============ OGREverse list, Apr 10th (Last: Apr 8th) =============
===== No counters...
From: Barak Engel
===== Grunt on a hot tin box
From: Chris Camfield
===== Aide De Camp
From: tanker@best.com
------------------------------
From: Barak Engel
Subject: No counters...
Hi all,
Finally got my hands on Ogre/GEV (10x to everyone who replied to my
original postings about this). Now I have a new problem - I have no
counters. I dont mind that too much, I can always use counters from Car
Wars for example, but the problem is that the games do not list the counter
values anywhere in the rules, only on the counters themselves.
Could anyone be so nice as to let me know the values for each unit in Ogre
and GEV?
Many TIA,
Barak
-----
[Go to: http://www.sjgames.com/catalog/ order the OGRE minis rulebook
and back convert all moves and ranges by two inches to the hex.
You can even take Militia back with you, see:
http://www.io.com/~hcobb/gev/infantry.htm -HJC]
------------------------------
From: Chris Camfield
Subject: Grunt on a hot tin box
> [Infantry makes every tank better. Why purchase a heavy or even a
>light and not put a squad on top? Even in the suits the grunts are only
>faster in really tough terrain where you wouldn't send the tank
>anyway. -HJC]
True, but if you sent every tank into battle with an infantry rider, I'd
expect the infantry to die very quickly.
> DEFENDING THE RECTANGLES: Mr Camfield posted a comment about da
>formula to the boards while I was trapped in Stygian Plains, NY. He
>doesn't like the simpilicity of my two rectangles. Da formula gives the
>combat value (not the production cost per se, but competitive pressures
>would tend to make these converge, t'cha?) as the sum of the area of two
>rectangles. The first has a base of the first phase move plus the attack
>range times a height of the attack strength and the second has a base of
>the attack range plus the second phase move times a height of the defense
>strength.
I don't wish in any way to imply that I think the formula is inherently
flawed!
Anyways, here's the rationale behind what turned out to be quite an awkward
hack:
- If you double a unit's combat strength, you do not double its attack
capability, because a 2:1 attack is not worth twice as much as a 1:1
attack. Also, an attack strength 3 unit like the missile tank will often
have to round down attacks because it is firing at D2 targets. There just
aren't many D3 units in the game! I did some simple-minded analyses
comparing different attack strengths vs different defence strengths
(weighting each combination equally, and valueing X results as 3 times
better than a D).
- The value of the sum of movement and range (the "strike range") is *not*
linear. If I have a bunch of units which move 4 and have a range of 2, and
you have units which move 3 and have a range of 2, I may have a significant
tactical advantage; worth more than (4+2)/(3+2)=6/5(?).
- The value of range may not be linear either. The longer your range, the
larger the obstacles you can fire over. If a howitzer is placed two hexes
from a river, a R2 unit simply *can't* hit it. I have to admit that this
element is partly based on the first two, and the fact that reducing the
value of D6 significantly reduces the value of howitzers unless range is
given a boost.
- High defence values (>2) are worth more than their printed worth.
Arguably incorrect.
- A "maneuverability" term should be introduced, but should not overwhelm
the other terms.
> Is the GEV worth twice as much as the Light Tank, simply because it
>moves more?
I think this ought to be represented in costs *somewhere*, either through a
unit value formula or through command & control costs. GEV/Ogre has just
traditionally not been a game revolving around light tanks and light GEVs,
and I don't think I'd want to play a game which was reduced to maneuvering
LGEVs, LTs, and militia. But I haven't addressed this here.
Anyway, here in all its gory detail is my hack on the formula.
Start with:
A - attack
D - defence
R - range (in *hexes*)
M1 - movement phase 1
M2 - movement phase 2
MM - movement mode (heavy, hover, normal)
Look up, and note:
AV - attack value
A AV
1 1
2 2
3 2.5
4 3.5
5 4
6 5
DV - defence value
D DV
1 1
2 2
3 3.5
4 4.5
RV - range value
R RV
1 1
2 2
3 3.5
4 5
5 6.5
6 8
7 9.5
8 11
SRB - strike range bonus; use M1 or M2, whichever is appropriate (it's
obvious)
M*MF+RV SRB
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0.5
7 1
8 1.5
9 2
10 2.5
11 3
MF - movement factor
1 if MM is normal
1.1 if MM is hover (reduced for no other reason than to make the #s fit)
1.33 if MM is heavy
The formula:
Cost, for VPs/Ogre Miniatures points: (don't divide by 6, and you have GEV
VPs)
T1 + T2 + T3 / 44 * 6
Where:
T1 = AV x (RV + M1 x MF + SRB1)
T2 = 2 x DV x (RV + M2 x MF + SRB2)
T3 = (M1 + M2) x MF x (AV x RV + 2 x DV) / 7
The first two terms are immediately obvious as parallel to the ones in the
old formula. The difference is that the non-linear values are used, and
the strike range bonus is added in.
The third term is the maneuverability term. It basically calculates "how
much stuff are we moving, and how fast" - movement times the sum of a value
for the guns and a value for the armour.
