HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: davis@csulx.cs.weber.edu (mike davis)
Subject: Re: World War I
Organization: Weber State University, Ogden Utah
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 20:52:51 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.191856.17835@m.cs.uiuc.edu> silber@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Ami A. Silberman) writes:
>benjie@pram.cs.ucla.edu (Benjie Chen (Guest)) writes:
>
>>Any one has any comments on this game(from SPI I guess)?
>>Ben
>Are you refering to the old S&T issue game from about 10 years back?

I think he means the game WWI.  It was a "Folio" game.  It can in a bag, 36x24
mapboard, and about 150 counters.  It can out in 76 I think.  I use to play
it all the time.  One of my earyest wargames I had.  i like it alot, only took
an hour to an hour and a half to play.  Unfortantly my brother chucked it when 
I was in the army.  If you can find it.  GET IT!!!!
From: admiral@m-5.Eng.Sun.COM (Michael Limprecht @Sun Micro Mt View. )
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Looking for gaming stores in Silicon Valley
Date: 17 Apr 92 18:36:13 GMT
Reply-To: admiral@m-5.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: m-5


Another Place:


Scenario Games in Fremont. Just off Mowry Ave in the Mowry East Shopping
Center. (510)792-9333


They carry games of all types, models and trains. If Chuck doesn't have it
he can order it for you. Chuck is also a big supporter of the Pacificon
Games Convention.

Check it out!

Mick
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"The 23rd PROM":
    The motherboard holds my
      software/ I shall not want.../
    She restores my scroll.../ 
      And yea, though I/
    Commute to the Valley/
      Each day, I fear no evil.
Return.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!admiral or admiral@m-5.Eng.Sun.COM
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: vvirrank@cc.Helsinki.FI (Ville Virrankoski)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: WWII: PTO Questions
Date: 10 Apr 92 08:09:13 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki, Finland

In article <gdt5=Yg91HvkAwdn5M@rchland.ibm.com> seurer+@rchland.ibm.com (Bill Seurer) writes:
>
>|> When comes 3-3 Australian infantry?
>
>Are they not listed on the OB nor in the initial placement?  Maybe they
>are just for breaking the 6-3 divisions apart into 3-3 brigades.
>

They are not in the OB or initial placement. You couldn't break divisions 
if You have insufficient brigades. With Japanese they are listed in the
OB, but not with Australian.

>|> US OB
>|>
>|> When comes 2-3-3 naval airs?
>
>I seem to remember some depleted 2-3-3's starting out on the board in
>'41.  Or are there extras in the counter set?
>

2-3-3 are one-step naval airs. They are used in the US CVLs, but they are not
listed in the OB. They are not even mentioned in the OB chart or scenario 9.
(There are couple of them in the 1944 scenario)


>|> Do Indian units get supply from any Indian cities? Burman cities?
>|> Malayan cities?
>
>Yes, No, No.  The supply rules are very concise about this.
>

How about Australian land units in Australia? Are units in Perth, Darwin
or Derby out of supply? (I don't have the maps beside me, but question
is about Australian west coast cities.)


Ville Virrankoski
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: bruno@convex.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)
Subject: Re: WANTED: Sword's Path: Glory
Originator: bruno@convex.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: bruno@convex.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 19:29:17 GMT

From article <1992Apr12.061348.15526@athena.mit.edu>, by ktko@athena.mit.edu (Kwanghyon T Ko):
> I'm looking for the LEG game Sword's Path: Glory, which is out of 
> print.  It doesn't have to be mint only playable.

This is an April fools day joke right? SPG playable !!!

> 
> Thanks
> 
> K. Thomas Ko
> Dept. of Biology
> MIT
>
From: cchiang@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Huh?!  Wot?!?)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Axis & Allies: Germany's only chance!
Keywords: A&A, Axis & Allies
Date: 8 Apr 92 00:02:00 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Apr2.213141.13587@cs.rose-hulman.edu> morzinpl@HYDRA.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU writes:

>	Speaking of Karelia, my games usually go like this: Russia takes
>Eastern Europe, then the Germans have to decide whether to attack Karelia and/or
>bomb the navies to scrap.  They usually don't have enough air force to do both. 
>What are other peoples' opinions on this?
>						Pete
	I prefer to attack Karelia (in fact, I recommend it.  I've
won most of Axis games against this "Eastern European" strategy).
Though it looks fairly even, Germs should be the only one standing
after the smoke clears.  This will force the Russkies back into
Russia or attack Germs with Russkie infantry reserve.  Use just
enough force to take back Eastern Europe, send units to Africa, and
take out unprotected cargoships.  No more, no less.  e-mail me if
you want the complete description.  It's possible to defeat this
Allied strategy 50% of the time (which is awesome by standards).

