I'm BAAAAAACK -- at least for a while

[SamuraiProgrammer]

A long time ago, I got really tired of the crashes.

I gave up playing Railroads! and took it off of my system.

I got to thinking, with Vista updates, driver updates, etc. etc. that it might run better now.

Ugh - maybe not.

I have followed much of the advice here and am still looking for the elusive boot.ini files but I digress...

Anyway, I have reinstalled Railroads! and am starting to play a little multiplayer.

I have a few questions for those of you that participate.

What maps do you like to use?

What difficulty do you like to play at?

What routing difficulty do you like to play at?

What things are considered inapropriate while playing (other than cursing, insulting, and such)?

Are there times when it is more likely to find a game?

Are there better ways of finding opponents than the In Game | Multiplayer | Internet buttons?

Has the Wiki been reinstated anywhere?

Are there pdf versions of user created strategy guides anywhere other than this site?

Looking forward to playing with some of you - at least until my machine angers me so much that it is no longer fun.

[brandon]

As to the Wiki, yes, it was reinstated, improved and a lot added to it. You can find it here

[darthdroid]

What maps do you like to use?

Personally I like River's Run, Double Cross, Northwest, and basically any map where the cities are a bit spread out. If the cities are too close together, it allows for short tracking which is legal... but a bit boring once you're advanced.

What difficulty do you like to play at?

Tycoon or Robber Baron, depending on how much time I have

What routing difficulty do you like to play at?

Always hard, if you don't play hard routing, then you don't really understand the game. Track sharing is generally a very bad idea and using hard routing will if nothing else force you to learn to route properly-which is pretty crucial to making decent $.

What things are considered inapropriate while playing (other than cursing, insulting, and such)?

While I don't play much anymore, back in my day there were very few rules among advanced players. However, the noobs will always invent rules and try to enforce them on others and these rules are of this nature: "Anything I don't do or don't know how to do is illegal". Pay no mind to that and know that the actual rules or taboos of the game are very difficult to break. Generally only the most experienced players know the glitches that are truly "cheating" and these are hardly ever witnessed. There is one exception to this and that is a player called "MagicHeroGODtrain" who cheats more than the rest of the players combined. Magic not only violates the 3 advanced player rules but he also uses a trainer program. Just don't play him and you should not run into any problems other than noobs who make up the rules as they go

Are there times when it is more likely to find a game?

It's feast or famine, sometimes 8 games are up on the lobby at once, at other times you cannot find a game for an hour. Worse yet, once you get good... many folks won't play you so it may take more than an hour. However, I highly recommend you find any good players you can find and play them as much as possible and learn from them. Playing with noobs is like playing the computer, both teach you bad habits.

Are there better ways of finding opponents than the In Game | Multiplayer | Internet buttons?

Not really. It's pretty hard to try to organize games. Back when we tried to do a ladder we found it pretty impossible for communication and logistics.

Has the Wiki been reinstated anywhere?

The wiki was copied and pasted to some other site mentioned above that personally I boycott

Are there pdf versions of user created strategy guides anywhere other than this site?

All the strategy guides I have seen are pretty worthless. They are about as good as what you might find on youtube or at the firaxis site, etc. Frankly, I would recommend searching my posts in strategy and you'll see a wealth of information from myself and others on how to play. A lot of my stuff is pretty advanced, so don't be overwhelmed when you read some of it-some of the tactics require a bit of experience before you might know what is being talked about. But truly this site has more information on how to play the game than any place I can find.... just hunt around.

Looking forward to playing with some of you - at least until my machine angers me so much that it is no longer fun.

Welcome! You'll find most of the folks on this site are modders not players. But there are a few players here and there that are not only here but also helpful and friendly like BN3140. Just realize that players are a minority on the site, at least real players (online players) and good responses might take a while. As far as the crashing goes.... Most have this problem. Back when I had it, I would simply close down and restart the game every 3 or 4 games. That seemed to work. However, I think it is a graphics card issue as when I got a new computer that was about the only difference and I haven't had the crash problem since. Also note that you are dependent on others to some degree... player X might crash player Y. But the game CAN run smooth enough to make it quite fun and beyond addictive. Feel free to message me on any online questions or strategy issues

[brandon]

Two points here darthdroid. First, you make it sound like EVERY noob that plays online is troublesome. Based on that, EVERY person who has ever played online has been troublesome, including yourself. Could it be the dislike of new online players that causes the number of online players to be so low?

