HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Steve.Lamb@f1369.n203.z1.sac.ca.us (Steve Lamb)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Locust revamp
Date: 23 Jan 93 12:41:56 GMT

Patrick,

Thursday January 21 1993 23:08, Patrick W. Grady wrote to All:

 >> heat build-up and it's combat effective range damage jumps from 5 to 15.

 PWG> 'Scuse me.  Is this Clan ER Mediums you are talking about?  Last time I
 PWG> looked at the rules, the only ER weapons the IS had were Large Lasers
and
 PWG> PPC's.

    No, what I meant was..  The effective range of damage.  I.E.  I don't
count the machine guns because they get two close.  So the effective damage
range being the distance between two mechs...  And a ML doing 5 points of
damage. at a reasonable range the Locust can then do 15 points of damage with
3 ML's mounted on there instead of one.

 PWG> Gee.  One shot. One hit. One kill.   No armor is a pain in the butt.

    Gee, One show, one hit, one kill.  Sounds like most locusts I've run
ANYWAY.

 PWG> This idea works only if you have some terrain advantage.

    Remember, this is for base rules only.  I do NOT want to even talk clan
mechs (ya right) or anything else.  Why?  No rulebooks for them, and from what
I've seen, they severely disrupt the game balance.

 PWG> Personally, I modify my Locust's by dropping that MG/ammo garbage for a
 PWG> second Medium Laser and a larger engine.  Currently the Locust has a
160
 PWG> engine, but for an extra ton, you can install a 180 engine and move W 9 
R
 PWG> 14.  That worked great in our pre-Clan campaigns.  A little extra speed
 PWG> and firepower for just a few C-bills.

    Naaa, the 3 medium lasers plus it's walking = 10 heat perfectly.  Another
5 points of damage per round is more important at that point.  Because with 15
points of damage this Locust can take out another Locust with ease...  But if
that Locust has a bit more speed (larger engine) and lesser weaponry (2 medium
lasers) the 3 ML locust can take to ML hits anywhere on it's structure.  The
reverse cannot be said.

Steve C. Lamb, SysOp of Abcb Cafe     | "Wherefore art thou Ushiko-san!?"
Abcb Cafe 1:203/1369@Fidonet.org      |                    -- Umao-san
    Data: (916) 363-1424              | "Wherefore art thou Umao-san!?"
cm644@cleveland.freenet.edu           |                    -- Ushiko-san
abcbcafe!foxx@csusac.ecs.csus.edu     |   From Kimagure Orange Road
From: bp652@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Gil W. Lau)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Who needs light mecha?
Date: 26 Jan 1993 05:06:06 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bp652@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Gil W. Lau)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


What would be the advantages of a light mech (say, a Locust for you
Battletech types) over something cheaper to build, say a grav
tank or something?  Not only are you missing 3-D movement, but
any walking mech will have trouble compromising soft ground
(woe to the mech pilot suddenly caught in a flash flood!) and
other terrain.  Being small, they can't carry a whole lot of
firepower.

Coming to think about it, why a walking chasis?  Who needs mech
at all?  Why not build Ogres instead?  I mean anything walking
is inherently instable anyways, and has a gigantic profile.
I know, I know...mechs look much cooler!  But besides that.

  -- Gil
From: edmonds@cs.ubc.ca (Brian Edmonds)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: Arrow IV mech and spotter
Date: 25 Jan 1993 21:50:32 -0800
Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: cobra.cs.ubc.ca

taia_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz wrote:
> Endo-steel is more effienct(sp) than ferro. You get more free tonnage for
>the crits, though ferro is easier to install than eno. Since ferro can be
>"slapped" on to the mek and endo means a complete overhaul or a new mek.
Yeah, that occurred to me after.  I expect I'll go back and redesign a 
slightly modified AS7-J1. 

>Crossbow XBW-1K
Very nice. :)

> This mek has all 51 crits used and is without hands and lower arm actuators
>and is "legal" in it's design. Though the cost of this mek is huge! I figure
>it out to some 11,516,000 MC-bills and add 5,000 C-bills for every ton of
>homing Arrow rounds. Not cheap, but I have played these againist Dasher
>Wolfpacks and won!
Hmm, you may want to recalculate that.  I come up with a cost of 23MC.  
This raises a question I hadn't thought of before.  Is the ammo cost 
multiplied by the (1+tonnage/100) factor too?  It appears from the 
Compendium that it is, but that seems silly. 

