which game has best replayability value
helmet
games i keep bringing out the box are
1.warcraft 2
2.close combat
3.homm 2
main reason for this though is multiplayer games
homm 2 is the only one i still play against the computer though
some games become instant hits like civ 2 but how many people still play
them after 6 months? moo2 another example.
think the deciding factor in buying game these days is how good is
multiplayer companys should concentrate on this aspect of play
Nostromo
You want the best replay value of a game EVER, IMHO? One word, Stars!
I must have put in several hundred hours into it already (read 300+ -
it's probably more, but it scares me to comtemplate the truth), and
still pick it up every couple months (usually following a version
update) and fiddle around for a few days/weeks, play a couple games to
completion, etc. NO OTHER GAME has ever done this for me before! I
still expect to be playing Stars! in ten years time if they keep
upgrading and changing it. Let me explain - Stars! is to MOO2 what a
nuclear sub is to a snorkler - more depth, functionality, longevity
and options then you can poke a stick at! Getting the picture...?
--
To reply please replace 'spamfree' with 'labyrinth'.
Richard D. Arnesen
Lost Dragon wrote:
>
> >You want the best replay value of a game EVER, IMHO? One word, Stars!
>
> I'm usually very lenient when it comes to graphics. MoO, MoO2, and
> MoM I liked.
Well I have three games that had ultimate replay value and they are
in this order:
1) Civ (original)
2) Panzer General
3) X-com
Now of course this is only post 1990 games. I would have to think hard
to think of any older ones :).
>
> /| .oo__. .-----.------Lost Dragon Software------.-----. .__oo. |\
> { \| ,-'' | _O_ | Member: UDIC lost...@cris.com | _O_ | ``-, |/ }
> `,_/,(_)\_ | | | http://www.cris.com/~lostdrgn/ | | | _/(_),\_,'
> <...{_)_)_''`-----`-Official Dungeon Bane Web Page-'-----'``_(_(_}...>
CurtAdams
My tops:
Civ (original) - kept me up late for years, literally. I still play Civ 2
now and again, what, 5 years later?
MOO (original) - also lots of fun.
Warcraft II - but mostly against other people. The computer can't form a
decent strategy and is much too easy to beat.
MOM - somewhat limited; it was a lot of fun for several months but
eventually I learned how to really thrash the computer and then it wasn't
so good.
At this point I'd have to say that the most critical part of replayability
is multiplayer. For a long time eyecandy games (e.g. MOM) could really
hold my interest but after all these years of good graphics/sound etc. now
I just say "oh, more eyecandy". For me it's the game that's fun, and I've
yet to see a decent computer game AI, so the question is whether I can
play other people.
Stars! looks good, but I've only had it 2 months, so I'm not sure about
long-term playability yet.
Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com)
David Thompson
How did Xcom have any replay value? I finished it and never picked
it up again. I agree with the other two, though I'd add Civ 2, Master
of Magic and Warcraft II through Kali (I killed most of 1996 playing
it online).
____________________________________________
'Give me back the Berlin Wall,
Give me Stalin or Saint Paul.
I've seen the future, baby,
It is murder.'
- Leonard Cohen, "The Future"
To email me, remove the capital letters from my address.
Mark Asher
X-COM has replay because those squad-level battles never play out the same
way twice, IMO. Get Scott Jones' XCOMUTIL to do things like fix the
difficulty level bug, etc. There are even map-packs of new ship designs
now.
Personally, I got a lot of mileage out of mutliplayer C&C and Diablo.
Missionforce: Cyberstorm also got a lot of replay as a multiplayer game --
kind of a sleeper game that not too many people played.
If someone would come out with an Internet-playable version of Dark
Legions, I think that would be an excellent game also.
Mark Asher
David Thompson <NOS-me...@netcom.caPAM> wrote in article
<33bb8e95...@nntp.netcom.ca>...
Alex Taylor
1) Civ I
2) M.U.L.E.
3) Seven Cities of Gold
--
***********************************************************
Alexander Wright Taylor
Department of Geology and Geophysics
Louisiana State University
LSU Tectonics - Visualization and Data Integration Guru
"Sic Semper Stultus"
Owner of the "UberJeep"
***********************************************************
ReXX
> You want the best replay value of a game EVER, IMHO? One word, Stars!