Second, you complain about players not followwing rules, and you speak of the "3 advanced player rules", but, as usual, the actual rules are not listed. Just how does anyone expect 'noobs' to play by the rules when they don't know them. Start a thread in Strategy and list these "Online Rules", discuss them with other online players and edit the first post of "Online Rules" til everyone is happy with them. Then refer the 'noobs' to those rules.

[darthdroid]

Two points here darthdroid. First, you make it sound like EVERY noob that plays online is troublesome. Based on that, EVERY person who has ever played online has been troublesome, including yourself. Could it be the dislike of new online players that causes the number of online players to be so low?

Second, you complain about players not followwing rules, and you speak of the "3 advanced player rules", but, as usual, the actual rules are not listed. Just how does anyone expect 'noobs' to play by the rules when they don't know them. Start a thread in Strategy and list these "Online Rules", discuss them with other online players and edit the first post of "Online Rules" til everyone is happy with them. Then refer the 'noobs' to those rules.

Brandon,

Your allegation is correct. When I was a noob, 3 years ago, you bet-I did it too. Personally I did it because I witnessed other noobs blather about how this or that was illegal and assumed these were set rules. But after a while I noticed it varied a lot and there were no rules that seemed to apply. I also realized that certain issues were quite debatable.

Example: Crosstracking and stealing- I would argue that the simple fact that the computer does both indicates legality. That is a pretty hard observation to argue with.
And I also agree with your other claim about noobs. Yes, it is quite annoying when someone clueless and new to the game starts telling veterans what the rules are. It's kind of like when someone who builds maps starts trying to explain game strategy to a player who asked the forum a question-it indicates a bit of arrogance when there are advanced players in the forum who have played thousands of games and are clearly much more suited to answer strategy questions. It's also kind of like when you tell your doctor how to treat you and so forth.
I definitely never told any players way above my level how to play-just other noobs.

Lastly: As far as these 3 rules go, this is where your claim is wrong. I have listed them SEVERAL times on the site. There is no need to list them in this post as explained in my original post. The reason they don't need to be explained is because hardly anyone even knows how to do these 3 things. Less than 5% know even 1 of them. And as far as knowing all 3, I know of only 2 other players other than myself that know how to do all 3 things. Point being that because these 3 rules are so hard to break as they require vast knowledge of the game which few have, there is little need to announce what they are.

I'm not sure what this "as usual you don't list them" crap is. I have listed them many times and I always back up what I'm talking about, so that statement was pure rhetoric and nothing fancier.
I can actually list the players that violate these rules and that list is very, very short, that list has 1 name on it.... also mentioned above. And note that one of the rules was implicitly listed: "Rule 3: No use of trainers or any other cheat programs."

Make sense?

[darthdroid]

Two points here darthdroid. First, you make it sound like EVERY noob that plays online is troublesome. Based on that, EVERY person who has ever played online has been troublesome, including yourself. Could it be the dislike of new online players that causes the number of online players to be so low?

Second, you complain about players not followwing rules, and you speak of the "3 advanced player rules", but, as usual, the actual rules are not listed. Just how does anyone expect 'noobs' to play by the rules when they don't know them. Start a thread in Strategy and list these "Online Rules", discuss them with other online players and edit the first post of "Online Rules" til everyone is happy with them. Then refer the 'noobs' to those rules.

One last thing.
No, they aren't all troublesome. Many are actually very intelligent and ask questions of the veterans instead of telling them how things work like so many do. But strangely, the humble ones are quite rare. Crashdummy was one of these. When I met crash, he was a noob and asked me questions. I trained ol crash for a few months. By the end... I think he may have been better than I am. Which is a compliment to him as a student and myself as a teacher. Crash is the only guy that makes me nervous to play now.

