HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: GC.SUL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Sullivan)
Subject: For Sale: Divine Right
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:48:28 GMT

Divine Right game for sale

This game has never been punched or played.  The box is bent up and
faded but not torn.  Some of the counters must have fallen out of
the counter sheet as former owner(not me) stuck them back in with
scotch tape on the back, but counter sheets are all there and in
great shape.  The rules, and uncut player cards are in new condition
as is map.

This is a later edition of the game that has the corrected
army count for Shucassam.

Sale mechanics:

Price:        open bid plus shipping.
How:          email requests only please unless we have difficulties
              linking up.  If that is the case, I can provide a
              phone number that you can leave a bid on voice mail.

              I'll post hi bid every day.

              I'll accept open bids until September 1 or until there
              is a 24 hour period with no bids, whichever comes last.

              At that point, I'll post a message with the high bid,
              bidder, and begin another 24 hour period.

              When I get a 24 hour period with no new bids, the
              previous bidder will get a note from me.


Mike
From: ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (Alec Habig)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: SFB: Alternate Damage Allocation Methods
Date: 3 Sep 92 13:59:30 GMT
Organization: Indiana University Astrophysics, Bloomington, IN

In article <james.715382252@wrs.com> james@wrs.com writes:
>I've been thinking about another way that uses the computer to
>generate damage tables, but you don't need the computer to play.
>What do you think of this:
>
>Generate a table of random die rolls (say 1000).  Print out the
>lines of the DAC that correspond to the rolls, and number the
>lines.  To actually generate the damage, use three 20-sided dice
>to determine your starting point in the table, and just call off the
>hits from that point.  This at least
>avoids rolling the dice and cross-indexing into the DAC chart, and
>should be random enough to not change the game at all.

Hmm... this sounds like more work, actually.  Instead of rolling 2 dice, you
roll three.  Then you have to search through not just 11 slots, but 1000.

Maybe something along the lines of a program which you hit spacebar and it
spits out the line on the DAC.  Then you could click on which horizontal line
you're on, so the computer could remind you that you've already taken that
underlined phaser hit this volley.  Of course, this requires a computer present
again, but that's not too hard in this age of laptops.

	Alec
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Michael Hall)
Subject: Re: Wings
Organization: NASA/ARC Information Sciences Division
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:43:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.221754.21308@cs.sfu.ca> kenward@cs.sfu.ca (Kenward Chin) writes:
>I have a friend who owns the board WWI air combat game Wings.  He's
>quite positive about it, but I haven't heard any talk about it in this
>group.  Any comments, or comparative notes with other WWI air combat games?

Every once in a while, I rave about it here on rec.games.board.  The
game is by Yaquinto, out of print.  It's great!  The counters are
better than you'll ever see in another game, the game is fun, and
there are tons of optional and advanced rules for hardcore wargamers.
It's a *real* wargame.  Think "Wooden Ships & Iron Men in 3D".  My
main criticism is that the design-your-own scenario points are unbalanced
- the Camel is too cheap - but that is a minor point and can be worked
around.

-- 
Michael Hall            \ "Advantage is irrelevant.
NASA Ames Research Center\  Countermeasures are futile."
hall@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov \  -Borg card counter
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: dxb105@phys.anu.edu.au (David Bofinger)
Subject: Re: rec.games.strategic
Followup-To: rec.games.chess,rec.games.go,rec.games.board,news.groups
Organization: Theoretical Physics, Australian National University
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 23:59:33 GMT

If you want to split up rec.games.board, I don't see why not. As far as I
can see there aren't any real disadvantages: it won't take any longer to
read two small groups than it does one large one, and there won't be any
significant increase in bandwidth. On the other hand, USENET guidelines
do expect there to be a significant traffic in a subject before a group is
created, and as far as I can tell this isn't true at present. "But we're
frightened off by the wargamers" is no excuse (my apologies for demolishing
a straw man). Or are these games getting shuffled off to the periphery, the
way that gomoku sometimes pops up in rec.games.go?

