HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu (DAVID BONAR)
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu
Organization: News and Views from LSU
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 22:02:31 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-9231]: sn01.sncc.lsu.edu

In article <18404@ector.cs.purdue.edu>, sjc@cs.purdue.EDU (Steve Chapin) writes...
>}} In article <1992Apr10.201426.1569@reed.edu> kanderso@reed.edu (Karl Anderson) writes:
>}}
>}} I can't think of a good solution to the problem, however.  Perhaps a
>}} stack within a tower must unstack to initiate an attack upon an outsider
>}} unless the two were in combat last turn?
> 
>I believe the bonus for a tower is defensive, not offensive (I could
>quite easily be wrong).  In that case, it seems ok that the attacking
>units got benefits of the tower's defense.
> 
>Keep talking about this; more sepecifically, instead of what you don't
>like about the current use of fortifications in combat, what role
>would you like them to play in combat?  (the "you" there is plural,

	My view is that a group should have to unstack from any tower or ship
to attack.  Obviously, if you are in a castle and wish to attack someone
outside the castle you must exit.  Maybe archery should be allowed from 
a tower but not hand to hand combat.  Additionally, unstacking would allow
the possibility (very remote chance) that stack A would leave its tower to
attack while stack B entered the tower attempting to attack A.  It makes 
sense that if you all sally forth someone might just sneak in behind you!

>}} I certainly hope Pain and co. didn't get a bonus for being mounted (not
>}} that it would have made a difference in my case).
> 
>Are you saying they shouldn't get a bonus because they were stacked
>with a tower, or shouldn't get a bonus at all?  I can see why you
>might find a mounted bonus in a building a little odd :-), but a
>mounted bonus in the open seems fine to me.

	A stack should be able to get either a mounted bonus or a tower
bonus, not both.  Mounted combat is difficult or impossible in a building
and carrying a tower around on your back is silly.

Dave
__________
Dave Bonar
eebonar@lsuvax.sncc.lsu.edu
Go Astro's  
__________
From: sjc@cs.purdue.EDU (Steve Chapin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Olympia misc.
Date: 17 Apr 92 12:52:43 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University


 
RE: all the Olympia discussion.
 
Some comments/replies on various things:
 
1) combat capture is coming.  It should be in place by today's turn,
but don't count on it.  After the base mechanics are in place, I'll
take a look at ramping up the damage for skilled units to make them
more valuable (or toning down the unskilled damage).  There have 
been several other comments on this via mail.  Question:  is Olympian
combat too bloody, or not bloody enough?  There are a limited number
of players with combat experience, but I'll ask anyway.

2) the economy will be rehashed.  Plans for now include the pioneering
of new markets and items within markets, and having a supply/demand
model including population, plus distance from source to determine
market prices.  At some way-off hazy day, NPC traders may be put in.
This is a big change, and won't happen real soon, but it's on the TODO
list.

3) thievery is also in the works (use stealth), along with mining,
armorsmithing, etc.  Fleshing out the skills is next on my list after
I get finished with combat.

The todo list is very long, but Rich and I are tackling it as fast as
we can.  Keep the comments coming!  The more, the merrier; it is
gratifying to see players so interested in the game.  It's also good
to know that the changes we have planned are actually desired.

Rocko 'The Truth' Zigarelli, assistant programmer to the stars (now
you know why I winnowed my faction way down; it would be unethical for
me to take advantage of game information.  I still keep a tiny faction
on the board for testing, but you'll be glad to know the Sheriff is
really retired from day-to-day Olympian politics).

sjc@cs.purdue.edu             Steve Chapin             Today's Grammar Lesson:
             Hear, hear! Who's here who knows whose booze this is?
From: 900667c@ace.acadiau.ca (Gerald Cameron)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: DM - Need quick advice for a Waste
Date: 10 Apr 92 18:03:56 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Acadia University

In article <1992Apr8.205527.8870@cco.caltech.edu> johnjohn@cco.caltech.edu (John White) writes:

>So, I got the following rollup that I need to get out tomorrow, if possible!

>9-10-13-12-14-5-7

>This screams "Waste!" to me!  But I have a dilemma.  Which design?!

>9-10-13-17-17-5-13

>or

>11-10-13-17-17-5-11

>The first guy is limited to SC while the second guy can use QS, has better  
>endurance, and a better damage rating.  However, the first guy starts out  
>with about 6 more skills that the second from the deftness.  The second guy  
>will probably win more.  WHAT SHOULD I DO?!?!?!?!?

This is probably a bit late, but I'd say design two as a LUNGER.  Yes, a 
five SP lunger.  Hey, It worked for Unicorn, didn't it?  If you're 
determined to make a waste, go with no. 2 also, since I'd call 11 the 
minimum ST for that style.

______________________________________________________________________
| Take 'Er Easy                            |          DEMON          |
|                                          |                         |
| The check is in the mail,                |     GERALD CAMERON      |
|   I'll respect you in the morning,       |                         |
|      Mob Boss knows everything about DM. | 900667C@ACE.ACADIAU.CA  |
|====================================================================|
|    Manager of Scotian D-Team (DM52), The Highlanders (DM42)        |
|                and The Highlanders of the WeHL                     |
|   Also collector of comics, player of RPGs, Business Student       |
|                       (blah, blah, blah)                           |
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: cadpoole@atlas.cs.upei.ca (Dale Poole)
Subject: Re: List of PBM's Needed
Organization: University of Prince Edward Island
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 03:39:06 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.132217.1@vax.sonoma.edu> correa@vax.sonoma.edu writes:
>Hello,
>
>Could somebody please post a list of all available PBM games,
>I would appreciate it greatly.
>
>
>
>juan correa


Hey!  Now that you mention it, some one used to post a fairly regular list
of Play By Mails and E-Mails.  Now where did he get to?  I wonder if he
never heard from people about how useful the info was?

So how many others out there, grabbed the list like I did, but didn't send
an appreciative note to the author.

Well, author, if you'reout there, my apologies.  The list was great and
provided me with several useful contacts.  If you are working on a new list,
I'd love to see it.  If not, perhaps you could repost the most recent?

Dale Poole
cadpoole@atlas.cs.upei.ca




Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: hauck@cs.washington.edu (Scott Hauck)
Subject: Re: Olympia misc.
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: rec
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 19:04:06 GMT

One followup to my combat idea - a Military Leadership advantage should alter
the 2-1 ratio for front-line troops.  Specifically, if the player with higher
military leadership has say a 3-2 advantage in front-line troops, the defender
is forced to pull cavalry and archers to the front line, but the better
military leader could be at a 3-1 disadvantage at the front line and still keep
his elite troops at their jobs.  Obviously, the higher the Leadership
differential, the greater the skewing of the ratios caused.

This would also apply to the 2-1 ratio for castle sieges.  A better attacker
may only need a 3-2 ratio to breach the walls, but a better defender would
require a 3-1 advantage.


Scott Hauck
Milinkthos
hauck@cs.washington.edu
From: ccs012@judy.ucdavis.edu (Riff-Raff)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: DM - Need quick advice for a Waste
Keywords: Duelmasters, Wastes, Rollups
Date: 10 Apr 92 02:30:36 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Trump Gladiatorial Enterprises

In article <1992Apr8.205527.8870@cco.caltech.edu> johnjohn@cco.caltech.edu (John White) writes:
>So, I got the following rollup that I need to get out tomorrow, if possible!
>
>9-10-13-12-14-5-7
            BA  ST/SL/PS/LU/PL/WS/TP
ST  9 + 4 = 13         9 / 11
CN 10 + 0 = 10        10
SZ 13 + 0 = 13        13
WT 12 + 5 = 17        17
WL 14 + 3 = 17        17
SP  5 + 0 =  5         5
DF  7 + 2 =  9        13 / 11

Why not a basher?  15-10-13-17-17-5-7 might also work.  Then again,
it might not... :)

>This screams "Waste!" to me!  But I have a dilemma.  Which design?!
>
>9-10-13-17-17-5-13
>
>or
>
>11-10-13-17-17-5-11
>
>The first guy is limited to SC while the second guy can use QS, has better  
>endurance, and a better damage rating.  However, the first guy starts out  
>with about 6 more skills that the second from the deftness.  The second guy  
>will probably win more.  WHAT SHOULD I DO?!?!?!?!?

I've got a Wall of Steel who's currently 6-0-0 with the following set-up:
9-13-11-17-17-6-11 (NEX Attack = 4, NEX Init = 4), so I think that no
matter design you choose, you're going to do well.

Personally, I'd go for the 11-10-13-17-17-5-11 Waste because I'm finding
that only being well suited to the SC and WF sucks.  The 13 DF is nice,
but I think that adding the QS and BS to your arsenal, as well as moving
you closer to the MS and GA ST requirements makes for a better warrior.
Of course, you lose a few skills, which is a problem, but I would still
go for weapon selection.

Trump

+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
! Donald Trump, CEO Trump Gladiatorial Enterprises ! dfcleary@ucdavis.edu    !
!	Too Much Posse - Murska (35)               !  The Official Trumpian  !
!    	Max's Miracle - Stormcrowe (45)	           !      Lunger motto:      !
!       Riff-Raff Crew - Free Blades (103)         !    "Gimme longspear!"   !
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
From: koerse@fwi.uva.nl (Niels Koerse (I88))
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Celestial Empire
Summary: Celemp10, looking for players.
Keywords: Celestial Empire pbem
Date: 8 Apr 92 09:01:24 GMT
Organization: FWI, University of Amsterdam


	Greetings Netters,

	If any of you is playing the PBeM game Celestial Empire
	I would like to get in touch. I have just entered Celemp10
	and all advice is welcomed, and aliences are also highly 
	appriciated.

	Niels Koerse
		
		Overtrown the empire Taliesin
		Now to be known as Emperium Simian Rex
		or Simian for short

	Ook ook
From: skrenta@cbnewsg.att.com (Rich Skrenta)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
Date: 9 Apr 92 18:22:05 GMT
Organization: AT&T
Originator: skrenta@cbnewsg.cb.att.com

cedman@714-725-3177.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes:
> 1. An attack on one single character in a tower by possibly one single  
> character outside the tower can hardly be considered a siege.

Combat rules clearly state that attacks are stack vs. stack.
Imperfect as this may be for 100% truism to reality, it works
pretty well most of the time.

> 2. Why should I be forced to fight and try to kill e.g. a ally who  
> happens to attack someone else who happens to be in the same building  
> in whom I don't have the slightest interest ?

You attack a group of people, you can't kill just one.  The rest
of the guild members will not stand by and let you murder one of
their own.  Your 15 men storm the tower with swords drawn, what
do you expect the defensive stack to do?

Other skills (not yet implemented) will allow more specific
targeting of individuals for assasinations and kidnapping.

> 3. Finally, your point about stacking is well taken in general, but  
> stacking with a building - in particular a guild does not require that  
> either of the characters is cooperative (in contrast with usual  
> stacking) or even are in any way aware of each other.

Stacks do not require that all of the members are cooperative
together, only that they are cooperative with the leader.  Thus
enemies may join together under a common friend.

In the case of a guild tower, the guild itself is the stack leader,
so the members need not declare each other cooperative to stack with
the tower.

--
Rich Skrenta
From: sjc@cs.purdue.EDU (Steve Chapin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:08:24 GMT
	<29E3CE6B.13787@noiro.acs.uci.edu>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University

}} In article <29E3CE6B.13787@noiro.acs.uci.edu> cedman@714-725-3177.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes:
}} 
}} There are several objections to this:
}} 
}} 1. An attack on one single character in a tower by possibly one single  
}} character outside the tower can hardly be considered a siege.

Where does one draw the line?  You can't be stacked with someone
unless you're cooperative, or in a guild.

}} 2. Why should I be forced to fight and try to kill e.g. a ally who  
}} happens to attack someone else who happens to be in the same building  
}} in whom I don't have the slightest interest ?

Either get truer or more competent allies (take that, Dr. Pain :-).

}} 3. Finally, your point about stacking is well taken in general, but  
}} stacking with a building - in particular a guild does not require that  
}} either of the characters is cooperative (in contrast with usual  
}} stacking) or even are in any way aware of each other.

In that case, I would say it's the responsibility of the guildmaster
to maintain a defensive force stacked with the tower.  There,
something for them to spend all that money on!  Perhaps Rich could
slightly modify the rules so that a unit can stack under a guild if
the guild is cooperative towards it, even if it isn't a member.  Then,
the Warriors' Guild could build up defensive forces and rent them to
other guilds for less than the capital investment.  Such defensive
units wouldn't be members, so they couldn't study.

}} 	   Carl Edman

sjc@cs.purdue.edu             Steve Chapin             Today's Grammar Lesson:
                      I advise that you take his advice.

                      Beef:  Real food for a dead planet.
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 05:45:10 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.035807.14969@comp.vuw.ac.nz> Bill.Viggers@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Bill Viggers) writes:

>|> Newbies in groups just make a better target. At least, I feel like I
>|> still have a bullseye painted on *my* chest.
>
>	From my understanding of it, being in a group will give you two
>	advantages.
>
>	1: You have a stack leader, stacks lead by an indervidual, get a 
>	combat bonus

I wasn't talking about newbies stacking together -- I was talking
about bunches of newbies being placed in the same starting province.


Xref: sparky rec.games.pbm:1056 rec.arts.sf.written:5856 rec.games.frp:18254 rec.arts.comics:13388
From: ghost@ra.nrl.navy.mil (G. Host)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm,rec.arts.sf.written,rec.games.frp,rec.arts.comics
Subject: MYTH II game is closed
Date: 16 Apr 92 16:08:35 GMT
Reply-To: ghost@ra.nrl.navy.mil (G. Host)
Followup-To: poster
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC

Game is closed. I will acknowledge the posts I have
receieved so far and will contact those players.
-- 
 ****** I don't pretend to speak for anybody else but myself! ******
Glenn Host  12307 Tigers Eye Court ; Reston, VA 22091  (703) 620-1141 
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: cedman@714-725-3177.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Reply-To: cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Date: 9 Apr 92 04:56:11 GMT

Greg Lindahl writes
> Carl Edman:
> >That is a dandy idea, but please also add a rule so that  
> >non-cooperative units which happen to be in the same stack (e.g.  
> >stacking in the same guild tower), do not necessarily get involved
> >in other peoples fights. If there had been such a rule my poor 
> >BtA[801] would probably not have died in the recent rampage.
> 
> If you're in the tower, and someone lays siege to it, why should you
> escape? If you don't feel safe in a stack, don't stack.

There are several objections to this:

1. An attack on one single character in a tower by possibly one single  
character outside the tower can hardly be considered a siege.

2. Why should I be forced to fight and try to kill e.g. a ally who  
happens to attack someone else who happens to be in the same building  
in whom I don't have the slightest interest ?

3. Finally, your point about stacking is well taken in general, but  
stacking with a building - in particular a guild does not require that  
either of the characters is cooperative (in contrast with usual  
stacking) or even are in any way aware of each other.

	Carl Edman
From: sjc@cs.purdue.EDU (Steve Chapin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:38:46 GMT
	<1992Apr9.162909.12489@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
	<1992Apr10.201426.1569@reed.edu>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University

}} In article <1992Apr10.201426.1569@reed.edu> kanderso@reed.edu (Karl Anderson) writes:
}}
}} I can't think of a good solution to the problem, however.  Perhaps a
}} stack within a tower must unstack to initiate an attack upon an outsider
}} unless the two were in combat last turn?

I believe the bonus for a tower is defensive, not offensive (I could
quite easily be wrong).  In that case, it seems ok that the attacking
units got benefits of the tower's defense.

Keep talking about this; more sepecifically, instead of what you don't
like about the current use of fortifications in combat, what role
would you like them to play in combat?  (the "you" there is plural,
and not intended to pick on Karl).

}} I certainly hope Pain and co. didn't get a bonus for being mounted (not
}} that it would have made a difference in my case).

Are you saying they shouldn't get a bonus because they were stacked
with a tower, or shouldn't get a bonus at all?  I can see why you
might find a mounted bonus in a building a little odd :-), but a
mounted bonus in the open seems fine to me.

}} 			Mohammed ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi

Rocko 'The Truth' Zigarelli (ex-Sheriff of Drassa, now retired)

sjc@cs.purdue.edu             Steve Chapin             Today's Grammar Lesson:
                     Those two want to go to the zoo, too!
                  They're aware bears bare their hair there.

  "Oh my God!  I shot my eye out!"  (Ralphie Parker, in "A Christmas Story")
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: 3AHUCSI@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU (Kasian Armistus)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: An idea for a new PBEM
Date: 15 Apr 92 19:58:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: CMUVM.92106.1558513AHUCSI
Organization: Central Michigan University


   Greetings all,
     I recently had an interesting (though I doubt original) idea.
What I was considering was a merging of Avalon's "Wooden Ships & Iron
Men" and role-playing.
     This was the idea I had.  I would accept players and randomly draw
out the commanding officers of the respective teams.  Then give each
commander a number of points to spent on ships.  Other players
will be captains of these ships (drawn randomly).  I will select an area
of operations, but you will have to dig up your own maps.
    The role-playing will occur between players in the squadrons, shore,
merchantmen, and others.
    Commanders will also be reponsible for battle tactics, flag signals
(which will be used during combat...no interactive communications.),
and suppling his ships.
    So what I need from you is a little support, and a few bold and
daring captains.   Please respond to me directly, not via the news.

BTW:  Sorry, if this is the wrong place to post this.  I didn't know
where else would be acceptable.
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: d_jaracz@oz.plymouth.edu (David R. Jaracz)
Subject: PBM Testing
Reply-To: d_jaracz@oz.plymouth.edu (David R. Jaracz)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 04:53:15 GMT


Hi!  I'm looking for some people to help me test out an alpha version
set of rules for a PBM I have just finished.  I have been working on
the rules since, oh about 1989-ish, and have recently "finished".
(famous last words)  Anyway, I was looking to have some alpha testers
do some work, quite possibly thru e-mail.  SO, if yer interested at
all in my yet-untitled Pro Wrestling PBM, let me know.....
From: umsister@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Sisterson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Duelmasters
Summary: HELP
Keywords: Duelmasters,Aimed-Blow,HELP
Date: 9 Apr 92 01:31:29 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

Greeting Duelmasters Fans.

I have a question, actually a couple of question, concerning how to 
fight my Aimed-Blow warrior.  I've never tried this style before, so
I'm wondering if I'm way off in my expectations of him.

This is his stats:
ambidestrous
intelligent
 avoids blows well
 rarely wastes his endurance needlessly
relatively slow and inactive
has a good endurance
very quick on his feet.
str = 11
con = 13
siz = 08
wit = 15
wil = 14
spd = 10
def = 13

Now, I must admit, he has had only one fight, and made sever good attacks,
but never landed one blow.

I tested him out with 
1st  2nd  3rd  4th  5th  6th+  Desp
10     9    7    8    8   10    10
 8    10    7    8    8   10    10

He fought a parry-reposte.

My warrior made several attacks in all 4 minutes, but never hit.
I'm I missing the point of the aimed-blow style?
Another question, how does kill desire affect the way you warrior attacks.
will it slow him down, or spped him up.  I would assume that it would slow
him down so that he could try an get in the better and harder blows.

Anyways, any help would be appreciated.  
I'm not sure if I can get all of the letters sent up, so can you
copy me on any letter sent up.  Thanks.

Casey Sisterson
University of Manitoba
umsister@ccu.umanitoba.ca
Owner of Odin's Guard, Stormcrowe(45)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: List of PBM's Needed
From: correa@vax.sonoma.edu
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:22:17 -0800
Organization: Sonoma State University

Hello,

Could somebody please post a list of all available PBM games,
I would appreciate it greatly.



juan correa
From: jc8o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jason Stanley Covert)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: pbem testgame starting
Date: 6 Apr 92 14:45:41 GMT
Organization: Freshman, Civil Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Thanks to all of those that responded, all of the positions have been
filled.        

                                                        Thanks,
                                                        Jason