1848 Australia for the third time

Few days ago, 1848 Australia appeared on our table for the third time. Its made such a good first impression on me when we played it for the first time, that I had to show it Elemele and Maciek. That they would judge and say if they like it /or not.

For me, this game is associated with a huge surprise, which gave me a former co-player, who just went to Australia. I got it in a package from a completely unknown person. Imagine my surprise. Suddenly you get a rarity, a pearl among 18xx. You do not have to look for it, beg and plead for someone to sell it to you. It just comes to you in a package and you just wonder if it’s a mistake and will you have to send it to someone else? Kesur, because of him, he did all the work. He first traced my wishlist. He found the owner of the game in Poland, he bought it and organized everything. A great surprise that we will play together sometime. BIG, BIG THANKS TO HIM.

The mechanics of this title have already been described by Galatolol. I will just add that price changes on the stock market are exceptionally high and share prices grow very fast (if they grow). There is one more interesting mechanism in it, a change of tracks. It is based on the fact that the map is divided into 4 areas (colors). Whenever the tracks merge at the boundaries of these areas, a track change marker is placed there. It works like a zero-income station. The result is that we run routes in the area of 鈥嬧媋 given color or we buy slightly more expensive trains that have an additional + to their route.
In the first game of last week, I won thanks to the Bank of England. I had a 50% shares in it from a certain point of play and I gradually developed it. The co-players have said that it is too strong and decided that I won. Yep, nice 馃檪
And we played again…

In the second game, we had almost equal shares in it and the situation turned around. Nobody wanted to develop it. In the penultimate SR, I sold my shares in the Bank of England (BoE) to buy something more valuable. In the last SR, Micha艂 and Galatolol did the same. In total, 100% of BoE shares went to the bank. It looked like I won this game (mainly for the value of shares), in another way I would focus all 100% of the shares in BoE and in the next operational rounds, most companies would probably go bankrupt. Because none of them had permanent trains or money to buy them.

In the last game the situation was partly repeated. We had almost the same number of shares (30%, 30%, 20%, 20%), the companies took loans, but nobody wanted to use the full mechanics of the game and to indebt one of own companies to be absorbed by the Bank of England. Almost nobody ;). I have that plan from the very beginning. If there is such a mechanic, if I had a 30% shares, then I decided to use it with the least possible loss. One company was to develop due to this, at the expense of the other company. I was able to do it only at the end of the game when some impatient players sold their shares in the Bank of England and I became its main majority owner. This caused the game to end due to reaching the limit of loans.

We talked about this game on Friday and Micha艂 from Olkusz accused Australia of the fact that it is not aggressive enough and there is no risk of bankruptcy in it at all. I could not refute this accusation at once, I had to sleep with it, put it in my head, etc … I do not intend to defend the game, because bankruptcy as such does not really exist in it. Any company that is in trouble and can not afford to buy a train is taken over by the Bank of England. I would only think about what the cost is? In the classic title of 1830, the player pays extra to the train from his own cash if his company can not afford to buy it. It is always painful, very often we lose 10% -20% of our assets and we still have a chance for a good result. Sometimes it is much more, 50% or even everything that can be liquidated and we must declare bankruptcy, after which the game ends.

How is it in 1848?
Suppose we ourselves want to go bankrupt our own company. Theoretically, this only pays off if we have a majority shareholding in the Bank of England. Because a player who decides to do so loses the value of his own shares, transfers them to the Bank of England without any compensation. In addition, his company must pay other shareholders from its own treasury and give them an amount equal to their issue price for each share. If there are no funds for this, then the president must pay extra interest. So, apart from the increase in BoE exchange rate and its income, we do not get anything in return and additionally we have to reckon with the fact that we will have to pay extra interest for that. Other players may prevent us from this process. The ideal situation would be if we could first sell shares of our company to the stock exchange (up to 20%) and only then we go bankrupt. Then we lose only the value of 2 shares, but if other players have sold our shares earlier on the stock exchange, then we will almost sell nothing, only 10% (because the stock exchange has a 50% shares of the company). So we are losing 5 shares. It can be only 100 pounds, or maybe even 500, it all depends on the game. If we were to decide for ourselves that we were losing 500 pounds, it probably is not worth it, because it is a big part of our final result. And nobody will voluntarily decide to bankruptcy.
It seems that the minority shareholders of the Bank of England must necessarily look after the majority owners so that for the latter, the bankruptcy was as painful as possible.

