HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Panzer Pranks still available?
Reply-To: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 19:19:37 GMT

mchance@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Chance) writes:
>Is Panzer Pranks still available?  Steve Jackson Games used to put it
>out.  Great fun - "World War II the way it actually was - in the
>movies!"  The only wargame I know of with required sound effects and
>rules for ricocheting tank rounds.

Great fun indeed, but it was put out by Chaosium, not SJG, and is long
out of print, sorry.  I saw Crazy Egor had one at GenCon/Origins, so
you can still find them if you look.  I remember the game had one token
infantry unit ...

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: allan@gfx.engga.uwo.ca (Allan Flanagan)
Subject: Re: A&A Fixing the imbalances, NOT!!!
Organization: University of Western Ontario, London
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 03:11:30 GMT

I aggree, the changes proposed would not work. (I seem to recall that
the battleship/carrier switch at Pearl was mentioned a year ago also.)

I think that the easiest way to balance out the game would be to NOT 
allow a Russian attack on JAPAN.  Keeping Russia from attacking Germany
would not really help the Axis or be historically correct.  I'm not
saying the no attack on Japan is correct but it is easier to justify 
than a no attack on Germany.

I can win with the Axis and come to think of it, they were games where
the Russian didn't attack Japan.


                
Allan...                 allan@gfx.engga.uwo.ca
From: ccspad@sunlab1.bath.ac.uk (Paul Dale)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: EiA: #of depots in the countermix
Date: 16 Oct 92 08:45:01 GMT
Organization: Bath University Computing Services, UK

In the referenced article, hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai) writes:
>I count:
>
>Austria 9 + 1 freikorps
>France  8
>Britain 8
>Prussia 7 + 1 freikorps
>Spain   8
>Russia  8 + 6 cossaks
>Turkey  7
>
>I'm beginning to feel that AH didn't give too much thought to the number of
>depots each nation gets.  France certainly deserves much more than the
>standard 8, and why in the world does Austria need 9?!  Argh.
>
>Maybe AH wanted nations to negotiate the use of other nations' depots.
>
[stuff deleted]
>--
>hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai)    :     :    :   :  : :: ::: :::: :::::
>Unix Geek for Swarthmore College        :     :    :   :  : :: ::: :::: :::::
>Information Services, Swarthmore, PA, US.       Copyright 1992 by Eiji Hirai.
>I don't speak for Swarthmore College.                    All Rights Reserved.

They may well have been thinking about the historical dependancies
of the armies. One of the things that set the Napoleonic French
armies apart from the other European armies was their ability to
forage very effectively and a greater reliance upon it. Austria
was renowned for it's reliance on depots and cumbersome armies.
There were an excellent set of rules and counters in the General
for the revolutionary wars where the situation is more pronounced
in that Prussia and Austria are hamstrung by awful depot restrictions.
Even with this perspective it still doesn't explain why France has 8,
the same as G.B.+ Spain and why Prussia has 7 :-)
The 1812 campaign demonstrated what happens when you are tied too firmly
to depots. Napoleon's ability to manoeuver effectively was severely hampered
by reliance on supply lines that previously he didn't worry too much about.


Paul Dale
Systems admin./applications support/programmer.
BUCS, Bath University, Claverton Down, Bath, Avon. UK BA2 7AY
tel: 0225 826215
e-mail: P.A.Dale@bath.ac.uk
fax: 0225 826176
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: bernasco@ghost.dsi.unimi.it (davide bernasconi)
Subject: Lucian where are u?
Organization: Computer Science Dep. - Milan University
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 12:54:21 GMT

This is a personal message ...
Lucian Hughes i can't succed in send ing you a post, please tell me another
time all your address and i'll try another time next week

bye bye (my vitp board is becoming hotter day by day)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      |   __ Austria          
  ___  Switzerland ____\_/  \___ __/              Davide 
     \_     __    /             \   Slovenia      Bernasconi
       \ __/  \__/      Venice __| ___---         
France  |       * Como       +/~~\|\          
        |       +            /~~~~~~| Croatia    
        |        Milan       /~~~~~~|           
        \    ______          \~~~~~~~\         bernasco@ghost.sm.dsi.unimi.it 
       ___\_/~~~~~~\  +       \~~~~~~~\       
  ----/~~~~~~~~~~~~~\  Florence\~~~~~~~\      
~~~~~ Medit. Sea ~~~~\          \~~~~~~~\     
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\  Italy   \~~~~~~~\    
Autore Massimi Manghi (grazie)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mcs52867@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: blood bowl
Date: 12 Oct 92 17:26:21 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

i've seen a lot of talk recently on this group about blood bowl. i've wanted
to get it for awhile, but the cost kind of discouraged me. i saw something
about somebody in a league having a set of dungeon bowl along with blood
bowl.  what's the difference between the two? can you run blood bowl with
the dungeon bowl set?
thanks for any help
mike
mcs52867@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
From: 00nderwin@bsu-ucs.uucp
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A&A Fixing the imbalances
Date: 8 Oct 92 14:05:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.002227.1@vax.sonoma.edu>, oberland@vax.sonoma.edu writes:
> Well, lessee...
> I agree with Dewey.  The game is screwed, historicaly, so any attempt
> on my part to fix inbalances is not going to do any more damage to
> history.
> 
> The game currently *IS* screwed.
> the first options are just thoughts.
> BUT, I feel that the Rockets for Germany at the beginning is almost
> needed(Hey, a free IPC DOES even it out quite a lot).
> Helps to even out the bomb g  the Allies.
> 
> best heard to date:
> 1:No russian attack on Japan
> 2:mine, rockets for Germany
> 
> Try this:
> (how I usually play)
> add a sub to germany's fleets, and add the Rockets.
> -or- add a transport to the med fleet
> 
> I personally HATE making a "no attack here/this turn" rule.
> I feel it goes against the game too much.  I feel it is far better to
> alter the placement or pieces on the board.A small change is all that is
> needed, IMO.
> 
> I DO like the no factory in Karelia option. going to try it out by myself
> a couple times.Maybe in conjunction with my place a man or two in each empty
> territory that Russia has idea....
> 
> Ag.  SOME people are soooo falme-happy. a simple "I don't like this"
> would be sufficient.  And.... *()*()^$% the manual!!!  It has holes
> which I am trying to remedy!
> 
> I am a GOOD Axis player, and need only a little push to even it out.
> I find that I can win, but only if I follow a narrow plan and make NOT ONE
> mistake.  I also have to hopwe the Allies make several.
> Playing myself, I have found out that the Axis need some real buffer for
> errors and bad planning, like the Allies have.
> 
> 
> Against good Allied players, I always get killed, even though it is close.
> I am sick of this, and wantto fix it.
> Well,
> 
> Keep the ideas coming...
> Joe
Wow!Now you know how Germany and Janap felt in the actual war!  Personally, I
like the game as it stands, except whenever I'm Russia I die rather quickly.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (Alec Habig)
Subject: Re: EIA: How far between depots? (Rule question)
Organization: Indiana University Astrophysics, Bloomington, IN
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 14:20:39 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.133918.24613@tdb.uu.se> t89dsp@tdb.uu.se (Daniel Spahr) writes:
>The group I'm playing in has a rules question that is nagging us: how far apart
>should depots be from each other to define a supply chain? In the rules 
>(7.2.3.2) it says:
>
>"A 'supply chain' is a seris of *one* major power's depots that are placed no
>more than two areas apart and lead back to a supply source of that major 
>power."
>
>As I see it, "two areas apart" mean: 'area with depot - area without depot -
>area with depot', etc; that is: one area without a depot between two areas with
>depots.

We've always played with your interpretation.  Yes, a corps can be three away
and still get supply, but a supply chain can't do this.  The justification of
this : all other "ranges" are counted this way (including the corps who is 
three areas away!).  That is, "two areas apart" in the supply line rule is the
same as "two areas away" for a corps paying for supply ($2).

It is still possible for France to go after Moscow - the French must use a
supply base in Poland to do so, and then they're at the end of they're rope
(but hey, this is exactly how it was done historically).

	Alec
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: A3R tournament
Date: 14 Oct 92 03:24:36 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

This is another notice for the e-mail Advanced Third Reich tournament.
Interested parties should address their replies to

Mike Stone
 71051.1037@compuserve.com
From: keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A&A - Tricky bomber strategy.
Date: 14 Oct 1992 02:54:37 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

josh@gacvx2.gac.edu writes:

>More on the tricky bomber stragegy:

>A close examination of the rules will reveal that all the countries combined
>can only purchase a total of 4 Industrial Complexes and 3 AA guns.  So if you

Oh?

keith
From: 91vanderkolk@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: BTECH: Clan/I.S. Ratios
Date: 16 Oct 92 14:01:11 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University


Lately the group I have been playing with has had many long "discussions" on
what tonnage ratio Clan should have to Inner Sphere. Right now we run Clan at
half tonnage with standard Clann pilots & Clan honor vs. Inner Sphere mechs
at standard pilots up to 3055 tech. With this ratio Clan has won just as much
as it has lost. Ideas? Comments?

John
"The Black Widow is just a figment of your imagination.....Right."
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich)
Subject: Re: A&A House Rules
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:51:31 GMT

>>>Some of the rules have been adopted in some of the MB editions.
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Were they adopted because of you?  Or did you and they make the same
decisions?

>Well, we can argue _basis_ until the cows come home; but the Axis WERE on a
>roll until spring, 1942 - hence enthusiastic population. Anyway, the bonuses
>do a great job of balancing the game!

Fine, if you say so.  I prefer trying to balance the game based on the
rules given and the setup as given.  Different means to the same end.

>>>RESEARCH:
>>I try to avoid research period, so I don't have any reall comment here.
>>I simply play the game strategically, and thus try to leave out the luck
>>factors that are created by technology.  My loss, perhaps.
>
>Under MB rules, research is a HEAVY randomizer! the house rules make for
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is what I just said above.  I think its use usually favors the
Allies, bacause they can (overall) afford it much more.  They don't need
it until the Axis have some, and the axis can't (necessarily) afford the
risk.

>Many of the changes PREDATE the 2nd edition (I am not sure about this, but
>it is my understanding that the 2nd edition was developed with this variant
>in mind).

Well, if these predate the 2nd edition (1987, I think), then they are
not really useful.  A revised version might be in order, though....

>Dan Shoham
>shoham@ll.mit.edu

Dewey

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: djbailey@skyler.mavd.honeywell.com
Subject: SFB: Necessity is the mother of invention
Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:39:04 GMT

I had a chance to play Star Fleet Battles a few years ago. Shortly 
after I stopped playing, I got an interesting idea that I would like 
to pass along in case someone wants to try it. I am unlikely to find 
an opportunity. 

When I played, there was a poor little underpowered Federation Destroyer 
that couldn't move when it planned to fire all its weapons. After 
listening to people discuss the merits of Klingon disruptors and other 
"heavy" weapons and looking at the weapons charts, I concluded that 
the plain Phaser I weapon was very efficient in terms of converting 
energy in to damage out and easily in a class with those other 
weapons.

Imagine if you will, one of those poor little Destroyers surviving a 
battle with it's photon tubes destroyed and reaching a repair facility 
only to find that a shortage of critical parts means the photon tubes 
cannot be repaired.  Suppose a very creative weapons officer or 
engineer replaces the photon tubes with Phasers. We have a unique and 
interesting little ship ready for a dangerous emergency mission.

In game terms, replace the 4 photon tubes with Phaser Is. Add a 
legendary weapons officer,if you like, and perhaps knock out some
hull boxes to simulate necessary compromises for adding the phasers.
I think this would add a nice touch to some campaign.

Let me know if it's been done.
-- Don Bailey
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Empires in Arms
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:33:59 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

In article <BLRRBH3S@cc.swarthmore.edu>, hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai) writes:

>[ Obligatory EIA question:  should France ever build cavalry?  French
>  infantry has a 4.0 morale, the same as cavalry.  Are the extra $$$ and
>  extra waiting worth it for calvary pursuit?
>
>  My personal feeling is that if you're France, you should build Guards and
>  Artillery first, infantry second and calvary third.  There's nothing like
>  having a corps with full Imperial Guards, a full Artillery corps, and lots
>  of infantry led by Napoleon.  Reminds me of the Death Star ("The ultimate
>  power in the Universe!") ]
>

Well, if you're playing with the optional cavalry superiority optional rule, of
course you should.  IMHO, you should use a good bit of militia in the home
garrisons (and any other not-too-threatened areas where you still want a
presence, to man the harbor defenses if nothing else).  Your artillery and
guards kick butt, but a good pursuit can be oh-so-satisfying, especially
against inferior troops like the Turks or Russians who you may be able to send
packing in a single round.  If you keep enough militia around to take the
occasional forage losses, you can use the money you save to build cavalry.

On the other hand, the Death Star is hard to beat with 19th century technology.
B^) B^) B^)


-Doug Gibson
 doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu

Neither UCLA nor the National Science Foundation has a clue what I am doing.
They just pay me to do it.

"We have to tear you to shreds because we care." - EAC
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Monday, 12 Oct 1992 11:24:09 MST
From: <ICECW@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject:    Citytech for sale!

Header says it all!  I have a copy of Citytech in excellent shape and
partially punched.  I know I'm never going to really play it!
Highest offer plus postage takes it (I am willing to trade even up
for something of equal value that I'm interested in!).

For those who don't know, Citytech is tha FASA product for Battletech
in a city environment!
Please email at icecw@asuacad   or
icecw@asuvm.inre.asu.edu             Thanks!
From: tuc@calico.cs.wisc.edu (Brian A. Cole)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Titan - what means "slugathon" ?
Date: 12 Oct 92 19:22:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.tuc.718917766
Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences

jerry@uni-paderborn.de (Gerald Siek) writes:
] Could someone explain that word to me?   I have not found in in any dictonary

  In short, "slugathon" in nonsense.  It is an amalgam of the work "slug",
meaning to strike heavily, and the suffix "athon" which denotes an event
of long duration or demanding great endurance.  [Actually, the only true
English word using the suffix "athon" that I can think of is "marathon",
but slang words in common use are "phone-athon", "play-athon", "walk-athon"]
So, an example of a "slugathon" would be a 50-round boxing bout.

  But I think that this all misses the point.  For some reason, just about
every game (at least ones in English) have a subtitle, like "the exciting
game of high finance".  In many (most?) cases, these subtitles are smug
and presumptuous.  I think the authors of Titan wanted to poke fun at the
rest of the game industry, hence the silly subtitle.

brian
-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~     _______    _____     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Brian A. Cole                 |_   _  |  |  ___|    Most people think disc golf
  tuc@cs.wisc.edu               | | | |__| |___     is a joke.    It is not.
  ...!uwvax!cs.wisc.edu!tuc     |_| |__________|    That gives us the element
                                                    of surprise.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: wschip76@ursa.calvin.edu (Tom Schipper)
Subject: BTECH: 'Mechs vs. Vehicles
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 20:56:29 GMT

What are the opinions on the fighting abilities of 'Mechs compared to those of
Battletech vehicles?  The book seems to indicate that 'Mechs are much more 
effective, but my personal experience is that although 'Mechs can move through
a greater variety of terrain, vehicles can be much faster, and up to about
50 tons can take out an equivalent weight 'Mech quite easily.  (At heavier
weights their susceptibility to criticals makes them more vulnerable)

Although the criticals are worse for tanks, barring a lucky hit, they take
far more damage.  There are no specified limits on how much armor they can 
carry (At least I can't find any) so it is quite possible for a 30 ton tank
for have 130 points of armor on its front, the only location that would be
hit in a one-on-one battle.


Another question, why aren't double heat sinks allowed on vehicles.  The only 
explanation I could come up with is that they didn't want to completly 
debalance the game in favor of tanks at light weights.  A possible explanation
is that the technology is too valuable to place in second line units, but if 
the tank is more powerful, it should no longer be second line.


Tom Schipper



Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: awells@fenris.claremont.edu (Adam "Servo" Wells)
