============ The Ogre Digest, August 3rd (Last: August 1st) ============= ===== GURPS OGRE From: "Paul Chapman" ===== Killing Zone From: Servitor@aol.com From: AvaheilDotter@aol.com From: Inire ===== Infantry Utility and Andrew's Lanchester Equations in Ogre From: Andrew Walters ===== New Ogre Options From: White Rat ===== INF riding Ogres? From: White Rat From: AvaheilDotter@aol.com ===== Disposable Iron Men From: White Rat From: AvaheilDotter@aol.com ===== Dim AI From: Stephan Beal ============================== From: "Paul Chapman" Subject: GURPS OGRE > If you don't mind, I still have plenty of questions. Somehow, I missed your response. Well, better delayed than vaporized, I always say:) > I've heard rumors that Steve is somewhat dissatisfied by the way GURPS > OGRE came out. If this is to be redone at some future date might I suggest > that the difficulty in shoehorning OGREs into the GURPS mechanics suggests > that GURPS (if it is to be universal) will need to allow for options to > customize high technology in the same way that the magic system is adjusted > to fit various fantasy worlds. (Any sufficiently cool technology being > indistinguishable from religion after all.) GURPS Vehicles presents a very complex system of quantifiying machines. SJ, IIRC, felt some of the numbers could have been adjusted to better represent the OGREverse. You raise a good point about "tech options." Of course, it is far easier to create "tweaks" for a non-reality based system. I'm not saying the exercise is useless; I'm saying it would be difficult. Hmm, I wonder if there would be a market for a 16 or 32 page book covering OGRE technologies exclusivily? > The effect will be that the entire design rules will be so distorted > that a design that works very well in one world will not be even remotely > practical in another. Given that different worlds should have different laws of physics, this is not an undesirable result. > For the OGREverse, these options might be superlightweight armor, > optical jamming, effective anti-missile and bulky AI. The effect being to > drive designs towards size (to use the bulky but lightweight armor and > include defensive systems) but keep the weight down enough to yield > hovercraft (up to a certain size.) Very good points. Can anyone come up with hard numbers for any of this? > Having had more than a few moments to hurry up and wait lately, I've > come up with some odd ideas of my own... In the OGREverse, this weapon would have 3 vulnerable areas. First, during initial launch, it would be moving pretty slowly, making it a duck shoot for Laser Towers. This could be compensated for by only launching far behind friendly lines. Of course, this would increase the orbital time, which leads to... The second zone of vulnerability would be in orbit (low orbit, yes, but still orbit). According to the timeline entry for 2076, "Sky clearing becomes a continual operation for both Combine and Paneuropeans." Anything in orbit has a lifespan measured in minutes, giving precious little time for manuevering. The final zone of vulnerability would the actual descent. Given sufficent skin cooling and radar absorbtion, this might just be the safest leg of the journey. It could be made safer by moving erratically through its path down to its target. Paul Chapman Miniatures Division Manager Ogre Line Editor Steve Jackson Games paul@sjgames.com You can't spell "progress" without an Ogre! ============================== From: Servitor@aol.com Subject: Killing Zone > Killing Fields? Where? Who do I need to kill ...uh, er... ASK about If you are referring to Killing ZONE, my playtest copy is dated 1996. I haven't discussed it here because it never saw print, but its all still copyright Steve Jackson Games. Sorry. On the bright side, with OGRE's successful return to retail and mail-order sales, its likely that Killing Zone will eventually be brought forward at some point (although it may not be called "Killing Zone" anymore). On the bad side, the financial problems at SJ Games mean that moving forward with such a project may have to wait a while longer than it might otherwise. On the bright side, with Paul Chapman now officially in charge of OGRE projects, we now have someone centralized and "In The Know" to ask. Sooo, Paul, if you're reading this right now, any thoughts on when the material from the old Killing Zone playtest might see the light of day for all? (And, if by some chance, wild marmosets and rabid devil poodles have eaten all copies at SJ Games, just drop me a line and I will be happy to send you MY copy.) Oh, BTW, whoever on this list that tried to email me... -I apologize, I accidently deleted it before reading. Please resend and mark it "OGRE" somewhere in the title so that I don't think its spam. best, John Hurtt (Servitor@aol.com) -Yes, I'm a Game Geek. How did you know? -Please visit my website at: http://hometown.aol.com/Servitor/Ogreindex/ogrindex.htm ===== From: AvaheilDotter@aol.com Subject: Killing Zone << > [Hey, you're not supposed to leak anything about Killing Zone! >Though it would be nice to have a resticted area on Pyramid to discuss it. >> If the stuff is playtest material that should not be released as it is unbalanced, I see no reason not to keep it confidential. As well as stuff that might make it less likely for game products to be purchased. But to keep a game growing in this era of constant updates, one has to balance secrecy against the interest of the players. Taking all the back and forth to secret areas, and I will not register with anybody, is a way to lose potential players. My 2 cents... Ad Astra! Stan Leghorn ===== From: Inire Subject: Killing Zone It's good to hear that KZ may finally be hitting the streets sometime: Years back when I was head-over-heels with the first OGRE Minis book I recall seeing in a catalog a product of that name for OGRE/GEV and pre-ordering it(I worked in a bookstore at the time)...funny: I wonder if it'll show up at my old job looking for me? ;-> And to think I sold/traded off all of my OGRE minis before I heard that the deluxe sets would be bringing them all back. Timing is everything! :-/ -j Jeff "My dice hate me!" Miller ICQ# 57242517 "The idea of verifying facts about the world through controlled repetition seems alien to just about everyone with the _possible_ exception of Fr Inire, and he's a bug-eyed space monster. . ." -Jim Henley, on the URTH list Gaming to keep War out of RealTime! 85 VF500F 'Contraceptor' **Specify Type Of Goat** ============================== From: Andrew Walters Subject: Infantry Utility and Andrew's Lanchester Equations in Ogre If each of your twenty infantry participate in one attack, statistically you should get 6.66 tread units. Less than that, and one of you is playing sub par (you are leaving the infantry out to take first shots they don't need to take, or the Ogre is targeting infantry with missiles). I'd say if you get twelve that's probably the appropriate contribution for infantry This is using Andrew's Unrefined Lancastrian Equations of Ogre: Assume armor units have an attack strength of 3 and get two and a half attacks each (average), and armor units will apply 90 of the attack points necessary. It takes 147 points of attack strength to stop a Mark III if the Main is targeted before treads and all other weapons ignored. If each squad of infantry participates in two attacks that would yield 40, for total 130 of the 147 necessary to stop a Mark III. So to win as the defender either you take more HVYs, get more than 2.5 attacks out of each armor unit, or your infantry must participate in more than two attacks per squad. Or you could just roll good. For the Advanced scenario the numbers would be: Poor infantry use: 10 treads Adequate infantry use: 20 treads Armor at A3 and 2.5 attacks will apply 150 attack strength points (ASPs?) Infantry at two attacks/squad will apply 60 ASPs That's a total of 210 ASPs applied. It takes 204 ASPs to stop a Mark V with the Mains-then-Treads plan. But the Mark V has a lot more missiles and a lot more secondaries, so its harder to use that attack plan. I also think armor will get less than 2.5 attacks each unless you trim the Secondaries back a bit. I'm not sure I'm an expert and using infantry, though I *love* them in G.E.V., but here would be my tips: #1 Split them up - as Henry mentioned a Secondary has the same odds on a 2/1 or a 3/1, make his attacks inefficient when you can. #2 Don't let them take first hits if you can avoid it - count the Ogre's movement, make sure you're outside of move+AP range. You will have to expose yourself to MB fire (I hope the MBs are gone by then) to get a shot, and you will *likely* have to expose yourself to SB fire to make sure your in position, but this kind of dance will occasionally make the Ogre sacrifice a hex of movement, and that's money in your pocket. #3 Mob it all at once. All targets in excess of the number of weapons the Ogre has have an *infinite* defense strength. #4 Some people suggest stripping AP. This is a little pricey for me, but since infantry can't be squished with treads you'd get a *lot* of infantry attacks late in the game. I believe you can take out AP for the same firepower that would take out 1.3 treads with GEVs, 1.6 treads with HVYs, or 1.5 treads with MSLs. So the firepower that would take out a Mark IIIs APs would otherwise take out 12 treads, or 18 treads on a Mark V. So you might trim AP down, but I have trouble believing its cost effective to take out all the treads. Do you think that without AP your infantry could take out 12 (or 18) more treads than they would normally take out? Certainly they'd have fewer loses, but that's not what the game is about... #5 Talk your opponent into using the G.E.V. overrun rules : ) Andrew ===== [I would only bother with killing AP after every other weapon has been striped clean and the forces I use are too lightly armed to do that. -HJC] ============================== From: White Rat Subject: New Ogre Options > From: "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" > > New Ogre Options: > > I just though that I would pass along the following Ogre options that I have > played with: > > Trapdoor Ogre: > This Ogre replaces a Main Gun with a concealed Cruise Missile. Usually the > Main Gun appears damaged. The Ogre advances in combat using its secondary > weapons. When it get to optimal range, the false Main Gun falls off the > front of the Ogre and the Cruise Missile is launched. The Ogre then, > usually, withdraws from the battle. The False Main Gun provides Def/4 for > the Cruise Missile until it is fired. If the False Main Gun is destroyed, > the Cruise Missile has Def/1. If the Cruise Missile is destroyed in the > ogre, all systems of the ogre take a 2:1 attack. After the cruise missile is > fired, a Def/4 door falls into place protecting the interior of the Ogre. > This concept has been seen on Mark I, III, V, and Fencer chassis. On the > Fencer, 10 missiles are removed to make room for the cruise missile; the > front doors (Def/4) for the cruise missile are undetectable until they are > opened. In all cases, the Ogres are indistinguishable from the normal > version until the cruise missile is ready to fire. This concept was > originally developed by John Hunter. Moderately interesting. I would make this scenario specific, as a CM can be one of those ugly imbalancers on the battlefield that your opponent really should have some clue about including lasers for. > Rampage Variant. > The Rampage Variant of Ogres has been seen on every version of Ogre fielded. > It is a simple refit, replacing the AP guns with Light Guns (LG). These are > equivalent to the guns from a Light GEV (1/2). This has proved to be quite > an effective upgrade at very little cost. Cost: Add 1/2 armor unit > equivalency cost to the Ogre for every AP converted (3 points in > Miniatures). The LGs are Def/1. Ratty-sense tingling. I don't think so. Consider that you have just added four secondary batteries worth of firepower, without the restriction that they must be used as four strength-three shots. I can't feature this being stoppable by 'six extra armor points on the defense' on a standard OGRE map. > Stormbringer/Incubus Ogre. > The Stormbringer/Incubus Ogre carries a sophisticated remote Ogre > Reprogramming Device (ORD). The device is classed 1-6. It has a range of 2. > It is only useful against Ogres. When it makes an attack, use the Mark of > the target Ogre for its defense rating (i.e. Mark I is 1, Mark III is 3, > Fencer is 4, Dopplesoldner is 6, Ninja is 4) and the class of the ORD as the > attack strength. If the attack succeeds, the Ogre is reprogrammed and > changes sides. When the ORD is fitted, it replaces an Ogre Main Gun or 2 > Missile Racks. This variant should only be used in scenario-specific > engagements (i.e. not competition, or as replacement for armor). Once fired, > it takes a number of turns equal to its class to recharge. It was named for > its ability to steal the "soul" of opposing ogres. Ratty-sense laughing out loud. This just doesn't fit with the extremely ELWAR intense OGRE universe. When jamming is so powerful that even the Mark I eyeball has difficulty detecting units, the idea of 'reprogramming' something as complicated as an OGRE AI under hostile battlefield conditions just doesn't work for me. If you can do this, then you can also take over the vehicle computers of minor enemy vehicles, and the game becomes a 'who can take control of the most enemy forces first and get a cascade effect' set of dice rolls rather than a tactical engagement game. If I really wanted to have a scenario where an OGRE changed allegiance, I'd set it up as a virus/hack installed by a traitor at the OGRE's last refitting and make it a guarantee, not a die roll. Something like an OGRE Mk V is just too unbalancing to a scenario if it can suddenly be on either side. > Would you try the advanced ogre scenario with the Mark-V's 12 AP guns > replaced with four 1/1 D1 unrestricted weapons? The Cobb formula says that > this is an even trade... -HJC] But he's suggesting doubling the range there, which makes it -not- anything like an even trade. Ratty ============================== From: White Rat Subject: INF riding Ogres? > I've gotta disagree about the need to defend the infantry: it depends > entirely on what the Ogre's priorities are! Granted, priorities may change, > but I can't see the Ogre at least not warning the infantry of the change in > plans (one turn is 4 whole minutes, after all, giving plenty of time for the > battlesuits to jump free of the Ogre). Consider that what makes an OGRE deadly is its reaction speed. Infantry would NOT merit a warning, as to even communicate at a level reasonable to humans will mean the OGRE delaying initiating its plans for as much as a quarter turn. > If it somehow determines that the survival of the infantry is "important", > then it would help defend them, perhaps even going out of it's way to enter > cover which may protect them, or turning it's side to nearby enemies so the > infantry could shield themselves on the other side against flak and > near-misses.. All of which is using the OGRE in a non-optimal way. It's a question of expenses, I'm afraid. Unless the infantry are the OGRE-verse equivalent of a Navy SEAL team, you don't use something that costs as much as a nuclear submarine to deploy them. And even in the case of SEALs, nuclear subs don't go 'in the line of fire' to save those men, they're covert delivery systems. An OGRE on the battlefield is more maneuverable than the infantry, possesses more firepower than the amount of infantry speculated on, and would only be handicapping itself to shepherd said units. Plus, the OGRE is a fire-magnet from all sides. I don't see such a thing as 'the other side' of the OGRE. > > Worst, the Ogre doesn't *need* them. > > Again, it does if it's priorities say it does. Perhaps in a highly-stretched > campaign the general may decide that too many losses are unacceptable, and to > pull back if losses get to point X. Then they're a priority by direct order. > They could also be a priority just because of the nature of the scenario > (e.g., "X attack points of units must surive..."). In such a case, the OGRE would be better deployed on its lonesome rather than handicapping it as above. That's part of the point of OGREs, you know...They can move in alone quite effectively. > > ... Many weapons target the Ogre, and most of them > > detonate harmlessly against 1.2m of BPC or are destroyed in mid-air > > by point defense. All these nearby explosions don't bother the Ogre, > > but they'd blow infantry off the tank, and probably disable them in > > the process. > > Fair enough. The Ogre has some pretty big bumps the infantry could use as > extra shielding, especially considering that they know the directions attacks > are coming from. It could also be assumed that the infantry can hop off > momentarily (to take cover by the treads, for example), to shield themselves > from an attack, then they hop back on. They're in powered, jump-capable > suits, after all. "Especially considering..." "HENRY! INCOMING AT 3 O'cl..." Right. These folks are going to hop around the conning tower in the time it takes a hypervelocity round to come in? Infantry's defense is mostly (as I understand it) a combination of a dispersed target with heavy jamming. If they're on the OGRE, they aren't dispersed and jamming becomes less of an issue. As for hopping off and hopping on, remember that the OGREs move faster than the jump-capable infantry do. Would you like to hop on and off a pickup doing twenty-five? > I guess it also has to do on one's vision of the Ogres (and perhaps "AI" in > general). Computers are simply tools. A standalone computer is a relatively > useless tool nowadays, too. I can't see any computer-driven object as being > anything _but_ a team player, just as your computer was being a team player > by accepting this email. They can play together to any extent their > programming allows for. Humans in the military learn 100% team-play (often if > someone doesn't play by the rules, people die, so it's rigidness is > understandable). I can't see the generals making exceptions for computers, > just for the sake of cinematics and drama. And OGREs learn that any unit may be sacrificed to ensure completion of the mission, including themselves. OGREs are not designed for team play. In the 'fluff', it is fairly repeatedly stated that infantry don't even like being near friendly OGREs. > What if the infantry are stuck inside sealed modules, perhaps with a D1 or D2 > "pod" for each squad it could carry? Then there goes all of their dodging around the conning tower abilities, as well as their mobility, and they are just more targets on the OGRE until they deploy. At which point some bright general will suggest having infantry deployment pods stuck all over his OGREs, left empty, and this will help to protect more vital OGRE equipment by 'layering' and forcing the defenders to shoot at more fiddly bits on the OGRE. And gee, why not stick such a pod on a heavy or superheavy tank and completely ignore the rules about spillover fire and infantry riding tanks that are fired on? I really don't see the point here. Stick your infantry on GEV-PCs, have them follow the OGRE at a good distance, then you have flexibility to exploit any breach the OGRE makes, keep up with it and support it if it's hurting, and move out independently -faster- than the OGRE can to deal with changing battlefield conditions. Fewer eggs in one basket, more force multiplier effects for the infantry in terms of maneuverability, etc. Otherwise, just assume that X number of infantry can ride a MkV, but they suffer spillover effects. Period. Anything else, to me, changes the game too much. > I believe it's the GEV rules which state something like "consider: a tank is > a _stable_ platform compared to what infantry are used to!" While I don't > completely agree, I would think that a multi-hundred-ton tank would actually > go quite smoothly over most terrain. I can't imagine feeling small bumps, as > one does in a car when they run over an armadillo. And those sloped sides of On the other hand, few tanks slew all over the landscape the way an evading OGRE will because it -doesn't- worry about throwing passengers against the door. It's braking and turning power are limited only by the mechanical advantage it can bring to bear, not preservation of soft passengers. > an Ogre might provide some cover for the infantry (though not enough to > warrant any DEF bonus, since the Ogre itself is a big target and they're > standing on it). Here we agree. Ratty ===== From: AvaheilDotter@aol.com Subject: INF riding Ogres? << What if the infantry are stuck inside sealed modules, perhaps with a D1 or D2 "pod" for each squad it could carry? >> Interesting idea here. Perhaps the pod carries a 1-1 AP gun that detaches with the pod to provide light light support fire? Or at least the module would be able to eject one hex from the Ogre. Tho, with weapons range as short as it is, the only weapon that the INF should want to ride the Ogre toward would be HWTZ/range 7+. All others, they are fast enough to get to from just outside of range. Ad Astra! Stan Leghorn ============================== From: White Rat Subject: Disposable Iron Men > From: Stephan Beal > > Infantry, infantry, everywhere... > but what the hell good do they do? > > In the Ogre Book, second edition, SJ makes a statement along the lines of > "one hallmark of good players is how they handle their infantry." > > It's been my experience that infantry can save the day by stripping those > last stubborn treads, so I won't dispute that statement at all. As an excercise for the student, consider that infantry within range of a slow-moving OGRE (usually the only kind they get to gnaw on) have roughly a 2/3 chance of dying per AP gun left on the OGRE per turn. They have a 1/3 chance of removing a tread or an AP gun. This is on a by-squad basis, obviously. Three squads against one AP gun produce different results. I tend to see many situations where the infantry go in ~ 3 or 4 turns from the end, and most of them are cut down the first turn of infantry/OGRE contact. Usually, only a couple of squads (or no squads) will be survivors at the stage where the OGRE (if still alive) is dancing on the command post. If the first turn the infantry concentrate on AP guns, more of them will be active in each remaining turn to gnaw on treads. This strategy, like any other, does not always work. I'm sure some bright lad can come up with an odds formula based on the maximum number of infantry that can attack the OGRE on X-turn... > [Split the infantry up! A secondary battery against a squad averages > 3/4ths the damage it averages against a full platoon. -HJC] You left the secondary batteries intact? Shame! Ratty ===== [A gun whose shells fall one hex short of my GEVs makes for a lovely fireworks display. -HJC] ===== From: AvaheilDotter@aol.com Subject: Disposable Iron Men << In short: what do you do with you infantry? I'd be very interested in hearing some tips/advice/experiences regarding this little-discussed topic. >> Optimum use in basic Ogre is just as you said, to kill the treads to stop the Ogre short of the CP. Slow the Ogre to speed 2 and get beside it and chew for all you are worth. It either takes a turn to AP them or keeps limping toward the CP. In other scenarios, the inf's close combat capability becomes really useful. Just try to over run a squad in a terrain. Even those in the open can block a road junction fairly well. ============================== From: Stephan Beal Subject: Dim AI > > From: "Herb Diehr" > > So, how about a dim AI? This would reduce the cost of any Ogre by > > 1 Armor Point and add 1 to all die rolls against it (I call it the > > Anti-Ninja). No other effects. Opinions? me: > Or perhaps just reduce the number of guns it can fire in one turn? A > limit of 2 guns/turn for a Mk III-size, or 4 for a Mk V, for example. > I couldn't suggest a cost reduction value on that, though. HJC: > [How about if the Ogre just had to announce all of its attacks at > the start of each fire phase, before rolling any dice for its first > attack, what sort of discount would that be worth? -HJC] I like that even better. Kind of a reverse-splitfire (I believe the splitfire rules are on your pages, Henry?). I would _guess_ at a discount of... 15% or so. This is a large disadvantage for the Ogre, especially considering that all non-Ogres (or full-fledged Ogres) wouldn't have this restriction. It definately sounds like a reasonable restriction for a "dim AI", however. This is definately worth some playtesting. ----- stephan Generic Universal Computer Guy stephan@einsurance.de - http://www.einsurance.de Office: +49 (89) 552 92 862 Handy: +49 (179) 211 97 67 Student: "Master, you must teach me the way of liberation!" Master: "Tell me who it is that binds you." Student: "No one binds me!" Master: "Then why do you seek liberation?" ===== [Splitfire is at http://www.io.com/~hcobb/gev/scenario/foxhunt.htm A Mark V with Splitfire against a standard advanced OGRE defense, except that the full GEV stacking, overrun and unit selection is used. Which side would you choose? (Hint: Splitfire neutralizes the advantage an all Light Tank defense would normally have here.) -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.