HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: desj@idacrd.UUCP (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Titan: 2 types of megacreatures in one stack
Date: 16 Apr 92 21:02:34 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research

In article <1992Apr6.220136.28871@ils.nwu.edu> lopez@ils.nwu.edu (Chris Lopez) writes:
>It surprises me how many people actually use tower teleport.  I
>almost never do it at any time during the game.  My Titan is far
>safer when people don't know which stack he is in.  Even if it they
>can say it is in one of those two or three.  Am I alone in this
>philosophy?

If your opponent(s) keep careful track of your moves, they will almost
always be able to narrow your Titan stack down to one of two: one
containing your Titan and the other your original Angel.  If either of
these stacks is ever involved in combat, or if you summon your
original Angel, then the location of your Titan is likely to be known.

So there really doesn't seem to be much ambiguity available.  The
problem is that Titan is just not a very good hidden movement game.
By keeping track of your mustering it is possible to identify almost
every unit.  (Splits quickly reveal themselves because the smaller
stack usually uses all of its units in further recruiting, especially
in a 5-2 split.)

An interesting possibility for a moderated PBM game would be to play
with true hidden movement.  That is, all that the other players would
know is that you mustered a unit, but not which one.  This would add
significantly to the concealment aspect of the game and thus reduce
the value of teleportation.  I'm not sure what other effects it would
have on the game.

					David desJardins
From: casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: The Fog of War and McClellan (and Yamamoto and Patton)
Date: 11 Apr 92 15:29:00 GMT
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr10.191700.11323@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, silber@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Ami A. Silberman) writes...
>casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE) writes:
>>Another battle which I have thought this mechanic might really improve is the
>>battle of Midway.  In that case, the US usually knows the Japanese
>>dispositions, strengths and objectives at the start, while the Japanese player
>>knows he is walking into an ambush.  One could allow both sides to choose their
>>strength levels, objectives, and intelligence using a VP scale.  Hence an
>>overcautious Japanese player might putz around too long while the US player,
>>lacking the Yorktown and without advance warning of the attack races to get
>>into position.  Or an overly confident Japanese player might run headlong into
>>the waiting arms of a 3 (or even 4) CV trap (the historical result).  Or,
>>finally, the US player could commit all his resources against a mere diversion,
>>upon which he would have to inflict a totally crushing defeat, or else lose the
>>game because he has drained resources from other key sectors for little gain. 
>>The initial scenario could be determined either randomly or by choice of the
>>players, or a combination (allowing the players control over the decisions
>>within the scope of their real-life counterparts, while letting chance determine
>>the factors that were not...in either case, VP would be added or subtracted to
>>maintain balance).  Naturally, the starting conditions would not be known at the
>>start.
> 
>Good idea except...  The US did know pretty well what the Japanese were doing
>(fleet composition etc.) due to intelligence intercepts.

You miss the point entirely.  It could have been otherwise, and the Japanese
did not know this was the case.  So, either the US player will always have an
intelligence advantage (and the Japanese player will always know he is walking
into a trap), or you allow the possibility of the battle being fought under
different conditions, under which neither player will have a priori knowledge.
Of course, it could _still_ turn out that US player has the same intel
advantage as historically, but the Japanese player cannot be sure. 


Dave Casper
CERN - Geneva
casper@vxcrna.cern.ch
From: morzinpl@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Axis&Allies Germany attacks U.K.
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:53:42 GMT
Reply-To: morzinpl@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

In article <1992Apr8.152315.18927@uwm.edu>, sackett@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Michael Scott Zimmerman) writes:
>In article <31440@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> cchiang@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Huh?!  Wot?!?) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr2.124646.645@gacvx2.gac.edu> josh@gacvx2.gac.edu writes:
>>>Conclusion:  Someone should calculate the chances of getting Long-range
>>>aircraft AND/OR Heavy bombers with SIX technology rolls.  If you get
>>>one of the two, go ahead and try the attack.  The worst that can happen
>>>is you fail miserably and resign.  So what, start a new game -- this
>>>one took less time to play than it did to set-up the board.
>>	Actually, the calculation is simple.  Let's use the best
>>case scenerio:  6 rolls, for heavy bomber OR long range aircraft.
>>	chance of Getting a six: 1 in 6
>>	chance of Getting a four or a six after the six: 1 in 3
>>	multiplied together: 1 in 18.
>>	multiplied by 6 dice:  1 in 3.
>>	Therefore the chance of getting heavy bomber OR long range
>>aircraft should be about 1 in 3 (theoretically).
>>
>>	I don't know, sounds risky to me (I'd go for it if it was 1
>>in 2 even then I might waffle about it).
>>
>>	Thanks for share that with us.  Let's hear more innovative
>>ideas.
>>
>>					- The TaZ
>>					cchiang@sdcc13.ucsd.edu
>
>
>Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't tech only good on Newly purchased
>units and not the initial units on the board?  

No, there's nothing about that mentioned.  That could get painful to keep track
of.
							Pete

If I am correct, the
>theory that Germany can attack Brits on first turn with heavy bombers
>and or long range air craft is shot full of holes!
>
>Mike.
>
>sackett@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
>
>
Xref: sparky rec.games.board:4978 rec.games.frp:17621
From: plt@wasp.eng.ufl.edu (Pete Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,rec.games.frp
Subject: WH40K:  Space Marine Chapter Names
Date: 10 Apr 92 17:56:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: eng.1992Apr10.175654.10197
Reply-To: plt@wasp.eng.ufl.edu (Pete Taylor)
Organization: U of Florida Engineering Comuputing Services

I am a fan of the WH40K stuff presented in Space Hulk and its expansions.  I 
have been putting together some campaign stuff of my own (it is still pretty
sketchy so don't ask me to send it to you yet).  Anyway, I was wondering if
there is a listing of Space Marine Chapter names so that I could use some 
names besides the ones that appear in Space Hulk.

Names I already have are:  Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Ultramarine, Space 
Wolves, and the Traitor Chapters listed in the Campaign book.

If there are any other names from other WH40K material please send them to 
me or tell me where I might be able to track them down.

Thanx in advance....

Pete
--
Peter Taylor                    |Paintgun:  68Automag
plt@wasp.eng.ufl.edu            |Martail Art:  Cuong Nhu Oriental Martial Arts
worldmage@maple.circa.ufl.edu   |              Cypress School, U of F
From: v116r8ac@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Chris Nasipak)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: BTECH - Kathil Shipyards
Date: 17 Apr 92 04:43:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: acsu.1992Apr17.034429.5172
Organization: United Nations Intelligence Taskforce
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


Kathil was attacked by the Liaosies during the 4th sucession war.  The damage
was reperable, fortunateley, and is being repaired now.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you really feel like    |         Not Croaker           |Somewhere else, the
arguing with a can of      |                               |tea is getting cold.
deoderant that registers   | v116r8ac@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu |Come on - we've got
nine on the Richter Scale? |   nasipak@acsu.buffalo.edu    | work to do.
        --- Ace            |                               |  --- Doctor Who
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I wasn't expecting the ReichsInspektor General."  -- General Strasser
"No One expects the Reichsinspektor General." -- Doctor Who, TimeWyrm:Exodus
From: cm9@prism.gatech.EDU (MCKEITHAN,CLIFFORD M.)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: SFB: Romulans & Torps
Date: 6 Apr 92 11:52:09 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Apr3.232503.17990@news.Hawaii.Edu> nishiha@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Gregory Nishihara) writes:
>
>Can a Romulaan fire it's torps and then cloak? Will the toprps hit the
>target after the Romulan goes under?

To the first question, yes.  The Plasma torp is self guiding, and will continue
to track its target after the firing ship cloaks.  

To the second question, I can't say.  It depends on the range and the movement
plots of the ship being fired at.  (small grin)  If you really mean CAN the
torps hit the target, yes the can.  But WILL they hit?  Only time will tell.
(point being that the Romulan ship cloaking has not effect on the torps he
has already fired).
Cliff

-- 
MCKEITHAN,CLIFFORD M.
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:     ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,ut-ngp}!gatech!prism!cm9
Internet: cm9@prism.gatech.edu
From: labc-4ac@e260-2g.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Getting in touch with Jolly Games
Summary: phone number for jolly games
Date: 13 Apr 92 19:35:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: agate.scnpdINN60b
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: e260-2g.berkeley.edu
Originator: labc-4ac@e260-2g.berkeley.edu

Does anyone out there know how i might get in touch with Jolly Games,
the makers of WizWar.  I saw a post a while back that there was an 
expansion set out and I would like to order it, but I can find no
phone number for them, and I'd prefer to not have to send a request
through the real mail with out knowing a currect price and such.  Could
someone please e-mail me or post their (Jolly Games) phone number, or
their address and the current price of their WizWar products.  THANKS!!!


 -=- Matthew L. Seidl
	seidl@cory.berkeley.edu
.
From: birmingh@fnalb.fnal.gov (Phillip J. Birmingham)
Subject: ROR: PBEM
Organization: Aardvark Comment Sucks Club
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 21:08:19 GMT


         Second call here:

         I am going to be running a PBEM game of Republic of Rome. I
    already have three players.

         I anticipate playing at the rate of about a turn a week (at first,
    maybe speeding up if all involved parties can handle it, or slowing
    down if necessary.

         Players should own or have access to the game itself. We will use
    the PBEM rules in the latest General, which will be explained to you if
    you do not have them.

         Other options (which scenario, optional rules) will be hashed out
    once the list is filled out.

         First two to get email to me are in, with the proviso that persons
    recruited by the current players are given priority if they get email
    to me by tomorrow morning (approx. 1500 UCT)
-- 
 Phillip J. Birmingham   birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov  
 I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough...
From: 891078p@ace.acadiau.ca (Trevor Perkins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: rec.games.board.A&A ?
Summary: Is a A&A group warrented ?
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:58:49 GMT
Organization: Acadia University

In article <haydenw.2@courier1.aero.org> haydenw@courier1.aero.org 
(bill hayden) writes:

>Does the heavy interest in Axis & Allies (as observed over the last couple
>of months) warrent the creation of a separate group ?

Sure, why not.  It would make wading through the articles easier.

  =======================================================================
  |   C. Trevor Perkins                       891078p@ace.acadiau.ca.   |
  |                                                                     |
  |    /|                                /~~\                           |
  |  /~~|cadia University                |      /| |\ |   /| |~\   /|   |
  |         Wolfville, Nova Scotia       \__/ /~~| | \| /~~| |_/ /~~|   |
  |---------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |             " Today Europe, Tomorrow the world ! "                  |
  |                                           - Adolf Hitler            |
  =======================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Looking for game based in 1066
Reply-To: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 15:12:45 GMT

c9106225@cc.newcastle.edu.au (Matt McLeod) writes:
>
>Is there a game based on the events of 1066, preferably taking into account not
>just the English/Norman conflict, but also the Norwegian-Scottish offensive in
>the North, and the various political pressures in Western Europe at the time?

I don't know of a strategic level game that includes all you mentioned,
no.  There is a grand-tactical level game just on the battle of Hastings,
though.  It's a Richard Berg design from an old S&T (I don't remember the
issue # - 125, maybe?) that is quite good.

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: bron@bronze.wpd.sgi.com (Bron Campbell Nelson)
Subject: Re: Axis & Allies rules clarifications (2nd edition) REPOST
Summary: Credit where due
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 00:46:02 GMT

In article <3701@winnie.fit.edu>, marrone@ee.fit.edu (Michael Marrone) writes:
> 
> 	Due to all the questions being raised about the rules, I figured it
> would be a good time to repost the summary of Milton Bradley's 1991 Rules
> Clarifications to the 2nd edition rules.  These were originally typed in by
> someone else, I don't know who, so I can't give credit to the person (sorry).

In the Credit Where Credit is Due department: this was originally posted
by Ting Hsu (ajz@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (T. Tim Hsu)).


---------------------------------------------------------------
Bron Campbell Nelson           bron@sgi.com
Silicon Graphics, Inc.
2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.        These statements are my own,
Mtn. View, CA  94039           not those of Silicon Graphics.
From: as298@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Stephen E. McGinnis)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: BTech: Wondering about Mech designs...
Date: 11 Apr 92 18:15:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.1992Apr11.181542.9194
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)


Hey gang,
In the last issue of BattleTechnology magazine it
listed the Mech's accourding to their combat
values. In that list it also listed some that had
been given in BT itself as well as other magazines.
I am looking for the designs for as follows:

10 Ton   MTE-12C   Mite   from Star Date v3/6
30 Ton   N4A       Nate   from Fantasy $& Adventure
65 Ton   ACN-6B    Archon from Game Review #5
"   "    CST-35    Cestus from Spacegammer # 79
100 Ton  MTM-4B  Matchmaker  from Star Date ? (No issue given)
 "   "    TYR-9T  Tyrant  from Game Review #4

If you can give me the stats as well as any history that
is given for these Mechs I would appreciate it.

Thanks,
Stephen E, McGinnis

-- 
Stephen E. McGinnis             "As you wish..."
P.O. Box 13314                          Princess Bride
College Station, TX 77840...er 77841
(So many Zip's  ;-) )
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: bernasco@ghost.dsi.unimi.it (davide bernasconi)
Subject: wfb goblin fanatics
Organization: Computer Science Dep. - Milan University
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 14:23:06 GMT

Don't pain ! It isn't a reply of fanatics/skirmish!

I'd like only to know when fanatics die : 

when their base touch a scenery or when there's a scenery in their radius 

thanx   davide		bernasco@ghost.sm.dsi.unimi.it
From: tjz20735@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Zych)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: SFB: Romulans & Torps
Date: 10 Apr 92 18:40:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: ux1.1992Apr10.184038.7271
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

aha@meryl.csd.uu.se (Anders Hallberg) writes:

>In article <shawni.702680141@tis.llnl.gov>, shawni@.tis.llnl.gov (Shawn Instenes) writes:
>> stevea@jab.tucson.az.us (Steve Albany) writes:
>> 
>> 
>> >[about the advantages of launching and landing fighters while cloaked]
>> 
>> There's a problem with this tactic.  All your opponent has to do is get
>> something to blow up near you (a ship, a shuttle, a t-bomb...), and your
>> ship lights up like a Christmas tree during the impulse of the explosion.
>> Instant lock-on.  Instant death of cloaked ship.  You could even be exposed
>> by one of your own fighters blowing up, if it were close enough to you.

>Shuttles and fighter do *not* explode.  It takes a ship, a mine or a PF 
>explosion that causes damage to the cloaked ship to get the flash-cube
>effect Shawn describes.  Note also that the explosion of a ship with an
>explosion strength of 9 or lower does not extend outside the explosion hex.
>Such a unit would have to explode *in* the hex of the cloaked ship to
>expose it.

>	/Anders

The best tactic I've found for fighting a Romulan is a Lyran.  Set your ESGs
to 3 hex radius, and cruise around waiting for the aforementioned 'flash-cube'
effect.  Then hit him with everything you've got.  I usually put minimum
energy to the ESG, as that is only intended to fix his position - a 3 hex ESG
is very wasteful on energy.

Tom   tjz20735@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
From: onder@ISI.EDU (Bruce Onder)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Fiend folio worth?
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:00:24 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: USC-ISI
In-reply-to: ckessel@sisters.cs.uoregon.edu's message of 15 Apr 92 22:06:37 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.220637.7030@cs.uoregon.edu> ckessel@sisters.cs.uoregon.edu (Chris Kessel) writes:


>> Fiend Folio: $25 (first ed with the blue cover)
>
>This isn't the first time I've seen the FF being sold at greater than
>cover value. Why is it so valuable? Seems everyone I know bought it 
>along with Monster Manual 2, etc. Are any of the other 1st ed books
>of value?

The Fiend Folio was a product of TSR UK.  I don't think it was ever
published in quite the same volume as the other books.  That alone
might account for an increase in value -- especially when you notice
that most Fiend Folios have been totally thrashed!

Also, it seems that most players either LOVE the FF of HATE it.  I
always thought it was pretty neat -- it had more fantasy type monsters
(ie, the descriptions weren't so concerned with exactly how the
monsters survived in their given ecology).  So the book is worth more
to the people who liked it and less to everybody else.

I think $25 is a decent price if it's in good shape AND you what it
had.

Bruce 
--
		Bruce W. Onder		onder@isi.edu

	But still I'd rather be famous than righteous or holy
		      Any day, any day, any day

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: pckyip@athena.mit.edu (Patrick C Yip)
Subject: La Battaille de la Moskova
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 02:18:24 GMT

My friend has a mint copy of the registered limited re-issue of 
"La Battaille de la Moskova" (sp?) by GDW. He would like to know
its value before deciding whether to sell it or not (he doesn't 
go to Convention, BTW). Could somebody give us a little information
about how much it worths now?

Patrick
From: poirier@ellerbe.rtp.dg.com (Charles Poirier)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Email (was Re: Titan: 2 types of megacreatures)
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:10:18 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.

>Re: Play by email Titan.

There are at least a couple of PBEM Titan games in progress already,
and several games completed.

>Well, that's quite a concept.  I hope you have a tabletop you can write
>off for any other purpose for, oh, hell, a year or so.

Not necessary, and it's closer to two or three months.  If you live that long.

>Here are my comments:
>1) I don't see any problem with secrecy about what's in a stack.  
[mechanics deleted]
>5) Will it work?
>OK Titanophiles, what's wrong with this?  I wrote it off the top of my
>head, so there are probably loopholes.  Obviously there is a STRONG HONOR CODE
>required, but I for one would enter any game assuming this was a
>non-consideration.
>Jeffrey Hall // jch@astro.psu.edu

PBEM games under way use a neutral moderator and blow off any pretense of
having to use your own memory to keep track of enemy holdings.  I dislike
the memory aspect anyway (having, myself, a poor one).  The moderator makes
all die rolls.  There is no way I would trust strangers to roll their own
dice out of my sight, and this also goes for most of my friends -- in fact I
play against one guy who I watch throw the dice and I still don't believe 'em.
:-)

The moderator mails a complete game status to all players each time said
status changes, including ASCII facsimiles of the boards, legion sizes,
and caretaker-stack-sizes.  I haven't had to pull out my physical board
at all except on the occasions when I pre-play real or hypothetical battles.
The moderator can accept moves ahead of time in some cases, which helps
to speed up turnaround time.  Not a bad system.

	Cheers,
	Charles Poirier
From: ace@lacey.cs.mcgill.ca (Arthur CHAN)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Japan in Axis and Allies
Keywords: Factory
Date: 4 Apr 92 20:37:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Apr4.203736.15340
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

In article <3APR199215081568@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov> colorado@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov  
(Martin Snow) writes:
> In article <31282@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, otran@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Oai Tran)  
writes...
> >hold.  If they do, the US ecomony will be able to by over 30 BRPs
> >worth every turn in asia to kick Japan off and lend aid to Russia.
> 
> Only 2 units per turn can be built in a new factory in China.  That's why 
> a UK factory in India (3/turn) is often a better choice.  RTFM, eh? :-)
> 
> Martin Snow
> 
> snow@lyrae.dnet.nasa.gov
> snow@cololasp.bitnet
> msnow%cygnus@vaxf.colorado.edu

If there is a factory in India, the Japanese will divert all ( most )
attack forces in attacking India, with only the initial UK forces
defending India.  If the Allies choose to build a factory, it
would most probably be on the US's 2nd Asian territory ( not China )

The reason is on Round 1 , all the UK forces will move to the 2nd said
territory surrendering India to Japan.  On the Japanese turn, they
will probably claim India and attack China.  On the US turn , the 
US will build the factory. This territory will contain the UK forces
from India as well as the initial US forces.

Besides, if the Allies chose to build a factory in India, the UK cannot
afford to support it with buying infantry since they IMHO should be
spending money on other things at home. ( eg Bombing Germany etc.... )
The US is in a better financial position to buy infantry in Asia.

Anyways, I personally feel that building a factory in Asia is 
a waste of Allied $ because I think the Japanese will claim all
the Asian territories ( including the factory ) in a matter of 
rounds.


--



                  
                 ######\   (    )   /######
             -#########//  |\^^/|  \\#########-
          -###########//   (@::@)   \\###########-
        /############((     \\//     ))############\
      -###############\\    (oo)    //###############-
     -#################\\  / ** \  //#################-
   -######/-\[^]-:/:-[^]-:/-[^]-:\:-[^]-:\:-[^]-\######-
  _#/|####<=---=====---=====---=====---=====---=>####|\#_
   |/|#/\#<<^>         Arthur Chan           <^>>#/\#| \|
   '  |/ V<<^>   ace@binkley.cs.mcgill.ca    <^>>V  \|  '
          <=---=====---=====---=====---=====---=>
          \-[^]-:\:-[^]-:\:-[^]-:/:-[^]-:/:-[^]-/
                      __\ | |  | | /__
                     (vvv(VVV)(VVV)vvv)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board