I was considering making my own double Arrow IV platform, but I think 
this one just about covers what I had in mind. :)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Edmonds (MSc CompSci)                            edmonds@cs.ubc.ca
From: st1y2@elroy.uh.edu (Gray, William W.)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Chicago Mech similuator Information
Date: 22 Jan 1993 21:17 CST
Organization: University of Houston
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: elroy.uh.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    


Wanted: Any and all information that would make
    contact between me and the folks that have the
	mech simulator in Chicago. I have a great lead
	that could have Houston being a home for the
	simulator.                 

Please respone via Email or voice: 713-735-3137

Thanks;

Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: logerius@punisher.cs.hut.fi (Lord Logerius of Angmar)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: Six limbed mechs and Centaurian Warlord
Date: 27 Jan 1993 16:44:49 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, CS lab
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.cs.hut.fi

In <1k4rcaINNmkh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> probe@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Prabal Nandy) writes:
>   I would also think you could subtract, let's say, 20 from the engine
>rating to account for the fact that the mech can gallop or move faster with
>thinner, lighter legs...?

>   (Personally, I think all quad mechs should be given some benifit like
>that...)


 Well the sidestep sort of reflects that.. it might not be too good
for the game balance, but I actually like the idea (The munchkin player 
inside me has woken...:)

  But wouldn't it be too much of an advantage.. and I could reason why not..
more legs >> more power lost in cables + more myomer muscles to power,
though I could well reason it other way around :)


  And also Centaurians would make excellent transport mechs ..
Little weaponry,not much armor, and a lot of space for cargo to the back (Ie
center torso+side torsoes)  and then some hooks or holders to keep the 
possible external cargo in place... Ahh I can see the mech in front of 
my eyes now..

 And these would be a lot better in some areas than conventional vehicles
they could cross difficult terrain etc.

  I can see a lot more mission possibilities here...

*Capture the supplies on their way to city X, do NOT damage the cargo.

*Destroy the fuel transport on its way to dropship N

(Gm's add support mechs at their leisure :)




>-- 
>      /| ________________   |probe@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu|  Lord of the Flies 
>O|===|* >________________>  |probe@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu|  1st MPC Division
>      \|                    | nandy@scivax.stsci.edu |  Colony Mechworks
>  Velox - Durus - Infestus  |  nandy@fos.stsci.edu   |  Colony World Myops


 Teclis. Tai-i of Rasalhague regulars


--
                                                                       
   Patrick Buchert                      Helsinki University of Technology
    pbuchert@hut.fi                      Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
     logerius@hut.fi
Xref: sparky rec.games.mecha:1407 rec.arts.anime:30198
From: avalon@stein.u.washington.edu (Prince Charming)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha,rec.arts.anime
Subject: Re: Robotech vs. ?
Date: 25 Jan 1993 00:32:24 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
NNTP-Posting-Host: stein.u.washington.edu

>Whether or not regular Veritechs and the SDF-1 could break through
>the shield, how about Shadow Fighters/Vindicators and the SDF-3?
>With their Destabilizers, they could penetrate the shields and drop
>off teams of Cyclones to go in through the airlocks and take the
>ship.  I suspect that the security teams wouldn't provide much in
>the way of opposition, especially if they all had the same degree of
>marksmanship as Worf demonstrated in "Rascals."
>
>--
>Chris Meadows  | Robotech/RIFTS/Palladium fanfic author/editor
>CHM173S@SMSVMA | They Might Be Giants about Star Trek aliens:
>CHM173S@VMA.SMSU.EDU   | "Everybody wants prosthetic foreheads
>CMEADOWS@NYX.CS.DU.EDU | on their real heads!"

One of the things that bothers me is when Worf does miss an "easy shot" when
the plot demands it. It could be done another way. Threaten the Captian, beam
in and ambush him, etc. One question to the above idea though...... The veritech
couldn't enter though an airlock, it is much to large. The only place that it 
could enter would be the shuttle bay. Assuming they did board there, they would 
have to abandon thier fighters because the hallways/turbo lifts aren't adapted
for anything that big either.

Avalon

Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: Re:  Engines
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 07:00:22 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.124759.5216@wkuvx1.bitnet> fannicm@wkuvx1.bitnet (Master Hawk) writes:
>   My problem is not with the non-linear system in and of itself, but with
>its lack of justification and logic.  It seems to support that
>semi-mythical beast (which FASA doesn't believe in anyway) "game balance". 
 
 
    \/\/ell, as far as I know, they never really HAVE tried to justify
 the engine tables.  It's just "that's the way it is, bigger engines
 get heavier in a non-linear fashion due to the fusion engine technology
 used."  Since comparable engine technology doesn't even exist today,
 there's no way you can really argue about it.

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: tfpayn01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Re: [Btech] SPREADSHEET
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:50:12 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <C1Ex18.IFp@newsflash.concordia.ca>, kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane) writes:
> In article <1993Jan24.132444.19747@husc3.harvard.edu> ender2@husc8.harvard.edu (Matt Ender) writes:
>>In article <1jsa4jINNfma@cobra.cs.ubc.ca> edmonds@cs.ubc.ca (Brian Edmonds) writes:
>>>Seems to be a decent reason.  My question is:  is there a simple 
>>>formula that given the engine rating you can calculate the tonnage?  
>>>This would be very nice to work into the mech design spreadsheet (sc) I 
>>>made.  Also, is there a simple formula for the internal structure 
>>>points? 
>>
>>If you're on a spreadsheet, I'd recommend using table lookup -- just
>>put the values off on the side somewhere, and use sc's equivalent of
>>123's @VLOOKUP to nab the appropriate values.  There is a formula that
>>someone posted a long time back, but I don't remember it, and I think
>>a few weights come out half a ton off.
>>
>>-- Matt
> 
> Does anyone want my spreadsheet ? WK1 format is ugly, as I use a lot of
> colors to help with visualisation. Ie anything in light blue is
> "editable".
> 
> 	XLS, WK1 and Mesa format are available.
> 
-- 

	YES, PLEASE!!

/  / // / / /  / /  / / // / / // / //  / /   /  // /  / / / / // // / / / // /
// // /  / // /// // / / /// /// // /// /// // // /// / ///// // /   / // // /
/  /  ________|\_______________________________________________   /  /  // / /
/ // |\_\_\_\_| |_____________________________________________/   / / / / / / /
// / / /      |/  / / //  // /  / / / //  /  /  / /  /  /  / /  /  / / / /// /
/  / /  /  ///  / /  /  Tom Payne *** Louisville, KY	 / //  /  /  /  / / / /
 /  //TFPAYN01@ULKYVX.LOUISVILLE.EDU   /  / INFTECR1@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU /// /
/ // / /  /   / / / /  ///  // (502) 635-2473 / / // // // / /////  / / // // / 
>>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-<<<
>>         Picard / Riker '96                                              <<
>>         Let's take this country where none have gone before             <<
			{Borrowed}
From: fannicm@wkuvx1.bitnet (Master Hawk)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re:  Engines
Date: 25 Jan 93 12:47:59 CST
Organization: Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY


   OK.  I have read the posts given here in response to my engine problem,
and while I do not agree with you, I am not in the mood to get into a big
Inter-Net arguement.  Suffice it to say that I realize the nearly
logrithmic curve of engine-weight to size is intentional, and I understand
that using a linear system to determine engine weights will drastically
change the effectiveness of heavier mechs (85+ tons) which, IMHO, suffer
now from a lack of mobility (which stems from a few sources).  Even more
important, it will lower the effectivenes of mechs of about 20-55 tons
because those engines that they spend just a few tons for will now, in some
cases, increase in weight.
   My problem is not with the non-linear system in and of itself, but with
its lack of justification and logic.  It seems to support that
semi-mythical beast (which FASA doesn't believe in anyway) "game balance". 

--Master Hawk--(25-JAN-1993 12:47)--
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: tfpayn01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Re: Btech to Rifts
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 12:16:34 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <C14vy2.Ks6@newsflash.concordia.ca>, kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane) writes:
> In article <1993Jan18.120528.4090@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> bbrownin@nyx.cs.du.edu (Barry Browning) writes:
>>
>>  I'm not really thrilled with the robots in Rifts, and I'd like 
>>to convert some Battletech 'mechs over to the Rifts system.
>>I imagine somebody somebody out there is familiar with both games,
>>and has tried this already (or at least thought about it).
>>So, anybody have any idea?  Stephane, how 'bout you?
> 
> 	Gack .... Rifts is like Robotech. So, the question is:
> 
> 	"Does anyone have a BattleTech to Robotech conversion
> 	kit ?"
> 
>>On another topic, how many of you people would willing to 
>>cough up 75 bucks for a MadCat model? (13" tall, 12" wide, 
>>vinyl casting)
> 
> 	Same as the one from GenCon ? If so... I already have
> 	one ordered through Inaus ... or do I ? (hmmm....)
> 
> 

