Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Monopoly as a Markov Chain

koaning.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 37 posts

Re: Monopoly as a Markov Chain

#11

Post by DanBC »

jon-wood wrote: post #7
blowski wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of hotels, put 4 houses as quickly as possible so there are no houses left for other people to build. Only upgrade to hotels when you can afford to put the houses that will become available onto another of your properties. Other people's sets are worthless to them if you own all the houses. Combine this strategy with the fact that the highest ROI on most properties is 3 houses, and you have a winning strategy…

That last line is the rub here. I used to play Monopoly as if my life depended on it. Now I don't, because no one will play Monopoly against me anymore.

Monopoly requires player elimination. That's seen as "mean", whereas winning isn't seen as mean. That's the main reason Monopoly isn't a good game. The other reason is that people have house rules, which often have the effect of reducing the risk of player elimination, which then increases the playtime to stupid lengths.

There are a bunch of great, easy to understand, easy to play games that are much better.

(HN search might find a few, there have been several threads before. Board Game Geek tends to skew toward the more complex end, but there's probably good lists of great family games.)

Re: Monopoly as a Markov Chain

#12

Post by blowski »

DanBC wrote: post #11
jon-wood wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That last line is the rub here. I used to play Monopoly as if my life depended on it. Now I don't, because no one will play Monopoly against me anymore.

Monopoly requires player elimination. That's seen as "mean", whereas winning isn't seen as mean. That's the main reason Monopoly isn't a good game. The other reason is that people have house rules, which often have the effect of reducing the risk of player elimination, which then increases the playtime to stupid lengths. There are a bunch of great, easy to understand, easy to play games that are much better. (HN sear…

There are some interesting variations of the game, using a standard Monopoly set. One I've seen allowed things like Lynch Mobs - if enough of the players agree, they can send someone to prison, remove their assets, or even eject them from the game. You could also institute a rule like "90% tax on cash holdings" or "those with assets under $200 receive an extra $1000 when they pass Go". It sort of combined Werewolf with Monopoly, because it required more skill at the human level to persuade your fellow players to vote with you.

Re: Monopoly as a Markov Chain

#13

Post by debugunit »

blowski wrote: post #12
DanBC wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monopoly requires player elimination. That's seen as "mean", whereas winning isn't seen as mean. That's the main reason Monopoly isn't a good game. The other reason is that people have house rules, which often have the effect of reducing the risk of player elimination, which then increases the playtime to stupid lengths. There are a bunch of great, easy to understand, easy to play games that are much better. (HN sear…

There are some interesting variations of the game, using a standard Monopoly set. One I've seen allowed things like Lynch Mobs - if enough of the players agree, they can send someone to prison, remove their assets, or even eject them from the game. You could also institute a rule like "90% tax on cash holdings" or "those with assets under $200 receive an extra $1000 when they pass Go". It sort of combined Werewolf wi…

"...Lynch Mobs - if enough of the players agree, they can send someone to prison, remove their assets, or even eject them from the game"

AKA democracy ;-)

Re: Monopoly as a Markov Chain

#14

Post by DanielBMarkham »

DanBC wrote: post #10
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I've found the best way to play games against friends is to disconnect my competitive spirit and anlytical mind and just sit back and enjoy the conversation. I have fun, and those folks who are hyper-competitive get another "victim", so it's good for everybody.

That, however, means a monopoly game can easily last 5 hours. The only way to play monopoly is to be brutal and eliminate everyone as quickly as possible. (Ignoring the best way to win is to not play, and play any of the very much better games)

Really? Maybe a couple of hours. I just buy whatever I land on. Others usually follow suit and fairly quickly the board is divvied up. Then it's horse-trading and luck.

I think that with a few simple heuristics the game moves along quickly enough. I have family members who are so nice they try to prevent doing things the other players don't like. These games take forever. Geesh.

I haven't played in quite a while, so I may be remembering the game moving along faster than it actually does.

Side note: we've been playing Machi Koro at home over the last few weeks. Very simple concept, mostly luck, and interesting enough for a somewhat fun 30 minutes or so.

Re: Monopoly as a Markov Chain

#15

Post by cantdutchthis »

hi all, glad to hear you guys like it. im the guy that wrote that post, didnt imagine that it might be trending.

some of the comments here are indeed very valid. the fact that you can push all the houses to your deeds actually might make it more interesting to push for the the cheap investment places that otherwise don't give too much of a return.

my main goal was to figure out which house yields the best return on investment. which was a problem that had been bugging the back of my mind for a while.

ill add strategies that ive missed and give credit to it when i recheck the blog for spelling.

Re: Monopoly as a Markov Chain

#16

Post by steveklabnik »

DanBC wrote: post #11
jon-wood wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That last line is the rub here. I used to play Monopoly as if my life depended on it. Now I don't, because no one will play Monopoly against me anymore.

Monopoly requires player elimination. That's seen as "mean", whereas winning isn't seen as mean. That's the main reason Monopoly isn't a good game. The other reason is that people have house rules, which often have the effect of reducing the risk of player elimination, which then increases the playtime to stupid lengths. There are a bunch of great, easy to understand, easy to play games that are much better. (HN sear…

  > Monopoly requires player elimination.
Absolutely. I love Monopoly, and when I mention this, people always say "but it lasts so long!" It only lasts so long because just as someone is about to get knocked out, someone else loans them money to stay in the game...

  > There are a bunch of great, easy to understand, easy to play games
  > that are much better.
My favorite with family is either Carcassonne (I even have a tattoo) or Ticket to Ride.

Re: Monopoly as a Markov Chain

#19

Post by davidgl »

blowski wrote: post #5
hermanschaaf wrote: post #2

A very interesting little experiment! Based off this, the author notes that the orange streets will provide a steady stream of income, and this is useful information. But the trick in Monopoly is to get hotels on your properties as quickly as possible, because this not only provides you with a revenue stream (and fastest return on investment), but also takes money away from your competitors, who would have used it to…

Instead of hotels, put 4 houses as quickly as possible so there are no houses left for other people to build. Only upgrade to hotels when you can afford to put the houses that will become available onto another of your properties. Other people's sets are worthless to them if you own all the houses. Combine this strategy with the fact that the highest ROI on most properties is 3 houses, and you have a winning strategy…

Also bare in mind the original game that evolved into Monopoly was designed to be upsetting, to teach the dangers of monopolies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_board_game_Mono...)

Re: Monopoly as a Markov Chain

#20

Post by JoshTriplett »

blowski wrote: post #12
DanBC wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monopoly requires player elimination. That's seen as "mean", whereas winning isn't seen as mean. That's the main reason Monopoly isn't a good game. The other reason is that people have house rules, which often have the effect of reducing the risk of player elimination, which then increases the playtime to stupid lengths. There are a bunch of great, easy to understand, easy to play games that are much better. (HN sear…

There are some interesting variations of the game, using a standard Monopoly set. One I've seen allowed things like Lynch Mobs - if enough of the players agree, they can send someone to prison, remove their assets, or even eject them from the game. You could also institute a rule like "90% tax on cash holdings" or "those with assets under $200 receive an extra $1000 when they pass Go". It sort of combined Werewolf wi…

Sounds like "Monopoly: Regulatory Capture Edition".
Post reply on HN