HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig)
Subject: Re: Legends: Arcane Spell Research (again!)
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:33:12 GMT

gairns@ccrs.emr.ca (jgg):
>OK ... I am reading and reading the AA research rules and
>I don't think I quite understand the mechanics of researching	
>AA.  Could some kind soul out there either post one of their
>research attempts, or help me flesh out mine. 

It's a two-stage process.  First, you issue a special action stating
that one of your characters who is in a magic guild wishes to research
an AA spell.  You describe the spell in as much detail as you wish,
and the GM tells you the spell id#.  (Or the GM says no-can-do or the
GM gives you the id# but imposes some modifications on the spell such
as making it higher level or the GM asks you to resubmit with, say,
better components.)  Once you have the id#, you research it as if it
were a regular spell, except that the guild's AA rating counts as a bonus
rather than its level.

As to just what level, number of spells, items, etc to specify, I don't
know, as I've had no successes to date.

-----
Dani Zweig
dani@netcom.com

   Aphorism is better than none.

Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig)
Subject: Legends -- Vampires
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:09:48 GMT

My thanks to those who responded to my question.  It appears that the
Vampyre status tree looks something like this:

Vampyres are tough (INV/DMG 6, SA 50) but can't afflict.
Greater Vampyres (INV/DMG 7, SA 100) can afflict Vampyre status.
Vampyre Lords (INV/DMG 8, SA 500) can afflict Greater Vampyre status.
Spirit of the Dead is Real Tough (INV/DMG 9, SA 750) but can't afflict at all.
Lord of the Dead (stats?) is as high as it gets, and can afflict Vampyre Lord.

I don't think I've ever seen a LotD.  (I wouldn't be surprised if they have
an invulnerability rating of ten, though. :)

-----
Dani Zweig
dani@netcom.com

   'T is with our judgements as our watches, none
   Go alike, yet each believes his own
		--Alexander Pope
From: griffith@xcf.Berkeley.EDU (Jim "The Big Dweeb" Griffith)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: legends
Date: 8 Jan 1993 06:24:14 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: xcf.berkeley.edu

In article <1993Jan8.035440.21269@netcom.com> dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:
>I don't think it matters much whether you go into a regular "North
>Island Campaign" game or a regular "Realm of the Immortals" game.
>Call MG's accounting number (503-772-6301) and ask what option would
>be fastest.  Setups generally take a long time.

Disagree.  If you get into a RTI or COA game, you're at a greater disadvantage
than if you join NIC.  A given module has basically identical geography,
locations, and NPC's across all games of that module, and knowing about a
given module helps you out with subsequent games of that module.  Since both
RTI and COA have been running for a long time, there are a lot of players
out there experienced with those modules (so they know to "go kill the
ancient dragon in the Shadow Hills to get the Sword of Power" and you don't).
Since NIC is brand new, you go in not knowing the game system, but knowing the
module as well as everyone else does.

They're in the process of setting up NIC 3.  If you sign up now, you have 
fair chance of getting a setup in the next month or so.

				Jim

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Griffith  /--OO--\     | Two great powers are on our side: the power of
 ...!ucbvax!scam!griffith  | Love and the power of Arithmetic.  These two are
BEWARE BATS WITHOUT NOSES! | stronger than anything else in the world.
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games
From: jennifer@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Jennifer Schlickbernd)
Subject: VGA Planets BUG
Reply-To: jennifer@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Distribution: "na"
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 18:04:37 GMT

Hi, last Saturday I ran my VGA Planets turn as usual, and ALL the turns
were STALE!  Has anyone else had this happen? I have not touched my system
date or time, although I had compressed my disk earlier that day.  Very
frustrating!!

-- 
Jennifer Schlickbernd  Technology Utilization Office  J. P. L.
jennifer@jato.jpl.nasa.gov or elroy!jato!jennifer@csvax.caltech.edu
72466.3413@compuserve.com  Voice:(818) 354-2241
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: dresnick@athena.mit.edu (David I Resnick)
Subject: DM rollup - request comments
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:04:10 GMT

Hi,

I just got the following rollup after doing my first DA (my guy almost
  beat that damned elf)

Anyway, it is

13 6 14 9 9 14 5

I was considering either

13 6 14 15 15 14 7 ST  or
13 6 14 15 13 14 9 ST


The fairly good damage potential and low CN points to an offensive.
He is quite fast, but that low DF really worrys me.  What styles can
best afford a low DF?  Is this low DF really going to cripple him?

Thanks,
--
       David Resnick                           dresnick@athena.mit.edu
From: mauricia@bu.edu (Anthony Mauricia)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: DM
Date: 11 Jan 93 17:24:33 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

It is true that you can switch if you receive a shield as a favorite, but the favorite selected is random.
-Tony
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: thompson@sun425.nas.nasa.gov (Keith C. Thompson)
Subject: Re: Legends: Change in Netherworld Status
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 00:51:55 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.232045.21293@netcom.com> dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:
>Two of my characters morphed in combat from Netherworld to Netherworld this
>turn, so I called MG to ask.  It seems that MG finally took note of the
>fact that Netherworld never morphs, so you now have a choice between 373,
>which can afflict but can't morph, and 1801, which can morph but not
>afflict.  (I was told 1801 on the phone.  Could he have meant 1851?)
>
>What I was told was that 373 characters can afflict themselves with
>1801, and that they were automatically being combat-morphed to 1801, 
>but that they could ask to be changed back.  
>
>I suppose they'll get around to making an announcement...
>
>-----
>Dani Zweig
>dani@netcom.com
>

I was told today that MG is indeed going to make an announcement.  They
have apparently received a *very* large number of calls on this subject.

I complained loudly about the name being the same for 373 and the
morphed status, as well as the afflicted statuses.  It would have been
pure hell trying to keep track of which slot was afflicted with which
status.  I had visions of trying to rearrange a force for a large
combat and receiving an extraordinary amount of purple ink followed by
substantial losses in combat.  I was told that they have changed the
status names so that we will be able to tell them apart.

Another sore point was the change from 2 inv / 2 dam to 0 inv / 0 dam.
I asked if this was truly what was intended, or if it was an oversight.
Apparently they have decided to change it to 2/2.

- Keith
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: Jesse.Taylor@launchpad.unc.edu (Jesse Taylor)
Subject: Re: galaxy battles
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 20:25:23 GMT

[I've been following the thread of rewriting the format of battles in
galaxy, and have a few opinions (don't know if these have been stated before)]

As the the arguement that galaxy turns take a year, and that ships only
shooting once for each attack during the battle was too slow for a year,
another point was made that solar systems are BIG places, and that a
battle would involve numerous skirmishes between the various ships, not
one HUGE engagement... Plus if you factor in ECM, ships might miss each
other in battle. Maybe each ship could fire twice in a turn for a battle?

As to the arguement that the game could stalemate if two people made two
huge fleets of flack ships.... No, only until one of them made a ship with
about 50 attacks and sent it in to break the stalemate...


That's all for now...

JT

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: bethmo@microsoft.com (Beth Moursund)
Subject: Re: Middle Earth PBM (MEPBM)
Date: 05 Jan 93 20:51:14 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <9301051246.AA22589@fccn01.fccn.pt> bc@fccn01.fccn.pt (Luis Miguel Sequeira) writes:
>Uh... is this PBM  played on the Internet,  ie., via email? Could  you
>post its email address, please? I'd be interested... :-)
>
>(If it's yet another _paid_ PBM by snail mail, forget it...)

Yes, it's a paid PBM by snail mail.  If it was email I would have
said MEPBeM.

Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: baidins@mercury.cis.udel.edu (Juris Baidins)
Subject: LEGENDS: NPC legions
Followup-To: rec.games.pbm
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Distribution: rec
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 18:20:52 GMT

A while ago there was a discussion on NPC legions, possibly moving
around the map and encountering player forces.

I scried one this last turn in ROTI 9.  The number of the legion is
in the lair and ruin range, the characters in it are NPCs, the soldiers
(Dak Nomads) are owned by 0.  The encounter orders are to block any
legion with more than 15 soldiers, but no military orders are given.

This turn I will see if it moved.

Juris Baidins
baidins@cis.udel.edu
From: sutin@ra.UCSC.EDU (Brian Sutin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: Galaxy: A modified battle algorithm
Date: 7 Jan 1993 06:39:55 GMT
Organization: Lick Observatory UCSC
NNTP-Posting-Host: ra.ucsc.edu

In article <C0GyD6.9sw@news.cso.uiuc.edu> amead@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Alan Mead) writes:

>What is a round?  Galaxy simply doesn't have 'em.  Ships are chosen
>randomly to fire, so its possible (if exceedingly inprobable) for a
>single ship with a single weapon to destroy hundreds of opponents
>before they fire once.  ...

You should try reading the rules sometime.  Enlightening.

Brian Sutin				sutin@lick.ucsc.edu
Lick Observatory, UCSC			Santa Cruz, CA 95064
    Fred:   "May I rescue you?"
    Ginger: "No, thank you.  I prefer being in distress."
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: crip@Micor.OCUnix.on.ca (Garth Werner)
Subject: Re: DM: Help Wanted With Roll-Up
Organization: M.B. Cormier INC.
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 93 15:58:07 EST

gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris) writes:

> 
> 	OK, I just got a roll-up, and I'm at a loss as to what to do with
> it.  The possibilities seem endless.  Let me give you the numbers:
> 
> 	10-13-9-13-10-5-10.
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 

        My personal suggestion is for trying 11-13-9-17-15-6-13 as a 
Parry-Strike.  That's been one of my pet styles for the past few months.

        Garth

Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: amead@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Alan Mead)
Subject: Re: Galaxy help needed
Organization: UIUC Department of Psychology
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 00:12:50 GMT

My analysis, was, I think, in error:

>enemy fire: let's say that you have one cruiser, the enemy has 30
>escorts.  Your cruiser automatically kills any escort it hits.  The
>escorts have a 1% chance of killing your cruiser.  What is the chance
>that your cruiser survives?  That's really really hard to say.  A
>simulation is the best way to answer that question.  But consider that
>over an infinite repitition, you would expect the escorts to fire 30
                            ^[of battles]
>times to the cruisers once.   Then 29 times to the cruiser's once.

15.5 times to the cruiser's once, then 15:1, then 14.5:1, ...

>then 28 times to once.  etc.  If each escort has a 1% chance to kill,
>it has a 99% chance not to.  The chance of NOT killing on n shots is
>(.99)^n.  On the above three "rounds", the escorts take 30+29+28 shots
>and have a 0.417 chance of NOT killing and a .582 chance of killing the
>cruiser.  *AND* combat continues for 27! more shots.  
                                      ^^^ this is clearly an error

So the expected (the mean for an infinite sample) number of shots the
escorts get is 15.5+15+14.5+14+... which is, I think, about 225.
(.99)^225 = .104, so about 10.4% of the time, the cruiser is expected
to survive the encounter.  I have no idea how to calculate the expected
number of casulties amongst the escorts.  (Except by simulation).

I *think* this is right.  The point is that combat is, for me, not
entirely intuitive and a numerical advatage can be wicked.

Also, I don't know how to solve for the ratio of shield to attack that
would produce a P(kill)=0.01, but an attack of 1.0 is pitifully small
when you talk about cruisers of mass 30 or larger, so this particular
example is a bit contrived.

-alan
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: bryan@stiatl.salestech.com (Bryan Donaldson)
Subject: Re: Legends: Spell Research
Organization: Sales Technologies, Inc.
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993 13:37:46 GMT

dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:
>gairns@ccrs.emr.ca (Jamie Gairns):
>>I am going to research a spell shortly.  I was wondering
>>what sort of spell components are commonly used.  Has anyone out there
>>researched spells before ?  What hoops did MG make you leap through...
>Components are classified by rarity.  So if you're going to use a
>standard resource, MG won't care whether it's ginger or meldorian,
>whether it's silver or gold.  I think there's a tradeoff between
>resources and spell points (and possibly spell level), but I'm
>not sure.

I tried to make a spell which would require a character as a prisoner to cast
the spell.  The prisoner would have ended up "laid to rest".  The location
which was the target of the spell would have ended up as a cloud castle.  MG's
answer, "Can't Do."

Of course, the prisoner as a component was NOT part of MG's discussion 
on allowed spell components.  I just happen to have a spare prisoner and
was looking for something to do with him.


-- 
Bryan Donaldson                    bryan@stiatl.salestech.com 
Sales Technologies, Inc            
3399 Peachtree Rd, NE               If one is born into an era of decadence,
Atlanta, GA  (404) 841-4000         one may as well enjoy it while it lasts.
From: leb@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (BASEL, LESLIE)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: Hmmmmm, for those who play games... :)
Keywords: newsgroup FBI
Date: 6 Jan 93 21:23:00 GMT
Distribution: na,local
Organization: University of Arizona
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <184765@pyramid.pyramid.com>, khearn@pyrps5.eng.pyramid.com (Keith Hearn) writes...
>In article <lkhfq9INNg71@cash.cs.utexas.edu> mckinney@cs.utexas.edu (Durwood Y. McKinney) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan4.214206.11171@netcom.com> cinnibar@netcom.com (Jeff Wood) writes:
>>>it turns out that person is not in 'our' game number.  And I'm sure people
>>>dislike to have those types of inquiries posted here along with the discussions.
>>
>>Well, this newsgroup doesn't get _that_ much traffic - the only way I
>>hear about these non-internet PBM games is by people talking about them.
>>I'd say go ahead and do your "call for allies" in this group and we can
>>worry about splitting if/when the volume of postings goes up too much.
>>
>>Ken McKinney
> 
>I agree. I don't mind seeing a few more messages that don't pretain to
>me. I'm mainly lurking here for VGAplanets and Duelmaster stuff, so I
>ignore most of the postings anyway. Ignoring a few more won't hurt me
>any. :)
> 
>BTW, DM players, anyone from Vithicar out there?
> 
>Keith
>AKA Arlon Greyfletch
>mgr, Mayhem, Inc. 
>Vithicar arena (game #49)
>record so far: 0-5-0 (Nowhere to go but up!) :)
>-- 
>Keith Hearn                   \    If a million dollars is a stack of 
>khearn@pyramid.com             \   $1000 bills 4" tall, the national debt 
>Pyramid Technology Corporation  \  would be a stack over 63 miles tall.
>(408) 428-7304 or (510) 263-2701 \  And it's getting taller, FAST!



Well, be carefull!  I used to play StarWeb in the early '80s and they
warned that anyone caught advertising (on dorm bulletin boards etc), would
be kicked out of the game for cheating.  Sigh! I suppose the rules could've
been changd since then but....

Rodger Coghlan
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: Middle Earth PBM (MEPBM)
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 02:56:31 GMT

In article <1993Jan05.022426.15639@microsoft.com> bethmo@microsoft.com (Beth Moursund) writes:

>Any MEPBM players on the net?  I've just signed up for a game, and I'd
>be interested in discussions with experienced players.

I haven't seen much discussion of it here, but I do know there's an
active discussion going on on Compuserve. Unfortunately, like most of
GSI's games, it's one with quite a bit of hidden information that's
quite useful to know, so you won't do nearly as well unless you can
dig up some experienced players. I've never played, but my home gaming
group does and they speak well of the game.

The one trick that I do know of is this oddity: An army always get to
move at least one hex, no matter what. So if you end your turn
adjacent to an enemy army, you can't be SURE of catching them no
matter what you do. If your army moves faster than theirs and move
into their hex, they may move into yours and escape. If you sit still,
they may not move into your hex. I'm not sure why things work this
way, but they do, and it's not that obvious from reading the rules.
From: afoss@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Aaron Foss)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: Galaxy: A modified battle algorithm
Date: 4 Jan 93 00:05:00 GMT
Organization: People-Net [pnet51], Minneapolis, MN.

I have to agree with jduffin.  Being that a turn last for one year, there is
hardly a chance of running out of time.  I think that part should be left as
is.
        On the other hand, it might sound stupid but, moral has never been an
issue in the game.  Sure all the people on the planets are mindless zombies
but the ones that get into the navy have to have a little bit of a mind. 
Maybe something like a moral rating for each group.  This brings up a another
point.
        The ability to form battle groups.  I think that it would be very
helpful.  When the group forms it has the speed of the slowest ship and shows
up on the group listing as one group.  A new catagory following ship types
wound be made that would look like:

Alpha Group:                1x "CA Vorkal"
                            3x "FF Death's Hand"
                            20x "Drone"

        This would be of great help to many players who have group lists in
the hundreds.
        I also think that some of the people on a planet should be able to
hide under the surface of a planet, and should be able to strike after a
couple of turns, on command of course.

        What do you think of these ideas?
afoss Supreme Commander of the Stellar Shiites
jduffin  Minister of Extremely Foreign Affairs
jlarson  Ayatollah of the Stellar Shiites
farley   Supreme Admiral Farley of the Grand Council
leroyjt  Proper Prime Minister of the Planet Israel
      
        "EMPIRE OF THE STELLAR SHIITES"
From: bc@fccn01.fccn.pt (Luis Miguel Sequeira)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: Galaxy Playing
Date: 7 Jan 1993 03:23:38 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

amead@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Alan Mead) writes:

>In my conceptualization, the galaxy computer player could be of one of
>two models.  Model 1 is like an expert system.
[etc.]

Ok - lots of work... :-)

But  I agree with  Alan, the system  _ought_ to work, and, with proper
tools (there are many,  even  freeware), you _could_  build  an expert
system to play Galaxy. As the Galaxy game is a closed system, ie., you
don't need to know that's snowing in Moscow to play  the game, and has
a  fixed set  or  rules,  with  their  meanings properly  expressed in
formulae, the computerised Galaxy player isn't just science-fiction...
:-)

There are even ways to get good heuristics for the game.  I'm thinking
about the  classification  some  Galaxy games use   to  show the "best
players" (The Tropanka  Power Index, Pankhurst's Galaxy game  'Beta').
On each turn, the  so-called "agents"   would choose rules to  improve
their "classification" on the "power index".  As this "power index" is
certainly based on lots of factors  (sorry, never bothered  to ask how
it _is_ calculated...) solely  based on the game,  it would provide an
excelent basis for the "agents" to know what is best to do,  ie., what
will improve their situation.


>I've even thought about running a computer tournament where only
>programs could play.  How many people would be interested in submitting
>code?  Not too many, I suppose :( 

Excelent suggestion.  Please  don't  start before  1999. I'll  have my
first version running by then. :-)

Seriously, the idea is neat (after all, they're  doing it on Diplomacy
with some success - and it's a much harder game! [even if it has fewer
rules...]) - but it still takes a _little precious time_ away... :-)

	- Luis Sequeira

  _________________________________________________________________________
 /
/
    _/     _/     _/  _/_/_/     Computer scientists do it byte by byte.
   _/     _/_/ _/_/ _/
  _/     _/ _/  _/  _/_/_/       "We don't ask for miracles to get the job
 _/     _/     _/       _/        done, we RELY upon them!"
_/_/_/ _/     _/  _/_/_/         

  bc@fccn01.fccn.pt                        Luis Miguel Sequeira
                                  Laboratorio Nacional de Engenharia Civil
  Phone 351-1-8482131 Ext. 2752   Centro Informatica/Grupo Sistemas Centrais
  "Don't call me, I'll call you"  Av. Brasil, 101 - 1700 Lisboa, Portugal
                                                                          /
_________________________________________________________________________/
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: Re: Galaxy: A modified battle algorithm
Date: 7 Jan 93 20:18:17 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

M22367@mwvm.mitre.org writes:
>If the above *is* true, then a round is already defined.  If not, perhaps it
>is the best definition and implementation of a "round".

This definitely is true.  Combat takes place in a sequence of rounds.
The ships fire in a random order in the round, except that if they are
destroyed before their turns come then they don't get to fire.  Once
every surviving ship with weapons has fired, next round, and so on.

                                        David desJardins
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
From: crip@Micor.OCUnix.on.ca (Garth Werner)
Subject: Re: DM
Organization: M.B. Cormier INC.
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 17:06:10 EST

johnjohn@cco.caltech.edu (John White) writes:
> Can't help you there.  My only AD warrior is in Darkholm.

        I am in 100,101and 102 now, but will switch from 100 to 103 next 
split.

> -minus DM sig.

        
        Praise Be!
From: Siegrist@elde.epfl.ch
Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm
Subject: pbem-game
Date: 6 Jan 93 10:20:39 GMT
Organization: CRPP-EPFL


    RMPM is a game where players wander around a 25 by 25 board, trying
to land on a space occupied by another player. There is no luck involved;
everything is based on your skill at planning your attack and avoiding others.
 
The second phase of the game involves setting up businesses that affect
the game on spaces where you have had encounters. Businesses can do
anything you can get the other players to agree on, at any price that
they are willing to pay.

   Interested?
   
   Send an e-mail to siegrist@elde.epfl.ch for more information

Newsgroups: rec.games.pbm