Subject: Re: Blood Bowl
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont CA
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 04:24:59 GMT

In article <1992Oct6.194629.21271@nstn.ns.ca> CS341A002@Husky1.StMarys.Ca (Loki) writes:
>takashi@nevada.edu writes:

>> <After about 20 minutes of play, consisting mostly of moving back and forth,
>> neither side wishing to attack the other>
>
>Neither side wishing to attack the other? God, you play strange blood bowl
>games...

I was in this league.  In fact, I watched this game.

The reason that neither team wanted to attack the other (both team's players
had about the same STs) was that the defender always has an advantage in a
block.  There is sometimes more of a chance of hurting the other player if
you let yourself get attacked and dodge.  The two coaches referred to (or at
least one of them) had tables listing the percentages of a) the other player
being hurt and b) them getting hurt for both A) blocks and B) dodges, and
for any range of die roll modifiers from -3 to +7.  Both teams (I believe
the game being referred to was between Skaven and Dark Elves) stayed in a
line five spaces away from each other, so that one team couldn't rush the
other.  They had both determined, from the chance tables, that it would
be more advantageous to wait for the other coach to attack their team.  

The stalemate ended when one player on the Skaven team, who was carrying the
spell Lightning Strike, ran to within one or two squares of the Dark Elf
team's Star Player Minotaur, who had (I believe) ST+2, MB2, and a couple of
other cool skills.  In short, a major player on the Dark Elf team.  He cast
the spell, and hit the Minotaur, who was forced to roll on the Injury table
at +3.  The DE coach rolled a 10 or 11, I think, indicating a result of
death.  He decided to reroll, and rolled a 12.  Irreversible death.  He
immediately conceded the game, believing that he now had no chance of
winning and not wanting to have any of his other players possibly injured.  

I think that one of the reasons that the first league that I was in didn't
work out too well was that there were very varied play styles in the group.
I tend to play in a pretty haphazard manner, but I have a lot of fun.  I
don't look too far ahead, and I don't really think about the numerical
odds.  However, there were certain coaches who played the game like chess,
examining each move thoroughly, thinking about the odds, looking a few moves
ahead.  This tended to cause friction between the people who finished their
turn pretty quickly and those who thought for quite a while.

But it's still a great game.  I just wish that I still had time to paint
miniatures, and still had the money to buy miniatures, and still had a place
to buy miniatures.  :(

Adam B. Wells
team manager, Brockian Ultra Cricket
awells@jarthur.claremont.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: Re: BTECH - no new group?
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 08:13:00 GMT

In article <16084@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:
>I have been informed that the powers that be for usenet vetoed the effort to
>split this group, saying the overall volume doesn't justify the procedure.

    \/\/ho informed you, and who are these "powers that be?"  Official
 discussion of the creation/etc. of newsgroups is held on news.groups.
 There has been no "official veto" of a new group.  The ways that new
 groups fail are: the original poster of the RFD doesn't follow up
 with a CFV, and the group doesn't get the necessary votes to be
 created.  The moderator of news.announce.newgroups may also choose
 not to allow an RFD or CFV to be posted, due to similarities with an
 existing group/etc.
 
    ][ urge you, and anyone else who is interested, to go over to
 news.announce.newgroups and news.groups and check out the process
 of how groups are created.  It's very educational.  (: 

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich)
Subject: Re: A&A Fixing the imbalances
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 03:33:07 GMT

reply to 00nderwin:
> AH!  But the Challenge!  DOon't you wnat
>to find out what would happen if Germany had a competant leader?

Like Joe said, not in this game.  If he (or I) wanted to know what
Germany could/would have done with better leadership, we'd play a
different game, like A3R.

If nothing else, look at the scale of this game.  I like it because
you have the entire planet to work with.  But, in a trade off, you lose
some accuracy.  It's acceptable to me, bacause I want to play a game
that covers the whole planet.  If I were interested in detail, I'd play
a different game.

I do like the challenge of finding that Perfect Axis Strategy(tm), but
again, like Joe said, it shouldn't be THAT hard to do....

Dewey

PS -- In the rules manual, they claim that the Axis must be very
aggressive early on to win.  I'd like to hear what THEY think we should
do as the Axis...


Dewey

Newsgroups: rec.games.board