I think there's a mistake on the explanation of the Freight Trains. Two 1f trains cannot combine to pass over a dit. Each individual freight train must start and stop at a city and, in the case of non-permanent ones, they must all chain together: the ending city of one becomes the beginning city of the next. If there is a permanent freight train, it must also connect to the non-permanents' route. If there is more than one permanent freight, then only ONE of the permanents must be end-to-end with the non-permanents (i.e. your second, third, etc permanent freights can run independently)
Tyler McGeorge That’s right. And I’ve played it correctly twice but once I got into the explanation some rules got lost. Which is why I wanted make sure I put the disclaimer in the description.
We did a little theory-crafting in an online 1862 game about when it would ever make sense to win a parliamentary auction and then fail to float the company (since the penalty for the failure is 5x the par price). About the only thing we could think of was very late game route preservation of a hyper-lucrative route (by parring at 54 and paying the 270). Mostly we're convinced that the failure to float penalty is just a really large "really, don't do this" stick. Or a way to force someone to sell shares they didn't want to when they were speculating on someone else buying the 4th and/or 5th share.
It never makes sense to be fined. The idea behind the float rule is to let you sell some shares during the stock round, in order to buy the extra 2 shares needed to float.
Hi, Thanks for the vid! I'm a beginner at 18XX, only 18Chesa owned and played, and a found this one overcomplicaded for my group. But I can see why more hardcore gamers like it.
@@BankruptcyClub We did: 1848: Australia. I think the BoE is a nice new thing without been to difficult to grasp! I watched your playthrough, by the way!! Thanks again!
Haven't watched this yet, but the fact that it's a 44 minute runtime indicates to me the rules are as complicated as they look to me at first glance. What do you think of this compared to 1824 which is showing up for me any day now.
David Arlington I like 1862 more than 1824. I feel that the levers in 62 are more fun to pull and the random setup makes each game feel unique. Unlike 1824 in which the mergers happen in a specific way at a specific time, which feels rote and it’s a matter of navigating known currents. 62 feels like trying to get a boat through a hurricane. I rather enjoy the excitement of the wild ride.
Mergers cannot be hostile, I take it? Playing permit denial by starting a company with a permit another company needs to expand seems strategically important.
Head Librarian Consent is required for mergers. There’s probably a player count where denying permits is a thing but at three we never experienced that. And once a company merges and “dies” it becomes available to start again so that permit is never really gone. The initial belief was that making a company with all three permits was preferred but in practice it seems like freight and another one work well enough.
When merging at the beginning of a company's turn, if neither company has operated yet, you get to operate the merged entity.
You guys are awesome! This game has received a lot of critical acclaim so I'm looking forward to this video.
I think there's a mistake on the explanation of the Freight Trains. Two 1f trains cannot combine to pass over a dit. Each individual freight train must start and stop at a city and, in the case of non-permanent ones, they must all chain together: the ending city of one becomes the beginning city of the next. If there is a permanent freight train, it must also connect to the non-permanents' route. If there is more than one permanent freight, then only ONE of the permanents must be end-to-end with the non-permanents (i.e. your second, third, etc permanent freights can run independently)
Tyler McGeorge That’s right. And I’ve played it correctly twice but once I got into the explanation some rules got lost. Which is why I wanted make sure I put the disclaimer in the description.
From what I read, I think each freight train's route, even when running them end to end has to contain a company's token.
@@pilotboba that's correct as well
We did a little theory-crafting in an online 1862 game about when it would ever make sense to win a parliamentary auction and then fail to float the company (since the penalty for the failure is 5x the par price). About the only thing we could think of was very late game route preservation of a hyper-lucrative route (by parring at 54 and paying the 270). Mostly we're convinced that the failure to float penalty is just a really large "really, don't do this" stick. Or a way to force someone to sell shares they didn't want to when they were speculating on someone else buying the 4th and/or 5th share.
It never makes sense to be fined.
The idea behind the float rule is to let you sell some shares during the stock round, in order to buy the extra 2 shares needed to float.
Hi,
Thanks for the vid! I'm a beginner at 18XX, only 18Chesa owned and played, and a found this one overcomplicaded for my group. But I can see why more hardcore gamers like it.
Thanks for watching. Hopefully you find more games your group can get.
@@BankruptcyClub We did: 1848: Australia. I think the BoE is a nice new thing without been to difficult to grasp!
I watched your playthrough, by the way!! Thanks again!
Really helpful video. Playing a test game today to get the rules ironed out...
Haven't watched this yet, but the fact that it's a 44 minute runtime indicates to me the rules are as complicated as they look to me at first glance. What do you think of this compared to 1824 which is showing up for me any day now.
David Arlington I like 1862 more than 1824. I feel that the levers in 62 are more fun to pull and the random setup makes each game feel unique. Unlike 1824 in which the mergers happen in a specific way at a specific time, which feels rote and it’s a matter of navigating known currents. 62 feels like trying to get a boat through a hurricane. I rather enjoy the excitement of the wild ride.
I am standing in front of a store which sells the game. 80€. Worth it?
Frank Weiler sure, it‘s a classic
@@el_dani well thank you for the quick response ;) I bought it anyway. Did not regret it.
Would be awesome if you did the same for 1848!
I’ve been meaning to do more teach videos.
Mergers cannot be hostile, I take it? Playing permit denial by starting a company with a permit another company needs to expand seems strategically important.
Head Librarian Consent is required for mergers. There’s probably a player count where denying permits is a thing but at three we never experienced that. And once a company merges and “dies” it becomes available to start again so that permit is never really gone. The initial belief was that making a company with all three permits was preferred but in practice it seems like freight and another one work well enough.