HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: brandon@nlm.nih.gov (Brandon Brylawski)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Interested in TITAN variants...
Date: 18 Aug 92 00:31:24 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: National Library of Medicine
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

This is not a full-bore variant, but just a rule we used to eliminate some
of the runs of terrible bad luck one occasionally has, as well as add an
extra dimension to certain situations.

Everyone gets one (or two) mulligan markers at the beginning of the game.
These can be used (a) to reroll your turn die ; (b) reroll all of the dice
just thrown in one monster attack, yours or your opponents. Once used, the
markers are gone forever.

A humorous monster to add to the game without changing much is the
Juggernaut, recruited by two guardians or two warlocks in a Tower only.
It's a 30 - 1 and ignores all terrain (due to being huge).
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich)
Subject: Re: Axis & Allies, some Q and A.
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 17:35:15 GMT

In article <63963@cup.portal.com> Patrick_Andrew_Barnes@cup.portal.com writes:
>among A&A players.  During noncombat movement you may land planes on other
>players' carriers.  If that other player then moves the carrier into combat
>on the next turn, are your planes allowed to participate?  Or must they
>remain on the carrier and take part in the combat since they would be
>attacking on another player's turn?  I would assume it is the latter, but

If a carrier is involved in combat, it's planes are assumed to be in the
air.  Also, if attacking, the movement factors for the planes start from
where the carrier is (so you cannot move the carrier 2, then the fighters
out 2 and back 2).  
If you have your planes on an ally's carrier and that carrier moves, your
fighters get a free move.  But, your planes would not get to attack with
the rest of an attacking force.

The first point here is in the rules, I'm not sure about the second,
though the closest thing I could think of to relate it to is the
Commander-in-Chief rule that was removed when the Second Edition Rules
were released.  Since someone's bound to ask, the Second Edition Rules
were released circa 1987 and are the ones that, among other things,
limit the production of units at new industrial complexes.
From: haralkar@plusplus.is (Haraldur Karlsson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Down with the king
Date: 13 Aug 92 10:52:00 GMT
Organization: Plusplus Inc., Reykjavik, Iceland

mathers@sibelius.trl.oz.au (Steven Mathers) writes:


>Has anyone played this game?  I have only played 3/4 of one game, but I
>can see what they were trying to do.  [. . .]

I've played that game a few times, but never with played the three last
rounds that are needed to win.
It seems to me that the main force of the players goes into smothering
each other and looking at the Throne as a secondary object.
The game is fun at times, but long played.

--
Haraldur Karlsson,| Tel. +354-1-620250   | '... but when the ghouls found they 
Plusplus Inc.     | Fax. +354-1-622819   |  [the rubies] where not good to eat 
Laugavegi 13,     | haralkar@plusplus.is |  they lost all interest in them'
101 Reykjavik,    |                      |   Dreamquest of Unknown Kadath, HPL.
ICELAND.          +----------------------+-------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: farrell@kiwi.cis.ohio-state.edu (christopher k farrell)
Subject: Re: Magic Realm review
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Computer and Information Science
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:13:16 GMT

In article <peters.713592193@physics.ubc.ca> peters@physics.ubc.ca (Dan Peters) writes:
>christopher k farrell writes:
>
>>              It's got about 30 pages of not terribly well written rules.
>>Expect to spend a while saying "what the hell?".  
>
>Sounds like the 1st edition rules. The "long lost" 2nd edition is well written,
>but (if I remember correctly) something like 80 pages. The biggest reason for
>the huge increase in size is simply the elimination of ambiguities and
>contradictions (e.g. certain combinations of spells and/or magic items don't
>make sense without added clarification). (BTW there are a few outright changes
>as well.)

	I was actually referring to the 2nd Edition rules, which still could be
a lot better (although they are much better than the 1st edition).  I would
have preferred more helpful examples; the ones in there are pretty 
straightforward, when what we really need is a example of the "worst case"
scenario (say a combat with multiple groups of natives, some of which are
only battling certain characters, some hired natives, multiple characters,
and some spell users, just for fun, and a couple of the the characters have
magic items).  This could be in addition to the simple example.

