I was just giving a high level overview, not a detailed description. But, yes, this would have to be determined.

I would think it would be distributed equally until the maximum was purchased, then cut off. This seems the most equitable, but an alternate method could be used. For example, the current largest shareholder could get their purchases filled first, then the second largest, etc.

The first method I thought of was the equal distribution, but that penalizes those who could otherwise buy a lot. Your second idea is interesting. Since a currency that everyone's buying probably won't have too many shareholders yet, this idea promotes keeping a bit of a currency that will die this turn and come back next turn. For instance with the Crowns, if this were in effect, then someone could be tempted to speculate on Crowns, expecting to become the biggest shareholder. This idea offers a LOT of strategy.

I think the most equitable idea would actually be to look at the purchases, and give each player a share of the supply in accordance with their share of the purchases. For example, in the last phase your order of 8500 Lira represented 58% of the turn's purchased 14768 Lira. So, you would get 58% of the 7000 Lira which is 4029 Lira.

This idea has its own pitfalls. There isn't much to stop players from making humongous orders, knowing that this will help them get the Lion's share of a contested currency.

Distribution aside, I think this idea could work.

OMG I love Devonian when he thinks out loud! :)

"However, I wonder if there should be buying curbs on the upside, just like there are selling curbs on the downside. "

I basically wondered the same, but from a reverse-angle point of view.
Why on Dip2000 they left total buying's freedom to investors and they put selling curbs on the downside? Wouldn't it be better without any curb? Yes, I like free markets.

The answer I gave myself got 2 main points.

- the selling curb avoids that someone could monopoly a currency and make millions of it.
Imagine if Diplomat33 after first turn could sell all his 3000 Piastres. He'd have been the one with more money, the Pts would have drop to around 0.65$ and now he could rebuy 9500 Pst and make again a huge profit on them. And so on until Turkey is alive. Whether this is a good strategy is questionable, but the point is that the currency would be unlinked (untied?) to its Country. Just a numeric speculation. Diplomat, after selling his 3000 Pts, could have attacked another currency and being the strongest since the start monopolize it. The whole Bourse would be unlinked to the game and who guesses the first good move, wins.
Yes, I like free markets. Thats why I hate monopolies.

- You can re-read the previos answer as "the selling curb avoids that someone" buys an unreasonable quantity of a currency. So there's already a buying curb, if you're a wise player.
What is an "unreasonable quantity"? Well, it depends. I think it depends on many things. The first is the Map (obvious, uh?). The second is how much money there's around:
- During pregame, the total value floating was 7000$ x 8 players = 56,000$
- After Spring 1901 it was more than 60,000$
- Now is more than 80,000$...
Who knows how much it will be at the end of the game. That's probably why @Dip2000 they didn't set up a buying curb. Not only because it should rise (a formula would be enough) but mainly because being good at decide how much to buy is one of the main points of the whole Bourse.
Buying curb already exists, if you can see it. And it changes from turn to turn, from situation to situation, from Game to Game, from Map to Map.
It's part of your skills being able to see it and decide what is the right quantity to buy.

___________________________
PS. Why don't we open a new thread to discuss modifications to Bourse? Looks like there's a lot of ideas about it we could develop.
Just perhaps it would be better wait for the end of this game, to open it. People like us, who just played 2 turns of Bourse and never seen an entire game before now, willing to modify a well-tested set of rules from another site, look a bit arrogant. I say let's see what happens here, first.
______
pps. IDK, if "arrogant" has exactly the same meaning of Italian "arrogante". I hope it's not too heavy, in english.

I have a question for Diplomat- what exactly are you doing? lol. you sold everything but one currency, and now you are doing what exactly?

@butterhead: I've been wondering as well!