But please don't use a name like rec.games.strategic unless you want to
include all the strategic military simulation games (Advanced Third Reich
and World in Flames, for instance). Otherwise the group will never be free
of "take this thread to ..." messages.

The big difference between games like go and games like World in Flames is
that the former is abstract whle the latter is a simulation. That is, WiF
asks the players to make the same sorts of decisions as someone in history
would have, while go has no real connection to anything "real". Both games
have strategic (and tactical, for that matter) aspects.

Call it rec.games.abstract or rec.games.board.abstract.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Bofinger   Department of Theoretical Physics, ANU
                 dxb105@phys.anu.edu.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: caraher@pn32.petnet.med.umich.edu
Subject: Re: Wings
Organization: pet/cyclotron
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:29:19 GMT

>I have a friend who owns the board WWI air combat game Wings.  He's
>quite positive about it, but I haven't heard any talk about it in this
>group.  Any comments, or comparative notes with other WWI air combat games?
 I haven't played Wings myself, but a group of fanatic air game players whose
opinion I respect love it. The impression I get is that for now Wings is the
best game on that era of air combat.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,rec.games.frp.misc
From: Elliott.Wong@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Elliott Wong)
Subject: Mech Designer
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 04:30:31 GMT

	I have uploaded Kurt Staiger's Mech Designer to wuarchive.wustl.edu
It is a mech editor for the BattleTech game.

	It is in the \pub\MSDOS_UPLOADS directory as mchdsgn31.zip

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: eam3@po.CWRU.Edu (Eric A. Meyer)
Subject: Re: Axis and Allies
Reply-To: eam3@po.CWRU.Edu (Eric A. Meyer)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 22:42:56 GMT


In a previous article, barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich) says:

>Why are you asking?  It's in the rulebook.  Ok, maybe you don't fully
>understand the rulebook.  Fair enough, here we go:

   Which rulebook?  Probably the second one, which some of us don't
own (me, for example).  So, can you tell us how we may obtain a copy
of the latest rules?  (The answer 'buy a new copy of the game' is NOT
a valid response.)

		-EMeyer

-- 
"Unstable condition--a symptom of life       | Eric A. Meyer (eam3@po.CWRU.edu)
 In mental and environmental change          |  Alumnus,  Beta Nu of Theta Chi
 Atmospheric disturbance--the feverish flux  |---------------------------------
 Of human interface and interchange-"  -N.P. |    "What do you think, sirs?"
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: c34657b@saha.hut.fi (Tuomas Viljanen)
Subject: Re: ancients mailing list (Personal reply)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 17:07:11 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.155738.1@vaxa.strath.ac.uk> craa27@vaxa.strath.ac.uk writes:
>In article <1992Aug24.143340.8482@cbnewsh.cb.att.com>, alr@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (andrew.l.reibman) writes:
>> Based on response to my previous posting, I have started an
>> ancients minatures mailing list. 
>
>Dear Andrew, (and sorry net, but 2 attempts to reply have died, so I decided
>              to followup and endure the flames).
>
>I'm interested, please add me as a recipient for this list

If you did not get my mail, please add me in also.


  ++ Tuomas Viljanen                     ++ For a battle like Crecy, you do  ++
  ++ Lahderanta 20 A 19                  ++ not need a military genius like  ++
  ++ SF-02720 Espoo 72 FINLAND           ++ Edward III. All you need is an   ++
  ++ 358-0-592175 or c34657b@saha.hut.fi ++ idiot like the Duke of Alencon.  ++
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,news.groups
From: v073pzuy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Hooked on Phonics)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Dragonchess
Date: 31 Aug 92 15:50:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Help!  I accidentally let my fingers do the walking and killed all the Dragon-
chess posts.  Could someone please repost the rules?

Advance thanks,
					---Chet
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,rec.games.go
From: allis@cs.rulimburg.nl (Victor Allis)
Subject: Go-Moku solved
Reply-To: allis@cs.rulimburg.nl (Victor Allis)
Organization: University of Limburg, Maastricht
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 15:05:28 GMT

A few months ago, there has been a discussion about whether Go-Moku is a
first-player win. Although everybody agreed on the fact that this is probably
true, no proof existed at that time.

