HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 05:58:47 -0500 
From: Erik Lauer <el0g+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: A&A - I think I found it!!!!
	<Bz7pBL.2yv@news.udel.edu>

>In article <sf_Euk600VB=Q4z0VC@andrew.cmu.edu> Erik Lauer
><el0g+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>>I must be misremebering the map or intial set up:
>>
>>>Misc: 1a from Lybia to Caucasus with BS
>>>JAPAN'S turn:(the real key!)send a fighter to Caucasus(It reaches) send
>>>bomber to hit that armor if it can(usually, it is within range-assume not)
>>
>>Doesn't Britian have an inf in Iraq, an Armor in Egypt, and a fighter in
>>india to take the Caucasus back with?  This would leave Germany with
>
>C'mon, Erik, don't you have the board memorized like the rest of us? :-)


You forget that Persia is between Iraq and Caucasus, so only the fighter
could reach.  Even if they could reach, though, they couldn't win the
battle.  They'd be facing 3 infantry and 4 armor.  But, the land uniots
can't reach, so it's a moot point.

Isn't there 1 inf starting in Persia?  Since his post indicates only 1
tank there (everything else is attacking Karelia), 1 inf and 1 fighter
should be fine.  Attacking Karelia with less than the maximum possible
just makes a huge battle that probably looses that much worse.

>nothing adjacent to Russia by Japan's turn (since they allies now hold
>Karelia and Caucuses).  As I see it unless you took Karelia you are
>about to die.  If you barely took (losing your planes) and Britain takes
>it back, and sinks your tiny Baltic fleet you are still in a lot of
>trouble.


Dewey

Erik
---=
From: wjames@cse.ucsc.edu (John Amenta)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Anzio EPBM AREA Rated Opponent Wanted
Date: 11 Dec 92 22:13:22 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz (CE/CIS Boards)
NNTP-Posting-Host: pal.ucsc.edu



I am looking for a EPBM (Electronic Play-By-Mail) opponent for the AH 
game Anzio, 4th addition.  I am a newly rated AREA member (1500),  and
wish to only play another AREA rated member, who is willing
to abide by the AREA "Code of Conduct" and will want to exchange
moves in a timely and dependable fashion.

Please Email me at: wjames@cse.ucsc.edu if you are interested.  I
would like to play a single game only for now, but am willing to
play either side and willing to discuss which scenario will be played
(although advanced rules are preferred)

John 
wjames@cse.ucsc.edu
From: barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A&A - I think I found it!!!!
Date: 18 Dec 92 20:28:58 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware

>> ...Original complexes (ones you started the game with) give you
>> unlimited capacity - you can place any number of newly purchased items
>> in a territory with such a complex; new complexes (ones you purchased
>> and place or captured) give you limited capacity per turn...
 	     ^^^^^^^^
There's been some discussion about what complexes can produce what.  I
covered it first, but no one seems to have caught it.  "New" complexes
refer to complexes that that particular player did not own at the
beginning of the game.  The quote above demonstrates this.  Again:

Original complexes have unlimited production for the original owners.

All others are limited to the IPC value of the territory, and the
territories that have no production (ie, Gibraltar, any neutrals) could
only produce 1 unit per turn.

>I never liked this rule.  I have aVERRRY strong suspicion that the original
>rules allowed the AXIS to win more often(largely due to this and multiple
>flak) and they got a lot of flak about "NAZI's WINNING WWII" from somewhere.

Actually, the new rules make it better for the Axis.  Why?  Well, on UKs
first turn, they build a complex in Persia.  The Axis cannot reach that
territory, unless Germany takes Syria on Turn 1, which is possible, but
a counterattack can easily be mounted (From India and the bomber and
India's fighter) to hold that territory.  Then, Depending on Japan's
first turn, the US may very well be able to build a complex in Sinkiang
(not all the time, but often enough), and that's pretty much that.  With
unlimited production there (remember we're talking 1st edition rules),
neither of these territories should ever fall into enemy hands, and the
game is only a matter of time.

>The new rules seem to make it almost impossible(and I DO mean that) as the
>game is originally set up.  You HAVE to resort to something like the No-Russia
>first-attack rule JUST to make it MORE even(It still is not quite).

No, but it's better.  Under 1st edition rules, I could win as Allies 85%
of the time or better.  Now, it's 55-60%

>WHAT'S UP?  I feel that a NEW revision should be put out that makes the game
>even.
 
I'd like to know how accurate the set up is.  It's supposedly based on
the military deployment of the Spring of '42, but I'm not about to
research how much stuff was where at that time.  Anyone?

>Joe

Dewey
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: "michael sloan" <michael.sloan@canrem.com>
Subject: gaming cons
Reply-To: "michael sloan" <michael.sloan@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 15 Dec 92 02:51:06 EST

GAMING CONVENTION

REDCON 5
PLACE:  ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE   KINGSTON, ONTARIO
DATE:   jANUARY 29, 30 31 1993

A well orgainized convention, with a good mix of fantasy and historical
gaming.

If you want more info, feel free to drop me a line.

MIchael.Sloan@canrem.uucp

          MICHAEL SLOAN
---
  DeLuxec #7519  Peace through superior firepower!!
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: oberland@vax.sonoma.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A&A - I think I found it!!!!
Date: 16 Dec 92 04:12:04 GMT
Organization: Sonoma State University

In article <Yf=J24_00Vp0E57WpZ@andrew.cmu.edu>, "Joseph E. Beck" <jb8n+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> 
>>AFTER you do your plan, I will then rebutt with apan's, and we shall see how
>>you survive a full round or two, with every country playing.
>>(we will play a game, but not with dice, but with probabilities)
> Just curious, what types of probabilities to you intend to use.  I've
> heard a *lot* of different systems mentioned by people on the net.
> Also, will it use the "dice of joe"?  :-)
> 
>>Does this sound acceptable?  I would like to show you whait looks like
>>after one round(the state of the world).
> Should be interesting...

Dewey said he would moderate.  He has aprogram that will do rolls, and be fair.

Better yet, we could play it out with dewey moderating(doing the rolling).

Should be interesting, and fair. 
Lines: 40
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 10:52:47 MST
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: $stephan@sasb (Stephan Fassmann, Software)
Subject: Re: SFB : scenario question
Organization: BYU

One of the most fun scenarios i've played with multiple sides is Combat Rally
(in S1 or Module B).With a few minor changes.
Everyone has a BCH or DN for less experienced players plus 30 pts for 
Options.
The starting map is open space, and the objective map is asteriod belt.
The best part is the transit map: an asteriod field with positional 
stabilizers( I know you're thinking "wha?") because of the central feature a 
Hypermass and we also use the randomly generating hypermass rules (on 
impluse 16 role a die for direction and three for distance) the maps wrap 
around for hypermass placement, they can only be on the transit map but the 
effects will cross over all maps eventually. They become active on impulse 
1 of the next turn(you have some chance of running away). A special rule we 
have is if the hyermasses are 6 hexes apart you have a wormhole at the 
central hex where the gravitaional forces are canseling each other. this has 
the effect of 1d6 for direction 4d6 for distance, and if you land in a 
hypermass you go big boom, double explosion rating, for the radiation burst 
that is produced, mines are pulled as well and explode when they are sucked 
in. Makes life real interesting, eh?This is a great way to learn the 
hypermass rules, I'm not scared of hypermasses any more. :-)
This is a fast and furious game that is a blast the objectives are great, 
expecially if you toss 2 space slug drones at someone, they hate that. And t-
bombs are great being not an attack.
The best time I had was at a con we played this as a filler game, I was in 
the Fed BCF and I my target was a Hydran. I had launched null-drones and t-
bombed another player so everyone thought I had his target and moved away 
from me, and the hydran got close we both dropped our #1 shields to get a 
marker then he turned towards me and I turned into him and we ended up at 
range 0!!! :-> and down shields I fired 10 ph-1's, 2 ph-3's, bolted the F-
torps, and 4 fully overloaded photons. I rolled nothing less then a 3 on 
the ph-1's and 6 were 1's, it was the best alpha stike I have ever made. His 
untouched Overlord turned into a ball of scintillating gases 
instantaniously. though I took about 25 internals from the explosion and 
feedback damage at 1:30 in the morning it was great everyone loved it. I 
didn't win but that wasn't really in the picture anymore. 
Enjoy sorry this was so long.
______________________________________________________________________________
|Stephan Fassmann       Internet: $stephan@sasb.byu.edu     GEnie: S.FASSMANN|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|         Reality is for those who cannot take Science Fiction               |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: jjk@astro.umd.edu (Jim Klavetter)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: 2-player CIVILIZATION?,,advanced CIVILIZATION?
Date: 13 Dec 92 22:01:45 GMT
Organization: U. of Maryland @ College Park, Astronomy

I recently received CIVILIZATION (for my b-day).  I've taken a quick
look at the rules and it is pretty obvious that this game is best
with at least 4 players and the more the merrier (up to 7).  My
question:  is this game fun at all with only 2?  It seems trading
loses something, but maybe beyond that it isn't so bad?  Or is it
totally unfun with less than 3?