	OK, on balance the 2nd Ed. are a lot better (especially in the optional
rules section), but still leave room for imporvement.

						Chris

-- 
"Oh, what a wondrous piece of work is a man, how noble in reason, how infinite
in faculties,  In form and moving how express and admirable, in action how like
an angel, in aprehension how like a god ..." - Hamlet
"If all you told was turned to gold - if all you dreamed were new ..." - Enya
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,rec.games.board.ce
From: irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith)
Subject: Re: Cosmic Encounter Question ?
Originator: irilyth@fenris
Organization: HMC Academic Computing Services
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 15:18:39 GMT

In an article on rec.games.board, Dan Mazina (danm@cpqhou.compaq.com) writes:
> 	I have a question with the new Mayfair Games version of Cosmic
> 	Encounter. The question is what exactly do the allies get in
> 	a challange where one side plays a compromise card but the
> 	other side plays an attack card? [rest deleted for brevity]

The winning allies get normal rewards: winning offensive allies land on the
planet with the winning offensive player (barring other weirdness), or
winning defensive allies get a card from the deck or a token from the warp
for each token committed.

I don't actually have the rules in front of me, so I don't know why this
wasn't clear or how I'd interpret what the rules actually say. This is
definitely the way we've played it, though, and I think it's the correct
interpretation.
-- 
original text by Josh Smith    ::   Comments, questions, etc. welcomed
irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu   ::   #include <std.disclaimer>
"If you ever fall off the Sears Tower, just go real limp, because maybe you'll
look like a dummy and people will try to catch you because, hey, free dummy."
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: ksoutor@unlinfo.unl.edu (kevin soutor)
Subject: STARFIRE/NEW EMPIRES
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 05:25:36 GMT

Anyone remember these two games published by Task Force Games?
I have two questions:

 - Does anyone know if TFG is going to release them again?
 - Does anyone have a copy that they would like to sell?  My
   rule sets for SF and NE are in the Lost Game Limbo to which
   everything you REALLY want or need goes eventually.

Drop me a line if you have the time!

Kevin

ksoutor@unlinfo.unl.edu
--
       Kevin Soutor        | "Buzzards gotta eat, same as worms!" |
 ksoutor@unlinfo.unl.edu   |               -- Outlaw Josey Wales  |
From: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: JUNTA - help please
Date: 20 Aug 92 10:59:26 GMT
Reply-To: gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley)

ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (Alec Habig) writes...

> Now I've got a question : according to the rules, each player can move
1 (one!)
> stack per turn during the fighting in a coup.  Since the coup lasts
for such a
> short time (3 turns??), how does anything ever happen (especially if
you're the
> guy with the police spread out all over, or have a few extra mobs under your
> control).

   You've misread the rules. A coup lasts 6.5 turns (the rebel phase and
6 normal phases). Once the fighting starts in any one phases, it lasts 3
volleys. Thus every player gets potentially 7 stack moves and 21 volleys
(depending if you are rebel or loyal). Also the police get to immediate
bunch up if any red units come in in the first coup phases (Police
Response rule).

+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| Gary Bradley        |   "You receive a love letter from me and |
| ORACLE Corp, UK     |                  you're f*cked forever!" |
| Edinburgh, SCOTLAND |        - Frank Booth ("Blue Velvet")     |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------+
| "God damn the censor man"                                      |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: darragh@maths.tcd.ie (Darragh J. Delany)
Subject: Re: Advanced 3rd Reich
Organization: Dept. of Maths, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 19:36:12 GMT

che755v@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au writes:

>Tags:
>      JB - Jon Baker
>      SM - demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
>      TK - exukozi@exu.ericsson.se (Tom Koziatek)

>TK> It wasn't that absurd. Prior to the Lusitania, there was a lot of Pro-German
>                                        ^^^^^^^^^
>Didn't the sinking of the Lusitania occur in the First World War ?? (Or am I
>confused)

No, you are quite right, incidentally there is currently a dispute raging here
over who owns the wreck. The Lusitania was laden with gold and some of it was 
not recovered by the RN salvage mission.

>TK> Britain made a few anti-US mistakes, we could have entered on the opposite
>TK> side. What would the US reaction to say, a British sub sinking the Lusitania ??

Not likely, perhaps during the Great War but not WWII, the question was over US
isolation, help for the U.K. or outright alliance with U.K., alliance with 
the German Reich never really arose after 1936. 

>One of the amazing things (to me) is that when a German sub did sink a US
>destroyer, with the loss of 115 lives, the US still refused to budge (they
>jumped at much less after the Gulf of Tonkin incident!)

Iraqi attack on US vessels failed to trigger war, these incidents are not
so much reasons for war as causus belli to be used when it suits a governments
strategic goals.

>On another note (while we are talking about the US entering the war) I am
>lead to believe that the Australian government was very worried in the
>latter stages of 1941 that a Japanese attack concentrating solely on
>British possesions (esp. Australia!) [and perhaps the Dutch East Indies??]
>would not provoke US involvement.  Consequently they were relieved (as
>Churchill is supposed to have been) when news of the attack on Pearl
>Harbour came.  After that they went into fright all over again when they
>heard how devastating the attack had been.

There is a body of thought which holds that british intelligence knwew about
Pearl Harbour in advance but failed to warn the USA in order to embroil them in
the war. However all this speculation is slightly beyond the scope of this 
group and is more a historical question than a boardgaming one.

-- 
Dj.

ESS students don't have plans, silly
From: c9106225@cc.newcastle.edu.au (Matt McLeod)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Machiavelli (was: A&A vs Dip.)
Date: 18 Aug 92 07:52:13 GMT
Organization: Dept of Management, Uni of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA

In article <1992Aug17.025544.2561@trl.oz.au>, mathers@sibelius.trl.oz.au (Steven Mathers) writes:
> In a nutshell, Machiavelli is Diplomacy with garrisons.  A garrison must
> be taken by siege, which takes 3 turns.  You may convert from fleets to
> armies to garrisons or something like that.  Plus it is a different map.
> If you have either, I wouldnt bother purchasing the other.

There's a tad more than that to Machiavelli (at least as played on the Judge). 
You also have a currency system, and all units have maintainance costs etc. 
Also, there are the bribes (buy unit, disband unit, rebellion, etc) and
counter-bribes.  Plus the assassination chits, the bank, the
Militia/Mercenary/Elite Mercenary units.  And probably a heap more that I
forgot.

If you want to give Machiavelli a try-out, send the message HELP to
judge@u.washington.edu for info on how to get a PostScript map, rules summary,
etc.

To the best of my knowledge Machiavelli is no longer in print.


Matt

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Matt McLeod                                                                  |
| Programmer, Writer and General Computing Dogsbody                            |
| c9106225@brolga.newcastle.edu.au                                             |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|                               Share and Enjoy!                               |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: mikeehli@cie.uoregon.edu (Mike Ehli)
Subject: Re: Eurorails house rules
Originator: mikeehli@cie.uoregon.edu
Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 05:51:17 GMT

Our group was sufficiently annoyed by the ferry-crossing rules to make
the following house rule:

a) A train need not stop at a ferry milepost if it has used less than
   half of its normal movement rate; if a train's movement for the turn
   includes a ferry crossing, then the movement is at half rate.
   (i.e. if a 12-speed train used five or less moves to get to the ferry
   milepost, it may cross as if the crossing were a normal move, but may
   only move a total of six mileposts.  If the train uses six or more
   to reach the ferry, it still must stop as per the normal rules.)
   [This eliminates the frustrating situation of practically losing a turn
   if you are forced to end your move one milepost short of the ferry;
   now the most one can lose is half a turn, which will occur about half
   as often]
b) A train may make only one ferry crossing per turn.
   [thereby eliminating the possibility of crossing to Dublin/Belfast
   and back on the same turn.  Or Holland, too, now that I think about it.]

--Mike

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: woodhams@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Michael Woodhams)
Subject: Re: Eurorails house rules
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University Observatory
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:05:05 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.043527.11891@ll.mit.edu> shoham@ll.mit.edu (Daniel Shoham) writes:
>In article <16r9qhINN2dl@grapevine.EBay.Sun.COM> wag@georwell.EBay.Sun.COM writes:
>>Has anyone posted a set of house rules or variants for
>>Eurorails?  If so, could they repost or email me direct?
>
We usually always run a full train so that if you get a derailment,
you can lose a worthless load, and you might get lucky and draw a card
for a large amount of money to deliver those oranges you've had
sitting in your train for 4 months. 

Sometimes, somebody is running round in a train full of (say) surplus timber,
and you want some timber but there is none to be had. We play a house
rule that if you want to collect a load, but there is none left, you
can take it from somebody else UNLESS THEY HAVE ORDER CARDS FOR IT.
They must have as many order cards for timber as they have timber
loads on their train. It does not matter if they are intending to use
that card to deliver a different load.

We used to have a house rule "I get to use the red crayon" because in
the first game we played, everyone but me broke their crayon.
Unfortunately, at some stage there was a game I wasn't in, and the red
crayon got broken too. :-( (The yellow crayon is still unused, because
it is next to invisible.)

Michael W.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (Alec Habig)
Subject: Re: JUNTA - help please
Organization: Indiana University Astrophysics, Bloomington, IN
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 16:56:27 GMT

In article <2684@nlsun1.oracle.nl> gbradley@uks197.Berkeley.EDU (Gary Bradley) writes:
>1) Since money must go through the bank, doesn't this mean people will
>simply target the bank for assassinations all the time (especailly the
>Minister) on the basis that SOMEONE is probably going there?

No, because you have to specify "General X at place Y" (just like in "Clue").
Not everyopne goes to the bank every turn.  Also, assasination attempts aren't
free - there's some penalty involved or you have to play a card (my memory
fails me as to exactly what).

>2) When the president draws the yearly budget money, isn't it going to
>obvious if he keeps some back for himself since everyone will know how
>many notes he drew. How can the President hide the fact that he is
>skimming money??

Well, everyone KNOWS that the president is skimming money anyway.  Who
wouldn't?  What they don't know is how much.  This is a great part of the game
- exactly how much can the president appear to be skimming and get away with
it?  How much does he pay out, and to whom, to keep enough people on his side
in a coup?

>3) Does a single game have a high death rate for the players?

What's high?  You can expect to die once or twice a game, at least with the
people I play with.

>4) Is the Minor JUNTA game (2 & 3 players) worth playing?

I haven't tried it, but it didn't sound real good.


Now I've got a question : according to the rules, each player can move 1 (one!)
stack per turn during the fighting in a coup.  Since the coup lasts for such a
short time (3 turns??), how does anything ever happen (especially if you're the
guy with the police spread out all over, or have a few extra mobs under your
control).

We read that rule, and immediately made the house rule that each unit you have
can move once per turn.

Has anyone tried the way the rules suggest?  If so, how does it work, and/or
how are we interpreting it wrong?

	Alec
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: (Advanced) 3R - House rules
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 17 Aug 92 14:47:52 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <14322@mindlink.bc.ca>, Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes:
> Here's a question which would have been more usefully asked five years ago:
> 
> "How many 3R players use(d) house rules, by either ignoring restrictions in the
> rules or allowing actions not permitted by the rules?"
...
> Those who have used house rules in 3R would be doing me an additional kindness
> by saying what they were (in summary form) - I'm doubly curious to see how many
> of them wound up in A3R.

	West wall extends to Swiss border.  
	Conscripts rule (use diplomacy table and population figures to compute
# of units).  
	No Italian airborne.
	No German unit restrictions in Africa (if certain conditions are met).
	Nazi regimes in France/Spain/Turkey allow their entrance as major
powers (prompting increased US committments).  Also increased Russian
committments if Turkey enters.
	Germany can negate Russian winter rule by spending 10 BRPs in the fall
turn.
	Any city (not isolated) can become a fortress for 10 BRPs.  Any city
isolated for eight consecutive turns loses fortress status.
	US gets two airborne units.
	Revolt in occupied countries--double current partisans  This could be
brought about via diplomacy tables.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: yoo@netcom.com (Young-Kyu Yoo)
Subject: Re: Ratings in Scrabble (was Re: Scrabble Tournaments)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 07:25:54 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: na

kenward@cs.sfu.ca (Kenward Chin) writes:
>I'm a semi-avid Scrabbler, but have never heard of a ranking system.  Is
>it like unto chess, where you establish a ranking through playing already
>ranked players, or is it a score calculated from your average Scrabble
>scores?  (Or, is it something completely different?)

It's like unto chess...ratings are established through play in 
tournaments.  Unlike chess, though, non-tournament games against 
rated players do not factor in your rating.  

I see your e-mail address places you in San Francisco.  You might like to
check out the Scrabble club that meets weekly in Oakland (there isn't one
in SF).  It meets every Saturday at 12:15 at the Montclair Park
Clubhouse.  Send me mail if you'd like more info.
From: canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: Mech Editor available for ms-dos
Date: 19 Aug 92 14:12:01 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

In article <Bt7814.57w@apollo.hp.com> carlton@apollo.hp.com (Carl Hommel) writes:
>I have uploaded the file meched32.zip to the UMich archive.  It should
>be available after the usual delay.  Use ftp or /afs to access the
>file after it becomes available.

	Please, what is the full address of the "UMich archive"; I am
unfamiliar with it.

Thanks,
Carl

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Edlund Anderson	            	"Hefi ek ok aldri sva reitt vapn
canders@isr.harvard.edu			at manni at eigi hafi vidh kommit."
OR
anderso2@husc.harvard.edu			- Skarphedhinn Njalsson 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: melissa@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Melissa C Merrill)
Subject: Supremacy
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 01:09:22 GMT


Saw this game, and was wondering what other thought about it. thanks.

Mark
From: ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (Alec Habig)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Machiavelli (was: A&A vs Dip.)
Date: 19 Aug 92 12:03:17 GMT
Organization: Indiana University Astrophysics, Bloomington, IN

In article <1992Aug19.071513.18942@nntp.hut.fi> gvbraun@vipunen.hut.fi (Toni Kotinurmi) writes:
>I got all of those ( since Machiavelli seemed much more interesting than
>diplomacy, what I have read about ). Is it worth buying the diplomacy set
>in order to play Machiavelli ? Anybody know if the authority ( AH propably,
>I have the info somewhere ) sells just the rules without the mapboard,
>I really don't want to pay postage of the whole set.

Machiavelli is not an expansion to diplomacy - although they share the same
style, it is a separate game.  AH sells individual game parts, but these are
pricey enough that you might as well order the whole game.  Especially when you
consider counters etc (even if you already have a postscript map).

If you run into it at a game store, but it and WiF.  Machiavelli is a much
cheaper game (~$20, but that's probobly out of date) than WiF ($50 or so).

	Alec
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)
Subject: Re: Other 1830 questions
Originator: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 17:00:04 GMT

From article <9845@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>, by brendan@cs.uq.oz.au (Brendan Mahony):
> In <1992Aug16.183403.5653@uwm.edu> bruno@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III) writes:
> 
>>There doesn't seem to be any rules for how to carry out the bidding for private
>>companies.
> 
> Read the rules they are there.
> 
> Basic procedure is that each person can:
> 
> 	Buy the top card or
> 	Bid on any unsold card
> 
> When a card with bids on it comes to the top, all those with bids on it
> enter into a competitive auction.
> 
So far so good. However there are no rules for how the competitive auction
is to take place.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board