At the 4th Computer Games Olympiad in London, 4-11 August 1992, we presented
the Go-Moku program Victoria which has proven that Black can win at Go-Moku,
provided that there are no restrictions imposed on his opening moves.

Both the version where Black and White can win by having five OR MORE in a row,
and the version where Black and White can only win by having EXACTLY five in
a row (but an overline does not count as a loss), have been proven to be
first player wins.

Victoria's "brain" has been developed by Victor Allis (University of Limburg),
while her "beauty" (the graphical interface) has been written by Loek
Schoenmaker. Matty Huntjens has operated the multi-computer environment to
calculate the opening database. Loek and Matty are both from the Vrije
Universiteit in Amsterdam.

Victoria is capable of finding winning sequences of threats of between 7 and 19
ply in approximately 0.1 CPU second. Using this ability as evaluation function,
a winning tree has been grown of approximately 150,000 positions. At every
leaf node of the tree Black has a win by a sequence of threats.

For more information, see "Heuristic Programming in Artificial Intelligence 4:
the fourth computer olympiad" (to appear around Christmas).

Victor Allis,
allis@cs.rulimburg.nl
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,news.groups
From: quirk@pioneer.unm.edu (Gym Z. Quirk)
Subject: Re: rec.games.abstract (Re: rec.games.strategic controversy)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 19:09:28 GMT
Organization: Space and Planetary Image Facility
Followup-To: news.groups

[Followups sent to news.groups where they belong.]

In article <1992Aug26.172017.9025@sbcs.sunysb.edu> neilb@scs.leeds.ac.uk (Neil Bowers) writes:
>Why are you so determined to keep everyone in rec.games.board?
>There are a sizable number of usenetters who have expressed a desire
>for a group such as rec.games.abstract, since they have no interest
>in wargames and other non-abstract games which get coverage in r.g.b.

Sizable number?  I've seen 3 or 4 people max.  Even using the 'average
poster to lurker' ratio of 1:20, that means about 60-80 total people.
Remember.  To successfully create a newsgroup you need *at least* 100
more yea than nay, and a 2/3 majority to boot.

>-neilb

-- 
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk  (Known to some as Taki Kogoma)  quirk@pioneer.unm.edu
 I'll get a life when someone demonstrates that it would be superior to
                          what I have now...
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: rday@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E Day)
Subject: Re: BTECH - editor question
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:43:04 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.082121.1@cc.newcastle.edu.au> c9036991@cc.newcastle.edu.a
u (UNFORGETTABLE ... IN EVERY WAY . AND FOREVERMORE .. THATS HOW WELL STAY) wri
tes:
>
>    Just a simple question ... i tried to FTP to the umich site
>    to get the mech editor .. but couldnt find what directory it was
>    under .. could somone please tell me the directory path or even
>    just the name of the mecheditor file so that i can have another
>    look for about the fifth time ....
>
 The location for meched32.zip is msdos/games/strategy/battletech.

It is the only thing there.

(I hope that this helps)
-
-- 
If the price that I must pay to obtain my *  Robert E. Day/Syr Otto von    *
freedom, is to acknowledge that the Gov-  *  Schwartzkatz, Shire Mugmort   *
ernmet was granted the power to infringe  *  Barony Middle Marches,        *
on them, then I am not free. Paul Anderson*  Middle Kingdom                *
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: daniels@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Daniel R. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: Conquest of the Empire
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 22:49:10 GMT

duelge@schaefer.math.wisc.edu (Jason Duelge) writes:

>In article <1992Aug31.193856.13840@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bz556@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Joshua E. Randall) writes:
>>
>>Anybody play this game?  I find it a good break from more serious games
>>like CE and Diplomacy.  It does, however, suffer from the usual lack of
>>balance.  But as a "beer and pretzles" game it is a good one.
>>
>>Joshua E. Randall

I've played quite a few games of Conquest and I think it's cool, however, it
does lack balance.  If you are looking for a way to spice it up and make
it more challenging, you should look at _New Rules to Conquer_ article in
MOVES number 70, June-July 1992.  This two page article contains changes
to the Action Sequence (for random events), the Movement (galley movement),
and the Combat system (combat advantage to undermine the invincible legions
of catapults.)  I don't think they are MAJOR changes, but they're a start.