I know there is an advanced CIVILIZATION.  How much does this add to
things?  If I could only occasionally get a large group together would
it be worth trying the advanced game or stick with the original until
everyone is more acquainted with it?  And is Advanced CIVILIZATION any
fun with only 2?

Thanks for any help, email is ok.

jjk@astro.umd.edu also for Athabasca and Reudi
Jim Klavetter
Astronomy
UMD
College Park, MD  20742
From: nicholso@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Melvin H. Nicholson YBH)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: 2-player CIVILIZATION?,,advanced CIVILIZATION?
Date: 15 Dec 92 22:30:56 GMT
Organization: NASA Ames Res. Ctr. Mtn Vw CA 94035

As far as I can tell, 2-player civ is a waste of time, as the trading is
just too predictable (and Civ is primarily a trade game in it's orignal
version).

Regarding the expansions, my best advice is don't.  Apologies in advance
to Bruce Harper (designer of Adv. Civ, who frequents this group), but
most of the rule changes in Adv. Civ seem superfluous and sap the flavor
of the original game in what I feel is a misguided attempt to introduce
a more war-like, conflict based game.

Also, the big thing to watch out for is the "expanded" trade deck.  It
is probably more responsible for the problems which Adv. Civ tries to
fix than anything else.

In short, "pure" Civilisation is a great game, and I don't like the
"advnanced" version (sorry for the quotes Bruce.  I realise the
marketing need for the term ADVANCED, but it still grates me).

You should probably get a second opinion from someone who likes the new
game, as you may be more like them than like me, and also like the new
game better, but for now just enjoy the the original.

Mel
From: jdoucette@venus.cc.hollandc.pe.ca (Jingle bells, mortar shells, VC in the grass...)
Subject: F&E turns lengths
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Holland College - Charlottetown PEI
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 23:57:00 GMT

	Actually, turns in Federation and Empire are six months long....
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: zippy@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (steven.s.albert)
Subject: Re: VGs Civil War question
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:46:30 GMT

In article <Dec15.174747.36305@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>, dunger@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Dallace Unger) writes:
> In article <1992Dec14.191256.2200@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> zippy@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (steven.s.albert) writes:
> >depots are left either.  What happens to the reinforcements on the eastern
> >track if there is no place in the theater in supply to enter them?  Thanks.
> 
> Build a depot and then you're in supply.  Remember you don't have to be
> in supply to build the depot.
> 

I realize that is a possibility; however, since I have imports at < 100,
it costs me 3 commands to build a depot. I need to use those commands to do
other things, so the question still remains.  Even if I opted to build
a depot, this is turn 10 and I only have 2 east and 2 west reinforcements.
I happened to get the initiative on the first pulse so I have to enter an
sp.  One or two more of those before a 3 DRD comes up is a distinct
possibility.

	Steve Albert
	ssa@usl.com
From: robh@grex.ann-arbor.mi.us (Robert Henderson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: New Dracula Boardgame?
Date: 18 Dec 92 00:33:51 GMT
Organization: GREX Public Access Unix +1 313 761 3000

In article <8050@news.duke.edu> cjs@phy.duke.edu (Carl Schnurr) writes:
>Has anyone tried out Leading Edge's new boardgame, Dracula?  
>I enjoyed their Aliens boardgame and expansion in a silly
>'beer and pretzels' way, and am curious about this new one.

I managed to playtest this at U-Con, during one of the slow points
at Registration.  I really didn't like it at all, it just didn't
add up to anything beyond rolling dice and trying to roll high, and
if I wanted to do that, I'd play Yahtzee.  Then again, if you
drink enough beer, I guess any game can be fun.  >8)
-- 
RobH (or Rob Henderson, if you prefer) / robh@grex.ann-arbor.mi.us
Take my shoes off and throw them in the lake...  (Kate Bush)
What do you want from us?  We're Evil!  EVIL!!!  (Dr. Forrester & TV's Frank)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: robert@geoblue.gcn.uoknor.edu (Robert Lindsay)
Subject: Re: New 3W games, review request
Originator: usenet@kittyhawk.ecn.uoknor.edu
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 19:35:40 GMT
Organization: Geosciences Computing Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK

In article <1992Dec16.225705.3686@delfin.com> gordon@delfin.com writes:
>3W has recently come out with a whole plethora of new games, Salvo, 
>The Black Prince, Roundhead & Calvalier 2 (sp) among them.  The box 
>blurb on most of them say 400 counters, 4 games, and can be played 
>solitaire.
>
>Could some kind souls post reviews of the games they have tried ?

I got the original Roundhead & Calvaliers last year. It looks like it
should be a good system, but it's almost impossible to hurt your opposents
with fire or melee combat. It is the same system used in Black Prince,
the crusades, Roundhead & Calvalier 2, etc. I don't know anything about Salvo,
But their Tarawa game is buggy also.

>
>Gordon
>


Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: dunger@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Dallace Unger)
Subject: Re: Civil War - NSP
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:37:43 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523

In article <1992Dec11.000608.12518@speedy.aero.org> don@surtsey.aero.org (Don C. Hancock) writes:
>First, I'm not sure I have all my counters.  Does anybody know how many
>of each there are?

I'll check this weekend and mail you the answer.

>Second, does the restriction also apply to units in the force pool?
>Say, I've spread the union navy fairly thin.  Now I've gotten more
>nsp's in the pool.  Do I permanantly loose the nsp that I don't have
>counters for?  Or if I take loses, or re-group the on-map nsp's, can I
>later have them all.

Yes.  Yes.  No.

I beleive these are the right answers.  Although I could not find the
specific rule, I'm sure I read it some where.  Maybe in the errata?

Dallace Unger

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: f12008ad@triton.unm.edu (Student Class Account)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A&A - I think I found it!!!!
Date: 17 Dec 92 09:49:55 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

>> OK, I have said many times what they do:
>> They build 8 inf in Karelia, put only 1 inf in the Caucuses.  They have
>> 19 inf, 3 tanks, 2 fighters in Karelia, 1 tank in Russia.  Please tell
>> me what you build, and what you put where to make it so hard on them. 
>> You will not tell me, I do not know why.
> 
>  Forgive me for my interuption, but I have a 1984 version of the game and
>certain rules that were brought up from the newer version make this
>impossible..  Since Karelias' IPC value is only 3 how can you build 8
>infantry in it?  And, if you leave Russia with only one take what is to
>stop Germany from attacking Caucaus with 1 fighter 1 bomber and 3 infantry
>then blitzing through it and attacking Russia with 2 fighters and 2
>tanks..  (Taking all of Russias money and basicly winning the game in the
>first round)
Probability system of combat that I like deleated (I do not have the program)
>                              John
>-- 
>    narc@sugar.neosoft.com      narc@taronga.com
>            <John Lightsey/Narcosynthesis>
>  "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." -Tacitus

     The rule limiting the production of units to the IPC value of the 
teritory applies only to newly built factories.  All factories on the board
prior to turn 1 have unlimited production.

     All combat movement takes place simultaneously.  Therefore, a tank may
only blitz through a territory that was either friendly or unoccupied at the
start of the turn.  You may not resolve a combat then move the armor through
the forcefully vacated territory.

     I am looking forward to Erik and Joe's game.

-- 
David Saville          :  It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger 
f12008ad@triton.unm.edu:  man to laugh at that man.
                       :                    - Jack Handy 
***************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: gordon@delfin.com (Gordon Hua)
Subject: Re: WIF question: China attack limit
Reply-To: gordon@delfin.com
Organization: Delfin Systems, Sunnyvale CA
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:50:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.015042.4900@athena.mit.edu>, cwk@athena.mit.edu (Chuck Krueger) writes:
|> Encountered a minor problem while playing WIF the other day. The 
|> situation was that Japan had not yet declared a major offensive
|> on the Chinese and the Chinese have all of their airforce built
|> and they have access to sea zones in order to fly naval air 
|> missions. Are the number of aircraft that China can fly into these
|> sea zones at all limited by the China attack limit? If so, what about
|> the Japanese player's ability to counter these moves with aircraft/CV's?
|> I'm pretty sure this one's not spelled out in the rulebook (at least not
|> clearly) so I'm willing to hear any thoughts people might have.
|> 
|> Chuck

This is pretty clearly spelled out.  Before the Major Offensive, China and 
Japan are limitted to flying in missions a maximum of the attack limit 
number of aircraft/CV.

Gordon Hua
From: paul@sierra.com (Paul Stratton)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: ban on lead-based figures in new york
Date: 16 Dec 92 19:10:41 GMT
Organization: Sierra Geophysics Inc.,  Kirkland, Wa

In article <92343.190749ALOHC@CUNYVM.BITNET> ALOHC@CUNYVM.BITNET writes:
>
>     NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH DOES HEREBY ORDER THAT:
>     1) Pursuant to Public Health Law Section 16, the following
>Respondents, manufacturers of the figurine products containing
>lead specified at paragraph 3 below, shall immediately cease the
>sale and/or distribution of said products in New York State:
>
...
>
>                         MARK R. CHASSIN, M.D., Commissioner
>                         New York State Department of Health

WHEREAS the European Economic Community (EEC) and the United States
Congress have both given an exemption to lead figures as collectors
items!

.

-- 
Paul Stratton               -----   -----   -----    -----    -----    ------
Sierra Geophysics, Inc.    /          /    /        /    /   /    /   /     /
P.O. Box 3886              -----     /    /---     /-----   /-----   /-----/
Seattle, Wa.  98124            /    /    /        /   \    /  \     /     /
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: Europaphiles - where are you??
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 17:16:18 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.022421.548@alchemy.ithaca.ny.us> cpf@alchemy.TN.Cornell.EDU (Courtenay Footman) writes:
>The trouble is that the Russians can do this in FITE.  There losses
>are horrendous, but they can slow the Germans drastically.  I have
>never gotten to the second summer, to see if the high Russian losses
>make them easy meat for the Germans, but they do have enough
>forces to "stop" (3 hexes a turn == "stop") the Germans through
>the first summer.

Then play into the second summer. If the Soviets lose more than 150 points
per turn on a regular basis, they lose the game. A 200 pt loss rate kills
the Red Army in 7 turns.

It seems too many people are terrain fixated in FiTE. Where you kill
Russians isn't as important as killing them.

However, I find it hard to believe that a competent German player is
being held to three hexes a turn. Where do you come up with enough
Soviets to double-line the front from the Baltic to the Black Sea?
If you do have enough, the Germans aren't being aggressive enough.

A quick German tactical tip: Get your panzers as far forward as possible.
Operate them in groups of three to four C/M divisions with at least two
groups within three to four hexes of each other. A "wedge" formation
works very well:

	       Pz XX
           Pz XX    Mot XX
		C/M unit
		+ truck

(This being a rough ASCII sketch.) If the Soviets counter-attack, fine.
They're attacking your toughest units, and whatever they bring forward to
attack, dies.

Repeat after me: German casualties are acceptable. 35 pts per turn is no
problem, as long as Soviet losses are high.
-- 
Stephen Graham
graham@cs.washington.edu	 uw-beaver!june!graham
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: heinenb@kaa.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Benedikt Eric Heinen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Popularity of Titan (was Re: Titan jargon)
Date: 12 Dec 92 02:38:25 GMT
Organization: Rechnerbetrieb Informatik - RWTH Aachen
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaa.informatik.rwth-aachen.de

drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr) wrote:
>Based on this thread thus far, it seems safe to say that Titan has a very
>devoted following.  Is there any hope of Avalon Hill releasing any sorts of
>expansion kits or variants for it?

What do you expect to be released? I don't think there will be anything.
What do you want to expand? More monsters? A bigger map? more complex combat
rules?
  I don't think, Titan would become a better game using such expansions. Titan
is simply fun to play. If you want variants, there are some easy ways of 
installing variants, but you don't need additional counters or so for these
ones. Perhabs you can try to play this way, if you have a caretaker in game, 
that doesn't lead a titan himself. Before game play starts, shuffle all
monster counters and randomly take a certain percentage og counters out of
the game without stating how many monsters of all races are left throughout
the whole game.
Using this strategy you are forcing all players not to concentrate on a certain
type of legion (i.e. some players only work with jungle armies without
mustering other creatures mightier than Rangers). If all players don't know, 
how many counters of all creatures are left (and how many were in there in the
beginning), most of them get away from concentrating on certain army types...

just try it out a few times.

yours,

    Benedikt
Newsgroups: rec.games.board