HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: 91vanderkolk@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: BTECH: Jade Falcon source book mechs
Date: 29 Sep 92 09:34:49 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

Does anybody know if FASA is going to come out with Stats on the "lost"
mechs from the Jade Falcon source book? By "lost" mechs I mean the Atlas II and
company that have been mentioned before. Also when in Merc. Handbook 2ed. due
out?


John
From: v055nmvy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (David A Gaidasz)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: centurion errata sheet wanted
Date: 30 Sep 92 18:37:00 GMT
Organization: New Avalon: Camelot Corps Command
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <Sep.30.10.23.27.1992.18951@andromeda.rutgers.edu>, dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Donald A Shaffer) writes...
> 
>   If anyone out there has got a copy of the errata sheet from 2nd eddition
>centurion dealing with the real engine costs and stuff, could you please send
>me a copy. Thanks in advance.
>                                                don. Shaffer

	That's easy chummer. Just cut the price of any engine rated 10-2450
in half. The 2500 hundred is also wrong. It's 625,000.

						David Gaidasz
						Renegade Legionaire-at-large
________________________________________________________________________________
| David Gaidasz  		      | Disclaimer:  I stand alone;	       |
|   (aka White Knight, KnightWalker)  |     	     in ideas and actions,     |
|   v055nmvy@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu     |              thoughts and reactions.   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| "You'll never see my shade, or hear the sound of my feet,                    |
| While there's a moon, over Bourbon Street." -Sting, Moon Over Bourbon Street |
|______________________________________________________________________________|
From: demented+@pitt.edu (Scott E Berry)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Btech/RoboTech comparison
Date: 2 Oct 92 17:08:05 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


It is impossible to form a valid comparison between Battletech and
the mecha combat system for the ROBOTECH RPG.  Only generalizations
Robotech mecha are faster. Robotech mecha are generaly 20-30 tons
(except for the 285 ton Mac II).  Robotech weapons  generaly have
longer ranges.  Robotech mecha have real missles instead of 
semi guided rockets. 


Try scaling hand to hand damages.  Mac II punch 2d6 MDC Battletech 
punch  for a 285 ton mech 29 points.  Thats about 1d6 MDC = 15 points.
Lets take an example battle between a Robotech Excalibur and its Battletech
brother a Warhammer.  The Excalibur fires 6 short range armour piercing 
missiles (8km range) doing 1d6*10 MDC for a minimum of 150 points per 
missile and lets not forget that Robotech missles always go for the 
main body(ie left right or center torsos). Not much chance of the war hammer
ever getting into range.  I must admit that I chose a MDC to armour points
conversion that favored Robotech but that just shows how impossible a
comparison is.    
   

     I have thought of doing some system similar to Battletech that
would give Mecha speeds and weapon ranges some meaning.  Would anyone
else be interested.  The Palladium system is to much like D&D for mechs.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Scott E. Berry
                               demented+@pitt.edu  
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: poirier@ellerbe.rtp.dg.com (Charles Poirier)
Subject: Titan rules question
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 21:10:45 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.

A controversy arose during a battle in the Desert in a recent Titan game.
I had a Ranger and wanted to move it four spaces, ending on Sand.  The
terrain effect on movement reads "Non-flying non-natives are slowed when
entering Sand."  Compare this to the effects of Bramble and Drift, which
both read "Non-natives are slowed when entering."  I have always thought
this to unambiguously permit what I wanted to do.  Not so, said one of
my opponents, who cited an article in The General (Avalon Hill's gaming
magazine) answering this very question.  This article supposedly says that
flyers can *cross* sand normally, but are slowed if they land there.  The
rationale is that there is a rule saying that a terrain effect only affects
a flyer if it lands.  That is fine with me, but I say the terrain effect
is just what it says it is on the terrain effects chart I quoted above.
Nope, says the article, the terrain effect for sand is "badly worded".

I am relatively incensed, not because this affected my game but because
the ruling is so clearly wrong.  You Titan fans out there will help me
decide how to treat this issue.

1) Is this baloney or what?  Do you play that ALL non-natives are slowed
	landing in Sand?
2) What possible distinction was meant to be drawn, by adding the words
	"non-flying" to the Sand terrain effect?  To make a distinct
	difference in the wording of one terrain effect, when in fact
	there was no difference intended between any of the mentioned
	terrains, would go beyond "bad wording" to "utter stupidity".
	This is not a reasonable possibility to me.  There are no other
	comparable "wording" errors in the rules, in my opinion.
3) What are the odds that the question was answered by some bonehead newbie
	goon at TAHGC who certainly didn't write the rules, and probably
	never even played the game?  When an "official" ruling is clearly
	bogus, do you feel obligated to obey it anyway?


	Charles
From: 91vanderkolk@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: Clan Honor
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:37:11 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

In regards to your questions Carl:

A Clanner wouldn't engage in physical attacks because that is not how
"civilized" battles are fought. Clanners prefer ranged combat in Mechs.
(This is a stereotype too)
MY gropup also had the indirect fire question too. We decided that a Clan mech
could only do indirect fire on a mech that it has already targeted. In othe in
other words a Clan mech could initially shoot at someone without seeing them
first.
We allow retreats. Why? Because retreating is a basic military principal. This
follows with the logic why throw good after bad. Also if you don't retreat
against a hopeless position that is wastefull, and the clans don't like waste.
DEath before dishonnor. That sums it up for a clanner.
To your question about what mechs Clanners can fire at: the first IS mech that
attacks them or the appropiate mech? We leave that to the Clan players
discrerestion. Using your example: That locust charges your clan mech, but
there is an Atlas attacking you. If I was the Clanner I would take them both.
All the more glory to me.

Hope this helps.


John
From: roan@convex.com (Russell Roan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: erwinrd@seattleu.edu - My email won't reach you
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:16:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Sep29.161632.24189
Distribution: usa
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.


	My apologies to the net, but I have been for some time
trying to get email to erwind@seattleu.edu, and it has been bouncing.

	Could you give me your telephone # and we could arrange things
that way.

				Thanks,

				Russell
-- 
Russell Roan	  |"Lord, teach us to respect our political opponents....
roan@convex.com   | In the hard campaign ahead, help us to never boast,
Vox: 214-497-4841 | nor to be uncharitable."  - Dan Quayle at prayer.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: blum@news.ils.nwu.edu (Daniel Blum)
Subject: Where to get Russo-Japanese War
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:15:44 GMT

Somebody was looking for a copy of GDW's Russo-Japanese War.  Marc
Miller has a mint copy for $45.  He also has Crimea, $67, Chaco, $90,
Torgau, $90, Eagles, $270, DNO, $110, and SSN, $45 (all are unpunched,
in original packaging).  Nore that this list is several months old, so
it may be out of date.  His address is
	
	Games
	PO Box 193
	Normal, IL 61701

The prices include shipping.

--
_____________________________________________________________________
Dan Blum           Institute for the Learning Sciences   Room 327
blum@ils.nwu.edu   1890 Maple Ave., Evanston, IL 60201   708-467-2306

"By the power vested in me by my own over-inflated ego, I now 
 declare this bridge officially open."
_____________________________________________________________________

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: 891078p@ace.acadiau.ca (Trevor Perkins)
Subject: Re: A&A:  Attention Dewey's opponents ;)
Organization: Acadia University
Distribution: global
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 15:58:15 GMT

 josh@gacvx2.gac.edu writes:

>  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.
>
    I AGREE !!  Ignoring the US fleet is suicide, plain and simple.  The 
game is already weighted in favor of the allies, so why give them more of an 
advantage.  The US fleet MUST be taken out in the first round to get the US 
temporarily off Japan's back so that Japan can go after the USSR to ease the 
pressure on Germany.
                   			- Trevor
  =======================================================================
  |   C. Trevor Perkins                       891078p@ace.acadiau.ca.   |
  |                                                                     |
  |    /|                                /~~\                           |
  |  /~~|cadia University                |      /| |\ |   /| |~\   /|   |
  |         Wolfville, Nova Scotia       \__/ /~~| | \| /~~| |_/ /~~|   |
  |---------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |   STRESS -  The condition caused when the mind overrides the        |
  |           body's basic urge to choke the crap out of some jerk      |
  |                    who desperately deserves it !!!                  |
  =======================================================================
From: rday@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E Day)
Subject: 300 years of development(was Re: Btech/RoboTech comparison)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 13:59:38 GMT

In article <s903609.718351522@minyos.xx.rmit.OZ.AU> s903609@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.a
u (ACE) writes:
>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.

