Game Design Thoughts - Mountain Passes revisited

Warning this rambles more than a little bit

While I still feel that ignoring  mountain passes, even in an 18xx game, shouldn't be done. Yet I can't ignore how restrictive that makes the board. Will a restrictive board, from the viewpoint of laying track tiles, be fun to play on? Will there be a reasonable replay value?

I have read all of the comments I can find about the CO 18xx (Rock & Stocks) and I'm not sure that it even came up as a design element, although 3 tunnel companies were originally included in the early drafts and were eventually eliminated because no one used them. The question that comes to mind is that board may not be restrictive enough, especially when you see the amount of track that is seems to be laid in northwestern Colorado. Where is the compromise point?

Let's take a look at just a small area of the map and you can see how much is going in this portion of the board. I did expect this area to be more or less the center of the action since it includes Denver.

A little description. The multi point starts represent the passes. My first thought is that they should be located on the hex sides, so Tennessee pass needs to be moved a little bit. The red line, more or less, represents the continental divide, which is what most passes cross or tunnel through.

The big problem hex is the Golden hex. The area actually includes three major towns; Golden, Blackhawk/Central City and Boulder and four passes, one of which I haven't included (yet?); Rollins Pass, Loveland Pass, Argentine Pass and the missing pass is Berthoud. Of these four passes only Rollins pass was actually built over. Geographically all of this fits in one hex. The reality, on the ground so to speak, is that three of the passes can only be reached through Clear Creek Canyon which the Colorado Central (along with a couple of others) built through going west as far as Silver Plume (a little farther than that but close enough). Rollins pass was reach through South Boulder Canyon (kind of, sort of) between Golden and Boulder on the front range. Loveland, Argentine and Berthoud passes all would need tunnels built (long ones) to keep the grades at reasonable levels. Rollins Pass was actually crossed without a tunnel but that trackage was considered temporary while the Moffat Tunnel was being built (The tunnel construction started in 1923 and was completed in 1927, and the first train passed through in February 1928. It is the highest railroad tunnel in the US at 9,200 feet and still 2800 feet beneath the surface and 6 miles long). Even if the hex is reduced to two passes its going to require a special tile to represent the difficulty

Let's take the hex apart:

1) The first difficulty, three towns occupy the hex at the current map scale. I think Boulder can be safely eliminated, it was never on a major railroad route. Boulder sits in a rather steep valley at the base of the foothills making it difficult to serve by rail. Golden must be there even though its right next to the Denver hex, at the very least from an historical context and if the Colorado Central is used as one of the railroad charters then this would be its home hex. Blackhawk and Central City are strictly gold mining and can be represented as a resource providing revenue. It might need a custom tile.

2) The second difficulty, mountain passes. In the ground scale four passes could potentially occupy this hex with only three sides to work with; Loveland, Argentine, Berthoud and Rollins. Loveland Pass and Argentine Pass, if built, would to the west eventually into the same valley leading down to Dillon (they would roughly meet at Keystone Resort). Berthoud and Rollins pass take you north to Steamboat Springs. Rollins Pass is the only one that could be crossed without a tunnel (although that added 27 additional miles to the mainline, along with all the problems associated with trying to cross mountain passes in the winter). I think I could, in theory shift Argentine pass to an adjacent hex from looking at a map. But it still leaves the problem that Berthoud and Rollins would both need to use the same hex side.

3) The third difficulty revolves around trackage rights. For the moment lets just ignore the hex difficulties, and look at those. In most 18xx games track is really controlled via stations at cities and if you can trace a legal route to it you can use any track on the board as long as it connects to at least one of your station tokens. That rule should still hold true for the Colorado board, the difference is you need to determine who can use a pass and how to mark it. For example If the D&RG builds over La Veta pass (which is down south) then only the D&RG can cross it. However the D&RG should be able allowed to award trackage rights to other companies (either subsidiaries that it owns or those companies owned by other players). At the moment I'm thinking that every pass should have its own tile and every company should have an additional set of "control" tokens, to go along with their station tokens, they would be used to signify which company owns the pass crossing. But then the dilemma is how to show which companies have "trackage" rights over that pass.

Another situation, relatively common in Colorado history is two railroads banding together to form a railroad specifically to build through a particularly difficult stretch of terrain. The railroads would share trackage rights and, almost inevitably, one of the parties would buy out the other, usually when the partner when bankrupt). The more I think about it the more I like the idea of trackage rights if I can come up with a simple mechanism to reflect it. I could envision a game where the need to build track gets as cut throat as the financial side of the game. 

Ideas are still swirling.

Game Design Thoughts - Updating the search for Data

 

Redtail Hawk, one of a mated pair that lives in one of our neighbor's trees and regularly hunts over the field behind our house.

The Redtail Hawk is riding the thermals constantly scanning for his next meal. I have been feeling much the same this past week or so, scanning for information and sometimes finding it. Let's just say if I was the hawk I'd be really hungry most of the time.

I have continued to dig for information on Colorado mountain passes, maybe to much but some sources have at least been revealed. The first was a long shot a book by Larry Rynearson called Colorado's Historic Mountain Passes. It has some good information and even information that is helpful but its definitely not the definitive resource I would like it to be.

While I was scouting around for maps I stumbled across across a couple of pdf documents that apparently came from the USGS. There are 11 in total but I have only been able to find two and they don't cover the entire state, most of the western third is missing including the SW corner which is a pain since its a big focus for Colorado railroading from a mining standpoint. The first pamphlet is: "Historic Trail Map of the Leadville 1 (degree) x 2 (degree) Quadrangle, Central Colorado", the second one is  the "Historic Trail Map of the Denver 1 (degree) x 2 (degree) Quadrangle, Central Colorado. These maps and the supporting pamphlets were prepared by Glenn R Scott. There was an anniversary edition including all 11 maps in 2004 but I haven't had any luck in finding it.

The maps are great but the most interesting aspect is the sure amount of historical information that is included which far outweighs the value of the maps. The information includes all the mountain passes in the area and how they can be accessed (foot, road via 4WD, road via car, railroad built on it, railroad still present etc.), not to mention all the wagon toll roads that proceeded the railroads. There is just a wealth of information to be had. Now if I could just find the rest of the pamphlets and maps.

Here is a bit of an example of the information included about a pass:

Argentine Pass (In 1860s' called Sanderson Pass; in 1870's called Snake River Pass, also Georgetown Pass), 13,207 feet. On the Continental Divide between Peru Creek and old Decatur in the Peru Creek Mining District ad Leavenworth Creek and Georgetown in SE 1/4 sec. 9, T. % S., R. 75 W., Clear Creek and Summit Counties. Jeep trail on the east side and foot trail on west side

What it doesn't say is if it was surveyed as a possible railroad pass. However, at 13,207 feet of elevation the answer is likely no or it was deemed to be a useful route.

Here is another example for a pass that did carry a railroad line:

Boreas Pass (earlier Tarryall Pass, Hamilton Pass, or Breckenridge Pass), 11,481 feet. From Tarryall Creek and Como to Indiana Creek branch of Blue River and Breckenridge, NW 1/4 sec. 26, T. 7S., R. 77W., Park and Summit Counties. Railroad built over pass in 1881 (Brown, 1972, p.58). Auto road - closed in winter.

At least it gives me something to work with and since it includes references it should help the search for more information.

Something else I have been working on is transcribing the rules for 1869; The Golden Spike. This was the first 18XX game I worked on with my ex-father in law, Colin Barnhorst. Unfortunately I can't find my copy but I was able to acquire a set of the beta rules that had been converted to pdf. I took the trouble of retyping the whole thing since the scan wasn't very good, mostly to jog my memory on what we had done. We published this in 1996 and there are maybe 40 copies or so out in the world. I have been toying with the idea of publishing it again, but I need to track down an individual who I gave permission to re-publish it. I don't know if there are any of his versions out there or not but I at least need to see what happened there. This time I will include some designer notes in it, tough after 25 years, but we introduced a lot of concepts that make it a very different 18XX game.

So there you go, a small update on the nonsense that has been running around in my head.

Game Design Thoughts - Struggling with the Passes

 

A journeyman locomotive; first on the Colorado & Northwestern (later re-organized as the Denver, Boulder & Western) as #30 from 1898 - 1919, then on the Colorado & Southern as #74 from 1920 - 1943 and finally on the Rio Grande Southern as #74 from 1948 - 1952. This is a 2-8-0 Consolidation built by Brooks and is an excellent example of the potential life span of a steam locomotive. At the time it was built for the C&N it, and its two sister locomotives, #31 and #32, was among the largest narrow gauge locomotives in its class.

Needed to start off this one with a little bit of history that I can actually verify although it doesn't really settle the train "rusting" question. However, it spurs thoughts that maybe a slightly less 18xx traditional approach to trains might be in order, maybe as simple as making more trains of each type available as well as solidify that the "upgraded" engine that was introduced in 1869, The Golden Spike, is a useful item. This issue that comes up with messing with the trains is upgrading tiles which is keyed to the current trains available. Another discussion to be saved for later.

I recently discovered that there is a Colorado 18xx game currently under development. I was going through BoardGame Geek when I stumbled across it. Its called 18CO: Rock & Stock by R. Ryan Driskel. It looks pretty solid with a couple of interesting twists, particularly in the taking over of companies. Its focus is definitely very different from what I have been throwing around; it doesn't have narrow gauge, it doesn't worry about mountain passes and it doesn't really represent the hodge podge of small and minor companies that created the rail network. It is definitely a different game and I look forward playing it. There are a number of pictures of games in progress and the one thing that strikes me is that the huge (comparatively) amount of rail building in Northwest Colorado which didn't happen historically (and for good reason) and the lack of rail building in Southwest Colorado which did happen. He also included the Durango & Silverton RR which is a tourist railroad operating over the old D&RG RR track between Durango and Silverton through the Animas Canyon. I get the impression that it was included to encourage rail development in the area but its an anachronism that probably needed a different solution. Of course its hard for me to really say anything about it without playing through the game, but Ryan's work is definitely a very interesting take on a Colorado 18xx game.

Which brings me around, finally, to the whole point of this particular post: Mountain Passes. I have previously mentioned that I feel that the mountain passes should be included and the game play I see in Ryan's version reinforces this. There are reasons that the railroads didn't build in certain areas; accessibility. If you want to travel from Fort Collins, Colorado to Steamboat Springs, Colorado more or less directly you would take State Highway 14 to US Highway 40, its about a 3 hour trip covering about 160 miles and takes you over the Continental Divide over at Muddy Pass where it connects with US Highway 40. In addition to Muddy Pass (elevation 8,772') you will cross Cameron Pass (elevation 10,276'). Cameron Pass was surveyed several times by railroads (including the Union Pacific) but no railroad ever built over the pass. The only information I have on the pass is that the grade from the west is gentle and steeper from the east. Its prone to heavy snow and avalanches, certainly not unique to other passes in Colorado that were crossed by railroads. So why? I have been trying to dig up railroad survey reports for Colorado and I'm coming up empty except for the Transcontinental Pacific Reports which aren't of much use to me for the time period my version would start.

Let's take a look at US Highway 40 which is a major east-west highway running from Utah to New Jersey. Going south from Steamboat Springs it first crosses the Continental Divide at Muddy Pass, again at Rabbit Ears Pass (elevation 9'426) and a third time at Berthoud Pass (elevation 11,306'). Three mountain passes that no railroad ever built over. I know that Berthoud Pass was surveyed by the Denver, South Park & Pacific and felt to be to steep to build over. The Denver, Salt Lake & Pacific railroad elected to build through Gore Canyon (after it crossed Rollins Pass) rather than build over the other two passes. Again I would love to see some documentation as to why?

I have fallen back to looking at two other games that featured a Colorado railroad theme; Rails through the Rockies by Adventure Games and Tracks to Telluride by Winsome Games. All three of the games that I have mentioned have bonuses for completing an east-west route over the divide, to much so in my opinion. The real goal for most of the major railroads was to provide a direct connection to Salt Lake City and open up the area economically, not so much to create a transcontinental route which already existed at that point. In fact if you really read about Palmer's desires for the D&RG was to build more of a north-south route down to Mexico and then the Pacific (in broad terms anyway). We already know that 18CO doesn't really address mountain passes specifically, while the other two are very focused on construction over the passes. Tracks to Telluride (TtT) has 30 passes on the board, Rails through the Rockies (RtR) has 15 passes and a unpublished re-make of RtR (by Mayfair Games) features 20 passes. Which brings us back to the issue of what mountain passes (I consider the Royal Gorge to be treated as a pass) to include. You can't just through in every pass, there are 90 mountain passes in Colorado and some of them can only be crossed on foot although the majority are probably reachable with 4WD vehicles with good ground clearance (like a Jeep). Obviously they can't all be included and I think that is one of the failings of TtT, it includes passes that are only crossable by 4WD vehicles and would never be considered viable by a railroad.

An example of such a pass is Slumgullion Pass in southwestern Colorado that is included on the TtT board. Slumgullion Pass is 11,530 feet in elevation and is crossed by a paved road (State Highway 149). The north side of the pass has a 9% grade which is just impractical for a railroad even using switchbacks. The costs involved just out weigh the benefits. 

It comes back to information. There are passes that were surveyed by the railroads that were practical but were not built over, where are these passes? I have a couple of candidates that I think were surveyed and were practical but not used; Loveland Pass and Argentine Pass. But those are suppositions at this point and I would really like to see some evidence of why decisions were made. For instance the crossing of Rollins Pass by the D&SL was because there wasn't money at the time to build the tunnel (6 miles long, known as the Moffat tunnel completed in 1928 and still in use). Once the tunnel was built the pass route was completely bypassed and only used after that when there was a usage fight over the tunnel itself. If anyone has ideas on a good source of information I would appreciate it. I would like to get to the Library at the Colorado Railroad Museum but their hours are impractical for me and I'm not so desperate (yet) that I'm willing to pay a researcher there.

Game Design Thoughts - 18xx Games - Thoughts on a Colorado board design

In most of the 18xx games that I have played terrain is not usually an issue. There will be a number of mountain hexes that will require some payment of funds and the occasional open ground tile that has a price associated with it (I'm guessing some type of terrain that needs more grading, cuts, fills and/or bridges). For example, the original 1830 board has 11 hexes with mountains and 8 hexes with water obstacles that require payment to lay the initial tile on the hex out of a total of 75 hexes where tiles can be placed. That's about 25% of the board with features that require the corporation to pay for the initial tile placement. After a tile has been placed upgrades to green and russet tiles are free.

On the original version mountains are represented by the triangles and the water ways by the dark blue.

The ratio of tiles requiring a payment as opposed to those that are free is going to reverse for an 18xx game set in Colorado. Without really pulling out a map I'm guessing that 75% would require payment and 25% would be free. The question then becomes how do you handle the mountain passes or should I just ignore their presence. There is certainly going to be a certain number of hexes that are completely impassible, which created a "pass" rush, as the major players competed for the best passes to get across the mountains. I think I could safely ignore some of the lower passes like Raton and Monument Hill and those would just be represented as a charge to place the tile. And maybe that's all that really needs to be done. Maybe a note on the map to indicate elevation and that would be it.

It does mean that the railroads are going to be more strapped for cash than in other 18xx games which makes the concept of the refurbished trains all that more appealing.