HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: azmoodeh@aludra.usc.edu (Hooman Azmoodeh)
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Subject: Hi There!
Date: 31 Aug 1992 18:28:05 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu


I am looking for an AT-LARGE team to join.  I have never played in a tournament
before and would like to join one if possible.  I am not good at ogging but am 
pretty decent at everything else.  Oh, I'm also not very good at starbasing.
If you know of a team that I can join please let me know by sending me mail at
the following address: azmoodeh@aludra.usc.edu or eslami@aludra.usc.edu
Thanks :-)
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
From: lyodav@iastate.edu (Sun God)
Subject: Re: 3rd space guardian robots
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:58:25 GMT

In <1992Aug25.072057.13852@news.cs.indiana.edu> mvanheyn@silky.cs.indiana.edu (Marc VanHeyningen) writes:

>Thus said Greg K Chung <gc2n+@andrew.cmu.edu>:
>>Since some people seem to hate 3rd space bombing/taking, and since we
>>all know that the current M5-type robots aren't good enough... 
>>
>>Why doesn't someone just implement a super M5 robot?  Using a borg
>>firing algorithm (eg sfops, etc)...
>>
>>And with unlimited fuel...  
>>

>Not that this hasn't already been said seventeen billion times, but
>making guardians too powerful leads to the possibility that the a team,
>sensing its imminent genocide, will bomb its future race to bring in a
>super-guardian to help it.

>I don't recall all the solutions.  The two I can think of offhand would
>be to make guardian robots self-destruct when tmode involving their team
>occurs and making guardian bots only go after the player(s) who have
>attacked their space (by bombing or beaming.)  It might be preferable to
>make them faster and more aggressive, so they'll likely die (after
>killing the bomber a few times); say, give them SC speed and
>manuverability and BB everything else, and make them constantly
>and mercilessly ogg the bomber.  The proposal to make guardians robots
>take back the planets taken also has some appeal.
>everything else.
>-- 
>Marc VanHeyningen     mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu     MIME accepted
>On->ORI Ogg their base!
>Om->ORI Killing their base does nothing to help our team at this point.
>On->ORI But he's hurt!!!

   This demonstrates what I've believed all along: the 4 race galaxy is stupid.
It's an artifact of days when games actually had 4 teams. If you want to play
a 2 team game, you have a two race galaxy. The rest is just junk that doesn't
really belong. I can't wait for Ray Jones' new 2 race server. INL games are
two race. Normal games should be too, except for people's irrational clinging
to the way things are for no reason other than "That's how it's always been,
that's how it will always be!" Like some old man in a rocking chair who doesn't
want to change. If you want to run a 3 race game or a 4 race game, put in 3 or
4 races. Until the hardware can support it, the galaxy should only have 2 
races. 
   While I'm posting, I'll repeat my ancient plea: fix detonated torps so
that the kill goes to the person who detonated. Fix plasmas so the kill goes
to the person who didn't die from it. Fix all of the other instances where a
guy can get a kill for himself or a teammate, or at least fix as many of these
bugs as possible. A guy shouldn't get his own kill for detonating, but if he 
dets on an enemy starbase and the detted torps kill it he should get that
kill. Can't anyone code this? 
--Dave/WeenieBlaster
Member of 12 Angry Men
          ^^
Many more this fall!
From: surge@milton.u.washington.edu (Jonathan Sari)
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Subject: Re: 3rd space guardian robots
Date: 2 Sep 92 09:29:13 GMT
Organization: The Barbarian Hordes of Gnur

In article <17jjodINNqbs@agate.berkeley.edu> tom@soda.berkeley.edu (Tom Holub) writes:
>Perhaps this is why you think there is such a thing as an 'unbreakable LPS'.
>Strategy is *paramount* in an LPS for the winning side (if they plan
>to win).  Tactics are important for the defenders, but mostly
>useless for the attackers.
> -Mojo

I bet I could create an unbreakable LPS if I could choose any 8 players
(*hint* Those 8 players wouldn't include me).

The problem, then, would be that it wouldn't be an LPS as soon as that
LP popped.

Ensign Pac-man
-- 
  surge@u.washington.edu, BITnet: surge@milton, UUNet:uw-beaver!surge@milton
"What's in it for me?" "Enough cash to buy the Outer Hebridees."
"14 shillings sixpence?"
From: jgr@ecl.psu.edu (Jim Reisman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Subject: Hockey? An Offsides Rule
Date: 31 Aug 92 20:39:48 EDT
Organization: Engineering Computer Lab, Pennsylvania State University




Hockey fans and gods,

  Now that we are getting full hockey games on nova, we
are begining to see players take advantage of certain
"features". It might be time to consider some modification
to the hockey code. 

