=============== OGRE/GEV list, Mar 26th (Last: Mar 24th) =============== ===== Tables of Disorganisation From: Jack Thomas From: sdorr@ix.netcom.com (Scott David Orr) ===== OGRE Victory Point errata From: Alan.Hench@MAIL.UTEXAS.EDU (Alan A. Hench) From: Bob Apthorpe From: sj@IO.COM (Steve Jackson) ============================== From: Jack Thomas To: "Henry J. Cobb" Subject: Tables of Disorganisation I admit my error about the use of Commander for a Combine squadron, I should have read the Minis book more carefully in that regard. However, concerning the use of Mark III's, the book (page 10) states that the captured Sheffield factory was producing Mark III units for the Paneuropean forces, and that for the majority of the war, both sides had Ogres. This is why I assumed both sides would need experience in fighting Ogres on the battlefield. By the way, what's the latest word on the new miniatures? Jack Thomas thomasjl@indiana.edu ----- [Ogre Minis, page 10, caption on photo: "Ogre Mark III or Paneuropean Legionnaire: identical in all but allegiance" -HJC] ----- To: "Henry J. Cobb" From: sdorr@ix.netcom.com (Scott David Orr) Subject: Re: OGRE/GEV List, March 24th. > [Sir, you are missing out on a vital part of the OGRE experience, >just browse on over to SJG's web site and place an order for the Ogre >Minis Book (or support your local retailer, for $15 and skip the >shipping costs), on pages 52 to 55 you will find the ToO that have me so >confused. -HJC] "Sir"? :) As a matter of fact, I have Ogre Miniatures. The TO&E's in that book seem to be based loosely on real-world (esp. U.S. Army) TO&E's, but (as I recall, not having the book with me at the moment), there are a few differences, and a few things (like having a separate command structure for _organic_ transport -- in fact, the term "organic" necessarily implies that the organic elements are part of the main unit) that you would probably never see in a real military organization. I think the TO&E's in the book are a good guideline, but, "official" or no, if you want to create realistic military units, it would be better to study how real units are organized. BTW, I'm still curious (as I mentioned in my original message) about what you were referring to when you talked about giving officers "virtual promotions" by giving them half a "point", and about where you found out that Commander is a Paneuropean rank (I don't remember this being in the book anywhere, but I could be wrong). Scott Orr ----- [I was thinking of a temporary wartime rank, like General Custer of the ACW becoming Colonel Custer of the "Manifest Destiny" campaign. The rule during the ACW is that this temporary rank was just barely outranked by the same permanent rank. -HJC] ------------------------------ To: "Henry J. Cobb" From: Alan.Hench@MAIL.UTEXAS.EDU (Alan A. Hench) Subject: OGRE Victory Point errata > In a long gone Space Gamer, Steve noted that the one-point cost was >in expending the missile, or loosing it. (There's a certain amount of >infrastructure on the beast that is recovered with it or not, but the >external mountings take more surface area per missile, which increases >the area to armor, but still Mark V's LOVE Missile Racks, they give >first missile shot to Mk-VIs (yes six gets first shot against five) and >still win) The errata seems not to have been rolled over to the Web >pages, pity. This would suggest that an externally mounted missile costs 1 point for the missile itself, plus an extra amount for the external mount itself. With a D4 Missile Rack running 6vp, the mount for a D3 external Missile should be about 3 or 4 vp. That'll give a total cost for the external Missile of 4 or 5 vp. Does that seem right? > The bigger problem is the following table... > >OGRE Total Cost - Item Costs = Body Cost >Mk-I 25 30 Negative five points >Mk-II 50 52 Negative two points >Mk-III 100 82 18 points >Mk-III-B 120 92 28 points >Mk-IV 150 113 37 points >Mk-V 150 118 32 points >Mk-VI 210 168 42 points Where do Total Cost and Item Costs come from? How were they calculated? If they come from the Ogre Minis book, I'll try to pick up a copy sometime. I get the feeling that the Ogre/GEV world has moved beyond the original microgame versions. > Thank goodness the current working formula does not cover OGREs! (I >can just see a battlefield littered with Mk-I hulks, each with one >functional 2ndry battery and a thread, each costing exactly zero points >%-) -HJC] Assuming Total Cost is the actual game cost for an Ogre, and that Item Costs measures the military capability of the Ogre, comparing the two should indicate whether the Ogre is over- or under-valued. In the cases of the MkI and MkII, the game charges less than the Ogre is actually worth. With the larger Ogres the game cost is higher than the item cost. This suggests that the smaller Ogres are better buys than the larger Ogres. 