HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pca8c@Virginia.EDU ("Phil Abel")
Subject: Re: A&A: Why does America fight Germany?
Organization: University of Virginia Mercenary Training Center
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:37:57 GMT

If USSR attacks Eastern Europe, they have to send their three
armour (2 in Moscow, 1 in Karelia), and the three infantry in
Karelia, and the fighter in Karelia. Odds of winning with these
items are 90%. Any less and the odds drop substantially. Now,
this battle complete, recall that the rulebook says any unit
which moves during the combat portion of a turn may not move
during the non-combat portion (except planes). Thus all the
USSR tanks are stuck in E. Europe, doomed to destruction in the
German counterattack, and unavailable for use in recapturing
Caucasus.

As for the US/UK invasion fleet: This fleet is not operational
until the end of the second turn. My strategy pivots on the
ability of Germany to annihilate Karelia ON the second turn.

The basic plan is that USSR will divert enough units from
Karelia to allow Germany to more easily capture it. If Germany
can talk Japan into landing its Burmese fighter in Caucasus on
their turn, that's yet another threat which Moscow will have to
respond to with more infantry.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: pietu@cc.lut.fi (Petri Regina)
Subject: Re: Epic Space Marines
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 20:39:20 GMT
Organization: Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland

jrzorn@garnet.berkeley.edu () writes:


>Some more Epic questions:

>	Continuing on the theme of wave serpents. What happens when the
>irresistable wave meets the immoveable force field of a mekboy speedsta or
>impenetrable mekboy gargant?

Well this may sound stupid... but

If you fire the wave, you have to use the scatter dices. The wave hits
or changes direction (on dragsters case). 

If you move the wave serpent close to the gargant and the wave hits the gargant
work the effects as normal.

>	On the theme of forcefields. Can an eldar tremor canon, which
>propagates its attack through the ground, do damage to the mekboy speedsta
>and gargant, or do their fields in some way block attacks through the
>ground. If the latter is the case, how do they affect mole mortars?

Force fields or shields do not have effect on tremor cannons or vibro cannons.
And as my opinnion neither mole mortars. Those attacs come from ground 
where the gargant or titan stands.

>	Any responses will be greatfully read.

>JZ

-pietu
-- 
*--------------------------------------*
* email: pietu@lut.fi * tel: 953-29385 *
From: 2huwbeach@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: A&A Question: Placement of Ships
Date: 18 Dec 92 13:39:15 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services


	In my 1984 version of A&A, Britain is to place a Battleship at
Gibraltor at the beginning of the game.  Also Germany is to place a sub in 
the Southern Europe Sea Zone.  The problem is that both Gibraltor and 
Southern Europe share the same sea zone.  I know there is also a rule stating
that a ship cannot pass through the Gibraltor/North Africa Sea Zone unless
it owns the countries on both sides of the sea pass.  So what we usually do is
place the British battleship in the sea zone just west of Gibraltor and place
the German sub in the Southern Europe sea zone just east of Gibraltor.  But
neither of these ships can pass through the Gibraltor strait since neither
Britain nor Germany own both sides of the strait.  Is this correct?  Was this
an oversight in the rules?  Opinions are welcomed.

			Thanks

			Matt Rose
			Univ of Kansas
			Remote Sensing Lab

		/ Refighting WWII since 1989	/
From: oberland@vax.sonoma.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A&A - I think I found it!!!!
Date: 13 Dec 92 09:50:17 GMT
Organization: Sonoma State University

Way too busy.  Not keeping track of things like I should...
Thanks for the program that allowed the neat stats for the battles goes to
BARRY.
NEAT program(just wished it was a bit faster).

Joe
From: davidf@HQ.Ileaf.COM (David Fristrom)
Subject: Re: History of the World
Reply-To: davidf@HQ.Ileaf.COM (David Fristrom)
Organization: Interleaf, Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 14:37:36 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.145023.2707@lth.se> e91mom@efd.lth.se (Martin Omander) writes:
> 
> 	I got my copy of "History of the World" directly from the
> Ragnar Brothers. I don't remember the price, but it wasn't too
> expensive.
>	[Address deleted]

I have heard that Ragnar has sold "History of the World" to Avalon
Hill, and will no longer be producing it themselves.  So, assuming my
source was correct, the bad news is that you may not be able to buy it
for a while (since they have sold out), but the good news is that
eventually it should be fairly easy to find, at least in the States.

