STARWEB EMAIL DISCUSSION GROUP (THE SEDG) (Sponsored by Flying Moose Technologies' Starweb Analyzer - http://flyingmoose.cjb.net) VOLUME 55 December 3, 2001 CONTENTS Feature Article – The Multi Mystique v2.0 (Part One) By Jack Fulmer Questions – Art matters SEDG Web Page URL The Captain's Log The Swap Corner - Flying Moose Technologies Starweb Analyzer V1.5 beta (and beyond) Correspondence FEATURE ARTICLE The Multi Mystique v2.0 (Part One) By Jack Fulmer The original version of this article appeared in the Flying Buffalo Quarterly #49, which was printed in February 1984. Many things have changed since then including some of my views on how to play multi-player Starweb. One thing hasn't changed though. I still like to play multi-SW better than all other Starweb variants. Since I am a Starweb player who likes to win games, I've written this article from that viewpoint. I realize there are players who don't care about score and still enjoy playing. Whatever your motivations for playing multi-SW some part of this article should be of interest to you. I would also be very interested to read multi-SW articles by other players. General Considerations If you are going to try multi-SW you had better enjoy long printouts, big battles and most importantly, logistics. Even if you only get your "share" you should control 51 worlds, 51 keys and 20 artifacts. If you are successful during the game you will own 60 to 70 or more of both worlds and keys. It is most unusual to score well with less although it could occur depending upon your character choices and if you have an extremely close alliance. At this point I've completed 19 games of multi-SW. I've averaged considerably more than 70 worlds and keys per game. In some games I've owned more than 100 worlds or keys. One of the major differences today from the situation in 1984 is that back then the web contained 225 worlds. Today of course we're dealing with 255. This has only made even stronger my belief that logistics management is crucial to success in multi-SW. Given the volume of data from your turn sheet and the logistical challenges of the game your method of turn preparation and analysis will make a difference in your multi-SW success or failure. Mapping, Turn Analysis and Order Preparation Some players I used to know prepared their turns by visually scanning their printouts and made only minimal use of maps. I'm not sure if anyone still plays Starweb that way. It is certainly possible but not very practical for multi-SW. I suspect that all players who score well in multi-SW use some sort of a map to plan their play. You might use a map only to see the world connections easily. I utilize far more detail than that but success in multi-SW requires the player to have at least a strategic overview of the game. As a practical matter only a visual map can provide that overview. I use a manually prepared map. Other players use aids such as The Starweb Analyzer from Flying Moose Technologies. No matter how you prepare your map it is very important to have most of the data from the Starweb turn sheet on it. You need to have in front of you, on the map, world connections and the crucial information about each world. This includes: industry, metal production, current population and the limit, Iships and/or Pships, the world's owner, and fleets at each world with the number of ships, metal carried and their ownership. Once you have all of this data on your map you will have an excellent view of the total situation. Do you need to get a fleet to world 42 fast? A glance at the map now shows all fleets within a one turn range of W42 plus what, if anything, is in between. There is no need to check world 42's connections, their connections, find a fleet, and remember where and how big it is while looking for others. All this preparation and analysis takes time. On average I spend about six to eight hours per turn mapping, analyzing and preparing orders for each multi-SW turn from about turn five to the end of the game. If you can't invest much time you will have difficulty succeeding at multi-SW. Whether you manually map each turn or use a computer aid it is very important to have a gestalt of the game position. With such a large number of fleets and worlds to coordinate, if you don't have an overview and a strategic plan then you are on your way to defeat. Once I've got all the information from the current turn on my map the analysis and planning starts. I write on my map the new positions for fleets that are moving or a one or two letter code for other actions. For example, I note on the map "AH" if my fleet is attacking a world. Once I do all of that I can see not only this turn's position but also what I expect to see on the next turn. Another important point is that the process of mapping out the expected new position is an iterative one. By that I mean that I will plan an action for a fleet (for example) only to come back and change that action after planning the actions of other fleets at worlds as much as four or five worlds away from the first fleet. Seeing the overview makes that process much easier and efficient. Missed orders can be very damaging. To avoid this problem I prepare my orders for each turn in sequence by the type of order. In addition, I use a checklist of order types. For example, I start by writing all ship transfer orders, then all build orders and so on. In any Starweb game you need to have some sort of a method to avoid missed orders. I started using a checklist more than ten years ago when a missed order cost me a win by 33 points. After you have finished preparing your orders for a turn put it aside for a few days. Then before you send it in recheck your orders for accuracy. At least verify the critical orders like metal hauling, PBB builds and drops, etc. Successful multi-SW players will be preparing 150 or more orders per turn from turn 5 or 6 until the end of the game. More than 200 orders per turn are not uncommon for me. You should find a way to minimize mistakes in order preparation and then use it every turn of every game. Easily the biggest mistake you can make in multi-SW is to miss turns. Miss one and you're in trouble. Missing two or more turns is suicidal. I know this is also true in regular Starweb but the small number of players in multi-SW plus the need to conquer someone to win exacerbates the situation. The best example I can give is from my own experience. In more than twenty years of playing multi-SW and nineteen finished games I have missed exactly one turn. The game in which I missed that one turn is the only game of multi-SW for which I received a rating less than 820. That finish was a direct result of the one missed turn. Character Choice We all have a favorite character type or two that we like to play. In addition to personal preferences I think a logical analysis of each character type specifically for multi-SW is useful. Given proper circumstances and luck any character combination can win. However, I do believe that certain combinations have a better than average chance of success. Bearing in mind that each player's lowest scoring character is the one they are measured by what guidelines should you use when picking a combination? Here are the three questions that I ask myself when I decide. Question 1. Assuming that I never get more than my share of the web can I get the character to 10,000 points by turn 20? Question 2. How do the resources needed for scoring purposes of this character complement and/or conflict with my other character choices? Question 3. How badly do I need the specialized capabilities each character has to offer? My reasoning behind each of these questions is as follows. Question 1 assumes that I neither conquer anyone else nor am I conquered myself. In reality this is highly unlikely, but since I don't know which will occur I've assumed that I can at least hold my own. There is a further assumption that if I can reach 10,000 points by turn 20 with all three of my characters that I'll have a good chance of winning. From my experience I have found this to be true. It is very rare for a multi-SW game to have a winning score less than 7,000. Many games end at 9,000 or more. In recent years typically my multi-SW games have ended on turns 16 through 18. Question 2 is a fairly obvious consideration. However, its answer is far more subjective than Question 1. I'll express my views in detail when I discuss the individual character types. The answer to Question 3 is wholly subjective. It should be determined based on the player's character preferences and the degree of aggressiveness intended in the player's game plan. Here is my personal evaluation of each character type using these three questions as a guide. Evaluate the character combinations yourself and see where we agree or disagree. Merchant Question 1: Assuming that I can unload an average of 35 metal per turn on each of three homeworlds from turns 8 through 19, score is no problem. Question 2: No significant problems with any other character. You're going to be hauling that metal anyway. A Merchant does it with the least number of ships. Question 3: I've included a merchant every time in my games. Scoring is no problem and I get to full production sooner with more ships available for exploration and battle. Preferred Combinations: Any characters. Artifact Collector Question 1: If a Collector owned all the artifacts they would score 1660 points per turn (Editor's note – see the Question of the month section). Assuming that you will find in your area 20% of the total, 330 points per turn won't get you to 10,000 by turn 20. To meet the 10,000 point goal you must have some combination of lucky distribution, trade (Trade what? What are your other characters?), and/or conquest of somebody else. The answer is almost certainly no. Question 2: If you can find enough artifacts in your area or can take them by conquest from somebody else then your conflicts are reduced. Trading ships and/or keys for artifacts is dangerous. In multi-SW you are virtually certain to be at war at some point. I've been in one in every game I've played. You will need all the firepower and flexibility you can muster. Trading any significant number of worlds is out if you've got an EB, Pirate or Apostle since, as we'll see, they need all the worlds you can get. If you find a good, trustworthy ally then your trading problems may not be too bad if your characters and your ally's characters are complementary. You can't count on this. The quickest way to get all of your artifacts to a Collector is to have him own all three homeworlds through the first eight or ten turns. Everybody brings home artifacts and unloads them. This is a major conflict with an EB, a minor one with an Apostle and no problem with the others. You can also accomplish this by shifting artifacts to Collector keys but that is a bit more complex to manage and may consume gift orders needed for other purposes. Question 3: The Collector has one important factor in his favor. Once you get enough artifacts to him scoring problems are over. A Collector who lasts the whole game is certain to have at least a respectable score. I've included a Collector three times. Through a combination of luck, conquest and deals with allies I won two of those games. In the third game, which was an anonymous multi-SW, although I eventually owned nearly 100 worlds and 100 keys, I could never get enough artifacts to win. I did get a rating over 820 for the game though. Artifact trades with non-allies have been virtually non-existent. Preferred Combinations: M, B, P, and A Acceptable: EB Empire Builder Question 1: Owning all three homeworlds for 19 turns is worth 2500 points. If you make the ridiculous assumption that your EB owns all 48 other worlds in your share of the web from turn 4 through turn 20 each world must still average 9.2 points per turn. It won't happen. Clearly, for your EB to succeed you must plan on conquering somebody, trading for a lot of worlds, or both. Question 2: No conflicts with Merchants. Some conflict with an Artifact Collector but only to the extent that it's hard to quickly get all of the worlds to the EB and all of the artifacts to the Collector. If you don't have a Collector you may be able to do some trading of artifacts for worlds. The only combination that such trading would appeal to on a major scale would be an MBC. An MAC might be willing to trade worlds for artifacts depending upon his scoring plan for the Apostle. Conflicts with Berserkers are minimal except that the loss of one homeworld for the EB means 600 to 800 fewer points for the EB in a typical game. Also, the earlier you start your robot attacks and PBBs the more worlds your EB must own to continue proper scoring. A Berserker would be helpful in conquering someone else. The tactical advantage of robot attacks is somewhat offset by the two gift per turn limit. You will probably have to have the EB attack home at Berserker owned worlds to transfer ownership quickly enough. An Empire Builder combination with an Apostle has many of the same drawbacks as the Berserker but without the Berserker's tactical advantages. Early transfer of all worlds to the EB would be critical. Don't even consider saving some worlds for full conversion by the Apostle. Giving the Apostle homeworld to the EB and then migrating out converts will be a must. Every convert migrated will be a ship not built. I think combining these two would be a mistake unless you can ally with an MBC. At first glance the EB and Pirate combination seems an impossible one since both must own many worlds to score well. Further analysis reveals some mitigating factors. First there are those 2,500 homeworld points for the EB. The Pirate doesn't need to own them since you're normally not going to plunder the homeworlds anyway except at the very end of the game. Second, you're going to need your high metal production worlds unplundered and producing through most of the game so why not have an EB own them? Third, your EB could use the tactical advantage the Pirate has to conquer the extra worlds that you need to win the game. Finally, if you could have the EB own the Pirate's worlds for the two turns out of four that he doesn't need them then you might be able to make the combination work. The way to do this is to not declare the EB and Pirate mutual allies. Leave the worlds to be transferred unprotected and shuttle fleets around capturing back and forth as necessary. It has been done successfully but demands extremely good coordination of forces, requires a lot of fleets, and you must acquire a vast empire. Question 3: EBs don't have any special advantages. If they make it through a whole game then they're a cinch for a respectable score. However, they're just about everybody's prime target. Preferred Combinations: M, C, and B Acceptable: P Unacceptable: A Berserker Question 1: The answer here is yes but you will usually have to drop a lot of PBBs to do it. Question 2: No conflict with Merchant or Collector. Some conflict and complement with an Empire Builder as stated under discussion of that character. The Berserker and Apostle are truly complementary, especially if combined with a Merchant. You can play the combination in two different ways. You can give all worlds to the Berserker early in the game while fully converting only a few worlds with appropriate population levels and limits. The Berserker and Apostle would jointly attack the Berserker's normal population at the appropriate time. Or you can try the conversion approach and give the Apostle essentially all the worlds. In that case Apostle scoring will come from world ownership, convert and martyr points. Both approaches can work although the convert and martyr approach is less certain. Either way you must plan on a crescendo of PBBs at the end of the game. That is if the other players let you get away with it. Berserker and Pirate combinations are also highly complementary when a Merchant or Collector is your third character. The Pirate owns all the worlds and plunders madly. In this case the Berserker uses robot attacks in preference to PBBs wherever it is practical. These attacks should carefully preserve one to seven people on the worlds. This leaves them still in the Pirate's hands for continued plunder. Inclusion of the Pirate will force you to conquest in search of worlds to plunder. That's fine since if you picked this combination aggression is probably in your game plan. Question 3: I believe that you should always have either a Berserker or Pirate or both for their tactical advantages. If you don't include a Berserker do include a Pirate. Preferred Combinations: M, C, A, P Acceptable: EB Pirate Question 1: You can't get there from here. Let's make another ridiculous assumption. Suppose that the Pirate owns all 51 worlds from turn 2 on. Plundering 40 of your worlds as fast as you can plus key points and a few hundred artifact points would provide at most about 9,000 points by turn 20. If you pick a Pirate then you must plan on conquest. Question 2: No conflicts with Merchant or Collector. Berserker and Empire Builder combinations are as analyzed previously. Combination of a Pirate with an Apostle brings all of the same problems as the EB compounded by converts. It would be extremely difficult to pull off successfully. Question 3: As stated in the Berserker analysis I believe inclusion of a Pirate or Berserker has a high tactical value. Also I like those gigantic Pirate armadas you can develop with three or more homeworlds at full production. Preferred Combinations: M, C, and B Acceptable: EB Unacceptable: A Apostle Question 1: A conditional yes if you also include a Berserker. In the good old days when an Apostle could declare a jihad against himself a Berserker was not as important. Question 2: As discussed previously regarding the other character types. Question 3: Converts can help you hold or capture a world against anyone but a Berserker. A scattering of them created by exploratory fleets in your neighbor's territory also acts as a group of convenient spies. I don't believe that these advantages are significant. Preferred Combinations: M, C, and B Unacceptable: EB, P Next Month... Part Two including Diplomacy, Strategy and Tactics, and more! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- QUESTIONS - Can anyone answer this? Asked by Ken Cassady "Here is a question for the newsletter how many points can the AC get in one turn during the game (not after)." Now this simple question generated a lot of controversy that I believe showed us all that our mathematical skills need some brushing up :-). It also convinced me that those players who want their scores to be as close as possible to the winner are asking the impossible. The answer (IMHO) is 1780. Oh yes, I've received answers of 1650, 1680 and others. Here is how I've got it figured – someone check my math. There are Platinums, Vegan, Arcturian, Silver, Titanium, Gold, Radiant, Blessed (8). Plastic doesn't count. Then there are Lodestar, Stardust, Shekel, Crown, Sword, Moonstone, Sepulchre and Sphinx (8). This makes 64 standard artifacts at 15 pts each = 960 points. Let's keep track of the art – there are 9 plastics also (we are up to 73). The Ancients are 8 as well as the Pyramids, which adds another 480 points. This puts the art count to 89. The Ancient Pyramid adds 90 more points and brings us to 90 arts. There are 10 of the Special artifacts. The Scrolls are worthless (except as bonuses) but the other 5 (Black Box, Lesser, Radioactive, Slippers and Treasure) are worth an additional 150 pts/turn. The grand total comes to 1780. Please let me know if I've miscounted (again). Here is the new question. If the Art Collector has all the art at the end of the game, how many points would he reap on the last turn? Has anyone seen this happen? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- STARWEB EMAIL DISCUSSION GROUP - is now available on the web. Look for our new MAPPER'S SECTION on the SEDG Web Page. http://www.accessv.com/~somnos/sedg.htm ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FEATURE - THE CAPTAIN'S LOG - Web Date 011202.0827 5 Starweb - Winner, Winning & The Game... By Walt Schmidt walts@dorsai.org "Thou shalt not covet; But tradition approves all forms of competition." - Arthur Hugh Clough On Tuesday, 03 Oct 2000, Flying Buffalo sent out T1 to SW-XM/202. It had a return due date of October 17 and the victory point total for this game was 20,000 points. It was a private multi-player game consisting of the following seven players and character-types: Ken Cassady: Pirate-Vex, Berserker-Hun Herb Diehr: Pirate-Direwolf, Merchant-Helen Mic Hammerschmitt: Apostle-Pauline, Artifact C-Gertrud Elliot Hudes: Pirate-Slumber, Merchant-Shlufen John Muije: Merchant-God, Berserker-Tinman Walt Schmidt: Merchant-mNemo, Berserker-bNemo Sharon Wyatt: Empire B-Eggnog, Artifact C-Zorba On Wednesday, 14 Nov 2001, Flying Buffalo sent out T29, the final turn for SW-XM/202. The game results were as follows: 1 - Mike McCaffrey - a standby! [EGGNOG]: Empire-Builder (Score=24295) [ZORBA]: Artifact-Collector (Score=22329) (Keys=5, Ships=15, Artifacts=91, Bonus=2000) 2 - Elliot Hudes [SLUMBER]: Pirate (Score=15538) (Worlds=118, Keys=121, Ships=4506, Industry=429, Mines=764, People=9228) [SHLUFEN]: Merchant (Score=32061) 3 - Ken Cassady [VEX]: Pirate (Score=12320) (Worlds=93, Keys=77, Ships=2293, Industry=271, Mines=626, People=7787, Artifacts=9, Bonus=1000) [HUN]: Berserker (Score=17250) (Worlds=27, Keys=49, Ships=1324, Industry=159, Mines=130, Robots=350) 4 - Michael Hammerschmitt [PAULINE]: Apostle (Score=10694) [GERTRUD]: Artifact-Collector (Score=13915) 5 - John Muije [GOD]: Merchant (Score=8754) [TINMAN]: Berserker (Score=1237) 6 - Walter Schmidt [MNEMO]: Merchant (Score=7925) [BNEMO]: Berserker (Score=687) 7 - Herb Diehr [DIREWOLF]: Pirate (Score=448) [HELEN]: Merchant (Score=591) I think the final Diplomatic Message from [SLUMBER] to [EVERYONE] sums things up just fine: "Great game everyone! Nothing like a game where you exterminate all the opposition then gracefully glide over the finish line. Especially lovely that we own everything and got rid of all the converts." Why am I reporting this? [YES, WHY Nemo??] [Hi, Alter] SW-XM/202 was The Captain's First Semi-Annual Challenge Game! Who would have thought it would be won by a STANDBY - playing an ARTIFACT COLLECTOR and an EMPIRE BUILDER?!? And Mike, as King-'O-The-Hill I owe you your Captain Nemo Fabulous No-Prize Certificate - soon! That brings us to today. It's time to announce the Captain's Third Semi-Annual Challenge Game! A seven player, bi-weekly, email, dual-multi, 15,000 victory point (lowest of your two scores - and me thinks 20,000 was too much of a slide) game. All communications are allowed, and the only other requirements or rules are there ain't any - other than those printed in the Starweb Rules booklet. Once we have seven players and we have picked our tentative two character-types, I will share this information with all - and we all will then have several chances to change our minds. Folks - here's your chance to test the mettle of your "characters" against others of us who read SEDG. The winner of this proposed game will be the recipient of Yet Another Captain Nemo Fabulous No-Prize, get special mention in an edition of SEDG, and, receive a specially designed No-Prize certificate - designed by himself and suitable for framing or any other use the winner can think of... So, Be Thee Up To It?!! The first six to email me ( walts@dorsai.org ) are in, and the game will then begin. "Life is a game in which the rules are constantly changing; Nothing spoils a game more than those who take it seriously... If you follow (one of the) Crispian principle(s) you will be able to Say "Phooey," too, instead of reaching for your gun when you fancy yourself betrayed." - Quentin Crisp Jack Fulmer, in this month's feature article, tells us how he likes mult-player games - we agree with him 100-percent, there. He also mentions