HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cedman@714-725-3177.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Reply-To: cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Date: 9 Apr 92 15:00:20 GMT

Steve Chapin writes
> }} Carl Edman writes:
> }} 
> }} There are several objections to this:
> }} 
> }} 1. An attack on one single character in a tower by possibly one
> }} single character outside the tower can hardly be considered a 
> }} siege.
> 
> Where does one draw the line?  You can't be stacked with someone
> unless you're cooperative, or in a guild.

That is exactly my point - guilds are different in this regard. So a  
change I would propose is that other forces who happen to be in the  
same stack as the attacked force only join in the defense if they are  
either cooperative or better with the attacked force which would be the  
case anyway almost all the time - except in guilds - or if they and the  
attacking force are hostile towards each other (in which case the  
attacking force would just drag the bystanders into the battle).  
Possibly one should even consider a force in one stack fighting on the  
side of the other stack if they are more friendly with that side. Can  
you say traitors in the castle opening the gates ? 

Consider this algorithm:

1. All units in the attacking and attacked stack are just put together  
into one big heap. 

2. The attacking unit is put on the attack heap and the attacked unit  
is put in the defense heap.

3. All units hostile to any units in the attack heap but not hostile to  
any units in the defense heap are put in the defense heap. And the same  
for the attack heap. All units cooperative or better to any units in  
the attack heap but not cooperative or better to any units in the  
defense heap are put in the attack heap. And the same for the defense  
heap. Repeat this step until no more units are being added.

4. Now the units in the attack heap fight it out with all the units in  
the defense heap. If and only if the defense heap has total control  
over a building (i.e. no units from the attack heap inside the walls of  
the building) that heap will get the defense advantage of the building  
(otherwise there was a spy inside who opened the gates).

5. All units which were not assigned to either the attack or defense  
heap by this algorithm would just end up as innocent bystanders - maybe  
there should be some chance that they are wounded in the crossfire, but  
they would generally not be involved in the fighting.

This algorithm would a) solve the problem above b) make combat more  
realistic and c) make attitudes on the negative side also mean  
something. What do you think ?


	Carl Edman
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: 900667c@ace.acadiau.ca (Gerald Cameron)
Subject: DM: Farewell for the Summer
Summary: see ya all next September
Organization: Acadia University
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 23:39:09 GMT

Well, these last few months have been fun, but my last day of watching the 
net is Monday, so I thought I'd wish all the DM players farewell.

I take a bit of pride in the fact that I was the one who managed to inspire 
some DM discussion on here, and I think as a result a number of people have 
discovered a game which they have learned to love.  Also, I think a lot of ,
managers have learned a lot as well.

I assume the talk will continue without me, and I hope I can Join in again 
next September.  In the meantime, see you on the sands.

______________________________________________________________________
| Take 'Er Easy                            |          DEMON          |
|                                          |                         |
| The check is in the mail,                |     GERALD CAMERON      |
|   I'll respect you in the morning,       |                         |
|      Mob Boss knows everything about DM. | 900667C@ACE.ACADIAU.CA  |
|====================================================================|
|    Manager of Scotian D-Team (DM52), The Highlanders (DM42)        |
|                and The Highlanders of the WeHL                     |
|   Also collector of comics, player of RPGs, Business Student       |
|                       (blah, blah, blah)                           |
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
From: dwagon@nella8.cc.monash.edu.au (Dougal Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Celestial Empire Game #3 Over
Summary: Game over man
Keywords: Celestial Empire
Date: 9 Apr 92 05:37:11 GMT
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.