It is quite a fun game, but after several plays we have noticed that
the winner tends to be who ever draws the British Empire in the final
phase, which means the previous several hours of play were pointless,
if fun.  Perhaps AH will fine-tune things a bit -- although it is so
close to perfection that they might be better off leaving well enough
alone.

David Fristrom		|
Interleaf, Inc.		|   "Words, words, words, I'm so sick of words"
davidf@ileaf.com	|
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: Re: BTECH: The DRA-SD2 Shadow Dragon II - with new technologies!
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1992 05:09:50 GMT

In article <ByvtFA.x5@dcs.ed.ac.uk> re@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Roderick Easton) writes:
>
>   This cannot happen.  For a start (though I didn't read the original
>article describing them) twin engines are out.
 
    \/\/ell, yes, but then you didn't read the original article, did
 you?  <grin>  The original poster was using an added rule that allows
 him to use twin engines.  It would have helped if he had re-posted
 his original rules before the design he posted, but it probably
 wouldn't have effected much -- We can all figure out for ourselves
 what twin engines would give you.  I'm not saying that I advocate the
 new rule, myself.  I personally wouldn't allow any mech using this
 rule into my games, unless I was given the chance to design some new
 mechs using that rule, as well.  Even then, I don't think I'd want
 to regularly use this rule, myself. 
 

>It also defeats the purpose of the heavier engines and seriously
>disrupts game balance

    \_/
     |ah, that's why I wouldn't want to use it on a regular basis.

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: pmenard@cse.unl.edu (Patrick Menard)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: 2-player CIVILIZATION?,,advanced CIVILIZATION?
Date: 14 Dec 1992 08:08:21 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln	
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: cse.unl.edu

jjk@astro.umd.edu (Jim Klavetter) writes:

>I recently received CIVILIZATION (for my b-day).  I've taken a quick
>look at the rules and it is pretty obvious that this game is best
>with at least 4 players and the more the merrier (up to 7).  My
>question:  is this game fun at all with only 2?  It seems trading
>loses something, but maybe beyond that it isn't so bad?  Or is it
>totally unfun with less than 3?

>I know there is an advanced CIVILIZATION.  How much does this add to
>things?  If I could only occasionally get a large group together would
>it be worth trying the advanced game or stick with the original until
>everyone is more acquainted with it?  And is Advanced CIVILIZATION any
>fun with only 2?

>Thanks for any help, email is ok.

Well, its not too fun with less than 3 unless you use the Independent Kingdoms
variant posted on here.  It adds lots of strategy (with a few loopholes) and
basically adds more players to the game.  Trading is still real hard to
accomplish and the game still isn't as good as it is being played with more
people.

Shadow

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: gletty@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Bruce Gletty)
Subject: Re: SFB vs GEV FAQ.
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:34:04 GMT

warren@nscf.org (L3 Warren) writes:

>seurer@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Bill Seurer) writes:

>>I realized that I had
>>wasted a ton of money on a game that was losing its flavor.  The 
>>distinct differences between the early ship designs made them interesting.
>>The later much-too-similar designs ruined it.

>Well, to each his own, certainly.

>However, you can still play the older ships with no problems. And despite
>all the changes that have been made to "modernize" ships, the main
>philosophies of the races have been preserved.

>Kzinti ships still sacrifice direct firepower for drone power. Feds still
>don't use drones much (their racks are used for ADDs mostly, to make them
>less of a pain to play against Kzinti). Roms still have pathetic drone 
>defense abilities (other than the cloak, of course). They've all preserved
>their strengths, diminished their weaknesses a little, and generally still
>fly using similar tactics to their ancestors.