Edit: I realized that crash actually was on for a long, long time before I began training him. We started chatting while we played and that led to me giving him pointers. But he was still what I would call a "noob" when I began training him. And this is common-guys who are on here for even over a year, playing a lot but not really learning how to play.

[brandon]

Hmmmm, this is getting rather interesting. We have a game, Multiplayer SMR. There are three rules which everyone should follow, but hardly anyone knows how to do them? Only three people know how to "do" these three things. And, they require "advanced knowledge of the game". So, what is the worry over these "rules"?

But, these 'noobs' are making up rules. Doesn't this simply mean that rules need to be set for people as low as 'noobs' to keep them from creating thier own during play? These are the 'rules' that you seem to be talking about. These are the rules that need to be worked out and kept at the first post of a thread discussing them. "Strategy" contains 1057 posts at this time. I really do not think someone wants to search thru that many posts for three rules that only apply to 3 players.

I just did a search of your posts for "rules" and got these two refering to rules of multiplayers -

http://www.hookedgamers.com/forums/view ... 335#p34335
http://www.hookedgamers.com/forums/view ... 361#p34361

And this one contained "cheats"/"rules" -

http://www.hookedgamers.com/forums/view ... 422#p37422

In the last, you first announce 3 "cheats" which you right away call "rules". Then you add a fourth "cheat"/"rule" in the next post. And none of these require any "expert knowledge" of the game.

Your turn for a reply.......

[darthdroid]

Hmmmm, this is getting rather interesting. We have a game, Multiplayer SMR. There are three rules which everyone should follow, but hardly anyone knows how to do them? Only three people know how to "do" these three things. And, they require "advanced knowledge of the game". So, what is the worry over these "rules"?

But, these 'noobs' are making up rules. Doesn't this simply mean that rules need to be set for people as low as 'noobs' to keep them from creating thier own during play? These are the 'rules' that you seem to be talking about. These are the rules that need to be worked out and kept at the first post of a thread discussing them. "Strategy" contains 1057 posts at this time. I really do not think someone wants to search thru that many posts for three rules that only apply to 3 players.

I just did a search of your posts for "rules" and got these two refering to rules of multiplayers -

http://www.hookedgamers.com/forums/view ... 335#p34335
http://www.hookedgamers.com/forums/view ... 361#p34361

And this one contained "cheats"/"rules" -

http://www.hookedgamers.com/forums/view ... 422#p37422

In the last, you first announce 3 "cheats" which you right away call "rules". Then you add a fourth "cheat"/"rule" in the next post. And none of these require any "expert knowledge" of the game.

Your turn for a reply.......

Brandon,

As usual, you're just an instigator; I get no indication of sincere concern for smooth online playing from you. Rather, I believe you just like to argue.

Do you even play online? To my knowledge you don't. You seem to just argue from what I've seen. I have no interest in assisting you in your mental masturbation so make the next post constructive, rational, and I may continue to DISCUSS, DISCUSS mind you, I'm not interested in arguing with you when I'm betting you really know nothing about this.

Now, you said my "rules" first were too hard to find, yet in the same post admit you found them and it appears you did so quite easily as I indicated you could (further proof of your desire to argue and nothing beyond). Now you also made a bold claim that these did not require advanced knowledge of the game. So let's put that to the test; back it up.

Tell me Brandon, what is the major online glitch I speak of that generates loads of cash in seconds and how does one do it? Clearly a noob like you would know since you pounded your chest and called me a liar and said essentially that anyone could do these things. So let's have it. If you cannot explain it, clearly all I'm saying is true and you're not even thinking as you type.... just trying to pick a fight as usual.

I'd also point out that I'm being helpful in this post to it's original author. He asked a variety of questions. You offered no answers, just referred him to the bogus bobby site like a cheap salesman. I actually offered valuable info, told him what to expect, answered ALL his questions. Then you come in and try to pick apart my answers (proving precisely what I said about arrogant wankers) and it's just simply a battle you are not armed to fight-so quit trying and consider that I may indeed be an expert on the subject of online play and maybe you could learn something if you closed your big mouth once in a while

[darthdroid]

One other thing. You asked about online players and the lack thereof. I just wanted to clear up your continued confusion. There are actually A LOT of online players. I'd say at least 200. However, only a select few of us get ADDICTED to the game and are there on the online game a lot.

