HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 12:57:44 EDT
From: Sime <TJS107@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Some Car Wars Questions

Just a few things I noticed from Uncle Al's Catalog From Hell that I want to
comment on:

First:  I hate when they contradict themselves.  Or else I just don't understan
d what they're trying to say. With grenades, it sez 'They no longer hit on the
turn after they are fired, but on the same phase'.  Then the next sentance it
sez 'Grenades now impact after one phase for every 4" of range.'
So what's the deal? Which one is right?  I assume the second one is correct,
but what's the use of the first sentance, aside from confusing me?

Second: Laser guidance-IR lasers can't penetrate more than 1" of smoke/paint.
So why does 1/2" of smoke/paint thwart laser guidance, ie when a laser
reactive web sets off smoke/paint?  It's a half inch, the laser goes in (thru
a half inch of smoke) aquires the target and then comes back out (thru another
half inch of smoke:  2 half inches of smoke = one inch;  one inch is not more
than one inch) so the laser should be able to penetrate. Or am I missing someth
ing again?

Third:  Not really a question, but just an observation.  It's possible to do
zero points of damage to vehicles but not peds, correct?  OK, so why get a
Heavy Machine Gun?  It does 2D-2, in other words from 0-10 points.  I don't
know all the statistics of die rolls but it doesn't seem worth the extra weight
and space for a HMG when an MG does a decent job on its own, or a better to hit
roll with a Vulcan. (I ain't got the rule book here I'm going on memory so
please correct me if I'm wrong on something)

Another thing I shoulda put up with the smoke and paint article, but it has
different penalties for firing thru smoke and paint listed in various places.
Which is correct, -1 per 1/2", right?

I'll probably have more stupid questions RE: Car Wars later after I read thru
the books some more.  I just started reading thru them again so of course I
shall come upon lots o' things that will never cease to confuse me in the realm
of Car Wars.  Thanx for any help.

-Sime
                                                      Go Pirates!
The poison of love so pure it's deceiving,            Go Pens!
And deceit is all we have it's got to be over         Go Steelers!
It's dangerous this game we play you're
Killing me with words                            (guess where I'm from)
          -Queensryche
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,rec.games.pbm,bit.listserv.dipl-l
From: pcorless@cisco.com (Peter Corless)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Fast Food Franchise
Date: 7 Oct 1992 03:59:45 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Lab, SRI International
Distribution: world
Reply-To: pcorless@cisco.com (Peter Corless)
NNTP-Posting-Host: corless-mac.cisco.com

You can find it a Planet 10 Comics on Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road.

-Pete.

p.s. I have the game if'n you want to play it...


Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: jpeck@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (John Peck)
Subject: Advanced Heroquest question
Summary: What does PV mean?
Keywords: Advanced Heroquest PV
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 21:30:49 GMT


I have just purchaced Advanced Heroquest, and like it very much.  The
monsters' statistics contain a stat that Heroes don't have called 'PV.'  I
can't find any explanation in the rules for it, but it appears to be a
rating system to show how tough the monsters are overall.  If this is
true, does anyone know the exact equation they use?  Could I apply it to
Heroes?  Replies by email are greatly appreciated, since I think this is a
simple question.  Thanks.
Brooks Peck    john-peck@uiowa.edu

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: A&A:  Attention Dewey's opponents ;)
From: josh@gacvx2.gac.edu
Date: 6 Oct 92 00:32:09 -0600
Organization: Gustavus Adolphus College, St. Peter, Minnesota

Dewey, it is good to see you and some of the others firing off those posts. 
But I hope you don't mind some playful kidding.

ATTENTION  ATTENTION anyone playing the USA against Dewey's Japan (read a Japan
which does not attack the Hawaiian fleet 1st round).

Its the first round and Japan has failed to attack your Hawaiian fleet.  What
is the USA to do?  Buy 2 bombers.  During non-combat move the following to the
sea zone surrounding almost all of Alaska : 1 battleship, 1 carrier with 2
fighters on it, 1 sub, and 1 transport.  Move the following to mainland Alaska:
1 bomber, 1 fighter, and 2 infantry.  Place the 2 bombers you purchased in
Western USA.  Now you are really causing some trouble for Japan.  Japan has two
options 
	1.  Attack the USA fleet.
	2.  Wait for the USA to attack the Japan sea zone.

