From: Gregory Wong <sax@s...>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 11:30:19 -0700
Subject: [OT] JUMP and mail list archives
I asked this before, but I didn't get any responses. I was looking for a review of the game JUMP, and someone pointed me to the archives for this list. I then asked where I could find the archives for this list, and I didn't get a response. Could someone please point me to the archives of this list? Thanks.
From: Roger Burton West <roger@f...>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 19:37:17 +0100
Subject: Re: [OT] JUMP and mail list archives
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 11:30:19AM -0700, Gregory Wong wrote: Web: http://www.warpfish.com/jhan/ft/Archive/index.shtml
From: Jeremey Claridge <jeremy.claridge@k...>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 19:52:19 +0100 ()
Subject: Re: [OT] JUMP and mail list archives
> Could someone please point Point------------------ http://www.warpfish.com/
From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 15:42:51 -0400
Subject: Re: [OT] JUMP and mail list archives
At least half a dozen list members have participated in a couple of PBeM games of JUMP and it seems to be a pretty fair explore-and-conquer-the-universe game. Whether or not you like it depends on how much detail you want--it was a bit too simplified for me. I think it would be pretty easy to implement fixes, though. If I were assigned to fix it, some of the things I would fix are: * add benefits for trading with other nations *slightly more unit types to produce somewhat more complex combat *add detail to tech tree *give players the ability to influence what they're researching *delete "transport through black hole" The main problem with it, though, is that as Player A gets an advantage, he becomes more and more unbeatable. When you find a rich planet, you get more income; you use the income to build more ships; you use the ships to find more planets... On the other hand, if you don't happen to have juicy planets around (or if you can't recruit/conquer them quickly), you're sunk. That's not unrealistic on the face of it, but it's a problem from a game standpoint IMHO. In theory (and in the Real World) the little guys can band together to hold off the superpower, but in the game, it's too easy for the superpower to lure smaller nations away from the coalition, then crush the coalition, then annex his "allies". The diplomacy in a FTF game *may* better enable the other players to keep the leader in check than I could in PBeM. It would be easy enough to fix with some kind of "Domestic Unrest" factor so that the bigger you got, the more you had to subtract from your economy (or the more likely you were to suffer insurrections). YMMV [quoted original message omitted]