Where do "/ 7" and "/ 44" come from? They balance the formula. :-)
However, note the results, below...
(I can put the actual calculations on a Web page, or put up the Excel
spreadsheet, if anyone wants me to. But this has mainly been an exercise
in obsession, and I hope no one takes this too seriously, so I hope for now
that you'll trust me on this.)
HVY 6.1 (1.02AU)
GEV 6 (1.00AU)
MSL 5.9 (0.99AU)
HWZ 11.9 (1.99AU)
LT 2.9 (0.49AU)
MHWZ 12.3 (2.05AU)
SHVY 12.2 (2.03AU)
LGEV 3 (0.5AU)
All as they cost in the game. However, this isn't necessarily a good
thing, as I think we recognize that the SHVY is overrated, and the missile
throwers may be too. (Perhaps the range factor should be toned down.)
Now, one of the things that I had in mind when I was coming up with this
was that hopefully units that we cook up ourselves but which go beyond the
limits of what's reasonable would be shown to be too expensive by the formula.
Two examples:
The SGEV: A4, R3, M4/3 as GEV (if you'll pardon the reference, SJ
described it way back in SG 74 as "possible - but it would be state of the
art engineering, and would have to cost a lot more than the algorithm would
lead you to believe")
Cobb formula cost:
( 4 x (3 + 4 x 1.2) + 2 x 3 x (3 + 3 x 1.2) ) / 6 (as I'm using board game
ranges)
= ( 4 x 7.8 + 6 x 6.6 ) / 6
= 70.8 / 6
= 11.8
Camfield formula cost:
T1 = 3.5 x (3.5 + 4 x 1.1 + 1) = 3.5 x 8.9 = 31.15
T2 = 2 x 3.5 x (3 + 3 x 1.1 + 0.5) = 7 x 6.8 = 47.6
T3 = (4 + 3) x 1.1 x (3.5 x 3.5 + 2 x 3.5) / 7 = 148.225 / 7 = 21.175
(T1 + T2 + T3) / 44 x 6 = 13.6
The FMSL: A2, R4, M4 as HVY (noted by Fish Flowers on the game site as
"game breaking"...
it has a strike range of 8, through woods!)
Cobb formula cost:
( 2 x (4 + 4 x 1.33) + 2 x 2 x (4) ) / 6
= ( 2 x 9.32 + 4 x 4 ) / 6
= 5.77
Camfield formula cost:
T1 = 2 x (5 + 4 * 1.33 + 2.5) = 2 x 12.82 = 25.64
T2 = 2 x 2 x (5) = 20
T3 = (4) x 1.33 x (2 x 5 + 2 x 2) / 7 = 5.32 x 14 / 7 = 10.64
(T1 + T2 + T3) / 44 x 6 = 7.67
Now, it may well be that these results don't go far enough in indicating
these units are really valuable, but in both cases the units ARE valued at
over 6 or 12.
Of course, the formula is a mess, but that's how this numbers-freak cooked
his numbers.
Chris
Chris Camfield - ccamfield@cyberus.ca
Big Rude Jake Fan Club President
Visit the Big Rude Page at "http://www.bigrudejake.com"!
"I've had dinner with the devil, and I know nice from right" (BRJ)
-----
[I expect my tanks to die very quickly, but the marginal firepower
increase from a squad of grunts is marginally worth the marginal increase
in cost. Militia are pure profit on top of a tank.
Hey, at least I managed to cook my numbers to within one percent.
And the "punishment" factors you propose aren't that punishing. The
SGEV is worth at least three Heavy tanks. Why not either tack a
percentage increase on the total price tag of a unit or go with a design
system? (I.e. pick mobility system and have size and weight factors.
Units without attack strength would still cost almost as much, etc.)
-HJC]
------------------------------
From: tanker@best.com
Subject: Aide De Camp
>From: Mister McKnight
>Has anyone heard/used/tried the ADC2 on Ogre? Looks like a good way to
>"port" the game to the PC and then use it for pbem games. But then you also
>can use it to playtest new units and make new maps with different surfaces
>or even increase the number of players by adding a new set of units with a
>different color. Cool, no?
I have not gotten as far as making the maps and counters yet but I hope to
sometime soon. ADC2 is perfect for PBEM Ogre/GEV. Get it.
Paul J. Calvi Jr.
tanker@best.com
"If I had time...to study war, I think I should concentrate almost entirely
on the 'actualities of war,' the effects of tiredness, hunger, fear, lack
of sleep, weather....The principles of strategy and tactics...are absurdly
simple: it is the actualities that make war so complicated and so
difficult, and are usually neglected by historians."
--FM Archibald Wavell to B.H. Liddell Hart (as quoted in "Frontsoldaten:
The German Soldier in World War Two" by Stephen G. Fritz.)
-----
[See http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/6599/v_map.html -HJC]
Henry J. Cobb hcobb@io.com http://www.io.com/~hcobb
All OGRE-related items Copyright (c) 1998, by Steve Jackson Games.