@Guaroz: Totally agree on the arguments for the limits! Had there been no limits, my strategy would have been to sell everything in the spring (unless I heard of certain currencies going up) and then in the fall buy as much as I could of the cheapest currency, safe in the knowledge that I'd inflate the price and be able to sell it all for a profit next turn. Then, I'd be able to continue doing that all game with my only caution being if a country was liable to be eliminated. A player could be their own market that way.
The limit on sales makes things more interesting because you have to make a balance. If a country looks to be a strong, lasting power, you want to buy into them early, but not too much for risk of getting burned by other players starting a run on that currency. You cannot make yourself the market.
A limit on purchases would make that strategic choice less pronounced. By limiting purchases, you couldn't trap yourself (at least it would be harder), so there wouldn't be as much of a balance to achieve.

I think d33 is doing what devonian did the turn before. However he made the mistake of selling all his lire, meaning although he has $3100 in US, he wont have much to spend...

@Guaroz - just finished reading your post from about 7 hours ago (haven't read others yet) and I've just got to say I totally disagree with you. If the real game was having such an impact on the financiers game (eg using the Italian example above) why would Italy's currency be worth 4 times the value of Russia's who's got more SCs and better alliance prospects.

You're thinking to far ahead, the bids where based on spring moves, which, at the time, had Italy with better build options...

I'm totally for free markets too, but would prefer the market in Bourse to operate lite the real life market. Except in generally exceptional hyperinflation or debt defaulting currencies don't go in freefall like the Crown did last turn. Yes wild speculative "investment" like what we're seeing in Bourse does happen in real life, but the market is more than just 10 or so players. The real market and its magnitude doesn't really create the circumstances we've seen. Ditto the rapid appreciation of the Lira (and no doubt the Crown next turn, although I'm waiting on others to chime in about a market "correction"!)

I agree with Ambassador. In my view there are only two situations, where the game impacts the financiers game. If one country will be defeated in the next rounds, because everybody will try to sell this value. Or at the end of the game, because everybody tries to get the value of the winner.
During game you sell what you assume others will sell and buy what you assume others will buy. After the first round all said that the value of Lire would raise because it was the cheapest value apart from Crown. Nobody bought Crowns because everybody said he would sell Crowns. Selling Crowns was caused by the endangered position of Austria in the game.
But apart from these endangered values we will see that not the value of the best situated country raises or will stay at a high level but the cheapest value. Each turn mostly everybody will buy the cheapest not directly endangered value. This value raises a lot. Then everybody sell this value the next turn while we buy the cheapest value of the next turn again.
Because of this it happened, that the Lire is worth 4 times the Rouble and I'm sure the same will happen this turn to Austria's value and next turn maybe Russia's value. And not because of better build options in the game.

@Ambassador, I think it is a combination of speculation, AND the prospects for eventual success. I bought heavily into Italy, as did everyone else, out of speculation, but also because I thought it might last a long time. (At least some portion of my purchase will be worthless if Italy is gone in less than 18 turns.) Based on Italy's opening move, I thought Italy had good prospects for longevity. On the other hand, Austria, which cost less, had a much worse long term prospects.

This year, it is likely Austria will be the hot item. Not just because of its low price, but because it now appears to have Italy as an ally instead of an enemy. However, everyone will still have to evaluate how long Austria will last in order to make it pay off. If Russia and Turkey join forces, like they should, Austria may get squeezed. This is where the market will be a balancing factor in the buying.

(By the way, I think I just reinforced Guaroz's rebuttal to my proposal for curbs on purchases.)

Just a reminder that players now have approx. 24 hours to send me their orders.

Amby, the crown collapsed because I could have taken Vienna and Trieste last turn, people wanted out

For someone who isn't privy to the talks between traders fasces, you sure do talk like you know everything we were thinking. Honestly, while you possibly taking Vienna and Trieste HELPED collapse the crown, it was hardly the only reason. Before the game even started, people had decided to drive the price of the crown down figuring either Austria would collapse and we'd make max profit by selling early, or we could always buy back at a cheap price.

And besides, as I spoke with you earlier via PM, at least 3 of us had a hunch that you were playing a Key Lepanto. The fact is, the setup of Bourse Diplomacy encourages runs like this. As long as a nation isn't within a couple years of dying, or in danger of dying, their price doesn't have to have anything to do with how well the country is doing. You're going to see price fluctuations for all countries, even the strong ones, as people try to maximize their money. Only in mid-game are you going to see the prices start to settle around how well people are doing until near end-game, the strongest country has the highest price.

tobi1 your analisys of the game looks perfect. I wonder how can you be only 6th, atm.

Amby, real life market has millions professional operators paid with real money to do their job all day long!
I'm joking, but yes we're just playing a game where a beaten army doesn't die and can even retreat into the adiacent enemy's Capital, conquering it. Is it real? no, it's a game.
Same way, Bourse don't want to assign season by season a value to how good a country is. It's just a game, you have to do your best with the rules you have (and be thanking kaner for GMing it for free) to win it.
If a country may be heavily under/overvalued it's just because Diplomacy it's a turn-based game. It's discontinuos, and so is the market based on it. It's not like real currencies being bought and sell 24h/day in 200 bourses all around the world by millions investors and thousands Corp. who never sleep.

The game you imagine is:
- A column of green armies left Trieste, where are they headed? who bets on Vienna sells some Crowns, who bet elsewhere or they come back holds, some sells Crowns anyway.
- A column of armies left Belgrad, where are they headed? maybe Trieste? investors react shyly and wait for what Budapest will do, maybe there will be a support.
- Armies left Venice, What if they're headed Tri and Tri's armies are headed Vie? investors now sell more Crowns.
- No, wait Trieste looks he's heading South and so is Serbian armies. Now investor stopped selling Crowns.
- Trieste's armies are very south now. Who thinks it's a misorder and they will go to Albania still holds Crowns, but the rumour of a Lepanto has been spread and many investors are starting buying Crowns!
- Trieste passed the serbian borders, Bulgarian are alerted but they seems to be supporting something, not bouncing in Serbia. Who believes in bounce still hold, but most of investors are now buying Crowns
- Serbia took Greece. The Lepanto is on the table. After its maximum, small bounce-down of the Crown.....

Instead the game we play is:
-Trieste took Serbia. Stop. Suddenly, there's a Lepanto. Stop. Suddenly Crown go from depression to stars. Period.

When you bought "Ship Battle" did you complain there was no water in the box? :-)

That said, I'm open to any coherent proposal for a rule change. I just wonder why we don't wait to see how this game works out.

@guaroz, I don't think we are trying to change the rules mid-game, (at least I'm not), just make proposals for the next game.

Funny, Devo's analisys for buying liras last turn was identical to mine. I wonder how could I have bought 7000 units less than him. Or did he buy 7000 units more than me? :-)

@Devo: Sure, only a mad would change the rules mid-game. That's why less than 6 hours ago I proposed to discuss on a separate thread rule-change for a next game. Better if we start after this game ends.

Guys were forgetting one simple fact:

It will take Devonian 18 turns to sell off all his lire, it will take Diplomat 8 turns to sell off all his Paistres, the fact is, when your buying a lot, yes your artificially driving up the price.

But if I die within the next 5 years, Devonian looses half his investment in Italy (assuming he sell 500 a piece now till the end) and such a large bid will probably cost him the game.

Because you can only sell 500 a turn, the risk of long bids, is that you don't know if it will pay out, so while many people now are claiming that the game is broken because selling all your stock to buy a different stock gives you so much money, it doesn't because if the country inevests in dies, you lost all your money.

I had more cash than you!

I must have faith in your ability Fasces!

"I must have faith in your ability Fasces!"
I wont let you down.

remember people - there is a fine line between speculating on either the game, by the traders (and the bourse by the players), and offering strategic advice.

Please be aware of your choice of words when you 'speculate' on the game.

@Devonian - totally agree. I'm not advocating a rule change, just facilitating debate on how to improve an excellent variant further. Anyone who's played a few games with me would know I appreciate injecting as much realism into variants as possible. That's all I'm advocating for future Bourse games. And yes, no doubt some of my observations will come to naught if Italy goes belly up before your 18th dumping of Lira ;-)

-------

Italian technology infuses the Austrian market, Roubles gain strongly while the Franc remains steady. Germany fortifies it's Western border, and fighting breaks out in the Mid-Atlantic Ocean. Mayhem engulfs the Balkans.

