The Railways of England ADVANCED Share System



If you’re not yet familiar with Railways of England and Wales, I’d suggest you start by checking out the first instalment in this series:
The latest Railroad Tycoon expansion: a 2-for-1 deal that includes a completely new train game from Martin Wallace
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/444919

There I explained how this series of games developed before and after Age of Steam, and how the Railways of England and Wales product actually contains two different games:
1. Railways of England & Wales: BASIC Expansion for Railways of the World
2. Railways of England & Wales: ADVANCED Share System

In this third installment of this series of reviews, I’ll be giving an overview of the advanced version of the game. If you read my introductory overview in the first installment, you'll already know that this is really nothing like Railroad Tycoon or Railways of the World, but is a whole new game from Martin Wallace. It just happens to need some Railroad Tycoon components. They could have given it an entirely different name because it's a totally different game - and that's why I'm giving it separate treatment in a separate review. But for whatever reason they included it with the Railways of England expansion, and called it the Advanced game. And it is advanced - more advanced than Railroad Tycoon, and maybe even a little too advanced for me. I find the complexity of Railroad Tycoon just perfect, and I'm not really interested in adding whole levels of complexity to the rules by introducing a share system and other things, not to mention that right now the people I game with enjoy medium-weight games, but nothing much heavier. But I recognize that there are gamers out there who love this kind of thing, and are dying to know what the Advanced Share System is all about. So for your benefit - even though it's not something I'm likely to be playing myself a whole lot anytime soon - I'll give you an overview of the components, summarize the basic rules, and tell you what people are saying about the game.



How did this Martin Wallace game come about anyway, and why is it packaged together with a Railways of the World expansion rather than as a separate stand-alone game? I asked the publisher that very question, and here's the answer I got:
"Good question. We wanted Martin to do an expansion for Railways of the World. The game he submitted was too far away from RRT base game. As a result, we contemplated releasing it as a standalone, but we wanted to do another RotW expansion, so we ultimately felt that it was best to have two separate games rather than try and bill Martin's game as an RotW expansion. I think your point is valid about doing Martin's game separately, but we made a decision to include it (or more accurately do an RotW ruleset for the England map)."

In other words, the Advanced game was conceived as a Railroad Tycoon expansion along with the England map, but because it was so different from the series, the developers added a more basic game similar to Rails of Europe using the England map designed for the Advanced game. This means that the Advanced Share System game actually originated first, and before the Basic game! Wallace basically built a whole new game out of the Railroad Tycoon system, by adding shares and changing other things. Sounds interesting! Let's take a look at it.

COMPONENTS

To play the Advanced Share System game, you'll need components from Railways of England, as well as components from either Railroad Tycoon or Railways of the World.

Components you'll need from Railways of England & Wales

What you won't need are the Railroad Baron cards and Railroad Operations cards used when playing the basic Railways of the World expansion. What you will need are these new components from Railways of England:

● Map of England & Wales
● Shares
● Shares Issued box
● Available Shares box
● Share markers
● Share price track
● Company tiles
● Reference cards
● Rule book

Components you'll need from Railways of the World (= Railroad Tycoon)

Then grab whatever version of the base game you own (Railways of the World or Railroad Tycoon), and take out these components:

● Trains
● Empty city markers
● Goods cubes & Drawstring bag
● Bond certificates
● Money
● Track tiles

Can you use components from Age of Steam as an alternative? Sorry to disappoint, but that won't work, because the Age of Steam track tiles are considerably larger than the ones from Railways of the World. As a result, the Age of Steam track tiles are simply too large for the England map. Believe me, because I checked! Don't believe me? Then look at these images and see for yourself!



But let's check out the new and additional components for the Advanced game in more detail.

Company tiles

The Advanced game introduces companies, and players will have shares in one or more of six different companies (in six different colours).