				- The TaZ
				cchiang@sdcc13.ucsd.edu
From: dmk8r@plaid.cs.Virginia.EDU (Darrell M. Kienzle)
Subject: Coming attractions from AH/VG
Organization: University of Virginia Computer Science Department
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 19:06:08 GMT


Well, I was in my local game store yesterday and asked the
owner about any new releases from AH / VG.  In reply he displayed
a flyer from AH which contained a list of _all_ of their releases
for the next nine months!   I cannot possibly remember all of the
entries, but I will try to dredge up what I can:

ASL: Kampfgruppe Peiper was notably absent.  I don't know how
     to interpret this.  Hopefully it means that they thought it
     would be out before the list was released...
     Croix de Guerre - the French module - is slated for Sept / Oct.
     Armies of Oblivion was not on the list for this year.
     The 92 Annual was listed for August (I think).

Simthsonian:  The Midway re-release should be out in the next month or so.

Tales from the Floating Vagabond:  At least six modules scheduled
    for this year.  Some of the more notable titles were Assault
    on Santa's Castle and In Cold Milk: the Cereal Killers.

VG:  A new game on the _entire_ U.S. Civil War.  Don't ask me - 
     I thought that they already had such a game out!

VG:  A new game on the North African campaign of WWII

Advanced Third Reich:  Due out next month, $30 - $40 price range.

Deluxe Diplomacy: Yep, with wooden pieces.  You heard it here first.
    Out this summer, $50 - $60 price range.

IDF:  Israeli Defense Force.  MBT in the sand.  End of the Year.

Runequest:  One or two modules.  Didn't really catch all the info.

Breakaway Hockey:  What can I say but... The Strike is Over!  Go Caps!

Gangsters:  This should be out in the next month or so.

Some Computer Stuff:  I think there was something about a new Computer
      Diplomacy and a new Legends of the Lost Realm supplement, but I
      don't remember anything else.

That is all I remember, and I can't vouch for any of it.  But I was 
very interested to discover that such a list exists.  If you need 
more info, I am sure that your local game store proprietor has access 
to this list and could be convince to share it.

Well, now I know where my money will be going for the next nine months...

Darrell Kienzle
dmk8r@virginia.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: njs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (nicholas.j.sauer)
Subject: Re: Talisman
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 14:41:53 GMT

In article <1992Apr05.005518.15900@ecst.csuchico.edu>, pkralik@ecst.csuchico.edu (Wintermute) writes:
>
>The recent Talisman character selection questions prompted me to ask this 
>question. How do fellow netters handle characters that always maintain a 
>certain number of spells in their possession(ie. Conjurer, Sprite)?  We will 
>often get people playing these characters casting spell after spell after 
>spell etc...  Are we just not reading the rules correctly or can these chars 
>just keep on casting as many spells as they want to with no restrictions?
>
>We were thinking of making the restriction that a character could only cast a
>spell that he had in his possession for more than 1 turn(ie. no newly acquired
>spells) but I was thinking that that could possibly cause some problems, too.
>
>Any suggestions?

How we handled it was to use the following house rule.  Basically, from the
start of his turn until the start of his next turn (a round of turns), a 
character may only cast a number of spells equal to his normal spell quota.
This maxes at three for CRA 6+ characters.  There are also a list of 
"defensive" spells that do not count toward this total (Counterspell, 
Reflection/Spell Turning, etc.).  We also do not allow people to just burn
spells (i.e. cast a Counterspell on nothing just to discard it).  You have to 
use the spell (in the case of the above named spells) on another spell in
order to discard it.  

We either made this up or got the idea from the optional rules at the end of
the Talisman City (I know that the defensive spell idea, at least, came from
there).  The non-burning spell rule was probably inspired by close reading of
the Counterspell card and equating it to a Cosmic Zap in Cosmic Encounter 
(which you can only use when someone attempts to use his power).  I guess you 
could leave spell burning in with the above rules, with the addition that such 
a spell still counts against the character's quota.  Anyway, this is one of a 
list of about ten house rule items we decide on before each Talisman game (I 
guess it's time we sent another Q&A sheet off to GW).

Nick Sauer
From: silber@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Ami A. Silberman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Road to the White House
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:31:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: m.1992Apr10.203144.24950
Distribution: rec
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL

Anyone know anything about the new game "Road to the White House"
by Mayfair?

thanks
-- 
ami silberman - janitor of lunacy
	silber@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: goudswaa@fraser.sfu.ca (Peter Goudswaard)
Subject: Re: Request reviews: AH "Science Fiction" games
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 04:47:41 GMT

mxb8@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew Bakaitis) writes:


>	First, I got a job.  Then I got a check.  Now I'd like to
>buy a game....but which one?

>	I'm primarily interested in space oriented games, such as
>Cosmic Encounter.  The GW space opera, megawar miniature games look good,
>but I don't have the time/money to invest in the lead (or, apparently,
>the time deciphering the rules).

>	So, are there any reviews on Merchant of Venus, Alpha Omega, or
>Stellar Conquest?  I've only heard a little on Merchant of Venus, nothing
>on the other two.  Are they real dogs?
>	Being a relative newcomer to the board/wargame market, is there
>anywhere else I can look for games like this?  Other than AH, that is?

>Thanks,
>Matt
>-- 
>Matt Bakaitis
>mxb8@pop.CWRU.edu

Hi, Matt.  Yeah, I bought Merchant of Venus about 5 years ago.  Played it
once.  I was hoping for a bit of planetary conquest, ship and weapons
development, etc, but all I got was some space-based snakes & ladders/
monopoly thing that took far too long to play.  Not too fun, I found
that the amount of strategy was fine for a group of ten year olds, but
not for anyone else.  I opted out of the space oriented games, as much
as I liked them, because of the amount of time it took to get to learn
and play some of the better games.  Also was hard to find enough people
to play -- usually the biggest obstacle next to conflicting schedules.
I also recall having another similar game - I don't remember the title
of it, but I think it was "endorsed" by Isaac Asimov (rest his soul, he
was a talented man).  It was also junk, sort of like a stellar Stock
Ticker.  

My advice is stick to Space Opera, or something like it.

P*.*

Peter Goudswaard

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: A Gleam of Bayonets
Keywords: Antietam, Civil War problems
Reply-To: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 17:15:45 GMT

randym@triton.unm.edu writes:
>I
>feel that any game that attempts to simulate a Civil War battle SHOULD put
>the gamer into the historical mindset of the commanders, INCLUDING the 
>"fog of war" which is lacking in most boardgames. 

The game _Lee Invades the North_ in Counterattack #2 supplies the fog of
war, though not on a tactical level.  The game is operational level -
each hex is 2 miles, I believe.  Forces are represented by HQ units, and
the strength of each unit is recorded on a sheet kept hidden from the
opponent.  There are units to represent the transfer of troops, but you
can't see how many troops are being transferred, since that is also
written down.  I believe there are limits, so one transfer unit can
only be so many units, but I haven't read the rules in a while, so I
forget if this is true or I'm making it up.

Columbia Games hinted they might come out with an ACW game - these are
the Wooden Block games that include Limited Intelligence automatically by
the nature of the pieces.  Not this year, though . . . they're working on
WestFront WWII game.

I've long argued that the wargamer has an unfair advantage by being able
to see the whole map and pieces with their inflexible numbers.  However,
I detest computer games, and don't consider them a viable alternative -
no flame war intended, just personal taste.  I'd be interested in seeing
someone develop something like Up Front for larger units - there's a game
where you don't see the map at all!

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: m1b@imperious.ssd.ray.com (M. Joseph Barone)
Subject: A&A: Axis strategy
Organization: Raytheon Company
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 16:15:00 GMT

	This article assumes second edition rules and no optional or
house rules.  Here's a strategy for the Axis that I was thinking about
but haven't tried:

	Germany go for strategic bombing against Russia to cut off
Russia's source of reinforcements.  At the same time, go wild in
Africa and attack Russia merely to kill stuff rather than to conquer.
Maybe sink the British fleet but try not to lose any aircraft.
Purchases are focused on one bomber per turn and replacement infantry.
Japan builds two industrial complexes (one per turn) in Asia and
ignores USA.

	The Western Allies can't do too much for the first two turns
so by that time, Germany would have three bombers and Japan is cranking
six armor in Asia and ferrying junk over from Japan.  Russia should be
on the ropes by turn three and the Axis should be nearing an economic
victory.

	Has anyone tried this?  What problems would be encountered?
-- 
Joe Barone --------------------> m1b@rayssd.ssd.ray.com
{gatech, decuac, sun, necntc, ukma, uiucdcs}!rayssd!m1b
You keep saying that word.  I don't think it means what
you think it does.
From: melody@grad02.math.ncsu.edu (Patrick Melody)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: BTECH: Omega rules addendum
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:38:24 GMT
Organization: NCSU Mathematics Dept.

To everyone who got a copy of Omega rules from me or this newgroup:  there a 
minor detail which was accidentally left out regarding Clan L-BXs:

     *Clan LB-Xs now cost the following:

                     Tons   Crits
            LB-2X      4      1
            LB-5X      5      2
            LB-10X     7      4
            LB-20X     9      7

     (The reason for this is that using standard tonnages make the Ultras
easier to fit in a 'mech than LB-Xs, plus they are allowed a double fire rate
if you want to use it, while the only thing "special" about the LB-Xs is
the ability to use cluster ammo and a marginal range advantage for the LB-2X
and LB-5X.  Unless you are bent on using cluster ammo or feel a desparate need
for that marginal range advantage, installing LB-Xs doesn't make a heck of a 
lot of sense.  Cluster ammo has its uses in certain situations, but in our 
experience, it's generally better to use standard ammo and have the double
fire rate option available.  These tonnage/crit modifications make LB-Xs a 
little more viable.  Also, LB-Xs are described as being lighter than standard
autocannons, but just about any Clan tech is lighter than Inner Sphere tech,
so this also makes Clan LB-Xs a little lighter than Clan Ultras.  Note the 
Inner Sphere LB-10X is unchanged.)

The listing of Omega rules 'mechs I mailed out/posted uses this rule, so no
changes to those 'mechs are necessary.

----------------------------
patrick melody@math.ncsu.edu

 
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: exukozi@exu.ericsson.se (Tom Koziatek)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Re: Japan in Axis and Allies
Date: 8 Apr 92 12:38:15 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems

In article <9770105@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> dlc@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Dennis Clark) writes:
>> 
>> Only 2 units per turn can be built in a new factory in China.  That's why 
>> a UK factory in India (3/turn) is often a better choice.  RTFM, eh? :-)
>
>  Excuse me?  I don't remember this restriction on factories.  What 
>specifically does this rule say to restrict production placement this much?
>
>DLC
>

The rules he's referring to are the second edition rules. This revision also
includes that vital rule that Russia CANNOT attack on the first turn.


                                                          -Tom
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Wednesday, 8 Apr 1992 13:07:04 MST
From: <ICECW@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject:    MB "Battle Master"

Anyone hear of the upcoming MB release, "Battle Master" or something like that?
I saw a picture of it in the hobby store today--had a lot of plastic figs, sort
of like a MB WFB? Any idea on release date, price, etc?  Thanks!
From: v077mdph@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (John of Gaunt)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A&A Sub Rules
Date: 10 Apr 92 06:26:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr9.211755.26771@uwm.edu>, sackett@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Michael Scott Zimmerman) writes...
>In article <Apr.9.12.34.26.1992.19580@yoko.rutgers.edu> tomlee@yoko.rutgers.edu (Thomas J Lee) writes:
>>
>>I've played that the subs may withdraw, and land forces need not occupy.
>>I think it makes sense for land forces -- why should they have less
>>flexibility after *winning* an attack than after a failed offensive?
>>(Okay, I can think of some reasons but they're not very compelling).
>>
>>The sub rule makes them a bit more useful and "tricky". Some interpretations
>>of the rule would allow the sub to move 3 in one turn, which is fine
>>with me but might bother some folks.

	We have always played with the rule that you can't withdraw when all the
enemies are dead.  I think there's a good reason for this ( for both land and
sea units ).  A unit pretty much uses all of its available fuel during any 
attack.  Men get fatigued.  The only exceptions are planes.  I think they should
be allowed to withdraw, and then fly back to someplace to land, though the 
withdrawal would take up one of their moves.

>>Tom Lee
>>tomlee@paul.rutgers.edu
> 
>So what you are saying is that Germany can attack Kareily ( pardon the spelling)   
>with all his tanks and some infantry, destroy the Ruskies, leave his remaining
>infantry there and retreat his tanks to a well defended adjacent territory?

	This is not legal.  All attacking units must retreat, and to the same
place, with the sole exception of subs.

Snoopy
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: seurer+@rchland.ibm.com (Bill Seurer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: WWII:PTO & ETO Compatible?
Date: 6 Apr 92 19:17:34 GMT
Reply-To: "Bill Seurer,905161 " <billseurer@vnet.ibm.com>

|> Having now seen that PTO-players are reading this group, I would like to ask
|> this:
|>
|> I own WWII:ETO (2nd ed.) and would like to add Pacific Theater into
my games.
|> It says in the rules of ETO, that ETO can be linked to PTO, but someone told
|> me they are not really compatible (something to do with the ground
unit sizes
|> I guess). Is this true?

All the units except for the naval units are "smaller" in size in PTO
while using the same range of numbers.  For instance, British infantry
divisions are (I think) 6-3 units in PTO while British infantry (corps?
armies?) are 6-4 in ETO.  The one American infantry corps in PTO is
something like 20-3 (as are Soviet corps) while they are 6-4 (5-4) in
ETO.

There is a section in the rules of PTO on converting air and ground
units between the two fronts.  I just skimmed through it since I don't
plan on combining the two games, yet.

- Bill Seurer    Language and Compiler Development     IBM Rochester, MN
  Internet: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com          America On-Line: BillSeurer
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: nfs410c@kepler.unh.edu (Neil F Sorenson)
Subject: AH's Elric
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 14:09:54 GMT

  I was able to find a dusty, shrink-wrapped copy of a classic Avalon Hill
bomb called 'Elric' yesterday for only $11!!!!  I have been looking for that game for ages.... it is out of print for very good reasons!
  Anyway, I needed to share my moment of exhaultation with all of you.
  BTW, also bought the new release of The Awful Green Things from Space and
I was not amused at having bought a $20 paper game.... grrrrrrrrrrr....
  If Steve Jackson games was going to release Ogre with a card stock board and
heavy card counters.. why not with Green Things?  Major let down....
From: purtill@idacrd.UUCP (Mark Purtill)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Republic of Rome erratum from The General (vol. 27, no. 4)
Date: 9 Apr 92 14:33:24 GMT
Organization: idacrd, princeton, nj

thornley@cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley) writes:
Re: First Punic War.
>If Scipio is
>commanding, he has 5 influence for being first-turn consul, 7 for being
>dictator - the only way you can give him a command on turn 1 - and
>5 each for the naval and land victories.
	Why does he have to be dictator?  Just elect him Field Consul
and send him off.  (This, of course, assumes he was played at the
beginning of the game, as otherwise he's not available at all.)  So
his influence is only 15, and the Rome Consul is HRAO.

>There aren't that many inactive wars in the deck, and I've never noticed
>the Senate eager to ignore existing wars.  I think the rule as published
>is good, and that's how I want to play.
	I haven't played much, but in the PBeM game I'm running, we're
into turn four, and the First Punic War is still out.  The senate
didn't do anything about it until one of the leaders showed up.  The
PBeM game in the General also has an ignored War, although for
different reasons (it's the Second Punic, and they know the Third
can't show up.)
	I had a vague idea on that problem as well; basically, one
would use the advanced, unprosecuted wars attack provinces rules, but
when a war ran out of provinces, it would attack "Italia" (the HRAO
would have to fight it with the available legions, but regardless of
fleets, the War could not be defeated, only stalemated).  If Italia
were lost, then the Senate would lose the 200T revenue, and if they
survived that, the war would attack "Roma" with an extra "Roman Allies
Desert" (the allies having been conquered with Italia), and if the
senate loses that, Rome is sacked, and they all lose (including
rebels).  On the plus side for the senate, the artificial "four wars
causes Rome to lose" rule would be dropped.
	Possibly (probably?) a bad idea, but I'll throw it out for
comment anyway.

^.-.^ Mark Purtill, IDA/CCR-P, Thanet Road, Princeton NJ  08540; (609)924-4600.
((")) Email: purtill%idacrd@princeton.edu; uunet!idacrd!purtill. (609)497-0526.