Not that much, the feds get to use almost everything. The original ships
were much more distinctive than the later ones. Scatter pacs, SWAC, ECM,
ECCM, and a few others add not much to the game but a lot to complexity.

Original ships:
Federation - Photon Torpedo, Phaser I, Phaser III
Kzinti - Fighters, Drones, Disruptor, Phaser I Phaser III
Klingon - Disruptor (DERFACS, UIM), Phaser II, Phaser III, Slow firing drones, ADD
Hydran - FIghters, Hell Bore, Fusion Beam, Phaser I, Phaser G   
Romulan - Cloak, Phaser I, Plasma torps
Gorn - Phaser I, Plasma torps
ISC - PPD, Phaser I, Phaser III
Lyran - PF, ESG, DIsruptor, Phaser I, Phaser III

Later model fed ships include almost everything but ESG. They also have the 
best fighters. Everyone has fighters and PFs. Everyone's arcs are about the
same (Kzintis used to have bad arcs on their weapons). Much more sameness.


-- 
This post is mine, and does not necessarily reflect the views of C.C.S.O.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,news.answers
From: gordon@delfin.com (Gordon Hua)
Subject: New 3W games, review request
Reply-To: gordon@delfin.com
Organization: Delfin Systems, Sunnyvale CA
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:57:05 GMT

3W has recently come out with a whole plethora of new games, Salvo, 
The Black Prince, Roundhead & Calvalier 2 (sp) among them.  The box 
blurb on most of them say 400 counters, 4 games, and can be played 
solitaire.

Could some kind souls post reviews of the games they have tried ?


Gordon

Lines: 15
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 15:41:08 MST
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: $stephan@sasb (Stephan Fassmann, Software)
Subject: Re: Fed and Emp
Organization: BYU

In article <STARFLT.92Dec15185235@starfleet-command.mit.edu> starflt@athena.mit.edu (Derrick Kong) writes:

>Exactly.  In a previous game, (which actually started with the turn 10
>setup), 70 Romulan ships attacked a Gorn starbase with about 40 ships.
>EVERY single Rom ended up crippled.  In the Alliance part of the turn,
>a Federation assault on a Romulan major planet resulted in another 40
>Rom cripples.  Literally 90% of the whole Romulan fleet was crippled.
>
Gaads, a the whole fleet crippled in basically a month that's terrible, or 
is a part of a turn longer then that?
______________________________________________________________________________
|Stephan Fassmann       Internet: $stephan@sasb.byu.edu     GEnie: S.FASSMANN|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|         Reality is for those who cannot take Science Fiction               |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: cleggp@rebecca.its.rpi.edu (Paul Jason Clegg)
Subject: WH40k:  Eldar WITH Marines?
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 23:12:46 GMT

A friend of mine gave me two Eldar aspect warrior minis (one's a Striking
Scorpion, the other a Howling Banshee), and I painted them REALLY nice (they're
my best two miniatures to date), but not exactly to "specs".

I maintain an Imperial Marine army force, whose basic color is flat black, 
with pink/purple details/shoulder pad/etc.  I figured that I really have no
use for Eldar, but they're such NEAT figures, I'd paint them up and use them as
singular mercenaries for my Marine force.  So the Eldar helmets are completely
black, with the aspect's rune on them in the pink/purple of the Marine force.
The rest of their bodies are black, but the armored plates are drybrushed
subdued versions of the aspect's colors.  Thus, the scorpion is a dark green,
and Banshee's a dark brown.  They came out REALLY neat.

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone else has ever used, or thought of using,
Eldar in a primarily-marine unit, either as contingents or as mercenaries?

My marine chapter's background allows me to do all sorts of neat stuff with
it; I intentionally made it a bit off the beaten path, as the whole chapter
is known as being a bit rebellious in its organization.  But they get the job
done, and Emperor's happy...  But this allows me to neat stuff like this with
them, and have it mesh with the concept of the chapter...

...Paul

PS>  I actually just wanted to start a thread about WH40k...  Anyone know if/
when the Vehicle book's coming out?


