============== OGRE/GEV list, August 20th (Last: August 17th) =============== ===== Regarding Badlands. From: Chris Camfield ===== OGRE Minis Questions From: sdorr@ix.netcom.com (Scott David Orr) From: daniel@jaws.greatwhite.com (Dan Tulloh) From: fish ===== Miniatures terrain rules From: fish ------------------------------ From: Chris Camfield Subject: Regarding Badlands. To: hcobb@io.com (Henry J. Cobb) If I recall correctly, the Badlands scenario, as well as Operation Newspaper and a horde of silly unit listings (such as the Very Light GEV Mobile Howitzer), were in Space Gamer 74. Shockwave has the Cruise Missile assisted Ogre scenario (off-board missiles supporting a couple of Ogres assaulting a CP), Casey Joneski, Recon In Force [Breakthrough and Raid using the GEV and Shockwave maps], and a breakout-style scenario whose name I don't remember. As to using Battletech maps: I do not have the Ogre Miniatures book, nor any miniatures. If there some plastic minis are released, I might think about getting into Ogre Minis, but otherwise, I won't. The Battletech maps unfortunately are not as hilly or cramped as the Necromancer map, which would make the emplaced nukes available to the defender much less useful. Christopher Camfield - ccamfiel@uwaterloo.ca - BMath Joint CS/C&O "And the Crow and the Jackal and the Jackfish Are suited up to go another round / I'll be up to my ticker in dead-beats When the cold steel hammer swings down" (BRJ) ------------------------------ From: sdorr@ix.netcom.com (Scott David Orr) Subject: OGRE Minis Questions >From: fish >3) Can you 'dig in' a HWZ (or other unit, for that matter) for a >permanent hull-down position? I don't mean reventments, I mean actually >altering the terrain so that the hull of the HWZ is, say, a quarter inch >below the 'tabletop', leaving the gun barrel visible. Maybe CEs could do it. > > [You'll dig a square kilometer ditch?] Sure -- if a hill or valley blocks LOS, couldn't engineers create an artificial hill or valley? >7) I was under the impression (from GEV) that infantry in water were >actually _under_water, and couldn't be attacked normally. But Minis would >have me believe that they can be attacked normally (pg. 42) in water. If >that's the case, they must be above the water. So what are they, >swimming? Why can't they fight? If they overrun a GEV which is above >water, are they automatically destroyed, as if the GEV had overrun them? In original GEV, they were in rafts or what have you on top of the water, and they could be attacked; it's the Ogres that go underwater. The rule you quote above is identical to the one in the original GEV. >7.5) Are infantry riding GEV-PCs automatically destroyed if they are >overrun by a GEV while over water? Can they fight? > > [They will be shot at by the attacking GEVs after they are forced to >automatically dismount by the note on page 34] But if the GEV-PC's snarfed the GEV's before the GEV's got to fire? (For that matter, if enemy GEV's overrun a hex containing both GEV's and infantry, or marine infantry and infantry, logically shouldn't the same thing apply?) Scott Orr ----- [The note on page 35 is misleading, Infantry in a water-overrun lack attack, not defense, if they are unsupported it gives the same result. -HJC] ------------------------------ From: daniel@jaws.greatwhite.com (Dan Tulloh) Subject: OGRE Minis Questions >From: fish >Well, OGRE Minis finally arrived yesterday, and I've got a few questions >about them. Many of these have probably already been asked (and >answered), but my copies of Pyramid (Ask the OGRE!) are all 2000 miles >from here right now. So: > >3) Can you 'dig in' a HWZ (or other unit, for that matter) for a >permanent hull-down position? I don't mean reventments, I mean actually >altering the terrain so that the hull of the HWZ is, say, a quarter inch >below the 'tabletop', leaving the gun barrel visible. Maybe CEs could do it. > > [You'll dig a square kilometer ditch?] Sure, why not? Surely this is nothing more complicated than setting off a nuclear "satchel charge" in the terrain you want to dig into and then setting the howitzer in the crater that is created. Dan Dan Tulloh daniel@greatwhite.com ----- [Isn't it hard enough to decontaminate the gunnies as it is? -HJC] ------------------------------ From: fish Subject: OGRE Minis Questions > 3) Can you 'dig in' a HWZ (or other unit, for that matter) for a > permanent hull-down position? I don't mean reventments, I mean actually > altering the terrain so that the hull of the HWZ is, say, a quarter inch > below the 'tabletop', leaving the gun barrel visible. Maybe CEs could do it. > > [You'll dig a square kilometer ditch?] No, you'll dig a ditch a couple tens of meters across in both dimensions. It'll have to be represented on the map by a square kilomter-wide ditch, sure, but even that isn't an overly difficult feat. I'll be the US Army Corps of Engineers could do such a feat today in less than twenty-four hours; use tactical nuclear weapons as demolitions charges and a few platoons of CEs _could_ build that square-kilo ditch in, say, five hours. > 7) I was under the impression (from GEV) that infantry in water were > actually _under_water, and couldn't be attacked normally. But Minis would > have me believe that they can be attacked normally (pg. 42) in water. If > that's the case, they must be above the water. So what are they, > swimming? Why can't they fight? If they overrun a GEV which is above > water, are they automatically destroyed, as if the GEV had overrun them? > > [Their powder gets wet and they can't swing their swords > efficiently, this really isn't a change from GEV, except now the Marines > carry tridents. (Quick: how much for HEAVY WEAPON Marines? ;-)] Dunno, six? Or eight? (How much for militia marines?) But you still didn't answer the last question: are infantry overrunning a GEV above water assumed to be destroyed? Actually, how about this: infantry in overrun combat in the water still enter combat as normal, with defence of 1 per squad as per normal, but regular infantry and CEs simply have an attack value of 0. Thus if two squads of infantry riding a GEV-PC overrun a LGEV on a lake, the LGEV could try to take out the GEV-PC (and then kill off the infantry at its leisure), or nuke an infantry squad its first fire phase, with a better chance of doing so than disabling the GEV-PC. This would solve all of these irritating questions of how infantry fight in water-borne overruns. -- fish ><> ----- [Yeah, that's about right, but the LGEV should never shoot at the Infantry, until it's gotten everything that CAN shoot at it. -HJC] ------------------------------ From: fish Subject: Miniatures terrain rules Units are counted as being in a forest for all purposes except movement if any part of their miniature/counter is touching the terrain. Okay, so far so good. But for movement purposes, units are counted as being in the front of their counter. So a GEV could pop through 1.5" of forest, come out the other side, and just sort of hang out with its nose out of the forest (so it doesn't get disabled upon the beginning of the next turn -- it's nose is out of the forest), but still gains the defence bonus. Likewise for non-hover units, only they don't even risk being disabled, they just don't have to pay 2x movement costs for moving through rough terrain. Is this interpretation correct? By a strict reading of the rules, I think it is, but it could be argued that any hover unit which gained the 2x defence value for rough terrain must roll for disabling upon the next turn. If this _is_ correct, could a hover unit just back up into a forest terrain area, without putting its nose in (avoiding disabling chance -- it's not paying the 2x movement costs until the nose goes in), but still gain the forest defence bonus? Another question, not dealing with strict rules interpretations this time: How do people handle movement distances? Do you move similarly to combat ("I want this GEV to go _here_", then measure the distance and see how far you got) or just plop the ruler down and then move along it? The problem with either one is that they give an easy reference point for range estimation, which under the basic rules is supposed to be just that -- an estimation. The only way that I've seen which avoids this quick and easy reference (the ruler on the table, that is), is for the player to indeed say "I want this GEV to go _here_" (Pointing at a point on the table), and then not look while the referee measures how far the GEV actually got towards that point and checks for overruns. The problem with this is that it's time-consuming. Any thoughts? How do most people play this? (I've never seen anyone else but my friends and myself play Ogre, so I don't know the customary ways of doing things, which is why I keep asking stupid questions.) -- fish ><> ------------------------------ Henry J. Cobb hcobb@io.com http://www.io.com/~hcobb All OGRE-related items Copyright (c) 1996, by Steve Jackson Games.