Re: [Rails-devel] 1835 presidency swap: Bug fix required (typos corrected)

[Schnell, V. <vol...@ar...>]

Hi Stefan,

in the end it should be the same result.

Lemmis moderator: when in doubt about the certificates, there is a 
popup, where the user has to decide.
This is for me the best way, because the decision has an impact on the 
certificate limit.

greetings

Volker

Am 29.08.2015 um 12:58 schrieb Stefan Frey:
> Hi Volker,
>
> I agree that there is a difference between buying and selling and that 
> in the case of another player buying more is different and is and will 
> be handled as you described.
>
> Caveat: There is no mechanism yet in Rails to ask the old director for 
> his choice in the case of another player getting more shares. (e.g. 
> buying or during share exchange of the Prussian minors/privates). 
> However I changed the current implementation that the old director 
> receives the multiple share if possible.
>
> The difference in understanding the rules is what happens exactly 
> during share selling: Selling to the Pool or Exchanging the Presidency?
>
> It is clear that the president certificate cannot end-up in the Pool 
> in non-pure-Tresham 18xx. However in my view is that if you sell more 
> than needed for dumping, your president certificate ends up for a 
> "virtual" second in the Pool and then the new president receives the
>
> There are technical reasons (ease of implementation, generalization to 
> 30% director shares, etc.), but in addition it is my view that selling 
> the director to the Pool (even it it cannot stay there in the end) is 
> more fundamental than the specific interpretation that the old 
> director "always" chooses what he receives in return. Especially if he 
> ends up with nothing in his portfolio in the end.
>
> I hope that you can live with that rule interpreation. And 
> unfortunately I will not add a game option to play it differently, as 
> this would require drastic changes how share selling is implemented in 
> Rails.
>
> The current algorithm is much more robust to (potential future) share 
> structures than a specific solution for 1835 only.
>
> By the way: Do you know how Lemmis moderator handles those cases?
>
> Stefan
>
> Those are the examples where our view differs:
>
> ** The result differs mainly for examples of that structure:
>
> X has 40% [d, 2*n]
> Y has 40% [m, 2*n]
>
> Pool has 10 [n]
>
> I understand that you prefer the outcome for those cases where X sells 
> 10% or 20%, where in your interpretation the old president X is 
> allowed to choose the m certificate in exchange.
>
> However in those cases where X sells 30% or 40%, the m certificate 
> possibly ends in the pool, which I think is counter-intuitive.
>
> ** But a more extreme example:
>
> X has 20% [d]
> Y has 20% [m]
>
> Pool has 40% [4*n]
>
> How does X sell 10% here? In standard 18xx this no problem: Sell d to 
> the pool, receive one n in exchange and the d moves to Y in exchange 
> for 20%.
>
> But in your interpretation X first exchanges d with m and then puts m 
> into the pool and receives one n from the pool?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 08/29/2015 12:14 PM, Schnell, Volker wrote:
>> Hi Stefan,
>>
>> I don't agree with your opinion, that the exchange of the directors
>> certificate works with the bank pool.
>> in all 18xx games, except with receivership like 1829, 1853, the
>> certificates are exchanged between players.
>> The Change of director is also possible, when buying shares.
>>
>> 1835 cases.
>>
>> Nominal certificate 10%
>> Director certificate d=2 20% share
>> Multiple certificate m=2 20% share
>>
>> X has 40%, x = 4 [d, n, n]
>> Y has 40%, y = 4 [m, 2*n]
>>
>> X sells one share, the old director decides about the make up of the 
>> percentages (english rules IV.3 last sentence), he receives 1m or 2n 
>> from Y.
>>
>> Same situation but Y buys n, he has now 50% and receives the 
>> directors certificate (d). the new director now hands 1m or 2n to the 
>> old director, while the old directer decides about the make up.
>>
>> Greetings
>> Volker
>> Am 28.08.2015 um 22:47 schrieb Stefan Frey:
>>> Follow-up to my proposal below:
>>>
>>> * Remark first: "Certificate" versus "Share"
>>>
>>> To be precise I use "certificate" to the physical representation of
>>> shares in 18xx. I use "share" is the smallest unit of the division of
>>> the share capital in 18xx.
>>>
>>> So the president certificate in 1830 represents 2 shares, the other
>>> certificates are single shares. Each share represents 10% of share 
>>> capital.
>>>
>>> In 1835 the companies of the second group (BA, WT, HE) feature a
>>> double-share certificate at the bottom of their IPO stack.
>>>
>>> The new mechanism is implemented now. As far as it possible and/or
>>> technical feasible at the moment.
>>>
>>> * What are the current limitations on selling shares/certificates?
>>>
>>> - Selling certificates can only be done in groups that represent the
>>> same number of shares.
>>>
>>> - As the president certificate can be sold in "parts" (and the old
>>> president receives Pool certificates in return), it belongs to the
>>> single share group.
>>>
>>> Example: In some cases in 1835 the double share certificates have to be
>>> sold before it is possible to dump the president.
>>>
>>> - Exchanges to the Pool for the new president are executed by returning
>>> certificates which represent minimal shares. Thus the new president
>>> prefers to give up two single share certificates instead of one double
>>> shares certificate.
>>>
>>> * What is the long-run target?
>>>
>>> Players first select what percentage they want to sell. For Example:
>>> "40% of BY". If there are several combinations of certificates that
>>> allow 40% the next step allows to select which certificates to sell.
>>>
>>> If the new president has choices what to return to the Pool in exchange
>>> for the president certificate he is asked to choose.
>>>
>>>
>>> * Reason for this limitation:
>>> I am reluctant to change the action definitions of selling shares just
>>> before the Rails 2.0 release.
>>>
>>> However behind the scene the code has been changed substantially and is
>>> already based on the long-run goals.
>>>
>>> The automated test games run again and I have added a few new specific
>>> test cases. However I am still a little bit reluctant and will 
>>> release a
>>> new Rails 2.0 beta 5 tomorrow based on the new implementation.
>>>
>>> As before feedback welcome and thanks again to John David Galts ideas I
>>> have based my implementation on.
>>>
>>> Stefan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/23/2015 04:37 PM, Stefan Frey wrote:
>>>> John:
>>>> I really like your suggestion. I think it is a good way to handle 
>>>> those
>>>> cases in a rigorous way. In addition it is fully compatible with the
>>>> standard way of how standard 18xx treat the change of director in such
>>>> cases.
>>>>
>>>> I adapted your proposal to include that it is not allowed to sell
>>>> multiple certificates such that you are able to get a nominal share in
>>>> exchange, which Volker and Erik referred to.
>>>>
>>>> However it is still possible for the director share, which I 
>>>> believe is
>>>> important. (The second edition of the German rules claim that this is
>>>> not possible, however I do not agree with that ruling).
>>>>
>>>> And Dave is fully right, game rules are not written as algorithms. 
>>>> It is
>>>> our task to transform those rules into an algorithm which most people
>>>> can agree on that the algorithm is a good representation of the 
>>>> game rules.
>>>>
>>>> So my proposed algorithm (based on John David Galts suggestion) is 
>>>> found
>>>> below.
>>>>
>>>> Again feedback is very welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Stefan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * Algorithm for Change of Director after Sale of Stock:
>>>>
>>>> ** Definitions:
>>>>
>>>> Share nominal n%
>>>>
>>>> Nominal (n) certificate 1 times n%
>>>> Director (d) certificate has d times n%
>>>> Multiple (m) certificate has m times n%
>>>>
>>>> Director X  has x times n% of stock
>>>> Potential director Y has y times n% of stock
>>>>
>>>> Pool P has p times n% of stock
>>>> Pool limit p_max times n%
>>>>
>>>> ** Steps:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Director can trigger change of director if he sells s >= (x-y) + 1
>>>>
>>>> 2. Only allowed if (s + p) <= p_max
>>>>
>>>> 3. Director puts d and other certificates (total o) into the pool, 
>>>> such
>>>> that (d + o) >= s. Choose o such that o is minimal.