	Inaus?  A model supplier?  Inquiring minds wanna know!
-- 

/  / // / / /  / /  / / // / / // / //  / /   /  // /  / / / / // // / / / // /
// // /  / // /// // / / /// /// // /// /// // // /// / ///// // /   / // // /
/  /  ________|\_______________________________________________   /  /  // / /
/ // |\_\_\_\_| |_____________________________________________/   / / / / / / /
// / / /      |/  / / //  // /  / / / //  /  /  / /  /  /  / /  /  / / / /// /
/  / /  /  ///  / /  /  Tom Payne *** Louisville, KY	 / //  /  /  /  / / / /
 /  //TFPAYN01@ULKYVX.LOUISVILLE.EDU   /  / INFTECR1@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU /// /
/ // / /  /   / / / /  ///  // (502) 635-2473 / / // // // / /////  / / // // / 
>>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-<<<
>>         Picard / Riker '96                                              <<
>>         Let's take this country where none have gone before             <<
			{Borrowed}
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: pcs$1948@altair.selu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Boots wants Btech
Date: 28 Jan 93 11:31:37 -0600
Summary: where else can I play BTech?
Reply-To: self
Followup-To: poster
Keywords: btech MUSE
Distribution: world
Organization: Southeastern Louisiana University

Hey out there! This is Lt.'Boots', also known as Puss in boots.
I have been trying to get on the B-Tech MUSE(I am only a Pvt. there)
and I haven't been able to connect.What's the deal?
Where'd the MUSE go?
When can I connect on?
Is there any other MUD,MUSE or MUSH I can get on?

                      |\
                      |/  
                      |\       _  /
                      |/ () () |  \
                                  /
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: Re: Stephane-New FASA L.O.S. Rules???
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 07:26:13 GMT

In article <busch006.728095920@staff.tc.umn.edu> busch006@staff.tc.umn.edu (Johnny R.) writes:
> Also I was wondering if you could (in your infinite busy-ness) make a few rule
>clarifications. In the compendium they say that a mech is only 1 level
>high yet in the part describing terrain they say  a mech is 2 levels
>high. How high is  a mech according to FASA? I assume it's 2 levels
>high. And laastly is fasa in the LOS rules assuming a mech is 1 or 2
>levels high?

     _
    /-\ mech is officially two levels high at all tines.  In the
 Compendium on p. 21 it states "a standing BattleMech is figured to
 be 1 level higher than the terrain on which it is standing."  That
 simply means that a mech's head is up a level higher than its feet,
 so it can see over anything next to it that is one level high.  A
 vehicle on level 0 is considered to be one level high, so a mech
 on level 0 is considered to be 1+1= two levels high.

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Battletechnology: Need some info about.....
From: taia_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz (Second Genyosha)
Date: 22 Jan 1993 03:33:38 GMT
Reply-To: taia_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Organization: Wellington City Council (Public Access), Wgtn, Nz
NNTP-Posting-Host: kosmos.wcc.govt.nz

 Friend of mine is looking for a missing column from
Battletechnology: The Lost Issues, can anyone help? His request is posted
below.

> The NAIS Midterm exam isn't bad, and the article on Targeting
>and Tracking systems has some damn good ideas and information (although over
>the top with a couple of the systems), its only major flaw is that the article
>is missing an entire data column that is slightly important. (I've written
>to BattleTechnology twice now about the missing column) "The Data/Time Delay
>Ratio Column", the author of the article is listed in the magazine as
>David Waters.

All replies by e-mail if at all possible.
Thanks in advance!
This has been....
 Tony Taia                 (Chu-sa of the Second Genyosha)
 TAIA_A@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz  **Join the DCMS see the Inner Sphere and kill it**
3055-3067: So little time, so many Clan meks to kill! Pussycats -1/2 price :)
**Noone knows what I know, so you know that what I know is only mine to know**
From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Nobody of Importance)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: Robotech vs ?
Date: 23 Jan 1993 17:42:21 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: daisy.cc.utexas.edu