-- 
+                +        +    +  + + +  +    +        +                +
  Paul Clegg, cleggp@aix.rpi.edu.   <I> killed God, why do you ask? 
         System One RPG designer.   Project Galactic Guide Coordinator.
+                +        +    +  + + +  +    +        +                +
From: thpr_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Thomas Parker)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: ban on lead-based figures in new york
Date: 17 Dec 92 23:43:48 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Dec16.191041.15498@sierra.com> paul@sierra.com (Paul Stratton) writes:

>In article <92343.190749ALOHC@CUNYVM.BITNET> ALOHC@CUNYVM.BITNET writes:
>>
>>     NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH DOES HEREBY ORDER THAT:
>>     1) Pursuant to Public Health Law Section 16, the following
>>Respondents, manufacturers of the figurine products containing
>>lead specified at paragraph 3 below, shall immediately cease the
>>sale and/or distribution of said products in New York State:
>>
>...
>>
>>                         MARK R. CHASSIN, M.D., Commissioner
>>                         New York State Department of Health

>WHEREAS the European Economic Community (EEC) and the United States
>Congress have both given an exemption to lead figures as collectors
>items!

>.

>-- 
>Paul Stratton               -----   -----   -----    -----    -----    ------
>Sierra Geophysics, Inc.    /          /    /        /    /   /    /   /     /
>P.O. Box 3886              -----     /    /---     /-----   /-----   /-----/
>Seattle, Wa.  98124            /    /    /        /   \    /  \     /     /


Unfortunately the listing in the amendment on Lead to the Environmental 
Protection Act simply states that lead figures are collectables.

IT DOES NOT give us the right to possess them.  Therefore there is no
conflict with national law...
amd won't be even if the amendment to the EPAct ever gets passed (I don't
know if it was yet, those of us in college have this problem with news...

And for those that care, still waiting for news of the hearing...

Tom Parker

thpr_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE)
Subject: Re: WiF, Question about national effort, pilots ?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 14:10:00 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.230519.22780@delfin.com>, gordon@delfin.com writes...
> 
>A thought about national effort, should the termination of national effort 
>be allowed?   Conditions required would be no enemy units in or adjacent to the Home Country.  The rationale would be 'now that we've repelled the 
>invasion, the emergency is over, lets go back to business as usual." 

I'd say absolutely not.  National Effort is a last gasp desperation measure.
Allowing it to be ended would invite abuse.

>The Planes in Flames module does not address national effort.  National
>effort allows only INF, HQ, and FTRs to be built, in PiF, FTRs are now 
>composed of pilots and FTRs.  The rules have not been extended to 
>explicitely allow pilots to be built while under national effort.  I 
>would advocate a house rule to allow pilots to be so built.  What do
>other people think ?

I haven't read the pilot rule to PiF too carefully, but isn't the idea that if
you are fighting over your own territory, you have a better chance of saving
the pilot when a counter goes down.  Hence one could probably survive without
building pilots, if on the defensive.


Dave

Newsgroups: rec.games.board,rec.games.frp.marketplace
From: cal@fang.att.com (Charles A. Licata)
Subject: Looking For???
Organization: AT&T Tax Systems Development, Maitland FL
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 14:18:45 GMT


Not to long ago someone on the net was looking for three specific
issues of the White Dwarf.  All of them were in the low 100's and
I sent to him 1 of the issues.  Well, I lost your name, address,
and everything, soif you are still out there I have the other two 
issues if you want them.


Chuck
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: barich@ravel.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich)
Subject: Re: A&A - I think I found it!!!!
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 20:36:15 GMT

>  Forgive me for my interuption, but I have a 1984 version of the game and
>certain rules that were brought up from the newer version make this
>impossible..  Since Karelias' IPC value is only 3 how can you build 8
>infantry in it?  And, if you leave Russia with only one take what is to
>stop Germany from attacking Caucaus with 1 fighter 1 bomber and 3 infantry
>then blitzing through it and attacking Russia with 2 fighters and 2
>tanks..  (Taking all of Russias money and basicly winning the game in the
>first round)

Since you have the 1984 rules (the first edition), you obviously have
not had a chance to see the new (2nd - 1987) edition rules.  Allow me to
clarify.