> it's probably more, but it scares me to comtemplate the truth), and
> still pick it up every couple months (usually following a version
> update) and fiddle around for a few days/weeks, play a couple games to
> completion, etc. NO OTHER GAME has ever done this for me before! I
> still expect to be playing Stars! in ten years time if they keep
> upgrading and changing it. Let me explain - Stars! is to MOO2 what a
> nuclear sub is to a snorkler - more depth, functionality, longevity
> and options then you can poke a stick at! Getting the picture...?
Yea, well, it's a matter of opinion. I have both stars! and Moo2 and i'm
not sure if the can even be compared. Moo2 beats Stars! when it comes to
technology. Sure, Stars has big motha cannon and so on, but it's really
all numeric info. Like laser 1, laser 2, plasma 1, plasma 2. They just
have names. Moo2 tech isn't like that at all and that's why i find it more
interesting. You can do cool combos with different weapon techs like
shield piercing weapons + invading the ship after it's engines have ceased
to work. I admit that Moo2 has no mines etc. like stars has, but so far, i
like moo2 better. And also, stars is a game where multiplayer is a
neccessity. Against AI, it has no diplomacy like Moo2 has which is
dependant on race. And stars! races suck. There are no characteristics in
them either like moo2 creatures have.
-ReXX
[Reko Nokkanen - http://www.sci.fi/~rexx : NetRunner Archives - re...@sci.fi]
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ ReXX on EFnet #netrunner & #mtg (occasionally) _/ This space for rent. _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Chan Jun Yu
Of course Civilization 2! I've played it for 10 times!
--
| CJY GAME PAGE |
|Computer games news, tips, cheats and links|
|===========================================|
| http://home.netvigator.com/~cjy/index.htm |
William Fletcher
In article <33BACD...@biotite.geol.lsu.edu>, Alex Taylor <al...@biotite.geol.lsu.edu> wrote:
>1) Civ I
>2) M.U.L.E.
>3) Seven Cities of Gold
>
Personally, I like:
1) Pirates! and especially Pirates! Gold...
2) Civ I and (blasphemy.. never played it, but if it's 1/2 as good as the 1st
one, Civ 2)
3) Any of the TSR AD&D games from SSI
4) C&C/ Warcraft2/ Diablo multi
5) Duke Nukem 3D / Doom2 Multi (in that order)... Quake's just too slow...
6) NASCAR / IndyCar Racing
7) Lords Of The Realm 2
8) Heroes of Might and Magic 2
9) TIE Fighter / XWing
10) Mail Order Monsters for the C-64
Some of these aren't in order, but just came to me as I was thinking of the
best games I've played, and still play... (With the exception of MOM)...
Ben
James Reedy
David Thompson (NOS-me...@netcom.caPAM) wrote:
Thru the use of Xcomutil created by Scott Jones - fixes difficulty bug,
can also play with greater difficulty than allowed by the setup of the game,
can incorporate new maps etc. I have been playing and replaying now since I
first got it.
I would also include PITs /TOP 2 in the list - I only play against the AI
( on defence it is pretty good but not great on offence (like most AI's))
: How did Xcom have any replay value? I finished it and never picked
: it up again. I agree with the other two, though I'd add Civ 2, Master
: of Magic and Warcraft II through Kali (I killed most of 1996 playing
: it online).
: On Wed, 02 Jul 1997 08:38:49 -0400, "Richard D. Arnesen"
: <rdar...@ncms1.cb.lucent.com> wrote:
: >Lost Dragon wrote:
: >>
: >> >You want the best replay value of a game EVER, IMHO? One word, Stars!
: >>
: >> Probably a good game. Lack of good graphics turned me off though, and
: >> I'm usually very lenient when it comes to graphics. MoO, MoO2, and
: >> MoM I liked.
: >
: >Well I have three games that had ultimate replay value and they are
: >in this order:
: >
: >1) Civ (original)
: >2) Panzer General
: >3) X-com
: >
: >Now of course this is only post 1990 games. I would have to think hard
: >to think of any older ones :).
