HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bakerj@gtephx.UUCP (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: Advanced Third Reich Question
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 21:28:01 GMT

In article <28AUG199218053210@vxcrna.cern.ch>, casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE) writes:
> In article <14675@mindlink.bc.ca>, Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes...
> >Does anyone who is familiar with Adavnced Third Reich have an opinion
> >concerning the following question:
> >23.2, 29.552, 31.2:  Do exploiting Axis armor units lose
> >their automatic supply status after a Russian Winter die
> >roll of "5" or "6"?
> 
> Presumably the reason for the question is that a 5 (or 6) result says "armor
> units are treated like infantry".

Right, basically, your vehicles are bogged/frozen/stuck/unusable.

> At first glance, it seems a bit extreme.  The idea of whole tank units just
> disappearing sends chills down my spine.  I should state though that I have a

I don't think whole tank units are disappearing, per se, they're just frozen
in place.  You can go back in the spring and get them.  Well, since they're
stuck in the mud in spring, you can go back the next summer and get them.

> conflict of interest since I am currently in an A3R campaign game as the
> Axis...
> 
> Since they are treated like infantry, it is effectively as if they are in
> limited supply rather than unlimited, as they would normally be.  This seems
> like a reasonable enough restriction.

Presumably, the exploiting units are fully in supply following their
exploitation because they brought sufficient supplies with them to carry
them through the next season.  The fact that the weather has turned sour
does not mean that those supplies are instantly gone.  All that means, is
that their vehicular component is not usable.  The infantry component still
has all necessary supplies to conduct an offensive.

I second Mr. Casper's opinion - the armor units are treated as if they were
in limited supply.

J.Baker.
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:45:02 EDT
From: Carl Fago <CDF1@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Europa

I have been thinking about the Europa game system and considering whether
it would be worth it to purchase part of it (the campaign areas that I am
interested in.)  So I am soliciting comments on Europa.

Specific questions...

(1)  Is it still being published?

(2)  I have heard that there were problems with the rules and it was
evolving.  Is this still the case?

(3)  What are the various titles available and what are the campaigns
that they apply to?

(4)  What do you think of the game?  Good or bad.

Thanks in advance!

 *-=Carl=-*  INTERNET - cdf1@psuvm.psu.edu    | Be wary of strong drink.     |
             DELPHI - WULFGAR  GEnie - C.FAGO1| It can make you shoot at tax |
 Carl Fago   State College, PA                | collectors -- and miss!      |

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: stefano@bmdhh181.bnr.ca (Stefano Cascarini)
Subject: Re: Flat Top
Organization: BNR Europe Ltd, Maidenhead, UK
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 17:06:33 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.145608.6912@newshost.unh.edu>, sjk@kepler.unh.edu (Stephen J Kenny) writes:
|> For YEARS now, I've had Flat Top sitting on my shelf, counters
|> seperated, rules read and (somewhat) digested.
|> But I've never played it. Can't seem to find opponents in
|> my area.
|> Has anyone played this game, and can you tell me how it went?
|> (It seems fairly complex, but no more so than, say, ASL).

I played Flat Top a lot a few years back, my main memory of it is how ill 
I always felt afterwards. A combination of sitting for hours staring at the
board, intense frustration trying to get enough search planes up, fear when 
my carriers were sighted and disbelief when that carefully planned strike 
is shot out of the sky by CAP and AA without so much as sinking a destroyer. 

So as you can probably tell it's the most fun game I have ever played (bar none).

I have seen some quibbles about speeds and ranges of the A/C but I don't 
think they really detract from the game, the complexity is a lot less than ASL, 
and I'm told if you can get a referee and play blind the game is better again. 