Original owners of original complexes still have unlimited production,
thus the USSR can build all it wants to there.  If the Germans or
Japanese get hold of it, they could only produce three units per turn
there.  If and when the USSR gets it back, they again have unlimited
production there.  And, if the USSR's capital (Russia) falls to the
Axis, then the liberator of Karelia (US or UK) can produce in Karelia
until Russia is liberated (At 3 units per turn, of course).

The reason you cannot attack Cacausus and then blitz requires a careful
understanding of the rules.  Note that Combat Movement comes before
Combat, so you would have to blitz Cacausus before you destroyed what
was there, and you cannot do that because the first territory that the
tank moves through must be empty to ally-occupied.
 
>  If you two decide to play a game out on the net might I suggest another
>method of determining wins/losses in battles..  (This may have allready
>been stated, but I'll go over it anyway)
 
I'm going to be the moderator of said game, and we're discussing how to
work this out.  I myself am hoping to get a few problems out of a
program that calculates battles any number of times I want.  If I get
that done, then we can go ahead and use it (running it 10000 times per
battle ought to define the "average").

The method you use is the same I do when trying to predict outcome for
battles at board-side, but I have found that rounding (even to the next
round of combat) often doesn't work out too well, mostly for small
battles (when the rounding makes more of a difference).  But thanks for
the offer!

Dewey

PS -- If anyone has any really good ideas about how to proceed
(excluding the program I've got (or another one) and the method desribed
above, drop me a note - barich@brahms.udel.edu   ).
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 11:44:33 EST
From: <JJR111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: The makers of SFB

Are we talking about SFB and Star Trek Combat Simulator, from FASA,
here??????  Maybe thats the problem.
Jim
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: cpf@alchemy.TN.Cornell.EDU (Courtenay Footman)
Subject: Re: Europaphiles - where are you??
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 02:24:21 GMT

In article <1992Dec4.100740.1@dhvx20.csudh.edu> rholmes@dhvx20.csudh.edu writes:
>In article <tq3qv4_@lynx.unm.edu>, collier@atlas.titan-abq.com (Michael Collier) writes:
>> against a defending player who can "work" the system, they don't have nearly
>> enough mobility. why does it take a reasonably skilled german player a couple
>> of turns against a reasonably skilled soviet player to reach Minsk in "Fire
>> in the East"? they got there in about a week, historically. one of the reasons
>> is this very same turn sequence. slowing down the advance is very easy when
>> you can only attack once or twice per turn. another reason is the lack of a
>> command/control system to hamper the soviet player initially (i.e. until
>> he takes the several months in game terms it took historically to sort out
>> who his "good" commanders are).
>
>I beleive the problem comes from using the Panzer divisons
>to mop up the Soviets on the border instead of driving into
>the Soviet rear areas to cut supply lines. 
>
>
>> as an aside, in  Atlanta at 1990 Origins, i was told rather sullenly by
>> a disappointed
>> GR/D person that the reason why Second Front (which was in platest kit form
>> at the time) was going so slowly was because they couldn't figure out
>> a way for the game to duplicate the
>> american breakout in normandy. the consensus seemed to be that a good
>> german player could practice a policy of prophylaxis indefinitely, merely by
>> getting enough stuff (no mater how junky) in the way at better than 10-1 odds
>> (or whatever the limit is for overrun attacks is), which resulted in the
>> american
>> player being able to advance about 3 hexes per turn. this is much the same
>> strategy a soviet player can  use in Fire in the East.
>
>Yes, this tactic will limit the American advance until
>the Germans will runout of warm bodies. 
The trouble is that the Russians can do this in FITE.  There losses
are horrendous, but they can slow the Germans drastically.  I have
never gotten to the second summer, to see if the high Russian losses
make them easy meat for the Germans, but they do have enough
forces to "stop" (3 hexes a turn == "stop") the Germans through
the first summer.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtenay Footman			I finally got back on the net.

cpf@alchemy.ithaca.ny.us		Now I will never get anything done