BSE Digest V1 #20

From: kerry@io.com (Kerry Harrison)

Date: Sat, 03 Dec 1994 00:28:11 +0000

BSE Digest                Friday, 2 December 1994      Volume 01 : Number 020

In this issue:

+       BSE: Cargo Carrier = Cargo Carrier
+       Re: BSE: Fuel
+       BSE: SAM CC
+       BSE: FAX Turns
+       BSE: Convention Meeting
+       BSE: Cargo Carrier = Cargo Carrier
+       BSE: BSE- Thoughts on Fuel
+       BSE: Territory
+       Re: BSE: Territory
+       Re: BSE: Fuel
+       Re: BSE: Cargo Carrier = Cargo Carrier
+       Re: BSE: Convention Meeting
+       Re: BSE: FAX Turns
+       BSE: Re: DELTA EMPIRE

See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the bse-list
or bse-digest mailing lists.

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

From: RTGThad@aol.com
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 1994 20:18:12 -0500
Subject: BSE: Cargo Carrier = Cargo Carrier

The reference to offensive use has to do with the delivery of ground combat
material <for the SAM that would be in conjunction with teleporters as well>,
not space battle. The Cargo Carrier has always been classified as a cargo
ship. Ask Don Pierce or Mike Sheperd if they wouldn't have liked to use the
CC as a warship at the FK battles.

The only CC EVER used in this role was the Delta Empire and that was when
they were configured 400-500-10. And it took Charlie Gittings and the USS et.
al.  3 years to research a way to put Pulsars on board and get them to
function.

Sorry, guys, it is a "Cargo Carrier", quite literally. This is not a new an
RTG thing, it's the way it has always been.

Thad

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

From: RFN2@aol.com
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 1994 23:36:52 -0500
Subject: Re: BSE: Fuel

Let's just say that all ships are solar or fission powered and be done with
this fuel thing. We all have more to do, and there are better ways to improve
the game and our enjoyment of it.
This is my buck fifty.
Rob

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

From: Jackmyster@aol.com
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 1994 23:47:03 -0500
Subject: BSE: SAM CC

Sorry guys.

The CC could never fire offensive weapons <did that include bug farts? g>

The only way it could be used "offensively" was to carry warriors, inside SAM
space.

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

From: Alan Hatcher <ZU02380@UABDPO.DPO.UAB.EDU>
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 94 08:59:41 CST
Subject: BSE: FAX Turns

I have a request to make of RTG while you're considering changes to the
game.  How about considering a drop of the two-day waiting period on faxed in
turns.  With postage going up to 32 cents in January, plus the fact that it
usually takes 4 days or so for mail to get from here in the outback of Alabama
to anywhere outside the South East, I find it cheaper and safer to fax in
turns.  I never really understood ABM's view that faxing somehow gave a big
advantage to a player.  As long as a player is only running 70 tu's a week for
a position I can't really see where this is so, unless a player actually
having the audacity to spend more money on turns since he wouldn't have to skip
 a week seemed so horrible to Mike P.  So how about it Pete and Thad?  Would ya
 be willing to give those of us in the modern age a break? ;)

Alan

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

From: Alan Hatcher <ZU02380@UABDPO.DPO.UAB.EDU>
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 94 09:13:03 CST
Subject: BSE: Convention Meeting

I guess this is another question for Pete and Thad.  Does RTG attend any
gaming conventions on a regular basis? And if so(or if not so I guess), are
there any plans to continue the BSE get-togethers?

Alan

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

From: steve668@dallas.relay.ucm.org
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 08:59:59 CST
Subject: BSE: Cargo Carrier = Cargo Carrier

Thad,
As I understand it from a SAM, the CC's printouts do NOT say "merchant class"
vessel...unable to fire weaponry.  Meaning that they were in fact usable as
warships.  Or does this vary from SAM to SAM faction?

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

From: "Russell Boggs" <Russell_Boggs@isisph.com>
Date: 1 Dec 1994 09:53:58 U
Subject: BSE: BSE- Thoughts on Fuel

Reply to:   BSE: Thoughts on Fuel

The power plants may be fusion, but the thrust engines have to throw
something out the back to make you go forward.  Although technically not
fuel, it's close to the meaning of that term.  So it doesn't really matter
how advanced the power plant is, unless you start dealing with means of
propulsion other than what is implied by <<thrust engines>>.

Thad's idea about requiring new monster ships to require fuel is reasonable.
The <<advanced>> players who are running the monster ships can deal with the
added complexity.

I also think that maintenance is more of a role-playing consideration than a
turn surcharge.  It forces starships to come back to civilization.  You can't
go on a five year mission into the great unknown without worrying about
returning to a base.  And having frontier colonies being poor at maintenance
even adds to the flavor.

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

From: Nyghtt@aol.com
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 13:09:27 -0500
Subject: BSE: Territory

As ISS PD I am updating the IMP database (since nobody's been doing that
lately).  As part of this I want to note in the info for each system exactly
which government (if any) claims it.  Therefore I am asking all governmental/r
acial affiliations to let me know what systems they claim.

And, of course, if anyone wishes to make any other contributions I'll be
happy to include them too.

Thanks.

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

From: mhughes@pms144.pms.ford.com (Mark Hughes)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 13:44:59 EST
Subject: Re: BSE: Territory

> ... Therefore I am asking all governmental/r
> acial affiliations to let me know what systems they claim.

The Imperial Hughes Hegemony (IHH) Claims them all.  Get the hell out
of my space!

Ummm ... is this microphone on?

:-)

Mark

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

From: ccharnle@m-net148.arbornet.org (Chip Charnley)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 18:10 WET
Subject: Re: BSE: Fuel

>Let's just say that all ships are solar or fission powered and be done with
>this fuel thing. We all have more to do, and there are better ways to improve
>the game and our enjoyment of it.
>This is my buck fifty.
>Rob
>
>

FWIW, The GLYNIAN and the SNITS are FISSION powered. They basicly exploded
nuclear bombs in thier engine compartments to provide propulsion!

Chip Charnley

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

From: ccharnle@m-net148.arbornet.org (Chip Charnley)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 18:10 WET
Subject: Re: BSE: Cargo Carrier = Cargo Carrier

>The only CC EVER used in this role was the Delta Empire and that was when
>they were configured 400-500-10. And it took Charlie Gittings and the USS et.
>al.  3 years to research a way to put Pulsars on board and get them to
>function.

Thad,
     You have some facts off here. The only thing that Charlie had to
research was how to use HUMAN tech items on the DE. The research took less
than a year not three.

Chip

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

From: ccharnle@m-net148.arbornet.org (Chip Charnley)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 18:13 WET
Subject: Re: BSE: Convention Meeting

>   I guess this is another question for Pete and Thad.  Does RTG attend any
>gaming conventions on a regular basis? And if so(or if not so I guess), are
>there any plans to continue the BSE get-togethers?
>
>
>                       Alan
>
>

There was a statement in one of the files RTG posted that they would be
going to ONE major convention each year in support of BSE and thier other
games. Parenthetically they mentioned that that convention would usually be
GENCON.

Chip

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

From: ccharnle@m-net148.arbornet.org (Chip Charnley)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 18:13 WET
Subject: Re: BSE: FAX Turns

>    I have a request to make of RTG while you're considering changes to the
>game.  How about considering a drop of the two-day waiting period on faxed in
>turns.  With postage going up to 32 cents in January, plus the fact that it
>usually takes 4 days or so for mail to get from here in the outback of Alabama
>to anywhere outside the South East, I find it cheaper and safer to fax in
>turns.  I never really understood ABM's view that faxing somehow gave a big
>advantage to a player.  As long as a player is only running 70 tu's a week for
>a position I can't really see where this is so, unless a player actually
>having the audacity to spend more money on turns since he wouldn't have to skip
> a week seemed so horrible to Mike P.  So how about it Pete and Thad?  Would ya
> be willing to give those of us in the modern age a break? ;)
>
>                                   Alan
>
>

RIMWORLDS has what I consider a much more sane policy on this. That policy
says that ANY turn that involves combat must wait x days since the last turn
before it will be run. All other turns are run when received if the date
received is within the week it's supposed to run. Since BSE is run somewhat
differently, how about any position that is involved in combat on week X
won't have thier turn run until Friday of week X+1. All others will be run
when received if the turn is for the current week?

Chip

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

From: "Russell Boggs" <Russell_Boggs@isisph.com>
Date: 2 Dec 1994 15:47:06 U
Subject: BSE: Re: DELTA EMPIRE

Reply to:   RE>DELTA EMPIRE

Chip,
     Yeah, Charlie was only in the game about three years, so the research
couldn't have taken that long.
     But if I recall-and-guess correctly, when the GM's put the DELTA EMPIRE
out there, I don't think that they actually thought anyone would use it, or
if they used it, that they would use it for combat.  So I always assumed that
they didn't know enough to forbid Charlie from using it in combat, but by the
time they put players into the SAM's, they had realized their mistake.
     Or it might have been a sort of thing like Jack put it there and Mike
was stuck with watching it work.
- --Russ

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

End of BSE Digest V1 #20
************************

To subscribe to bse-digest, send the command:

subscribe bse-digest

in the body of a message to "Majordomo@io.com".  If you want to
subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-bse-list":

subscribe bse-digest local-bse-list@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "bse-digest"
in the commands above with "bse-list".