The companies themselves are not owned by any one player, but rather are controlled by the player that has the most shares in that company. If you buy the first share of a company, you take control of it. You only lose control of a company when another player has more shares in the company than you do. When you control a company (by being the player with the most shares in that company), you take the appropriate company tile, which looks like this:



Note that the company tile has room for storing shares, as well as money. During the course of the game, companies will hold money and so will individual players, and you can't simply exchange money between the two.

Shares

To raise money to build track, a company issues one or more of its shares. Shares correspond to the six different companies, and are available in the same six colours that match the company tiles:



Since the colours of the shares need to match the company tiles and the trains, the question has been asked whether the fact that the trains in Railways of the World are in six colours that are different from the ones in Railroad Tycoon will affect compatibility. According to the publisher, this won't be a problem because they kept this in mind when opting for new train colours. "The colors are the same or very similar, but with different shades (for example black is now a dark grey, red is now maroon etc)." (see the discussion here)

Each company has ten shares that it can issue.



Here's a close-up of the detail on the share cards:



There's a nice inside joke here with the names on the share cards - the name "Fred Gryphon" is an obvious reference to the publisher of the game. Less obvious is the significance of "Keith McBrownless", which is a reference to the game's developers: Keith Blume and Sean Brown.



Shares aren't the only way to raise the money needed for building tracks and completing mergers. When a company has issued all its shares, it can also issue bonds - this works in a similar way to Railroad Tycoon: a bond gives the company $5,000, but $1,000 per bond has to be paid to the bank during the Pay Dividends phase. For this purpose, you'll use the Bonds from your Railways of the World (Railroad Tycoon) base game.

Shares Issued Box

When shares are issued to raise money, a share is moved from the Company tile to the Shares Issued box, which looks like this:



When this happens, the company receives money equal to its present share value.

Share Price markers and Share value track

To keep track of the current share value of each company, there are Share Price markers for each company.



These are placed on a track which has the numbers 1 to 30:



Prices will fluctuate as the game progresses.

Available Shares box

The initial share price for each company ranges from $6 to $11, and is shown on an Available Company Shares box:



The Available Company Shares box is also used at the start of the game, when 5 shares from each company are auctioned.

Reference cards

There are also six reference cards that summarize the phases of each turn:



GAMEPLAY

Setup

At the start of the game, a train of each colour is placed on the zero space on the income track, just as in Railroad Tycoon. Each player gets $20,000 ($25,000 in a 2-3 player game), and the share prices of each company are marked on the share price track with their starting values:



Five shares from each company are placed on its company tile.



The other five shares are placed on its Available Company Shares box, where they will be up for auction.



In turns, shares are chosen and auctioned (with the starting share price being the minimum bid).

Flow of Play

Each turn consists of the four phases listed on the reference card:



1. Company Rounds

Order of play is determined by share price, from highest to lowest. Much like Railroad Tycoon, companies have three rounds to build track and/or move goods, but it is the controlling player of each company that decides which action to carry out:
1. Build track: A company may build one or two links during a round, and they must be connected to previously built links.
2. Move cube: Similar rules from Railroad Tycoon apply (eg cubes must be moved to the city of the same colour), except that there is no train limit when moving goods, i.e. you can move cubes as many links as you wish. If you move a cube along the track of a different company, that company's income marker moves 1 space forward on the score track, just as in Railroad Tycoon.
3. Pass: Take no action.

After all three company rounds, companies collect income based on their income marker (matching train colour) on the score track. In a twist from basic Railroad Tycoon, all company income markers are reset to zero after income is collected. In other words, payment of income is one-time, not a permanent increase, and the money goes to the company itself rather than the players.

2. Pay Dividends

This is how individual players get income. Companies issue dividends to shareholders, with the amount determined by the controlling player of the company. Their share prices are adjusted according to the size of the dividend, and may increase or decrease accordingly (the rules go into more detail about the specifics of this, for a summary see this player aid). After dividends are paid and share prices adjusted, each player also gets an additional $5,000.

