ATLANTISv2 atl-players-digest #19

From: csd@microplex.com (Christian Daudt)

Date: Wed, 08 Feb 1995 21:47:25 +0000

This file was automatically generated by csd@microplex.com
If you notice anything unusual, please e-tell me.
You better not kill Faction 9 or this service may be discontinued.:-)
Contributions in Silver will be gladly accepted.
Sorry, but this report is returning after I corrected a bug in my SW.
You may have lost some emails. If anyone is interested, tell me and I'll send you a
separate one manually created.
----------------------------------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 1995 13:11:36 -0800
From: "Mike Hughes" <Mike_Hughes@smtp.svl.trw.com>
Subject: Re: atlantis 2

Reply to:   RE>>atlantis 2

> I don't ask for conditional statement, but what happens in case
> there are 2 orders that taken an entire month ?
>
> If the MOVE order can occur, is it erased by STUDY order or not ?
> And if MOVE is not possible, is STUDY order performed ?

As far as I know, there are two things that can prevent you from moving one
sector.

The first is if you issue the order to a unit that is overloaded, which is the
player's fault for not keeping better track of what he is carrying.  This
condition is preventable through careful planning.

The second is if a faction in the sector you are attempting to enter has
declared you "Unfriendly" or "Hostile" and has issued a GUARD order to one of
his units.  This should take the whole turn, as your unit moves into the new
sector and is turned back by the enemy unit(s).

I know of nothing else that will prevent you from moving at least one sector
in a turn (at least in the Spring, Summer, or Fall).  Winter may or may not
prevent a unit that is walking (i.e. has one movement point) from entering a
sector that costs two to enter.

Geoff, can you clarify this point?

I see no reason to add conditional orders to the game at this time.  I agree
with Geoff that one of the good points of the Atlantis system is its
simplicity.  Conditional orders would not be a problem for players now with
only a few units, but once factions start to grow and have tens (or hundreds)
of units to control, worrying about both regular and conditional orders for
each unit would be too much to handle.

Comments?
Mike

----------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 10:45:47 PST
From: "GDUNBAR.US.ORACLE.COM" <GDUNBAR@us.oracle.com>
Subject: Atlantis 2.0: City Guards

OK, here's the official word on guards:

They will defend anyone who is attacked in their region, and
also defend anyone against theft and assassination (if their
observation is high enough).

In other respects, they are neutral, so you can't tax, or give
them stuff.

Geoff

----------------------------------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 1995 14:38:47 -0800
From: "Mike Hughes" <Mike_Hughes@smtp.svl.trw.com>
Subject: Re: ATLANTIS- TAX in Cities.

Reply to:   RE>ATLANTIS: TAX in Cities.

From a comment made by Geoff on the Design list before the game started:

>> Will the NPC "guards" stop taxation, or compete for tax revenue?
>
> The guards are "on guard" units, so they must be killed if you wish
> to tax a city.
>
> Geoff

----------------------------------------------------------
From: yaj@cc.gatech.edu (Jay Luo)
Subject: Re: Atlantis 2.0: City Guards
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 16:13:52 -0500 (EST)

> OK, here's the official word on guards:
>
> They will defend anyone who is attacked in their region, and
> also defend anyone against theft and assassination (if their
> observation is high enough).

This seems rather odd....  if faction A has a unit try to steal from
a unit of faction B's, and faction C, allied to B, has a unit with
observation, would C's observer stop the theft?  The rules as written
would tend to indicate no, that only an observer in your own faction
will protect you.

This might be a design issue, but I think it would make more sense for
theft and assassination to be easier in a city than in the wilderness,
or at least no harder; so it might be better if the guards didn't
protect against theft after all.

----------------------------------------------------------
From: "Matthew S. Taylor" <matthew@clark.net>
Subject: Atlantis-Updated Rules
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 17:47:45 -0500 (EST)

I have updated the MS Word / Word Perfect rules earlier mentioned.  I have
included the recent changes announced in The Times and appended a "pull-
out" section of those tables which appear throughout the rules.  I do not
know about you folks, but I got tired of looking them up even with a table
of contents.  As always, I appreciate feedback.  I have received very little
so far [two people] so I do not know if anyone is even using them.