The second option, when, as in the classic, we clean our company from trains and cash and with a smile on our lips, we pass the president’s certificate to another player. Such an operation probably pays only to a player who has a majority or equal shares of other players in the BoE and rather only in the late stage of the game, when the most expensive permanent trains are. The new president then has two options or he will go bankrupt a new company or one of his old companies. In both cases, it loses the value of shares and, in addition, it may have to pay off other shareholders. They are not crazy amounts, but it is always a negative factor in 1848.

To sum up, I played only three times and each time it was a great fun. Very interesting map versus mechanics associated with Bank of England, which strongly affects the actions of players. If this influence is always an obligatory element, which you must use (because today I have more shares than others), it will lower my assessment of this game. Then the gameplay can become schematic. We will find out in a while when we can show off more games.

Details from last play:

Time of play: 3 hours 40 minutes
Results: Marcin (magole) 5084 / Micha艂 (Elemele) 4760 / Maciek 4534 / Micha艂 z Olkusza 3705
Game type (stock market / engineering): (50% / 50%)

Translated by Google


1848 Australia po raz trzeci
W ostatni pi膮tek, Australia pojawi艂a si臋 po raz trzeci. Zrobi艂a na mnie tak dobre pierwsze wra偶enie, gdy grali艣my j膮 po raz pierwszy, 偶e musia艂em j膮 pokaza膰 Elemele i Ma膰kowi. Po to, aby sami ocenili i powiedzieli czy im si臋 podoba.

Dla mnie z t膮 gr膮 wi膮偶e si臋 ogromna niespodzianka, kt贸r膮 sprawi艂 mi dawny wsp贸艂gracz, kt贸ry wyjecha艂 w艂a艣nie do Australii. Dosta艂em j膮 w paczce od zupe艂nie nieznanej mi osoby. Wyobra藕cie sobie moje zaskoczenie. Nagle dostajecie rarytasa, pere艂k臋 w艣r贸d 18xx. Nie musicie jej szuka膰, prosi膰 i b艂aga膰, aby kto艣 wam j膮 sprzeda艂. Po prostu przychodzi do was w paczce i zastanawiacie si臋 tylko, czy to pomy艂ka i czy b臋dziecie musieli j膮 komu艣 odes艂a膰? Kesur, bo o nim mowa, odwali艂 ca艂膮 robot臋. Najpierw prze艣ledzi艂 moj膮 wishlist臋. Znalaz艂 w Polsce w艂a艣ciciela gry, utargowa艂 jej zakup i wszystko zorganizowa艂. Wspania艂a niespodzianka, w kt贸r膮 kiedy艣 razem zagramy.

