Sea Ogre

[piningforthefjords]

Good question on the movement factor on the naval units. I kinda like the fact that they are faster, makes up not being able to get onto the land, which I'm guessing in most scenarios will be 75% of the hexes. Sounds like a playtest question.

Those hovercraft landing ships are too cool, are they not?

My goal in life is to have Corbeau's counters done and a DRAFT gamebox done by Sunday night, so the playtesting can begin. If anyone wants to suggest a map or two, go gab the editor and go for it! Just email it to me.

Last, I'm still foggy on the subs. They are passive until they fire, but does overrun combat count as firing?

[h3rne]

Originally Posted by Rolando

I like the idea of the naval thing, specially subs, but I also doubt that it is feasible, in the OGRE setting the vehicles use detection devices that know where you are even across mountains and the horizon, how can water be a cover.

I'm going to disagree here. Water is incredibly unfriendly to E.M. radiation with maximum penetration depths/lengths of around 100m even at the most favourable wavelengths. You can't hide ground units from satellites, but you can hide subs. Sonar is the only way to go - except the ocean is a noisy place. Small signal to noise ratios are camoflage, regardless of the data channel.

I can't think of decent mechanism for detectors that doesn't wander outside of the Ogreverse (nanotech for instance, where you could seed an ocean with nanobots that form a laser comms network that was all pervasive - you'd still need a minimum of around 2000 billion bots for earth).

The subs are safe!

Simon*

[Corbeau]

Tristan,

About the maps - yeah, roughly 25% or more of the maps is going to be land. That means GEVs have an extra advantage over ships, which is necessary since most ships outfight them point-for-point. That's a big part of the reason that I made ships speedier than land units. Maps are in the mail, by the way.

I've been doing some thinking about transports. I'm beginning to agree that a GEV-type landing craft is the way to go. However, I'm not so sure about the fluff capabilities for GEVs in one respect: endurance. Could a squad of GEVs actually cross oceans? My gut says no, but the fluff isn't too clear. They can certainly cross water at a tactical scale.

That brings me to my next idea: carriers. Not aircraft carriers, but GEV carriers - both for combat GEVs and transport GEVs. The carriers would be huge conventional ships (doesn't have a prerequisite for Ogre-durability, which in my mind is building a solid mass of armor and equipment - these would need to hide squishy humans as well). In combat they'd be a sideshow besides being valuable to kill (can you say expensive?), but when thinking on the strategic scale they could deliver tons of units across oceans.

[h3rne]

Originally Posted by piningforthefjords

Those hovercraft landing ships are too cool, are they not??

Way cool. And BIG. I had no idea this technology existed. However, given that it really does, a unit akin to the GEV-PC would make sense, except this would be a GEV-AC. Hey, it could carry GEV-PC's loaded with troops, (but I'd have to wonder why you'd bother - use it for shifting armour!).

GEV-AC:
VP: 6
Attack: 1/2
Defense: 2
Move: 3+1/2+1
May enter any non-water hexes, but does not receive the road bonus (too damn big). Carries 4 points of Armour (i.e. 2 SUPERHVY or 2 HVY and 2 GEVs etc.). Infantry are carried "free" on armour as per GEV rules 5.11.

Originally Posted by piningforthefjords

Last, I'm still foggy on the subs. They are passive until they fire, but does overrun combat count as firing?

I have an idea about the subs.

Strategic Nuclear Submarine:
VP: 18
Attack: 3/3 + 1 Cruise Missile
Defense: 2
Move: 3/1
May not enter any non-water hexes. The controlling player logs the position of the sub by hex reference. A "sub?" marker is placed on the gameboard whenever it makes an attack of any kind. Obviously, due to its secondary move it represents to the attacking player one of seven hexes that may or may not contain the sub, any or all of which may represent targets for Anti-sub weapons (see below).

A disabled sub is forced to surface, during which time it may not move or fire and is represented on the board by a "sub" marker (the flipped "sub?" marker) and is then vulnerable to "conventional" weapons, but ironically, not AS!

The Combat strength in overruns is doubled due to torpedoes (normal attacks are via missile launchers - this qualifier was pasted from your original, but I'm not crystal clear as to what you are referring), but a sub can only be over-run when on the surface.

Subs can over-run submerged, and they get to fire first, however as the opponent then knows exactly where it is, it would be basically fatal if any surviving unit has an AS array. Clearly, a sub does not have to over run when entering an enemy hex.

Subs cannot be targeted by lasers. The sub itself is worth 6 points, while the other 12 are the cruise missile (these 12 are lost when the missile is fired). Incidentally, is the 24VP an error? My "Formula" spreadsheet rates your sub as 6VP as, indeed, do you in the previous stats block

Now, equip the Krakens with Anti-Sub Weapons (depth charges basically) that are only effective against subs. If we "go GEV", other units will need them, as conventional fire will not harm subs, although, for consistency I'd buy into the Ogreverse exceptions to Howies and Ogre Missiles (and cruise missiles I guess). This means that the subs do have to be hollow (depth charges won't work otherwise).

AS weapons have a remarkably similar profile to AP weapons on Ogres (i.e. 1/1 D1) but come in similar collections. A "Kraken MkIII" would typically have an array of 8. AS weapons target hexes. The sub contoller must sit poker-faced whilst the Kraken player rolls for each targeted hex, and own up honestly if a hit is scored. So a savvy player might target 6AS in one hex, knowing that this is guaranteed to force the sub to surface (if it is present there of course!)