In article <1993Jan23.032551.11981@wam.umd.edu> shyeah@wam.umd.edu (Orange Beef) writes:
]	Ok, enough arguements about who would win vs SDF-1 and the
]good old enterprise (either the new one or the old one[like I remember their
]numbers either])  The SDF-1 was unreliable...the main cannon would not fire,
]no fold systems...so why compare the 1st model(the SDF-1) to a more tested
]and varied ship(Enterprise)  Get a real comparison...
]	The SDF-3 vs the New Enterprise...both tested and reliable!
]Who would win? Of course the SDF-3...2 MAIN CANNONS! 4 Rail Cannons,
]over 2000 mech's, and other nasties that could cause trouble for the
]Enterprise...plus the SDF-3 has the barrior shield and pin-point barrior...
]The fold system works too...So why compare the old compare the almighty
]SDF-3 will ya...8)

Why compare the SDF-3? Bring on the SDF-*17* from WPI. They have some warp
capabilities (including warp-capable Veritechs!) :)
 
]...sig..what sig? I'm a Robotech fan...I dont need no sig...
]

Subject: Patrick Chester            |Words to live by:
Age: NOYB                           |"Military action is important to the     
Address: A place                    |nation--it is the ground of death and     
Email:wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu    |life, the path of survival and destruction
Political Views: Somewhere in orbit |so it is important to examine it."-Sun Tzu
Blackmarks: Politically Incorrect   |Famous Last Words:                        
(hobbies)   Anime Otaku/Trekker     |--If you cut me down, I will only become
            Technocentric           |more powerful...  
            Netrekker (claypigeon)  |--Shhh!! There it is again....           
            Whole bunch of -isms    |--Use the bazooka to open the door...
     Won't remove Sun Tzu quote to  |--I cut the red wire...
     make the Greens happy ;)       |--I have a *very* bad feeling about this
-- 
<***** INSERT LAWSUIT DEFLECTION TEXT*****> 

I speak (type actually) for myself only. Even if I did decide to 
speak for UT, no one would listen. 

Flame away, I don't bleedin' care...
From: Scott.Lampman@f1369.n203.z1.fidonet.org (Scott Lampman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Robotech vs. ?
Date: 21 Jan 93 18:39:39 GMT


LM>Wrong Allan. The SDF-1 is capable of withstanding a barrage of phaser
LM>hits from the Enterprise's puny phaser. But the Enterprise can't take
LM>one hit from the main guns nor can it take several hits from lesser
LM>sources. Remember the  Enterprise has only one gun, but the SDF-1 has
LM>tons and that's not including all the MACs.


     The NCC-1701D has 11 phaser banks EMPLACEMENTS!  That means in the
forward arc of fire up to 3 phasers can fire with a max out put of 5.1
megawatts each.  For comparison, the type I and II hand phasers used by the
crew have a max output of 0.01 MW.  Also, do you remember the ep. where there
was some low tech ship useing lasers and missles about to attack the
Enterprise, and the good Capt. made a remark about how they could just use the
navigational deflecters to defend them selfs.  That is what 99.9% of the
SDF-1's weapons would be, including the VF's and destrodes.

     Oh, and by the way,  that's 5.1 MWs per emitter. The upper dorsal phaser
array has 200 emiters, for a total of 1020 MEGAWATTS!!

... Get a life, before you losse it.
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Robotech vs. ?
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 05:24:30 -0800

BILLY,

Saturday January 23 1993 08:32, BILLY JOE BISSETTE wrote to All:

 BJB>     When has the Enterprise ever fired more than one phaser?

    There is one shot where the photon's split apart and the Enterprise fires
2-3 phasers.  However, he has you on this.  He is quoting DIRECTLY FROM THE
BOOK WRITTEN BY THE TECHNICAL ADVISORS ON THE SHOW.  If they say the
Enterprise can fire 6 kabillion phasers at once, too bad, it can.  It's their
baby, their rules.

Steve C. Lamb, SysOp of Abcb Cafe     | "Wherefore art thou Ushiko-san!?"
Abcb Cafe 1:203/1369@Fidonet.org      |                    -- Umao-san
    Data: (916) 363-1424              | "Wherefore art thou Umao-san!?"
cm644@cleveland.freenet.edu           |                    -- Ushiko-san
abcbcafe!foxx@csusac.ecs.csus.edu     |   From Kimagure Orange Road
From: fannicm@wkuvx1.bitnet (Master Hawk)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: FTP query
Date: 26 Jan 93 00:47:05 GMT
Organization: Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY


   I'd appreciate it if someone would E-mail me with a list of some FTP
sites with D_D/Battletech/Shadowrun/etc. files.  I already know about
Greyhawk.stanford.edu.  

Thanks

--Master Hawk--(25-JAN-1993 18:46)--
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha