HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A3R - Naval Rules
Date: 19 Aug 92 01:18:49 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

Carriers will be allowed in Europe when playing the Global War scenario (A3R +
Rising Sun).  It didn't seem worth it just for A3R.  It may be that the British
will lose a 9 factor fleet from their European force pool and have it replaced
by 2 carrier factors (which would carry two naval air factors).  The design
problem is ensuring that the Allies are unlikely to benefit by putting all
their carriers in Europe, but this problem applies to all Allied forces, and
really relates to the effects of Japanese successes in the Pacific on the war
in Europe.
From: jf41+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jonathan R. Ferro)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Magic Realm review
Date: 12 Aug 92 21:48:20 GMT
	<1992Aug12.022155.26296@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

farrell@tomato.cis.ohio-state.edu (christopher k farrell) writes:
> However, once you've played a couple times, you start to realize that
> looking for treasures is not only not the only viable strategy, it's
> not even really one of the best!  That's where things get interesting.

I convinced the CMU gaming club to buy this game based on its
reputation, but we have quickly gotten tired of it for the following
reason: the density of the rules prevents a simple understanding of how
"real-world" actions should correspond to game actions, making it
extremely difficult to use the usual "skim the rules, start playing, and
refer back when you have questions" method of learning a new game.

I, at least, would greatly appreciate hearing more ideas for play
strategies and how to think about how the game is progressing.
(Any simple way to remember all the parts of the combat sequence would
be helpful, also.  :-)

--
Jon Ferro		MIT Transportation Modelling Research Center (TMRC)
jf41+@andrew.cmu.edu	"We can hack it!"
SGNTR VRS VRSN 3.1B: Strppd nd cmprssd fr qckr trnsmssn! nfct yrs tdy!
From: vbl@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Randall Julian)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: BTECH: VTOL design
Keywords: BTECH,VTOL,VEHICLES
Date: 17 Aug 92 14:18:49 GMT

I tried to use VTOL's in a BTECH senerio, in which an "Airport" was to 
be defended.  I thought for sure there was a pre-made VTOL somewhere in 
the 3025, 3050 TR or the compendium, but no...  So I made one up on the 
spur of the moment without really understanding the vehicle design rules.
I was destroyed rapidly (as expected..rotor hit), but after reviewing
the design rules closer the one I whipped up was way under powered and
under armored (not that it would have helped much).

I tossed the Compendium rules for VTOL design into Quattro-Pro and produced
a more heavily armed and armored version.  Problem is I still don't know
if it is "legal".  There are no critical slot considerations, no mention
of how to account for the bulkyness of XL engines for the "...additional
shielding and transmission equipment...".  Because of the lack of slots,
there appears to be no limit to the number of weapons that can be carried
except for weight and heat considerations.

Please look this hacked VTOL over and tell me if I've blown some rule, 
further I'd be interested in comments on VTOL use and stratagy.

I have deliberately ignored the rule that you cannot mount more weapons
than you can dissipate heat for.  This is stupid, you just cannot go over
on heat, so you choose which weapons fire like in the BTECH training rules. 
This gives the pilot weapons choice based on the situation, altough he
cannot "unload" with everything.


		   Name: VTOL-25/14-A              Tech: Inner Sphere
		 Weight: 25         Power: 350     Tons Remaining:       0
		 Cruise: 14   Lift Factor: 140
		  Flank: 21        Engine: 210     Type: XL    (STD, XL or ICE)
							  Amp: 0
	 Engine Wt.: 4.5
	Cockpit Wt.: 1.5
	   Lift Wt.: 2.5
	  Air Frame: 2.5      IS Pts.: 3
		  Armor: 4.0   Armor Pts.:64

	Location      Frame      Armor           IS  Armor
		   Front    3           20           OOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO
		   Right    3           14           OOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOO
			Left    3           14           OOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOO
			Rear    3           14           OOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOO
		   Rotor    3            2 MAX (2)   OOO OO
								 0 Remaining

	 Heat Sinks:      12 Extra Sink      2
						   Weight:     2.0

Weapons

Name             No.   Weight  Tot. Wt. Dam.  Heat  Min  Short  Med.  Long
Medium Laser      4      1        4      5     3          1-3   4-6   7-9
SRM-6             1      3        3     2/m    4          1-3   4-6   7-9
SRM-6 AMMO (15)   1      1        1
                        Total:    8
                 Total Energy:    4
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: spectre@wpi.WPI.EDU (Christopher Jachimowicz)
Subject: Baggage Claim
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 13:14:14 GMT


I have been looking for the Ravensberger (?) game BAGGAGE CLAIM for some time
now, and have come to find out that it is no longer in print.  Would anyone
have a fairly good copy which they would be interested in parting with?

-- 
Christopher S. Jachimowicz             |  "If there is no room for the sky in
Assistant Dean for Student Activities  |   a man's soul, how can he understand
Worcester Polytechnic Institute        |   what a pigeon is?"
spectre@wpi.wpi.edu                    |                  -White Reveries-
From: v131p9t3@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Ninstar Cybermage - Back Again from the Mists!)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: LAM fans out there?
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:19:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Aug17.190235.1@cc.newcastle.edu.au>, c9036991@cc.newcastle.edu.au (UNFORGETTABLE ... IN EVERY WAY . AND FOREVERMORE .. THATS HOW WELL STAY) writes...
>	Well, i suppose that you have to look at this in terms of what they
>	can and cant do .. you have to remember that they can only be
>        relatively light mechs, and wont be able to pack muck firepower. And
>	also that they have a good chance of getting stuck in a particular
>	mode if some of the transforming gear gets damaged .... 

Oh I don't know, I have a 55 ton LAM that has most of the firepower of a 
Marauder.  It uses an XL engine, has all the armor of the stock version,
and 2 PPCs and 2 Med. Lasers.  5/8/5 movement too.

>	Otherwise .. alll thos straffing runs :)

Tell me about it.  This Mech is dangerous.  In Airmech mode it can really ruin
a mech's day.  A decent pilot can get into a mech's rear every round in Airmech
mode too.  And in Mech mode I'd rather have this than a marauder, anyway.

James Shank           	#		v131p9t3@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu
AKA: Ninstar Cybermage  #	or	shank@acsu.buffalo.edu
###############################################################################
"Ten thousand years old...He could be trouble." -Vampire Hunter D
"Every night I say a prayer, in the hope that there's a heaven..."-Styx
"How do you make ammends for a god's sins?"-Forgotten Realms
##############################################################################
Sneaky Types,Inc.:Clandestine operations for the common man.
	"Don't call us.  We'll just bill you when it's done."
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Monopoly Rules
Date: 21 Aug 92 17:17:56 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Gary Bradley <gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU> writes:
>You can build 3 hotel immediately (no matter whose turn it is when
>you aquire the set). The confusion I suspect comes from the property
>cards saying the cost of a hotel is X (money) plus 4 houses. This is
>simply indicating that IF you have houses there already, you can trade
>them in against some of the monetary cost of a hotel.

This is just wrong.  If there are not enough houses available, you can't
buy hotels.  This is an important component of strategy.

What is your evidence that the rules don't mean what they say?

                                        David desJardins
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: robert@geoblue.gcn.uoknor.edu (Robert Lindsay)
Subject: Re: SPQR
Organization: Geosciences Computing Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:59:58 GMT

In article <jjonsson.83@alexandria.lib.utah.edu> jjonsson@alexandria.lib.utah.edu writes:
>Has anyone played SPQR, a game of combat in the heyday of the 
>Roman empire? If so, what did you think, and how does it stack up against 
>other games in the vein?

I've got it but haven't played it yet. The atrwork is nice and the rules look
a little cleaner than it's predicessor game Great Battles of Alexander theGreat
It only deals with Legions up to about 200 BC though. I can't think of any
other in-print tactical romans game to compare it to though.

>
>Jeff Jonsson
>Marriott Library System Support, University of Utah.
>==============================================================================
>--"It's the sound of the secret--  jjonsson@alexandria.lib.utah.edu
>-- machinery at the center of  --  jjonsson@utahlib.bitnet
>-- the world." -Cliff Steele   --  "You talkin' to me?"
From: jleitzel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James W Leitzel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Blank boards?
Date: 20 Aug 92 14:18:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: magnus.1992Aug20.141806.21031
Organization: The Ohio State University

In article <14421@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:
>I believe Avalon Hill sells blank hex sheets and die cut counters.


Last I hear of, The Armory sells lots of blank counters and hex grids.

jim
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| I take so many guilt trips, I qualify for |      Oh look, how quaint.      |
| frequent flyer miles. - Jon Arbuckle      |        A .signature file       |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Advanced 3rd Reich
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 14 Aug 92 13:57:10 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.
Summary: Alternate WWIIs

In article <1992Aug13.125844.10208@exu.ericsson.se>, exukozi@exu.ericsson.se (Tom Koziatek) writes:
> In article <14239@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:
>>Comments on several topics:
>>
>>1. Ahistorical possibilities.
>>
>>There has been discussion about whether Advanced Third Reich
>>allows ahistorical possibilities such as Russia remaining neutral
>>or the United States not participating in the war.  It does.
>>Specifically:
>>
>>b. If the Axis restrain themselves or are losing (or both), U.S.
>>entry into the war might well be delayed until 1943 or later.
>>U.S. participation in the war on the Axis side is an historical
>>absurdity and is not permitted in the game.
>>
> 
> It wasn't that absurd. Prior to the Lusitania, there was a lot of Pro-German
> sentiment in the US. Had Hitler curbed his maniacal tendencies a bit, iand 
> Britain make a few anti-US mistakes, we could have entered on the opposite
> side. What would the US reaction to say, a British sub sinking the Lusitania ??

	The main factor limiting pro-German sentiment was FDR.  A variant could
likely be formed:

	FDR is assasinated, and blame placed on British sympathizers angry at
US neutrality.  US may enter war on Axis side if the following conditions are
met:....  Otherwise it remains neutral, and may not grant BRPs to any
beligerent.

	Or something similar.

	Have fun with it!  There's something to be said for following the rules
to a T, but there's also great fun in playing "what if".

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games,comp.sys.amiga.games
From: carlton@apollo.hp.com (Carl Hommel)
Subject: BTECH: Mech Editor available for ftp (honest!)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 14:43:22 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA
Followup-To: rec.games.board

[ I'm crossposting this to the two comp.sys groups, because there
  are often queries there for BattleTech related programs.  Followups
  are directed to rec.games.board, where the serious Btech discussions
  take place. -carlton]

The busy archivers at the University of Michigan have moved meched32.zip
out of the UPLOADS directory into its final resting place.

The method of choice to access the archives is to use AFS.  Try the
following.  If the machine you are using to access the Internet has AFS,
it will "just work".

cp /afs/umich.edu/group/itd/archive/msdos/games/strategy/battletech/meched32.zip meched32.zip
     
If that doesn't work, use FTP.
    Name:    archive.umich.edu
    Address:  141.211.182.23

Then, cd to the msdos/games/strategy/battletech directory.  Be sure to
use binary mode.  For some reason, a "dir" will show nothing, but a
"ls" or a "get" will work.

If you don't know how to use ftp, go read the FTP FAQ in news.answers.

Happy designing,
Carl Hommel
carlton@apollo.hp.com


>Mechedit is a BattleMech editor written by Henry Link.  Version 32
>supports 3025, 2750, 3050, 3055, and Clan mechs.  This is not a game.
>It merely allows you to quickly create and modify Mechs.  You will need
>an MS-DOS system or emulator.
>
>I have typed in the mechs from the 2750, 3025, and 3050 books, as well
>as all the variants.  Note that I was working from the books and the
>old mechedit writeups, and not from the record sheets in the BattleTech
>status sheets.
From: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: JUNTA - rules questions
Date: 20 Aug 92 11:25:23 GMT
Reply-To: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)


   Firstly a great many thanks are due to everyone who took the time to
respond to my initial JUNTA queries. Now that I have read the rules over
a few more times, I have some other questions which do not fall into the
"give me your opinion" category. These are rule discepancies as far as I
can see. As always, any replies much appreciated.

1) When the current president dies/resigns the rules state that the
Chamber must re-elect a successor immediately. When this occurs, what
happens to the position(s) currently held by the
new President? Rules elsewhere state that the president can never hold
another position.

2) In the section about electing a president at the very start of a
game, the rules mention that votes from influence, vote and position
cards can be cast. How could anyone have a position at this time?

3) During a coup, the rules first say everyone moves and fires in turn,
then later say comabt is resolved by area. Which is it? Does everyone
have one move then everyone resolves combat in every area? (This would
make the most sense to me).

4) Okay, this is an opinion question...would anyone care to share their
thoughts on the order of power of the various positions. Which is the
best to have? Is there any difference between
the 3 generals in terms of strategic starting positions for a coup?

+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Gary Bradley        |   "You receive a love letter from me and |
| ORACLE Corp, UK     |                  you're f*cked forever!" |
| Edinburgh, SCOTLAND |        - Frank Booth ("Blue Velvet")     |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| "God damn the censor man"                                      |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: umlepine@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Bryan Lepine)
Subject: Conquest of the Empire
Summary: Want to buy 
Keywords: Empire Help
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:25:25 GMT

	I was wondering if anybody wishes to sell a copy of Conquest of
the Empire. I'm having a hell of a time getting a copy where I live and
miss the game very much. I'll pay shipping and will pay a REASONABLE
amount for the game. I would prefer a new copy or used in very good condition.

Please Email replies.

-- 
============================================================================
"For a successful technology, reality must take |Bryan C. Lepine           |
 precedence over public relations, for nature   |umlepine@ccu.umanitoba.ca |
 cannot be fooled."	 -Richard Feynman       ============================
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: stig@Lise.Unit.NO (Stig Hemmer)
Subject: Re: Other 1830 questions
Organization: Anarchy
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 13:20:53 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.185925.22591@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, mitton@dave.enet.dec.com (Dave Mitton) writes:
> And Secondly, there is nothing stopping you from purposely buying more
> trains that you do have room for.  The excess train(s) must be returned
> to the Bank Pool with no compensation to the RR.  See Rule 21.0, para 2,
> 4th sentence. 
> 
> "A Corporation with excess trains must immediately return the surplus to the
> Bank.  No payment is made for them but they may be re-sold by the Bank as an
> alternative to whatever other trains are on offer if they are of a type still
> in use.  Re-sale is at face value"
> 
> You can just push out your obsolete trains this way.  This rule leaves
> it to the RR to decide what to return to the Bank.

This rule quote does not match the rules I have in front of me. The
differences aren't really significant. 

If Dave is reading the same rules as I have he is quoting severly out
of context. If his rules really are different he is excused.  Are
there different editions of the rules?

What I have goes:

 A Corporation may own a maximum of four trains until the first 4
 train is bought. The number is then redused to three. After the first
 5 train is bought the number is reduced to two. A Corporation which
 finds itself with excess trains must immediately ...

Which I read to mean that the context is reduction of train limits,
_not_ just any train purchase.

A few lines further down there is an example which I think strengthens
this interpretation.

 ... For example, a Railroad owning a 3 and 4 train may buy the first
 5 train offerend because prior to this sale the Corporation was
 allowed to hold three train. Immediately after the purchase, ...

My point is that the 'because prior ...' part of this example is
meaningless in Dave's interpretation of the rules.

Now, the rules doesn't directly say whether a Company may trade in its
second train for a Diesel. IMHO, the way the trade-in and train limit
rules are worded suggests that this is legal.

Stig 'Tortoise' Hemmer   aka   stig@lise.unit.no
.no means Norway, a minor kingdom in northern Europe.
Our whalers sail circles around Greenpeace. Yeah!
This is NOT a .signature virus. Do NOT copy it into your .signature
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: nigel@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov
Subject: Re: 1830 "first" stock round
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md, USA
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 21:35:42 GMT

In article <1992Aug16.180803.3435@uwm.edu> bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III) writes:

[much deleted]

>So far far I agree with what you say, but the question was can you sell stock
>in this second round once all the private companies had been bought. You might
>want to do this to float a second company (buy 60%, sell 10% buy another 60%).

Yes...it isn't the first SR anymore since an OR has passed (ie
dividends paid by private RR)...which reminds me that I royally
screwed up last night by selling a share in the first SR for a share
of B&O after floating my RR.  I don't think it mattered as there were
B&O shares left in the second SR but in a tighter game it would have
made a difference.

Nigel
--
Nigel Tzeng
.sig under construction
From: exukozi@exu.ericsson.se (Tom Koziatek)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Advanced 3rd Reich
Date: 13 Aug 92 12:58:44 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems

In article <14239@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:
>Comments on several topics:
>
>1. Ahistorical possibilities.
>
>There has been discussion about whether Advanced Third Reich
>allows ahistorical possibilities such as Russia remaining neutral
>or the United States not participating in the war.  It does.
>Specifically:
>
>b. If the Axis restrain themselves or are losing (or both), U.S.
>entry into the war might well be delayed until 1943 or later.
>U.S. participation in the war on the Axis side is an historical
>absurdity and is not permitted in the game.
>

It wasn't that absurd. Prior to the Lusitania, there was a lot of Pro-German
sentiment in the US. Had Hitler curbed his maniacal tendencies a bit, iand 
Britain make a few anti-US mistakes, we could have entered on the opposite
side. What would the US reaction to say, a British sub sinking the Lusitania ??
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: mathers@sibelius.trl.oz.au (Steven Mathers)
Subject: Re: wrg ancients
Reply-To: s.mathers@trl.oz.au
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 01:08:15 GMT

In article <1992Aug11.140642.19715@cbnewsh.cb.att.com>, alr@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (andrew.l.reibman) writes:
|> Are there any other WRG ancients players out there?
|> 
|> If there were interest, I'd be willing to start a mailing list
|> to discuss armies, figures, tactics, etc.
|> 


Shit, yeah.  I have only half a Nikephorean Byzantine in 15mm because I
lack the patience to paint them.  I picked them because I really like
the combination of massed archers, light cavalry and shock cavalry.  The
hoplites come in for some use as well, although there are too few of
them to really make up what I would call a classic 'balanced' army.  I
like the Alexandrian Imperial list for the same reasons.

I usually play with paper squares which is good because you get the
chance to play different armies all the time.  I have only ever had one
really deciecive win which was with Assyrians vs some contempory
opponent that I cant remember, but I had the chariot advantage (of
course) and had a large outflanking force of chariots and LI with JLS,
Sh come screaming into his left flank at exactly the right time.  Rolled
him up in two turns and suffered hardly any CPF's, maybe 3.  the troops
celebrated that night, I can tell you.

Newsgroups: rec.games.board