>>>>
>>>> 4. Potential (new) director exchanges certificates (of his choice, but
>>>> see below) of total size e = d with the pool for the director 
>>>> certificate
>>>>
>>>> 5. (Old) director receives [(d+o) - s] (of his choice) from the 
>>>> pool, if
>>>> this is not possible the previous step is repeated with a different
>>>> choice until the old director receives the required amount of shares
>>>>
>>>> 6. If the last step cannot be executed in any way, selling s is not 
>>>> possible
>>>>
>>>> ** Remarks:
>>>> - The program only offers choices in step 4 that allow step 5/6 to be
>>>> succesfull
>>>> - The program only offers transaction of size s that can be executed
>>>>
>>>> ** Examples:
>>>>
>>>> A) 1830 standard case
>>>>
>>>> Nominal certificate 10%
>>>> Director certificate d=2 20% share
>>>>
>>>> X has 40%, x = 4 [d, 2*n]
>>>> Y has 30%, y = 3 [3*n]
>>>>
>>>> Pool has 30%, p = 3
>>>>
>>>> Director sells 20%  (s=2)
>>>>
>>>> 1. Yes: s= 2;  (x-y) + 1 = (4- 3) + 1 = 2
>>>>
>>>> 2. Yes: s + p = 2 + 3 <= 5 = p_max
>>>>
>>>> 3. Director puts the director certificate, but no other into the 
>>>> pool (o
>>>> = 0). (d + o) =  2 >= 2, minimal o
>>>>
>>>> 4. Potential director exchanges 2 10% shares with the pool
>>>>
>>>> 5. Old director gets nothing in return, transaction finished
>>>>
>>>> B) 1830 selling the director partially
>>>>
>>>> Certificates as above in A)
>>>>
>>>> X has 20%, x = 2 [d]
>>>> Y has 20%, y = 2 [2*n]
>>>>
>>>> Pool is empty, p = 0
>>>>
>>>> Director sells 10%  (s=1)
>>>>
>>>> 1. Yes: s = 1; (x - y) + 1 = 1
>>>>
>>>> 2. Yes: s + p = 1 + 0  <= 5 = p_max
>>>>
>>>> 3. Director puts the director certificate, but no other into the 
>>>> pool (o
>>>> = 0) d + o = 2 >= 1, minimal o
>>>>
>>>> 4. Potential director exchanges 2 10% shares with the pool
>>>>
>>>> 5. Old director receives 1 10% share from the pool
>>>>
>>>> C) 1835 case
>>>>
>>>> Nominal certificate 10%
>>>> Director certificate d=2 20% share
>>>> Multiple certificate m=2 20% share
>>>>
>>>> X has 50%, x = 5 [d, m, n]
>>>> Y has 40%, y = 4 [m, 2*n]
>>>>
>>>> Pool is empty, p = 0
>>>>
>>>> Director sells 30% (s=3)
>>>>
>>>> 1. Yes
>>>> 2. Yes
>>>> 3. Director puts director certificate d the pool and a 10% share. 
>>>> It is
>>>> not allowed to choose the 20% share here, as o has to be chosen to be
>>>> minimal
>>>> 4. Potential director chooses to exchange the director certificate 
>>>> from
>>>> the pool with either the multiple certificate m or the two nominal
>>>> certificates
>>>> 5. Old director gets nothing in return, transaction is finished
>>>>
>>>> D) Another 1835 case
>>>>
>>>> Certificates as above in C)
>>>>
>>>> X has 40%, x = 4 [d, m]
>>>> Y has 40%, y = 4 [m, 2*n]
>>>>
>>>> Pool is empty, p = 0
>>>>
>>>> Director sells 10% (s=1)
>>>>
>>>> 1. Yes
>>>> 2. Yes
>>>> 3. Director puts director certificate d the pool, but no other
>>>> 4. Potential director can only exchange the 2 nominal certificates, as
>>>> otherwise the director cannot receive the 10% share in step 5. If Pool
>>>> contains a nominal certificate it is his choice
>>>> 5. Old director receives 1 10% share from the pool
>>>>
>>>> On 08/21/2015 11:59 PM, John David Galt wrote:
>>>>> Please use this version, I hit send too soon.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-08-21 13:18, Stefan Frey wrote:
>>>>>> Another 1835 implementation issue:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> President swaps are not easy to understand for newbies in any 
>>>>>> 18xx (you
>>>>>> are not allowed to sell the president share, however you are 
>>>>>> allowed to
>>>>>> tear it apart, virtually sell one half of it to the pool and then
>>>>>> receive two shares by the new director, who gets the fixed director
>>>>>> certificate, then the old director puts one of received shares 
>>>>>> into the
>>>>>> pool and keeps the other).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In 1835 the 20% shares make selling the presidency even more 
>>>>>> interesting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Selling the president certificate involves two steps of share 
>>>>>> movements:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A) Exchange the president certificate with shares from the new 
>>>>>> president
>>>>>>
>>>>>> B) Move the remaining sold shares into the pool
>>>>> I do not agree that these are separate steps.
>>>>>
>>>>>> In 1835 both steps could include either 10% or 20% shares (PR: 5% 
>>>>>> or 10%
>>>>>> shares)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Depending on what the president received in A) this might even 
>>>>>> change
>>>>>> the possible options for B.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However it implies that the current president has to choose both A)
>>>>>> which certificate to exchange with the new president and B) which
>>>>>> certificate to put into the pool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The current implementation only asks for A) and has some serious 
>>>>>> bugs in
>>>>>> executing the share transfers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I intend to fix those bugs before the next release, however I 
>>>>>> would ask
>>>>>> if anyone has a different opinion on how it works for 1835?
>>>>> I have not seen any case in which the current program gets it 
>>>>> wrong (in
>>>>> my view) -- however, I have not exhaustively tried every single case.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following is the exact sequence of events I expect to happen 
>>>>> in any
>>>>> purchase or sale of stock (after any starting packet). This 
>>>>> applies to
>>>>> all games, not just 1835.
>>>>>
>>>>> In a purchase of stock:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) The player buys a certificate, not share(s).
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) If the purchase causes a change of president, then the new 
>>>>> president
>>>>> exchanges one or more certificates (totaling the same number of 
>>>>> shares
>>>>> of that company) for the president's certificate, wherever it is.  
>>>>> (This
>>>>> is a direct exchange between two players, unless the president's
>>>>> certificate is in the bank pool, as it might be in 1829 
>>>>> (receivership)
>>>>> or 1853v1 (when the company hasn't floated yet).)
>>>>>
>>>>> (In 1835, if there is a choice, the outgoing president chooses which
>>>>> certificate(s) he receives from among those in the new president's 
>>>>> hand.
>>>>>      I would follow this principle in any other game where any 
>>>>> company has
>>>>> non-presidential certificates of more than one size, if the rules 
>>>>> do not
>>>>> address the question.)
>>>>>
>>>>> In a sale of stock:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) A sale that is going to cause a change of president may only 
>>>>> be made
>>>>> if some other player holds at least the number of shares that the
>>>>> president's certificate contains.
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) Except for the special case given in point (5), the player sells
>>>>> certificate(s), not share(s).
>>>>>
>>>>> (3) If the sale will cause a change of president, then one of the
>>>>> certificate(s) sold must be the president's certificate. Otherwise 
>>>>> the
>>>>> seller must retain the president's certificate.
>>>>>
>>>>> (4) If the sale causes a change of presidency, then the new president
>>>>> exchanges one or more certificates (totaling the same number of 
>>>>> shares
>>>>> of that company) for the president's certificate in the bank 
>>>>> pool.  (The
>>>>> outgoing president does not participate in this swap and does not 
>>>>> have
>>>>> any right to claim a certificate from the new president's hand.)
>>>>>
>>>>> (5) A special case is where a player who holds only certificate(s) of
>>>>> two or more shares each in that company wishes to sell a number or
>>>>> shares that is not divisible by one of his certificates. (For this
>>>>> purpose "one share" is defined as the amount of the smallest 
>>>>> certificate
>>>>> that exists for that company.)
>>>>>
>>>>> In this case the "fractional sale" may only be made if one of the
>>>>> following is true in addition to point (1):
>>>>>
>>>>>        A: The bank pool contains certificate(s) of the company in 
>>>>> the right
>>>>> sizes such that the seller can be given the correct number of shares
>>>>> from the bank pool.  In this case the seller exchanges 
>>>>> certificates with
>>>>> the bank pool, and then point (4) applies.
>>>>>
>>>>>        B: Statement A above is not true, but, the sale will cause 
>>>>> a change
>>>>> of presidency, and the bank pool and the old and new presidents' 
>>>>> hands
>>>>> together contain enough certificates of the company to give both 
>>>>> the old
>>>>> and new presidents the correct numbers of shares, with the new 
>>>>> president
>>>>> holding the president's certificate.  In this case a three-way 
>>>>> swap of
>>>>> certificates is performed.  If there is more than one correct way to
>>>>> perform the swap, first the outgoing president chooses which
>>>>> certificate(s) he gives up; then the new president chooses which
>>>>> certificate(s) he gives up.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Example:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the attached save file OL has the following share distribution:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Remark: this is from a replay of one of Bill Stoll's 1835 pbem 
>>>>>> games -
>>>>>> see http://askwaltstollmd.com/bill/archive/1835zwolf/index.html
>>>>>> Fun fact is that I played 1835 ftf with one of the players before he
>>>>>> moved to the US)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Eyal: 50% (1 20% director, 1 20% share, 1 10% share)
>>>>>> Marco: 40% (1 20% share, 2 10% share)
>>>>>> Nick: 10% (1 10% share)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What are the possible scenarios for Eyal to sell his directorship?
>>>>> If Eyal sells 10% (which does not change the presidency), he just 
>>>>> moves
>>>>> his 10% certificate to the bank pool.  Done.
>>>>>
>>>>> If Eyal sells 20%, he moves the president's certificate to the bank
>>>>> pool.  Then Marco takes it and chooses 20% (either one 20% or two 10%
>>>>> certificates) to place in the bank pool.
>>>>>
>>>>> If Eyal sells 30%, he moves the president's certificate and the 10%
>>>>> certificate to the bank pool.  Then Marco takes the president's
>>>>> certificate and chooses 20% (either one 20% or two 10% 
>>>>> certificates) to
>>>>> place in the bank pool.
>>>>>
>>>>> If Eyal sells 40%, he moves the president's certificate and the 20%
>>>>> certificate to the bank pool.  Then Marco takes the president's
>>>>> certificate and chooses 20% (either one 20% or two 10% 
>>>>> certificates) to
>>>>> place in the bank pool.
>>>>>
>>>>> If Eyal sells 50%, he moves all three of his certificates to the bank
>>>>> pool.  Then Marco takes the president's certificate and chooses 20%
>>>>> (either one 20% or two 10% certificates) to place in the bank pool.
>>>>>
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>> Some special (hypothetical) cases:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A) No shares in Pool
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
>>>>>> Marco: 20% (20%)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IPO: 40% (4 10%)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
>>>>>> Answer: No, as it not possible to get a 10% share out of IPO to 
>>>>>> Eyal.
>>>>>> Eyal has to sell all 40%.
>>>>> Agreed.
>>>>>
>>>>>> B) 10% shares in Pool
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Eyal: 40% (20%P + 20%)
>>>>>> Marco: 20% (20%)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pool: 40% (4 10%)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is it possible for Eyal to sell 30%?
>>>>>> Answer: Likely yes? Is it possible for Eyal to swap the received 20%
>>>>>> share from Marco with a 10% of the Pool?
>>>>> In most games (and I think this includes 1835), Eyal is prevented 
>>>>> from
>>>>> selling 30% because this would cause 70% to be in the bank pool.
>>>>>
>>>>> But let's change the example by having the pool hold two 10%
>>>>> certificates and a third player hold the other two.  Then Eyal may 
>>>>> sell
>>>>> 30% by placing both his certificates in the bank pool and taking a 
>>>>> 10%
>>>>> certificate from the bank pool.  Marco must then trade his 20%
>>>>> certificate for the president's certificate.
>>>>>
>>>>> Eyal may also sell 10%.  In this case he just places his 20%
>>>>> non-president certificate in the bank pool and takes a 10% 
>>>>> certificate.
>>>>>
>>>>> -end-
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Rails-devel mailing list
>>>>> Rai...@li...
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Rails-devel mailing list
>>>> Rai...@li...
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rails-devel mailing list
>>> Rai...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>

-- 
Volker Schnell
email: vol...@ar...
homepage: home.arcor.de\volker_schnell