This game is not for everyone, nor is it a very typical game. It's an online business simulation and if you're into train table building, SMR online may very well not be your cup of tea. But if you like heated competition and seemingly endless tactics, you might very well find yourself online playing this game and quickly get addicted.

I have no dislike of new players, I have dislike of ARROGANT players. Magichero is a case in point. This guy disgusts me, he is actually an intermediate player-he has NO reason to cheat, yet does, EVERY SINGLE GAME. He is my least favorite player as he has done more damage to the online playing atmosphere in less than a year than over 3 years worth of players I've seen, combined. He's no noob, he's a middleman, a middleman who cheats.

Now I doubt your inquiry or assumption was based on an interest in truth, but in case I'm wrong about you for once, I thought I'd clear it up.

I enjoy playing noobs, IF and ONLY IF they aren't so arrogant to tell me how the game is played or are poor sports when they lose, etc. That's all I care about, that it is a fun, fair atmosphere. I played noobs all the time, I offered them a handicap to keep it interesting for myself: I'd offer them to be investors while I was a robber. I would also offer them pointers or answer any questions about what I was doing-I would prefer more advanced players so I was frequently training people to be nasty at the game and the humble ones loved it. I trained BN3140 also, and he's pretty damn good now and knows most of the tactics-who knows, maybe he's gotten better than I am now.

I have no problem with noobs for the sake of being noobs, I have a problem with arrogance and the arrogant ones tend to be noobs. The advanced players tend to have respect for each other and really enjoy playing each other as once you get to our level, few games are actually challenging. So when you actually get a chance to play another vicious player-it's a treat. But it's the game I love, I really don't care who I am playing as long as they have a good and fair attitude.

[brandon]

So, asking questions is "instigating"? As to playing online, I kinda like to know the rules before I play a game, online or off. And, I'm simple asking for clarifacation, not an arguement.

As to playing online, how do you know I don't? (by the way, I have in the past). And there you go getting nasty again. I've seen many people get frustrated and start name caling and make accusations. And, again, I'm not arguing, I'm asking questions.

As to finding your "rules", I used a method that few know or care to use. I use it quite often in this and other forums. You, like another person well known for it, get someone like me doing a search and questioning what is stated and you throw a fit. You stated that you had posted these "rules" known by only those of "expert knowledge" of the game many times. What I was able to find was "cheats" that you also called "rules", but nothing "expert" about them. So, again I ask, "Where are these 'Rules'?" (and here you will most likely state that you are not going to waste your time, that if i want them I can search for thme)

And no, I don't know of this "major online glitch" and how to do it. Of course, I'm not one for cheating, and that is all it is, cheating, not a rule, unless you are saying that you are not to do this cheating, and one of the first "rules" of any game is not to cheat.

And I'm sorry to say, I did answer a question of his, where the Wiki was. At this time, the only SMR Wiki IS on Bobby's site. Bogus? "Counterfeit or fake; not genuine". Since it can be read, it is real. Aside from what one childish action caused, it was an exact copy of the one from this site, which, again, does not exist anymore. So it IS the only source of data on SMR that does not require a lot of searching. As to your paste accusation of stealing it, search for most anything on the net with the word 'wiki' beside it, and you will get several sites, all pretty much exact copies of each other. So, I did answer one of his questions, the one I knew the answer to and I answered it correctly.

And I did not "pick apart" your answers. I simply stated that these "Rules" needed to be posted in one post at the beginning of a single thread so others can easily find them. You are being the "arrogant wanker" by not making full replies, name calling and being a 'greater than anyone' smart mouth.

You are going to do a "I told you so, I am right" as you always do when you cannot answer for your actions and inactions. You need to learn that if you are going to post on a forum, you MUST expect replies to be tossed at you. Or is there a new rule that you must have a certain rank or above to others with a certain rank?

[darthdroid]

So, asking questions is "instigating"? As to playing online, I kinda like to know the rules before I play a game, online or off. And, I'm simple asking for clarifacation, not an arguement.

As to playing online, how do you know I don't? (by the way, I have in the past). And there you go getting nasty again. I've seen many people get frustrated and start name caling and make accusations. And, again, I'm not arguing, I'm asking questions.

As to finding your "rules", I used a method that few know or care to use. I use it quite often in this and other forums. You, like another person well known for it, get someone like me doing a search and questioning what is stated and you throw a fit. You stated that you had posted these "rules" known by only those of "expert knowledge" of the game many times. What I was able to find was "cheats" that you also called "rules", but nothing "expert" about them. So, again I ask, "Where are these 'Rules'?" (and here you will most likely state that you are not going to waste your time, that if i want them I can search for thme)

And no, I don't know of this "major online glitch" and how to do it. Of course, I'm not one for cheating, and that is all it is, cheating, not a rule, unless you are saying that you are not to do this cheating, and one of the first "rules" of any game is not to cheat.

And I'm sorry to say, I did answer a question of his, where the Wiki was. At this time, the only SMR Wiki IS on Bobby's site. Bogus? "Counterfeit or fake; not genuine". Since it can be read, it is real. Aside from what one childish action caused, it was an exact copy of the one from this site, which, again, does not exist anymore. So it IS the only source of data on SMR that does not require a lot of searching. As to your paste accusation of stealing it, search for most anything on the net with the word 'wiki' beside it, and you will get several sites, all pretty much exact copies of each other. So, I did answer one of his questions, the one I knew the answer to and I answered it correctly.

And I did not "pick apart" your answers. I simply stated that these "Rules" needed to be posted in one post at the beginning of a single thread so others can easily find them. You are being the "arrogant wanker" by not making full replies, name calling and being a 'greater than anyone' smart mouth.

No, have no intention of making any other replies to you since you cannot keep the talk decent. Of course you are going to do a "I told you so, I am right" as you always do when you cannot answer for your actions and inactions. You need to learn that if you are going to post on a forum, you MUST expect replies to be tossed at you. Or is there a new rule that you must have a certain rank or above to others with a certain rank?

I see that while first you claim my rules are not for advanced players and thus that my claims are false.... you then cannot tell me how to break rule 3. Can you move a station across the map and do so very quickly? Can you rotate your station 90 degrees to face the direction you want it to? Can you tell me WHY you would want to rotate a station? See Brandon, it's a bit more complicated than your assumptions led you to believe. Can you find me a trainer program for SMR? Okay, great, now find me one that works online.

If you cannot answer yes (and prove it with explanation, link, whatever) to at least a few of these questions, you have proven what I said is true: You don't need to know about these rules because you don't even have the knowledge to violate them. I was already clear about that but you argued anyway. Now you backpeddle and pretend you're just asking questions. You must think people are really stupid to not think you are completely transparent and everything I've said is true. You are not asking questions to know the rules to play online properly, you are just trying to pick a fight and by denying it you also reveal much, much more about your character and how cheap your price is.

Again, the real issue boils down to this: I answered this man's questions and was helpful with ACTUAL information; and you ignored his questions and just pimped the clone site like a cheap salesman. There is nothing valuable from you so far in this dialog, just rhetoric. So blather on all you like about how you were just asking questions. You are way too arrogant to actually ask a real question brandon. If you weren't, you'd know I'm the largest source of strategy and online play info on this forum and you'd have a little respect for that and at the very least keep your mouth shut.

If you ask a REAL question, you'll find I answer with a smile. As I think you are actually so self absorbed you might not realize what you really are, I thought I might demonstrate what that might look like. Here are some examples:

"What kind of rules do the noobs try to make up?"

"Why is rule X, Y, or Z invalid in your opinion?"

"Are you willing to play by someone else's rules? Regardless of how stupid you think those rules are?"