>I have had this game for over four years.  Don't play it too much.
>Last week at GenCon i saw a copy of it at Crazy Egor's.  It was priced
>at $375.  WOW!  I couldn't believe it ...
>I'm reluctant to play my copy now, and am curious why it would be so
>expensive.  Its not *that* good a game.
>I've got Broadsides, Fortress America, Shogun and A&A.  I guess A&A is
>the only one still in print?

Yea, I think Axis and Allies is the only one in print.  More expensive than
when it first came out, I think.  I have Broadsides, Fortress America, Conquest
of the Empire and A&A and I have played Shogun once.  I don't believe that
someone would actually pay $375 for Conquest even IF it was still pristine and
shrink-wrapped.  Perhaps as a Christmas present. . . . 

By the way, I think Shogun only went through one print run and even though
I only played it once, I think it's definitely one of the best.  Better than
Conquest. If any of the games would sell for $300 I think it would be Shogun,
I would hold onto yours.  Or sell it to me. . . cheap ;)

>Jason

Daniel at University of Illinois, USAw3
-- 
Daniel R. Sawyer
daniel-sawyer@uiuc.edu

--
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,rec.games.pbm,bit.listserv.dipl-l
From: bss@math.ufl.edu (Bob Slaughter)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Tactica: Wheeling
Date: 23 Aug 92 17:15:49 GMT
Organization: University of Florida Department of Mathematics

I now have both the Ancients and Medieval rule books for Tactica.  In
Ancients, wheeling can only be done the first two turns by Massed
infantry, whereas in the Medieval rules units can wheel all game long
(albeit in both games wheeling is a real slow process). Has there been
arule change here?

Thanks.

-- 
*     Bob Slaughter                           *  Model Railroading is fun  *
*     InterNet#1:  bss@math.ufl.edu           *    Call 1-800-FOR-RENT     *
*     InterNet#2:  Haldane@Pine.Circa.Ufl.Edu *   Vampire RPG list admin   *
*     see also: haldane@nerix.nerdc.ufl.edu, haldane@ufpine.bitnet         *
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Naval Ops. (re: WWII why NOT abstract?)
Date: 23 Aug 92 19:26:47 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <1992Aug22.115027.89848@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au>, by che755v@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au:
> In article <1992Aug21.120215.3677@desire.wright.edu>,
>  demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
>>       But a BRP cost per mission might make it more realistic.  That way you
>> can have ships fight two major battles (as long as you have BRPs :) in the same
>> game turn.
>>       Strategy and hidden movement become even more important: you know
>> there's a task force moving into the Coral Sea, but how many ships do you
>> oppose it with?  Should you save BRPs for another battle that turn?

> Doesn't Victory Games "Pacific War" use a system similar to the BRP system
> advocated here???  [..] I seem
> to remember something about "operational factors" that limited the number
			       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Called "Command Points"

> Can anyone offer a critique of the system and/or correct/add to
> the information I've posted???

The description fits fairly well.  The command points are necessary
not only for naval operations, but also for movement of land units and
air attacks, purchase of transports, and infrastructure construction
(airfields + ports).  They are dished out on a monthly basis and
distributed over the different HQs.  On the whole, they must be
consumed in the month they are generated, but a certain amount can be
collected to enable the currently weaker player to launch a large
operation every few months.

Not only does this system simulate supply lines fairly well, in a
streamlined manner (with some corners cut, of course), but they
managed to integrate the operations with a great way to simulate
different levels of military intelligence, i.e., you do not know
beforehand how well or with what forces your opponent will be able to
react to your operation, while he may not know exactly (or even
roughly) how your forces are composed.  On the other hand, depending
on his success in searching, he may know a lot.