This turn Zethrin is the proud winner of game 3 of Celestial Empire.
He won by getting 30,000pts. The details of the game at the end of the winning
turn were:

Game:3	Turn:23

SUMMARY OF SHIP TYPES
Empty Ship      4		Small Cargo     0
Medium Cargo    15		Large Cargo     17
Super Cargo     5		Mega Cargo      0
Ultra Cargo     1		Small Ship      1
Medium Ship     1		Large Ship      2
Super Ship      1		Mini Battle     0
Small Battle    0		Medium Battle   7
Large Battle    1		Super Battle    3
Dreadnought     1

OWNERSHIP STATISTIX
Empire     Plnets   ResPlan  Indust   Income   Score    PDUs
WhatName?  14       3        71       836      621      167     
Tiban      9        0        60       559      13702    100     
Lummox     47       5        92       1943     18470    234     
Kartheige  34       4        74       1537     26410    214     
The Krail  16       2        64       778      13105    191     
Wumpsters  13       1        62       679      15492    120     
Retchian   9        0        61       538      13015    112     
Zethrin    37       4        139      2050     30423    422     
Benden     0        0        0        0        6514     0       
NEUTRAL    77       8        90       2879     0        212     
Total      256      27       713      11799    137752   1772    

SHIP STATISTIX
Empire     Ships    Fghtrs   Cargo    Shield   Tractor
WhatName?  6        167      145      211      3       
Tiban      5        25       50       15       0       
Lummox     6        233      499      54       5       
Kartheige  8        318      184      37       7       
The Krail  7        276      240      217      10      
Wumpsters  6        50       117      2        0       
Retchian   4        3        80       20       20      
Zethrin    15       297      608      60       11      
Benden     0        0        0        0        0       
NEUTRAL    2        0        0        0        0       
Total      59       1369     1923     616      56      

-- 
Dougal Scott - dwagon@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au  Faculty of Computing & Info Tech
I am eager for the pleasures of the flesh more    Monash University, Caulfield
than for salvation, my soul is dead, so I shall            Victoria, AUSTRALIA 
look after the flesh. -Carmina Burana
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: johnjohn@cco.caltech.edu (John White)
Subject: DM - Tourney Strategy
Originator: johnjohn@small
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 18:10:33 GMT

On the "eve" of the "Death and Taxes" Grand Tournament, I thought I'd post  
some things that I've noticed about and wondered over the tournaments that  
I've run warriors in.  

My lungers do well against other offensives.

My Wastes tend to do well universally.

Shouldn't a good AB do well in the Rookies division?

There sure are a lot of Rat Pak's!

And a serious question:  How do you group your strategies?  I tend to do  
this the same for all of my warriors:  Everyone except TP's, PR's, and  
Waste's on a "quick" tactic.  The three on a "slow" one.  How do you all do  
yours?

And BTW, I'm sad to see Demon go so early in the year.  And jealous too.

--
John White
johnjohn@cco.caltech.edu
|===============================================================|
|                    Reasons to go to Caltech:                  |
|000)  Food?  Sleep?  Reading?  What?  Huh?                     |
|001)  I saw a woman.  Once.  I think.                          |
-- 
John White
johnjohn@cco.caltech.edu
|===============================================================|
|                    Reasons to go to Caltech:                  |
Xref: sparky rec.games.pbm:1058 rec.games.board:5145
From: Bill.Viggers@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Bill Viggers)
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 05:27:40 GMT


In article <18404@ector.cs.purdue.edu>, sjc@cs.purdue.EDU (Steve Chapin) writes:

	[ bits removed ]

|> 
|> Keep talking about this; more sepecifically, instead of what you don't
|> like about the current use of fortifications in combat, what role
|> would you like them to play in combat?  (the "you" there is plural,
|> and not intended to pick on Karl).
|> 

	The way I see it, units stacked with some terrain (be it a ship, tower,
	castle or whatever), should get two kinds of bonuses.