Do not be too confidant with technological marvals. A "modern" Victorian army 
(about 1000 men, with rifles, artillery & cavalry) were defeated by an army of 
footmen using spears in the opening of the "Zolu" war. The Victorian army was 
outnumberd about 20:1(as I recall), but the technology level difference was 
greater than 300 years.
-- 
If the price that I must pay to obtain my *  Robert E. Day/Syr Otto von    *
freedom, is to acknowledge that the Gov-  *  Schwartzkatz, Shire Mugmort   *
ernmet was granted the power to infringe  *  Barony Middle Marches,        *
on them, then I am not free. Paul Anderson*  Middle Kingdom                *
From: kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: BTECH: anime combat rules that reflect anime reality
Date: 5 Oct 92 13:12:56 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec

From: clarka@netcom.com (Andrew Clark)

> "Those idiots put the pilots in the HEAD!  Morons," growls the
> Veritech pilot as he leaves headless Mechs in his wake.

Hehehe ... yup ... I have to agree, that makes little sense except in a
"aesthetic" fashion.

> The difference between Btech and Robotech in terms of technology is
> profound.  Robotech Mecha are powered by protoculture (and have
> fly-by-thought control systems that put VRPP to shame.)  Btech
> mecha rely on bulky fusion engines and have constant overheating
> problems; the only limitation on Veritechs seems to be ammo.

That depends, most Veritechs, at least the one's I saw in "combat", had
plenty of ammo to waste dozens or more enemy Battle Pods. Ammo is
"slight" consideration.

To bad that Kevin doesn't plan to release a Macross II sourcebook. The
again, his system sucks IMHO.

BTW, MAcross II is beautiful, and all the new Veritech's have "bits".
Small, fly by instinct support pods. At least in the space sequences.
Shades of Gundam , n'est ce pas ? :-)

> 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. 

This is all beacause the "Yackaty Yack" game rules. You don't like,
change 'em. In fact, after a GenCon luncheon between the writers, we
might see a "house" rules book. This book would contain all the best
"house" rules that people added to the game. Only problem, a true
concern, is not to do what StirFryBeatles did... many contradictory
rules. (That's SFB for the un-educated :-)

> I'd rather have anime combat rules that reflect anime reality.
> (Btech -- kind of, Robotech -- nice mecha, bad rules, Mekton -- ???) 

	You didn't hear me say this... but Mekton's MTS book makes the
	game "more anime than anime". Watch for it soon!

PS (Gosh I feel guilty admitting that another game has better
construction rules and such!)

> -- 
> clarka@netcom.com     Andrew Clark     My ignorance is my own fault.
> "We have virtual reality today: George Bush lives in it." | Bad cop! 
> "Macs are to computing what television is to journalism." | No donut! 
> Secondary account at aclark@UCSD.EDU -- prefer mail at netcom site.   


+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Stephane I. Matis |  E-Mail : kgnome@cs.concordia.ca  | Viva NeXTSTEP 3.0 ! |
|.............................................................................|
|------------ bla bla Mecha*Press bla bla Dream Pod 9 blabla FASA ------------|
| BATTLETECH ----------------------------------------------------- NeXThead ! |
|------------ aka : Major Adrian Hammerhand, WolfNet Intelligence ------------|
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 14:25:15 -0400 
From: "Timothy C. Worsley" <tw1r+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Titan: Victory points

Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.board: 26-Sep-92 Titan: Victory points
Gerald Siek@uni-paderbor (580)

> Has anyone of the more experienced Titan veterans tried to modify the
> scoring rules?   Yesterday we had a game where one player won three
> fights successively and collected about 300 points while the loser 
> got nothing although he had managed to slay a large number of the winners
> characters.
> I wonder how the game would be if both, winner and loser get points for
> the characters slain (e.g. the winner gets full points and the loser half
> points or so).

	The problem is that if the loser scored points, he would have no reason
to want to flee.  Additionally, he would be tempted to try to kill weak
"points" (Tower creatures etc.) pieces instead of stronger "quarterback"
pieces (Dragons Wyverns etc).
	The biggest problem is fleeing, of course.  Most conflicts in Titan
should be solved via fleeing.