how he likes to play to win. More on this next month - but as I've said a number of times before, I like to play Starweb for the games sake. Winning is icing on the cake, as it were. Makes admiral sense to me! See you next issue... Shai Dorsai ! Nemo ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FEATURE - THE SWAP CORNER Flying Moose Technologies Starweb Analyzer V1.5 beta (and beyond) For those of you that enjoy using our software to play Starweb, go to our web site http://flyingmoose.cjb.net and obtain V1.4, which has already been released. If you haven't used the beta version previously you will need to obtain the Registration key from us to turn the Evaluation version into a fully functional Registered version. This is free of charge for customers who have been using our software (even if you have been on board since V1.0). V1.5 beta is now being loaded onto our web page. Mike promises to keep putting up new versions as he adds new features. So far there have not been any bugs that I can see and it's quite stable. More play testers would help us find any that are still out there (so don't erase your V1.4 – just add V1.5b). Presently there are two interesting changes. Mike has decided that he dislikes the Order Editor hovering over the Analysis window obscuring either the List or Map Views. So he has invoked two changes. Presently, when you open the Analysis window you will notice that the List View (on the left) is now divided into two – a top and bottom. The top still contains the world information as before (World View default). The bottom area contains the Filter and Ring control features previously found on the tool bar. They are essentially unchanged except for new icons, the 'apply now' option is the default and the And/Or radio buttons are at the top. The fun begins when you open the Order Editor. The Draft, Final and Previous orders are added as tabs after the Filters and automatically open to the Draft Order Template. This simple change allows you to use the Order Editor without obscuring your view of the Map or World info. When the Order Editor is invoked its Menu items and Tool Bar buttons are added to the existing Menus and Tool Bar. The Filter Deselect All button remains on the Tool Bar for ease of removing the filters when you are busy with the Order Editor (which closes the Filter Tab by default). There are now 3 new buttons on the Tool Bar – a) Maximize Map Window – removes the World View, Filter or Order Editor window and puts up the map over the whole Analysis window. This allows you to see as much of the map as possible. Clicking on this button will toggle it on or off. b) Maximize List Window – puts the List View up from top to bottom of the Analysis Window beside the map (Currently how you view the Analysis window). This minimizes the Filter Dialogue and Order Editor. c) Maximize the Filter/Editor Window – plasters the Filter Dialogue and Order Editor window to the left of the Map View from top to bottom. You cannot see the World View but it gives you a lot of room to work on orders if screen space is at a premium. Mike is also very busy making further use of Starweb Analyzer and email interactions. Currently you can use the Analyzer to use your default mail program (MAPI supported) for emailing your orders to FBI or your Draft orders to an ally. By introducing email addresses into the header information of a Dummy Turnsheet (already a good idea for incorporating map information not available on an existing turnsheet) it will be possible to make this process even smoother with the email address of your recipient already filled out. If you have suggestions for new features or requests – now is a good time to send them in. Of course no SWAP Corner is complete without a plug for our upcoming convention. Flying Moose Technologies Starweb Convention. Yes, it's now official. Here is the information about the Con. The web site http://members.home.net/mikewulkan/toppage2.htm will have more details including a map to the resort and links to the Resort's homepage. The Flying Moose Technologies' - Great White North (Canadian) Starweb Tournament It's official! Flying Moose Technologies will host the first Canadian Starweb Tournament and we shall be bringing Flying Buffalo's head Honcho -- Rick Loomis up to moderate the game. Come and enjoy 3 days of gaming, playing the award winning Starweb face to face with your allies and opponents. There will be a beautiful plaque presented to the winner of the tournament and the satisfaction of crushing your enemies. When: Friday April 26th 9 a.m. - Sunday April 28th 6 p.m. Due to the location of the Tournament it is recommended that you arrive no later than Thursday evening. Registration: Please send your registration fee to Flying Moose Technologies 2912 Remea Crt. Mississauga, Ontario