Not all people like the bidding system, since it means that one side
may be running the show for months on end (the Japanese in the first
half of 1942 and the US from 1943 or 1944 onwards), sprinkled with
only a few opportunities for counteroffensives.  Personally, I'd say
it works very well (but I haven't played beyond 1943 yet).
-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: bz556@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Joshua E. Randall)
Subject: Conquest of the Empire
Reply-To: bz556@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Joshua E. Randall)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 19:38:56 GMT


Anybody play this game?  I find it a good break from more serious games
like CE and Diplomacy.  It does, however, suffer from the usual lack of
balance.  But as a "beer and pretzles" game it is a good one.

-- 
Joshua E. Randall
bz556@cleveland.freenet.edu
My motto:  "So little time, so little to do."  --Oscar Levant
From: thomasm@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael J. Thomas)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Suggestion for FAQ (long)
Date: 30 Aug 92 20:57:07 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization


kccc@wucs1.wustl.edu (Ken Cox)  writes in his suggested FAQ:

>
>
Q)  May I make a challenge on a planet where I already have a base?

A)  Yes.  This often happens when you are challenging another player
    in your home system.
>
>
 
  My friends and I have always played that you *can't* make a challenge
against a planet where you already have a base, whether you are attacking 
your planet or another player's system.
 
 *retrieves Eon and Mayfair rules books*
 
 Hmmmmm....  Well, Eon states, in the Expansion 9 rulebook that you 'point 
the cone at the Moon or Planet you choose in the defensive system.'  However,
when you turn over your own Destiny Disc, you can 'attempt to *regain* a
home base.'  (my stress).  This would imply that you can't attack a planet in
your system on which you already have a base.  Either 1) we implied this rule
even further, to include other players' systems, or 2) we *did* read it
somewhere and I just can't find it at the moment.
 
 Mayfair also has a similar statement in their rulebook.  When Red turns over
Purple's Destiny Card, Red can either 'challenge a Purple base directly, 
challenge an empty planet in the Purple system, or challenge one that
contains other players' tokens but none of Purples.'  This more implicitly
implies that you *can* attack a planet where you already have a base, since
the only player who can't have tokens on that base is Purple.
 Mayfaair also states that when you turn over your own Destiny Card, you can
try to 'regain a base'.  The implication is still there from Eon's rules.
 
 So, my original reason for response (the belief that you can't attack a planet
where you have a base) seems to have been refuted.  However, it still makes
sense, most of the time, to not attack a planet where you already have a base.
We'll probably continue playing this way, it's been ingrained after years of
playing.


Michael

--
_____________________________________________________________________________
Michael Thomas    |   Hail Eris!   | The writer of this .sig is a
House of the      \    All Hail   /  Genuine and Authorized POPE
Techno-Discordians |  Discordia!  |  So *please* Treat Him Right
Cosmic Encounter Statistics Vault,| (A POPE is someone who is not under the 
Second Sub-Level Basement         |  authorities of the authorities)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: a few questions...
Date: 31 Aug 92 20:42:12 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA
Originator: gharris@jade.tufts.edu

In article <RATINOX.92Aug31105619@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu> ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu writes:
>>>>>> "MF" == Massimo Fasciano <fasciano@nil.IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:
>
>MF> 4) Zombie is immune to Void, right?
>
>No. Voided tokens do not go to the Warp, they go *away*. Zombie is immune
>to the Warp, not the Void.

	I don't have a set with me, but I believe that Void is worded such that
tokens that would go to the Warp go to the Void instead.  Since Zombie tokens
would not go to the Warp, they don't go to the Void.

>Richard Pieri, Northeastern's Stainless Steel Rat/   | /| / /   | The Worlds
>Internet: ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu   /__  |/ |/ / /| | Welfare Works
>    UUCP: ...!northeastern.edu!meceng!ratinox  /   | /| / / / | | Association:
>  BITNET: UA_RLP@NUHUB{.BITNET}               /__  |/ |/ / /  | | I will solve
--
"If you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce, they taste more like
prunes than rhubarb does."              -Groucho Marx 

gharris@jade.tufts.edu          George Harris, Tufts Univ. Dept. of Mathematics
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce