3 ms·

I've always used Monopoly as a good way to explain inflation. If you play by the stated rules in the game, any property landed on goes up for auction to all pl

I've always used Monopoly as a good way to explain inflation. If you play by the stated rules in the game, any property landed on goes up for auction to all players if the current player doesn't want to purchase it. Imagine what happens to the purchase price of properties in this scenario if every player started the game with 10 times more money...

koheripbal 7y ago
I've always used it as a business negotiations lesson. The winner of the game is often the person who makes the most deals to secure the most property monopolies. The KEY lesson is that you can trade "down" as the loser of every single deal, and yet still win by virtue of the fact that you've made the MOST deals. Making deals captures untapped value. There's actually a LOT more strategy to Monopoly than the people in this thread realize.
- dkonofalski 7y ago
  Have you actually played Monopoly until the end? The winner is not usually the person that makes the most deals. It's the person who makes the best deals for the dice rolls. If you buy blue, green, and yellow blocks through deals, you're almost always guaranteed to win regardless of how many deals you've made outside of those. The remaining players can continue to make deals and, as long as you don't accept them, they can never win.
- throwawayhhakdl 7y ago
  That is... false. Trading down consistently only works if you’re playing with idiots. Trading a high value property for a low value property makes sense if you get a color set, but if you do this multiple times with bare minimum competence players, the likely outcome is that everyone has at least one set, but you have booth the lowest amount of cash to develop things and the least valuable properties. With the exception of edge case (although often optimal) strategies where you lock down the available houses, trading down is likely a sign that you’re trying to increase your likelihood of winning from 0% to 10%, while improving the odds to a greater degree for whoever is getting the better deal. Most properties are superficial until they have specifically 3 houses on them. If you have three color sets, but fewer than 3 houses on any of them, you’re going to lose.

koheripbal 7y ago

I've always used it as a business negotiations lesson. The winner of the game is often the person who makes the most deals to secure the most property monopolies. The KEY lesson is that you can trade "down" as the loser of every single deal, and yet still win by virtue of the fact that you've made the MOST deals. Making deals captures untapped value. There's actually a LOT more strategy to Monopoly than the people in this thread realize.

dkonofalski 7y ago
Have you actually played Monopoly until the end? The winner is not usually the person that makes the most deals. It's the person who makes the best deals for the dice rolls. If you buy blue, green, and yellow blocks through deals, you're almost always guaranteed to win regardless of how many deals you've made outside of those. The remaining players can continue to make deals and, as long as you don't accept them, they can never win.
throwawayhhakdl 7y ago
That is... false. Trading down consistently only works if you’re playing with idiots. Trading a high value property for a low value property makes sense if you get a color set, but if you do this multiple times with bare minimum competence players, the likely outcome is that everyone has at least one set, but you have booth the lowest amount of cash to develop things and the least valuable properties. With the exception of edge case (although often optimal) strategies where you lock down the available houses, trading down is likely a sign that you’re trying to increase your likelihood of winning from 0% to 10%, while improving the odds to a greater degree for whoever is getting the better deal. Most properties are superficial until they have specifically 3 houses on them. If you have three color sets, but fewer than 3 houses on any of them, you’re going to lose.