HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: urban@cis.rand.org (Michael Urban)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Advanced 3rd Reich (was Re: mounting maps on boards)
Date: 22 Jul 92 01:21:22 GMT
Reply-To: urban@cis.rand.org (Michael Urban)
Organization: RAND, Santa Monica CA

Well, all this map-mounting advice will come in handy for those
rich folks who purchase Avalon Hill's Advanced Third Reich.  I
have finally seen a copy, and was astonished to discover that
the mapboard was unmounted.  The game is $50.  I am unable to
understand this price.  It is not as if the new game was developed
from scratch, nor is AH a small publisher trying to cover a fixed
setup price over a smaller number of units.  

Hrumph, Avalon Hill!


   Mike Urban
	Michael_Urban@rand.org
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: gregory_b@cubldr.colorado.edu (Brian Gregory)
Subject: Re: AH - Panzer Blitz
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:40:03 GMT

In article <0095E0D0.F031C260@abby.chem.ucla.edu>, doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu writes:
> I've played PanzerBlitz, but not for a long time; I only own PanzerLeader.
> If I remember right, you could probably improve the game significantly by
> simply pasting some of the PanzerLeader rules which differ (I forget what
> ones seemed particularly different, but LOS comes to mind... it's been a long
> time!).  Of course, you don't want to change the setting-specific rules
> (primarily terrain rules), but I think that PanzerLeader is a somewhat
> better fleshed-out system.  If you don't have it, you might want to take
> a look at it somehow...
> 
> -Doug Gibson-

Agreed, PL has opportunity and indirect fire (extremely important in any
tactical simulation) well worked into its system.  Pb only mentions them
or lists them, cryptically, as optional rules.  Infantry assaults are
also more detailed in PL, as I recall.  These rules should be easily adapted
to the Pb game.  IMHO, there are better systems for more accurate simulation
of the trials and tribulations of tactical warfare:  You CAN fairly 
accurately simulate how Churchill or Monty thought and fought looking at 
a board that covers most of europe with systems that exist in WWII, WiF,
etc..  However, PL and Pb poorly simulate how a Guderian or Rommel would've
could've directed a battle from inside a tank under fire.  Still, I like
PL (with a few house rules) as a playable tactical level game.
 
***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---
Brian Gregory				||"I only went out for a walk,
I-net:  GREGORY_B@CUBLDR.COLORADO.EDU	|| and finally concluded to stay till 
ECE Graduate Student			|| sundown, for going out, I found,
Univ. of Colorado @ Boulder		|| was really going in." -- John Muir
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: spardron@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Steve Ardron)
Subject: Re: AH's _The_Longest_Day (TLD)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 10:37:17 GMT

The chief problem with the longest day is the devestating effect of bad luck.
Many games that involve many dice roles balance out, as both sides have good
and bad luck, but the game totally swings with good or bad luck in the
weather, resolved with only a few dice roles. I have seen games where the
invaders land, and go virtually immediately into storm (overcast first roll,
storm the next), and stay there for the next six turns. There is no way
they can overcome such luck. Similarly, excellent weather, and a good landing
result in a steam role inland.

It is an excellent simulation, but leaves much to be desired as a game
because of this luck factor (though it is a good representation of the risk
they took in the landing...)

Steve Ardron
spardron@descartes.waterloo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: mjunkin@turing.toronto.edu (Mike Junkin)
Subject: The Longest Day (again)
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Date: 29 Jul 92 02:46:08 GMT

I'm afraid I can't agree with all the positive comments that have appeared
lately about Avalon Hill's "The Longest Day". Primarily, I think it's in 
some respects a very poor simulation, and also not a very interesting game. 
    The primary flaws have to do with the replacement/supply system and the
complete lack of exploitation of successful attacks (in a game where one 
side was fully motorized!). 
    Both the replacement and supply systems operate in the same way. There 
are a fixed, slowly increasing, number of replacement/supply counters. Once 
one is expended, it goes back into a "pool", from which it may be drawn to 
reenter play in the next turn. Thus, in order to build up supplies, one must 
attack, so as to free the supply units so they can reenter later in the game! 
The process of re-entering play takes ten turns for the Allies, and at 
least three for the Germans. It is important to realize that this severely 
limits the Allied offensive capability throughout the game. Roughly speaking, 
a division can be on the attack only two in twelve turns. In fact, the rate 
of supply point arrival in the Cobra scenario (only the campaign game suffers 
this system) far exceeds any amount achievable in the campaign game.
    Regarding exploitation of attacks, there is no "mechanized movement 
phase", or the like, so the defender is always able to plug holes created in 
his line during his next turn, at least until you've ground him into dust. 
The only way to create breakthroughs that can be exploited in a movement phase
is by eliminating units using your artillery during the defensive bombardment
phase of the other side's player turn. This prevents anything dramatic from
happening. By the time a breakthrough is achieved, the German player simply 
has nothing left.
    Further, coastal artillery is too powerful, Allied airpower is understated
(esp. ground support) and Allied port capacity is too low (Try keeping up to 
the historical rate of arrival even in good weather).
    As a game, I don't feel that it's particularily interesting, given the 
fact that the campaign was simply a battle of attrition from June 15 to Cobra
(i.e. for 40 turns), and the sequence of play does all it can to prevent
anything else from happening.

    On the plus side, the order of battle is excellent, and the map is well
done and very detailed.

    I'm sorry to be so harsh about the game, but I feel that the both sides of
the story should be told about a game that costs over US$100.

Michael.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: beowulf@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (john.a.foley)
Subject: Re: AH's _The_Longest_Day (TLD)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 23:33:10 GMT

Bruce Gletty points out that TLD can fit on a 4' x 8' space.
At least in the US, this is a happy size: you can easily get
plywood panels in this size that you can lay on top of a
table or sawhorses; I put a finishing sheet of fiberboard
on top for a smooth surface.  Perhaps not as elegant as a
perfect table, but certainly the poor man's equivalent.

John Foley

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: helen@pulua.hcc.hawaii.edu (Helen Rapozo)
Subject: Re: SFB: Star Fleet Battles info request
Organization: Honolulu Community College
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 05:21:41 GMT

In article <64518@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt7994a@prism.gatech.EDU (ORMOND,SEAN PATRICK) writes:
>
>	Many years ago I was part of a group of serious SFB players.  We
>	I was wondering if anyone could post or mail some info on the 
>products currently available for SFB or the products that you feel are 
>necessary for a good game. Any advice would be greatly appreciated...reality
>has been getting rather dull lately! :-)
**************
The Captain's Edition list (not the most complete)

1) Basic Missions (Fed, Klingon, Rom, Kzinti, Gorn, Orion and Tholian),
   this is basically the Designer Edition or Volume I of the Commander's
   Edition.  Includes map, SSD, rules, dice and 2 sheets of counters.

2) Advanced Missions, includes SSD, rules, 2 (or 3) sheets of counters and
   this is the contents of Expansion 1,2 and 3 of the Designer Edition
   or Volume II and III of the Commander's Edition only covering the
   races of Federation, Klingon, Romulan, Kzinti, Gorn, Orion and
   Tholian (no Neo-Tholian).

3) Module C1, includes SSD, rules, 1 sheets of counters for the races
   covering Hydrans, Lyans and Wyn.

4) Module C2, includes SSD, rules, 1 sheets of counters for the races
   covering Neo-Tholian, Andromedan and ISC.

5) Module J, includes SSD, rules, 3 sheets of counters for Carriers,
   Escorts and fighters for all races that use fighters.

6) Module K, includes SSD, rules, 3 sheets of counters for PF and
   PF Tenders for all races that use PFs (also includes the Federation
   PFs).

7) Module R2, includes SSD, rules, 2 sheets of counters for additional
   ships for the Federation, Kzinti, Orion and Andromedan races.

The Basic Set was released sometime in 1990, while I just purchased
Module R2 a couple of weeks ago.  I understand that they will bring
out Module R3, R4, R5 and ending with R1.

There is also a Module H1 and H2 which covers the Mega-Hex counters and
maps plus cut out planets.  If memory serves I think there was another
module that had extra Ammunition counters, and more maps.



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
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Playing (Advanced) Civilization properly
Date: 24 Jul 92 15:04:04 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

When I say "there's not much point in discussing old Civilization", I mean in
this context - it seems to me there's general agreement that aggressive
behavior is discouraged in the old game.

As for the usefulness of discussing the old game in general, that is up to
those discussing it - I don't know how many Civilization players have switched
to the new game, how many have decided never to switch, and how many simply
haven't got around to it yet.

I think you made a good point though - the games are sufficiently distinct that
the subject heading should differentiate between them.  The same is true of
Third Reich and Advanced Third Reich (should these games come up for
discussion).
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: pmwg1641@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Peter M. White)
Subject: Re: **BOGGLE**
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 00:09:33 GMT

jesse@uts.amdahl.com (Jesse Mundis) writes:

>apurmal@us.oracle.com writes:

>>> like to get together to play Boggle.
>>> 
>>> I'm also looking for people to play scrabble with.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> - Tanya_Davis.esh.qmail.slac.stanford.edu

>>I tried sending you mail, but it bounced.  Try sending me mail.

>Ditto.  I actually had a number of attempts bounce. (Creative mail addressing
>is your friend)  Anyway, try sending mail to me, as I am a boggle player
>as well.

>Jesse
>jesse@uts,amdahl.com

Try:  Tanya_Davis.esh@qmail.slac.stanford.edu

(I am sitting in her sysadmin's livingroom on a visit to Bay Area friends.
So, he knew the problem when I pointed it out.

Small World.)


--Peter


______________________________________________________________________________
						|
     "Guards!  Let me draw their fire!"		|	p-white@uiuc.edu
		   --Scapegoat,_Marshal Law_	|
______________________________________________________________________________
From: nigel@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: CENT:  Now that we've bashed BTECH into oblivion how is Centurion?
Date: 28 Jul 92 23:30:40 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md, USA


Hmmm...I've always found the BTECH universe to be annoyingly unbelivable...
but how is the other FASA game Centurion?  Better or worse?  I'm about to
ditch my BTech stuff and buy something else.  If those rules are better
I may simply switch.

Nigel
--
Nigel Tzeng
.sig under construction
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: gregory_b@cubldr.colorado.edu (Brian Gregory)
Subject: Re: Game sale
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 22:48:34 GMT

>In Message-ID:<1992Jul19.051509.16458@unislc.uucp> "gwd@unislc.uucp" 
(Greg Davis) wrote:

>The following games are available for sale:
>
>SPI	After the Holocaust	Unpunched

I only have fond memories of playing this once, and so don't remember
much, but I know I like games of this type (build up a civilization)
and so will offer $20 for After the Holocost.  Don't know if the box
is bulky, but $3 for postage should cover it!

Brian.

P.S.:  Tried to reply directly by email, but it crashed.
bg
-- 
***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---***---
Brian Gregory				||"I only went out for a walk,
I-net:  GREGORY_B@CUBLDR.COLORADO.EDU	|| and finally concluded to stay till 
ECE Graduate Student			|| sundown, for going out, I found,
Univ. of Colorado @ Boulder		|| was really going in." -- John Muir
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH Scenerio
From: taia_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 04:21:04 GMT
Reply-To: taia_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
 <BrLvGs.FtC@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> <1992Jul21.042249.7912@peponi.wcc.govt.nz>,<BrqMu8.I1v@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>
Organization: Wellington City Council, Wgtn, NZ

In article <BrqMu8.I1v@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>, cpbeaure@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Chris Beauregard) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.042249.7912@peponi.wcc.govt.nz> taia_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>>In article <BrLvGs.FtC@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>, cpbeaure@cayley.waterloo.edu (Chris Beauregard) writes:

 [ Urbanmechs being slow etc deleted ]

>> THE SLOWEST, but the AC/10 is a bit limited on the field.

>Well, I did mention the AC/20 variant...That's where heaviest firepower
>comes in...

 Oh yeah, but I think that the loss of armour and range are both huge
minus'. It allows the mech a lot of firepower, but when an Atlas can out
run you......er I don't have a lot of respect for the humble trash can! :-)

 [ High speed/jump meks like Spider and Ostscout discussed ]

>> The Jump 7 and fire one medium is a real pain! But a PPC to them isn't
>>very good for the armor or the internals. :-)

>Actually, jump 8.  <nitpick>  The problem is hitting them with a PPC.
>+4 target plus whatever terrain mods <what, you don't use terrain?!?>
>really dumps your chance of hitting.  You wouldn't believe how hard
>three OstScouts can be on a heavy or assault.  You can have it so that
>one of them is almost always pumping the medium, and physical attacks,
>into the rear.  

 I was refering to the +4 modifer at jump-7, the jump-8 is not necessary
unless you want to move into a better position. I totally agreed with you,
as once I had a Heavy Lance spend 14 rounds trying to kill one Ostscout!
With jump-7, you also don't overheat! :-)

>Yep, I love it when I randomly end up with one of those and my opponent
>gets this look of glee in his eyes.  <heh>  'Specially because few
>people I know of remember how fast these things are...

 I hate it, but I can acknowledge the danger of such a situation. I just
like the bigger meks, that's just me!

>> Ambassador, dude you have copies of "Stardate" and "Stardrive" magazines?
>Well, I got the one with the mini-mechs in it...Looked interesting.
>Those things don't last all that well though...

 Oh! I have Stardate #3,4,5,6 and Stardrive #1.
Does anyone have Stardate #1,2 and were there any issues after Stardrive #1?

>Say, speaking of mags, anyone ever seen the White Wolf with the Useless
>Mechs in it?  That Ballista isn't as bad as it looks....

 Never seen it as New Zealand is a very long way away! My Challenge mags.
take six months to get here :-(

>Chris Beauregard                                cpbeaure@cayley.waterloo.edu
>Differently Expressed:  The politically correct term for politically
>correct people.

 And I am.....
Tony Taia
 tai-shu@akeake.vuw.ac.nz, TAIA_A@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
3067:The Stacalkas-Nomen, when the Combine destroys the Clans!
 *sigh*Not another Cluster, we'll be here till Christmas.
 HEY! VUW and WCC don't know Btek, so you know that this is mine!
From: u8901744@cs.uow.edu.au (Daniel Robert Farnan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH RE. BattleTech Info Please
Date: 29 Jul 92 05:51:56 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia

clarkep@kappa.uleth.ca (Paul Clarke) writes:


>   Would someone please exlain to me why it is so unusual for a merc company
> of about battalion size to own a dropship AND Jumpship?  In FASA's Mechwarrior
> the rolls for two lances of people owning a jumpship are actually quite
> high.  Being a beginning GM, I have collected a lot of books to try to help
> me out, and in the Mercenary's Handbook, it also makes it easy to aquire.
> 
> Also they name several new types of dropships.  Could someone please send me
> the stats at least for the scout class and merchant class Jumpships and 
> Gazelle dropship?
>  
> I look foreward to your answers.

>   Recon Scout 1 of the Rose Fox Battalion.


	The important stats for the Jumpships & Dropships - what they can
	carry - is given in Merc Handbook on the page with their "cost". The
	reason why Jumpships are hard to come by is all down to the setting
	of the game - I personally would make it more difficult for a new
	merc outfit of even battalion size to get a Jumpship (Merc 2Ed.
	Stephane?) as they are such tremendously valuable resources. The best
	solution, I think, is for the hiring House to offer mercs who have
	completed a really important job either land or a Jumpship (probably
	an old one in disrepair which the mercs will then refit at their own
	cost) - that way the GM can control what resources the players have.


-------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Farnan,	InterNet: u8901744@wraith.cs.uow.edu.au
Wollongong Uni

"Don't ask me why I did it...
I must have been lonely, stupid or blind...
But I know that it seemed like a good idea at the time"

Mike Batt, "It Seemed Like A Good Idea At The Time"
-------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: rlbell@babbage.waterloo.edu (Richard Bell)
Subject: Re: Civilisation-want to learn how to play properly...
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:42:31 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.150803.916@ida.liu.se> d89magni@odalix.ida.liu.se (Magnus Nilsson) writes:
>bakerj@gtephx.UUCP (Jon Baker) writes:
>
>Last when we played Adv Civ, I managed to do quite well, The first civ-card
>I bought was the by you so much hated metallurgy! And why did I go and purhase
>such an idiotic card?

[reasoning deleted]
>
>So don't be so negative about military, used right it can prove to
>be a very useful strategy in Adv Civ. Also, it provided me with a fun game
>where something happened all the time :)
>

Unfortuneately, you can only buy Military, and romp about the board once.
I was lucky enough to be the one to do this in the group we had that used
to play quite often (1 game a week for several months).  Every game played
after that stunning victory, everybody had Military no more than two turns
after the first.  Military is only useful if your enemy does not have it.

The only other time that I bought Military, which did not start a race for
everyone else to get it was when I was being badly punted on.  Only by
acting as inoffensively as possible, was I able to preserve my potential
advantage(ie I only kept it because I did not use it).  It did eneble me
to intimidate others, though.

Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: zarda@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Dr. Strangelove)
Subject: Re: VG Fleet Games
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 18:21:21 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.140609.8241@zoo.bt.co.uk> ipc@zoo.bt.co.uk writes:
>Hi there,
>
>Anyone out there play Victory Games 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th or 7th fleet?
>
>I wondered if anyone had produced any house rules to solve any of the
>games problems.
>
>There are two main problems in the game (IMO), they are:-
>
>i)  Bias towards the Nato player

Ian,

If you have the newer Games 7th Fleet and 5th Fleet, like I do,
then don't play NATO against the "USSR". I like trying other
things like Japan against China or China and Japan against a reduced
7th Fleet. I really dislike playing their scenarios, lets face it the
Soviets are gone and the Russians are not half as powerful. Try making
new scenarios. In fact if you have one share it with me... I'll give you
some of mine.

Ken



-- 
 Dr. Strangelove      "You know your having a bad day when the fifth
 U.Wisconsin Milwaukee    inning rolls around and they drag the warning
 Major: Political Science  track." -Mike Flanagan, pitcher Baltimore Orioles
 Why that Alias? From the Movie Dr. Strangelove.
From: timothy@vansant.gsfc.nasa.gov (Timothy Van Sant)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: AH's _The_Longest_Day (TLD)
Date: 21 Jul 92 17:27:45 GMT
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center

There are a couple of issues of the General with errata and articles.   
These are essential for TLD players.  I've got them all but don't know the  
issue numbers off the top of my head (if anyone wants to know them, send  
me some E-mail).

My only ftf experience with TLD was at Avaloncon last year.  We got  
through June 25th and are resuming play on the same game at this year's  
convention in ten days.  We played with a number of rule changes that the  
gamemasters (Steve Piotrowski and Paul Sommers) have found vital. Namely,  
coastal artillery fire is conducted on units individually, not on whole  
stacks.  This increases the number of resolution die rolls and hopefully  
results in a better chance for moderate results.  With regard to landing  
HQ's, they suggest disrupting HQ's for 2 turns instead of eliminating them  
(and putting a division out of supply for 10 turns).  I think these  
changes make it easier to get a decent invasion turn completed, something  
which isn't trivial to repeat.  The consensus from last year was that  
there should be a campaign game scenario which begins on or soon after  
June 7th that would avoid the vagaries of the invasion turn.

I agree with Chris, TLD is a tremendous game.  It's got scope!  If a  
numbered hex system  existed, and six or seven players could be found to  
play it via E-mail, you could avoid the awful problem of how to store the  
damn thing.  Corps commanders would only need to set up their maps, and  
would not really know what was going on in other sectors.

Tim Van Sant
timothy@vansant.gsfc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: ganderso@unlinfo.unl.edu (gary anderson)
Subject: SPQR / GREAT BATTLES OF ALEXANDER
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 12:17:07 GMT

For a long long time I've been waiting for the definitive tactical
ancients game, the game that would be to the ancient world what
Richard Berg's GBACW (TERRIBLE SWIFT SWORD, etc.) is to the
American civil war.

I've been noticing GMT's recently-released SPQR and the mate-able
GREAT BATTLES OF ALEXANDER (both designed and/or developed,
interestingly enough, by Richard Berg).  

Has anyone played these games?  What's your opinion?  

Thanks.

Gary Anderson
ganderso@unlinfo.unl.edu
From: scimatec1@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Thanks to Robert Rossney + ????'s
Date: 26 Jul 92 19:58:16 EST
Summary: Thanks + ???'s
Keywords: stockmarket
Distribution: world
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

Thanks to Robert Rossney
Thank you for the quick reply to my question about stock market game.  Can you
post the address of Gamescape in San Francisco?  Do they have a catalog that
you can use to look at their inventory? Or better yet, do the have a toll free
number.  Thanks again Larry