🚀 go-pugleaf

I just had to say that I have spent many hours playing this great game!

In a previous article, judd@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Stephen Judd) says:

>In article <40helt$t19@agate.berkeley.edu>,
>David Simpson <davesimp@beavis.CS.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>>
>>I'm curious if there are any people out there who played (or still play)
>>the EA game Lords of Conquest, a risk-like boardgame?  If so, could someone
>>send me a brief summary of gameplay?
>
>Another great game; you can probably still get it at SSI.  It is based
>on the board game "Borderlands", by the same folks (EON) who did "Cosmic
>Encounters", if you've ever played that game.
>
>It is much better with multiple players.  You get to trade with the other
>players, as well as get the satisfaction of thoroughly annihilating a real
>live person.
>
>One really great thing you can do is ring an island with ships, making
>it completely impregnable!
>
>When playing the computer you can cheat somewhat by pressing the firebutton
>while the computer is thinking.
>
>The game had a few bugs.  Sometimes the computer would put a ship on an
>inland lake, and get into an infinite loop by trying to use that ship
>to attack another country (bring ship... ship can't reach country... bring
>ship...).
>
>One thing I wish I could describe better to you is the combat system.  I
>think it in essence rolled a dice for every attack and defend point,
>and the guy with the highest total wins.  The only thing is that
>occasionally you could win battles at ridiculous odds like 10-1.
>It may be that at each turn the computer rolled two dice, and
>gave the winner a point at each throw, and determined battle outcomes
>this way.
>
>If you do write some sort of clone, may I make a suggestion?  Keep it
>simple.  All too often I see remakes of old games (e.g. on the Amiga)
>where they add a bunch of new features and fancy graphics, and in the
>process completely wreck the game (the essence of the game is lost).
>
>	-Steve
>
>>-Dave
>