============ OGRE/GEV list, Sep 12th (Last: Sep 7th) ============= ===== Archaic Sub Units From: jimaclem@juno.com ===== Crewing requirements. From: jimaclem@juno.com From: andrew.flowers@gs.com (Andrew Flowers (INTERN)) From: sdorr@ix.netcom.com (Scott David Orr) ------------------------------ From: jimaclem@juno.com Subject: Archaic Sub Units Hi All! Here is my take on archaic submarine units with modifications to make them useful in the OGRE universe. Gimme your thoughts (you feel my fingers touch key points on your face!) Ogre Subs I felt like the BPC subs article was a little too general, so I decided to create some of my own rules for submarines. First of all, the older, archaic sub units should be considered. Since there were so many types built, I have decided to treat them as three basic units: SSBN, SSN, and SS. The SSBN is a boomer, or ballistic missile submarine. With the advent of laser defences, their missiles became obsolete, but their use as cruise missile launch platforms was not unnoticed. With the big missiles removed, and some modifications to the launch tubes, they became the biggest cruise missile carriers around! SSBN (Archaic Unit) Attack: 4 (torpedoes) Range: 6 (only against ships, and other subs) Defense: 1 (early units w/o BPC armor) 2 (units with BPC added) Move: 2 (surfaced) 3 (submerged) VP: 12 (non BPC) 15 (BPC) (these values DO NOT INCLUDE THE CRUISE MISSILES!) Each boomer has had each SLBM replaced with four (4) cruise missiles. Each is assumed to have had 20 missile tubes, giveing the new version eighty (80) !!! cruise missiles. For stability, though, the sub can only launch eight (8) CM's per turn (two tubes worth). Needless to say, this unit is going to be around only to launch massive attacks on long range targets. These may carry up to four SLOM's (Sub Launched Ogre Missiles). These are the same as the standard Ogre missile, just launched via the sub's torpedoe tubes. It can launch up to four at a time, though if there are multiple targets, they must all be within two hexes (four inches) of each other, due to the older targetting systems. These targets may be on or under sea, or on land. The sub may not use it's torpedoe attack in the same turn it launches SLOM's. The SSN is an attack submarine, similar to the Los Angeles, 688 class attack boats. These are optimized to kill surface ships, and especially subs. They lack the big missile capacity of the SSBN's, but are still dangerous to surface, sub-surface, and land targets. SSN (Archaic Unit) Attack: 6 (torpedoes) Range: 6 (only against ships, and other subs) Defense: 1 (early units w/o BPC armor) 2 (units with BPC added) Move: 2 (surfaced) 4 (submerged) VP: 15 (non BPC) 18 (BPC) The SSN can carry up to six (6) SLOM's, described above. These are launched with the same restrictions as for SSBN's. They can also carry up to six (6) cruise missiles, in external tubes. They may launch any or all of these in a single turn. The SS is a diesel-electric sub, found in coastal waters for defense purposes. It seems safe to assume that some of these would see service with newer weapons. SS (Archaic Unit) Attack: 3 (torpedoes) Range: 6 (only against ships, and other subs) Defense: 1 (early units w/o BPC armor) 2 (units with BPC added) Move: 3 (surfaced) 1 (submerged) VP: 6 (non BPC) 9 (BPC) The SS can also carry SLOM's, up to two, with the same launch restrictions as above. They may not carry CM's. Give me some input on these. I'm working on rules for ocean movement and combat, hope to have those posted soon, along with surface and sub units built during the Ogre era. Thanks Jim C. Duck and cover! ----- [One gets the impression from the load on the missile crawler and Ogres that the cruise missiles and ogre missiles are very large. My take is that a SSBN could carry one Cruise Missile or Ogre Missile per SLBM replaced and launch one missile per turn, but without having to surface. (It would need to combine the Ogre Missile attack with some other unit's attack in that case.) -HJC] ------------------------------ From: jimaclem@juno.com Subject: Crewing requirements. >From: Robert Gurskey >I recently discovered the OGRE/GEV website and am slowly working my >way >through the '97 newsletters (?). Has the following topic been >discussed; >what are the crew complements of the various fighting vehicles. I know > >the LGEV is single manned but no other vehicle's crew has been >described. > >Also, if scenarios existed which started with abandoned vehicles, who >could operate them. Could 3 heavy tanks spare one crewman each in >order >to get a fourth heavy tank operating? Can infantry operate vehicles? >Or >would this require special skills like an engineer squad. > >Thanks for listening and hope to be added to the mailing list soon. Seems reasonable to me that two heavies could each give up a single crewman, and make a skeleton crew for another heavy. Since the crewmen might not be in their usual positions, maybe reduce the move of each of the three by one point, or reduce the attack by one, just to simulate the change in crew positions. Maybe to simulate the new crews ability to adjust to their new situations, allow the reductions to be removed after, oh, say 5 turns. (If they live that long!) I don't think infantry could effectively operate the vehicles at any fighting par, though they might be able to drive them off the battlefield. Engineer squads are included in this lack of ability. JIm Clem Duck and cover! ----- [Note that armor units can "operate" in a disabled mode with no crew whatsoever. -HJC] ----- From: andrew.flowers@gs.com (Andrew Flowers (INTERN)) Subject: Crewing Requirements I'd also tend to agree with Henry (and the article he referenced -- and haven't you mentioned that article before, Henry? I've seen it before, I know) that the Heavy probably has three crewmen. I also seem to recall some fiction giving them three crewmen. Light Tanks probably have two, yes -- check out any of the thinly disguised flame wars in Armor magazine for an argument for a two-man _MBT_... Also, look at: http://www.janes.com/public/defence/gallery/jpict.html and, specifically: http://www.janes.com/public/defence/gallery/970618.jpg This sort of conforms to my view of the light tank -- a two-man, low-silhouette light armoured unit. That or the (cancelled) XM8 AGS. (I thought I had a link to info about the XM8 around here somewhere but it seems to have wandered.) GEVs, depends on the vehicle -- the standard Paneuropean GEV would probably need at least three crew (to control all the random sponsons tacked on): Driver, Gunner, Commander/Gunner, maybe another gunner for a total of four. And so on -- you can probably count on all weapons being autoloading or heavy automatic. One gunner per gun, probably, with a commander in the larger units. Every unit needs a dedicated driver, unless you're a nut like an LGEV. As for rules for swapping units out to take over abandoned vehicles... have fun. I don't think it's very likely you'd find any abandoned vehicles lying around the battlefield, since crewmen are likely to be a lot safer inside an armoured hull than running around in the skin outside their tracks. In any case, you'd have to make rules for abandoning vehicles first. And I don't think a vehicle could reasonably give up any of its crewmen and still operate at full effectiveness; if it could, then they'd never have that guy in there, and use the space and weight for more ECM, thus raising the defence by one. -- Fish Andrew (fish) Flowers Personal: awflower@midway.uchicago.edu | Work: andrew.flowers@gs.com Drive offensively. Buy an Ogre ----- [The B-29 had more turrents than gunners and computers are much better these days. -HJC] ----- From: sdorr@ix.netcom.com (Scott David Orr) Subject: Crewing requirements. I don't really see how you can operate an armored vehicle with less than 3 crewmen: you need a driver, a gunner, and a commander. It's possible that you could reduce the need for some of these crewmen through automation (after all, a fighter plane works okay with one crewman--but he can't really shoot unless he's got the plane pointed at the target or he has seeking missiles--but it works better with two crewmen); but if a heavy tank needs three crewmen, I don't see why an LGEV doesn't need them; and if the LGEV needs only one, I don't see why the heavy tank needs 3. Mind you, it coud be that the bigger vehicles can afford the space for extra crew without sacrificing other things (like silhouette or armor), and that could explain he one-man LGEV (whose reduced efficiency would already be reflected in its attack rating), but the relationship between size and crew probably isn't a straight-line one. > Since the man in the LGEV is a lieutenant are any GEV wings of Air >Force extraction? -HJC] I find it hard to believe you'd put a lieutenant in an LGEV, when you'd have a sergeant commanding a GEV or heavy tank. Heck, even in a lot of air forces a lot of pilots are sergeants. Especially given the casualty rates in the Ogre universe, using an officer to command an LGEV (assuming it has a 1-man crew) would be an unconsionable waste of an expensively trained soldier. Scott Orr ----- [Ogre Minis, p53: "It is unusual for a fighting vehicle to be commanded by anybody below the rank of lieutenant". Note that this means that half the officers in Mechanized Infantry formations are vehicle commanders. Sorry about the delay, I've been strike-struck. Three things to note as of late: The industry is on-track for a billion transistor chip by 2011, rovers work OK when they are light-hours away from human supervision and the Army is going to need automated surveillance systems to make up for the land mines they're giving up. I hear the rumble of distant treads no later than 2015, but the right place to talk about it is: http://www.sjgames.com/ogre/board/ But, if the first one is completed in 2006, I know what to call this fearless monster. -HJC] Henry J. Cobb hcobb@io.com http://www.io.com/~hcobb All OGRE-related items Copyright (c) 1997, by Steve Jackson Games.