: >
: >>
: >> /| .oo__. .-----.------Lost Dragon Software------.-----. .__oo. |\
: >> { \| ,-'' | _O_ | Member: UDIC lost...@cris.com | _O_ | ``-, |/ }
: >> `,_/,(_)\_ | | | http://www.cris.com/~lostdrgn/ | | | _/(_),\_,'
: >> <...{_)_)_''`-----`-Official Dungeon Bane Web Page-'-----'``_(_(_}...>
: ____________________________________________
: 'Give me back the Berlin Wall,
: Give me Stalin or Saint Paul.
: I've seen the future, baby,
: It is murder.'
: - Leonard Cohen, "The Future"
: To email me, remove the capital letters from my address.
--
===========================================================================
Jim Reedy jamesr @psd.com.au
"Noooo body expects the Spanish Inquisition, Our chief weapon is surprise,
surprise and fear. Our 2 chief weapons are suprise and fear and a fanatical
devotion to the Pope. Amongst our weapons are such diverse elements as -
Surprise, Fear And a Fanatical devotion to the Pope. Cardinal Fang ...."
Monty Python 'The Spanish Inquisition Sketch'
===========================================================================
joe...@imap1.asu.edu
On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, William Fletcher wrote:
> Date: Thu, 03 JUL 97 11:06:19 GMT
> From: William Fletcher <b...@mindspring.com>
> Newgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
> Subject: Re: which game has best replayability value
>
> In article <33BACD...@biotite.geol.lsu.edu>, Alex Taylor <al...@biotite.geol.lsu.edu> wrote:
> >1) Civ I
> >2) M.U.L.E.
Multiple
Use
Labor
Elements
This game was awesome. My Dad and I and a couple friends would actually
play 4 player for hours on this on the C-64.
I have heard you can get a C-64 emulator. I wonder if mule is still around.
> >3) Seven Cities of Gold
> >
>
> Personally, I like:
> 1) Pirates! and especially Pirates! Gold...
Yep hours of my life were wasted on the game.
erikh
What about harpoon classic with a scenario editor? Not the Harpoon 97
classic, but the old, buggy original.
K. Laisathit
In article <33bb8e95...@nntp.netcom.ca>,
David Thompson <NOS-me...@netcom.caPAM> wrote:
>
> How did Xcom have any replay value? I finished it and never picked
>it up again. I agree with the other two, though I'd add Civ 2, Master
>of Magic and Warcraft II through Kali (I killed most of 1996 playing
>it online).
Apparently you have Xcom in your killfile. Otherwise, how could you
miss the X-COM posts in this newsgroup? Let me point out that after more
than 3 years, X-COM still generates a constant stream of posts. There
aren't many titles which claim the same kind of persistence. BTW, I just
pull it out from the shelf recently and I must say that it's as fun as
ever. There are so many things I didn't quite discover when I played
the first time.
Later...
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
K I R A T I L A I S A T H I T kir...@u.washington.edu
Brian C Robinson
One word: Angband.
--
'Whatever as I am a little girl.' - Brian Robinson
InThane Walkup
On Thu, 03 Jul 97 11:06:19 GMT, b...@mindspring.com (William Fletcher)
wrote:
>2) Civ I and (blasphemy.. never played it, but if it's 1/2 as good as the 1st
>one, Civ 2)
Civ II managed to be at least as good as Civ. Bryan Renolds did an
excellent job with it, then told the Microprose wazoos to go stuff it,
and joined up with good 'ol Sid in Firaxis software.
Rob Merritt
NOS-me...@netcom.caPAM (David Thompson) wrote:
> How did Xcom have any replay value?
Well, everyone has different taste but I I replayed the hell out of
the original Xcom. Its my favorite computer game of all time and I've
been gaming since 1977. I spent over a year practially playing just
Xcom. I finished it 7 or 8 times.
Rob Merritt
http://www.jagunet.com/~robertm
"No eat, no sleep, just the GAME!" - unknown
Bunny
> Apparently you have Xcom in your killfile. Otherwise, how could you
> miss the X-COM posts in this newsgroup? Let me point out that after
> more
> than 3 years, X-COM still generates a constant stream of posts. There
> aren't many titles which claim the same kind of persistence. BTW, I
> just
> pull it out from the shelf recently and I must say that it's as fun as
>
> ever. There are so many things I didn't quite discover when I played
> the first time.
hmm..try not to forget...if Derek Smart continues to go on flaming
posters, his thread and all other BC3K related thread might actually
last as long as three years too (after all, he did take a long time to
come out with the game, his thread might last half that long)...so news
thread persistence does not a replayable game automatically make!
cheers..
Stuart Park
Brian C Robinson (bcr1...@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu) wrote:
> One word: Angband.
Another word: Nethack.
--
"If only he used his talent for niceness, instead of evil"
- Get Smart
Stuart Park
E-Mail: stuart @ banana.psd.com.au Melbourne, Australia
Raymond Ovanessian
In <5pm2ii$6f1$1...@skydiver.jaguNET.com> rob...@jagunet.com (Rob
Merritt) writes:
>
>Well, everyone has different taste but I I replayed the hell out of
>the original Xcom. Its my favorite computer game of all time and I've
>been gaming since 1977. I spent over a year practially playing just
>Xcom. I finished it 7 or 8 times.
Same here! I'm from the Pong generation as well, and X-Com is my
favourite of all time too. My second is Aces of the Deep, and third
Red Baron, fourth Railroad Tycoon, and Chess is the strategic game
that I've played the most.
BTW, I spent about a month on just the demo of X-Com.
RayO
Nostromo
>Yea, well, it's a matter of opinion. I have both stars! and Moo2 and i'm
>not sure if the can even be compared. Moo2 beats Stars! when it comes to
>technology. Sure, Stars has big motha cannon and so on, but it's really
>all numeric info. Like laser 1, laser 2, plasma 1, plasma 2. They just
>have names. Moo2 tech isn't like that at all and that's why i find it more
I never said a word about tech. In fact, if you're citing mere tech
levels as a reason why MOO2 is better, well, I'm sure everyone else is
getting the picture...Stars! has depth that is without compare by the
likes of MOO2 (remember, nuclear sub vs snorkler analogy?); it's this
that keeps bringing me back. I'm tipping you played MOO2 1st and you
're unwilling to admit that GRAPHICS, not gameplay is what you can't
get past, ey? Sad statement about gameplayers' depth these days...just
check out Diablo :-)
>interesting. You can do cool combos with different weapon techs like
>shield piercing weapons + invading the ship after it's engines have ceased
>to work. I admit that Moo2 has no mines etc. like stars has, but so far, i
>like moo2 better. And also, stars is a game where multiplayer is a
You make your own combos the same way for Stars! True, Microprose may
have 'embelished' the tech names a little better - so what? What the
hell does this have to do with gameplay? Ever heard of 'suspension of
disbelief'?
>neccessity. Against AI, it has no diplomacy like Moo2 has which is
>dependant on race. And stars! races suck. There are no characteristics in
>them either like moo2 creatures have.
Oh dear. The vitriol just keeps coming. First of all, I've NEVER
played Stars! multi-player. Think about this. Keep thinking...
Though about it?
Ding!
And I still think it's ten times better than MOO2 !!!
Creatures have NO CHARACTERISTICS!!!??? I'm not even going to dignify
that last bit with a response.
P.S Stars! has it's OWN newsgroup. Enough said?
Yours digustedly,
Robert Miskec.
P.P.S you are as always entitled to your opinion - I just happend to
disagree with it most vehemently on this ocassion...and what I'm
really saying is, if you really think MOO2 is better, it's entirely
your loss.
Richard D. Arnesen
William Fletcher wrote:
>
{snip}
> 10) Mail Order Monsters for the C-64
I was just strolling through these until I hit this.
Man that was such a cool game. I wish I could find a version
for the PC. I can remember playing for days and designing
the weirdest monsters known to man :).
Richard D. Arnesen
Brian C Robinson wrote:
>
> One word: Angband.
YM "Nethack" HTH :)
Brian C Robinson
Richard D. Arnesen (rdar...@ncms1.cb.lucent.com) wrote:
: Brian C Robinson wrote:
: >
: > One word: Angband.
: YM "Nethack" HTH :)
Nethack = *ywan*
Mark
The subject is best replay value or best games?!?
I've just gotten back into PC gaming since last summer, since college
took about four or five years away, and the games pre-1990,91 that were
good were Pirates sid meier stuff, my faves. For some reason the new
Civ2 was too much for me to handle. I've only played it a week or two.
