Master of Magic

I will finally complete the epic quest of describing all of the great old PC games. And this final installment has the best of the bunch: Master of Magic. [Cue the epic music]

You start off in a city, with two units (one swordsmen and one spearmen). And from this you have to forge an empire, conquering not one world, but two (Arcanus and the alternate plane Myrror).

The best part of this game is that there are many variables to change the difficulty of the game. You first choose the wizard you will play, or customize your wizard. You have five different magical styles to choose from (Life, Death, Sorcery, Nature, Chaos)--and can choose up to four of those (you can't choose both Life and Death). You also choose how many spell books you have of those. [You can find more spell books later in the game.]

You simultaneously choose "retorts"--as many as you can have along with the magic you select. These aid the wizard in how one uses magic or interacts with the other wizards--like artificer, which allows you to create artifacts cheap; or death mastery, which makes death spells cheaper and stronger. [You can earn new retorts later in the game as well.]

Your next choice is which species to start with. This will have a serious impact on the difficulty of the game; some species grow very fast, some slow; some are strong melee warriors; some have great range warriors. Some fly, some walk on water. I recommend taking a species that has tough low-level warriors and then capturing cities of tough high-level warriors later. I usually start with Halflings and try to capture High Men, Elves or Nomads later. [Halflings are "lucky" which gives them a powerful advantage in combat. They also make more food / city dweller, so they can host larger armies.]

As you grow in fame (from winning battles) you might have heroes volunteering to join your army. I recommend only accepting the ones who can cast spells--this allows you (the main wizard) to save mana to convert to gold as needed [via alchemy] or to use in the tougher battles; or for overland enchantments [like Crusade--every one of your units gains one level]

This game is pretty complex for its era and fans have been clamoring for a remake basically since the day it was released.

I will say one thing though: I have proof the game cheats. Yesterday I found myself up against an enemy hero that had 99 attack, 99 defense, 99 resistance and 99 hit points.

Civilization

Third of the great classic computer games.

This game is great because, again, you start off with roughly the same opportunities as all your opponents. You start with one (or rarely two) settler unit. That's it. You found cities, develop troops, explore the world, and research new technologies to allow you better troops.

The technology tree is what set this game apart from others of the day. Now, if you're the first to discover gunpowder, you can create musketeers where nobody else can, and that's a distinct advantage. Or later, a cannon going up against a knight unit or an ironclad ship against a wooden ship are mismatches that you can see in this game.

Also, you can create roads and railroads to improve the speed of transportation of your units across the continent. So, if somebody threatens to attack one of your cities, one of your units can cross to attack the newcomer or defend the city nearly immediately. You also have the ability to terraform your surroundings...irrigating planes, transforming forests into plains, etc., for improved use of natural resources.

This game also has diplomacy, which was lacking in the previous games. You can trade technologies or bribe an opponent to attack another opponent, for instance. And there are "Wonders of the World" which give the civilization that creates it certain advantages. For instance, the Great Wall of China allows you to sue for peace with any civilization at nearly any time (provided you get an audience with their leader).

The later versions of this game are in a different perspective than the original, which is top-down. I prefer the original but it's not as polished as the later ones.

In any event, I highly recommend this game!

Wargame of the Century

In 1978, Interstel released a game called Empire. They subtitled it "Wargame of the Century," with over 20 years left in the century. And yet, IMHO, it lived up to its name.

Mind you, nobody's rushing to hand over the "best graphics of the century" award. Or the "best sound of the century" award. But do graphics and sounds make a good game? Not a bit. It's the game's interface, replayability and just plain fun that make it worthwhile. All you need graphics to do is let you know that "this is a battleship and this different looking thing is a destroyer." And sound to let you know something's happening.

Empire has something of a plot, though you needn't pay attention to it: a group of humans are fighting over occupied worlds. So you arrive on a planet with a bunch of cities, take one city (each) and are off. If you never heard the plot, then you'd think you were on earth (or an earthlike planet) fighting for world domination. -shrug-

So there you are in your one city. You can build armies or fighters, if it's landlocked, or if a port city, those and the ships: transports, destroyers, submarines, carriers, cruisers and battleships. There's no researching for better weapons, no upgrading the cities. Everybody starts off the same and everybody has access to the same resources.

