Re: Announcing the winner!!

["Clark D. Rodeffer" <cdrodeffer@...>]

I guess I get the booby prize this time around! First, Rob, thanks for
your kind words and suggestions. I'll definitely take them to heart,
and hope to improve Black Thursday. I have posted an unredacted PDF in
the rulesets in progress file area, and welcome everyone's comments
and suggestions for improvement.

> Lastly was "Black Thursday", (which I
> believe should have been more properly
> called "Black Tuesday") a game based
> on the '29 stock market crash.

I did consider using Black Tuesday as the name, since, if I recall,
the single biggest percentage drop occurred on October 29. That's also
the date most popular media quote for the crash. However, most
historical accounts agree that the steep downturn definitely started
on October 24, and that was the day Wall Street investors (the setting
for this game) started dumping their holdings. Indeed, panic among
popular investors came later, some on Monday and many more on Tuesday.
In light of last week's Great Lakes regional power failure, the term
"Black Thursday" may take on a new meaning, so perhaps I should
reconsider the name again....

> You are investors trying to dump stock
> as quickly as possible. At first glance
> it appears to be a negotiation game,
> but a few plays made us realize that
> there no need to ever trade at all. The
> task of losing stock through "Windows
> of Opportunity" are so easy, that
> there's no reason that all the players
> shouldn't have lost all their stock
> before exiting the building.

This is a problem, and one that definitely needs to be fixed. As you
pointed out, the game is meant to be negotiation-driven, but if it's
too easy to get rid of stock by other means, something needs tweaking.
I want there to be some sort of Windows of Opportunity mechanism
because it adds a lot to the theme. But as it is, the balance is
obviously off. I revisited the rules, and found several areas where
minor ruleset changes might redirect play toward negotiation. Again, I
welcome everyone's comments regarding these possibilities:

1. Change the number of players from "2 to 4" to "3 or 4"? Negotiation
games don't work very well for 2.

2. Vary initial portfolios depending upon the number of players (10
each for 2 players, 7 each for 3 players, 5 each for 4 players)?

3. Change the building layout to reduce the number of steps, and hence
reduce the possible encounters with Windows of Opportunity? Perhaps
the 3x8 or 3x7 plus a peaked roof are better?

4. Force closure of Windows of Opportunity if more than some number (2
or 3?) are open? Or set some maximum for the number of Windows of
Opportunity that can be open at a given time.

5. Limit number of action points spendable on movement (to 1 or 2 per
turn)?

6. Limit number of action points spendable on buying from the market
(to 1 or 2 per turn)?

7. Force sale of some number more than one (perhaps 2) matching stock
certificates from a Window of Opportunity, in order to force players
to hold onto more certificates?

> On the plus side, "Black Thursday"
> had one of the better games, but it
> really needs *a lot* more time in
> play testing. I'd continue to work
> on this, because I'm sure there's a
> very good game waiting to be
> released here.

Again, thanks for your kind words, even for this last-place finisher.
It's true that I had very little time for play testing; almost all of
it occurred over Easter weekend when my family was in town. After
that, things got very busy with my writing and day job, and further
development got put on hold until July, when I couldn't find
interested play testers. Still, I am encouraged, and will continue to
work on Black Thursday with the hope of having a much better game in
the not-too-distant future.

Clark Rodeffer