3. Merger Phase

Companies can attempt to merge, and this is one of the more interesting aspects of the game. The controller of each company may propose one merger. Both companies need to approve the merger by means of a simultaneous vote within each company (each share is worth one vote). If approved by both companies, the merging company buys each available share of the target company, and the target company is no longer in existence (although it can be brought back into the game as a new company). Part of the strategy in the game is the setting up of railway companies to be merger targets to help your main company grow its track.

4. Shares Phase

Players get the opportunity to buy shares. Each player can place one share up for auction, either from the Shares Issued box or the Available Company Shares box (with the money paid going to the bank in the case of the former, or to the company in the case of the latter). Shares can continued to be offered by players until each has passed when it is their turn to start the auction. This allows you to consolidate control in a company, or take control from another player. The price paid does not affect the share price.

End of the game

Just like in Railroad Tycoon, the game ends when a certain number of locations are emptied of cubes. Shares are cashed in for their present share price, money is subtracted for bonds outstanding (again like Railroad Tycoon), and the player with the most money is the winner. And that, folks, is the Advanced Share System game of Railways of England & Wales!



A very useful quick-start guide to the Advanced Share System rules for set-up and game-play is available from BGG user kneumann here:
http://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/45518

CONCLUSIONS

What do I think?

A somewhat different game

Although some mechanics from the original Railroad Tycoon are retained, the Advanced Share System takes the game in a very different direction, by making control of the railways share driven. You no longer have your own colour, but buy shares in a company that has its own colour. Thus you may have an interest in several different companies at the same time. This adds several elements completely foreign to Railroad Tycoon, since it's the player with most shares in a company that controls it and makes the decisions concerning building track, delivering cubes, and proposing mergers. Cubes may also be moved as many links as you wish, because there's no need to upgrade your engine. Using dividends as a means of income - if the company controllers decide to pay dividends! - also adds a new element. Variable share prices and the potential for mergers also add new points of interest to the game play. These things all add new layers of complexity, and really need to be seen working together in a game to be properly understood and appreciated.

In a sense, it's unfortunate that this new game is packaged as part of a Railways of the World expansion, and requires components from the base game although it is quite different from it, because it will be difficult to judge it independently. How well would the Advanced game have done had it been marketed as an entirely separate game, in a single unit containing all the components it needed, and under a different name? We'll never know, of course. But being packaged together with a basic expansion for Railways of the World inevitably means that that people who are only interested in the Advanced game are less likely to buy it if they don't yet own Railroad Tycoon or Railways of the World. It also results in the game getting a lower profile, and having the potential to play second fiddle to the basic Railways of the World expansion, and having to compete with and be confused with discussions and ratings for the simpler form of the game.

On the other hand, the distinction between basic Railways of the World game and the Advanced Share System shouldn't be overstated. Clearly the Advanced Share System was conceived and intended by Wallace as an expansion for the Railroad Tycoon system. It's true that the game he ended up with did incorporate some radically new elements that makes it quite different from the original, and that's why the developers and publisher included a basic expansion that's more inline with Railroad Tycoon as we know it. But even in the Advanced game, many of the trademark elements of Age of Steam and Railroad Tycoon are still present. In automobile terms, it's a distinctly different model, but it has the same engine. As such, it does represent a further level of development within the same train game family, a development that more or less began with Lancashire Railways, matured into Age of Steam, and mutated into different directions with Railways of the World, Steam, and now Railways of England and Wales. Although each has a unique and distinct flavour, they do represent different members of the same system, and with Railroad Tycoon (=Railways of the World) and Steam Basic being the more medium-weight candidates, and Age of Steam, Steam Advanced, and Rails of England Advanced Share System being the heavier-weight candidates. The expansion for Steam, Steam Barons, also adds shares to the game system, and is perhaps the best point of comparison to Rails of England Advanced Share System.