And any of the questions posted by the original author... which is precisely why he got good answers from me as I indicate. It's funny how not only can you not ask any real questions (just fake ones you are trying to start a fight with-they are fake as you don't really care about the answer, just trying to get a rise out of the other guy), but you also failed to answer any of his real questions and posting a link doesn't count as that's a "referral" not an answer.... funny how it goes both ways: He who cannot answer a question apparently fails to know how to ask them as well....

Thank you for your drama and rhetoric, drive through.

[darthdroid]

One other thing I forgot to mention. Maybe you have played a few (clearly a very few) online games. That does not qualify you as an "online player". That's like going to Canada once and calling yourself "world traveled". So let's not say things that insult both of us, k brandon?

Since you are clueless about the discussion, let me save you all these assumptions and clear a few more things up.

1/ There is no point to posting the rules for the following reasons:

a/ Less than 5% of the online players go to hookedgamers or any other site for information about the game, generally they just don't care-they just want to play, not discuss or read.

b/ Again, these rules are NOT hard to violate IF and ONLY IF you know the secrets/tricks/whatever. So it's actually best if they are not discussed, certainly not at length as it's safer if people don't even know these things can be done. If they know they can be done, they will search for the answers on HOW to do them and some of them will indeed begin to violate them. We have 1 or 2 players at present that violate the rules. If a few dozen more knew what I'm talking about, I'm betting a few more would begin to break the rules.... pretty soon one of them starts blabbing these tricks to everyone and pretty soon... half the players break the rules and the entire online game is WRECKED. It's already messed up from just ONE PERSON doing it. Now I understand you don't care about the online atmosphere, you're just here to stroke your ego, but I do care and I have only revealed bad information like this to one player-the other one figured it out on his own I think (magic).

2/ This is how it works so your idealistic vision of some cohesion among players is just a bit ignorant, this is why:
First, as I stated, nobody really comes here (to hooked), there are a LOT more online players than there are modders, they just generally don't use this site so online players seem rare here. This means we really have no way of "posting rules" that could be seen by the players. Your idea is like hanging a sign with a black background and black writing on it somewhere-nobody could read it.

So, without some location that all the online players go (or at least 25% or 50% or something), there's really no way to do what you are talking about. As I stated above, this is a "logistics problem".

With that in mind, this is how it works:

Noobs begin to play and learn from each other. They learn silly rules from each other like "no stealing" or "one station per city" (meaning only resources can be "stolen") or "no crosstracking (also known as "tracksneaking"), etc. They play each other and as long as they are agreed on the rules of their personal game... it's not really an issue.

Now I could go through each and every rule they come up with and explain why it is a bad rule that goes against the nature of the game. However, until they become advanced, they cannot possibly understand why such a rule is stupid and in some cases actually works against them, not their enemy/opponent.

But to give you an example:

Crosstracking: Saying "no tracksneaking/crosstracking" indicates the following:
1/ The player obviously is not skilled at building bridges.
Players usually crosstrack because they are "blocked" by an opponent's tracks, either intentionally or unintentionally. Either way, a good player (intermediate or better) knows that there's really no such thing as being blocked, I have several tactics to avoid being blocked and most of them are proactive from the beginning of the game so the issue never comes up. Bridges ultimately allow for no blocks to actually be possible except in the rarest of cases-and in those cases, a subway could still avoid the block-ie ultimately blocking is not really possible and blocking is the whole rationale for the "no tracksneaking" rule.

2/ It is very difficult to tracksneak and make both flat and straight tracks. The value of such tracks is MUCH more important than the need to cross over someone's tracks.

3/ There are psychological warfare and tactical advantages to building a bridge instead.

Moral of this story is that the advanced player, when told "no tracksneaking" would laugh because he or she never uses it anyway, it's a low level noob tactic used due to ignorance. So if someone wants to tracksneak across my tracks, that is fine by me, it only indicates they do not know how to play so what do I care if they cut some corners as they see it.

I could argue each and every noob rule and prove the truth of my theories (and have) in combat and that is the best way to solve a strategy or tactics argument of course.

