ATLANTISv2 atl-design-digest #4

From: csd@microplex.com (Christian Daudt)

Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 02:59:33 +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.
----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 13:57:54 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA02502; Tue, 24 Jan 95 13:57:54 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA23883
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:25:25 -0800
Received: from gatekeeper.us.oracle.com by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA23879
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:25:19 -0800
Received:  from prodpyr2.us.oracle.com by gatekeeper.us.oracle.com with SMTP (8.6.7/37.7)
	id NAA19734; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:25:07 -0800
Received:  by prodpyr2.us.oracle.com (Oracle 1.12/37.7)
	id AA16884; Tue, 24 Jan 95 13:23:58 PST
Message-Id: <9501242123.AA16884@prodpyr2.us.oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 13:23:58 PST
From: "GDUNBAR.US.ORACLE.COM" <GDUNBAR@us.oracle.com>
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Subject: Re: Atlantis: getting meta-game information through e-mail
X-Orcl-Application: In-Reply-To: UNX03.US.ORACLE.COM:owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net's message of 24-Jan-95 13:47
X-Orcl-Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
             boundary=Boundary-8207321-0-0

--Boundary-8207321-0-0

Although this would be nice, I'm not going to do any of that
right now. Currently, I run the game on a different computer
than I receive the email on, making querying the game file
impossible. And, although I could set up a faction-finder
system of some sort, I think that providing a player list has
nearly the same effect, with the bonus that it is less work
for me.

Geoff

--Boundary-8207321-0-0
X-Orcl-Content-Type: message/rfc822

Received: 24 Jan 1995 12:55:54                    Sent: 24 Jan 1995 12:46:24
From:"owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net" <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Subject: Atlantis: getting meta-game information through e-mail
Reply-to: owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net

I just sent a message to atl-players suggesting that people reveal their
factions, so that e-mail could be used to communicate.  The problem is
that not everyone has easy access to the players list that is sitting
in ftp.rahul.net:pub/atlantis.  How hard would it be to set up a
mail daemon that would respond to requests for information about
Atlantis?
For instance, someone could send a request like:
    SEND FACTION 89
and would get back:
    grady@swindle.Berkeley.EDU
I know that it is currently possible to send to an ftpmail site and
grab anything available just by FTP, but this mechanism, were it
implemented, could eventually be used for other automated requests.
For instance, it could be used to do turn checking (assuming someone
completes an Atlantis-2 checker).  Perhaps in the long run, it could be
used to communicate with others in a given sector, by relaying e-mail to
others within that sector, even if they have not revealed their faction.

Of course, the big problem with this is that it is yet another program
for Geoff to write/maintain.  (For anything other than providing the FTP
information, it would have to have access to the game database, so it
could not be completely independent.)

Steven

--Boundary-8207321-0-0--
----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 13:59:21 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA02529; Tue, 24 Jan 95 13:59:21 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA23350
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:17:00 -0800
Received: from swindle.Berkeley.EDU by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA23319
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:16:34 -0800
Received: from localhost by swindle.Berkeley.EDU (5.65/XCF-1.34)
	id AA29737; Tue, 24 Jan 95 13:16:19 -0800
Message-Id: <9501242116.AA29737@swindle.Berkeley.EDU>
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Subject: Atlantis: forecasting results
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 13:16:12 -0800
From: grady@swindle.Berkeley.EDU

In Phoenix (a commercial PBEM game I'm currently playing), there is
a _wonderful_ facility, wherein when you send a turn in, you get back
both a syntax check (telling you which orders you submitted were formed
incorrectly), and a "forecast" report, which tells you approximately
what the results of your turn will be (with assumptions made for certain
unknown variables, such as the combat skill of an opponent).  It can do
this because the forecasting mechanism is built into the Phoenix engine
-- the same code generates the forecasts and the actual turns.  I haven't
played enough of Atlantis to know whether a forecast makes sense, but
there are definitely some great reasons for having the turn-checker
be done by the some program as the game itself (increased robustness,
reliability, security, convenience, and accuracy spring to mind).
I seem to recall a discussion about this going on during Atlantis-1.0,
and I think the conclusion was that Russell couldn't easily add it to
the engine.  But since this is a new version (has it been rewritten by
any chance?), maybe it would be easier to add now?

I want to make it clear that I am talking about something that does
more than just check the syntax, even if it isn't a true forecast.
E.g., given the current state of the world, if you issued an order
like "BUY 20 swords", it could tell you that there were only 6 swords
available.  Perhaps it could tell you the state (<behind>, <reveal>,
etc) of all your units after your orders would complete, etc.  It could
check that the UNIT order specifies a UNIT you own.  There are lots of
useful checks that could not be done without game knowledge.

On the other hand, now that I think about it, all this could be done
with a program that used the most recent turn report as the source of
it's information (assuming each turn report contains the complete state
of your current knowledge)... But the reasons mentioned above for having
the same program do both still hold.  Nonetheless, I'm not holding my
breath for such a modification to the game, so in the meantime, maybe
I'll write something in Perl -- if I do, I'll announce it.  But still,
after my experience with Phoenix, I feel like any PBEM game with a
modicum of self-respect should have a turn-checker built in...

Steven

PS If you're interested in Phoenix, contact info@den.com...
----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 14:41:54 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA02746; Tue, 24 Jan 95 14:41:54 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA10515
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 09:31:58 -0800
Received: from imag.imag.fr by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA10510
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 09:31:53 -0800
Received: from cosmos.imag.fr (cosmos.imag.fr [147.171.130.1]) by imag.imag.fr (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id SAA09438 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:31:49 +0100
Received: from deimos.imag.fr (deimos.imag.fr [147.171.20.10]) by cosmos.imag.fr (8.6.8/8.6.6) with ESMTP id SAA13130 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:31:49 +0100
Received: (dedieu@localhost) by deimos.imag.fr (8.6.8/8.6.9) id SAA15716 for atl-design@tango.rahul.net; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:31:28 +0100
Message-Id: <199501241731.SAA15716@deimos.imag.fr>
From: Eric Dedieu <Eric.Dedieu@imag.fr>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:31:28 +0100
X-Organization: IMAG Institute, University of Grenoble
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Subject: ATLANTIS. Entertainment question.

How are the entertainment fees computed ?

In the rules:

"The demand for entertainment, and the amount of money that can be earned this
way, are shown in region descriptions".

I see only the amount of money, not the demand. Is it the poulation of the
region ? If so, information still lacks about what silver can be expected per
skill level.

--
Eric Dedieu  (Eric.Dedieu@imag.fr)
LIFIA - 46 av. Felix Viallet, 38031 Grenoble Cedex, France
Tel: 76 57 48 13  - Fax: 76 57 46 02  - Dom: 76 49 78 80
----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 15:09:02 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA02926; Tue, 24 Jan 95 15:09:02 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA28276
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 14:46:13 -0800
Received: from gatekeeper.svl.trw.com by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA28263
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 14:46:00 -0800
Received: from smtp.svl.trw.com (smtpout.svl.trw.com) by gatekeeper.svl.trw.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA03075; Tue, 24 Jan 95 14:41:02 PST
Message-Id: <n1421164032.6411@smtp.svl.trw.com>
Date: 24 Jan 1995 17:32:08 -0800
From: "Mike Hughes" <Mike_Hughes@smtp.svl.trw.com>
Subject: Re: Atlantis- getting meta-
To: "Atlantis Design mailing list" <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
X-Mailer: Mail*Link SMTP-QM 3.0.2

Reply to:   RE>>Atlantis: getting meta-game information through e-mail

Looking at the rules, it appears that the FIND command still works.  It will
return the e-mail address of selected factions.

So:
 FIND 120

Should return:
 The address of Faction 120 (120) is mike_hughes@smtp.svl.trw.com.

Mike

----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 15:24:07 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA02983; Tue, 24 Jan 95 15:24:07 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA25108
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:49:58 -0800
Received: from minerva.cis.yale.edu by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA25070
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:49:24 -0800
Received: from [130.132.111.106] (je-college-node.net.yale.edu) by minerva.cis.yale.edu with SMTP id AA19910
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 16:46:12 -0500
Message-Id: <v01510109ab4b240229ec@[130.132.111.106]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 16:47:46 -0500
To: DBS%MP003@mpa15ab.mv-oc.unisys.com, <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
From: mosherj@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Joshua Mosher)
Subject: Re: atl- Ward & Exit

At 12:14 PM 1/24/95, DBS%MP003@mpa15ab.mv-oc.unisys.com wrote:
>>Exits/ This refers to exits from Atlantis city. Are they random (ie to
>>different cities each turn)? If not maybe they should be to spread the
>>200 odd(in some cases very odd ;-) ) factions across the map.
>
>I agree, this would be a good feature.  The exits should be randomly
>set to cities within the world.  This not only allows players to
>settle in diverse locations, but adds a certain amount of randomness
>to the startup.

I don't know--I can see severe problems with this proposal. It would make
Atlantis City very unfriendly to the inexperienced or error-prone. What if
you accidentally left half the force you just spent good money recruiting
behind as you left A.C.? If the exits change, you could end up marooned.
The exit system is complicated as it is. Let's not make people's lives
miserable!

[snip]
>On War factions, I still think that there should be some
>combat/tactics skill benifit for specializing as a War faction.
>Let's face it specializing as a war faction makes it so that
>you can't even make your own weapons, and magic is out of the
>question.  I suggest that the tactics skill be eliminated
>from the other specialized factions (at least as a learnable
>skill after they specialize, maybe they can keep the ones they
>have already trained and accept transfer of ones from other
>factions).

Well, taxation has proven an immensely powerful tool in the past--I
wouldn't pity the poor War factions too much. Some have even suggested
making Taxing a full-month activity. It is a matter of concern, though. I
think that is what the playtest is for, to see whether the faction types
(and the other aspects of the game) are balanced. If they aren't, I am sure
Geoff will entertain ideas like limiting tactics learning.

Josh Mosher

----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 15:29:45 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA03012; Tue, 24 Jan 95 15:29:45 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA29650
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 15:08:15 -0800
Received: from swindle.Berkeley.EDU by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA29642
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 15:08:12 -0800
Received: from localhost by swindle.Berkeley.EDU (5.65/XCF-1.34)
	id AA00137; Tue, 24 Jan 95 15:08:11 -0800
Message-Id: <9501242308.AA00137@swindle.Berkeley.EDU>
To: "Mike Hughes" <Mike_Hughes@smtp.svl.trw.com>
Cc: "Atlantis Design mailing list" <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Subject: Re: Atlantis- getting meta-
In-Reply-To: Your message of 24 Jan 1995 17:32:08 -0800
	     <n1421164032.6411@smtp.svl.trw.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 15:08:09 -0800
From: grady@swindle.Berkeley.EDU

> Looking at the rules, it appears that the FIND command still works.  It will
> return the e-mail address of selected factions.

Unfortunately, you can't use that to communicate _before_ the next
turn is run.

Steven
----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 15:56:53 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA03182; Tue, 24 Jan 95 15:56:53 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA01978
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 15:45:30 -0800
Received: from think2.lakeheadu.ca by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA01967
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 15:45:24 -0800
Received: from thunder.lakeheadu.ca by THINK2.LakeheadU.Ca with PMDF#10551;
 Tue, 24 Jan 1995 17:53 EDT
Received: by thunder.LakeheadU.Ca (5.61/4.7) id AA03722; Tue, 24 Jan 95
 17:54:22 -0500
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 17:36:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Daniel Percival White <dpwhite@THUNDER.LakeheadU.CA>
Subject: Re: Atlantis: forecasting results
In-Reply-To: <9501242116.AA29737@swindle.Berkeley.EDU>
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Message-Id: <Pine.3.05.9501241729.A3317-b100000@thunder>
X-Envelope-To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Mime-Version: 1.0

On Tue, 24 Jan 1995 grady@swindle.Berkeley.EDU wrote:

I believe the source code for Galaxy had a turn checker in there
somewhere... it referenced your orders against the main database of the
program, and gave you all the commands it recieved properly, and any
problems it had with them...

> after my experience with Phoenix, I feel like any PBEM game with a
> modicum of self-respect should have a turn-checker built in...

Perhaps you could set up the program to do a little bit more... maybe
write a program that is left running that checks incoming e-mail at
atlantis@rahul.net that you can write messages to...
ie. picks up commands in body of text when subject = "BOT"
commands could be as follows:

(note I used BOUNCE - you could substitute 'SEND' - I'm too lazy to edit
it out)

BOUNCE TURN - resends your turn (if somehow you seemed to have lost it)
BOUNCE TIMES - sends you a copy of your latest TIMES submission - to
perhaps check something, or if you remember something later you wanted to
add, but weren't sure you had in there... (etc)
BOUNCE ORDERS - sends you a copy of your latest ORDERS submission, again,
similar reasons...
FIND XXX  - sends you the e-mail address of faction xxx (same as the FIND
command for your turn...
FIND ALL  - sends a list of all the e-mail addresses it can get ahold of.
HIDE ME   - disallows someone using the FIND command to get your e-mail
address (i.e. you don't want people to know you exist...) perhaps this
could check the alliances file (or whatever there is) and allow FIND to be
used by anyone declared friendly or better.

I can't think of any more off hand, but I'm sure someone else will

BTW, I'd love to code this... I'd just need a hand with a couple of
things......

Daniel.

----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 17:29:59 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA03653; Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:29:59 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA17100
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:26:27 -0800
Received: from keymaster.us.oracle.com by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA17077
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:26:18 -0800
Received:  from prodpyr2.us.oracle.com by keymaster.us.oracle.com with SMTP (8.6.7/37.7)
	id LAA07276; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:26:11 -0800
Received:  by prodpyr2.us.oracle.com (Oracle 1.12/37.7)
	id AA20658; Tue, 24 Jan 95 11:24:10 PST
Message-Id: <9501241924.AA20658@prodpyr2.us.oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 11:24:10 PST
From: "GDUNBAR.US.ORACLE.COM" <GDUNBAR@us.oracle.com>
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Subject: Re: ATLANTIS. Entertainment question.
X-Orcl-Application: In-Reply-To: UNX03.US.ORACLE.COM:owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net's message of 24-Jan-95 10:51
X-Orcl-Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
             boundary=Boundary-8203995-0-0

--Boundary-8203995-0-0

Sorry, this is a bug in the rules. $20 per level per man.

Geoff

--Boundary-8203995-0-0
X-Orcl-Content-Type: message/rfc822

Received: 24 Jan 1995 10:06:20                    Sent: 24 Jan 1995 09:50:29
From:"Eric Dedieu " <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Subject: ATLANTIS. Entertainment question.
Reply-to: owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net
X-Orcl-Application: X-Organization:  IMAG Institute, University of Grenoble

How are the entertainment fees computed ?

In the rules:

"The demand for entertainment, and the amount of money that can be earned this
way, are shown in region descriptions".

I see only the amount of money, not the demand. Is it the poulation of the
region ? If so, information still lacks about what silver can be expected per
skill level.