A somewhat controversial game

Railways of England does have somewhat of a checkered history, as is evident from an unhappy Wallace post here. Is it possible that some aspects of the game have become unfortunate casualties of the legal dispute between Wallace and FRED? I have no idea, but I do know that this thread is not the place to get into discussing legal wrangles. As far as a discussion of the game itself is concerned, it has to be admitted that the rules as written do seem to leave some questions about mergers open to interpretation. See for example the discussions here and here. Until now my requests for official clarification from the designer, developer, and publisher haven't received a response, and if that changes I will be sure to post any helpful information in this thread. Perhaps something official is just around the corner, but for now I do think we're not completely at a loss. I want no part of any mudslinging against either Wallace or FRED, and as an outside observer, it hasn't escaped my attention that one of the developers of the game, Sean Brown, has been very active in posting replies in an effort to provide answers to any outstanding questions. Here's Sean explaining a move to fellow developer Keith Blume:



In Sean's own words, "I addressed every rules question in the Railways of England and Wales forums, but everyone in the thread wanted to get an "official" answer from Martin, because they did not like the answers provided. Martin has yet to answer the questions in the thread. We will issue an official errata as soon as possible and post it on the ROEAW page."

In my estimation, Sean Brown seems to have made every attempt to give good answers to all the questions raised, and I'm happy to take the word of one of the game's developers as authoritative. In view of this, I'm not sure that claims that the game is broken or unclear are entirely reasonable or fair. Richard Young's assessment appears to be one worth embracing: "I think the answers he [Sean Brown] has given to most of the issues raised here stand up reasonably well and I agree with him that the game is playable as written. You may not like how it plays however." In other words: sure it would be nice to have Martin Wallace himself answer some of these questions. But for now we have answers that allow us play the game at least as the developers intended it - so let's go ahead and play the Advanced Share System game as clarified by Brown, and give it a good workout with this rule-set. Since the Advanced game appears to be the kind of game that requires some solid playing to get a grip on the game, it doesn't seem wise to insist on a rash negative judgment before giving it a fair trial. Meanwhile, I expect that we'll soon see some official errata or an FAQ, hopefully sooner rather than later, so that everyone can get on with playing the game multiple times and giving it a good series of plays. If the design proves flawed at the end of that process, then we'll have to speak less enthusiastically about the game, but for now a negative conclusion seems premature.

Update 1: The designer Martin Wallace has since shared some observations here. See also the discussion in this thread, which includes posts from the designer and from the developer Sean Brown, and makes good progress towards clarifying some of the unresolved questions. At least one variant has been proposed as a way of solving some of the questions asked, and is also worth looking at.

Update 2: There is now an official FAQ and Errata (PDF alternative) from the publisher, that should answer most if not all outstanding questions.

What do others think?

It's still early days, and there are some mixed feelings about the Advanced game, perhaps in part because some would like an official word on their rules questions about mergers directly from the designer, and not just from the developer. To be fair, it should be acknowledged that for the most part, the Advanced Share System has met with warm enthusiasm.

Characterizing the Advanced Share System:
The “Advanced Game” is really a misnomer. It would be more accurately called a “Game Option 2” since it is really a completely different type of game from the traditional Railroad Tycoon. ... It is really like getting two games in this expansion. Overall, I think it is a nice bonus and provides an additional playing option to the base game.” – KAS
Aside from the mergers, which are really just a way to sustain capitalisation, the closer relative is Imperial rather than the 18xx.” – J C Lawrence
Honestly they should have just made an entirely new series for this. In no way do the advanced rules resemble Railroad Tycoon. The only similarity is that you are laying track and moving cubes; beyond that it is a completely different beast. I think they would have been better off exploring these ideas more fully in a new series rather than trying to shoe-horn it onto a Railroad Tycoon expansion.” – Mike Betzel
Is is good? I haven't decided yet. I really like how it scratches both the Railroad Tycoon itch of develop a company and make it succeed by setting up a good route, and the 18xx itch of allowing you to invest in other people's companies and merge companies. Yet I'm not quite sure it’s a great system.” – Ryan Sturm


Criticism of the Advanced Share System:
"Advanced rules weren't that great." - Mike Betzel
"This was my biggest disappointment at Origins 09. I thought it was just a Railroad Tycoon expansion but Martin is trying to cover rail games from every possible angle and brought elements of the 18xx games (which I hate) into this." – - Jimzik
"Seems really interesting, but the rulebook and components for the advanced game are not very helpful." – J W (waddball)


Praise for the Advanced Share System:
"Rating of 10 is based on the new 18xx light advanced rules. Absolutely loved it. The game is fantastic, and it will be hard to play with the regular rules again." – Rob Leveille
"Even better than Railroad Tycoon. Mixes in elements from a number of game genres. The advance rules make the game feel like one of the 18XX series, but lighter. Nevertheless, there is tension and tough decisions all over." – Jay Volk
The game offers a variant that for those train lovers was described at Origins as 1830 Light. Martin Wallace has added shares to the game. ...the opinions are unanimous. The game is brilliant. The after game analysis is high. The components are excellent. There is a feature in the game that allows mergers of companies. This expansion appeals to the hardcore gamer and the gamer that is beginning to discover rail games. Awesome!” – John Dextraze
"Very interesting! This adds a light 18xx feel to the game." – Snooze Fest
"One of the playtesters. Like the addition of the shares and dividends, as well as the mergers." – Todd Sweet
The advanced 18xx rules turn the game into an interesting blend of Railroad Tycoon and Imperial. The advanced rules will need at least a short FAQ.” – C Sandifer
We really had blast playing this and the couple of players that had burned out on regular Tycoon had a great time. Mergers are an awesome addition to this game!” – Patrick S.
"Played the 18xx lite version. It's good. The board is beautiful. – Joe Geerkin
"Very interesting, not altogether unexpected direction for Martin to take the series. Now, in addition to a very nicely developed system of track building/goods delivery, we finally have the emergence of the beginnings of a stock market." – Richard Young
"The new "18xx-light" rules are very good." – Tim Harrison
"It is a fantastic game ... a really terrific expansion and alternative to the original." – Craig Palenshus
"You're getting both another expansion map for Railroad Tycoon AND a light 18xx game with 2 other expansion maps already on the market ... it's a deal and a steal at $34 for 4 games. The map is tight and the 18xx variant is fantastic to scratch the 18xx itch without devoting a day to one game." – Erin O’Malley




The final word

The final word hasn't been said yet about this game, as the jury is still out on what the game play is like. Is Railways of England and Wales Advanced Share System for you? Maybe, and that will largely depend on your personal taste for this kind of game. I'm glad I've got the game, if only for the basic Railways of the World expansion! I'm happy with the clarifications offered by the developer on the rules, but hopefully the appearance of an official FAQ or errata shortly will help bring any remaining critics on board to at least try the game as it's intended, so that we can get some more well-considered feedback based on experience with the correct gameplay. It's your call whether or not to buy the game, and hopefully my review will give you the tools you need to make an informed decision, and a fairly good sense as to how the game works.

Perhaps one of the game's weaknesses is also its saving grace: the fact that it's packaged as part of a Railways of the World expansion actually means that you don't have a whole lot to lose in getting it. It's already worthwhile in its own right as a basic Railroad Tycoon expansion, and will retain trade value and playing value for that aspect alone. Whether Martin Wallace's new advanced train game turns out to be a gem remains to be seen, but given that this product is already worth buying simply on its merits as a Railroad Tycoon expansion, the chance to take a ride on Martin Wallace's new train and see how it turns out is really just a bonus! I look forward to hearing what other passengers on this train will have to say once it's been taken for a long and well-tested ride! Bring on the discussion!



