============ OGRE/GEV list, June 19th (Last: June 15th) ============= ===== The hills are alive..... From: "Clinton D. Coates" ===== Kill the Howitzer Scenario results From: peletier@grolen.com ------------------------------ From: "Clinton D. Coates" Subject: The hills are alive..... Hi all, I plugged some numbers into the terrain suggestions. (A bit of background, I am an archaeologist now, but was formerly a forest engineer and used to deal alot with grades and terrain etc.) > RE: Hilly terrain ... > >From memory here: taking into account each hex is 1500 meters and > attempting to keep things as simple as possible for ease of play, I choose > to use 10 meter contors (or was it 15 meters??). There would be a little > number in each hex showing it's "AVERAGE" elevation in ten (fifteen?) meter > steps. A rise of a single step would block Line-Of-Sight (LOS) for most > units, two steps for SUPERHEAVY tanks and four for OGRES. So would there be contours on the map, or just elevation numbers on the hexes? > A rise of 10 steps from one hex to the next would cost most units two > movement points, 15 steps for OGRE class movement. 10 steps would be either a 6.7% (100m/1500m) or 10% (150m/1500m) *average* grade. 'Steep' hills on major highways end up being about 7% maximum grade, which slows my land rover down a good movement point or two.. > A rise of 20 steps > costs an entire turn's movement factor to climb, 25 steps for OGRES. 20 steps would be either 13% (200m/1500m) or 20% (300m/1500m). When laying out a logging road, we would use 18% as an absolute maximum for grade for a short section of spur road. Normal maximum grades would be 12%. A logging truck at speed can roll over a short section of 18% grade pretty easily, but a longer stretch would have it down to crawling speed (30-50km/hr). > A > rise of 25 steps (30 for OGRES) is unclimbably steep. Infantry don't > slow down until the rise is 25 steps (which costs its entire movement > factor) but can climb up any grade. 25 steps would be either 16.7% (250m/1500m) or 25% (375m/1500m). Bulldozers can easily go up much steeper grades than 25% In British Columbia, the limit for rubber tyred ground based skidding for logging is about 30-35% (depending on where it is and the terrain) and as high as 45% for track based skidders. Beyond that, we use cable yarding systems. The above is just to try to give some real life numbers to the movement values. Granted, skidders and logging trucks are a far cry from future combat vehicles. However, I would suggest that the abilities of tracked vehicles would not be too much different than today and that perhaps looking to the M1 Abrams or a Leopard might be useful for getting an idea of the terrain limitations for the future. Also, I think GEVs would be affected much more by steep terrain than other kinds of vehicles (or do they just have afterburners?) LOS. If the slope is unchanged or gets steeper between a few hexes, wouldn't LOS be preserved between them (IE valley bottom to ridge top). Some alternate ideas: One of the downfalls of the traditional topographic style map using iso lines for elevation is that it is not always easy to read. One of the systems that has been developed to get around this is a technique called illuminated contours. This system gives a 3d effect to the map similar to a terrain model built up from flat pieces of cardboard cut to contour shape then illuminated. The light and shadow play makes the terrain 'jump' out very quickly. Instead of using average elevation numbers to decide on movement costs, one could just count the number of contour lines crossed to move from one hex to the next and have threshold numbers. Alternatively, one could use a small slope template to measure the distance from one line to the next to give the same threshold values. This system would make it easier to portray key tactical terrain like ridge/cliff systems, low long hill systems, and small valley systems. A system similar to the one in battlesuit could be used to calculate LOS. I recall that it worked quite well, though it was a bit slow. In OGRE, the distances are a lot less (in units of measure), so I think it would be simpler. It also doesn't take too long to become familiar with figuring LOS from topo maps, so you don't always have to resort to the calculations. The contours on the maps could be idealized somewhat to remove ambiguities. For a bit of added spice, you could also include terrain features like gullies and ridge lines to add hiding places from LOS. So, to sum up: terrain numbering (TN) advantages quick to construct a map (and can use existing maps) quick to figure out LOS and movement costs TN disadvantages not very realistic elevations and terrain feel are not intuitive illuminated contour (IM) advantages more realistic portrayal of terrain more precise measure of LOS IM disadvantages more complex movement cost and LOS determination more time consuming to make map One of the problems with any terrain map at the scale we are dealing with in an Ogre game is the 1:100,000 scale. A *lot* of significant terrain types can be hidden on a map at this scale. I don't think it would be all that hard to take any piece of 1.5km square area and hide something the size of a MBT in it, perhaps with the exception of some parts of southern Saskatchewan.... Just my $0.02 Clinton ------------------------------ From: peletier@grolen.com Subject: Kill the Howitzer Scenario results I have played about a dozen scearios of Kill the Howitzer. This scenario was created by Garth L. Getgen who is on this forum often. (See him if you want the scenario). What I have found is that initially, the defender almost always loses. BUT, after 2-3 games, the defender finds the magic that makes this almost impossible to lose. The new player to this scenario almost always loses to the experienced player of the scenario defending or attacking. Should I tell the secret ? Naaaa Thanks to those who helped play test by email. PS: I have two boards open for GEV via Email, let's play peletier@grolen.com ------------------------------ Henry J. Cobb hcobb@io.com http://www.io.com/~hcobb All OGRE-related items Copyright (c) 1997, by Steve Jackson Games.