ZZnew guy
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: bkdavis@eos.ncsu.edu (B K DAVIS)
Subject: Re: BTECH: Mechwar 1.01 Fix?????
Originator: bkdavis@pepe.csc.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: bkdavis@eos.ncsu.edu (B K DAVIS)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 14:43:21 GMT


In article <1992Oct6.013431.27028@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, mhatz@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Hatz) writes:
|>Newsgroups: rec.games.board
|>Path: taco!gatech!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx!mhatz
|>From: mhatz@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Hatz)
|>Subject: BTECH: Mechwar 1.01 Fix?????
|>Message-ID: <1992Oct6.013431.27028@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
|>X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
|>	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
|>	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
|>Sender: usenet@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu (netnews admin account)
|>Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
|>Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 21:34:31 GMT+5:00
|>Lines: 7
|>
|>I got the newest version of Mech War 1.01 and am still having all kinds of
|>trouble with it.  I try to run the mechwar.exe and all the fights barf
|>ANSI all over the screen in a very ugly way.  I am using a 386/25, Stacker
|>and SmartDrive if these are possible offenders?  Any hints would be very 
|>appreciated.  This happens when I go into the weapons screen to select the
|>weapons to fire.  Thanks.  Mike
|>
|>

I am having the same problem.

Brian
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: blum@news.ils.nwu.edu (Daniel Blum)
Subject: Chicago area gamers - Rock-Con?
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:18:01 GMT

Are there any Chicago-area gamers planning to go to Rock-Con?  I'm
interested in going, if I can find transportation...

--
_____________________________________________________________________
Dan Blum           Institute for the Learning Sciences   Room 327
blum@ils.nwu.edu   1890 Maple Ave., Evanston, IL 60201   708-467-2306

"By the power vested in me by my own over-inflated ego, I now 
 declare this bridge officially open."
_____________________________________________________________________

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: lph@inel.gov (Randolph M. Pacetti)
Subject: Re: Titan: rules bug?
Keywords: carry-over
Organization: Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 23:32:52 GMT

Rule 12.5 covers your "Bugs" 3 and 4.  If you want to carry to someplace
that the bonus does not apply, you can do so by foregoing the bonus for
all attacks by that creature.


-- 
---
Randy Pacetti, Engineering Specialist, AI and Information Engineering
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, PO Box 1625, Idaho Falls, ID 83415-2090
Internet: lph@inel.gov  Office: (208) 525-5442  FAX: (208) 525-5996
========== long legal disclaimer follows, press n to skip ===========

Neither the United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory or any of their employees, makes any warranty, whatsoever,
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility regarding any
information, disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
privately owned rights.  No specific reference constitutes or implies
endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States
Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.  The views and
opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the
United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory,
and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.
From: dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Donald A Shaffer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: BTECh/Mechwar. question
Date: 30 Sep 92 20:07:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: andromed.Sep.30.16.07.51.1992.23307
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


   I don't know how many of you have heard of alt.pub.dragons-inn, but I was
wondering if us Btech players could get our own group like that.  For those
who don't know about the newsgroup, alt.pub.dragon's-inn is a place where
people go and generally tell interactive stories( much like a mud using the
news).  I have no idea on how to start a group like this, so if any of you
computer wizzes can tell me(and help me make it) I would be much obliged.
   I was thinking that our pub would be dedicated to the Btech universe instead
of in a fantasy world like in dragons-inn.  It would have two time zones.
One before clan, and one after clan.  So how about it.  Could we do it?
   
*******************************************************************************
Never attach an Atlas with     *     Don Shaffer
  a locust.                    *     dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu
   -last words of the commander*
    of Lacies scout lance      *
******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich)
Subject: Re: A&A: Allies buy how many dice
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 05:32:40 GMT

In article <0enRP4W00iUxE24nlm@andrew.cmu.edu> "Jonathan T. Moore" <jmci+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>
>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....

See the other post I made...

Actually, I forgot to mention as well that *if* the Japanese only hit
twice when attacking and the US sub can withdraw, then the US has the
advantage by far.  Using a program I have that runs a given battle x
times, I get that, without the US sub (ie, it was lost on Japan's turn),
the Japanese will win 66.7% of the time, the US 23.2%, and a mutual
annihilation (which favors the US) 10.1% of the time.  If the sub was
able to withdraw, then the US wins the counterattack 58% of the time,
and the Japanese only 33.6% of the time (8.4% annihilation).  Amazing
the difference of one sub...

>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?

My friend, like Mr. X said in Oliver Stone's "JFK", "You are closer than
you think."

Dewey

Newsgroups: rec.games.board