  One thing I would like to see added is rules for
offsides players.  As it is now, players will move to the
opposing team's goalie box after the faceoff and
harass/cripple/ogg the goalie repeatedly.  This tends to ruin
any usefullness of a goalie.
  
  Also there is the hockey "goal scum" who lurk outside the enemy
goal waiting for the puck to come to them.

  I humbly suggest the following modifications which should
improve playability :

1) Institute an "Offsides Rule" - A player should not be two
"lines" in front of the puck.  e.g. If the puck is below Orion,
Orion players should be no farther ahead than centerline.  If the
puck is between Orion and the centerline, Orion players should be
no farther ahead than Kling, etc...

2) Add a "Goalie Box" - No player in opposing team's goalie box unless
the player has possesion of puck, or puck is in goalie box.

Penalties: - Relocation to a sideline planet, 75% damaged  


Does this modification seem reasonable?

Jim

ID: Ikko-ikki
    Hockey-ikki

"Hockey?"
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
From: explorer@iastate.edu (Michael Graff)
Subject: Re: TBird
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:40:21 GMT

In <u40cqB2w165w@heroes.UUCP> yap@heroes.UUCP (Yap Yap Yap) writes:

>     I think TBird is a very silly server.  With the jacked up scouts, I 
>can't imagine anyone actually enjoy playing there.  The Galaxy class 
>ships made it worse.  What a keen idea - give the high ranked players
>the best ships...  It *is* kinda fun to go in and just ogg the GA's 
>though.  Is it just a joke server or what??  An attempt at a chaos 
>server??  Product of the mentally disturbed?  :-]

Call it experimentation.  Call it an accident.  Call it someone who
played scouts a lot sneaking a few changes here and there into the scout
ships.  ;)

Seriously, one of the former netrek programmers here at ISU altered some
of the ship stats.  This ended up in making scouts more powerful than
they used to be.

The GA's were (both times I tried them) a rather complete failure.  At
least the second time around they were closer, but still not close
enough to make the game play fair.

As for a joke server, no.  Call it a Continual Test Server.

And, recently people have begun (what I would call) bitching and moaning
about the machine it runs on.  tbird.cc.iastate.edu is a machine which
sits on my desk in my office.  It normally sits idle at night, which is
why the game runs there in the first place.

If the machine can't handle all the connections it seems to be getting,
I'm sorry.  If you think I should request an upgrade from a DS2100 to a
5000 so netrek will run faster, you're insane.

If you don't like tbird, make suggestions.  If you still don't like
tbird, play elsewhere.

Side note:  I'll be installing either the calvin server or the NBR
server, whichever I like best, really soon now.  More than likely this
weekend.

Thanks to all those who like tbird, and would like to see it stay
around.

-- 
--
Michael Graff    Iowa State University Computation Center      Project Vincent
215 Durham                voice: (515) 294-4994           explorer@iastate.edu
Ames, IA  50010           fax:   (515) 294-1717           gg.mlg@isumvs.bitnet
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
From: "Marc VanHeyningen" <mvanheyn@silky.cs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: 3rd space guardian robots
X-Quoted: 40%
Reply-To: mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu
Organization: Computer Science Dept, Indiana University
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 18:37:03 -0500

Thus said tom@soda.berkeley.edu (Tom Holub):
>In article <1992Aug27.213155.8857@ils.nwu.edu> shafto@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (Eric Shafto) writes:
>)
>)I will also assume that you have never been on the "winning" side of an
>)unbreakable LPS, since you are such a good strategist, and only bad
>)strategists could have a problem breaking an LPS.  While we are on the
>)subject, I think that you meant "tacticians", not "strategists".  I
>)don't really see much use for strategy in an LPS, while tactics can be
>)supremely important.
>
>Perhaps this is why you think there is such a thing as an 'unbreakable LPS'.
>Strategy is *paramount* in an LPS for the winning side (if they plan
>to win).  Tactics are important for the defenders, but mostly
>useless for the attackers.

Um, I don't think you two are really disagreeing on how to break LPSs
so much as where the division between strategy and tactics is.  Some
strategic issues become moot in LPSs ("Gee, which planet should I try to
take?") and techniques like "Have four guys come in cloaked at once"
could arguably be classified as either strategy or tactics.  (I think I
would call them the former.)  Tactics are still useful for attackers,
depending on the clue level of defenders; pausing to let the defender
pour eight torps over the planet just before you enter orbit is a
tactic, and can work really well sometimes.

Regarding the galaxy setup, I think it would be a less enjoyable game
without some kind of neutral area to the galaxy.  A two-race galaxy
wouldn't be a galaxy, it would be an arena.  It would tend to make
concepts like "Hold the front line" mean something, and would tend to
make the game less like ace pilots fighting and more like trench warfare
in 1917, where countless ships rush in and mow each other down along a
slowly moving line.
-- 
Marc VanHeyningen     mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu     MIME accepted
{ x Mostly Harmless | x >= Ensign ^ x <= Commodore }

It ain't scumming if it works.
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 15:51:38 -0400 
From: "Timothy C. Worsley" <tw1r+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: 3rd space guardian robots
	<1992Aug28.182548.26012@ils.nwu.edu>
	<JIVE.92Aug28150009@spanky.ssc.gov>
	<Mebiuoa00Vp2Ab9FdQ@andrew.cmu.edu>
	<0ebmUwO00awEELvVR_@andrew.cmu.edu>

Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.netrek: 29-Aug-92 Re: 3rd space guardian
robots "Robert W. Hill"@andrew. (934)

> It is silly to say that a SB defends a planet worse than a standard
> ship.  SB's have way too much
> firepower to be compared to any other ship type.  A good SB will know
> you are carrying, and will 
> shrug off the notion of the ogg.  Of course, if you have a runner-scum
> SB, then he would probably
> be a runner scum in other ship types as well, therefore defending even
> worse in those ship types.

	SB firepower includes DD torps (with shorter range), 150pt plasma, and
150 pt, high-speed phasers.  A BB has better torps, but only 130pt
plasma and 105 pt low-speed phasers.  The only big difference is the
phasers.  In a normal game, the SB's huge fuel capacity and impressive
T/P greatly augment its other weapons, but in an LPS arround a fuel
planet, it's not that big of a difference.
	I'd have to agree that a SB won't be scared by a single planet taker,
but if a wave comes in, the SB player has to be thinking about an Ogg,
and a moment's hesitation can make a big difference.

ZZnew guy
From: bathurst@noaapmel.gov (Bill Bathurst)
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Subject: Re: Borgs : WHY?  HOW?  AS IF...
Date: 28 Aug 92 22:31:38 GMT
Organization: NOAA/PMEL, Sand Point Way, Seattle, WA


Borgs are not that difficult anymore for me.  I fight them the way I fight
robots.  Weave in so their auto-torps don't hit.  Tow, phaser, torp.  They
die.  

The problem with borgs is that they will tear up newbies.  But, then again
experienced xtrek players do also (:
--
Bill Bathurst				Internet:	bathurst@noaapmel.gov 
NOAA/PMEL				Phone:		(206) 526-6765
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:35:29 -0400 
From: "Timothy C. Worsley" <tw1r+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: AA vs RankScum, kinda

	Well, RankScum and AA met again, sort of.  In fact, each team had only
5 regulars, and 2-3 (at different points in the game) subs.  The sub
list was impressive, including Balinor, Akira, Mr. Wizard, and NSX.
	AA (away for some reason) chose Rom, so RS was naturally Fed.  
	Once AA had reduced RS to their core, they retreated in and began
collecting plasma.  AA had a great deal of trouble ousting Stiletto from
his base, but eventually succeded.  By then, RS was down to Earth and
Alt.  Things remained essencially the same for the rest of the game.  RS
took Den once, and AA took Alt a number of times, but we couldn't break
the LPS, and they couldn't expand.  Eventually, we indied Alt, and left
it to concentrate on Earth.  Earth went down to 2 armies, but we ran out
of time before we could take it.

Final score 
AA 18
RS 1
indi 1

	I don't have stats.

BTW, we found a cute bug with the INL sever.  If you indi a planet
before the game starts, the server will crash.

ZZnew guy
From: leonard@mimsy.umd.edu (Leonard Dickens)
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Subject: Ship explosion foo
Date: 31 Aug 92 20:05:29 GMT
Organization: Universal Export Ltd, Regent's Park, London

Jonathan Hardwick writes:
>ObTrek : why do ship explosions appear on the edge of your tactical
>display seconds AFTER the ship dies?  Everyone involved in the combat
>sees the ship explode at the correct time.  But if you wander into the
>zone within the next few seconds, you see the explosion time-delayed
>on the edge of your tactical display.  Feature or bug?

Bug.  Problem is that only ships with in redraw range (that is, on the
local map) get their explosions updated.  This means that if you get
to a place where there is a ship exploding, you will always get to see
the full explosion sequence.  (Sortof a feature, that.)  The problem
is exacerbated by the fact that it often takes the server a while to
tell people a ship has moved from being DEAD to OUTFITing.  So there
are several seconds possible that you can wander up to a long-gone
explosion and get the whole thing replayed for you.

This is now on my TODO list for NBR.

-Leonard
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
From: tjones%peruvian.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Ray Jones)
Subject: Re: INL server version 2.0
Date: 30 Aug 92 02:26:57 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept., Salt Lake City

In article <34738@cbmvax.commodore.com> jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) writes:
>rjones@dsd.es.com writes:
>>I just dropped the Official INL server on ftp.cis.ksu.edu.  This is version
>>2.0.  There was a version 1.1, but 2.0 came so soon after it, it never got
>>announced. 
>
>	Please, when you announce something available for FTP, PLEASE give
>the full path for the file!  Those of us stuck using ftpmail can take days
>or more of trading mail messages with ftpmail-servers to try to locate
>the needed file(s).

Sorry.

/pub/Games/netrek/INL.tar.Z (I think.  I usually drop it in the
/pub/uplaod area, so I don't see where it ends up.)

>Randell Jesup, Jack-of-quite-a-few-trades, Commodore Engineering.



Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
From: lyodav@iastate.edu (Sun God)
Subject: Re: 3rd space guardian robots
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 04:59:14 GMT

In <1992Aug27.183709.7708@news.cs.indiana.edu> "Marc VanHeyningen" <mvanheyn@silky.cs.indiana.edu> writes:

>Thus said tom@soda.berkeley.edu (Tom Holub):
>>In article <1992Aug27.213155.8857@ils.nwu.edu> shafto@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (Eric Shafto) writes:
>>)

>Regarding the galaxy setup, I think it would be a less enjoyable game
>without some kind of neutral area to the galaxy.  A two-race galaxy
>wouldn't be a galaxy, it would be an arena.  It would tend to make
>concepts like "Hold the front line" mean something, and would tend to
>make the game less like ace pilots fighting and more like trench warfare
>in 1917, where countless ships rush in and mow each other down along a
>slowly moving line.
>-- 
>Marc VanHeyningen     mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu     MIME accepted
>{ x Mostly Harmless | x >= Ensign ^ x <= Commodore }

>It ain't scumming if it works.

   It would mean a partial end to some kinds of the worst scums, and a partial
return of the dogfighting era. I thought that this is what you guys wanted...
It seems MORE like ace pilots fighting to me. And more like a faster paced
game than these silly 30+ planet wars. I'm not saying it's the only way
netrek should be played, I'm just saying that I can't wait to TRY it on Ray's
server. You guys will try something new, right? It's not like broccoli, where
you know it's going to be bad and there's no reason to try it. ;-)
--Dave/WeenieBlaster
Minister of Statistics, 12 Angry Men
   Does anyone maintain a FCS list? (Frequent Clever Suggestors) If so, put
me on there. I've got this new idea for a rating scheme....
   Ok, here it is: 
Offense: stays the same
Planets: Stay the same, but 1/2 credit for neut, 1/2 for take
Bombing: seperate the married cousins, ogging and bombing. This would only
   include armies bombed. Credit would be given for reinforcing a friendly
   planet up to 4. (clever eh?)
Defense: Is changed from the current meaningless stat to the # of armies 
   destroyed on enemy ships. Is weighted to a factor of 1/2. Is weighted this
   way so that about 3 armies must be ogged to give the same credit as for
   one planet, which is perfect since the average planet take uses 3 armies.
 
   Ok, this gives the average player 3.5 DI per hour instead of 3.0. That's
where the new (and naval-rank accurate) rank of Flt. Adm. comes in. You'd
need ratings of 9.00 for so many hours. Would be slightly easier to get 
9/3.5 = 2.57 than 8/3 =2.67 times the average player's DI. BUT, you'd have to
do it for more than 40 hours. Say, 50. All in all, a cool system. I don't 
expect to see people rushing out in the streets shouting "What a cool system!"
though. *sigh* It would require starting with a new database...
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
From: rjones@itchy.dsd.es.com (Ray Jones - Perp)
Subject: Re: Doorstop bug
Organization: Design Systems Division, Evans & Sutherland, SLC, UT
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 13:13:48 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.000304@IASTATE.EDU> isae@IASTATE.EDU (isae@vincent.iastate.edu) writes:
>this is FYI that the bug has been fixed and no more fake admirals exist 
>there. :-]

Damn.... That was the only time I'd ever get to see 

Admiral rjones

oh well...

Admiral rjones (demoted)
--
                                          rjones@dsd.es.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Subject: fun wanted.
From: phifo@nutmeg.cs.ntu.edu.au (Phillip Follett)
Date: 30 Aug 92 18:03:15 +0900
Distribution: world
Organization: Information Technology, Northern Territory University

I am looking for a netrek group that I could join to play team orientated netrek.
I live in Darwin, Australia.  At the university here we have a local netrek that
is occationally used.  There isn't a great number of netrek fans here, so we never
get more than 5 or 6 players playing at once (and even then people only play for 
15 mins or so).

I realise that a link overseas would probably be much too slow, so a group in 
Aussie land would be preferable.

Could you please mail me if you can help me out.

				Thanks in advance.


===============================================================================
Phillip Follett                 |
phifo@nutmeg.cs.ntu.edu.au      |      Wasting time is an important part
Northern Territory University   |          of living.
Darwin, Australia               |
===============================================================================
From: fadden@uts.amdahl.com (Andy McFadden)
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Subject: Re: sick(big)dog metaserver
Date: 27 Aug 92 20:36:47 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <714889634.5613.0@alexandra.weh.andrew.cmu.edu> stimpy+@cmu.edu (Rick) writes:
>Or, just use the amdahl one...
>btw, how long is that gonna be around?

Well, eventually it should replace the Berkeley one.  Right now it's a bit
flaky though (just fixed another one which caused it to hang when port-1 just
sat there doing nothing).  I've got it running under dbx so when it goes
south I can figure out where it's stuck.

>--Rick

-- 
fadden@uts.amdahl.com (Andy McFadden)
[ Above opinions are mine, Amdahl has nothing to do with them, etc, etc. ]
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
From: mcn@cwru.edu (Michael C. Neuman)
Subject: Re: borg hours on b62150.student.cwru.edu
Reply-To: mcn@b62103.student.cwru.edu
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:20:35 GMT

In article <17p46mINNc50@moe.ksu.ksu.edu> bav@hobbes.ksu.ksu.edu (Brick Verser)  
writes:
>fadden@uts.amdahl.com (Andy McFadden) writes:
>>Unless my math is wrong, that's human hours from 6am to 10am on the west  
coast,
>>making it effectively a borg-only server for us.
>>
>>Why not just make it 100% borg and dispense with the hours altogether?
>
>Absolutely.  I've said it before in person to a server keeper or two, and
>I may even have said it here.  But I'll say it again.  The best way to 
>attract players to a server is for it to be consistent.  

  Well, I arranged the hours that way to make my human/borg hours alternate  
with those of rwd4...  

  I certainly don't want to go totally borg because I enjoy human games much  
more than borg games--but at the same time I also need a place to test my  
server and bot mods... In any event--I'll do some more checking with players  
and see what works best for everyone interested...

--
Mike Neuman                mcn@b62103.student.cwru.edu
			   NeXTmail accepted!!!
"To make a machine that will be proud of us." - Thinking Machine's motto
From: fadden@uts.amdahl.com (Andy McFadden)
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek
Subject: Re: UDP performance criteria
Date: 23 Aug 92 22:30:15 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Aug23.103151.8915@news.cs.indiana.edu> mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu writes:
>Worf:	Oops, we're not bombing.  Re-sending bomb packet...
>Riker:	No, dammit!  Re-Energize!

Yup, this can happen.  The quick fix is to check for beaming AFTER the check
for bombing.  The proper fix is to clear fBomb when the player requests a
beamup or beamdown.  Another possibility is to reduce the number of retries
on bomb requests.

Of course, this only happens when you hit 'b' and then 'x', and the server
doesn't get the "you are bombing" packet back before it gets the "please beam
down" packet.  Rare, but not unheard-of.

Of course, I usually slam the "beamdown" key about 20 times anyway just to
be safe...

>Marc VanHeyningen     mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu     MIME accepted

-- 
fadden@uts.amdahl.com (Andy McFadden)
[ Above opinions are mine, Amdahl has nothing to do with them, etc, etc. ]
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek