HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Alexx@world.std.com (Alexx S Kay)
Subject: Re: Several questions generated by a game.
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:52:46 GMT

ap1i+@andrew.cmu.edu (Andrew C. Plotkin) writes:
>Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.board.ce: 12-Dec-92 Re: Several
>questions gener.. Brian C. Kohn@hoqax.ho.a (861)

>> And therefore his conditions were invalid.  He must be able to win via
>> his own win conditions.

>I don't remember anything about having to be able to WIN by the extra
>condition -- you just have to make sure that everybody can MEET the
>winning condition. Which is true, for the example.

>I don't even agree that Schizoid cannot win by that condition. If he
>meets it, then he wins. Right? (I use the logical if/then, not the
>causal.) 

There exist (at least) one moon and comet which can give a player the use of
his powers without having home bases.  Depending on your house rules about
the timing of a win, the Schizoid might well be able to win under those
conditions.  It probably *is* still in his best interests to avoid it, barring
unusual circumstances (e.g., knowing that the Power Surge Moon is in his own
system, and being a multi-power with the Will, so he is likely to be able to
take that moon early in the game.)

Alexx

Alexx@world.std.com
"Can you dig it, Max?  Together again to usher in a whole new year - 1969!"
   "'69?  Captain, this is '83."
"Yeah, well, time's a trip, man."
		-- Captain Cloud
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
From: Alexx@world.std.com (Alexx S Kay)
Subject: Re: How do YOU carry CE/MCE around?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 17:34:54 GMT

A friend of mine keeps his set in a large round cookie tin :-)

Alexx

Alexx@world.std.com
"Good work, Max!  Hey, let's catch that freak show now.  I hear they have the
 best rodent-headed boy in the state!  Not counting yourself, of course."
    "I'm a *lagomorph*, Sam!  Look it up!"
"You crack me up, little pal!"          -- Sam and Max
From: weinberg@imager (George Weinberg)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board.ce
Subject: Re: Several questions generated by a game.
Date: 15 Dec 92 03:20:50 GMT
Organization: Laboratory for Experimental Astrophysics

With respect to an earlier note,  let me point out that not only is something which would make you lose your power clearly a valid schizoid condition if the wild witch is in the game,  it is valid if the wild witch could conceivably enter the game (you're playing with new lucre rules,   or one player is reincarnator who might become aristocrat,  or whatever.

Incidentally,  since if schizo is in the game wild schizo will also be in the game,  it is perfectly legitimate to have as your winning condition "must be playing green tokens" if you happen to start as green.

If I were playing Aristocrat-Schizo and said,  "I win" before the game starts,  would anyone bother to ask what my conditions were?

Mr. Grinch
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: charbonn@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (gary charbonneau)
Subject: Re: VGs Civil War question(s)
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:18:25 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.230627.22149@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> zippy@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (steven.s.albert) writes:


>> optional Lyon/Jackson rule.  With regard to the second statement, in
>> our games, BOTH sides tend to build up their armies to max strength.
>> I suspect differences in styles of play here.
>That's interesting.  I suspect it is a stylistic difference, but it also
>depends on the north.  In our game, the north didn't build lots of armies.
>One in the west under Grant with 25 sp and one in the east under Lyon
>with 25 sp.  They just plowed through everything I had.  I was able to
>delay for a while by picking off garrisons and occupying empty towns, but
>eventually the ANV got pushed out of Virginia when the Army of the James
>under Sherman was formed and hit Virginia too.

Whoa!  Max strength for a Western army is 20, so how you do that (unless
you promote him to four stars and move two armies at once)?

- Gary Charbonneau
  charbonn@silver.indiana.edu





Organization: Doctoral student, Mathematics, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 23:33:09 -0500 
From: Erik Lauer <el0g+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: A&A - I think I found it!!!!
 <BzC7F2.A1v@NeoSoft.com><b#arqbk@lynx.unm.edu> <WYATTW.92Dec17130427@tekig1.pen.tek.com>
	<1992Dec17.220335.1@vax.sonoma.edu>

>I never liked this rule.  I have aVERRRY strong suspicion that the original
>rules allowed the AXIS to win more often(largely due to this and multiple
>flak) and they got a lot of flak about "NAZI's WINNING WWII" from >somewhere.
>
>The new rules seem to make it almost impossible(and I DO mean that) as the
>game is originally set up.  You HAVE to resort to something like the No-Russia
>first-attack rule JUST to make it MORE even(It still is not quite).
>
>WHAT'S UP?  I feel that a NEW revision should be put out that makes the game
>even.
> 
>Joe

The newer revision makes it much easier for the axis than the old one. 
The second edition with the mod that captured original factories have
unlimited production make it easier still (though still heavily biased
towards the allies).

Look at how most AA games used to start (partial, just to show the main
problem):

Russia:  Attack Mancuria with 5 inf, tank, plane.  After 1 round retreat
to China.
Britian Attack Kwangtung, land fighter in China.  Build unlimited
production factory elsewhere.
US: Build unlimited production factory in China.  Neat!


Erik
---=
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: pca8c@Virginia.EDU ("Phil Abel")
Subject: Re: A&A: Why does America fight Germany?
Organization: University of Virginia Experimental Weapons Center
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:52:26 GMT

The whole russian front thing is a precarious situation, and
depends heavily on your opponents and relies partially upon
the luck of the dice... However, hypothetically speaking, this
would be my typical German response:

If USSR attacked Ukraine and I was Germany, I would send
everything into Karelia save for an aircraft or two to aid in
naval battles. I stand a fairly good chance of winning this
fight.

The allies would most certainly take Karelia right back. But,
as Germany, I would buy 6 armour on my first turn. Second turn
I would bowl into Karelia with the 6 armour, the two from
Western Europe, the 4 infantry left over from Germany, and any
aircraft I so desire. The final result is that I'm highly
likely to take it back for good.

The bottom line is that without outside help, Germany will
easily vanquish USSR. Thus, the USSR essentially must maximize
the time during which it can keep the German forces at bay.

I have even found that if USSR attacks Eastern Europe and buys
four armour and an infantry on its first turn, it can oftimes
take back Eastern Europe on the second turn with its remaining
forces. Risky, but effective.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Talisman questions
From: mnor1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Mark Hiro           Norman         )
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 12:31:42 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept. University of Auckland

In <3121@devnull.mpd.tandem.com> bruceb@mpd.tandem.com (Bruce Burden) writes:

>schrey@oak.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Timothy M. Schreyer) writes:

>>  How does everyone handle the "magic whirlwind" that can ensue when 
>>  someone has a player character who must maintain at least one spell?
>>  This character can draw and fire about four or five spells before
>>  hitting one which is not "as required" or "at any time".
>>
>	When I eventually setled on was defining the phrase "at the beginning
>    of the turn" as meaning exactly that. The beginning of the round ends
>    AS SOON AS some action is taken, such as casting a spell.

>	While it doesn't limit the "at any time" spells, you will probably
>    run into a "at the beginning of the turn" or an "as required" which
>    will stop your "magic whirlwind".

In my group, we normally use the rule that a spell can only be gained at
the beginning of a turn; so the wizard, sprite, wand-holder etc are kerbed
from total dominance. We settled on this one after a game with lots of
spell users AND the Gipsy, I think :-)

Of course if the spellcaster forgets to take their spell at the beginning
of their turn... too bad, they have to wait till next time.


>								Bruce
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Bruce Burden            bruceb@mpd.tandem.com         Tandem Computers Inc.


Lines: 33
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 13:51:47 MST
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: $stephan@sasb (Stephan Fassmann, Software)
Subject: Re: SFB vs GEV FAQ.
Keywords: SFB
Organization: BYU

In article <1992Dec16.204016.2410@st-andrews.ac.uk> ccjm@st-andrews.ac.uk (Colin Charles James MacDonald) writes:

>Precisely my point. ARE we taking about the same game? I do not own the
>Doomsday rules (ha ha I don't think) as I am (was) the proud possessor of
>the Commanders Rulebooks 1-3, the fighter and PF supplements and lots of SSD
>booklets. I didn't feel like paying top whack for a collection of volume 1
>and half of 2 just so I could get my boarding party and self destruct rules
>rewritten. Ten minutes and a photocopier were quite sufficient, thank you.
>SFB DOES have addenda. Not now, but addenda was brought out for it on sheets
>tacked on the end of some of the older rules, which I immediately lost.
>Do you see where the confusion comes in? If we were to play each other I
>would first have to spend some time familiarising myself with the new rules
>just to make sure that I did not commit a faux pas. Fair enough if we both
>use Doomsday, but we don't, do we? Are we talking about separate games? No,
>probably not. But there are enough differences to matter, which is my
>original point, and what annoys me most.
>
>Fair enough?
>
>-----
>Colin
>-----
Well, technically we are talking about different games, but they are vaery 
similiar, and differences are kind of annoying, but now that we know what 
the differences are they can be minimized.
Thanks for clearing that up, I nooticed your other messages about Fasa/SFB 
that helped too.
Read ya.
______________________________________________________________________________
|Stephan Fassmann       Internet: $stephan@sasb.byu.edu     GEnie: S.FASSMANN|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|         Reality is for those who cannot take Science Fiction               |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: narc@NeoSoft.com (John Lightsey)
Subject: Re: A&A - I think I found it!!!!
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 05:33:01 GMT
Summary: Rules dilema

In article <0f=EVYe00Vp3IEI0Zd@andrew.cmu.edu>, el0g+@andrew.cmu.edu (Erik Lauer) writes:
> oberland@vax.sonoma.edu , Joe writes:
> 
> >BAD play?  I have SHOWN that they have a bad choice to make.  Attack vs
> >defense.  IF they think that I will attack, then they buy defense.  The
> reverse
> >holds true.  My plan is to do the OPPOSITE of wehat they prepare for, thereby
> >forcing them into a worst-case battle.
> >They build i, I spread out and force them to go on the offensive,
> without extra
> >tanks.
> >They build a, I kill Karelia
> 
> OK, I have said many times what they do:
> They build 8 inf in Karelia, put only 1 inf in the Caucuses.  They have
> 19 inf, 3 tanks, 2 fighters in Karelia, 1 tank in Russia.  Please tell
> me what you build, and what you put where to make it so hard on them. 
> You will not tell me, I do not know why.
 
  Forgive me for my interuption, but I have a 1984 version of the game and
certain rules that were brought up from the newer version make this
impossible..  Since Karelias' IPC value is only 3 how can you build 8
infantry in it?  And, if you leave Russia with only one take what is to
stop Germany from attacking Caucaus with 1 fighter 1 bomber and 3 infantry
then blitzing through it and attacking Russia with 2 fighters and 2
tanks..  (Taking all of Russias money and basicly winning the game in the
first round)
> >
> >Does this sound acceptable?  I would like to show you whait looks like
> after one
> >round(the state of the world).
> 
> Sure.  I look foward to it, though it may have to occur after winter break, OK?
> 
 
  If you two decide to play a game out on the net might I suggest another
method of determining wins/losses in battles..  (This may have allready
been stated, but I'll go over it anyway)
 
  Add up each sides attack or defense value of its' pieces, divide this
number by 6 to determine the number of kills it inflicts, save any
remainder to add to the next round of fighting (Unless there will be no
other round in which case if the remainder is 4 or more it is considered a
kill..)  An example:  3 inf 1 tank attack 1 plane 1 inf..
 
  Attacker                           Defender
3i   1t         K   R                1p   1i             K   R
3    3          1   0                4    2              1   0
2    3          0   5                4    0              0   4
2    3          1   4                4    0              1   2
 
  Surviving forces are 1 inf and 1 tank from the attackers forces..
 
     Anyway..  Sorry if this seems redundant....
                              John
-- 
    narc@sugar.neosoft.com      narc@taronga.com
            <John Lightsey/Narcosynthesis>
  "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." -Tacitus
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: robert@geoblue.gcn.uoknor.edu (Robert Lindsay)
Subject: Re: VGs Civil War question(s)
Originator: usenet@kittyhawk.ecn.uoknor.edu
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 19:07:10 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Geosciences Computing Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK

In article <1992Dec16.182230.14187@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> zippy@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (steven.s.albert) writes:
>
>I'll have to check out the Clash of Arms game.  For those with an interest
>in the Civil War, but at a different level, let me put in a plug for the
>Great Battles of the American Civil War (GBACW) series that Richard Berg

A the risk of continuing to sound like a crank. I think that the GBACW system
is entirely too overwought. For instance, unlike in The Civil War, you have
to keep count of how many impulse in a row you've had, and their are all these
exceptions on when the other player get a impulse.
:wq

>did.  With the turn continuation stuff that was in the last games produced,
>he caught a lot of the flavor that's in TCW where you can't count on doing
>everything you want to.
>	Steve Albert
>	ssa@usl.com


From: brione@hpfcmdd.fc.hp.com (Brion Emde)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 22:21:11 GMT
Subject: Anyone played AMBUSH?
Organization: HP Mechanical Design Division
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Has anyone out there ever played the Victory Games game called Ambush.  It is
billed as a solitaire squad level tactical game.  I picked up a copy for my
Christmas present and would like to know what people think of it.  I haven't
had a chance to look at it yet, cuz it aint Christmas yet :-(

Thanks for your information,

Brion Emde
Hewlett-Packard Mechanical Design Division
Fort Collins, CO 80525
(303)229-4838
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: VG's new _Through Five Aprils_
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:09:39 GMT


I just saw a new Victory Games "pentagame" (5-game) release called _Through
Five Aprils_ (or something like that) in a local hobby shop.  It contains
grand-tactical level treatments of 5 major Civil War battles (including Pea
Ridge and Gettysburg--don't recall the others), using a common rules set
with a small group of excusive rules for individual battles.  The writeup
on the box claims short (1-5 hour) playing times, depending on the battle.
This appears to be basically an updated version of the old SPI "Blue and
Grey" series of quadrigames.  Has anybody checked this game out?
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: helen@pulua.hcc.Hawaii.Edu ()
Subject: SFB: FRAX?
Originator: helen@pulua
Organization: Honolulu Community College
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:00:48 GMT

With all this talk about the FRAX going on, has anyone played it
in a game or two?



Honolulu Community College            cs_rapozo@hccadb.hcc.hawaii.edu
874 Dillingham Blvd.                  helen@pulua.hcc.hawaii.edu
Honolulu, HI 96817                    rapozo@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu
Ph#: (808) 845-9202
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: kogoma@vesta.unm.edu (Taki Kogoma)
Subject: Re: SFB: Starbase Augmentation Modules
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 02:58:41 GMT
Organization: Nit-Pickers for a Better Tomorow Afternoon
Keywords: SFB, Starbases

In article <gl#@byu.edu> $stephan@sasb (Stephan Fassmann, Software) writes:
>What was disgusting was looking up the weapons for the Tholian SB Weapon 1 
>is a Ph-4!!!!!. You are facing 6 more Ph-4s than normal and I was wondering 
>why the Klingons have such a hard time cracking the tholian Capital. Not any 
>MOre. Ugh. Now add a Rocky Road Redux Wedding Cake, Ph-4 ground bases on 
>asteriods on the corners of the second layer of the cake with lots of phaser 
>captor mines in the sencond layer as well as the first. Now add barracks, 
>fighter, and PF modules and a couple of WEb Tenders, a Tholian D 
>Dreadnaught (more phasers, can go out and recharge the first layer 
>"safely"), and lots of PC's and DD's (lots of Ph-1's) the Klingons and 
>Romulans have a very bad day.The only one who might have a chance would be 
>Andro's but it would NOT be pretty maybe only with a Devastator BB. Would 
>you want to try an assault on something like that?

Actually, the latest Tholian web trick (as of the CL #10) is called
the 'Tholian Buzz-saw'.  Picture a 2-armed spiral of web with the
base at the center.  Since you've set up in an asteroid field like any
sane Rockhead, you have several good choices of anchor points, just
make sure that each 'arm' wraps around far enough to provide you with
at least 2 layers of protection.  Since the base is connected to each
arm, the outer web as strong as the base and associated ships can
maintain it.  For more fun, fill each 'alley' with mines to taste.

(If this is illegal, go bug TFG, they published it as the 'best
term-paper'.)

My only regret is that I considered this configuration years ago, but
never had a chance to test it (nor ever thought about sending it in.
;-)

-- 
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk  (Known to some as Taki Kogoma)  kogoma@vesta.unm.edu
 I'll get a life when someone demonstrates that it would be superior to
                          what I have now...
Lines: 56
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 14:42:04 MST
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: $stephan@sasb (Stephan Fassmann, Software)
Subject: Re: SFB vs GEV FAQ.
Keywords: SFB
Organization: BYU

In article <1992Dec11.110152.25471@st-andrews.ac.uk> ccjm@st-andrews.ac.uk (Colin Charles James MacDonald) writes:
[...]
>>>Is a Rules Lawyer one who KNOWS rules, or one who ARGUES rules for hours on
>>>end? 
>>
>>The latter. I can hear the whining voice complaining even now "Yeeeew can't
>>dooooo that! Rule 56.2.a says that isn't possible." Especially when the
>>person is wrong.  And even after the argument is over, I can hear them 
>>either gloating or complaining. I've nearly given up games because of rules
>>lawyers...
>> 
>>-Shelley Louie
>>Digital is illusion. Life is analog.
>

In my definition there are:
-Novices: They know the rules that you tell them.
-Players: They have the rules but are not interested in optional/advanced 
rules.
-Rules Lawyers: They like to play with most of the rules (there is no way to 
play ALL the rules). Generally Power-Gamers.
-Rules Rapists: They argue rules to death trying to do something that really 
isn't allowed but you let them do it after two hours because you are tired 
of listening to them. I usually never play with them again and sometimes 
walk out on them. This person everyone hates.

>
>Oh damn. I'd like to totally destroy your comments in a witty and incisive
>manner, but I can't. I like SFB, but, bugger it, I'll come out of the closet
>and say it...
>STAMP OUT SUPPLEMENTS.
>SFB is a nice game (OK, if you limit sides and points :) ) but it's a shame
>that there are as many different versions of it as there are players. I HATE
>HATE HATE playing with new people, those moments of fear and tredipation when
>you fire your shotgun and they say "Oh, we outlawed them YEARS ago.".
>Nasty, isn't it? Errata I like, if it clears things up, but...
>Let's all chant: NO MORE ADDENDA, NO MORE ADDENDA.
>
>-----
>Colin
>-----
I wonder if we are talking about the same game. The SFB put out by ADB and 
TFG doesn't have addenda, it has erratta (fixing of mistakes). It hasn't 
had addenda since Doomsday came out and never will. That was the whole idea 
of the Captains Edition. 
House rules are a pain but if I can go to the rulebook and find it and they 
say it is only a house rule well shucks to them for not telling me to begin 
with. If you are at a con and they aren't using the Tournement Book 1991 
then it wasn't really worth going to. That defines all the rules you can 
use, and gives you the ships to play too. 
Enjoy,
______________________________________________________________________________
|Stephan Fassmann       Internet: $stephan@sasb.byu.edu     GEnie: S.FASSMANN|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|         Reality is for those who cannot take Science Fiction               |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: stanford@leland.Stanford.EDU (Scott Stanford)
Subject: F&E: # players to use?
Organization: none whatsoever
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 04:17:37 GMT

Well, seeing as F&E seems to be crawling up on the net, I guess there
ARE a few people who play it (I tend to get frustrated with all the
bookkeeping (any good tips?)).  Anyway, maybe I'll have to dust it off
and play it again.  My question is for people that are playing the
historical game (General War).  How many people do you have on a side?
Just one person running the allies and one the axi...coalition?  Or
one to a race, several to a race?  How do you like playing with that
number of people?

Scott
-- 
Scott Stanford                 |)  Eenie meenie miney moe.
stanford@leland.stanford.edu  /|   Catch a tiger by the toe.
                             ((|,) If he hollers...yeah whatEVER.
"MORE Doctah Peppah!!"        ~|~  He's EATIN' your ass.  Run, you idiot.