Either option tremendously slows Japan's move toward Russia.  Attacking the US
fleet will mean Japan using all its transports, 1 sub  and maybe some fighters
to suck up HITS.  Then on the USA turn what ever is left gets attacked by 3
bombers (plus 1 fighter if the USSR has been able to hold Manchuria)
(The bombers land in Yakut) 

If Japan lets USA attack.  USA can bring 3 bombers, 1 battleship, 3 fighters, 1
sub, 1 carrier, and 1 transport.  And perhaps UK can follow up this attack in
round 3 with a couple of fighters and a bomber.

Moral to the story.  I believe Japan ignoring the USA Hawaiian fleet is a
mistake.  THis allows the USA to become a serious threat in the PAcific by
spending $30 dollars on bombers the first round.  (ALL the following rounds USA
buys transports and men for the Atlantic).

My strategy as Japan is to attack the Hawaiian fleet with 1 bomber, 1
battleship, 1 fighter (from the carrier) and 1 sub.  Japan will win this battle
with 1 bomber and maybe 1 battleship remaining.  THis attack kills off the
HAwaiian fleet especially that carrier AND keeps the bulk of the Japanese navy
safe and sound causing havock along the coast of Asia.

Oh well, kind of a long post focusing on only one point.  Don't get me wrong,
Dewey knows this game well -- but I believe completely ignoring the USA
HAwaiian fleet is a mistake a sharp ALlies player can take advantage of without
taking too much pressure off of Germany.

More posts later.						Josh.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Date: Sat,  3 Oct 1992 13:22:12 -0400 
From: "Jonathan T. Moore" <jmci+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: A&A: Allies buy how many dice

In article <BvIGuC.Du5@news.udel.edu> barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H
Barich) writes:

>Now, it's the US's turn.  I attack the carrier, 2 fighters and two
>battleships with a transport, a battleship, two fighters and a bomber.
>I see the US getting 2 or 3 hits.  Probably 2.  So, the Japanese lose
>what?  Let's say two fighters (If the Japanese lose the carrier and a
>fighter, I withdraw and the Japanese fighter crashes into the ocean, and
>I don't think you are going to lose a battleship yet).  In return, the
>Japanese kill the transport and one fighter.  Now I continue the attack,
>and get three more hits (I should get three hits in at least one of the
>two rounds...).  You as well get three hits, and we both now have no
>navy.  

In my experience, the counterattack almost never works out this way. I
did forget to mention the Japanese carrier staying and having the planes
land on it. Anyway, I've played about ten or so games where the Pearl
Harbor strategy was used, and it always works out splendidly. On
average, it seems, the Japanese keep their two battleships and the U.S.
has no navy (or an air force, for that matter). Then, of course, the
battleships withdraw to Japan, and it becomes increasingly harder for
the U.S. to cross the Pacific (not that I think this is a worthwhile
American strategy anyway). I don't know. Maybe a lot of flukes happen in
games I play....

On another topic, barring the British bombing raid strategy (which
started this whole discourse, apparently, and which I agree seriously
hampers Germany), what do you think is the best German strategy to take
Russia? So far, my experience shows that Germany should only buy
infantry, and launch an assault against the Russian stockpiles with all
the "3"s (tanks and planes, as well as the bomber, as long as they
survive) and simply withdraw when all the warm-body infantry have been
used up. With this strategy, it seems that the Germans can maintain
their quality pieces while carrying out an attrition strategy in a
scenario where Russia cannot outproduce them (assuming Japan makes at
least moderate gains in Asia). Well, what do you guys think?

Jon
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: BTECH: We need a FAQ?
From: taia_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Date: 30 Sep 92 17:54:58 NZST
Organization: Welligton City Council, Public Access.
NNTP-Posting-Host: kosmos.wcc.govt.nz


 I was wondering maybe it's time to start a BTECH: FAQ?

 There are enough readers for one. Things that come to mind that could
be placed in the FAQ are
 1. BTECH what it is?
 2. Headers and how we post on rec.games.board
 3. The C-3, what it does, where it came from and how do we order one? :)
 4. The RFD debate etc updates
There can be more and the order I've started things will be changed :) 
Comments....

