What does this mean for me? You will always be able to play your favorite games on Kongregate. However, certain site features may suddenly stop working and leave you with a severely degraded experience.
What should I do? We strongly urge all our users to upgrade to modern browsers for a better experience and improved security.
We suggest you install the latest version of one of these browsers:
Kongregate is a community-driven browser games portal with an open platform for all web games.
Get your games in front of thousands of users while monetizing through ads and virtual goods.
Learn more »
robot wars monopoly
like normal monopoly but when all robots have been bought there is a torment and the winner is the person with highest points as it’s 32 points for fist place 31 points for 2ND and so on
I couldn’t disagree more, frogguy. Monopoly isn’t really a game, (as it stands). There is only one dominant strategy; buy everything you can afford as soon as you can.
**Monopoly Diplomacy** (A mash-up, of sorts.)
No dice are used.
3 properties are distributed randomly to each player at the start of the game.
Play is conducted in rounds.
The first player of a round is bid on by silent auction.
A player’s movement each turn, (1—6 spaces), is recorded secretly. All players reveal their moves simultaneously.
A player may only conduct one action per turn: Move _or_ resolve the space effects.
Rent is resolved on the landlord’s turn; they may not move _and_ collect rent.
How to gracefully keep a player from camping their own properties, or camping a beneficial space?
How to allow for players to land on opponent’s spaces?
A mechanic that requires the player to move forward 1d6 immediately after resolving a space effect. (This would introduce the opportunity for a player to randomly land on an opponent’s property.)
I imagine the rhythm of play going like this…
Fred and Barney secretly write down how many spaces they will be moving. Fred writes down 3, Barney writes down 6.
Fred and Barney bid to go first. Fred bids $2, Barney bids $5. Barney pays his $20 to the bank. (Fred keeps his $10.)
Fred and Barney reveal their moves. Since Barney won the bid, he moves his piece forward 6 spaces. This ends his turn for the round. Fred then moves his piece 3 spaces.
Next round starts. Fred’s strategy is to buy less expensive properties and develop them quickly. Barney wants to jump forward and start buying the luxury properties. Neither player is too concerned with going first so they both bid $0. Barney goes first, (carrying over from last round).
They reveal their moves. Barney reveals another 6 and moves ahead 6 spaces. Fred reveals a 0, meaning, he will resolve the space action. He opts to buy the property. He pays, collects the deed, and rolls a d6. The result is a 2… so Fred then moves ahead 2 spaces. The round ends.
Eventually players will be only rolling a single die when they want to gain the benefits of the board’s effects.
I don’t know if this would even be fun.
Still rolling some ideas around for how to fix the land-grab issue, but one small house rule might make the base game a bit more enjoyable for all.
The game ends when the first player is eliminated, and whoever has the most money (including some bonus for owning properties) at that point is the winner. Ties are broken by cash value on hand. This gets rid of the drown-out win issue and also directly eliminates the… err… elimination issue. It would also add an interesting aspect where players who aren’t quite winning need to band together to help out a player who might be on the verge of elimination in hopes of prolonging the game long enough for them to squeak into the lead.
Even with that, you still have the roll-and-move issues and the land-grab issues, but it’d at least be a band-aid fix for some mid to late game issues.
Bankruptcy (cant think of a good name right now)
The land grab issue was bugging me and as I was about to fall asleep I just thought “To solve the land grab issue, you just need to make it so you don’t want to grab land” and that obvious statement suddenly sparked an idea in my head. I will try to formulate my thoughts into words best I can but keep in mind I’m still on the verge of sleep while writing this so I’m not sure how coherent it may be.
Basically there is a money cap such as $1000 or something and once you get more than that you lose. Basically you **dont** want to buy land because that will end up getting you more money. However you will need to buy land as you progress to get rid of some of your money. You also don’t want to buy houses but you will be forced to, to keep your money down if you are getting close to the cap.
As you buy more properties and houses you get more money, and as you get more money you need to buy more houses and properties to spend that money so you dont hit the cap, but as you buy more you then of course get more money, so its a loop leading to the inevitable but I think it could be an interesting twist that can get rid of the land grab aspect.
If you dont get what I’m saying or if I didnt explain myself very well I will try to explain better tommorow after some sleep.
I’ve seen house rules that capped the game after a particular number of turns. That adds urgency to the game but doesn’t solve the land-grab issue or introduce any strategic decisions.
I like the idea of **Bankruptcy** because it’s simple. Simple rules are always good. “Instead of winning all the money, you want to lose all the money!” Anyone can understand that, and it challenges you to rethink Monopoly from the ground up… but in the end does it really add anything? I’m afraid it wouldn’t… you STILL roll the dice and land randomly where you land, and you STILL only have one choice; to buy or not. Now, instead of buying, you just don’t.
So, it still needs some kind of unique hook to make it work.
My strategy would be:
• Buy properties like crazy. Mortgage everything as soon as you get it.
Here’s one for you to consider. I’m not going to think through the whole thing, but the basic premise is that INSTEAD of a track-style board, it’s a grid… like a large chess board.
There are currently 40 spaces in Monopoly, and 64 spaces in Chess.
Each player would likely get a King, with maybe some movement enhancements available through the course of play.
Unlike the chess board set-up, players start diagonally. The board is more concentric; valuable properties near the middle of the board; invaluable ones toward the perimeter.
The strategic balance is to risk playing near the middle of the board with more risk and a higher reward, or maintain a more conservative, moderated approach by staying near the outside.
> *Originally posted by **[frogguy123](/forums/5/topics/277452?page=2#posts-6038274):***
> these rules change the game of monopoly itself and would have to have a name change.
Yeah, okay. We’ll change the name to **Monotony** or something.
Seriously, this is just a design exercise. We’re not really focused on the legal details of actually marketing the result. It’s a creative workshop.
Frogguy, how would YOU change the rules, components, or design of Monopoly to make it a real game?
Your strategy made me realize that one could simply keep mortgaging and un-mortgaging to keep there money low so thats a problem, so maybe if I changed it so that you cant mortgage properties it might work better?
But yeah, now that I actually think about it, it wouldn’t be all that different although possibly a nice twist over regular monopoly.
I just played monopoly for the first time since this thread started and I tried to pay attention to everything that kind of sucked about it. My main problem with it was the one-sidedness that it had once one player got really “powerful” so I think I may think more about how to make it easier for players to make a come-back if they are doing poorly.
But then again the game I just played may not have been so one-sided if it wasn’t for the house rule being applied of $500 always being on the free parking space (My friend got it twice and it became pretty one-sided after that because he was able to build all hotels on a corner of the board with the help of that money rather early on). So I don’t like house rules like that very much, it makes the game harder to play.
I’m just gonna go back to the drawing board and think of something based a little bit on Battle Monopoly and some ideas you posted.
Going with kantieno’s basic idea of Battle Monopoly (I haven’t read the original post about it): change the properties to battlefields and the money to troop “vouchers” (just for matching aesthetics). Players would have hit points and armour (and possibly other stats as well?). Each battlefield section (set of properties) would have different effects (e.g., reduce armour, poison, mutate, etc) that would be enhanced based on the number of that set owned. Houses and Hotels would be changed to gun towers and missile towers (or something along those lines; they would increase base damage (but not effects), which would be decreased by armour).
Most importantly, though, increase number of dice to three, and let the player choose which two they want to use for movement. One of the battlefield set’s effects could be to “disable” a die, thus reducing choice of movement.
Obviously, Chance and Community Chest would need to be updated accordingly, as well as the various effect spaces on the board (you could simply make the Jail into a POW camp (same functionality), or it could become a type of gladatorial arena, perhaps?). “Mortgaged” properties would effectively be abandoned; takeover rules would probably be desirable.
You could even have equippable weapons, where a player landing on a hostile property could damage a tower (if any are present), and players landing on the same space can damage each other (less armour, of course).
> *Originally posted by **[dragon\_of\_celts](/forums/5/topics/277452?page=2#posts-6040578):***
> Most importantly, though, increase number of dice to three, and let the player choose which two they want to use for movement. One of the battlefield set’s effects could be to “disable” a die, thus reducing choice of movement.
This is an interesting idea to me. I like the general concept of rolling three dice and choosing two for one purpose and using the third for another purpose.
You shouldn’t play with any money on Free Parking. It injects more money into the game’s economy and devalues properties and rent, as well as any financial penalties that show up here and there. Basically it makes everything cheaper.
Here’s an idea I had what if you had multiple monopoly boards maybe 3 or so and you traveled between the boards using the transport/railroad spaces. You control two pieces to make it quicker. Basically you control different properties between the different boards to get money like normal and to win you have to buy a statue say $1000 or so on each board as you pass go.
It doesn’t really fix anything about the game but I still think it could be pretty cool. I’m thinking of other ideas dealing with “cross-dimensional traveling”.
Hmmm… that’s an interesting idea!
You could also “block off” quadrants of the board. No property blocks span the corners or railroads, so it would be easy to “close” large portions of the board. (Players would simply skip the closed sections as if they weren’t there.)
Certain events, such as any player owning a complete property block in the open section, or all properties in the block becoming owned, would trigger the opening of the next section. This process would continue until all four blocks were open.
Players start on GO. The space after Reading RR is the Chance just after Short Line RR, (this is the “GO” quadrant). If any one player happens to own both Mediterranean/Baltic or Park Place/Boardwalk, the next section is opened; Oriental to Pennsylvania RR, (the “Jail” quadrant).
Play continues until all of the Jail quadrant properties are purchased OR a single player happens to own all three properties in either group, (the light-blue Oriental group or the purple St. Charles group).
The likely outcome of this format is an acceleration of the game. You’d probably want to replace the “bankruptcy” victory condition with something more practical, like “10 properties owned (and un-mortgaged)” or “$5,000 cash” or something.
Mine Craft Opoly
Different colored Miners or Different outfitted people
Dirt : 1 dollars; Sand : 5 dollars; Sand Stone : 10 dollars; Iron ore : 20 dollars; Iron: 50 dollars; Gold: 100 dollars;
Diamond: 500 dollars!
Meh \>.\< JUST played Monopoly yesterday xD Can’t look at the board anymore to try and replace stuff with cool mine craft things xD
But I was gonna make it so that the point was to have enough money to get the Diamond Necessary to make enough tools to chop down and dig up and mine out all of your opponents stuff as you land on it, as tools only have a certain amount of usage, and the amount of money you use to buy the properties would actually be health, which would get mined up one at a time by enemies who land on it.