Skip to Content

Should I worry about relative increments in stock market games? rss

4 replies [Last post]
larienna's picture
Joined: 07/28/2008

This is an element I have not considered, that I am not sure if it really matters for game balance.

For your understanding, stock value goes from 10$ to 200$ with steps of 10$. That that creates a 20 space board.

Let say I have 1000$ in share value at different price, all the configuration below has the same value:

5 shares at 200$ = 1000$
10 shares at 100$ = 1000$
100 shares at 10$ = 1000$

Now let say all these 3 shares raises by 10$ I will get with the following values:

5 shares at 210$ = 1050$
10 shares at 110$ = 1100$
100 shares at 20$ = 2000$

Which means that low shares will generate much more value. They will also destroy a lot of value when they drop low.

So I am wondering if I should use non-linear progression, where it increase slower below 100$ and faster above 100$.

Or I should keep it this way, as low stock has very high risk of crashing, so it's worth the risk.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Keep the risk. However, some

Keep the risk.

However, some stocks are low, because more have been put out in the field.

So, the change should be depending on how they started in the first place.

If only a few are handed out and start at 200 each, while having only 5. Lets says you change 10 percent. Then it would be 180 or 220 each.
When they hit the 20, the risk is very high.

The other one of 100 each. They would change by 10 each. When these hit 10, the risk is again very high.

The difference is, the one of 200 simply costs twice as much. Thus a player can buy only half at a time.

Only use this 10 percent if it helps the game in strategy. If not, go with the linear of 10 for all.

larienna's picture
Joined: 07/28/2008
There is no limit on the

There is no limit on the number of shares.

So if a share is sold at 200$. It can possibly buy 20 shares at 10$. So a potential 20:1 buying ratio

Which could be problematic and bust my number of components I have. Yes, players could use a piece of paper but only in exceptional cases.

A solution that came to my mind, on Neopets, the stock market system prevent buying stocks which are too low.

So I could block let say buying stock at 10-20$ The minimum would be 30$, allowing at most a +25% profit when moving from 30$ to 40$. And a 6:1 when selling a 180$ share to buy 6 shares at 30$.

Still that makes buing high less favorable, but again, that could be the goal of the game.

Jay103's picture
Joined: 01/23/2018
Well, yes, a $50 stock

Well, yes, a $50 stock gaining $10 is a 20% increase. A $200 stock gaining $10 is a 5% increase. They're not the same.. if you want them to be the same, the increases should be based on percentage. In the real world, stocks gain %, not absolute $.

larienna's picture
Joined: 07/28/2008
Well, it's easier to manage,

Well, it's easier to manage, especially for stock splitting (when they reach 200$ they drop at 100$). Also makes it easier to balance the number of space below and above 100$.

After talking on BGG, another idea came to my mind in order to counter balance the low increase at higher stock value which could incite buying stock high.

The solution is to change the dividend payout. Instead of having a lineear flat 10% of the stock value, the div % increases as the stock value increase. Since both values are on they board, they don't need to be calculated by players.

For example, I could make the div % go from 5% to 15%, instead of flat 10%.

So a 20$ share only gives 5% div, so 1$
while a 100$ share gives 10%, so 10$
and a 200$ share gives 15%, so 30$

which means that now:

5 shares at 200$ gives 5 x 30$ = 150$
10 shares at 100$ gives 10 x 10$ = 100$

Originaly, both payout would have been 100$

So I could use that rule and prevent buying 20$ and lower and it might be enough.

Syndicate content

forum | by Dr. Radut