	1: The odds against them should be reduced.  In combat, you are told
	"Falred outnumbers Gorbie 32-1", I assume this gives some kind of 
	advantage over and above just doing more damage in a linear fashion.
	When you have a piece of fortification you may want to either:
		i:	count each defender as being world X much more than an
			attacker,
	or	ii:	Limit the maximum number of attackers able to assult the
			place at a single time.

and/or	2: The defenders should also get some sort of armour bonus.  I'm not
		sure how the fortify command works at the moment, but if it
		was a persentage, then that % could be added to your AC, so
		in a castle that offers 100% protection, all armour was
		doubled.  This won't work too well as plate mail would then
		make you imortal.  But something along these lines maybe.
		Or perhaps it should just have an armour factor that is 			
		added to your regular armour.  (again this could run into
		trouble if you have plate mail (ar 5) and fortification level
		5, as that would give AR 10 and imunity to damage).

	As an extra note, I also think that attacking units should not get
		any bonus from their fortifications.  Making them unstack
		might prove problematic for ship combat though...
		Captain:"quick unstack so we can attack that rich mercahnt ship."
		Sailor: "Aye aye Capt.. <glug, glug, girgle, girgle.....>

	Lastly I think it important that if the defenders flee, then they
	don't remain stacked with the structure (I don't know how this works
	at the moment, so this may be the case already).  Again though ships
	might pose a problem "Run away, run a <girgle>..."

Bill (Merlinium the grey [537])
From: dwagon@nella8.cc.monash.edu.au (Dougal Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Celestial Empire Game #5 Over
Keywords: Celestial Empire Feline Winner
Date: 11 Apr 92 04:06:06 GMT
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.


Celestial Empire Game #5 finished with Feline the winner by getting 
30,000 pts. If anyone is interested the dox are available by ftp frlom 
sola.fcit.monash.edu.au in the celemp directory. 
Here are the details of the game at the end:

Game:5	Turn:23

SUMMARY OF SHIP TYPES
Empty Ship      2		Small Cargo     0
Medium Cargo    20		Large Cargo     23
Super Cargo     1		Mega Cargo      0
Ultra Cargo     0		Small Ship      0
Medium Ship     2		Large Ship      3
Super Ship      0		Mini Battle     0
Small Battle    0		Medium Battle   2
Large Battle    3		Super Battle    0
Dreadnought     0

OWNERSHIP STATISTIX
Empire     Plnets   ResPlan  Indust   Income   Score    PDUs
X_Force    6        0        60       472      11113    120     
StarFleet  7        0        67       535      11211    114     
Feline     59       5        144      2519     30504    336     
Rogov      10       1        69       619      11691    121     
Republic   29       4        90       1488     21982    206     
Alpha      9        2        70       599      14678    143     
exxxryzzz  5        1        66       471      11294    120     
Kaspar     34       5        86       1654     21506    183     
Meloria    0        0        0        0        9674     0       
NEUTRAL    97       9        88       3325     0        214     
Total      256      27       740      11682    143653   1557    

SHIP STATISTIX
Empire     Ships    Fghtrs   Cargo    Shield   Tractor
X_Force    5        4        50       0        0       
StarFleet  6        29       96       10       0       
Feline     13       97       457      81       11      
Rogov      6        41       129      19       2       
Republic   7        90       274      43       0       
Alpha      5        61       117      15       0       
exxxryzzz  5        5        50       0        0       
Kaspar     9        122      213      24       18      
Meloria    0        0        0        0        0       
NEUTRAL    0        0        0        0        0       
Total      56       449      1386     192      31      


-- 
Dougal Scott - dwagon@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au  Faculty of Computing & Info Tech
I am eager for the pleasures of the flesh more    Monash University, Caulfield
than for salvation, my soul is dead, so I shall            Victoria, AUSTRALIA 
look after the flesh. -Carmina Burana
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 16:29:09 GMT

In article <18377@ector.cs.purdue.edu> sjc@cs.purdue.EDU (Steve Chapin) writes:

>Either get truer or more competent allies (take that, Dr. Pain :-).

Old Olympian saying: Rich man need no allies.
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: skrenta@cbnewsg.att.com (Rich Skrenta)
Subject: Re: Olympia workers and Earning Power
Originator: skrenta@cbnewsg.cb.att.com
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 16:32:40 GMT

gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
> Well, there is one easy way to earn lots of money in Olympia today --
> kill off lots of newbies and take their money ;-) Perhaps Rich should
> start off everyone with 5 armed guards or something.

This would just make the carnage 5 times bloodier!  I'm considering
ways to protect new players, but nothing has really gelled for me yet.

So far the idea I like most is to put a protective aura around new
players which lasted 3-5 turns.  If they attacked anyone, it would
cease, but while they had it, they couldn't be attacked.  This would
only apply to their PC's, not to formed units.

> But seriously: yes, it does make sense to have more of an economy
> where people harvest various sorts of raw materials and then trade
> with each other.

This is definitely in the works.  This turn mining skill should
be operational, so you can scrape various elements from the earth.
Forestry is still on the to-do list; farming sounds promising.
Equestrian can already be used to "harvest" wild horses, although
I think it's a bit too lucrative at the moment (watch out, D'Arc! :-)

> But I've yet to see a commercial game which had a
> satisfactory economic system, so do keep in mind that it's very hard.
> Things you want to avoid:

>   o  letting the people with the most money earn more, so they get
>      richer and richer and run away with the game

This is a serious problem.  I need to think of some ways to
limit growth of large factions without simply imposing limits
(you can only run 40 units, for example) as some PBM's do.
I'd rather it be more natural.

>   o  making the system have a lot of luck involved (gee, I found a
>      gold deposit 100 times richer than normal, aren't I special?)

Randomness in Olympia is pretty tame.  Usually I pick a target
value or range and allow some random variation within it, such as 20%.

Of course, things like rare deposits must still be rare!

>   o  making economic activity much more profitable than exploration
>      (or much less, for that matter)

A player recently complained that Olympia was too economic,
and there weren't enough fantasy elements (monsters, quests, etc.) 
Some additions this turn should begin to remedy this.   :-)

--
Rich Skrenta
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: srt@aero.org (Scott "TCB" Turner)
Subject: Re: Olympia misc.
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Distribution: rec
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 16:35:44 GMT

(Steve Chapin) writes:
>Question: is Olympian combat too bloody, or not bloody enough?  There
>are a limited number of players with combat experience, but I'll ask
>anyway.

Combat seems to be reasonable, though I think I agree that there isn't
a big enough ramp between unskilled and skilled players.  Ideally
there should also be a bonus for mixed-tactics stacks, ie., stacks
with skills and weapons to perform (1) range attacks, (2) infantry
attacks and (3) mounted attacks should get considerable combat
bonuses.

My objection so far has been that a group of 4 fighting a group of 7
wasn't able to flee combat.  All were on foot.  That seems pretty
unreasonable to me.  I should think it would take 3 or 4 to 1 to
prevent flight.

				-- Scott T.


Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: Olympia combat
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 03:06:43 GMT

In article <29E39C69.9868@noiro.acs.uci.edu> cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes:

>That is a dandy idea, but please also add a rule so that  
>non-cooperative units which happen to be in the same stack (e.g.  
>stacking in the same guild tower), do not necessarily get involved in  
>other peoples fights. If there had been such a rule my poor BtA[801]  
>would probably not have died in the recent rampage.

If you're in the tower, and someone lays siege to it, why should you
escape? If you don't feel safe in a stack, don't stack.
From: I27LG@CUNYVM.BITNET
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: looking for pbem in forgotten realms
Date: 15 Apr 92 02:13:38 GMT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

As my subject goes, I am looking for a pbem that I can join that is set in the
Forgotten realms.  Thank you for those who reply, it is greatly appreciated.


 Kyramus
From: skrenta@blekko.rt.com (Rich Skrenta)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Olympia authentication
Date: 11 Apr 92 08:59:03 GMT

Passwords are provided on Olympia orders to allow some amount
of security that other players don't order your units around.

However, there are a couple of problems with them.

	o  They are optional, so players which didn't set
	   a password and which never play much might not
	   notice if their units are being controlled by
	   less scrupulous players.

	o  Most players seem to forget their passwords.

I have thought of three possible solutions to this problem:

	1)  Ignore it, and trust the players to be nice.
	    Basically leave the current system alone.

	2)  Authenticate based on the email address.
	    I don't like this one, since some players send
	    orders from multiple sites, and it's easy to
	    forge email.  I can't see it working any better
	    than the current password system.

	3)  Include a newly generated password with each
	    player's turn report.  They would have to supply
	    this password with their orders, or they wouldn't
	    be accepted.

Choice #3 is what I want the feedback on.  This is a rather
harsh rule, but I am concerned that some players are profiting
from illicit character manipulations.  Would you find such
a password scheme acceptable?

	   ***  Report of Olympia turn 19 for Osswid [501]  ***

			 Turn 20 password:  fxy9

And then on next week's orders, I say something like

	faction 501 fxy9

	entity 501
	   ...

--
Rich Skrenta <skrenta@rt.com>  N2QAV
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: sms35849@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott M. Stortzum)
Subject: awesome damage
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 14:59:45 GMT

Wiz,

Didn't you use to run a P-L whose Id# was 1 different than Max's?  I think
he was called The Old Fart's Bro (Max = Old Fart).  By the way, what team
are you in 7, because I'm currently in 7 and haven't seen any traces of your
name being discussed.  John, I also have 2 of my first 5 warriors ever in AD,
they don't fight much though.

Scott

"happiness is a 9 fight basher with 65 skills and 3 masters!!!!!!!"
From: rdf@chem.ucsd.edu (Robert D. Feinstein)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: pbm system for Advanced Squad Leader?
Date: 10 Apr 1992 22:09:21 GMT
Organization: University of California San Diego, Chemistry
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sdchemi3.ucsd.edu

Hello to the world of netters!

I would like to inquire as to whether or not there are any
pbm systems out there for Advanced Squad Leader?
(Avalon Hill, WWII squad level war game, etc.....)
I realize that this is off the track for most of the more
fantasy and sci-fi game players out there, but I figured...
gamers are gamers (no offense intended to anyone).

I belong to a very active ASL club here in San Diego.  We have
developed a number of outstanding additions/variations to the
system, one of which is a fairly rudimentary pbm system.  If 
anyone wishes to express interest in the possibility of pbm ASL, or
if it is already going on somewhere, I would love to hear about it!

Thanks in advance for your reply!

Robert D. Feinstein
rdf@sdchemi3.ucsd.edu
From: Kevin_Deane@mindlink.bc.ca (Kevin Deane)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Martial Arts Simulation cont'd
Date: 16 Apr 92 16:55:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: mindlink.11460
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada

Hello everyone, so far I have received 25 replies with regards to my MA
simulator.  I have already thought of a name for the game.(will be announced
later)  Please note that this game is free.  No cost.  Moves will be taken care
of via email.  I should have the rules laid out soon.  Just a few little
details left.  I will post the rules on the net as well I will send them to
each of the individual players.  Here are some introductory notes:
The game will be martial art combat inside and possible outside the arena.
Random encounters do occur.(ie. if your guy is cocky he/she might get into a
lot of fights outside) Also there are 20 different martial art styles
available.  I have a system for designing your own Martial Art.  This wont be
available to users for a while.  You will have to train in one or two styles
for a while before you can do this.  Everyone will start out at low belt.
White and red for Karate.  There will be sparring right away for all MA Styles.
You can increase in rank through experience in tournaments, in forms(if your
art has them), as well you can increase speed, strength etc. in between
tournaments by specifying whether you will be working out on weights, running a
lot etc.  Another question someone asked me was whether there would be team
play.  The answer to this is yes.  I will have team play.  It is up to the
players to decide who should join a team.  Once a team is designed(Max of 4
players per team) a captain should be chosen, or someone who is the vioce of
the team.  Well I hope this gives you some indication of what might happen in
this game.  I should have a formal write-up soon.  
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm