From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: PBEM Fanzine, v92n2
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 01:36:54 GMT

======================================================================
              ######    ######    #######   #     #
              #     #   #     #   #         ##   ##
              #     #   #     #   #         # # # #
              ######    ######    #####     #  #  #
              #         #     #   #         #     #
              #         #     #   #         #     #
              #         ######    #######   #     #
======================================================================
A Fanzine for Free Computer-Moderated Play-By-Electronic-Mail Wargames
======================================================================
volume 92, number 2    (yes, volume 92 is the first)   august 15, 1992
======================================================================
Greg Lindahl, Editor                                 gl8f@virginia.edu
======================================================================

Table of Contents:

Opening Stuff

   o  The Editor's Corner

Articles

   o  The PBM Habit, by Van Norton

Columns

   o  The Game Administrators' Corner, by Mel Nicholson

Regular Features

   o  List of Stand-By Positions
   o  Game Descriptions & Information
   o  Hints about sending electronic mail to other networks
   o  What's this "ftp" thing anyway?
   o  Archives and subscriptions by email

======================================================================
The Editor's Corner
======================================================================

Well, as you can see, I've opted to start publishing monthly instead
of twice-monthly. This gives me more time to sit back before I panic
and start badgering my friends for articles.

Speaking of articles, why don't you write one? We've had some
interesting suggestions for articles. First off, strategy articles for
any of the games listed below. In particular, there seems to be a
debate in the Galaxy community over the ship designs 33/33/33 and
40/20/20. Why hold your wisdom in when you can enlighten all of us?

Second, an article on how to keep in character and out-of-character 
issues separate. This is something that seems to work out naturally in
face-to-face gaming (people can generally tell when you're playing in
character), but doesn't always work out very well in postal or email
gaming.

Or, think up your own topics. As always, I'm also looking for new
games to list details for.

-- greg (gl8f@virginia.edu)

======================================================================
The PBM Habit                                               Van Norton
======================================================================

Recently in a game I was playing, the gamemaster took a week off.  The
game had been running on a standard one week turn-around for a number
of months, but the gamemaster needed a week of down time. At first, I
was frustrated. I found myself wandering in and looking the computer
from time to time. I occasionally logged into the net before I
remembered no turn was due. I was restless and anxious.

I tried to pass the time by sending mail to other players in the game,
but without a new turn to look at, I was rapidly losing interest. When
the next turn was due, a short 12 days after I had received my last
turn results, I barely had the interest to complete the turn. Was this
the same game I was so anxious about? It seemed so trivial and tedious
now.

I believe that I was suffering from PBM withdrawal. I had become
addicted to a game. After suffering the withdrawal period, I no longer
had much interest in the game. My addiction to it had been broken.
Laugh and point fingers if you will, but I believe many gamers suffer
the same symptoms. As long a a game is running smoothly and REGULARLY,
the unsuspecting gamer has no idea he has become hooked. After all, he
is getting his fix at regular intervals. But watch out when a turn is
missed! A forced break from the gamer's 'fix' and he becomes anxious
and moody.

There are other symptoms. Have you ever noticed how paranoid gamers
become when their turns are late? The mailman obviously knows
'important' mail from junk and withholds 'important' mail from you.
Or the gamemaster thinks you are doing too well in his game so he
doesn't mail your turn until after everyone else's. Or perhaps the
gamemaster receives your turn in time to process it, but intentionally
loses it to set you back. How frequently do you log in when expecting
late PBEM results?

PBM games have insidious ways of working themselves into your life. It
is nearly impossible to take a vacation from PBM.  Abandoning you
position for any length of time will doom the gamer to failure in most
PBM's. And as one PBM winds down toward its finish, there always seems
to be another worth joining.

PBM gaming can be addicting. A mild addiction, certainly not as
self-destructive as heroin or cocaine, but more in line with caffeine
or chocolate. I have seen others spend major portions of their lives
and incomes on PBM. Hopefully, by recognizing PBM as possible problem,
you can keep the beastie in its place.

I don't believe PBM itself is to blame. By nature, we humans thrive on
power and routine. PBM provides both.
 
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

The author is not a PhD in psychology from Harvard and does not have
five years experience in clinical psychology specializing in
addictions. He is not licensed to practice psychoanalysis in this
state or any other state of mind. He is, in fact, merely offering his
opinion.

======================================================================
The Game Administrators' Corner                          Mel Nicholson
======================================================================

Drafting a game

Last issue I mentioned I'd write about dealing with playtesters.
Well, I guess I lied, because this article has almost nothing to do
with playtesters.  This article is about taking existing games and
rewriting them.  The example I'll use is "Splat", which is one of the
first games I ever wrote.  I was six years old at the time, and the
game (and the later versions of it) was pretty popular in the six year
old circle (for whom chess was a bit too much to take for the most
part --- too many rules, and chutes and ladders was too boring --- no
action or control).  This isn't an email game, but the principles of
game drafting I'll eventually get to towards the end apply to all
games.  Of course, anyone familiar with my anecdoting knows that the
prelude will be longer than the conclusion...

Here are all the rules to Splat:  Each player gets all of the
numbers from one through nine.  That's his team.  The team must be
arranged into a 3x3 grid The two players' grids are lined up face to
face, and each side's columns' front number fights the opposing number.
To resolve a fight, add the roll of a die for each player to the
number fighting for that side.  The higher total of number plus die
roll Splats the lower.  Ties meant both numbers got Splatted.  The
number would make battle passes where each column replaced losses
until one side or the other had been wiped out in each column.  The
survivors would then regroup for another pass until one side or the
other was unable to field a team (placing at least one person in each
column).

The really cool part of the game was the pieces.  We folded pieces of
paper into little triangular blocks with the numbers scrawled on the
front.  Whenever a piece was beaten, the victor got to "Splat" to
vanquished --- literally and usually violently.  After the "fallout"
from less coordinated "splats" were put back into place, and the dead
cleared off, the battle would rage on, usually generating enough noise
to have the teacher show up, take the pieces and dice away, and
"bench" us for recess.  That was okay, because we would then play
Splat on "the bench" at recess.  (Pieces were easily remade, and there
were always more dice, especially when the teacher left confiscated
ones in easily retrievable locations)

The Splat fervor lasted about two weeks.  Then Splat-playing died out
and Red Rover regained it rightful place as the Big Game.  (Red Rover
is a game where boys tackle each other very hard to prevent them from
running from one side of the field to the other, sort of like Gridiron
without a ball).

While every once in a while a game of Splat would get played, the
mania was gone.  Then came the first variant: Super Splat.

Super Splat started just like Splat, except that one empty row was
left between the two 3x3's.  On each players' turn, one piece was moved
one space (no diagonals), staying within the imaginary 3x7 grid (the
borders were not enforced until after the Great Runaway Chicken
strategy was tried).  When one piece tried to move onto another piece,
a regular Splat battle ensued, and the survivor (if any) was placed in
the defender's square.  The winner was the first person to kill seven
of the opponents.  (You still needed three pieces to "stay alive",
just like the old game)

Super Splat survived a few years, though never with the sort of
popularity that Splat had enjoyed as the "invented right here king of
all games which will be around for ever", but it did entirely replace
Splat, and eventually became known just as Splat.

(Super) Splat stayed about the same until it finally was "outgrown"
Then one day in the seventh grade we learned to fold pyramids (among
other solid shapes) out of paper.  As soon a I saw them, inspiration
hit.  3D Splat!

Each player got 9 (surprise, surprise) pieces, and had the same board
as Super Splat.  The pieces were pyramids.  On the pyramids, the
player got to use all the numbers from 1-9 (four times) with the
restriction that no number could appear twice on the same piece.  The
rules were like Super Splat except for four changes: 1) On each turn
you could move each piece instead of just one.  2) Instead of moving a
piece could rotate 90 degrees.  3) The attack strength of the piece
depended on the side of the piece facing the battle.  4) No dice were
used --- the higher number won.

In practice, the Splatting of the pieces was no longer done after the
first few games of 3D Splat, and the pyramids were replaced with
squares, due to the time involved in making the pyramids.  The name 3D
Splat stuck in spite of all the 3D and Splatting being removed.

Okay, that's all the nostalgia you have to sit through: now I'll start
with the real article.  Game ideas, even dumb ones, can be revised by
making simple changes to the structure of the rules.  Only the main
vision of how the game works need remain (or not).

In the case of Splat, the main idea was this: two sides blast each
other to bits in a series of one-on-one confrontations.  It is
interesting for me (and I hope you) to look back on the game series
and look how odd some of the artifacts in the final version appear,
yet how natural for those who had grown up with the earlier versions
of the game they are.  Take the victory conditions for example: why
would the player lose upon having two pieces left?  While it turned
out that this prevented long boring stalemates with pieces chasing
each other around the board, it didn't come about that way.  I could
have removed that artifact from the game, but it would have caused the
game to be unplayable.  The moral: not all good game design decisions
are made on purpose.

More importantly, revision is a Good Thing(tm).  I seriously doubt if
anyone on the net would be interested in playing Splat (the original),
except as a game to play with/between six year old children that can
help them with some number skills while not being too frustrating to
learn or too obviously a Learning Game.  3D Splat, on the other hand,
would probably still be an interesting game for most of us at least
for a few plays, with enough strategy to surprise the most hard core
chess fan.  (For those who only like games with lots of violence, use
the pyramids and SPLAT them)

Before you go off to revise every game which has ever been made, there
is a caution or three.  First, remember that simple is good.  Most of
the revision between versions of Splat involved REPLACING rules, not
adding them.  The tendency towards adding and adding complexity is a
terminal one, which usually produces hideous monsters which are
totally unplayable.  In fact, some of the moves involved REMOVING
rules (like the part about no longer rolling dice).  Splat, Super
Splat, and 3D splat are all of about the same complexity, at least
from a rule-learning point of view.  I don't need to repeat to this
group the numerous examples in the commercial industry where creeping
featurism has ruined an otherwise good game.

Another thing to remember is to not lose sight of how the game works.
It's okay to reshape the vision of the game, but if you lose the
vision entirely, the game is going to suffer.  For example, let's say
I increased the number of dice in any version of Splat to five per
player.  The game would suck.  The outcome would be random and
frustrating.  You might as well just roll the dice and forget about
the pieces.  (Which might also be a good game for four year olds, but
that's another story.)  The problem is the even in the original Splat,
the important part was the the number of the pieces had a major effect
on the outcome of the battles.  That was what Splat is all about.

Finally, and this is the hardest part: it is okay to reverse a design
decision after it is made.  Just because you used to use one method
for doing something in your game, and you have since changed it into a
new, improved method, does *not* mean that you can't resurrect the
part of the old version you discarded.  This is especially useful when
multiple changes interact.  Change A might be an improvement to the
base game, and change B might improve the game with change A added in.
But perhaps B without A would be better yet?  In more detailed games
with lots of design decisions, it helps consider how these decisions
interact.  Things which may not have made sense or worked right with
one format may later turn out to be just right after the game has
changed.

To summarize, don't be afraid to make changes to games.  Just remember
that you should try to stay true to a vision of the game, avoid
unuseful complexity, and to not be afraid to reverse decisions or
reconsider them in light of other changes.  I hope this helps.

Next Issue: I'll talk about playtesters (unless I change my mind again).

======================================================================
List of Standy-By Positions
======================================================================

This section gives a list of available positions in existing games.
Two new Galaxy games started between last issue and this issue, and
both expect to have some positions become available because of player
drop-outs early in the game. Contact rob@ccc.govt.nz or
bampton@cs.utk.edu for more details. Be sure to clearly state that
you're looking for a standby position. They also occasionally start up
new games; hopefully they'll wait a couple of weeks next time so I can
announce the new openings in the newsletter...

There are *always* Diplomacy standby positions and games starting --
contact the Diplomacy server (details below) for a list.

======================================================================
Game Descriptions and Information
======================================================================

Galaxy -- Galaxy is a closed-ended strategic economic/military space
simulation. The game typically takes place on a 100x100 2D map, with a
few hundred planets and 20 to 50 players. Players compete to capture
planets, which can be used for economic expansion. You may purchase
technology in many areas, allowing your ships to fight harder and move
faster. Galaxy turns range in size from 10k early in the game to
100-200k late in the game. The author, Russell Wallace, is currently
running 3 games, Rob McNeur is running 5 games, and a few other people
are running a few other games. The rules and source code are available
for ftp on ftp.erg.sri.com, directory /pub/pbm/galaxy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Star Empires -- Star Empires is a simple closed-ended strategic
space-opera-style game. Every star system is adjacent to every other
star system, so good communications with all other players is the key
to staying alive. The author, Roger Lincoln, is currently working on
version 3, which will hopefully include a new combat system and a 2D
universe to replace the current trivial topology. When he starts a new
game, we'll announce it here, or you can contact rhl@mbunix.mitre.org
for more information.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Celestial Empire -- Celestial Empire is a closed-ended strategic
economic/military space simulation. Empires compete to capture worlds
which produce many different types of resources, of which different
amounts are needed to manufacture various items. Two games are
currently in progress, and the author, Dougal Scott, plans to start 3
more games soon. The rules may be ftp-ed from yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au in
the directory /pub/celemp. After you've read them, if you still want
to join a game, send your name to Dougal.Scott@fcit.monash.edu.au.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Olympia -- Olympia is an open-ended economic/military simulation in a
fantasy setting, with a little role-playing thrown in for good
measure. The game is currently in beta-test, with turns running weekly
and about 120 players involved, and it's been going for a little over
6 months now.

For more information, send email with the word "HELP" to
server@olympia.rt.com. You can retrieve the rules and back-issues of
the Olympia Times newsletter from this server. I believe that the GM,
Rich Skrenta, has a large number of requests to join the game that he
has not processed yet, so don't hold your breath waiting to be added.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Diplomacy -- The Diplomacy Adjudicator is a fully-computer moderated
gamemaster for Avalon Hill's Diplomacy boardgame. To get more
information from the moderator, send email with the word "HELP" in it
to judge@u.washington.edu. Some information is available via FTP from
milton.u.washington in the public/misc subdirectory. All of the
information up for ftp is also available via the email server. As of
August 1992, there are roughly 120 games in progress, and 750 players
are registered. In addition to standard Diplomacy games, several
variants are available for either normal or anonymous play.

Diplomacy is covered by its own on-line magazine, which you can
subscribe to either by reading the newsgroup bit.listserv.dipl-l, or
by sending email with the phrase:

subscribe dipl-l Your Name

to the address listserv@mitvma.mit.edu

======================================================================
Hints about sending Electronic Mail to other networks
======================================================================

OK, so now you're wondering, "I'm using FidoNet or CompuServe or
FoobieBlech and those email addresses he keeps on talking about sure
look funny to me!". Welcome to the modern world of networking. See,
there's this big amorphous network called the Internet that lots of
other networks, like FidoNet and CompuServe (but not GEnie, yet) are
hooked up to. And you can send email between all of them, if you know
the right incantations. Often size or cost limitations will keep you
from being able to play games on another network, but at least you can
send me letters to the editor or articles.

Compuserve: If your ID is [76515,1122] then your canonical Internet
address will be 76515.1122@compuserve.com. The comma is replaced by a
period, and that's your username. Compuserve.com is the name of your
site. The .com on the end means that Compuserve is a business, and
also generally means it's in the USA. This address is the one that
non-compuserve people will use to talk to you.

To send mail from CompuServe to the Internet, you use this sort of
address: >INTERNET:gl8f@virginia.edu In this example, the ">INTERNET:"
part indicates that the email is going to the Internet, and
gl8f@virginia.edu is a normal Internet address (mine).

Compuserve users have to pay extra for mail to or from the Internet.
If you're a flat-fee user, the cost is 5 cents per 2500 characters,
minimum 15 cents, and the first $9 per month is free. This can add up
to a bit of money if you're playing Olympia, where a typical player
might get 500k of email per month in 100 messages.  In addition, the
maximum size for a given message is 50kbytes, and most Internet games
do not split their game turns into pieces if they are too large. But
you can try. Diplomacy, for example, should be ok and not that
expensive.

To go from FidoNet to the Internet and back is a similar process.
Actually, it's not so simple. I have a document that describes this,
but since FidoNet seems to be a bit of an anarchy, you can't even send
netmail from some nodes and others may not be configured properly to
send mail to and from the Internet. And, when you send email, someone
is paying to send it, or maybe there is a local gateway and it's free.
So, you should probably talk to your sysop first to figure out what's
going on.

Anyway, the long and the short of it is this: FidoNet users can send
mail to the Internet by sending normal netmail to the user UUCP, and
then on the first line of the message, put the line:

To: gl8f@virginia.edu

To send email from the Internet to FidoNet, you take an address such
as "Dale Webber at 1:105/55.0", and turn that into
dale.weber@p0.f55.n105.z1.fidonet.org. Again, this is subject to the
same caveats above about the gateway and the costs involved. From what
I've gathered (but I haven't asked recently), they ask that you keep
messages under 10k bytes and to only send two or three a day.  This is
a fairly small amount that would limit your ability to play Internet
games, but you can still submit articles to this fanzine (hint, hint).

If you want to avoid the limitations, yet don't know how to get
directly on the Internet, I can mail you a list of public-access Unix
sites with Internet email capabilities. Just send me a short note,
using the above info, to "gl8f@virginia.edu", and I'll mail a copy
back.

======================================================================
What's this "ftp" thing anyway?
======================================================================

ftp is an acronym for "file transfer protocol", and it is only
directly available to the privileged few who are directly hooked to
the Internet using heavy-duty hardware. There is a way to use ftp via
email, and if you can get email to me, I will send you a document
explaining how to use it.

======================================================================
Archives and subscriptions by email
======================================================================

PBEM is archived at "ftp.erg.sri.com". I will also be setting up a
mailing list to distribute this magazine, but keep in mind that it
will be posted on a regular basis to at least Usenet and CompuServe,
so if you're reading it now, you probably won't need to get on the
mailing list to receive it in the future.

======================================================================

PBEM is published monthly. Please redistribute it far and wide, but do
not modify or delete any articles.

PLEASE CONTRIBUTE! Our focus is primarily on free wargames, but we're
interested in articles about anything relevant.