchasing is the only real strategy (and table-less) part of the game.

The table lookups really date and drag the game down. The tables are just too awkward to make the game run smoothly. The random selection for delivery locations is really goofy. To get the region of the United States you have to roll 3 dice, total 2 of them then look at the third to see if it is even or odd and look that up on a table. Then you have to do the same silly steps again to determine the city within the region. Once you determine the destination you have to cross reference that information with your current location in order to find out the payoff. Ugh!

The game is kind of interesting but the tables really drug it down. Also, the near lack of decisions each turn made this game a real snoozer. This game is basically a modified version of monopoly, except there are no houses, no hotels, the rent is the same, and you can't trade. But you do have the choice of routes so you can take a path down Baltic Ave instead of heading up Boardwalk.

The "ramming" at the end of the game is weird, but it is the most fun portion of the game. I can't figoure out how this would relate to anything in real life but it does make for an interesting game.

All in all if you want a rail game, I would say pass on this game and pick up something like Ticket to Ride or Age of Steam. (Yes, Ticket to Ride is simple, but it flows smoothly unlike this game). I understand the nostalgia that many of you feel, but please don't bring this to the table with anyone but other people who want that "old" feeling.

Thread: Re: Card Variant - anyone tried?

jack208 — 2006-06-15T02:35:27+00:00

jjrbedford wrote:
Thanks for the kind words. We also never play RB except with the variant.

I just wanted to stress that Bernie Norton is the designer of the variant. All I did was finally package it up reasonably nicely. Unfortuately, Bernie isn't on the Geek, though even at 75+ years he still games regularly with us.

75+? Woooo.. I salute Bernie! I hope when I reach that age, I'll still be able to game regular as he does. It's really one of life's ultimate leisure to have a few rounds of boardgames with your mates then, ain't it?

Thread: Re: A Shorter Rail Baron

snixon — 2006-06-15T01:15:35+00:00

This sounds interesting. Try it with the Cards. I have found that they speed the game up a lot and can shave off about 30 minutes or more. The combined total of the cards and these rules might make it a long Euro game time wise.

Stance

Thread: Re: Card Variant - anyone tried?

snixon — 2006-06-15T01:11:18+00:00

I am one of the ones who plays Rail Baron with Alfonzo, we really like the card version and that is how we play now. That having been said I must add two things; 1) it makes the game a better game a) faster, b) more strategic (you get to play knowing your next few deliveries) and c) less likely to get screwed by a bad delivery (it still happens). 2) If you insist on matching the statistics of the origional game dice chart you will have to shuffle the cards every turn. I have tried it by throwing in the blank cards and and shuffling it then. Shuffling IS A MAJOR PAIN way too many small cards.

I really reccomend using the cards!