1856 essentially takes 1830 and shakes it up a bit. Though both games share a common ancestry to the original 1829, 1856 works from the very successful ideas put forth in 1830, but deals instead with the unique environment of Canada.

Each player plays an investor who has decided to gamble his money on a series of railroad companies, in the hope they will turn a good profit and bring untold wealth. However, unlike the Robber Barons of 1830, these investors usually ended up relying upon government loans to start risky companies. Eventually, most of them were merged in the Canadian Government Railways (CGR) when it became impossible to pay back the loans.

Companies are started when a player buys the presidents certificate and starts the company. Once the correct number of shares (starting at 2, but eventually 6) are purchased, the company can then operate. The money spent on the first half of the shares bought in a company are available to the company, but the other half requires the company to reach a specified destination. This requirement disappears for companies later in the game, but by that point the companies are typically much better funded and the trains are much more expensive.

In comparison to 1830, these companies start with only a portion of the shares purchased, and more realistically only get money as the shares are bought (until later in the game, where the rules are made a bit unrealistic in order to make it possible to afford a train). However, the trains are more expensive, while the companies have less money. This dilemma is solved by allowing players to take out loans from the government, which if not paid back cause the company to be merged into the CGR.

Essentially, the game shifts between Share Rounds where players take personal cash and buy into companies, and Operating Rounds where the president of the each company (the player with the most stock in the company is president) makes all the decisions about that company. Of critical importance is that the company treasury does not affect a player's final score directly. Victory is simply a matter of how much cash you have, and how much your stock is worth. Company stock goes up in value if fully owned by all players, or the company pays dividends to each player, while it goes down if the company fails to pay dividends (usually in order to afford a better train) or players start dumping stock. At the same time, if the company ends up needing to buy a train and can't afford it, the president has to bite the bullet and has to chip in his own cash to pay for it. As trains are bought, other trains become obsolete (often forcing more trains to be bought) and a player has to balance the need to pay dividends with the need to pay off loans and buy trains. If the president ends up having to pay out of his own pocket, he is bankrupt and the game ends. Otherwise, the game ends soon after the bank runs out of money (sometimes a player can prolong or end the game quickly by certain tactics).

1856 is probably my favorite game of the ones I have played in the 18XX series, but it has some flaws that keep it from usually being considered as good as 1830 or 1870, at least by Americans. First, there is some hint that the game has a 'perfect' strategy. There is a variant that uses 8 trains instead of Diesels that removes this problem, IMHO. Second, though there are 11 companies to start, the board is setup in such a way that if several players start companies close together (typically the LPS,GW and CA or the GT,CPR,CV) while others do not, the ones that do typically win. This stereotypes the play a bit, and I haven't found a workaround (OTOH, 1830 has a similar problem with New York). Also, though I don't consider it a weakness, some people just aren't comfortable with the loan system (it tends to give a player an 'out' on going bankrupt, and with Diesels in play it is often a good move to merge). Finally, in my experience it can be very hard to make a comeback from a bad position, so you can usually get a sense of who will win as soon as the permanent trains enter the game.

Nonetheless, I find this to a be a truly wonderful game to play. First, let me commend Mayfair on a very good presentation. The quality of the parts is very high, particularly compared to 1830. At the same time, the game adds a whole new layer of tactics and strategy, while I find it has a bit more flavor than 1870. With the variant suggested above, players typically prefer not to merge with the CGR, and the question of whether to take loans (and how to pay them off) or not becomes critical. Additionally, the lack of money means that players find themselves trying to pay dividends on companies even when they are desperate to take a round and pay off loans. All these decisions, most of them painful, make this game well worth the time commitment.