HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: leet@acsu.buffalo.edu (Brian D. Leet)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Generic Object Description
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:22:51 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <gdukx9q00aw9A1y1YY@andrew.cmu.edu> wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu (William Henry Timmins) writes:
>>Problem:  Suppose I design a sword object, and then want to hit someone
>over the
>>head with the flat of my sword.  This should not kill that person.  But if I
>>do not specify what happens, I would just kill the person because the sword is
>>sharp and force-multiplicative.  How can we design a system where I can say
>>"Hit man on head with flat of sword" and have the right things happen?  Does
>>the object designer need to pull this out as a special case and write a
>>function for it?  Probably, since the "flat" of a sword is different from the
>>"flat" of a gun, especially since guns have no flat!
>
>Use a different action... for example, 'hit <target> with <object>' just
>smacks a target with a flat or blunt part of your object. 'cut' can be
>used if you have a sharp edge, and 'stab' if you have a point.
>
>-Me

What about strike, skewer, slash, bash, pierce, etc...?  At some point you 
need to draw a limit here.  Based on my experience in OOE (LPmud, basic mudlib
design) I would say you are trying to do just a bit too much.  The best way 
to go about it would be to set up the sentence/command parser to be flexible.
Then if you hard-code into the sword that you can use a command like:
Hit troll with flat of sword
A special routine/function in the sword may be called.  If you try:
Hit troll with flat of axe
and axes do not have this special "variation" coded into them the parser may
ask a question like: "Do you wish to hack the troll with your axe?" since it
notices the word axe in the command used with other terms it does not 
recognize.
	Keep in mind these are special situations.  Any computer run/simulated
environment needs to deal with only basic variables and conditions with any 
special situations and options hard-coded into the location that will allow
them to work.  I have no clue how many verbs there are in the English language
but i doubt you could code them all (nor would you have reason to).  The key
is actually to make the "basic" objects as simple and open as possible in 
order to allow the most flexibility in hard-coding special options into them.
If you want an example of how the environments I have worked on run I would
be glad to post some (when I have a chance.)
					Brian  (@TMI, @Underdark)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: howell@blegga.u.washington.edu (David Howell)
Subject: Re: Generic Object Description
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 07:29:09 GMT

As someone else pointed out, this is begging for an OOP approach.
Ironic, really, using Object Oriented Programming to describe
objects. :)
 
OK: Object-->Thing
 
It's got a weight, a shape (probably length, width, heigth), a name,
an appearance (either verbal or graphic file or both, I suppose).
 
Now. Plant: Thing, and add rate of growth, needed phenomena for
growth (object sunlight, object water, etc.), 

Daffodil: Plant, (set appropriate parameters), add appearance of
flowering part, timetable of flowering, etc.

Carnivorous Daffodil: inherit Daffodil, but change response to
presence of certain objects. Default response is to ignore. If
Object-->Animal is within range (dependent on size, one supposes), then
use function attack.
 
A Specific Carnivorous Daffodil would be scaled from the general
(80% of size, 110% of normal aggression vis a vis presence of
animal, color 10% darker than default, etc.)

A good start would be to take a specific object (George's Sword), and
describe it in detail. Then, figure out what's specific to that sword
(location of manufacture? The nick in the blade?), what's a property of
class "Long Sword" (shape, width), property of "Sword" (made of steel,
has pommel), property of "Edged Weapons" (affect of edge on Things,
<effect>, existance of point), what's a property of "Weapons" (various
actions regarding impact, I guess), and so forth. There should
also be objects like "Steel", so the sword can inherit certain fields
from that, and should probably be able to inherit surfaces. If
steel has a range of surface reflectivity, then setting it to
`polished' might cause it to inherit the "Medium Mirror" surface.
You can't really use it for shaving, but it can do a credible job of
reflecting light. It _just_might_ work for looking at a Medusa, for
example.
 
The first couple of objects are a bear, especially when you start
trying to deal with responses to stimuli. Below certain temperatures,
"Steel"'s response to impact should change: it gets brittle. Around
room temperatures, it would inherit "Thing"'s properties: ignore
temperature. Above a certain point, it needs to inherit properties
from "Lava" with suitable modifications.
 
Once "Steel" is set, though, doing "Iron", "Titanium", "ChromeMoly Steel'<
or "Adamantine" would probably be a matter of inheriting "Steel" and making
just a couple of changes. The more objects, the easier the process gets.

Yes? No?

Dave Howell
howell@blegga.cac.washington.edu
<danger-->header address is in error>
From: esper@cs35b.cs.umn.edu (Dave Sherohman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Skills/Attributes-General query
Date: 12 Apr 92 16:26:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: news2.1992Apr12.162659.15033
Organization: University of Minnesota

In article <emj.702966543@atop> emj@atop.ugcs.caltech.edu (ed johnson) writes:
>to exceed, for instance.  This would reqire a die-rolling system where
>the chance of rolling a number goes down exponentially as the number
>goes up.  A good approximation of this is a re-roll on 20s, or on 10s and

One system I've seen that does this is d10X from Cyborg Commando.  And it's
even simple - 1d10X = 1d10 * 1d10.  This gives a distribution from 1-100
with a mean of 30.25.  Admittedly, the probability curve isn't strictly
decreasing, and there are plenty of numbers which can't be rolled, but I'd
think it would perform acceptably.

esper@ima.umn.edu
From: wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu (William Henry Timmins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Skills/Attributes-General query
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:17:11 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

>One major complaint I have with systems such as Vampire and Cyberpunk 2020
>is their method of adding the stat and skill.  This puts them on equal
>footing, which I strongly disagree with: stats implies base ability across
>a large field, skills should confer a marked advantage over a much smaller
>domain.  In that system, there is no difference effectively between a PhD
>with no aptitude for his field and a young gun who is just plain good.
>
>Your proposal seems to have the same failing, save if were were to specify
>that skills have either a different scale (say 1-20) or shift the range
>(from say 3-12) to allow skills more of a effect on the overall percentage.
>However as is, skills are equal in value to stats, assuming their method
>of distribution is the same.  If you were to make stats above 7 very rare
>and allow higher skills, then you'd likewise shift the value over to skill.

	My view is that stats are the talent of a person to do certain types of
tasks, while skill is the training in any one area to do a task. Thus,
training simply magnifies the effect of your stat in a specific area.

Actually, here's a better system:

	A while ago I noticed something I disliked about many scores in
systems. Let's say the scale of stats are 1-20.
	If I had 10, and another person had 20, it implies that the other
person is twice the level that I am.
	However, if I had 10 and another person had 2, it implies that I am
FIVE times as good as they are.
	In any system where stats advance linearly, this simply makes no sense.

	My proposal is to use simple multipliers. If I have a strength of x2,
my strength is twice that of average. If I have a strength of /3, my
strength is 1/3 that of average.
	The advantage is that this system is fairly intuitive. A knowledge of
stats gives you a good basic approximation. If someone had a x2.3
strength, their character could know that they are about twice normal
strength.

	To combine this with the previous skill system, a given skill could be
multiplied by the stat. Someone with a logical aptitude of x2.7 and a
skill of 20% would have a modified skill of 54%.
	Damage, lifting, and other real world performance is easier to relate,
as well. I have found it convenient to limit range of such stats to
/3-x3. (I also worked out how stats relate to physical characteristics,
but am still working out the details)

Comments?

-Me
From: db@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Dave Berry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: PBeM: creating/joining governments?
Date: 10 Apr 92 16:53:48 GMT
Reply-To: db@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Dave Berry)
Organization: Laboratory for the Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh U

In article <1992Apr10.100841.1586@cs.tcd.ie> droe@cs.tcd.ie (David Roe) writes:
>BTW, in a later posting, someone mentioned Brittania had a similar system
>- does it? Ive never seen it.

Agreemens made during an election for Bretwalda may not be broken.  They last
one turn.

Dave.
--
 Dave Berry, LFCS, Edinburgh Uni.      db%dcs.ed.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk

"And so it looks like we're in for another five years of silly government."
					-- Monty Python.
From: db@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Dave Berry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Dice.game (a good one)
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:33:15 GMT
Reply-To: db@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Dave Berry)
Organization: Laboratory for the Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh U

In article <ku4po4INNgun@aludra.usc.edu> baruz@aludra.usc.edu (Fat Bloated Idiot) writes:
>This is called "Pigs."  Winner is the first to get past 100.  There's
>a version that involves rolling pig-shaped dice.

There's also a postal version ...

Dave.

--
 Dave Berry, LFCS, Edinburgh Uni.      db%dcs.ed.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk

Authority is arbitrary.          Nobody is normal.         Assume nothing.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: jhawes@everest.srd.bt.co.uk (Jason Hawes)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Dice.game (Pass the Pigs)
Date: 10 Apr 92 08:54:54 GMT
Reply-To: jhawes@everest.srd.bt.co.uk
Organization: British Telecom

Well you live and learn !

I'd heard of this pass the piggies game but I had no idea I was
playing it !!

I first met the game on a school's 480Z (that a computer - any one
else had to use those things ??), but unfortunately the piggies
reference had already been lost.
From: umsmigi0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Trevor Allan Smigiel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: A new trend in roleplaying?
Date: 7 Apr 92 12:49:09 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada


     Perhaps they could publish all the non system specific stuff in
one book, and have small cheap booklets with tables and whatever for
the specific systems.

Trevor
No .sig
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: emj@atop.ugcs.caltech.edu (ed johnson)
Subject: Re: Skills/Attributes-General query
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 04:29:03 GMT

William Henry Timmins <wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>>numbers.  Your idea, while perhaps mathematically pleasing, would be
>>even worse, since we are multiplying by non-integral values.  Basically
>>a calculator would be mandatory.

>	Multiplying a number by something by 2.5 is the same as multiplying by
>25 and moving the decimal place, or you could limit it to 1, 2, or 3.
>	Dividing is a bit more of a bitch, making calculators a bit more needed.

Use a logarithmic scale.  Multiplying by 2.5 would be the same as adding
log(2.5) ... use whatever base you like, although I think that anything
around 2 or over is a bit extreme.  Of course, the base would have to be
larger than one.  Experiment and see what works for the range of numbers
you want.

>>Of course, these skills could be calculated in advance, but how would
>>you handle difficulty modifiers?  I would assume more multipliers
>>would be involved.

More multipliers; if you want just additions, they would be messy, because
on a log scale, the additions would depend on what you're adding to.
Apologies if that's muddled, you probably know what I mean.

>	I would use multipliers, simply because I don't mind using a
>calculator. I mind the number of steps more than the difficulty of a
>step.
>	Raising something to a power I mind less than chart look ups, simply
>because typing three keys in a calculator is something I prefer to
>searching texts.

>	On the other hand, you could always simply subtract. Something might
>have a -25% or some such.

>As I like simple equations, one of my favorite equations for skills is:
>	chance = .8^(skill level needed/skill level)

simplifies to log(chance) = some_number * (needed - current).  The
log(chance) would just be some number, a die roll that you would need
to exceed, for instance.  This would reqire a die-rolling system where
the chance of rolling a number goes down exponentially as the number
goes up.  A good approximation of this is a re-roll on 20s, or on 10s and
20s.

>	The above determines that at a given level of skill, there is a good
>(80%) chance of success. It has the advantage that it can never exceed
>1, a problem with other systems. The disadvantage is that you NEED a
>calculator to do it out.

>	Currently, I'm thinking of much simpler mechanics, since I don't really
>care about designing a system that closely mimics reality, just hints at
>it. The above was more detailed attempts I've made in the past.

The above is quite simple and needs no calculator.  It has the nice
benefit of making arbitrarily high rolls possible (if not probable).
Your character could roll an 82 and it would be talked about for
10s of sessions afterwards!

>-Me

Ed
From: 911087e@ace.acadiau.ca (John Enzinas)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: re: EXTEXO
Keywords: cut cut cut
Date: 5 Apr 92 17:03:40 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Acadia University

could someone cut this up and repost it or mail it to me? my news program 
does not have enough available memory to get it all at once.

that anarcha austrailia (sorry about the spelling) one too?
thanx
--johnny vague

 

*****EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE IS TRUE*******************************
Pansexuals of the world Unite!!!!!!
                  911087e@ace.acadiau.ca <johnny vague>
                               So what If I said it, You Believed it!
*****EVERY THING ABOVE THIS LINE IS FALSE*****************************
From: gt3017a@prism.gatech.EDU (Guy Elden Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.games.xtank.programmer
Subject: 3-d Xtank??
Date: 10 Apr 92 00:10:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology


     I don't know if this is the right group to post to for this, but what
the hell... Has anyone heard of a 3-d version of Xtank and if so, where in
this damn world I could get my hands on it? 
A group of us at school here, in our very limited spare time, play all sorts
of x-games, and would like to add a 3-d version (of which I here there is)
to our little collection. Any help is much appreciated.

-- 
gt3017a@prism.gatech.edu (Mr. Spock) | "All of us get lost in the darkness,
a.k.a. Guy Elden Jr.                 | Dreamers learn to steer by the stars,
                          Rush ------| All of us do time in the gutter,
                         'The Pass'  | Dreamers turn to look at the stars"
From: bcolbert@rucs2.sunlab.cs.runet.edu (Brad Colbert)
Newsgroups: rec.games.xtank.programmer
Subject: Questions! Repost! Repost!
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:33:32 GMT
Organization: Radford University

Wow, first time I have posted a question.

Well here goes...

1)  I was thinking the other day about what weapons are used today for
    attacking tanks.  The TOW missile is the first that came to mind.
    An incredibly potent weapon, I beleave you should only be able to 
    have a few.  Make them real expensive, and hard to operate.  Say
    you have to be completely stopped to fire, and make them screen range
    since you have to see the target to hit it. Also, if someone goes 
    in between the firing tank and the missile, guidence is lost since
    technically it is a wire.  Also make it realatively slow.

2)  How would I go about adding stuff to the Xtank code, such as new tanks
    and new weapons.  I was able to add a new armor type called Kryptonite.
    It has a defeat rate of 4 (much more than any armor) is as lite as
    kevlar BUT costs $500 dollars per unit.  I think its only fair that
    if someone outfits a tank with this stuff they deserve their tank
    to be in the millions of dollars, which is what mine was.  One kill
    on me and the oppenent had 11000 pts.  I also modified the strength of
    the HARM missile becuase at 30000 a piece etc, they should do some
    serious damage.

3)  I think I have a bug in my HARM display code.  When I try to fire more 
    than one launcher at a time they dissapear, and blink widely like ghost
    images, but they do hit their target.

4)  How can I write a robot program that will use the map for targeting,
    HARM missiles.  Im trying to write a program that is a standoff,
    piss-u-off, hit and run deal.  I like the idea of some innocent
    bye-stander wandering around, and out of nowhere comes a HARM.  WAMM!!!
    Anyways you get my drift, in short what do I need to do to get a 
    programm to use the RADAR as the targeting device.

5)  It would be convienient(sp) to hold down the "g" key AND the "t" key
    AND the  "space" key so that I can ram and fire and aim all at the same
    time without fitting the buttons a million times.

6)  Last but not least...  WHEN IS THE 3D VERSION COMING OUT!!??  I
    can't wait!

P.S.  Could you put me on your mailing list please!?


-| bcolbert@rucs2.sunlab.cs.runet.edu |---------------------------------------
|                         Where you come from is gone,                       |
|             Where you thought you where going to never was there,          |
|         And where you are is no good unless you can get away from it.      |
|                     Where is there a place for you to be?                  |
|                                 No place.                            - F.O.|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.xtank.programmer
From: steveb@gcm.com (Steve Burghardt)
Subject: ftpmail guru?
Keywords: ftpmail
Organization: Greenwich Capital Markets, Inc.
Distribution: rec
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 18:10:34 GMT

Are there any ftpmail gurus out there?
I have been trying to get xtank1.3d.tar.Z
via ftpmail but I keep getting some odd results.
First I am notified that I will get getting my results later.  This is ok.
But then I get the following:

	>>> open ftp.eng.umd.edu
	Connected to mojo.eng.umd.edu.
	220 mojo.eng.umd.edu FTP server (Version 5.1 Tue Oct 29 21:15:40 EST 1991) ready.
	Remote system type is UNIX.
	Using binary mode to transfer files.
	>>> user anonymous ftpmail/steveb@gcm.com
	331 Guest login ok, send ident as password.
	230 Guest login ok, access restrictions apply.
	>>> cd /pub/xtank
	250 CWD command successful.
	>>> type binary
	200 Type set to I.
	>>> get "xtank1.3d.tar.Z" /tmp/ftpmail15912.file.0
	200 PORT command successful.
	150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for xtank1.3d.tar.Z (1549811 bytes).
	226 Transfer complete.
	1549811 bytes received in 55 seconds (27 Kbytes/s)
	'get' (xtank1.3d.tar.Z) command failed.

