============ The Ogre Digest, Apr 23rd (Last: Apr 16th) ============= ===== OGRE Recognition Handbook From: PaulandLynette@aol.com ===== Unit Diversification From: Darren Breland ===== BPC Subs revisited From: Darren Breland ===== Wheeled vehicles From: Darren Breland From: Sumnerd1234@cs.com ===== OGRE Brains Possible? From: Darren Breland ===== Wounds Unlimited contest closes...and so do they... From: Michael Powers ===== Battle Suit & Starship Troopers From: Sumnerd1234@cs.com ===== Flunky's page From: Servitor@aol.com ===== Article: New Nuclear Weapon From: William Spencer ===== Edition Identification From: Anthony Vernier ===== OGRE Battlefields From: Stephan Beal ============================== From: PaulandLynette@aol.com Subject: OGRE Recognition Handbook I've finally gotten the first 2 pages of this new project up on the web, displaying Mk III and Vs The overall goal is to be able to display an imagery database of OGRE miniatures so that others can see your work, and (possibly) be inspired by your paint schemes. Selecting those first colours to brush on is always a bit tricky... (It will also give people the opportunity to have your work on the web without creating your own website, although its great to see so many popping up everywhere - its a testomony to the resurging popularity of a well tried and tested game). I just wanted to say thanks to those who have already submitted some pics to the cause. It certainly is starting to look good already. Any and all submisison will be greatly received and I guarantee that they will go on, and that full credits will be given. Best wishes to all, Paul O'Grady http://panpacific.homestead.com/Home.html ===== [Please submit any OGRE site you find to http://dmoz.org/Games/Board_Games/Space_Combat/Ogre/ Well, those that can take the load of a boosted search from A'OL. -HJC] ============================== From: Darren Breland Subject: Unit Diversification It is very easy when purchasing your units to "tailor" your force to simply overwhelm an enemy Ogre or defense. In what I refer to as "cheesy" force purchasing, an opponent can buy any number of a given type of unit that he wishes in an attempt to overwhelm a more diversified force. A good commander will be able to exploit the weaknesses of such a force and may come out ahead. But there are situations where the difference between a good game and a total rout can be in the armor types chosen. For example: 12 GEV's -vs- an Ogre MkIII ... the GEV's will win in open terrain. 12 Heavy tanks -vs- 12 GEV's will get varied results depending upon terrain, but the GEV's will usually come out ahead. If you put ALL of your armor points into any one unit type, you can almost always win at an Attack-Defend style scenario (except maybe with Light Tanks) by simply overwhelming you opponent. This type of buying strategy, from a realism standpoint, is ridiculous. A commander rarely has only 1 type of "ideal" unit to bring to bear -vs- an enemy in the real world. Unit shortages, attrition and force allocation will usually limit the amount of any one particular unit type a commander could even hope to receive. The commander must leverage the strengths of the units that he has available to achieve victory. To illustrate my point: Soviet units in KFOR in Kosovo needed rations, they were requisitioning rations, but kept getting weapons instead. These guys were starving but had plenty of weapons! A friend of mine who is a USMC sniper said he traded a case of MRE's for a brand new AK-74 plus ammo. Which was good for him since US troops couldn't carry ammo for their M-16's but could carry ammo for an AK-74. My point here is that if you NEED 12 GEV's, you would prob get 8 plus a few light GEV's or Heavy tanks. I have seen some "house" rules that state they don't allow purchasing of more than 4 of any given armor unit type. This is fine for small forces, but what about large battalion sized forces? Has anyone put together a point system that requires you purchase "X" number of points of one unit if you choose "Y" number of points of another? Or even a table or organization that requires you purchase "blocks" of units. (Such as 3 HVY's + 1 SHVY) I am going to attempt this and see how it works in "the field". I think it will make game play a LOT more fun and realistic. For example: For every 4 GEV's you must purchase 2 other equal or lesser point value units. I would be interested to hear from anyone that has tried and had success with this. ============================== From: Darren Breland Subject: BPC Subs revisited Check out http://www.sciam.com/2001/0501issue/0501ashley.html. Found on the SJ Ogre message board posted by Charlie451. Lots of info on the development of "supercavitation" technology. May