Mechanik臋 tego tytu艂u opisa艂 ju偶 poprzednio Galatolol. Dodam tylko, 偶e zmiany cen na gie艂dzie s膮 wyj膮tkowo du偶e i ceny akcji bardzo szybko rosn膮 (je艣li rosn膮). Jest w niej jeszcze jeden ciekawy mechanizm, zmiana tor贸w. Polega to na tym, 偶e mapa jest podzielona na 4 obszary (kolory). Za ka偶dym razem, gdy tory 艂膮cz膮 si臋 na granicy tych obszar贸w, to stawia si臋 tam znacznik zmiany tor贸w. Dzia艂a on jak stacja z zerowym dochodem. Powoduje to, 偶e trasy uruchamiamy raczej w obszarze danego koloru lub kupujemy troch臋 dro偶sze poci膮gi, kt贸re maj膮 dodatkowy + do swojej trasy.
W pierwszej grze sprzed tygodnia wygra艂em dzi臋ki Bankowi Anglii. Mia艂em w nim od pewnego momentu gry 50% udzia艂贸w i stwierdzi艂em, 偶e b臋d臋 go sukcesywnie rozwija艂. Przez co wsp贸艂gracze stwierdzili, 偶e jest on zbyt silny i uznali, 偶e wygra艂em.
W drugiej grze (tydzie艅 temu) mieli艣my w nim prawie r贸wne udzia艂y i sytuacja si臋 odwr贸ci艂a. Nikt nie chcia艂 go rozwija膰. W przedostatniej SR sprzeda艂em swoje udzia艂y w Banku Anglii (BoE), aby kupi膰 co艣 bardziej warto艣ciowego. W ostatniej SR zrobili to samo Micha艂 i Galatolol. 艁膮cznie do banku trafi艂o 100% udzia艂贸w BoE. Gdyby nie to, 偶e wygrywa艂em gr臋 (g艂贸wnie na warto艣ci akcji), to skupi艂bym ca艂e 100% akcji i w kolejnych rundach operacyjnych, prawdopodobnie wi臋kszo艣膰 sp贸艂ek og艂osi艂yby upad艂o艣膰. Bo 偶adna nie mia艂a permanentnych poci膮g贸w ani pieni臋dzy na ich zakup.
W ostatniej (pi膮tkowej) grze sytuacja si臋 cz臋艣ciowo powt贸rzy艂a. Mieli艣my prawie r贸wn膮 ilo艣膰 udzia艂贸w (30%, 30%, 20%, 20%), sp贸艂ki bra艂y po偶yczki, ale nikt nie zamierza艂 wykorzysta膰 w pe艂ni mechaniki, jak膮 daje gra i tak zad艂u偶y膰 jedn膮 ze swoich sp贸艂ek, aby zosta艂a wch艂oni臋ta przez Bank Anglii. Prawie nikt ;). Ja jedn膮 ze swoich sp贸艂ek od pocz膮tku do tego przygotowywa艂em. Skoro jest taka mechanika, skoro mia艂em 30% udzia艂贸w, to postanowi艂em, 偶e to wykorzystam z jak najmniejsz膮 strat膮. Jedna sp贸艂ka mia艂a si臋 dzi臋ki temu rozwija膰, kosztem drugiej firmy. Uda艂o mi si臋 to zrobi膰 dopiero na sam koniec gry, gdy niekt贸rzy zniecierpliwieni gracze sprzedali swoje udzia艂y w Banku Anglii i sta艂em si臋 jego g艂贸wnym wi臋kszo艣ciowym w艂a艣cicielem. Spowodowa艂o to, 偶e gra zako艅czy艂a si臋 z powodu osi膮gni臋cia limitu po偶yczek.

D艂ugo o tej grze w pi膮tek rozmawiali艣my i Micha艂 z Olkusza zarzuci艂 Australii to, 偶e m.in. jest ona za ma艂o agresywna i 偶e nie ma w niej 偶adnego ryzyka bankructwa. Tego zarzutu nie mog艂em odeprze膰 od razu, musia艂em przespa膰 z tym przespa膰, pouk艂ada膰 to sobie w g艂owie, itd… Gry nie zamierzam broni膰, bo bankructwa jako takiego faktycznie w niej nie ma. Ka偶d膮 sp贸艂k臋, kt贸ra ma k艂opoty i nie sta膰 na zakup poci膮gu, przejmuje od razu Bank Anglii. Zastanowi艂bym si臋 tylko jakim kosztem si臋 to dzieje? W klasycznym tytule 1830 gracz dop艂aca do poci膮gu z w艂asnej got贸wki, je艣li jego sp贸艂ki nie sta膰 na zakup. To jest zawsze bolesne, bardzo cz臋sto tracimy 10%-20% naszego maj膮tku i dalej mamy szans臋 na dobry wynik. Czasami jest to du偶o wi臋cej, 50% lub nawet wszystko, co mo偶emy up艂ynni膰 i musimy og艂osi膰 bankructwo, po czym gra si臋 ko艅czy.