--
Eric Dedieu  (Eric.Dedieu@imag.fr)
LIFIA - 46 av. Felix Viallet, 38031 Grenoble Cedex, France
Tel: 76 57 48 13  - Fax: 76 57 46 02  - Dom: 76 49 78 80

--Boundary-8203995-0-0--
----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 17:31:03 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA03676; Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:31:03 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA06098
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 17:06:52 -0800
Received: from gatekeeper.us.oracle.com by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA06089
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 17:06:44 -0800
Received:  from prodpyr1.us.oracle.com by gatekeeper.us.oracle.com with SMTP (8.6.7/37.7)
	id OAA27810; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 14:19:41 -0800
Received:  by prodpyr1.us.oracle.com (Oracle 1.12/37.7)
	id AB00407; Tue, 24 Jan 95 13:31:13 PST
Message-Id: <9501242131.AB00407@prodpyr1.us.oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 13:31:13 PST
From: "GDUNBAR.US.ORACLE.COM" <GDUNBAR@us.oracle.com>
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Subject: Atlantis: Tactics

>On War factions, I still think that there should be some
>combat/tactics skill benifit for specializing as a War faction.
>Let's face it specializing as a war faction makes it so that
>you can't even make your own weapons, and magic is out of the
>question.  I suggest that the tactics skill be eliminated
>from the other specialized factions (at least as a learnable
>skill after they specialize, maybe they can keep the ones they
>have already trained and accept transfer of ones from other
>factions).

Dave,

I don't think you were on this list when tactics came up before.
What I think I'm going to do is implement a limit on the total
levels of tactics that you can have in your faction, based on
faction type:
              Levels
              ------
Non-War       3
Generic       5
1/2 War       10
War           25

So, a War-only faction can have 5 fully trained tacticians, while
a non-War faction can have 1 level 3 tactician, or 3 level 1
tacticians.

This system adds two things:
1) Gives more advantage to War factions in battle.
2) Makes you deployment of good tacticians an important issue.

This idea is very much up for debate; what do you guys think?

Geoff

----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 17:42:57 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA03756; Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:42:57 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA19748
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 12:17:15 -0800
Received: from swindle.Berkeley.EDU by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA19713
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 12:16:36 -0800
Received: from localhost by swindle.Berkeley.EDU (5.65/XCF-1.34)
	id AA29615; Tue, 24 Jan 95 12:16:09 -0800
Message-Id: <9501242016.AA29615@swindle.Berkeley.EDU>
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
Subject: Atlantis: getting meta-game information through e-mail
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 12:16:08 -0800
From: grady@swindle.Berkeley.EDU

Steven
----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 18:11:26 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA03904; Tue, 24 Jan 95 18:11:26 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA08160
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 17:45:34 -0800
Received: from news.his.com by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA08082
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 17:43:44 -0800
Received: from his.com (clone@localhost) by news.his.com (8.6.4/8.6.4) with UUCP id UAA00829; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 20:23:16 -0500
From: tim.hruby@his.com
Received: by his.com
     id 0N8KX0IV Tue, 24 Jan 95 16:32:30
Message-Id: <9501241632.0N8KX0I@his.com>
Organization: Heller Information Services, Inc.
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.24
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 16:32:30
Subject: BUYING RECRUITS
To: mosherj@minerva.cis.yale.edu, atl-design@tango.rahul.net

> I noticed a problematic result from the first turn. In the rules, it says
 > that if there is too much demand, the product will be distributed
 > proportional to each unit's BUY request size. Apparently, though, if your
 > BUY order is too small, you don't get anything at all. This seems an odd
 > way to distribute goods and will lead to silly levels of competition. To
 > guarantee that I get at least one elf, for example, I must ask for
 > five or six. If others don't actually want elves, I end up with far too
 > many for my needs.
 >
 > How about a small modification that says that a faction is guaranteed at
 > least one of the product with too much demand (unless there simply isn't
 > enough to go around to each faction, in which case they could be
 > distributed randomly one to each until they run out)? This would
 > seem fairer and much more reasonable.
 >
 > Josh Mosher
 >
 > P.S. My whole assumption may be wrong--I am sure Geoff will correct
 > me if what I described in my first paragraph is incorrect. It just seems
 > to fit what I and others experienced in the first turn.
 >
Josh,

I noticed this before the first turn and mentioned it to Geoff.  I disagree
with your assessment and proposed repair, however, because (1) this is want
competition and auctions are like, as you may have to overbid to get what you
want, and that carries the risk of you paying too much, (it would probably be
too difficult to code a bidding war auction into the Rules, where you could
offer to pay more toguarantee that you get the precise quantity you want) and
(2) your remedy would create an exploitable bug.

Here's a copy of what I wrote Geoff, and his reply:

Me:
4]  I assume that when there is more demand for recruits than the region can
supply, we'll get them pro rata to our demand for them? I assume this because
other things are explicitly listed in the rules this way.

A side question:  Will you always get at least one of something you tried to
buy, or is it possible to get nothing?  If you'll always get at least one,
what prevents a person from cutting and pasting multiple "buy 1 xx" orders, to
guarantee that they get precisely the number they want?  This could a
seriously exploitable bug.

Geoff:
Your assumption is correct. It is possible to get 0.

----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 18:17:18 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA03939; Tue, 24 Jan 95 18:17:18 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA08025
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 17:41:42 -0800
Received: from news.his.com by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA07997
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 17:40:51 -0800
Received: from clone.UUCP (clone@localhost) by news.his.com (8.6.4/8.6.4) with UUCP id UAA01533 for atl-design@tango.rahul.net; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 20:35:23 -0500
Received: by clone.his.com (Fred/1.9q)
	id AA07499; Tue, 24 Jan 1995 17:10:03
From: tim.hruby@his.com (Tim Hruby)
Reply-To: tim.hruby@his.com
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 16:10:35
Message-Id: <790996205.AA07499@clone.his.com>
Subject: Atlantis Design: Missile Weapons
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net

I have a feeling that the Crossbow is overpowered compared to the Longbow.

Compare:
(A)
100 Green Longbow troops (L1) get 16.6% hits a turn (.5 * 1:2 table (33%))
                                                 -> 17 kills vs. no armor
                                                 -> 12 kills vs. Mail
                                                 ->  6 kills vs. Plate

100 Green Crossbow troops (X1) get 33.3% hits every 2 turns (.5 * 2:1 (66%))
                                                 ->  33 kills vs. any Armor

If you have green troops, it's obviously better to have Xbowmen, as they'll
get guaranteed more kills than the bowmen. And even when bowmen can match the
Xbow for kills, the bowmen have to spread it out over two rounds, allowing the
enemy to get more attacks in before they are taken out.

(B)
100 Regular Longbow troops (L2) get 25% hits a turn (.5 * 1:1 table (50%))
                                                 -> 25 kills vs. no armor
                                                 -> 17 kills vs. Mail
                                                 -> 8 kills vs. Plate

100 Regular Crossbow troops (X2) get 40% hits every 2 turns (.5 * 4:1 (80%))
                                                 ->  40 kills vs. any Armor

Here, the Xbowmen appear clearly superior vs. any type of armored forces.  The
Longbowmen are superior only against rabble.

(C)
100 Elite Longbow troops (L3) get 33% hits a turn (.5 * 2:1 table (66%))
                                                 -> 33 kills vs. no armor
                                                 -> 22 kills vs. Mail
                                                 -> 11 kills vs. Plate

100 Elite Crossbow troops (X3) get 44% hits every 2 turns (.5 * 8:1 (88%))
                                                 ->  44 kills vs. any Armor

Here again, the Xbowmen appear clearly superior vs. any type of armored
forces, and the Longbowmen are superior only against rabble.

I think this is somewhat skewed.  To balance things out somewhat, I propose
narrowing the skill gap by 1, i.e. Xbow is targeted vs. 1 rather than zero,
while LB remains vs. 2.  Or LB is lowered to 1, and XB remains at zero.

Here's a Chart: (remember the 1/2 rate for Xbows)

Weapon    Troop Skill  Target#  Hits/Attack  Kills/NArmor  /Mail    /Plate
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current LB     1         2        16.6%         16.6%      11.1%     5.5%
Current XB     1         0        33.3%         33.3%      33.3%     33.3%

Current LB     2         2        25%           25%        16.6%     8.3%
Current XB     2         0        40%           40%        40%       40%

Current LB     3         2        33%           33%        22%       11%
Current XB     3         0        44%           44%        44%       44%

**********
Current LB     1         2        16.6%         16.6%      11.1%     5.5%
Harder  XB     1         1        25%           25%        25%       25%

Current LB     2         2        25%           25%        16.6%     8.3%
Harder  XB     2         1        33.3%         33.3%      33.3%     33.3%

Current LB     3         2        33.3%         33.3%      22.2%     11.1%
Harder  XB     3         1        40%           40%        40%       40%

**********
Easier  LB     1         1        25%           25%        16.6%     8.3%
Current XB     1         0        33.3%         33.3%      33.3%     33.3%

Easier  LB     2         1        33.3%         33.3%      22.2%     11.1%
Current XB     2         0        40%           40%        40%       40%

Easier  LB     3         1        40%           40%        26.6%     13.3%
Current XB     3         0        44%           44%        44%       44%

Either one of these changes makes the Longbow a more comparable weapon to the
Xbow, while still differentiating them by speed and armor-piercing ability.

I think that I prefer the "Harder Xbow" option, as it better retains the
Xbow's superiority against Armored opponents. I think the Xbow is still
superior in a comparision between 40% every other round vs. 22.2% each round,
due to the importance of front-loading the other sides casualties.  I'm not as
certain of the winner in the 1 @ 44% vs. 2 @ 26.6% comparison.

Comments?  Do people agree with me?  Should we push Geoff to make this a
change?

Tim

--
tim.hruby@his.com
PGP key available by server or request.
507/7305D1   2C 67 E4 30 A1 A1 B2 2D   94 12 6C 9C 9D F3 A7 B8
----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 18:35:31 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA04050; Tue, 24 Jan 95 18:35:31 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA09882
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:20:43 -0800
Received: from minerva.cis.yale.edu by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA09873
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:20:39 -0800
Received: from [130.132.111.106] (je-college-node.net.yale.edu) by minerva.cis.yale.edu with SMTP id AA06734
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 21:20:27 -0500
Message-Id: <v01510101ab4b63985708@[130.132.111.106]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 21:20:31 -0500
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
From: mosherj@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Joshua Mosher)
Subject: Re: BUYING RECRUITS

At 4:32 PM 1/24/95, tim.hruby@his.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > I noticed a problematic result from the first turn. In the rules, it says
> > that if there is too much demand, the product will be distributed
> > proportional to each unit's BUY request size. Apparently, though, if your
> > BUY order is too small, you don't get anything at all. This seems an odd
> > way to distribute goods and will lead to silly levels of competition. To
> > guarantee that I get at least one elf, for example, I must ask for
> > five or six. If others don't actually want elves, I end up with far too
> > many for my needs.
> >
> > How about a small modification that says that a faction is guaranteed at
> > least one of the product with too much demand (unless there simply isn't
> > enough to go around to each faction, in which case they could be
> > distributed randomly one to each until they run out)? This would
> > seem fairer and much more reasonable.
> >
> > Josh Mosher
> >
> > P.S. My whole assumption may be wrong--I am sure Geoff will correct
> > me if what I described in my first paragraph is incorrect. It just seems
> > to fit what I and others experienced in the first turn.
> >
>Josh,
>
>I noticed this before the first turn and mentioned it to Geoff.  I disagree
>with your assessment and proposed repair, however, because (1) this is want
>competition and auctions are like, as you may have to overbid to get what you
>want, and that carries the risk of you paying too much, (it would probably be
>too difficult to code a bidding war auction into the Rules, where you could
>offer to pay more toguarantee that you get the precise quantity you want) and
>(2) your remedy would create an exploitable bug.

Actually, if you look carefully at my proposal, I do not allow for your bug
because my repair would only distribute one of the product _per_faction._
This means you can't have every single unit BUY to get more, no can you can
several BUY orders from one unit to do the same. If there is an excessive
demand, each faction get one. Geoff has already said he doesn't consider
this an important issue, but I hope he will reconsider if there are any
truly scarce commodities out there.

As far as my original assessment. I do think it rather silly that one had
to try to BUY ridiculous numbers of elves just to get any reasonable
number. It just doesn't seem to relate to an ordinary, real world situation
at all. If there is a shortage, you don't solve it by trying to buy _more!_
Instead you offer a higher price. As I and others have suggested, this
would be a clever and fair alternative.

Josh Mosher

----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 18:36:00 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA04059; Tue, 24 Jan 95 18:36:00 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA09924
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:21:41 -0800
Received: from minerva.cis.yale.edu by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA09916
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:21:37 -0800
Received: from [130.132.111.106] (je-college-node.net.yale.edu) by minerva.cis.yale.edu with SMTP id AA06642
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 21:20:05 -0500
Message-Id: <v01510101ab4b63985708@[130.132.111.106]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 21:20:10 -0500
To: tim.hruby@his.com, atl-design@tango.rahul.net
From: mosherj@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Joshua Mosher)
Subject: Re: BUYING RECRUITS

Josh Mosher

----------------------------------------------------------
From owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net  Tue Jan 24 18:59:21 1995
Return-Path: <owner-atl-design@tango.rahul.net>
Received: from tango.rahul.net by microplex.com (4.1/SMI-4.1/920826)
	id AA04154; Tue, 24 Jan 95 18:59:21 PST
Received: by tango.rahul.net id AA10941
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for real-atl-design); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:49:01 -0800
Received: from minerva.cis.yale.edu by tango.rahul.net with SMTP id AA10935
  (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:48:57 -0800
Received: from [130.132.111.106] (je-college-node.net.yale.edu) by minerva.cis.yale.edu with SMTP id AA14544
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for <atl-design@tango.rahul.net>); Tue, 24 Jan 1995 21:48:50 -0500
Message-Id: <v01510103ab4b6aadffa8@[130.132.111.106]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 21:48:55 -0500
To: atl-design@tango.rahul.net
From: mosherj@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Joshua Mosher)
Subject: Re: Atlantis Design: Missile Weapons

At 4:10 PM 1/24/95, Tim Hruby wrote:
>I have a feeling that the Crossbow is overpowered compared to the Longbow.

[excellent analysis cut]

>Either one of these changes makes the Longbow a more comparable weapon to the
>Xbow, while still differentiating them by speed and armor-piercing ability.
>
>I think that I prefer the "Harder Xbow" option, as it better retains the
>Xbow's superiority against Armored opponents. I think the Xbow is still
>superior in a comparision between 40% every other round vs. 22.2% each round,
>due to the importance of front-loading the other sides casualties.  I'm not as
>certain of the winner in the 1 @ 44% vs. 2 @ 26.6% comparison.
>
>Comments?  Do people agree with me?  Should we push Geoff to make this a
>change?
>
>Tim

Yeah, I have always thought the crossbow a superior weapon (perhaps someone
with more military experience than I in old Atlantis might contradict me).
In particular, a tactical advantage plus crossbows seems devastating. You
get to pound his armored troops, and then his weakened force gets to
respond.

However, it is important to note that armor did not seem plentiful in old
Atlantis. Even experienced factions apparently found it usually more
valuable to make their iron into swords to tax and fight with. Given that
scenario, the "rabble" could very well be deadly swordsmen, just poorly
protected.

Josh Mosher