Canada L5L 2H5 Cost: $100.00 US or $150.00 Canadian. For those that Register after Dec. 25th the price will be $120.00 US (or $175.00 Canadian). Where: Birch Haven Resort, Baysville Ontario. This Resort/Conference Center is found in Muskoka - a region composed of thousands of lakes and hills nestled in northern Ontario. It is a robust ecologic niche entrenched in the geologic formation known as the Canadian Shield, an area virtually stripped of topsoil by the most recent glacier's advance leaving outcroppings of three billion year old Precambrian rock and thousands of lakes in its wake. Call (705) 767-3354 to make your Resort reservation - 1 night payment by credit card will be required to hold the room. Birch Haven will charge $30/person/day Canadian (without meals) based on a double occupancy. It will be $45/day for single occupancy - the rooms come with kitchenettes. Due to this being the offseason the Restaurant will be closed but there are several restaurants in nearby Baysville (2 minute drive) as well as General Stores to help you stock your fridge while you game. Directions: It's a 2-hour drive from Toronto. For those landing at Toronto International Airport - take Highway 401 east to Highway #400. Go north on Highway #400 past Barrie and then get onto Highway #11 north. You will pass the following towns - Orillia, Gravenhurst and Bracebridge. Exit Highway #117 and go east 16 kilometers (10 miles) until you reach Basyville. After you pass over the bridge in Baysville look for the Birch Haven Resort and Conference Center on your left (within 2 kilometers). (Out of town guests - it is recommended that you rent a car. There may be some opportunity to grab a ride with a local Torontonian on Thursday evening - check with me if you wish to explore this). Refund Policy: This convention is basically being put on by the Canadian fans and to limit our risk of large losses (to bring FBI to Canada, reserve the Resort etc.) we are making the registration fee nonrefundable after Dec. 25th, 2001. If the Convention must be cancelled from our end your Registration fee will be refunded. Starweb Analyzer: If you bring a laptop you will be able to get your turns on diskette to input into your Starweb Analyzer. If you have a laptop but not the Starweb Analyzer I encourage you to check out our web site. http://flyingmoose.cjb.net. If you prefer paper and pen - I will ensure that I have an inkjet printer available for paper turns. If we get a large response there might be a chance of running other FBI games. Please let me know if this is of interest to you. For more info on FBI games - http://www.flyingbuffalo.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CORRESPONDENCE In response to last issues feature article 'Starweb - The Next Generation by Walt Schmidt' Rick Loomis writes: I intend to post a longer response to the newsletter, but basically the problem with reprogramming is not that I can't find a dozen programmers who are willing to do the work for "royalties", but that I haven't got the time to spend first making sure the programmer is competent to do the job, and then spend all the time necessary to make sure the job is done as needed. Currently I don't have to pay anyone royalties on Starweb. There is no guarantee that a new version of Starweb will get any more players than we have already, and if we don't get new players, all we would have done was add an extra expense. But thanks for the offer. Rick Loomis Editor's note: Your company, your game, and your call. All things in life are a risk. From Volume 53 – I said: > (nobody wins a game they are exterminated from), < John Shannonhouse replies: Just for clarification's sake, this is not necessarily true. I remember a merchant who, on the last turn, dropped off his metal and transferred down all his ships as he unloaded, winning the game the same turn he was eliminated. He owned NOTHING but the win. Editor: Picky, picky . Steve Harper said (in answer to the Berserker question of Volume 53): >> Elliot, To answer your question, Have F175U then Transfer all ships to F88 F88R100. After the last orders are sent, the ships might as well be robots. Steve Harper<< Editor: Yes, this would work. A small bit of unappreciated SW trivia is that a berserker can capture a robot world by R attack. The chances of success are tied to the size of the robot attack and the number of robots already on the ground. In my situation I wasn't sure that the game would end AND I wanted the world to be held by me, able to produce ships and capable of defending from the enemy. It would have made the victory at this HW that much more sweet :-). Well, that's it for Volume 55. Don't be afraid to submit articles or suggestions. They don't have to be long. Address your correspondence to Elliot Hudes at somnos@compuserve.com