HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Rick Pavek)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Auction Prices for Wargames at Gencon
Date: 29 Sep 92 17:32:40 GMT
Organization: Boeing

In article <peters.717723450@physics.ubc.ca> peters@physics.ubc.ca (Dan Peters) writes:
>
>I imagine that these high prices for DR represent games in fairly good
>condition.... Can anyone give me a clue as to what my copy is worth? It's

While I can't estimate the value of yours I can tell you that there
were wide fluctuations of prices at Origins.  Mint copies of DR were
going for less than punched.  It depended when you were there, and
who else was there bidding with you.  10:00PM Saturday night was a
good time to go...

I seem to recall a partially punched WIE going for a rediculous amount,
was it $35?

You can't base general prices on an auction.  Overall I'd say the
auction was soft, and lots of people came away with real bargains.
(Like my _Up Against the Wall, MF_ for a paltry $30.  Zocchi lists
it for $150).

AH Journeys of St. Paul and Year of Our Lord went for about $100-105
each.  Talk about rare...  they should have gone for lots more.

There were dealers there, and there were people looking for bargains,
but I don't think there were many true _Collectors_ there.  Maybe
the collecting end of it just hasn't taken off like it has with
other hobbies...  lead soldiers, lionel trains, whatever.

My $.02

Rick
-- 
Rick Pavek                       | Never ask a droid to outdo its program.
                                 |           
Seattle, WA                      |   It wastes your time
                                 |          and annoys the droid.
From: gchen@lust.reed.edu (Mark Aranethes Jinglewood Chen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Bteck/RoboTech comparison
Date: 30 Sep 92 23:24:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Sep30.232433.2378
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

In article <Sep.30.16.17.44.1992.23680@andromeda.rutgers.edu>  
dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Donald A Shaffer) writes:
> 
>     This is probably going to seem silly, but a couple nights ago, me  
and a 
> started discussing Btech and robotech( which we both love).  Anyways,  
one
> thing led to another, and we started talking about what would happen if  
by
> some strange phenomena, mecha from the robotech universe came over to  
the
> battletech universe.
>     After laughing about the veritech pilot first seeing a maurauder :)  
we 
> actually started arguing about which technollogy is better, i.e. who  
would 
> win in a fight.  We came up with the following facts.
>    Robo. mecha rely on speen and manuevarability.  Btech relies on  
armour and
> massive amounts of firepower.
>   2. either battletech armor is more powerful than robotech armour, or 
> robotech firepower is stronger than battletech's.  i.e. it takes many  
weapon
> hits to destroy a mech but robotech mecha you see get destroyed fairly  
easy
> if hit (one shot, boom)
>   3. mechs are generally bigger than mecha.
> 
> Anyone have any comments? (Oh yes, for battletech mechs, use clan  
technology)
>  
************************************************************************** 
****
> Gee, I wonder how many AC/20 shots  * Don Shaffer
>   a veritech can take? :)           * dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu
>  
************************************************************************** 
****
the Robotech (Macross) mecha would win if it was a long fight
since they have unlimited ammo
mark
From: s903609@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (ACE)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: optional rules version 2.0
Date: 28 Sep 92 01:33:53 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre
NNTP-Posting-Host: minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au

Greetings,
	  Well, there seems to be a lot of discussion about weapon
ranges, accuracy, and rules consistency. I think the best reason for
NOT giving and AC/20 ranges in the vicinity of 24 hexes is because it
is an AUTOCANNON. This means it sprays a lot of ammo in one direction
in the HOPE of hitting SOMETHING with SOME of the ammo. Does this
seem to imply HIGH accuracy or LONG range to you ? Now this could be
true for low and high caliber weapons, but you are getting to get
more recoil from the higher caliber which would probably throw the
weapon out more than the extra range of the weapon would otherwise
be able to give.
	  I like the point someone made recently about gyrostabilizers
the weapons. FASA already uses this concept in Shadowrun so they are
obviously already happy with the concept, and may actually include it
in 'calculations' ( read guesswork here ) when working out there
weapons. 
	  Last point is about the technology question. Don't worry
about it. The technology is not consistent with anything present now
or in the setting. I am going to post something relating to this
specicifically at a later date, which will show what I mean.

-- 
			      ACE
                  s903609@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au
	        " How deep is the ocean ? " Eric
" No Silicon Heaven ? But where would all the calculators go ? " - Kryten
From: dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Donald A Shaffer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: centurion errata sheet wanted
Date: 30 Sep 92 14:23:29 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


   If anyone out there has got a copy of the errata sheet from 2nd eddition
centurion dealing with the real engine costs and stuff, could you please send
me a copy. Thanks in advance.
                                                don. Shaffer
                                                 dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Newsgroups: rec.games.board

> / hpfcso:rec.games.board / seurer@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Bill Seurer) / 10:09 am  Sep 23, 1992 /
> Speaking of the auction, has anyone received their money and/or merchandise
> yet?

I have received my unsold merchandise last Thursday (9/24), but not my
money.  I was thinking of writting them if I didn't receive a check by
the end of the week.

John Lang
lang@fc.hp.com
From: saint@lia.dei.unipd.it (Gian_Uberto Lauri 228495)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: MechWar 1.0 - please ftp to USA
Date: 1 Oct 92 13:45:52 GMT
Distribution: rec.games.board
Organization: Universita' di Padova, Italia

>Okay, I uploaded it to wuarchive.wustl.edu just now....
>Its in /pub/MSDOS_UPLOADS as mech10.zip

Another server where you can find it :

	sabrina.dei.unipd.it (it is for Italy, but the line with the
				USA allows some Kbyte/sec)

as

		pub/msdos/games/mech10.zip

o   oooooo	Gian Uberto Lauri	
      o    o	saint@alessia.dei.unipd.it
     o o
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Meier)
Subject: A&A 2nd Ed. Rules
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 02:56:22 GMT

I own the first edition of Axis and Allies from Milton Bradley.  I want a copy
of the second edition rules, as I hear they eliminate some of the major
blunders and misbalances in the first edition rules.  Do I need to buy the new
game? (Rather not) Can I just call or write Milton Bradley for a free copy?
(Desirable) Would they make me pay for it otherwise? (That'd suck.) Thanks for
your time.

-- 
Douglas C. Meier		|  Remember to vote this election year,       
Northwestern University, ACNS 	|  you probably won't get another one. 
I don't claim them, they don't	|  
claim me.......			|  dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
From: z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: Optional Rules Version 2.1
Date: 29 Sep 92 17:34:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: ccsvax.1992Sep29.113446.1249
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <+5_pcy.lunatic@netcom.com>, lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex) writes:
> .
>     |\|ow you've made so many changes you might as well give it a new
>  name.
>  
>     ]['d suggest calling it "Star Fleet BattleTech."  (:
> 

	Kinda funny, but I used Car Wars and GURPS Autoduel as idea sources 
mainly. I've never owned or played SFB...


Brandon Cope
From: kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: Jade Falcon source book mechs
Date: 2 Oct 92 13:13:04 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec

From: 91vanderkolk@gw.wmich.edu

> Does anybody know if FASA is going to come out with Stats on the "lost"
> mechs from the Jade Falcon source book? By "lost" mechs I mean the Atlas II 
> and company that have been mentioned before. Also when in Merc. Handbook 2ed. 
> due out?

I dunno about the Jade Falcon 'Mechs, but I'll ask. As for Merc Handbook
2nd Ed, The deadline is 12th October, then 1 month in Scotts hands, 1
month in editing & layout, 1 month in Art and then ...

	So, roughly February next year. BTW, the book will contain
	updates on Wolf Pack, Kell Hounds, Grey Death Legion.

It should also start the ball rolling for many new events ... which come
right after Natural Selection.


Hope this helps.

> John

+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 From     : Stephane I. Matis                "It Just Works..." 
 Internet : kgnome@cs.concordia.ca             - Steve Paul Jobs, CEO NeXT
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: ch166@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Louis Moreau)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Diplomacy question: Double support
Date: 30 Sep 1992 02:10:29 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Clearly, both german units are dislodged. The rules are very clear on that point.
Louis
From: dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Donald A Shaffer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Centurion designs wanted.
Summary: want designs for centurions vehicles
Date: 26 Sep 92 18:38:48 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


   Well, since btech designs have been popping up frequently, how about if you  Renegade Legion players start posting your creations.  Although I've only got 
Centurion, I would like to see other design for the other systems to.  So come 
on you Legion commanders, post your designs and lets get some reviewing done.
Show your support for a great game.
*******************************************************************************
LUCK! I don't know the meaning    *                
   of the word.                   * 
(**WWHHOOOOOOPPPP!!!!  BAAM!**)   *      Don A. Shaffer
Miracle, godsend, blessing, those *   AKA. Com. of the 545th Strike Legion
words I know. -A centurian of the *        The Fire Winds
            2nd Light Mech Inf.   *
            of the 545th          *    (TOG forever)
*******************************************************************************
From: erwinrd@sumax.seattleu.edu (Richard D. Erwin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: FGA - RIP
Date: 30 Sep 92 06:27:07 GMT
Organization: Seattle University, Seattle WA

I just got the word from Gene Moyers this evening; FGA is out of business.
According to Gene, Terry Shrum's mother was hospitalized with a brian tumor,
and it's been confirmed as malignant.  Since Terry will be taking care of her
during this time, he has decided to quit the business.

Gene Moyers will be fulfilling orders or returning advances (as the case may
be); you can call him at (503) 524-9705.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: allan@gfx.engga.uwo.ca (Allan Flanagan)
Subject: Re: A&A: Allied guide to crushing Germany
Organization: University of Western Ontario, London
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 03:20:40 GMT



Come on everyone, we all know that the allies can easily win.  What we
really need is STRATAGIES FOR AXIS VICTORY not allied victory.  Now
this is the real challange.

Allan
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Pacific War questions
Date: 28 Sep 92 11:16:15 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <5494@cvl.umd.edu>, by kayuucee@cvl.umd.edu (Kenneth W. Crist Jr.):
> 1) In the Battle Of Midway scenario the Allies have two SS1s listed. One is
> in Oahu [2860] and the other is at Kodiak Island [5161]. Is one of these a
> mistake and the Allies are only supposed to have three sub markers or is
> one supposed to be SS4 (or some other SS)?

I'd say this is a simple typo.  (There is at least one other case
where duplicate ID numbers are used in a scenario, and the errata
simply specify to take a differently-numbered counter.)

> 2) Under the section of Force Markers (10L-6) it says: "...but the core
> must always contain as many units as the screen." Is this right? Shouldn't
> it be that the screen must always have as many as the core? 

That would make no sense in game terms, because putting units in the
screen always gives you an advantage (4 AA fires instead of 2), and
you'd never put any units in the core otherwise.  As for the rationale
behind the rule, I guess it is supposed to simulate the effect that a
large task force will spread the ships over a large area and it is
more difficult to get all ships' weapons to bear on a given attack
unless you have lots of ships to spare.  Note that those units which
you would use in the screen (cruisers and especially destroyers)
represent more than one ship, and are thus more spread out in reality.
The rule is fairly abstract, and as a result there will be strange
boundary conditions (i.e., a 2BB 3DD task force is no better at AA
fire than one with 2BB 2DD, while a 2BB 4DD one is), but I always was
pleased that such considerations would be present in a game of that
scope at all.

Btw, there is a variant rule in one of the Generals that requires you
to put all destroyers in the screen, if possible.
-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: LIPSCOJA@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu (Andy Lipscomb)
Subject: Blood Bowl
Organization: Vanderbilt University 
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 04:44:35 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.21

Any Blood Bowlers out there?  I have a new race (Leprechauns) that I would like
to get feedback on...

Andy Lipscomb
lipscoja@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: peters@physics.ubc.ca (Dan Peters)
Subject: Re: Junta: house rules
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 06:52:35 GMT

>>9. First Fire. Defending unit always gets a free volley (without
>>   responce). After that, volleys are exchanged.

>How is this differant from standard rules?

In the standard rules, everyone fires in the first volley but the shots are
not simultaneous. In this guy's suggested house rule, the defenders get a 
free volley all to themselves.

Drin
--
-----------------
Gutted - Flame NA
From: ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: vs MEKTON
Date: 3 Oct 92 13:31:04 GMT
Reply-To: ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu
Organization: 3WA, Boston Office. Or Nu Meta Chi. Take your pick.
In-reply-to: m91kgh@tdb.uu.se's message of 3 Oct 92 06:31:34 GMT
X-Get-A-Clue: Have two, they're small.
X-Signature-Virus-Protection: Version 1.51
X-Posting-Software: GNUS 3.14.1 [ NNTP-based News Reader for GNU Emacs ]

>>>>> "KH" == Karl-Gunnar Hultland <m91kgh@tdb.uu.se> writes:

KH> For the first time I've seen the MEKTON II rpg at the local shop,
KH> and now I wonder how the system is, and how it compares with
KH> BattleTech.  What I've seen looking in the book I'll probably not
KH> like the "gaming world" but if the system is good I might buy it
KH> anyway.

They don't compare. BattleTech is a wargame; Mekton II is primarily a
role playing game. Mekton is geared towards Japanese anime giant robot
gaming with fast mecha as agile (or more so) than the people. ][f
you're looking for a tactical wargame, don't bother with Mekton; if
you're looking for a fast playing RPG, go for it.

--Rat
||||| | | | |  |  |  |   |   |    |    |    |   |   |  |  |  |  | | | | | |||||
Northeastern's Stainless Steel Rat          ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu
Sleep with one eye open / Gripping your pillow tight...
Exit: Light / Enter: Night / Take my hand / We're off to Never-Never Land
                                                    --Metallica, Enter Sandman
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: goudswaa@fraser.sfu.ca (Peter Goudswaard)
Subject: Trek III Com Sim good for RPG?
Keywords: Star Trek III Combat Simulator
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 05:55:46 GMT

I have been running a Star Trek role playing game that I developed
for a few weeks now, but haven't addressed ship combat.  I've looked
at and rejected Star Fleet Battles as too involved.  Oh, btw, my game
is played by email over a local FIDOnet node.  Anyhow, is the Star
Trek III Combat Simulator a good substitute?  My game takes place
in the Next Generation era, so I'll need to address the newer ships,
even if it means modifying the rules myself.  I am specifically
looking for an easy to use, quick set of guidelines to resolve ship
combat.  Any other Star Trek rules out there?

-- 
                                   _________                     _________
P*.*                              |         |      __/^\__      |         |
                                  |         |      \     /      |         |
         Peter Goudswaard         |         |   _/\_\   /_/\_   |         |
         goudswaa@sfu.ca          |         |   >           <   |         |
         pgoudswa@cue.bc.ca       |         |    >_________<    |         |
                                  |_________|         |         |_________|

         Or if you feel really lucky:  peterg@quesnel.education.gov.bc.ca
From: dave@admiral.uucp (Dave Litchman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: BTECH: MNA Rankings & Clan Honor
Date: 1 Oct 92 06:45:59 GMT
Organization: The Admiral's Unix System & The Grid BBS

In article <BvCLqL.BEF@apollo.hp.com> carlton@apollo.hp.com (Carl Hommel) writes:
>>Also here are some rules we have been using for Clan Honor.
>>1) Clan Battlemechs cannot initiate a physical attack.
>>2) A clan battlemech must declare enemy targets.
>>3) A clan battlemech can return fire on any battlemech that has fired [first].
>
>Why can't clan mechs declair a physical attack?

Clanners consider physical combat between 'mechs to be dishonorable. If you
have to resort to physical attacks to damage an enemy 'mech, it means that you
were found lacking when you tried to damage it with your weapons. Clanners have
no problem with *returning* a physical attack, though. If an IS 'mech kicks a
Clan 'mech, the Clan pilot should feel free to kick back, but only on the turn
that the IS 'mech performed its kick. Subsequent kicks will allow subsequent
retaliations.

>Here are the other rules we talked about in our group:
>4.  No indirect fire spotting for other mechs.

Good rule.

>5.  No retreats.  You may move around to take advantage of terrain, but
>    walking backward to keep your target in long range to prevent them from
>    firing back is not allowed.

I wouldn't even allow the use of terrain. Clanners believe in stand-up fights,
without the use of the kind of trickery that terrain allows. Unless we're talk-
ing about Clan Wolf...

>6.  Death before dishonor...
>
>Here is a question we could not settle.  Which statement do you think is
>correct?
>
>A.  Clanners *must* target the first IS mech that attacks them.
>B.  Clanners target an appropriate mech.

I would say statement B is correct. Clanners have a high standard for their
rules of engagement (or so they say) and the will stick to them, even if their
'dishonorable' IS opponents violate them. Remember, to the Clanners, the people
of the Inner Sphere are backward barbarians, and under no circumstances will
they stoop to their level. For that would be in violation of their ultimate
purpose, the taking of Terra, and the reinstatement of the Star League.

>Our lengthy 5 minute arguement boils down to this question.  Assume your
>clanner is faced with an Atlas and a Locust.  The Locust is feeling suicidal,
>and runs up and attacks you.  The Atlas dishonorably participates in a gang
>fire at a fellow clanner, who engaged with a third IS mech.
>
>Which mech will you target?

Depends on what I'm piloting. If I'm in a Dasher, I'll engage the Locust, and
allow my pal in the Daishi to take care of the Atlas. If it's me in the Daishi,
then I'll go after the Atlas and ignore the Locust.


-- 
"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: woods@colossal.Eng.Sun.COM (Don Woods)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Titan: rules bug?
Date: 27 Sep 1992 19:38:32 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: colossal
Keywords: carry-over

I played a flurry of two-player Titan games over the past few weeks
(most of them trying out the suggestion for "Seven-Top Titan" that
I saw on the net; thanks!), and ran into what looks like it might be
a bug in the rules.  (Blasphemy!)  It's not that the rules are unclear,
but they do seem to allow some things that don't make sense.

The issue first arose when I was fighting in the desert, and had a
critter next to two opponents, one up across a dune edge and one not.
As I was non-native, I lost a die fighting up across the dune.  The
rules state that attacks made across a non-dune edge cannot carry-over
up across a dune.  This makes sense, since I'm not allowed to roll as
many dice if I were fighting up the dune.  Note that if I attack up the
dune first, losing the die, I _can_ carry-over to the non-dune hex.

Bug #1: If my critter had been native, he wouldn't have lost a die going
up dunes.  But the rule doesn't say anything about native/non-native;
_nobody_ can carry-over from a non-dune to up-a-dune.  This seems weird
but not particularly broken.

Bug #2: For consistency with the rules that allow you to roll for a
higher strike number in order to allow carry-over to a harder-to-hit
opponent, it seems you should be able to roll one fewer die against a
non-dune foe and then carry-over up the dune.  But you can't.  This is
again weird but not broken.

Bug #3: If a native is striking down a dune, it adds two dice.  Can it
carry-over damage to a non-dune-edge hex?  There is nothing in the rules
to prevent it, but it means you are in effect getting extra dice against
a non-dune-edge foe.  I ran into this case last night, and it _does_
feel broken.

Bug #4: After seeing case #3, I looked at the maps and noted that a
similar case can arise in the Mountains (though not the Hills), where
a native can add a die going down a slope and (apparently) use that die
as carryover across a non-slope.  (Bug #2 doesn't arise because non-
natives lose skill, not dice, going upslope.)

The others and I agreed that it would make sense to use the general rule
suggested in Bug #2, and to extend it:  Before rolling the strike dice
for a creature with multiple potential targets, you declare who it's
striking at, what strike number it's trying for, and how many dice it's
rolling.  Carry-over (if any) can be applied to any opponent against whom
that strike number and number of dice could apply.

What do other people think of this "fix"?  Have other people run into
these situations?
--
--	-- Don Woods.				[*** Generic Disclaimer ***]
--				    ...!sun!woods.eng -or- Woods@Eng.Sun.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.board