--
Matthew Taylor

matthew@clark.net

----------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 17:48:55 -0500
From: mosherj@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Joshua Mosher)
Subject: Re: Taxing in Cities

At 12:24 PM 1/31/95, Jay Luo wrote:
>So will City Guards stop you from taxing in a city, or not?
>They would have to be "allied" to you in order to help anyone who attacks you
>in a city, which would imply that you could tax there without them being
>upset at you.  Unless there is a special exception in the rules for
>City Guards.  Can we get some official word on this?  Inquiring
>warmongers want to know.
>
>Incidentally, does a Guarding unit attack someone who taxes, or does the
>taxer's action simply fail?

Sorry, I should have clarified that I meant the guards are allied in terms
of protection. Keeping the peace does _not_ include shaking down the
populace. But don't take my word for it; here is Geoff's response to an
earlier question of this type:

>
>>Will the NPC "guards" stop taxation, or compete for tax revenue?
>
>The guards are "on guard" units, so they must be killed if you wish
>to tax a city.
>

There you have it. As far as their reaction to attempted taxation, TAX will
fail, but PILLAGE should result in combat I think.

Josh Mosher

----------------------------------------------------------
From: "Matthew S. Taylor" <matthew@clark.net>
Subject: Atlantis-Updated Rules
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 17:47:45 -0500 (EST)

--
Matthew Taylor

matthew@clark.net

----------------------------------------------------------
From: Mike Blaser <mab@kcc.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 95 15:48:07 GMT
Subject: Re: Atlantis 2.0: Possible bug

----------
>
>
>Remi says :
>
>Geoff,
>
>Yes, there has been a battle in Nork, (46,53).
>My Scouting party (5 HEL) in 46,53 has been attacked by 20 vikings and
>5 leaders.
>But there my units in Sledmere (47,53) didn't take any part in that battle.
>
>Also, I'm not sure that a unit of 5 HEL, losing 4 of them will leave
>nothing behind. (Where the heck is my remaining HEL ?)
>
>Cheers
>
>Remi.

From the battle report I received your last unit was wiped out in the second round of combat.  i believe your last HEL was sent to hell (sorry, I couldn't resist that one).

>Gurwan says :
>
>BTW, I'd like to tell everybody (that is not an ally already with
>faction #124 or faction #24 that these factions do attack on sight people
>who try to have a contact with them.
>Faction 124 : Mark Hesiden : hesiden@Stoner.COM
>Faction 24  : Mike Blaser : mab@kcc.co.uk

Now if Remi would take a brief look at his turn report (you know, the thing which very adequately gave you information on most of your faction's demise) he would see that my single, solitary scout in the location the battle took place did NOT join in the fighting.  In fact, the unit numbers he gave do not even include any of my units.  Still, if he wishes to start mud slinging I'm certain I know who's going to end up with more soil on his clothes.

>I remember clearly Mark Hesiden's message (Faction #124) calling for
>allies.
>It seems he doesn't need any right now.

Very sharp, this boy.  Very sharp.

>Info about them :
>
>	unit (352), leader, 3 horses; Captain
>	unit (942), 10 vikings
>	unit (943), 10 vikings
>	unit (944), leader, combat 1.
>	unit (945), leader, combat 1.
>	unit (946), leader, tactics 1.
>	Unit (947), leader

Hmmm, let me see.  Nope, no units of mine in there.  Sorry to disappoint you.

>If anyone feels like they want to have fun fighting
>with someone, please do choose faction #124 or #24.
>I think this might have been the first slaughtering in Atlantis. If
>anybody think they don't want that kind of thing around Sledmere,
>let me know, I'm ready to train troops to the combat skill. Please contact
>me via e-mail. My instructor is presently attending the Gathering.

If anyone wants to experience short, sharp shock therapy then please do give it a try.

>They did attack my HEL for pleasure. I hope they don't have any contact
>with the Gathering, as this is clearly a reason to be wiped out.
>
>Regards to peaceful factions.
>I wish trouble to the others, for we, peaceful people, are in danger.
>Some of the best men are now in the land of Heaven, the home of plenty.

And to this I say the meek may inherit the earth but they won't get the mineral rights.

Battles are going to be a common factor in this world and anyone who doesn't believe that this is the case will probably not last ten turns.  If everyone was to pussy-foot around trying not to tread on anyone else's toes then the game would not be worth playing.  If people start recriminations now there will not be enough factions left at the end of turn 7 to populate a dinghy.  I can understand how you may be a little bit distressed at the loss of your unit but believe me, you are certainly not going to be the last.

Grin and bear it pal, because you are NOT going to get them back.

Mike

Cognoscenti
Faction (24)
----------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Hesidence <hesiden@Stoner.COM>
Subject: Re: Atlantis 2.0: Possible bug
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 10:41:56 -0600 (CST)

Remi Butaud writes:

> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Gurwan says :
>
> BTW, I'd like to tell everybody (that is not an ally already with
> faction #124 or faction #24 that these factions do attack on sight people
> who try to have a contact with them.
> Faction 124 : Mark Hesiden : hesiden@Stoner.COM
> Faction 24  : Mike Blaser : mab@kcc.co.uk

This is Mark historian for The Black Company.  As historian
I feel that it is my duty to record things as accuratly as possible.

Mike had nothing to do with this battle, although we are allied so his units
should have joined the battle.  Part of the bug Geoff will fix I assume.

READ NOT FURTHER if you don't want to read role playing.

> I remember clearly Mark Hesiden's message (Faction #124) calling for allies.

This is correct.  The captain of the Black Company called for allies
right after the first turn.  Unfortunalty for Voyagers from Breizh
they did not respond and become one of the select few to be allied
with the Black Company.

Also it would seem that Voyagers from Breizh did not join the
Cartographer's Cooperation Consortium or he would have been warned
not to enter the region.  Two strikes, one more and the Voyagers are out.

> It seems he doesn't need any right now. (This was a clear refusal)

This is partly correct.  The Black Company's allie quota is full, but
the attack was not a refusal since the Voyagers never asked to be
allies.

> Info about them :
>
> 	unit (352), leader, 3 horses; Captain
> 	unit (942), 10 vikings
> 	unit (943), 10 vikings
> 	unit (944), leader, combat 1.
> 	unit (945), leader, combat 1.
> 	unit (947), leader, tactics 1.
> 	Unit (948), leader

For those intrested the poor elves were not defenseless
they did have swords.

Defenders:
  Scouting party (958), 5 high elves, 5 swords; a few good-looking but
  tired high elves.

> If anyone feels like they want to have fun fighting
> with someone, please do choose faction #124 or #24.
> I think this might have been the first slaughtering in Atlantis. If
> anybody think they don't want that kind of thing around Sledmere,
> let me know, I'm ready to train troops to the combat skill. Please contact
> me via e-mail. My instructor is presently attending the Gathering.

I think I should call in the Black Company's psycholgist.  First
he calls for people to have fun fighting, then claims no one
wants fights around Sledmere, and finally seems to be gearing up
for war dispite being against fighting.  I had no idea a historian's
job would be so difficult.  Hmmm, the psychologist tells me this
is the normal way one works up courage to declare war.

> They did attack my HEL for pleasure.

Actually no, the captain had several other reasons.  Pleasure
was just a side effect ;-)

>I hope they don't have any contact
> with the Gathering, as this is clearly a reason to be wiped out.
>
> Regards to peaceful factions.
> I wish trouble to the others, for we, peaceful people, are in danger.

Contact with the gathering is "a reason to be wiped out"?
Are you absolutly sure you are a peaceful people?

Mark Hesidence,  <<Its French, but I'm not.  It also too long for unix
     hesiden@stoner.com

a.k.a  The Black Company
----------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 09:22:54 PST
From: "GDUNBAR.US.ORACLE.COM" <GDUNBAR@us.oracle.com>
Subject: Atlantis 2.0: Possible Combat Bug

]This is Mark historian for The Black Company.  As historian
]I feel that it is my duty to record things as accuratly as possible.
]
]Mike had nothing to do with this battle, although we are allied so his units
]should have joined the battle.  Part of the bug Geoff will fix I assume.

This is not true. Allies will only auto-join on the defensive side
of a battle. He would have had to issue an ATTACK order to be
included in the battle.

So far, the only bug I'm certain of is that battle reports did not
get properly distributed. There were actually 2 battles that took
place; since the attackers did not take any losses, they were able
to attack the scout unit again, and finish it off. However, most
reports did not show this. Also, a faction completely uninvolved
(not even within 10 hexes) received a report of the battle.

I'm still trying to determine if all of the proper defenders joined
the battle.

Geoff

----------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 18:18:26 +0100
From: Remi.Butaud@ustc.vlsi.com (Remi Butaud)
Subject: Atlantis: Black Company

To those who don't care about Role-playing, do not read this, please.

Warning to all :

Please do not make any confusion between the actual player
(I am Remi, not insane, as far as I can tell, but can anyone
who is insane know he is actually ? Mmmhh.... I'm not sure
I can convince anybody with that...) and the Atlantis characters
(Gurwan : Surely insane, but not responsible for it... easy how I can
get my way out of that.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------

M. cognoscenti, Faction (24) House Scio :

What's all this blah blah about not wanting to be included in the
attacking units. It's not very fair, as you were complaining a few
messages before about your units _not_ joining the fight. Boy,
do you think everybody's blind ? You could at least have some courage.
I know what I'm talking about.

To The Black company :

Yes, The voyagers are sending (and receiving) reports from the CCC,
but there is no such thing as a warning not to go in 46,53 in any
of the messages I had. This reduces your sort-of-trying-not-to-look-too-bad
to barely nothing.
By wiped out, I just meant wiped out of the Gathering, of course,
I'm really, really feeling terrible when I think you could have
misunderstood me, did you ?

I am absolutely sure I am peaceful. (Am I ? Yes, I am)
Oh, BTW, please, show me your psychologist, as far as you're sure
you don't need him every now and then ;-)
I haven't eaten any for quite a long time ; and I'm quite pissed
when one of those smart-asses comes and tell me what my brain is
trying to make me understand !

Gurwan,
Voyagers from Breizh, Mourners.

-------------------

Remi

(Remi.Butaud@ustc.vlsi.COM)
----------------------------------------------------------
From: tulrich@unlinfo.unl.edu (Tim Ulrich)
Subject: Re: Atlantis 2.0: Possible Combat Bug
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 15:00:25 -0600 (CST)

> However, most
> reports did not show this. Also, a faction completely uninvolved
> (not even within 10 hexes) received a report of the battle.

That was me!  While I'm not totally sure about whether the world
"wraps" or not, as near as I can tell I'm about 60 sectors away from
where the battle took place.

Imagine my surprise as I'm reading about this battle, trying to figure
out if one of my units had somehow been magically teleported far away.

On my report, unit 942 (and all the other units of the faction which
were listed), attacked unit 958.  In the free round of attacks that
942 had, 3 high elves from 958 bit the dust.  958 was "routed", and
942 got another free round of attacks.  958 lost one.

The last bit says:

>  Total Casualties:
>  Scouting party (958) loses 4.
>  Unit (942) loses 0.

Just my view on the situation from several hundred (or is it thousand ?)
miles away.
--
Any views I express are probably my own...
Nobody else is willing to let me speak for them!

Timothy Ulrich					tulrich@unlinfo.unl.edu
----------------------------------------------------------
From: "Matthew S. Taylor" <matthew@clark.net>
Subject: Atlantis-Giri's faux pass
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 15:27:27 -0500 (EST)

I for one am willing to, this one time, give Giri the benifit of the doubt.
I find his action re the chain letter tacky, but forgivable ONCE & the double
faction explination plausable.  I will not shoot on site, but will expect a
greater effort to avoid spamming the lsit.
--
Matthew Taylor

matthew@clark.net