{"items": [{"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/103013777355236494008", "anchor": "gp-1411041234933", "service": "gp", "text": "@David German\n\u00a0\n@Todd\n\u00a0", "timestamp": 1411041234}, {"author": "David German", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/111229345142780712481", "anchor": "gp-1411043681637", "service": "gp", "text": "Sure, I'd try this. ", "timestamp": 1411043681}, {"author": "Mark", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/688456156222?comment_id=688459200122", "anchor": "fb-688459200122", "service": "fb", "text": "Wacky. I assume that under rule 2, you cannot convert your money from one game to the other at an arbitrary rate, you can only trade with other players. Why not use one combined currency across both games, with the winner being the player with the most total money at the end of both games? (Right, because pg doesn't actually work that way). Tweak the pg rules to have final payout on the last turn, maybe double out triple that payout to make it more significant.", "timestamp": "1411045258"}, {"author": "Mark", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/688456156222?comment_id=688459439642", "anchor": "fb-688459439642", "service": "fb", "text": "Also, if a player declares a modern art turn, who plays the painting? The player declaring the turn or the player to the left of the last player to play a painting. If the latter, which seems to be what you're implying, then I can easily envision a scenario in which only the player about to take a turn has interest in declaring a modern art turn, so the power grid game races to conclusion, especially since a turn of power grid is a much larger percentage of the game than a turn of modern art. But I like the idea.", "timestamp": "1411045469"}, {"author": "Todd", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/112947709146257842066", "anchor": "gp-1411045820043", "service": "gp", "text": "Ha!\n
\n
\nI think it should be scored like Tigris & Euphrates- the winner is the player with the best ranking in their worst game.\n
\n
\nAlso, as David knows, all custom game designs are required to incorporate simultaneous turns =P", "timestamp": 1411045820}, {"author": "Todd", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/688456156222?comment_id=688462054402", "anchor": "fb-688462054402", "service": "fb", "text": "Mark In the latter case you describe, I don't think anyone has much interest in declaring a turn of one or the other aside from information gathering (i.e. trying to move one of the games forward so you have a better idea of who is winning). The choice to play a turn of one or the other doesn't actually affect who is going to play a painting, so that's not a reason to delay.
Whereas, if it IS the player who is taking a meta-turn who gets to play a painting, you would just end up playiing Modern Art first. Which is one reason I assume that isn't the intention.", "timestamp": "1411047729"}, {"author": "David German", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/111229345142780712481", "anchor": "gp-1411047914422", "service": "gp", "text": "Agree with Todd about scoring. Regretfully disagree about simultaneous turns in this case :-P", "timestamp": 1411047914}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/688456156222?comment_id=688467538412", "anchor": "fb-688467538412", "service": "fb", "text": "@Mark: \"if a player declares a modern art turn, who plays the painting?\"
The player to the left of the last one to play a painting. We need to interleave the games somehow, so the idea is have people take turns deciding which game should tick next.", "timestamp": "1411051494"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/688456156222?comment_id=688467787912", "anchor": "fb-688467787912", "service": "fb", "text": "@Mark: \"Why not use one combined currency across both games\"
We did think about that, and that could also be fun, but our guess was that the floating exchange rate would be more fun because now there's a bit of negotiation.", "timestamp": "1411051638"}, {"author": "Todd", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/688456156222?comment_id=688470422632", "anchor": "fb-688470422632", "service": "fb", "text": "I think it would also be damaging to the mechanics of Power Grid to have the game solely decided by money. Even if you do that big end payout, it's still possible that someone could win by, say, powering 10 cities for a long time and just collecting cash, which would be a big departure from the intended flow of the game.", "timestamp": "1411053572"}, {"author": "Adam Yie", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/114873051319510815414", "anchor": "gp-1411078329452", "service": "gp", "text": "Would play (not that I'm convenient to Boston or good at either =)).", "timestamp": 1411078329}, {"author": "Alan", "source_link": "https://plus.google.com/116622117068577394094", "anchor": "gp-1411132383409", "service": "gp", "text": ".... Uhh ya. I'd do that. (once) ", "timestamp": 1411132383}]}