Its a great game, but when I got back into pc gaming, all the new
graphics games got me instead.
Anyway, the best REPLAYABLE game for me is Quake. Even though its
not great with its solo play, its got tons of replayanility. especially
with CTF, TF, Headhunter, and all those various mods. Of course this IS
a strategy usenet thread, but as the subject says best replay value, and
Quake makes it easy to hook up with anybody online, which makes it
extremely replayable thru multiplayer. Although thats just me. It's
the only game I still play since last summer.
Uh BEST game, or a game without multiplayer that I played
continuously, is, was, the original Wizardry. Which I played when I was
in junior high/grade school?, when I was a DnD nut. AND it was the
first game I've ever played on a computer too! Wow!. Doubt it has
replayibility now, but it was the most I've ever spent with a game,
considering I had no money then to buy games. And than all those other
RPG's like the second and third ultimas, Wasteland, I ditched school to
finish Ultima 3! Damn I'm weird!
Oh since this is strategy, yah Pirates was good when our family
upgraded to a 286, WOW 286! And then uh, the original Simcity I played
alot. "What the hells this building a city? No combat? . . . Ah! I
see! You watch the city grow and grow and grow!"
And for sports, I actually had simulation seasons with the original
Earl Weaver. WAIT actually that was probably the most replayable game
I've ever had. It was actually the only game I participated with other
people simulating seasons and having drafts. WOW!
My memory returns!
Uh, enough I'm getting nostalgic.
And since getting DKeeper, I've felt like I've gotten the best game in a
long while. I'll have to see in a month if this game can still hold my
attention. I think it might after trying out skirmish. Multiplayer
will extend it even longer if its good. AH!
Mark
Nostromo
>Sorry. I'm not feeling any loss here. Stars! has potential. But
>it's never going to be as popular as the MOO series if the author
>insists on keeping it in the graphical dark ages.
I didn't want a flame war, LD. Just this last thing (if not the only
thing) you complain about - graphics. MOO2 is a DOS game; Stars! is a
native Win95 game with so many user-configurable windows, panels &
buttons, that I still find new bits & pieces every now & then. So, as
far as 'graphical dark ages' goes - we finished with this one yet?
Play the whole tutorial through. Give it a fighting chance. Oh, & by
the way, I'm not what you'd consider a 'hardcore' strategy player - I
love all sorts of games - I think it was Lode Runner on the Apple IIE
back in '78 that got me hooked forever. Can't stand 'hardcore' stategy
games like the hex crap SSI puts out, though I loved their earlier
rpgs. Hate wargames. Love Quake, love Screamer, Diablo, Broken Sword,
X-Com, X-Wing, MTG, Comanche, & so many other disparate gaming genres
it's not funny! And I still love Stars!. Wouldn't you say that just
makes me a little easier to please than so many today? And Stars!
pleases so easily...
tho...@ix.netcom.com
I mean no disrespect to Civ 2 players....and I know I'm in a minority of
maybe three, but.....
I could barely finish two games of Civ 2 - I really WANTED to be
captured by it. But....I'd rather watch paint dry. It just never grabbed
me.
OTOH....I replayed the hell out of Capitalism....and am replaying
Cap Plus to hell.... and back! If you're willing to give a business sim
a try, you won't soon tire of Cap Plus.
Plus, (sorry) the game gives you choices and a free reign in a way Civ
and a lot of other strategy games don't.
BTW....I still have Civ2 on my HD. Keep waiting for someone to show me
the error of my thinking!
Tom
--
Why is Guy Fawkes a traitor but Thomas More a martyr?
milz
Hi,
you should get Close Combat on your list, for me its the best game with replayability.
yours
eckhardt
Thor Stromsnes
Well, if nobody else have mentioned them already,
Steel Panthers & Steel Panthers 2!
Thor
--
For your Tanking pleasure: check out the Panzer Paradise at :
http://home.sn.no/~thorrune/
milz <nospa...@algonet.se> wrote in article
<33C17E...@algonet.se>...
Nostromo
>I mean no disrespect to Civ 2 players....and I know I'm in a minority of
>maybe three, but.....
That makes two of us, Tom. Any others?
>I could barely finish two games of Civ 2 - I really WANTED to be
>captured by it. But....I'd rather watch paint dry. It just never grabbed
>me.
Yeah, it kept my attention span for about 3-4 hours. I stopped then &
said to myself 'What are you doing Rob? This is pointless - not fun'.
Then I was the proud owner of some more disk space.
>OTOH....I replayed the hell out of Capitalism....and am replaying
>Cap Plus to hell.... and back! If you're willing to give a business sim
>a try, you won't soon tire of Cap Plus.
>Plus, (sorry) the game gives you choices and a free reign in a way Civ
>and a lot of other strategy games don't.
Same way I feel about Stars!. But that's another argument with someone
else in this thread...
Red Jack
Stars! may be a great game but its about as exciting as calculating my
expenses in an Excel spreadsheet. Just my opinion, some people like
spreadsheets...
Red Jack
On Mon, 07 Jul 1997 21:52:29 GMT, nost...@spamfree.net.au (Nostromo)
wrote:
>I didn't want a flame war, LD. Just this last thing (if not the only
>thing) you complain about - graphics. MOO2 is a DOS game; Stars! is a
>native Win95 game with so many user-configurable windows, panels &
MOO2 comes as a Win95 app or a DOS app. You havn't played it have you?
I'll admit I havn't played Stars! in more than a year, but my
experience a year ago turned me off enough I will never give it
another try. I just don't find it to be entertaining. You apparrently
do. I'm happy for you, I wish there were a few more games out lately
that I liked. Please don't get all uppity about it though, just
because people don't like your favorite game doesn't mean they are
"missing" something! There havn't been more than 5 games I truly liked
in the last 5 or 6 years and Stars! is NOT one of them. Neither is
MOO, but I'd put MOM in there at about number 3...
Dan Phillips
nost...@spamfree.net.au (Nostromo) writes:
[A bunch of MOO2 -vs- Stars! stuff deleted]
Stars! is a fine game, and it definitly has more depth than MOO2, but to
tell you the truth, I prefer original MOO to MOO2, and when I want the
cool sort of depth and multi-player stuff that Stars! offers, I play VGA
Planets.
Why? because there's a trade off between depth and ease of use. I find
MOO2 to be too centered on managing your colonies, I prefer the slider
bars from the original. I find Stars! also to be too centered on managing
your colonies. Stars! is also a little bit 'bland'. There's no real feel
of the sweep of galactic politics and war on a grand scale, It is
difficult to get a feel for the 'personality' of a race in Stars!, which
is something that MOO does very well, and VGA Planets, well, let's just
say that the 'borrowed' races are expressed very well through their
abilities and ship design. The racial abilities in VGA planets are -very-
pronounced (and yes, a bit unbalanced) and that's the sort of thing that
helps create the suspension of disbelief that let's you submerge into the
unfolding story, and -that- is what makes for a very re-playable game.
That being said, if you can't dredge up the players for VGA Planets, it's
useless. For re-playability without dragging my friends into it, I like
MOO (original), Dungeon Hack, and (I'm almost embarased to admit it) Free
Cell.
-Dan Phillips
Magnus Itland
acu...@es.co.nz (helmet) wrote:
> games i keep bringing out the box are
> 1.warcraft 2
> 2.close combat
> 3.homm 2
> main reason for this though is multiplayer games
For single player strategic, I think Civilization reigns supreme.
On new machines I recommend the Civ2 version, but original Civ
is still eminently playable.
I also still have a round at RailRoad Tycoon now and again.
I only have one multiplayer game, which is of course CivNet ... :)
but there may be other good multiplayer games out there.
Magic: The Gathering is very replayable for those who like
the original card game, but less so for others.
Magnus Itland
I, itl...@sn.no (Magnus Itland), wrote:
>I only have one multiplayer game, which is of course CivNet ... :)
>but there may be other good multiplayer games out there.
Well, that's not the whole truth ... sorry.
There is also VGA Planets, which is so mundane a part of life
that I forgot it completely. :) And it's shareware too.
Scout
nost...@spamfree.net.au (Nostromo) wrote:
>P.S Stars! has it's OWN newsgroup. Enough said?
So does BC3000AD.......
>Yours digustedly,
>Robert Miskec.