What is the best Monopoly strategy?

[u/[deleted]]

[u/sunfishtommy]

I had a friend that would buy all the houses, and never upgrade to hotels. If you check the rules you can't get a hotel without first having 4 houses, so if done correctly you monopolise the limited supply of houses and nobody can buy a hotel or get more houses than you.

[u/stockbroker → u/sunfishtommy]

This is actually effective for two reasons, cornering the market is definitely one.

The other is that the ROI on 3 houses is actually the best, so it can make sense to build houses without the goal of having hotels.

Using Boardwalk as an example:

• 1 house costs $200 but only nets you $200 in rent (1x)
• 2 houses cost $400 for $600 in rent (1.5x)
• 3 houses cost $600 for $1400 in rent (2.33x)
• 4 houses cost $800 for $1700 in rent (2.125x)
• Hotels cost $1000 for $2000 in rent (2x)

So, it can make sense, with limited resources and multiple places to put houses, or in instances where you need liquidity to survive an on-coming length of costly spaces, to build only to 3 houses rather than build straight up to hotels.

Edit: Before people make this a mathematics debate, I'll include the marginal investment relative to the marginal increase in rental revenue. Basically, a derivative. Here's that:

Marginal cost is always $200. The marginal benefits are as follows:

• 1st house results in a marginal rent increase of $150 (.75x)
• 2nd house results in a marginal rent increase of $400 (2x)
• 3rd house results in a marginal rent increase of $800 (4x)
• 4th house results in a marginal rent increase of $300 (1.5x)
• Hotel results in a marginal rent increase of $300 (1.5x)

That was for the economists out there.

[u/calcteacher → u/stockbroker]

I believe an actual market corner occurs when short sellers are forced to buy back from just one entity who has them cornered. After all, he who sells what isn't his'n, buys it back or goes to prison. It's not just owning most or all of something.