So back to the reality of how the rules are developed:
Thus, the noob plays by some low level rules that either don't apply to advanced players (as they no longer use low level tricks like x, y, or z) or the advanced player wouldn't really care as once you are advanced, any set of constraints can really be placed on you and it won't really affect the outcome of the game. Like at some point a player quits calling any map "difficult" as they are all pretty much the same to an advanced player.

Soon the noob plays some of the higher level players and begins to learn a few things, including tricks or why this or that trick is a weak tool that should be discarded like extra fat tissue. Soon they become intermediate players.

A very few of these play at this level for a while and if they play a lot they play a few advanced players, and after a while, they realize that only the noobs use stupid rules like "no stealing" or whatever. They also realize that this is a skill game, stealing is quite irrelevant-and so they begin to consider other things in the game, like maybe that stealing is okay, etc. After a while they join the NATURAL rule system in place which is almost "NO RULES". And no rules other than these "glitches" mentioned is really how this game should be and is played by those of us that really invest ourselves into it and usually we tend to be the advanced players.

So you see Brandon, the rule process is very organic, it happens naturally and soon players begin nodding their heads to the set of "rules" or lack thereof that I have been arguing in favor for, for almost 2 years now. Some of them learn more quickly by talking to / playing with me or someone else. Others learn these rules through realization alone. I can only think of one skilled player that still believes in "no stealing" and haven't seen him for a long, long time.

Now the last thing I would mention is this: I'm a believer in democracy within the game. So I've played countless games by other sets of rules, including "noobish rules", I don't care; it can make it interesting. But it never matters. If I have 100 tactics, and you only have 10, if you take away 5 of my tactics.... think it will really make a difference? No it won't. And I like to play such "challenge games" as it results in proving to the noob that "stealing" is not how I win or "breaking track" is not how I win but rather just superior strategy to theirs overall. So I'm fine with them testing their theory by removing some of my weapons that they themself do not have or do not use.

With that in mind, I don't believe the game should have ONE set of rules. I DO believe it should have a BASE set of rules, those I have listed which are kind of 4 and kind of not, #4 really falls under #3, it just happens in a different way and we call it "ghost trains" instead. So this base set of rules is indeed in place for the advanced players and at least half the intermediates/middlemen.
This means that if a noob wants to host, he or she needs to announce his/her rules if they are extra rules. And that is fine. Or if they are not hosting and just want to play with rule a, b, and c, that's fine too, but they should discuss it in the lobby or waiting room and if everyone agrees to their rule, great. And personally to help the arrogant folks along, I frequently might say "Business Rules" which essentially means "no rules" (again, my 3 rules are really one rule: Don't cheat, where cheating is defined as taking advantage of major glitches in the game that if used, wreck the whole game)).
These rules I believe in really cannot be broken without wrecking the game. This is not true of any other rules. None of the other rules that people throw up actually wreck the game when broken, they change it, but not wreck it. So "no rules" is classified as "Business Rules" by me as the base line set of rules, or glitch only rules provide the most realistic atmosphere to business.

Now I've given you most of the bold print argument. If you're really interested or have decided to BECOME interested in a real discussion, your comments are welcome. So are questions.

[darthdroid]

Just had a prime example of this nonsense:

Played a game with a guy (all this talk got me playing again) and he was hosting and said "no stealing" in the waiting room. So I said, "no stealing what? resources?" He said, "No, no stealing products." So I said fine, we began the game with 2 other players.

Immediately the guy next to me starts shipping corn to the same city as I was, I notice he ships out the food. This seemed fair to me as it was as much his product as mine since he was supplying the wheat along with me (although I was the first one to both the city and the wheat). So I said nothing and competed with him.

So I work my way across the map and get to the host. I stretch from a city to the wood he is harvesting and start shipping wood to my city. Takes him 5 minutes to notice and he says "Hey! no stealing". I said "but you said "products", wood is not a product, it's a raw good or "resource". Products are finished goods". He disagreed, so I deleted my tracks (about 400k worth as it was 2 wood mines) and continued the game and bought him out anyway.