That's the beauty of the game, much like chess: you are completely in control of your destiny, and your opponents have the same options and desire to wipe you out. You always start the same, but the possibilities are endless.

But if you're bored, you can always adjust the sliders to give your opponents (or yourself) advantages. AND you raise in rank after battles, and wind up facing higher-ranking opponents who use better tactics. Also for kicks, the game has a planet editor, so you can create a planet to your liking.

I highly recommend this game, even for somebody who plays the most up-to-date wargames. Not only to revisit a classic and see the origins of wargames, but to play in a game with limited resources and test one's skills in tactis and generalship.

Reach for the Stars

Reach for the Stars is a classic computer game. It's one of four "4X" games that have stood the test of time extremely well. A 4X game is one where the gameplay can be reduced to: eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, eXterminate. The others are Empire: Wargame of the Century, Civilization, and Master of Magic.

RFTS is the simplest of these games.

You start off on a "Primary" planet (one that's very suited for habitation), in a star system with no other planets. You have one to three opponents. You can do the following things: (1) improve your planet(s); (2) build transports and colonize other planets; or (3) build warships and fight opponents. You really have to do all three at some point.

And really, that's the whole of it. You can change some setup options, but they don't overly affect the gameplay. The graphics aren't stellar (punny) but they do get you the idea. Like kids using their fingers as pretend guns playing cops and robbers; just make your point and let your imagination do the rest.

The remake, however, was not as much fun. Pretty much all the decision-making was taken out of it, and the opponents were able to expand much to quickly for you to keep up.

I won!

I decided to try to write something every day. I also have to remember not to save things as drafts, because apparently when one publishes the item, it goes back to the day one first typed anything, not the day of publishing. That's a little annoying.

I won an internet argument. That's not easy. Really. This is on KLBJ's message boards:

The thread subject is "Inside the Actor's Studio: Martin Lawrence"

Kevin Costner
why? I know he's made some gems like "Black Knight" and "Big Momma's House 1 & 2"

Udo
Because he's been performing for over 20 years? Like his work or not, he's a professional actor and comedian.

KC
He's a comic, not an actor.

If there was an Inside the Comic's Studio, he should be on it.

Udo
I'm gonna let you in on a secret:

Stand up comedians are actors. It's part of their skill set. Poor-acting stand-up comedians fail. Same with good (show) musicians. It takes acting to successfully do the same thing you did 5 of the last 7 days yet again today.

KC
But Martin Lawrence hasn't been in a good movie, either comedy or not. There are better actors that they could have chosen to be on the show, no?

Udo
First of all, you're [Ugh--I mistyped your] handle on here is "Kevin Costner." I don't know where you get to talk about acting at all. Producing and directing and casting oneself as the lead, perhaps.

But I digress.

I saw Bad Boys II on TV the other day. I thought he did well and the movie, even with its hackneyed plot, was pretty good.

KC
Yeah, the name is a joke.

And you like Bad Boys 2? Well, you can no longer comment on any movie.

Udo
I'm sorry. I didn't realize that this was a "my opinions are fact" forum. You win. You are obviously the best movie/acting critic in the world.

KC had no response.

Weekend Adventure

Friday, as I'm driving home, my car finally decided to give out. I knew it was coming for awhile but since the estimated cost of repairing my transmission was $3000, more than the vehicle's market value, I wasn't repairing it.
It gave out in Elgin, Texas: a nice little city where using your "Engine Brake" is illegal. And they even put up a sign to warn you. I coasted near the Chevron, but in the road and on a slight hill. I felt reasonably sure that I wasn't going to get this car up the hill, so I called upon some guys who happened to be in the store at the time.

"Hey can you guys help me move my car?"
"No English."
"Oh. ¿Pueden ustedes ayudarme movar mi coche?"
"Eh.. huh?"
"Mi coche está in la calle. Necesito movarlo en aquí."
"Oh sí sí."

I offered to buy the guy's grocieries he had in hand, but he refused. Nice guy.

Then we got the car moved and settled, and I had to move it again because I realized we had left it where the fueling truck attaches to the underground tanks. So I pushed it into what passed as a parking spot.

Saturday, we went to visit my father in Cold Spring, which seems to be somewhere on the Texas-New Hampshire border. Or it's just a long drive. That was nice; we got to catch up and go on the lake for awhile.

When I return home, my mother asks me "Did Danny behave?" Dan is my brother. Why he would be misbehaving--or suspected of misbehaving--is beyond me. Nevertheless, there it is.

I also found a cat toy there, which I had never seen before that day, and had first seen in Joel's (my father) house. A little coincidence for ya.

Sunday, Tommy (my sister's husband). You know what? Click here to see my family tree. Thanks to ImageShack for Free Image Hosting.

But I digress.

Tommy checked out my car, determined what needed to be done and then had to go to a MacGuyver's convention, where he learns to fix automobiles as FUBAR as mine using bubblegum, Wheat Thins and a penny found on the ground.

We had to purchase a new axle. We finally found one actually in stock and the sales associate said that there would be a "core charge." I asked him "But what if we weren't in the Marines?" He had the most blank expression I've ever seen, even after Tommy and I both tried to explain it.

Later, Hugh asks me if I'm going to call Tommy and ask him when he's coming back to fix the car. It's about a half hour till nightfall; no way I'm calling [insert a philosophical point about how adults have lives too]. So Hugh does anyway. So, Tommy, bad back and tired is willing to come fix my car in the dead of night and probably will require tools which won't be available since... hell, it's Elgin! Everything closes at 4 PM on Sunday. (OK, 8 PM, but still they're closed.) I called Tommy back and told him to hold off till Monday.
Monday, car gets fixed, and yes, they did have to go to the auto shop and rent a tool. I'm sure the ambient light from the sun helped immensely as well.

Now my car runs very smoothly. I still have to change the spark plugs and inflate the tires but that's small stuff compared to ...oh a broken axle.

Thanks again Tommy! You da man!

Religious Philosophy

I had a totally different thing to post here, but this one takes precedence. I received this e-mail:

Interesting point made here: If it is unconstitutional to mention God, why do our National Constitution and all the Constitutions of all the 50 States do so....????????????? hmmmmm Could we be being led down the garden path, so to speak?
...
«Excerpts from the 50 State Constitutions, some of which are merely restating the US Constitution's First Amendment.»
...
After reviewing acknowledgments of God from all 50 state constitutions, one is faced with the prospect that maybe, just maybe, the ACLU and the out-of-control federal courts are wrong

"Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants." - William Penn

If you found this to be "Food for thought.." copy and send to as many as you think will be as touched as I hope you were. GOD BLESS AMERICA

Now, being opinionated and outspoken, I replied to the group who received this e-mail like so:

It's amazing that somebody went to all the trouble to research 51 constitutions and still has no clue what the First Amendment to the US Constitution says.
That's really sad.
Here's the pertinent portion:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
Christianity is not the official religion of the US. Judaism is not the official religion of the US. Buddhism is not the official religion of the US. Islam is not the official relgion of the US. Why not? Because CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION. It says so in ink in the Constitution, ratified by every state in the Union, even those that came along after the amendment passed.
This country is not a theocracy. It has never been and shall never be. Why is that? because CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION.
Now, why is the original e-mail flawed? Because it states: "If it is unconstitutional to mention God,..." But I don't see where it is unconstitutional to mention god. What I see is CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE [OF RELIGION]. Any person can mention God. What we cannot do is require others to worship God in any particular manner. In fact, the e-mail that was sent, in itself, mentioned God and I don't see the Feds coming down on them. Or on me for this e-mail. Why not? Because CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE [OF RELIGION]. So quit spreading disinformation to further your theocratical theories. The information is not true, and you are lying.
Go to your local priest and ask them what they think of liars.

I have since received two "I agree" statements, one that took no stance but said "looks like somebody opened up a hornets' nest" and one person who didn't read the original e-mail but read my response and was offended that I should include this person in the response.

I don't know who you are! I didn't send you the first e-mail and I don't appreciate receiving a respond. You should send the your respond to the only person who originally sent it to you. I didn't even read the e-mail that was sent out in the first place and it uncalled for me to get your respond. Thank You,

That was annoying. I replied again, just to this person:

I don't know who you are. I disagree with the fact that you don't think you should receive a response. It was sent out as a group mailing and I responded to the entire group.

Nobody forced you to open my response and read it, just as you apparently didn't open the original and read it. I don't see the issue at all.

But I will defend to the death your right to disagree with me.

A little Voltaire for you.

Wheeeeeee!

Poor Advertisement

Bad advertising angers me, mainly because the advertisers assume that we are stupid, and secondarily because they may be right.

Consider:

• "Would you drive ... for $500?"
  Because this car company will give you $500 if they fail to undersell a competitor of the same car manufacturer. The scam? They only have to beat their competition by $1, not $500.
  "Oh geez, you mean I drove 35 miles from Georgetown to South Austin for a $1 savings?"


• "...and those Dos Equis better be Dos Equis or we'll have to turn you around."
  Next time I'm partying with self-important condescending jerks in Mexico, I'll remember to instruct them to bring their own damn beer if it's so important. Until then, callete la boca, cabrón.


• "Next time you put Cokes in the company fridge, put in two twelve-packs....'cause there's going to be some sharage."
  Hmm... $4 per 12-pack, so that's like $8 for one can of Coke, assuming of course that I even get that one, knowing the sharks around here. I'm sure Coka-Cola's all for that. How about I put in one thing that looks like a can of Coke but really is a hand-grenade. Pop the tab, kaboom! I doubt anybody steals my coke again.

Pretend like there's the little ©, ® and ™ above where needed.

Premier!

So, where to begin. My friend Cyndi got me into this mess. Now I'm blogging. Ugh. I'm being "normal." How did that happen?

So, who am I? I'm Dale. Nice to meet you.

What are my interests?
My long-term interests are things like Human Rights; Fantasy: books, games, cinema; Music: I've been accused of favoring 80s "hair bands," and I can't deny... Bad Company, till the day I die; and Math Now, if you put all those items together you get Philosophy.

My current projects are:

• Poker: Playing online till the Government assaults our individual rights and takes that away. Pokerchamps, where I got my start (I won $1 with no monetary input and used that to build up to over $100), is now closed to Americans. Now I have to go to Sugar's, a "cabaret," in order to win at poker. Thanks for looking after my ethical well-being, Oh Mighty Establishment. Why don't I look after your well-being and limit your campaign contributions and gifts acceptable and your very income until you eliminate the national deficit, which you promised you could do by 2005?



• Screenplays: I have two in mind, both of the genre (wait for it....) Fantasy. I've outlined both, and have done some writing on the latter (or the one that has been in my mind the shortest time, because it's the better, long-term idea)



• Books: Fantasy series in mind, and I'm working on a series of math texts. Current math texts don't actually establish a solid base. For instance: subtraction is defined as: a - b = a + (-b). But addition is not defined at all; so subtraction is actually meaningless.



• Inventions: I have a couple in mind. Implementing them, or getting patents may be difficult. They're improvements, not originals.



• Games: I have a great game concept in mind, but part of it seems to have become part of the "latter" screenplay. Not that it can't be reused, just that I'm more focusing on that. Hopefully one of the screenplays will turn out, then I can have the free time to work on the other things.

Imagine being on TV playing poker and having the announcer mention that you also developed a computer game, wrote some screenplays, a book, released an album, invented a couple of nifty things, and dunked on Shaq (well, assuming we played with a 6' rim...)