6 MkI's have the same Game Cost as 1 MkV, but their Item Costs are 180 to the MkV's 118. That's a 50% advantage. If this comparison is at all valid, 6 MkI's should be able to defeat 1 MkV. If the 6 MkI's aren't in fact 50% better than the 1 MkV, then there are two possible explanations. One would be that the Item Costs for an Ogre don't reflect the actual military capability of the Ogre. This would suggest that perhaps a different method of calculation should be used which does reflect the Ogre's military capability. The other explanation would be that the Item Costs figures are inaccurate. This would mean the underlying method used to calculate them is flawed. Either way, if the predictions made from comparing Total Cost to Item Costs don't work out in practice, the results will suggest that there is something wrong with the method used to calculate Item Costs. Of course, this test would have to be repeated several times. If the MkI's do have a decided advantage over the MkV, a string of bad luck could outweigh that advantage. If the MkI's don't do well over several battles, the next step would be to look at how those battles went. Try to see what the MkV was able to do that made it a match for 6 MkI's. Did the MkV's missiles make a difference? Then perhaps the Item Cost formula for missiles gives them too low a value. Did its extra treads keep it mobile longer? Then treads should cost more. The AP's in the MkI's take up about 1/7 their total Item Costs, while the AP's in the MkV are only 1/15 it's total. Maybe the AP's cost too much, inflating the Item Costs value for the MkI more than the MkV. If the MkV's 2B's seem to put it over the edge, perhaps they should be worth more, since the MkI's don't have any. ----- [Last time I thought I had an OGRE cost formula, the one-shot missile rail cost about 2 VPs each (plus one additional point for the missile), this is one-third the cost of the full missile rack, and so keeps the one-third cost of one-shot items. If the OGRE could be recovered, it was assumed that the rails where still OK (if shot off or shot at) and the missiles simply needed to be replaced (at one point each). Taking this into account the body table (Ogre Minis price of an OGRE minus price of all it's identifiable parts) becomes: OGRE Total Cost - Item Costs = Body Cost Mk-I 25 30 Negative five points Mk-II 50 52 Negative two points Mk-III 100 86 14 points Mk-III-B 120 100 20 points Mk-IV 150 113 37 points Mk-V 150 130 20 points Mk-VI 210 168 42 points The missile rack OGREs stick out more (but is a Mk-V body really the same cost as a Mk-III body?), but otherwise not much of a change. (It's not quite as bad as SFB where you can scrap a Freddy-DD and buy two more for the cost of the items removed). -HJC] ----- From: Bob Apthorpe To: "Henry J. Cobb" Subject: OGRE Victory Point errata > In a long gone Space Gamer, Steve noted that the one-point cost was > in expending the missile, or loosing it. (There's a certain amount of > infrastructure on the beast that is recovered with it or not, but the > external mountings take more surface area per missile, which increases > the area to armor, but still Mark V's LOVE Missile Racks, they give > first missile shot to Mk-VIs (yes six gets first shot against five) and > still win) The errata seems not to have been rolled over to the Web > pages, pity. Tell me what needs to be added to the errata page and I'll see that it gets fixed. Bob Apthorpe ----- To: "Henry J. Cobb" From: sj@IO.COM (Steve Jackson) Subject: OGRE Victory Point errata >The errata seems not to have been rolled over to the Web >pages, pity. Sorry, what errata? Steve Jackson - yes, of SJ Games - yes, we won the Secret Service case Learn Web or die - http://www.io.com/sjgames/ - dinosaurs, Lego, Kahlua! The heck with PGP keys; finger for Geek Code. Fnord. ----- [In the OGRE/GEV combined set, it is clearly stated in GEV 9.012 the exact VPs awarded for doing harm to OGREs of various sorts. In OGRE Minis on the other hand, the text description of OGRE components (but no costs) is on pages 8 and 9. The text description of the OGREs is on pages 9 to 12, with total per-OGRE costs, but no list of components. The OGRE Record sheets, with lists of components, are on pages 19 and 20, but no costs. The costs of OGRE components is on the quick reference card (after page 64), but the exact rules for scoring a captured or damaged OGRE are not given anywhere that I've looked. I think that some of the difference is due to several years of feedback on the OGRE/GEV games, has anybody read through all the Space Gamer back issues (I've lost mine) to compare these rulings to the Minis book? (Both of the issues I sent in, disrupted CPs in overruns and OGRE thread defense in towns, have been handled.) -HJC] Henry J. Cobb hcobb@io.com http://www.io.com/~hcobb All OGRE-related items Copyright (c) 1996, by Steve Jackson Games.