Therein lies the problem, stealing apparently means anything. I also asked the guy if his definition of "products" included people / human beings and mail. He said it did lol. I guess he was running a slave market map and hadn't told us. So now its not really a "no stealing products" game, it's a "stay away from me" game. There is a guy I play this way with (as thats the rules he likes) and we call it "King City Rules". This means whoever is to something first is the only one that can be there, cities, resources, everything. And those rules are clear so we never have a problem. And, it's quite a fun spin on the game because it essentially turns into more of a race to the goods and cities.

But NOOBS tend to think you are psychic and know what they mean when they don't know what they mean. No rational person would call a "human being" a "product" in this game. I also noticed he didn't yell at the guy next to me who was indeed violating his rule (stealing my products) as it did not affect HIM (the host).

And this is how it is 90% of the time, mickey mouse nonsense that serves one purpose: To allow the noob to make up the rules as they go to suit what their needs at the time are. That crap wrecks games.

Again, I reiterate my position:

1/ The game is designed to be played the way I like to play it and with the "base rules" I describe. If it was supposed to be one station per city, the game wouldn't allow more than 1, so there is no question stealing is a BIG part of the game, perhaps the MOST important part.

2/ The real problem with rules is that they really don't define them until mid-game which is not fair or sporting of them.

3/ I'll play by any rules that are clearly defined-it keeps it interesting to play with different rules.


This has caused me to consider making a post (as what's his name suggested) with all the rules I know of and the names I (and others) have for them. Perhaps it is a good idea after all. By being a loud mouth, I have been able to get certain rules into the general culture of the game. Like when crash and I made the rule on station moving to be limited to "the station building must be touching the green circle around a city somewhere". This rule is now pretty well used at least among the intermediate and advanced players. I'll give it some thought.

[brandon]

I'm being decent about where I post this so as not to interfere with what you are doing as I think it is the better way to do it.

You talk so much about others "steeling" ideas and information, your ladder as an example, yet you think nothing of taking my suggestion to you, calling me "what's his name", and starting a thread like it was all your brainstrom.

People, I suggested the idea to him, he took it and used it with negative gratitude.

One thing I will say tho is, I like the way you first argue about how you posted the three rules of play on this forum. When I search for them and cannot find them, you argue the point with

Lastly: As far as these 3 rules go, this is where your claim is wrong. I have listed them SEVERAL times on the site. There is no need to list them in this post as explained in my original post. The reason they don't need to be explained is because hardly anyone even knows how to do these 3 things.

Next you go into a set of challenge s for me, and you ignore pointing out where these 3 rules are. You then again come back and insult me and ask for another bunch of challenges, but you refuse to point out where these 3 rules of yours were posted. You need to back-up what you say, not me.

BUT, you then, finally, after much insulting and name calling, admit that you never have posted these 3 rules

1/ There is no point to posting the rules for the following reasons:

BUT, as usual, you refuse to admit you were wrong in what you had said. Normal you huh.

[darthdroid]

I'm being decent about where I post this so as not to interfere with what you are doing as I think it is the better way to do it.

You talk so much about others "steeling" ideas and information, your ladder as an example, yet you think nothing of taking my suggestion to you, calling me "what's his name", and starting a thread like it was all your brainstrom.

People, I suggested the idea to him, he took it and used it with negative gratitude.

It was a good idea and I thank you. I doubt it will get used much by those it would matter to (the online players) but it could be a useful tool.

I never said the "ladder" was stolen. And yes, I'm the one that initiated it here. I said my words/ideas were stolen, and they were. Except he kind of did a poor job (like on the station moving rule) of copying me and coordinating with me or just alerting me that he'd straight up paste it would have been good. Having the same name on a rule but a different meaning (quite a bit different) cannot really be helpful. BN meant well but went about it in a questionable way...

Now you accidentally added something valuable, indirectly through me with the rules. (it was a good idea, but I don't think your intent was one of a "helpful" nature-so that part was an "accident" lol) However, the above post is indeed positive... (by intention)

EDIT: I misunderstood your post just as you've misunderstood mine. If you read what I deleted in this post, please ignore it-it was due to misunderstanding your first sentence about being decent.