have to revise some rules based upon this info. :-) ============================== From: Darren Breland Subject: wheeled vehicles > [Yeah, but our current APCs ain't nuclear powered either. ;-) LOL! Very true...I just wonder how many miles-per-curies the nuke powered ones get moving and engaging at 75MPH. :-) > Also, I'd cap wheeled defense at D1, because nobody's going to put >state of the art defensive weapons and electronics on a cheap chassy. >-HJC] Agreed. But they do have the speed. Isn't it the electronics-speed-armor-PD combo, in that hierarchy, goes to make up the defense factor. You have a fast wheeled vehicle, prob nuclear powered so it can handle thicker BPC armor, it is faster and more maneuverable than a tank chassis, but a little low on electronics. Are you saying no PD either? Otherwise, I would give a wheeled AFV a D2. I still think the ONLY reason GEV's have a D2 is cuz of the speed/maneuverability thing... then again the GEV does combat cruise at 105MPH! ===== [The GEV also has mobility. Cruising fast down the highway limits your evasion tactics to slowing down or speeding up, while the GEV can dodge in two dimensions. -HJC] ===== From: Sumnerd1234@cs.com Subject: Wheeled vehicles > Also, I'd cap wheeled defense at D1, because nobody's going to put state of > the art defensive weapons and electronics on a cheap chassy. -HJC] Well, you amy want to talk to the French and the South Africans about that. The French currently deploy wheeled MBTs with many of their quick reaction units. I don't remember it actual designation off the top of my head, but I do remember it has a 105 mm main gun, laser range finder, thermal imager, and all sorts of other goodies. The South Africans deploy a wheeled howitzer that's considered to be the one of the best weapons systems on the market today. It out shoots anything the US or Europe currently produces, and that's without firing RAP rounds. Also I'm attached a corrected version of my Rising Sun scenario to this. Hopefully it's a little clearer in its setup instructions than the last version. ===== [OK, revised my copy on my webpage, http://www.io.com/~hcobb -HJC] ================================= From: Darren Breland Subject: OGRE Brains Possible? >From: "Herb Diehr" > Russians create 'artificial human brain'.... That article was taken from the "Christian Science Monitor". http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2001/04/19/fp16s2-csm.shtml. I usually take their journalism with a grain of salt.... no offense Herb. However, there are a lot of other interesting AI articles at http://www.aaai.org/Pathfinder/html/current.html for general perusal. Also check out http://www.aaai.org for the latest AI goings on. ============================== From: Michael Powers Subject: Wounds Unlimited contest closes...and so do they... Apparently WI has gone TU.com...so I guess that means our content entries are hosed too 8-/ -- Michael Powers Graduate Student, GWU/JIAFS NASA Langley Research Center (757) 864 4457 -- m.t.powers@larc.nasa.gov ===== [ http://woundsunlimited.com/rip.html -HJC] ============================== From: Sumnerd1234@cs.com Subject: Battle Suit & Starship Troopers In the Ogre Book, Vol. 1 there are rules for converting Ogre units for use in Starship Troopers. Has anyone given any thought to converting Battlesuit for use with it? I don't have a copy Starship Troopers myself (a friend of mine had one, but he moved to DC), but I'd like to get a copy of the rules if anyone's willing to part with them. ============================== From: Servitor@aol.com Subject: Flunky's page Thank you, Henry. Will do asap. Uh, BTW, since I'm trying to update my site on a regular basis, is there anything you personally would like to see? My next update will include an OGRE Macrotures battle report complete with pictures (and, if I get Todd's permission, graphics of the battlefield utilizing his V-map program). Suggestions are certainly wanted! best, John Hurtt (Servitor@aol.com) ===== [That is what I'd most like to see, reports about OGRE gameplay at conventions. -HJC] ============================== From: William Spencer Subject: Article: New Nuclear Weapon http://cgi.mercurycenter.com/premium/nation/docs/bomb16.htm It's a penetrator bomb. A nuclear penetrator bomb. No longer will you be able to cower in an underground bunker. -- William Spencer williamspencer@hotmail.com Shadowjack shadowjack@subdimension.com ============================== From: Anthony Vernier Subject: Edition Identification I'm looking for some input on two things. 1st: Is the article "Ogre meets Starship Troopers", by Mike Lazich, available any where besides Space Gamer #13 or in the first Ogre Book? Can it be placed on the website for download or can I get a photocopy from SJ Games for a price? 2nd: I was able to get an old edition of GEV but I can't figure out which edition it is. Here's some info, Metagaming; boxed (4" x 7"), color cover by Brian Wilson (1979 date); Rulebook Designed by Steve Jackson, 1978; Counters blue and white, one-sided die-cut,1980 Metagaming copywrite date; Map is cream with green and blue again 1980 Metagaming copywrite date. My guess is a 2nd edition later printing. Anyone want to hazard a guess........I got a good deal so I'm happy what ever the answer. Always nice to own a piece of history. Thanks, Tony Vernier (who played the original Ogre over coffee & strawberry pie too many times to count) ============================== From: Stephan Beal Subject: OGRE Battlefields On Tuesday 17 April 2001 14:17, HJC wrote: > 3.031 Militia on Roads. Forget this section ever appeared. The > gameplay reason is that disposable units should only touch the dice > at the moment of disposal and the explanation given is that > experienced militia are too wary to group up in the open and green > recruits are too disorganized to take advantage of any extra > mobility. > > 3.05 Militia Defense. As unarmored targets, each Militia counter > takes full, not spillover effect by any non-overrun attack into its > hex. Single militia platoon counters are not affected by D results > once they have been reduced to unready status, but multi-platoon > counters loose one platoon from D results in addition to being > reduced to unready status. I've never agreed with the idea of Militia in this game for exactly these reasons: complexity and inconstency with current units/rules. Try teaching a new player, "no, that infantry type is special, and is not killed if it's LAST unit gets a D." Sure, it's not like trying to teach him BattleTech, but Ogre (IMO) needs to stay a Beer & Pretzels game. Make an "Advanced Ogre" edition (or keep that stuff in minis, which is inherently more complex) for this kind of stuff. One of BattleTech's biggest downfalls, IMO, is that is has added SO many rules and complex processes in the past 12 years. It was slow to play back then, and it's even slower now. Ogre, on the other hand, has been relatively static until the last year or so, since the announcements of the new editions. IMO, Ogre's stuck around so long because it's good like it is. No, it's not perfect, but we can't make it perfect by filling every little niche with optional rules or clarifications. When rules need so much clarifications, it's time to question the rules. I appologize for the pessimism. :( I would just hate to see Ogre go through the rules-changes whirlwind which has plagued M:TG the past 4 years (a large reason my ~15k M:TG cards have sat idle the past year). > 4.023 Unit defense in revetments. A Mark-I Ogre in a large revetment > defends as if was in a city hex and does not get any defense bonus > above that. I don't like the "no def bonus above that" clause. This gives a 1-squad inf unit the same defense as an SB, whether or not the SB is holed up in a revetment (but that holed-up SB should get a bonus, too, I think). I understand the reasoning, I think (Ogre is big, and "sticks out of" the revetment?), but it seems that a something more consistent with current rules would be better (i.e., simpler to play). I do like the idea of treating it as if it's in a city except for: Again, this is inconsistent with existing rules (but no, I'm not claiming BattleFields is perfect). I play Ogre because I've memorized the rules and I enjoy the game. When we add stuff like this, lots of special cases, it diverges more and more from it's roots as a Simple game to play. Pretty soon we'll need a Ogre Special Cases supplement to get them all bound into one volume. Generic revetments clarification: a revetment adds 2 to DEF. I'm assuming this is after any terrian bonus. Can someone confirm that? I don't remember the rules as being very specific there. 3 Inf in a revetment in a city would be DEF 15 if this is not the case, which is really beyond the scale this game was designed to handle. How about attacks on treads for an Ogre in a revetment? Same as a in city, as Henry suggests (sounds fair enough)? What about an Ogre in a revetment in a city? Take care, fellas, ----- Stephan Beal "Belief makes a hollow place. Something has to roll in to fill it." -- Terry Pratchet ===== [The treads of an Ogre in a revetment in a city was exactly the problem I was trying to avoid. In OGRE Minis you multiply first, then add and I would assume that the same applies to Battlefields. -HJC] Henry J. Cobb ogre@sjgames.com Archives at http://www.io.com/~hcobb All OGRE-related items Copyright (c) 2001, by Steve Jackson Games.