-------

Spring 1902 currency values:

Austrian Crowns: $3.8
English Pounds: $0.88
French Francs: $0.82
German Marks: $0.88
Italian Lire: $1.68
Russian Roubles: $1.75
Turkish Piastres: $0.59

The total amount of each currency sold/bought is:
Austrian Crowns: 0 sold, 35800 bought = +35800 , up 3.58
English Pounds: 3400 sold, 100 bought = -3300 , down 0.33
French Francs: 2299 sold, 2600 bought = +400 , up 0.04
German Marks: 2100 sold, 200 bought = -1900 , down 0.19
Italian Lire: 4500 sold, 0 bought = -4500 , down 0.45
Russian Roubles: 0 sold, 12095 bought = +1200 , up 1.20
Turkish Piastres: 3999 sold, 500 bought = -3400 , down 0.34

Players' Net Worth & current Victory Points:
Devonian: $36707, vp = 576
Diplomat33: $8958, vp = 210
L Podolski: $15878, vp = 400
Guaroz: $42454.09, vp = 650.08
gman314: $28707.95, vp = 488.64
tobi1: $29359, vp =551
drano019: $18000.5, vp = 389
hiprox: $13459.25, vp = 357.47
Ambassador: $31532, vp = 581
amisond: $14950, vp = 349

-------

Who holds what & what was bought and sold in Spring 1901?

Devonian: Crowns 5900(+5900), Pounds 0, Francs 0, Marks 0, Lire 500(-500), Roubles 0, Piastres 0, US$7

Diplomat33: Crowns 1000(+1000), Pounds 0, Francs 1000(+1000), Marks 0, Lire 0 , Roubles 0, Piastres 3000(-500), US$2595

L Podolski: Crowns 2000(+1600), Pounds 500(-500), Francs 2500(+1400), Marks 1700, Lire 900(-500), Roubles 1000(+700), Piastres 100(-500), US$971

Guaroz: Crowns 8500(+8500), Pounds 1151(-500), Francs 0(-400), Marks 1500(-500), Lire 1500(-500), Roubles 2500(+2500), Piastres 101(-500), US$866.62

gman314: Crowns 5000(+5000), Pounds 1300(-500), Francs 752(-499), Marks 100(-500), Lire 1600(-500), Roubles 2000(+1400), Piastres 751(-499), US$1228.22

tobi1: Crowns 5500(+5300), Pounds 2000(-500), Francs 600(-500), Marks 700(+200), Lire 500(-500), Roubles 2000(+1900), Piastres 400(-500), US$135

drano019: Crowns 2000(2000), Pounds 1500(-500), Francs 400(-500),Marks 1150(-500), Lire 1200(-500), Roubles 2150(+2000), Piastres 400(-500), US$1726

hiprox: Crowns 1000(+500), Pounds 600(-400), Francs 835(-100), Marks 900(-100), Lire 1518(-500), Roubles 2120(+645), Piastres 1000(+500), US$804.31

Amby: Crowns 5600(+5000), Pounds 650(-500), Francs 1450(-300), Marks 850(-500), Lire 650(-500), Roubles 3800(+2450), Piastres 0(-500), US$1

amisond: Crowns 2000(+1000), Pounds 1100(+100), Francs 1200(+200), Marks 1000, Lire 500(-500), Roubles 1500(+500), Piastres 500(-500), US$758

----

I'll also be PM everyone soon as to their current stocks in holding. Remember there is a fine line between speculating strategic advice - be careful with what you say. In the meantime don't forget to check the above adjudication.

Thanks!

----

oh and another statistic for you folks:

Net Worth Generated = $151239.74
Total Net Worth = $240032.79

I do believe Devonian has a few more than 500 Lire left :p

my bad:

Devonian: Crowns 5900(+5900), Pounds 0, Francs 0, Marks 0, Lire 8500(-500), Roubles 0, Piastres 0, US$7

He'll be offloading Lira all the way 'til Italy joins the Euro.