BTW I don't propose to be the head of the FAQ as Summer in the southern
hemisphere is coming and I have some serious waves to conquer! :) So I
can't do it :(

This has been....
 Tony Taia
  TAIA_A@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz, tai-shu@kauri.vuw.ac.nz
3067: When we discover that the Clans fade away like a bad dream...I wish!
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: blum@news.ils.nwu.edu (Daniel Blum)
Subject: Re: Looking for some Wargames to Purchase
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 03:51:25 GMT

Marc Miller has a mint copy of Russo-Japanese War for $45 (or at least
he did a few months ago).  I don't have his address available at the
moment, but I should have it shortly, if you'd like it.
		
							Dan Blum
							blum@ils.nwu.edu
From: s903609@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (ACE)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Btech/RoboTech comparison
Date: 6 Oct 92 06:05:22 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre
NNTP-Posting-Host: minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au

clarka@netcom.com (Andrew Clark) writes:
>Btech mecha are "hand-crafted," built from the ruins of ancient
>technology only partially understood.  Weapons systems are woefully
>inaccurate (how many tank cannon have a max range of 500 meters today?)
>and maintenance needs are staggering. 

Just had to say something about this. Have people out there read the 2750
Tech Readout for BTECH ? The mechs in that are meant to represent how good
things were. Not a lot better than what they use in 3025 is it ? Not a LOT
worse than what is used by clans in 3055. Clan technology is DEFINITELY
superior, but after 300 years of unhindered development shouldn't they be
a lot better ? After all, if you had about a 1000 strong army from 1692, you 
would only need about 50 to 100 1992 regular infantryman to achieve total
victory. Why is this not the same with BTECH ? Don't answer that, I already
know. GAME BALANCE. But that's okay, it's just that if FASA reduced the time
frames, it could work better. BTW If people want to see FASA combat that
looks realistic you should play Renegade Legion, especially Centurion.

			       ACE
                   s903609@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au
	        " How deep is the ocean ? " - Eric
" No Silicon Heaven ? But where would all the calculators go ? " - Kryten
      " Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast." - Hero Rimmer
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: gregory_b@cubldr.colorado.edu (Brian Gregory)
Subject: WWII: PTO
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 00:25:47 GMT

Sorry to interrupt all the BTech and SFB posts...

I've just purchased TSR's WWII:PTO (1991, with ETO errata), and was 
wondering if any of you in the know have seen an official errata;
I've got a page or two of rules questions, and would rather see the
errata first (and ask more questions later) than send what I've got
if there is an errata around.  If I've no responses, I'll probably post
my little list of ?s here, so's any interested can post resonses to 
them or ask me once I've an answer(!).

Most of the questions are pretty simple, and can be reasoned by common
sense, but, hey, this is my first **new** wargame in ages.  Apart from
that (and a few mis-rated naval units for us Jane's-addicted nit-pickers)
it looks great!!

signing as...

***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---
Brian Gregory				||"When we try to pick anything 
I-net:  GREGORY_B@CUBLDR.COLORADO.EDU	|| out by itself, we find it
ECE Graduate Student			|| hitched to everything else in
Univ. of Colorado @ Boulder		|| the universe."  --  John Muir
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: blum@news.ils.nwu.edu (Daniel Blum)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Small SPI games
Date: 28 Sep 92 21:17:17 GMT
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

>I know auction prices were just listed, but I forgot I had SPI's The Kaiser's
>Battle: The German Offensive 1918 (1980).  It's in good condition, and I think
>it has all the counters.  Does anyone know what it's worth? (Not that I want
>to sell :))
>
>And, was there a SPI game about the Russo-Japanese war of 1905? I thought I
>remembered seeing it in the Kaybee Toy store in the early '80s (of course I
>was only 10 then....:)). How much does it go for in good condition?.
>
>Sentimental time....SPI games were my first wargames, got Pea Ridge for 
>Christmas one year. My first war game-enjoyed it immensely and it's lost now
>:(.  How much does a good condition copy of Pea Ridge run?

>Thanks in advance, Daniel at University of Illinois.
>-- 
>Daniel R. Sawyer
>daniel-sawyer@uiuc.edu

Kaiser's Battle is not worth all that much - possibly $15 if it's in a
box.  The Russo-Japanese War game is Red Sun Rising - it's not very
good, from what I've heard (GDW's Russo-Japanese War is supposed to be
better).  It should run about $30-40 punched (I think).  Pea Ridge I
haven't seen recently but it's probably fairly expensive.

							Dan Blum
							bluM@ils.nwu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Jester)
Subject: For Sale WH40k mini's
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 16:17:05 GMT

WarHammer Miniuatures For Sale

3 Lead Chaos Squats in Exo-Armor
3 Lead (with plastic arms) Genestealer Hybrids
2 Lead Genestealer Familiars
1 Lead Nurgle Chaos Renegade (primed)
5 Lead Chaos Fantasy Squats + Cannon
1 Lead Choas Hound
3 Lead Beastmen

All items go to this highest bidder
within reason. All buyers pay the cost
of shipping unless I deem fit you buy enough to
warrant me paying the shipping

send all bids to jester@sage.cc.purdue.edu
-- 
I am the paper-cut that ruins your morning. . .
I am the ingrown nail on the foot of crime
I am the squashed bug on your flying saucer widshield.
I am the moth that seeks your porch light.
From: dagibbs@quantum.on.ca (David Gibbs)
Subject: Re: Some Car Wars Questions
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 92 22:08:27 GMT
Organization: Quantum Software Systems

In article <92278.125744TJS107@psuvm.psu.edu> TJS107@psuvm.psu.edu (Sime) writes:
>Second: Laser guidance-IR lasers can't penetrate more than 1" of smoke/paint.
>So why does 1/2" of smoke/paint thwart laser guidance, ie when a laser
>reactive web sets off smoke/paint?  It's a half inch, the laser goes in (thru
>a half inch of smoke) aquires the target and then comes back out (thru another
>half inch of smoke:  2 half inches of smoke = one inch;  one inch is not more
>than one inch) so the laser should be able to penetrate. Or am I missing someth
>ing again?

Two possibilities: one, your laser reactive web uses HD smoke/paint screens,
or it uses smoke/paint streamers; or two, you measure actual distance
through smoke, rather than just assuming that going "kind of sideways"
through a counter is 1/2".  (That is, if the counter is 1/2" wide, then
the distance to cross the counter "sideways" is >= 1/2" and is only
equal to 1/2" if the angle of fire through the counter is exactly
90 degrees to the edge of the counter, other wise the distance through
is greater -- worst possible case is of course diagonally from one corner
to the opposite corner, in which case the amount of smoke penetrated
going one-way would be 1.12" (square root of 1.25).

Of course, if you are playing in a simplified world, where hitting
the side is 1/2 inch of smoke, and hitting the end of smoke is 1",
what do you do with partially overlapping smoke?

-David
(dagibbs@quantum.on.ca)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai)
Subject: is Recon @ NJ defunct?
Organization: Information Services, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 19:27:50 GMT

I used to order from Reconnaissance Co, a pretty knowledgable wargaming
store in New Jersey.  However, when I called their 210-365-1469 number, I
got a recording from the phone company saying "This number has been
disconnected.  No further information is available."

Have they moved or have they gone out of business?  I'm dismayed because
they were both (1) knowledgable about the field and (2) their discount
prices were great.

If they're out of business, can someone recommend a mailorder place that
takes credit cards?  Sniff, sniff.  Sob, sob. :-(

--
hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai)    :     :    :   :  : :: ::: :::: :::::
Unix Geek for Swarthmore College        :     :    :   :  : :: ::: :::: :::::
Information Services, Swarthmore, PA, US.       Copyright 1992 by Eiji Hirai.
I don't speak for Swarthmore College.                    All Rights Reserved.
From: josh@gacvx2.gac.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: A&A: Attention Erik's opponents.
Date: 7 Oct 92 02:46:41 GMT
Organization: Gustavus Adolphus College, St. Peter, Minnesota

This post is regarding the Erik L. response to the Japan not attacking Hawaiia
thread.

Erik lists two additional options Japan has after USA has moved forces to
Alaska.

Option 1:  Block the USA fleet from attacking the Japan sea zone with his sub.  
He must play with some pretty special sub rules for one Japanese sub to block
two sea zones at the same time.  Check the board, there are two different
routes from the Alaskan sea zone to the Japan sea zone.  So assuming you don't
allow subs to be spilit in half you must send a transport and a sub to do your
blocking.  Great - this stops two infantry from landing in Asia and allows USA
to kill 1 sub and 1 transport easily.

Option 2:  Move the fleet to Kwangtung.  Well, what did you buy as Japan??
Obviously not transports, since they would be placed in the Japan sea zone all
by themselves.  Did you by more men?  These men must be placed in Japan.  If
USA moves the fleet into the Japan sea zone you must attack and destroy it
before you may transport any infantry across.  But alas you lost all of your
transports, the sub, and maybe a few fighters when you attack the USA fleet in
the Japan sea zone.  Time to start buying transports again and it is yet
another turn before you can transport units to africa.  Did you buy an IC??
If you leave Japan weakly defended USA will attack and capture your capital -
usually not something you want to have happen.

By the way, if you are moving the fleet to Kwangtung you are not landing any
troops in Manchuria.  How many troops are you leaving in Manchuria?  How many
fighters?  There is probably a USSR force of 1 tank and 6 or 7 infantry sitting
in Yakut waiting to pounce (there may even be some USSR fighters close enough
to get in on the action if Germany isn't putting some real pressure on Karelia.


Conclusion:  Both of your proposed options are mistakes.  You can't afford many
mistakes with the Axis and still win.

Regarding your view of the balance of the game -->  The good Axis player will
beat the average Allies player almost all of the time.  The real question is
what happens when 2 good players compete.  When I play, I do not allow USSR to
attack on the 1st round.  Using this rule, I believe players of equal caliber
will play very close games.


Hey Dewey, you hinted at an interesting strategy that caused you a great deal
of thinking to figure out.  I would be very interested in hearing it.

							Josh.
  
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: shoham@ll.mit.edu (Daniel Shoham)
Subject: Re: Junta: house rules
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 23:22:50 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.032007.29501@newshost.anu.edu.au> (David Bofinger) writes:
>In article <1992Oct1.002509.1213@ll.mit.edu>, shoham@ll.mit.edu (Daniel
>Shoham) wrote:
>> In article <1992Sep30.165337.27213@HQ.Ileaf.COM> bret@HQ.Ileaf.COM (Bret Pettichord) writes:
>
>> >11. There is no limit to the number of volleys.
>
>I think letting the defence try to "hang on" is a nice feature. How about,
>the defender can declare the fight over any time they like after a certain
>number of volleys.
>
>> >12. You normally can kill a unit by rolling either a 5 or a 6 (not
>> >   just a six).
>> >13. Fortifications. The palace, barracks, and police are considered
>> >   fortified positions. Defenders of such positions are only killed
>> >   with a 6. The palace guards only get one die each when they fire.
>
>> This rule becomes unneeded if we apply rule #11.
>
>I presume you mean rule 12 here, the effect of rule 13 is actually quite
>different to that of rule 11.

What I meant was that rule #12 is not needed if we adopt rule #11. The only
reason I can think of to increase the lethality of each round is to get rid of
those unsatisfying "fights-to-a-draw". Rule #11 takes care of this problem. The
lower probability of kill makes the variance on the results higher (i.e. makes
it more likely for a weak force to "luck-out").

So, I would keep #11 and ditch #12+#13.

>> It also makes the Navy and
>> A/F VERY POWERFULL (they are supposed to be the $%^&ed offices. We defenitely
>> don't want to equalize offices).
>
>Depends whether the air force and navy need to roll 5s or 6s, and what
>effect fortifications have on them. I'd suggest having them kill on 5-6
>(6 versus forts) and reduce their dice. Incidentally, the navy is certainly
>a useless office but the air force isn't clearly outclasssed.

Again, a large number of dies rolling for 6's make the results less predictable
than a small number of dies rolling for 5-6. Junta is fun thanks to the many
unpredictable events.

>> It also reduces the presidential guard's power.
>
>Not really. They are still doubled (in defence now, instead of attack), and
>they have the only building anyone is likely to want to attack, so it
>doesn't
>help anyone else much.

I guess you are correct here.

>Now why aren't there any communist guerilla uprisings in this game? (Divert
>armies to the provinces, increase US aid, randomly assassinate people,
>allow
>the President to shoot anyone with a "socialist" influence card, give units
>to appropriate rebels in coups...)

In our club we have developed many "home-made" cards. They don't effect the
game too much, but they add new "jokes" to the regular ones. (Yes, we have
commies; drug-lords, etc.)

>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>David Bofinger  AARNet: dxb105@phys.anu.edu.au

Dan Shoham
shoham@ll.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board