Jak jest w 1848? Jest w mechanice tej gry pewien haczyk.
Za艂贸偶my, 偶e sami chcemy zbankrutowa膰 w艂asn膮 sp贸艂k臋. Teoretycznie op艂aca si臋 to tylko wtedy, gdy mamy wi臋kszo艣ciowy pakiet udzia艂贸w w Banku Anglii. Bo gracz, kt贸ry si臋 na to zdecyduje, traci na warto艣ci w艂asnych akcji, przekazuje je do Banku Anglii bez 偶adnej rekompensaty. Dodatkowo jego firma musi op艂aci膰 innych akcjonariuszy z w艂asnego skarbca i odda膰 im za ka偶d膮 akcj臋 kwot臋 r贸wn膮 ich cenie emisyjnej. Je艣li nie ma na to funduszy, to dop艂aci膰 do tego interesu musi prezes. Wi臋c poza wzrostem kursu Banku Angli i jego dochod贸w, sami nic nie dostajemy w zamian i dodatkowo musimy liczy膰 si臋, z tym 偶e b臋dziemy musieli dop艂aci膰 do tego ca艂ego interesu. W ca艂ym tym procesie mog膮 przeszkodzi膰 nam inni gracze. Idealn膮 sytuacj膮 by艂aby taka, w kt贸rej najpierw sprzedajemy akcje naszej sp贸艂ki na gie艂d臋 (do 20%) i dopiero potem j膮 bankrutujemy. Wtedy tracimy tylko na warto艣ci 2 udzia艂贸w, ale je艣li inni gracze sprzedali nasze akcje wcze艣niej na gie艂d臋, to my sami prawie nic tam nie sprzedamy, tylko 10% (bo gie艂da ma pojemno艣膰 50% emisji danej firmy). Czyli tracimy na 5 udzia艂ach. Mo偶e to by膰 100 funt贸w, a mo偶e nawet 500, wszystko zale偶y od danej gry. Je艣li mieliby艣my sami zdecydowa膰 o tym, 偶e tracimy 500 funt贸w, to nam si臋 to pewnie wcale nie op艂aca, bo jest to du偶a cz臋艣膰 naszego ko艅cowego wyniku. I na bankructwo nikt si臋 dobrowolnie nie zdecyduje.

Wygl膮da na to, 偶e mniejszo艣ciowi udzia艂owcy Banku Anglii musz膮 koniecznie pilnowa膰 w艂a艣cicieli wi臋kszo艣ciowych, tak aby dla tych drugich, bankructwo by艂o jak najbardziej dotkliwe.

Druga opcja, gdy tak jak w klasyku czy艣cimy nasz膮 firm臋 z poci膮g贸w i got贸wki i z u艣miechem na ustach przekazujemy certyfikat prezesa innemu graczowi. Taka operacja op艂aca si臋 chyba tylko takiemu graczowi, kt贸ry ma wi臋kszo艣ciowy lub r贸wny co inni gracze pakiet akcji w BoE i raczej tylko w p贸藕nym etapie gry, gdy zosta艂y najdro偶sze permanentne poci膮gi. Nowy prezes ma wtedy dwie opcje albo zbankrutuje now膮 sp贸艂k臋, albo jedn膮 ze swoich starych firm. W obu przypadkach traci na warto艣ci akcji i dodatkowo by膰 mo偶e musi sp艂aci膰 pozosta艂ych udzia艂owc贸w. Nie s膮 to szalone kwoty, ale zawsze jest to jaki艣 negatywny czynnik w 1848.

Podsumowuj膮c, zagra艂em tylko trzy razy i za ka偶dym razem gra艂o mi si臋 fantastycznie. Bardzo ciekawa mapa kontra mechanika zwi膮zana z Bankiem Angii, kt贸ra mocno wp艂ywa na poczynania graczy. Je艣li ten wp艂yw zawsze b臋dzie elementem obowi膮zkowym, z kt贸rego trzeba skorzysta膰 (bo akurat ja dzisiaj mam wi臋cej udzia艂贸w od innych), to obni偶y to moj膮 ocen臋 tej gry. Wtedy rozgrywki mog膮 sta膰 si臋 schematyczne. Przekonamy si臋 za jaki艣 czas, gdy b臋dziemy mogli pochwali膰 si臋 wi臋ksz膮 ilo艣ci膮 gier.

Czas gry: 3 hours 40 minutes
Wyniki: Marcin (magole) 5084 / Micha艂 (Elemele) 4760 / Maciek 4534 / Micha艂 z Olkusza 3705
Typ gry (stock market / engineering): (50% / 50%)

2 thoughts on “1848 Australia for the third time”

  1. The real pain of letting a company fall into receivership is not the share value you lose, but the fact that as the president of a former company your certificate limit becomes lower than the other players (-2 in a 4-player game, -1 in a 5-player game).

    Some things visible in the photos:
    * The grey K-tile in G6 is oriented in the wrong direction.
    * The OO-tile in B17 cannot be legal this way. When there was a green OO-tile on B17 it must have had an exit into C16, because it is the only way the green OO-tile could have been placed there coming from B19. That exit is no longer there. Also note that this means you cannot easily run to the A18 off-board from B19, because there is no brown OO-tile that has two sharp corners.

    1. Thanks RvdH83, we have somehow omitted this rule with an additional limit for the previous president, it is really painful.
      And you’re right about these tiles, our mistake.

Leave a Reply