Stef Cascarini BNR LTD   - No email please it won't reach me !
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,news.groups
From: eychaner@suncub.bbso.caltech.edu (Another casualty of applied metaphysics)
Subject: Re: rec.games.strategic controversy
Reply-To: eychaner@suncub.bbso.caltech.edu
Organization: Big Bear Solar Observatory, Caltech
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:20:02 GMT

os9ug@gkcl.ists.ca (OS-9 User Group) writes:
>ahabig@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (Alec Habig) writes:
>>
>>1) rec.games.board is a mid to low volume newsgroup.  In any usenet group,
>>there are going to be things you are not interested in.  [...]  If anyone
>>thinks rec.games.board is too much, suscribe to several other newsgroups
>>with a similar scope, and see what the volume is!
>
>As someone recently mentioned, proportion is more relevant than volume.

Sure, but that's not to say that volume is irrelevant...

>I think there is another problem here.  Apparently people who play the
>wargamer/simulation brand games, and who no doubt have only a minimal
>interest in seeing posts about checkers, shogi, etc., except those of
>us who want to read about checkers, shogi, etc., to have to wade through
>all their posts.  So far every objection has come from a "gamer" --

If you don't like wading through all the "irrelevant" postings here, then
create your OWN group for discussing the kind of game YOU are interested
in.  Or create a mailing list.  Don't create ME a new group and expect ME
to use it.  (I'm not particularly interested in Btech, but I get by...)

>So I guess I have to ask:  Since you don't play these games, why do you
>care?  And why do you insist that we read your posts?

Actually, I do care; I am interested in a wide variety of games.  And I
don't insist that you read "my" posts; if you want to create your own
group for discussing your own games, then fine.  I have no objections to
that.  But I do object to you taking over a group which I am perfectly
happy with, and throwing me out of it.

-G.
******************************************************************************
Glenn Eychaner, Big Bear Solar Observatory, California Institute of Technology
NSI/DECnet: SUNCUB::EYCHANER        Internet: eychaner@suncub.bbso.caltech.edu
USmail: 40386 North Shore Lane                eychaner_g@caltech.edu
        Big Bear City, CA  92314    Phone: (714) 866-5791 or (818) 356-4014
                                           (909) after November 14, 1992
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,rec.games.frp
From: jchaiken@nyx.cs.du.edu (Jarett  Chaiken)
Subject: Re: BattleTech MechEditor -- Whatta Piece of Work!
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 01:00:01 GMT

cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:



>(directory \pub\MSDOS_UPLOADS).  All I can say is "Wow!"  It's 
>amazing!  It actually makes it EASY to design 'Mechs!  I've designed
>about ten or twenty already.

No Kidding.  Its GREAT!  I can't picture playing BTECH w/o it.

>The only problem with it is that it won't print to an ascii file on 
>disk for some reason--it says something is wrong with the printer.
>Oh well.

Henry and I just got off the phone and we discussed this.  The Mecheditor
will only print to a txt file if there is a printer available. (it wont
use it, but it has to be there)

I am working on upgrades to his program now.  It will be written in C, and will
have some more features.  Henry  doesn't plan to make another DOS version of
Mechedit.  He is working on a Windows version now.  

>Kudos to the program's designer (can't remember his name) for such
>a great game utility!

Henry Link is his name.

--
Jarett D. Chaiken
jchaiken@nyx.cs.du.edu







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: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 17:49:09 GMT

From article <1992Aug21.185925.22591@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, by mitton@dave.enet.dec.com (Dave Mitton):
> 
> And Secondly, there is nothing stopping you from purposely buying more
> trains that you do have room for.  The excess train(s) must be returned
> to the Bank Pool with no compensation to the RR.  See Rule 21.0, para 2,
> 4th sentence. 
> 
This what I thought at first two, but I found an example in the rules where
they state that you are able to buy the first 5 train when already holding
a 3 and a 4 train *because* the two train limit doesn't apply until after
the first 5 train has been bought. This comment seems to imply that if someone
else already has a 5 train that you wouldn't be able to purchase a 5 train and
return the 3 or 4 train to the bank.

> "A Corporation with excess trains must immediately return the surplus to the
> Bank.  No payment is made for them but they may be re-sold by the Bank as an
> alternative to whatever other trains are on offer if they are of a type still
> in use.  Re-sale is at face value"

We figured this rule was for when another corporation purchased a new train
type that reduced the number of trains you were allowed to have, not that
you could buy extras and turn in some trains after doing so.
> 
> You can just push out your obsolete trains this way.  This rule leaves
> it to the RR to decide what to return to the Bank.
> 
> Furthermore, as Alan Applebaum pointed out in his "Bed of Steel" General
> article... this can be used to screw other players.  Combined with the rule
> that says that a  Corp. must buy the cheapest Bank train availible, before
> dipping into the President's cash. By causing a soon-to-be obsolete train to
> show up in the Bank just before another cash-poor Corp needs to buy a train,
> you can cause him to waste money on that train, and be in trouble again when it
> quickly becomes retired.

Actually I didn't even think there was a problem with buying extra trains
and turning in ones you didn't want until I read his article. He mentioned
that you shouldn't own two 3 trains because if you don't get the first 5 train
you will eventually not be able to pay dividends if you don't own another
corporation that will allow you to shuffle trains around. Since you can't buy
another train once someone else gets a 5, you have to wait until your trains
get flushed by someone else buying a 6.
> 
> 	Dave Mitton.
> 
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: seurer@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Bill Seurer)
Subject: Re: World in Flames/Planes in Flames
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 20:00:10 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester

I am interested in WiF but have a question.

How does the air combat work?  What does PiF add that WiF was missing?
-- 

- Bill Seurer     Language and Compiler Development      IBM Rochester, MN
  Internet: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com    America On-Line: BillSeurer@aol.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: dave@admiral.uucp (Dave Litchman)
Subject: Re: BTECH:  Jade Falcon Source Book
Organization: The Admiral's Unix System & The Grid BBS
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 07:04:35 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.152622.21769@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> velardeb@tramp.Colorado.EDU (VELARDE BRANDON CRAIG) writes:
>I just purchased the Jade Falcon source book, and I noticed that there are
>a few 'mechs in the Turkina Keshik that I don't recognize.  Two names that
>I didn't recognize are the Turkina, and the Black Gyr.  I believe there was
>one called the Lenner also.  Does anybody have any info on these 'mechs?
>

They're not described in the sourcebook itself?


-- 
"Dammit Jim, I'm a free man, not a number!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ray, when somebody asks you if you're a god, you say YES!" -- Winston Zeddmore
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: Europa
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 23:07:38 GMT

In article <92240.144502CDF1@psuvm.psu.edu> Carl Fago <CDF1@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>I have been thinking about the Europa game system and considering whether
>it would be worth it to purchase part of it (the campaign areas that I am
>interested in.)  So I am soliciting comments on Europa.
>
>Specific questions...
>
>(1)  Is it still being published?

	Yes. It's now published by Game Research/Design in Grinnell, IA
>
>(2)  I have heard that there were problems with the rules and it was
>evolving.  Is this still the case?

	Yes. Most of the problems come from trying to integrate the
	Allied invasion of NW Europe into it. Since this game (Second
	Front) has yet to be published, the system is still evolving.
	In particular, amphibious operations, supply, and mass air
	forces still have problems. There is also no coherent naval
	system right now, which is being worked on. The basic system
	is set though.
>
>(3)  What are the various titles available and what are the campaigns
>that they apply to?

	Currently available:
		Fire in the East (Russia, 1941 - May 1942)
		Scorched Earth (Russia, 1942-44)
		Balkan Front (Invasion of Yugoslavia and Greece)
		First to Fight (Poland 1939)
		Winter War (Russo-Finnish War 1939-40)

	The other campaigns will be re-issued over the next five years
	as part of the Collector's Series. Second Front will appear
	by Origins next year.
>
>(4)  What do you think of the game?  Good or bad.
>
	I like it enough that I'm running a mini-convention on it in
	Seattle this weekend.


-- 
Stephen Graham
graham@cs.washington.edu	 uw-beaver!june!graham
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: daniels@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Daniel R. Sawyer)
Subject: Orbit War
Summary: Want opinions on Orbit War
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 22:33:01 GMT
Keywords: Orbit War

Hello y'all.

I saw Steve Jackson Games' ORBIT WAR in the store today.  The game is about
superpower conflict in space circa 2020.  The blurb on the back sounded good
and I like the idea of a space conflict game between superpowers.  However,
I would like the opinions of people who have bought/played/read about
ORBIT WAR before I go out and buy it.

Thanks in advance,

Daniel at University of Illinois, USA
-- 
Daniel R. Sawyer
daniel-sawyer@uiuc.edu

--
From: dpipes@spica.srg (Dave Pipes x4552)
Subject: Re: WWII strategic level games
Organization: Certified Cat Herders Association, SA
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 14:11:36 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.board

In article <peters.715307558@physics.ubc.ca> peters@physics.ubc.ca (Dan Peters) writes:
>>                                                             ... check out
>>TSR's re-release of SPI's WWII:ETO (European Theater of Operations). 
>
>Could someone help clear up my confusion:
>
>Before TSR's recent release of WWII:ETO and WWII:PTO, I had never heard of
>these games, despite them being clearly some old SPI games re-released.
>Are these the same things as "War in Europe" and "War in the Pacific" (SPI
>monsters that I remember seeing as a kid but never played)?

Whoops.  They are not old games re-released, but new ones.  TSR has released
new games under the SPI logo, notably the SNIPER! follow-ons.  Definitely
not WIE/WIP rereleased.
>
>Drin

David Pipes
robear@digex.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,news.groups
From: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)
Subject: Re: rec.games.strategic
Originator: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 00:26:56 GMT

From article <1992Aug26.123855.1@us.oracle.com>, by cracicot@us.oracle.com:
>> 
>> Why not create either:
>> 
>> rec.games.wargames        OR
>> rec.games.gamers          (would include the non-war "gamer" games)
>> 
>> rec.games.simulation       another good suggestion someone made.
> 
> Why not just create:
> 
>   rec.games.board.avalonhill
> or
>   rec.games.board.ah
> 
> Since those seem generally to be the games mentioned when people
> speak of "gamers", "wargames", or "simulation".  Call it what it
> is, so there's no confusion.  A game is either from AH or not.
> No misunderstanding, no cross-posting.  Yes, that will leave a
> few random "wargames" in rec.games.board but it will not be many.
> 
> I'd read both groups anyhow, so split it or not, I don't care.
> 
> -----
> Chris Racicot                         Languages R&D
> cracicot@oracle.com                   Oracle Corp.

Well there are several problems with this. First there are a lot of wargames
that are not published by The Avalon Hill Game Company that are discussed in
this groups. There are also a number of their games that are not even close
to being considered wargames. There can also be further confusion, because
they have purchased the rights to publish many games that were originally
published by other people. For instance if I want to post something about
Twixt (my copy was published by 3M) do I post that in rec.games.board or
rec.games.ah (actually I am not sure that Twixt is in print right now, but
there are other ex-3M games that would serve as an example)?

In my opinion there is no need to split rec.games.board. I am even more
against moving any significant class of games currently discussed (even
though I skip over posts of a lot of them) in this group into another group
so that some tiny minority of posters feel they have to skip over too many
articles to read about their favorite games. If they really feel that way
they should create their own group and try to convince other people to
post to it. I also think that using the word "strategic" in the proposed
title for the new group is a mistake. The games that are to be discussed
in this proposed group were primarily "tactical" in nature, not strategic.
The title rec.games.abstract is reasonable, though it might suggest some
games that the proposer didn't intend.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich)
Subject: Re: Axis & Allies 2nd ed rules ADDRESS and more
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:44:44 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.201814.18935@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> eam3@po.CWRU.Edu (Eric A. Meyer) writes:
>>	CO Department
>>	Milton Bradley Company
>>	443 Shaker Road
>>	East Longmeadow, MA 01028
>
>   How much money (if any) do we have to include?  I assume the rulebook
>isn't free.

Duh!  Both Josh and I posted the address (I think), but BOTH of us
forgot to tell you how much money they want!  The rulebook (which now
includes a 4 page insert of rules clarifications) is $2.00 (US).

Of course, to us gamers, money is no object (cough, gag, choke).

Dewey  (sorry for the deletion.....)
From: casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE)
Subject: Re: Advanced Third Reich Question
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:05:00 GMT

In article <14675@mindlink.bc.ca>, Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper) writes...

Wow, this is a first...I've never had a game designer ask _me_ for an answer
on a rules question before...

>Does anyone who is familiar with Adavnced Third Reich have an opinion
>concerning the following question:
> 
>23.2, 29.552, 31.2:  Do exploiting Axis armor units lose
>their automatic supply status after a Russian Winter die
>roll of "5" or "6"?
> 
>In the next day or two I will have to make a ruling on this question, but I
>thought it might be held to see if there is agreement on what the answer should
>be.

Presumably the reason for the question is that a 5 (or 6) result says "armor
units are treated like infantry".

At first glance, it seems a bit extreme.  The idea of whole tank units just
disappearing sends chills down my spine.  I should state though that I have a
conflict of interest since I am currently in an A3R campaign game as the
Axis...

Since they are treated like infantry, it is effectively as if they are in
limited supply rather than unlimited, as they would normally be.  This seems
like a reasonable enough restriction.

Also. the game already has a lot of constraints on German armored activity in
Russia.  No overruns or exploitation are allowed in the Spring, and the winter
rules prohibit them except (just maybe) in the last years of the war.  To
implement this rule would be to effectively also curtail armored thrusts in
the Fall turn.  That makes it one turn of Advanced Third Reich and three turns
of Guns Of August.  Enough is enough.


Dave Casper
CERN - Geneva
casper@vxcrna.cern.ch

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: c9036991@cc.newcastle.edu.au (UNFORGETTABLE ... IN EVERY WAY . AND FOREVERMORE .. THATS HOW WELL STAY)
Subject: mecheditor -where is it
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 23:02:33 GMT


		Just incase you missed my last post .. and i know there 
	is some pretty heavy traffic in this group, could anyone who 
	actually found the mecheditor at umich please tell me what the
	directory path to it was, i couldnt find it and would like a copy 
	of it ...

				Mathew

-- 


	This is just a test .sig
	I suppose i should make it bigger, but i cant be bothred.
	All the ideas expressed are mine and therefore MUST be correct
	I will allow you to be wrong in your ignorance however.

	C9036991@wombat.newcastle.edu.au 
	C9036991@cc.newcasl.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE)
Subject: Re: Europa
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:32:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.230738.29382@beaver.cs.washington.edu>, graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) writes...
>In article <92240.144502CDF1@psuvm.psu.edu> Carl Fago <CDF1@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>>I am soliciting comments on Europa.
>>
>>(3)  What are the various titles available and what are the campaigns
>>that they apply to?

	[list of games deleted]

>	The other campaigns will be re-issued over the next five years
>	as part of the Collector's Series. Second Front will appear
>	by Origins next year.

God, what a joke.  I am all for making sure the product works before sending it
out the door, but how many Origins does this make that they have promised it
for?  Three?  Four?  It must be a record.  I recall about six months ago this
came up and someone (maybe Stephen, maybe someone else) *assured* me this
Origins would be the one.  Score one for the cynic...

How can GRD afford to keep flogging this sick horse and still stay in business?
Gee, maybe it's by re-releasing all the old titles so people who thought they
were almost ready for Grand Europa have to buy them all again...

And all this for a brain-dead system from the 1970's.  To the original poster,
I'd recommend Narvik (which you might still find gathering dust in a game store
or at a convention) and maybe Fire in the East/Scorched Earth if your wallet is
so full of money that you can afford the games, an addition to your house to
play them in, and a year's vacation to have the time.  Of course by the time all
the problems in the system get worked out, you might have to buy these again
too...


Dave Casper
CERN - Geneva
casper@vxcrna.cern.ch