HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cem@Apple.COM (Carles Moylan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Up Front armor penetration system
Date: 6 Sep 92 09:44:54 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

elvis@netcom.com (kEvin A. Thornbury) writes:

>I think you've misread the rules.

>rule 25.4: "...(EXC: IG/AFV ordnance firing at an AFV target does not
>add the to hit random number just drawn; instead it adds a number 
>equal to the relative range between firer and target.)...

>Now the ATR has a shot at killing it, because it adds the
>relative range and an RNC reading red as negative and black
>as positive...


I'm pretty sure I've interpreted the rules correctly.  If you look 
further in rule 25.4 it states:

"Having now determined the total strength of the attack...it is 
resolved separately for each target in the defending group by drawing 
a new RNC and adding any black number or subtracting any red number 
as per a normal fire attack."  

Thus, for vehicles, you are correct when you say that the "to hit" RNC 
is not added to the fire strength.  But a RNC *is* drawn to resolve the 
penetration itself, just like with the ATR.

As I understand it, this is how ordnance attacks work:

Versus infantry:
- Draw a RNC to determine if the target is hit.
- If the target is hit, the base attack strength equals the gun's 
      strength plus the RNC you just drew to get the hit (ignoring 
      color).
- Each man in the group is then attacked by this base strength + RNC 
      (NOT ignoring color) + standard modifiers for terrain, etc.

Versus vehicles:
- Draw a RNC to determine if the target is hit.  
- If a hit, the base attack strength equals the gun's boxed strength 
      plus the relative range (note that the RNC drawn for the hit is 
      NOT used versus vehicles).
- The vehicle is then attacked by the base attack strength + RNC (not 
      ignoring color) [just like infantry, as stated in rule 25.4 above] + 
      standard modifiers for terrain, etc.


I didn't mean to imply that the strength of hits on vehicles are 
modified by the RNC drawn for a hit.  I apologize if I wasn't clear. 

I think you've missed the part where hits on vehicles get modified by 
a RNC after deciding the base strength which includes the relative 
range but not the RNC drawn for the "to hit" process.  If you didn't 
have this RNC, there'd be no random element to penetration at all.  
The only random factor would be whether the shot hits or misses.

Using my example again, the 37mm AT Gun at RR5 has a "base AP 
strength" of 7 (boxed 2 + RR 5).  Barring other modifiers, it can kill a 
King Tiger from the front (armor=11) by getting a hit, and then 
drawing a black 4, 5, or 6 to resolve the penetration.  This, and other 
anomalous situations, are what I objected to.

I own the first edition of Up Front.  I know a second has been 
released.  Is it possible that my rulebook has a different (and 
erroneous) rule 25.4 than yours?

- Charlie Moylan (cem@apple.com)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: elder@ecf.toronto.edu (ELDER J David)
Subject: Battletech - mecheditor?
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:01:53 GMT


I have seen a number of posts referring to a Battletech mech editor. I
would be interested in taking a look at this ... where can I find it?
Is it source could that I can run on a UNIX box? Or is it PC based?

Thanks very much! All answers appreciated - I'd rather have too many than
too few.

David


-- 
David Elder                                University of Toronto
                                           Institute for Aerospace Studies
elder@bullet.ecf.toronto.edu               Fusion Research Group 
stange@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca 
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: bkdavis@eos.ncsu.edu (B K DAVIS)
Subject: Re: One the best mechs is...
Originator: bkdavis@c00060-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: bkdavis@eos.ncsu.edu (B K DAVIS)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 12:47:10 GMT


In article <Bu41Iz.IJA@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly) writes:
|>Path: taco!gatech!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!dv52151
|>From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
|>Newsgroups: rec.games.board
|>Subject: Re: One the best mechs is...
|>Message-ID: <Bu41Iz.IJA@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
|>Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 10:56:57 GMT+5:00
|>References: <1992Aug27.175508.1672@gacvx2.gac.edu> <1992Aug28.201814.18935@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> <BtwGqL.CJE@news.udel.edu> <4957@sumax.seattleu.edu> <1992Sep5.095754.1513@ncsu.edu>
|>Sender: usenet@news.cso.uiuc.edu (Net Noise owner)
|>Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
|>Lines: 16
|>
|>bkdavis@eos.ncsu.edu (B K DAVIS) writes:
|>
|>>While flipping through the 3025 readout I happened to gaze upon a mech that 
|>>I believe is the best heavy mech for 3025 that a person could have.
|>>I am talking about the Grasshopper. I will take that baby up against
|>>ANY other mech 75 tons and down. Hell maybe even against a an assault mech or
|>>2 depeneding. It packs a punch. You can very easily modify it into a mech 
|>>to be EVEN more feared.
|>
|>
|>The Grasshopper is extremely limited in weapons range. I would take the
|>Grasshopper in a scenario where you know you'll be starting in close, but
|>in a scenario where you must close the range, the venerable Archer will
|>have you for dinner. 
|>
|>Axly
|>
Hmm not really true that the Lrm and Large laser will only be pegging you, BUT
It can fire all of that while running towards you. the Archer will overheat very 
very fast, and the Grasshoppper will get in that min range quick. Also the 
Grasshopper has enough heat sinks that you could drop Large laser and something 
else and throw in a ppc. But still straight up the Grasshopper is the best heavy.
If for nothing besides the 22 heat sinks.


Brian
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
Subject: Re: BTech: Marauder II Variant
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: rec.games.board
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 15:52:48 GMT

kabreuer@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Klaus Breuer) writes:


>First one is a Marauder II Variant. Take the 'normal' 100t 
>Marauder II, take out the Jump Jets and add another Large Laser.
>Suddenly we have a large, hrd-hitting Mech with long-distance capacity
>who needn't worry about running out of ammo...
>Since I use the two ML for close-in defense only (I see myself more
>as a long-distance sniper than a close-combat fighter) I rarely have
>a problem overheating.

Removal of the jumpjets lessens the mobility of the 'Mech by a large
amount. There are numerous terrain conditions that give 3/5 'Mechs
MP cost problems. The jumpjets are too valuable when playing in 
rough terrain to take them out. 
36 heat a round may not overheat you right away, but it does
force you to cycle the large lasers. One round firing both gives
36. +8 on the heat scale. Getting back to zero takes firing only
20 heat worth. That means both larges stay silent that round. As 
a long range sniper, I can't see the advantage. 

>PS: How many of you play only 3025 Technology (perhaps with some
>3050 added, like the C3 computer or AMS)? I mean, Double Heatsinks
>remove the heat problem, XL Engines remove the space problem and
>Gauss Guns are Long-Range-High-Kill-Low-Heat Weapons whos Ammo
>can't really explode (come on, what's 20 points?). What fun is
>left designing a Mech like that?

I play all the technology levels, and have found equal challenge
designing 'Mechs for all the periods. 

Double Heatsinks do remove the heat problem to some extent, but
only if you are trying to recreate 3025 designs in 3050 tech. 
Designing a 3050 Warhammer, you find you can remove the small
problems (not enough leg armor on the most menacing looking
miniature) but your heat curve is a lot larger as you have almost
twice the guns of the 3025 'Mech.

XL engines remove the space problem? I don't think so. I find 
that critical spaces are more important building 3050 'Mechs 
than in building 3025. 3025 has no components competing for 
space in the Mech besides weapons and heatsinks. Add armor,
internal structure, triple strength myomer, MASC, XL engine vice
normal to the design debate and you can see it gets a lot 
more difficult deciding what is the optimum combination.

Gauss Rifles are very potent, but they are no more potent
that I remember AC 20s being when that was the biggest gun.

Clan Technology is also very potent, but play any of the scenarios
they have produced involving Clans and bid for them. If you think 
the technology gives you an easy win, you will be sadly mistaken.
Most Clan fights involving vastly superior numbers on the IS side.
The challenge with Clan Tech isn't building it, it's fighting it.


Axly

Newsgroups: rec.games.board,rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: cf324@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Lawrence C. Vogt)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: STOCKMARKET GAME by WESTERN PUBLISHING
Date: 6 Sep 1992 19:13:01 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


I am looking for a game called STOCKMARKET BY Western Publishing
I think it went out of print about 20 years ago.  I would be willing to 
pay $20 for one that has all the pieces in good shape for educational
purposes.  Send E-mail to usr1705a@tso.uc.edu
Larry
From: trent@mailhost.hsas.washington.edu (Sigfried Trent)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Battle tech stuff
Date: 8 Sep 92 19:07:07 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.board
Organization: Academic Services, UW

These are a number of unrelated battle tech themes

#1.  Seems to me that thunder rounds are sort of the penultimate
weapn.  They are difficult to avoid being hit by no matter how
fast you are and they realy concentrate damage.  Almost nothing
is safe from these suckers.  Small fast mechs are almost totaly
nulified, unless they spend all of their time in partial cover.
Does anyone have anything to say about this?

#2.  Once again I welcome people to send me thier mech designs and
variants as I am making a compendium and if you send them to me
I will send you a coppu of said compendium when it is done.

#3.  Some designs.  The following are a few of my favorite
designs that I personaly made.

For the assault minded I present the DEV-90 Devistator

tons: 100  Heat sinks: 10 double  Movement: Walk 3  Run 5
Armor:  Head 9, Center torso 47, RL torso 41, Legs 34, Arms 32
Back center 14, Back rl 10

Components:  XL engin, endosteel

Weapons:
1 gause rifol in RT
1 gause fifol in LT
1 ppc in RA
1 ppc in LA
1 c3 slave in head
1 pulse large in CT
1 pulse med in RL
1 pulse med in LL
And 4 tons of gause ammo

Comment:  A real fire power mecca, yet resonably ballanced.
Ultra destructive as part of a c3 team.  Magor weakness is
the xl engin which often grants early retirement.  Dont
fire all the weapons at once.  The extra firepower
is in case of emergency and use as spare weapons.


For the opposite end of the spectrum I give you the Supra-Locust

tons: 20  Heat sinks:10 double  Move:  Walk 10 Run 15 Mask 20
Armor:  Head 8, CT 8, RLT 7, Arms 6, Legs8, BackCT 4, Back RLT 3

Components:  XL engin, Endosteel, Ferro fiberous armor

Weapons:
4 medium lazers.  One in each arm and torso
1 small lazer in CT

Comment:  I love this mech.  Great for getting behind and ripping
up back armor.  If you lose out on initiative just run away for a 
round.  Enough armor to take some hits but dont get too cocky.


Finaly for the ultimate missile mech I present the Firebird

Tons: 85  Heat sinks: 11 double  Move: Walk 3, Run 5, Jump 3
Armor:  Head 9, CT 36, RLT 26, Arms 28, Legs 34, Back CT 18, Back RLT 10

Components:  XL engin, Endosteel

Weapons:
2 medium lazers in RT
2 medium lazers in LT
1 Large lazer in CT
4 LRM 15s one in each arm and torso
4 tons regular LRM ammo
3 tons swarm LRM ammo
3 tons thunder LRM ammo
c3 slave in head

Comment:  Like I said, a great missile mech.  I've never run out
of ammo, and I've never had the ammo hit because I use it quickly.
To run away, just jump aroun in the woods, and if they do get close
you can handle it with the lazers and physicals.  Great in c3 team.
Thunder the little guys and blast the big ones with regular ammo.
Dont expect to hit with everything, and dont expect to do tons
of damage.  But you gan give em a long lasting relentless barage.


"We live in an age when lemonaid is made with artificial flavoring and
dishwashing soap is made with real lemons"    Alfred E Newman
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: kabreuer@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Klaus Breuer)
Subject: BTech: MS-DOS Version Beta 0.2 ready
Organization: Student Pool, CSD, University of Erlangen, Germany
Distribution: rec.games.board
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 04:21:15 GMT

Hi all!

Looks like the previous version had a bad header, rather embarassing..
Well, here's the new version for MS-DOS PCs with EGA Cards:

* MechDesigner - using 3025 technology with some 3050 (AMS, etc)
                 No Munchkin XL engines, Double HeatSinks, etc :)

* WarriorDesigner - only for the computer game, subset of 1st Ed.

*MapDesigner - 26x16 Hex, including water, rivers, hills, woods, 
               buildings, fire, etc
*MechWar - The game itself - so far not finished, but beta version
           released by popular request (BUG WARNING)

ftp from: 131.188.1.43 in /pub/pc/incoming as mech02b.arj

ARJ is a compressing prog for PCs - the next version will be
ZIPed, ok?

Ciao,
Klaus
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: Re: BTECH: it's own group? <just a comment>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 07:00:48 GMT
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User

.
    ]['d love to see BattleTech get its own group.  Say, something
 like rec.games.battletech, or rec.games.btech.  IMHO, it shouldn't
 be under the rec.games.board hierarchy, as the BTech universe
 contains both boardgame/wargame and RPG elements.

-- 
    ________________________________________
   /  -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex  (: /
  /  lunatic@netcom.com  CI$:  76170,672  /  <----- Note new
 /  GEnie:  LUNATIC    AoL:  <canceled>  /  Internet address
/_______________________________________/
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Cosmic Encounters needed
Date: 13 Sep 92 11:42:04 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

Does anyone know where to get Cosmic Encounters modules?
 
Or, would be willing to sell them?

DC
From: kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: Hatchets (was: Re: BTECH - machine gun mechs)
Date: 15 Sep 92 18:06:06 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec

From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)


    > \_/
     > |es, it's the Mantis.  When I saw it, I asked Sam Lewis (the
 > head of FASA) on GEnie what the deal was.  He said that a mech can
 > only attack with one hatchet/claw/etc. per turn.  You can build a
 > mech with two, but the second one can only be used as a spare.


BTW, hi Lunatic ... you're a common sight on Genie. AS for Sam's
response, it's stock... since they really don't mind you having two
hatchets, or claws... especially since Ye-Wo-Lang (sp?) is suppossed to
have two by 3054. Go figure.

Also, whyle Nystul was developper, we playtested Solaris VII, and he
said that 2 claws, hatchets etc ... are ok.

Oh well.... I wonder of Jordan would have anything against two hatchets
or claws ?... :-)

Did you ever get the fealing that they rub each other the wrong way at
times ? :-}


    > ________________________________________
   > /  -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex  (: /
  > /  lunatic@netcom.com  CI$:  76170,672  /  <----- Note new
 > /  GEnie:  LUNATIC    AoL:  <canceled>  /  Internet address
> /_______________________________________/



P.S. Now don't you go and start rumors about me on Genie ! :-) I'll do
that myself ... hehehe

Roll!       ___      +---------------------------------------------------+
Over!   __ ( . )      From        : Stephane I. Matis
      _/__\(___)      Internet    : kgnome@cs.concordia.ca
    / /\\[==]//\ \    Working for : Monenco Systems Group 
   /_/  |THOR|  \_\   Working  at : Newfoundland Offshore Contractors 
  [00] _//==\\_ [00]  Writing for : Mecha*Press and FASA's BattleTech
      / _/--\_ \      		    Dream Pod 9
     |__|    |__|     "It Just Works... " - Steve Paul Jobs, CEO NeXT
     (__]    [__)     "Clam Warships are landing on Toycod !" - Anonymous
    [_=_]    [_=_]   +---------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: dave@admiral.uucp (Dave Litchman)
Subject: Re: BTECH-RiflemanVarient
Organization: The Admiral's Unix System & The Grid BBS
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1992 02:49:54 GMT

In article <2SEP199216114363@zeus.tamu.edu> elm4252@zeus.tamu.edu (MOORE, ERIC LEE) writes:
>
>Hookay.  This group is pretty good at pointing out the flaws
>in mechs that are posted.  Here is one that I have converted
>2 of my Rifleman to.  waddaya think? (besides the obvious
>use of the XL engine)
>
>weapons          locat     crit     tonnage
>lb-10x            ra        6        11
>lb-10x            la        6        11
>ammo (20)         rt        2         2
>ammo (20)         lt        2         2
>case              rt        1        .5
>case              lt        1        .5
>med laser         rt        1         1
>med laser         lt        1         1
>sma laser          h        1        .5

I would move the LB ammo and the case to the arms. That way, if you take an
ammo hit, you just lose the arm, with the respective AC. With the ammo in the
torso, the ammo hit would destroy the torso, and due to the XL engine, the rest
of the mech as well.


-- 
"Dammit Jim, I'm a free man, not a number!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ray, when somebody asks you if you're a god, you say YES!" -- Winston Zeddmore
From: mcneely@korg16.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Alan_McNeely)
Subject: Re: Titan - who does NOT like it?
Organization: NCR Corp
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 92 15:06:25 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.164528.15364@muddcs.claremont.edu> irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith) writes:
>In a prior article, Gerld Siek (jerry@uni-paderborn.de) writes:
>> [Tell me why I shouldn't buy Titan.]
>
>[Good discussion of dead time,  long novice games,  etc.]
>Most people I've met who have played
>Titan either like the game, because they suffered through the novice stages
>and are now experienced enough to move quickly, or absolutely hate it
>because they found the novice games so intolerable.

I'm one of those people who found the first game so intolerable I didn't want
to play anymore,  ever.  The other three players all found the game worthwhile.
I can easily imagine that if I pushed myself through six or seven games of
this it might become a lot more fun,  but there's too many games that I can
enjoy every time I play to push myself through this kind of learning curve.
There are obviously lots of people on the net who get a lot of pleasure from
Titan,  but for someone considering buying the game unplayed like the original
poster,  there's a substantial risk of disapointment.

I've never had as negative a reaction to any other game as I did to Titan.

Alan McNeely
 
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: roan@convex.com (Russell Roan)
Subject: Re: Civil War Strategic games
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:23:45 GMT
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.

In article <1992Sep8.130138.993@oz.plymouth.edu> sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>I have both VG's Civil War and GDW's House Divided, but haven't played
>either of them.  The former looks a bit too complex for my tastes,
>reading the rules, and the latter a bit too simple!

	I would recommend giving the VG game a try;  it's not nearly
as complex as it looks and plays very smoothly.  My main gripe is
that the rules are very wordy;  this makes them about twice as long
as they probably should be.

	I am currently in the process of slowly learning the
COA _War for the Union_ game.  It contains a higher level of detail
than the VG game.

	Finally, let me re-iterate what a previous poster 
said about the Fresno game ("The war that pitted brother 
against brother").

	UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES PAY FOR THIS GAME!!!!!

	I made the mistake of wasting $40 for this "game" last January 
before reading the universal condemnation on the net.  After reading
the nearly non-existent rules I gave up in disgust and haven't even 
punched the game.

-- 
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: nicholso@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Melvin H. Nicholson YBH)
Subject: Re: Titan - who does NOT like it?
Organization: NASA Ames Res. Ctr. Mtn Vw CA 94035
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 19:06:02 GMT

In article <1613@idacrd.UUCP> desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
>Here is the complete recruiting table for the Bo-Yin variant reposted;
>he asked me to post it for him as his posting access is not so good at
>this time.
>
>Also, he comments:
>
>> as for why this makes the game more interesting.... even after one gets 
>> lucky and converts a high level creature, it is So easy for someone to 
>> convert another line as there are SO many different lines......
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>The Creature Table
>
>[Tundra]
>Warbears => Roc (11~*3) => Gog (24-2) -> Jotun (23-3)
>            Giant  => Gog [10]
>	    Roc -> Colossus
>            [12]
>2 Gorgons + 1 Ranger #####> Demon (4~*5)
>                            [10]
>[Mountains]
>Minotaurs => Roc => Phoenix (15~*3) -> Juggernaut (15~4)
>	    Dragon => Phoenix [10]
>            Roc -> Colossus
>2 Rangers + 1 Gorgon #####> Demon
>   
>[Swamp]
>Wyverns => Medusa (7~~4) -> Gog
>           [12]
>[Desert]
>Griffons => Scorpio (12~3) -> Phoenix
>            [12]
>[Hills]
>Minotaurs => Dryad (5*5)
>             [12]
>[Woods]
>Warbears => Dryad
>
>[Jungle]
>Behemoth => Basilisk (14~*3)
>            [8]
>
>To cross recruit a Phantom Knight one needs at least two distinct
>of the below with one of them in the proper terrain.
>Phantom Knight (no terrain)
>Behemoth [Jungle]
>Wyvern [Swamp]
>Griffon [Desert]
>Demon [Tundra and Mountains]
>Unicorn [Hills and Woods]
>
>[The number in brackets under each creature is the supply for each]
>
>Explanations for special creatures:
>Demons:  Has infinite range for ~strikes, no range penalty,
>         native to sand/dune/slope/bog/bramble/drift
>Phantom Knights: same nativity as Demon
>     movement and attacks may be delayed until after completion of other 
>     movement and attacks (i.e. can intersperse movement and attack).
>Dryads: May enter Tree, gain 1d in tree, enemies not recruitable in treed
>	terrain (incl. P.K) lose 2d on strikes 1d on rangestrikes.
>Medusas: Rangestrike is full strength (7 dice at 4).
>Scorpio: Deliver 150%+ damage from sand, and 150%+ at non-native on sand.
>Basilisk: With 2+ in stack, all Behemoths/Gorgons promote to 8~*3
>Roc/Phoenix native to Volcano.
>
>Lords:
>Dominion (7*4) per 300
>Virtue (7*5) per 700
>Seraph (12~*4) per 1100


At first glance, this table seems badly balanced against the green
tracks, the the 4*~5 brush creature does not compare well with the
other creatures it is up against (and THEY are not dead end creatures)
plus it need some heavy non-green recruitment (a ranger) to get it.
Perhaps a 6*~4 creature for two Gor (no ran) would be more balanced?

Have you noticed the green paths being neglected in this setup?

Mel