I don't see where the error was. It looks kosher to me util that last line.
Oh, I also tried the same series of commands with 'binary compressed uuencode'
with similar results. Perhaps there isn't enough space on "/tmp" ?
Or have I been drinking too much caffeine?

Thanks in advance,   steveb@gcm.com
From: potter@silver.lcs.mit.edu (Robert Potter)
Newsgroups: rec.games.xtank.programmer
Subject: some gripes about 1.3d
Date: 15 Apr 92 03:04:50 GMT
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science

Just tried 1.3d for the first time.  Compiling it went relatively smoothly,
other than the #$%&^@ include-order "feature" in the Imakefiles (really,
guys, if so mamy systems are "installed wrong", can't you just put in a
workaround?!?).

Oh, yeah, gnat failed to compile (on SPARC):

cc -c -O4   -I/usr/include  -I. -I../Include
-DXTANK_DIR=\"/home/psyche/u1/molly/robert/fun/xtank\" -DX11 -DUNIX -DS1024x864
-DKEYPAD_DETECT  -DSTINGY_REDRAW -DBATCH_LINES -DBATCH_POINTS
-DCODE_SIZE=0x20000 -DSTACK_SIZE=0x8000 -DSUNOS4_0 -DTHREAD_SUNLWP -DMULTI_SYNC
-DDYNALOAD  -DALLDEFINES="\"-DX11 -DUNIX -DS1024x864 -DKEYPAD_DETECT
-DSTINGY_REDRAW -DBATCH_LINES -DBATCH_POINTS  -DCODE_SIZE=0x20000
-DSTACK_SIZE=0x8000 -DSUNOS4_0 -DTHREAD_SUNLWP -DMULTI_SYNC -DDYNALOAD\""
gnat.c
 
/: write failed, file system is full
compiler(iropt) error:  write_irfile: No space left on device


Other first-blush gripes:

	Panzy has no visible front.  Annoying.

	Panzy bitmaps need fixing.  Trike bitmaps STILL need fixing (badly).

	HARMS have mine-heads.  And pointless mount restrictions.

	Show/Pictures is broken.  Layout blown by new additions, and it only
	animates when you move your mouse.

	Lots of half-baked features.  By that I mean poorly documented,
	incompletely implemented, and game imbalancing.  I include my own new
	skidding code in this category (because of the bugs, mea culpa).

	If Xtank doesn't get its favorite fonts, lots of displays break.

I just wish people would spend a little more time on fixing current bugs and a
little less time on adding new "whizzo" features (and the bugs that come with
them).

	-Robert
From: Sheeran_F@ndg.ceo.dg.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.xtank.programmer
Subject: and vice versa
Date: 8 Apr 92 17:33:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: rtp40.9204081833.BN00048
To: xtank@eng.umd.edu


We usually play race with 2 people and 4 robot teams, with the robots 
generally non-moving bases conveniently located in already dangerous 
bottlenecks... The kind of maze/tank combos we favor generally take 5 
hours or so to win.  Of course, the idiot in the other tank is just as
much of a threat as anything else... 
 
What this leads up to is, someone impuned he would veto the inclusion 
of tank bodies that would "unbalance the game."  Of the 8 new bodies I
have carefully crafted and artistically rendered, 3 are expected to be
non-moving bases.  As non-movers that can be built into/on the ground,
they have no intrinsic maximum weight, allowing the maze designer to 
dial in exactly the desired threat at a certain point.  This may very 
well be 6 HRL with 25 heat sinks and 1000 armor/side, if that is the 
effect required.  Or, it might be a pair of light machine guns.  For 
people that like the shapes and want to use them as conventional 
moving tanks, they retain that ability too, although 1000 armor gives 
a SLOW tank!  The world would be a Better Place, i feel, if everyone 
had access to these gems.  No one is forced to use them, but they look
pretty cool, WE like them and are sure people would rather have the 
options than have them cut out...               (: Smily Frank :)