Edit: clarifications to rules as suggested by KAS and Marcin Krupiński, link to post by Martin Wallace, and link to official FAQ and Errata (PDF alternative) from the publisher.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The complete list of Ender's pictorial reviews: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/37596
64 
 Thumb up
7.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
KAS
United States
Arlington
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
Another good review Ender. Two minor comments on the rules description I saw:

Quote:
At the start of the game, a train of each colour is placed on the zero space on the income track, just as in Railroad Tycoon. Each player gets $20,000...

This is true for a 4-6 player game. 2-3 players get $25k each to start.

Quote:
Players get the opportunity to buy shares. Each player can place one share up for auction, either from the Shares Issued box or the Available Company Shares box (with the money paid going to the bank in the case of the former, or to the company in the case of the latter).

Shares can continued to be offered by players until each has passed when it is their turn to start the auction. Also if the player who starts the auction does not win, he/she gets to start another auction right away.
2 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marcin Krupiński
Poland
Warsaw
flag msg tools
designer
Designer of two games and one expansion
badge
This space is available for rental
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
EndersGame wrote:
The initial share price for each company ranges from $5 to $10


Not from $6 to $11? Great review - as always
2 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sean Shaw
United States
North Dakota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the review, I'm leaning more towards that it's an 18XX lite type feel for a game, and think it could be a good introductory game for that type of gameplay.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bruce Murphy
Australia
Pyrmont
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GreyLord wrote:
Thanks for the review, I'm leaning more towards that it's an 18XX lite type feel for a game, and think it could be a good introductory game for that type of gameplay.


It's not clear how much closer to 18xx something like this gets you. Plus the system seems to be seriously underdeveloped.

B>
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jennifer Schlickbernd
United States
Santa Clarita
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sean Brown has stated that FRED will release official errata/FAQ as soon as possible for the advanced game. Whether that will address the issue of the 'do nothing' share strategy is yet to be seen. If it doesn't, then the game should be evaluated accordingly.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bruce Murphy
Australia
Pyrmont
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jschlickbernd wrote:
Sean Brown has stated that FRED will release official errata/FAQ as soon as possible for the advanced game. Whether that will address the issue of the 'do nothing' share strategy is yet to be seen. If it doesn't, then the game should be evaluated accordingly.


It would be nice if they re-articulated the contribution of the designer once they've done fixing it. The Basic game that people like we already know is an entirely FRED thing.

B>
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Betzel
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fantastic review as always!

Our group worked our way through the advanced game. We certainly ran into many of the same questions that others have mentioned in different threads; there are things that just don't make a lot of sense, especially when compared to similar games. At the end, though, we felt that technically the game worked. Things flowed well (outside of the questions we ran into) and final scores were pretty close.

My main issue is that it just felt like these advanced rules were really forced onto the Railways of the World system. The income track is a very good indicator of this. Why does income have the same slowdown as in Railways of the World? It makes sense in that system because you are balancing income versus victory points. Here, spending the money on infrastructure to get two or three more links for an extra buck or two income can rarely be justified. It seems to artificially slow your desire to expand.

Ultimately we all felt that there are simply other games that better accomplish what the advanced rules were trying to do. We'd all rather play Imperial or Age of Steam over this. There are some unique mechanics like mergers but they don't add enough to warrant playing this over something else, especially when the base rules are so good. I love the Railways series for the simplicity and fun of the base rules and I feel like the Europe and England maps have really made the series great.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Sturm
United States
Lancaster
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wow a very thorough review, well done.

Though with this one I agree with Mike, I probably should play this again, to give it a fair shot, but I'm not really motivated to do so.

My main reason for this being that this game pulls away what was fun about building up a successful network and/or manipulating stock markets and turns the attention to an unintuitive clunky rule set.

There are three other great systems (18xx, AoS, RRT) already out there that do better independently what this game was trying to do all at once.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J C Lawrence
United States
Campbell
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
RyanSturm wrote:
There are three other great systems (18xx, AoS, RRT) already out there that do better independently what this game was trying to do all at once.


No, there's very little basis for comparison between AoS, the 18xx and RoE&W. The systems are fundamentally different. RoE&W's share system, while using the same nouns (shares) as the 18xx, bears few other relationships to the 18xx other than the basic one of attempting to implement a game within a game (an investment game within an encompassing deficit pick-up-and-deliver game, or visa versa depending on how you look at it). The merger system wanders even further field. No, this is a new beast that is fundamentally different from the others you mention. What exactly it is I'm a little less clear on.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Young
Canada
Victoria
BC
flag msg tools
Old Ways Are Best!
badge
Check Six!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the comparison to Imperial is holding up better than other comparisons. Here, one is investing in railway companies instead of countries. However, the aim in both is to pick your investments so as to maximize your return by the end of the game.

The details obviously vary - in one game you appear to be playing a war game; in the other, you appear to be playing a track laying, cube delivering train game. Dividends are key in both but in one you can set the amount of the dividend (even zero), in the other the decision is whether to issue or not and if so it will be at a fixed rate (it is perhaps for this reason that the ownership certificates are called "shares" in one and "bonds" in the other). The trading action each turn is more open ended in RoE&W as players can continue to purchase shares from any of those available to be bid on as long as their money permits; whereas in Imperial, you are considering bonds from a single country at a time and each player is limited to one bond purchase (or upgrade) per country per turn. Imperial however grants additional flexibility to a player not controlling a country when investing which has no equivalent in RoE&W.

In both cases, you may have a hand in how one, or some, of the entities carry on at various times during the game. In both, it is possible to compete effectively without ever controlling anything. Both have highly abstracted economic systems - but in both, the principle method of obtaining personal money with which to further invest is through the payment of dividends on held bonds/shares. Even the free "payday" allotment of $5K in RoE&W is vaguely similar to the free $2M that comes with the Investor Card in Imperial (except everyone gets paid each turn but this is consistent with the more wide open trading mechanic in RoE&W).

In both games there is some "betting" involved as initial investments are made before knowing how the entities they are investing in will fare. Both, as currently written, insist that an investment, once made, cannot be sold (although there is a promising variant of RoE&W that permits the selling of shares). This should motivate players to be careful with their initial investments lest they bet too heavily on what turns out to have been a lame horse.

Incidentally, it appears that both of these games will play in similar time frames with equivalent numbers of players.

There are undeniable kinks in the advanced version of RoE&W while the Imperial system has proven to be quite sturdy. Having had a chance to play RoE&W (advanced) with the suggestions made here (and on the base RRT map with six players), I think it will stand up rather well now. The code we need to break next regards mergers (not how but why). But I'm glad I have both and will happily play either. I'm also keen to see how the share system in Steam: Rails to Riches (Steam Barons) will pan out. Things are going in promising directions as far as I'm concerned...
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
New Zealand
flag msg tools
mbmb
Here's my question. Can the advanced share system be used for the previous railroad games - the original and Europe expansion?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Young
Canada
Victoria
BC
flag msg tools
Old Ways Are Best!
badge
Check Six!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In a word, yes...

The advanced rules can be played on any of the RRT/RotW maps.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Klemm
United States
Concord
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the review. I think it sounds a lot like Chicago Express.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
KAS
United States
Arlington
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
MisterBond wrote:
I think it sounds a lot like Chicago Express.


You may have been joking, but if not, this game and CE have very little in common.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Young
Canada
Victoria
BC
flag msg tools
Old Ways Are Best!
badge
Check Six!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Actually, in essence, there is a lot of similarity. The details differ greatly but at heart, the economic models of RWoE&W and CE are virtually identical.

The differing details will convey a different feel and a much quicker playing time with CE but I think the basic observation is quite shrewd.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.