Final punt. I favour "Leviathan" as a name for the sea surface Ogres, it rolls off the tongue with more threat.

That's my two penneth...

Simon*

[Corbeau]

Ah, I forgot to address the issue of subs in overrun combat.

A passive sub in an overrun combat remains passive until it actually fires, at which point it is flipped to its active side. Combined with the double attack strength in an overrun, this should make subs effective at overruning surface units of all sorts (well, short of a cybership).

H3rne, your GEV-AC is very close to what I plan to use. The main difference is that it's always a 2/1 for movement and moves exactly like a GEV (this means that it gets road bonuses - after all, so do Ogres). That, and I'd make them either 9 or 12 VP - 6 is really cheap if your compare with the GEV-PC.

In terms of subs, I figured the 6 extra VP as being for a specially equipped nuclear sub. It may not be necessary. The missile launchers comment was basically the idea of smaller missiles vertically launched from the sub (like a cruise missile, but much smaller).

I would not use your anti-submarine rules though. As interesting an idea as it is, it also adds a significant amount of complexity. Considering that I just got finished posting an anti-complexity rant on a different game board, I'm not going to introduce the problem to Ogre.

On naming issues, Leviathan would work I guess. My problem is that I always think of this when the name Leviathan comes up.

[h3rne]

Originally Posted by Corbeau

...The main difference is that it's always a 2/1 for movement and moves exactly like a GEV (this means that it gets road bonuses - after all, so do Ogres)..

Thanks for putting me straight - I'd forgotten all about the Ogres getting that bonus in which case the GEV-AC must get it too. And on reflection, 3/2 was a tad speedy. However, 2/1 does make them more or less useless on land as the armour version of the GEV-PC, as individual units can make as good a speed. Although that may be a good thing...

Originally Posted by Corbeau

...That, and I'd make them either 9 or 12 VP - 6 is really cheap if your compare with the GEV-PC..

6VP was a pure punt. I think its actual value should depend on how it playtests. They may prove a huge advantage, or not. My spreadsheet is very basic and suggests a mere 4.3 (3.7 for your version), but it doesn't factor in the effect of carrying units. Maybe I should add the attackstrength of the units carried to fudge the VPs upward? 2 SUPERHVYs/MHWZs gives 11.7 and 4 HVYs makes it 14.3. How many armour units were you thinking it could carry?

Originally Posted by Corbeau

...I would not use your anti-submarine rules though. As interesting an idea as it is, it also adds a significant amount of complexity.

Fair cop, I guess. Although I quite liked the AS/AP parallel, and provided the number of subs is small, it should have been easier than playing "mines". I was also going for the essential differences about sub warfare - stealth and invulnerability to surface guns.

However, there being many ways to separate feline & pelt, your rules address the first very nicely, and for the kind of "coast" scenarios we're considering may mean that the subs can't make enough depth to avoid tac-nuke surface fire, or indeed hide much. (I'll have to look into the Physics of being undersea and in close proximity to a nuke).

Besides, OGRE/GEV's playability is what makes it a classic. There's really no mileage in bogging it down. New rules need to be cannon. (Although, for the record, I like complex rules if they "add" on balance. I just bought AV:T after all...)

Originally Posted by Corbeau

...On naming issues, Leviathan would work I guess. My problem is that I always think of this when the name Leviathan comes up.

LOL. We really don't want a (tm) fight with FASA anytime soon. Kraken it is!

Simon*

[piningforthefjords]

Here's a pic of the gamebox in progress:

http://www.sirdinglydang.com/kraken.htm

The map was one of four supplied by Corbeau - made on Tom's map editor. Note that the editor outputs a map with smaller hexes than the gamebox uses. I had to enlarge the map to get the hexes to fit, the result is a little blurry. It will work for now.

The four maps are geomorphic and each will fit onto a letter size piece of paper, that way anyone who wants to use a paper copy can just print it out.

I haven't finalized the beveling of the counter edges either. The Pan counters look OK, it's hard to bevel the edges of a black counter and have them turn out right.

Any thoughts/comments/criticisms?

Lots of interesting feedback on this topic, I think that's cool!

[dylango]

Originally Posted by Corbeau

That brings me to my next idea: carriers. Not aircraft carriers, but GEV carriers - both for combat GEVs and transport GEVs. The carriers would be huge conventional ships (doesn't have a prerequisite for Ogre-durability, which in my mind is building a solid mass of armor and equipment - these would need to hide squishy humans as well). In combat they'd be a sideshow besides being valuable to kill (can you say expensive?), but when thinking on the strategic scale they could deliver tons of units across oceans.

Glad to see you're thinking along these lines Corbeau, because again these units exist today! The french Foudre class, the US Whidbey Island or Wasp classes, or the UK's Albion Class. A most appropriate pic here , look at that if nothing else posted here.

Also I had a thought about the submarines. One of the things I liked about GW's EPIC 40,000 was the way they abstracted some ideas to shed complexity. That logic might work well here, although abstract rules tend to turn some people off...

what I propose is this;

Leave the sub counter face up on the map at all times, it represents the approximate location of the sub. When an enemy surface vessel (or enemy sub for that matter) gets close enough (say 2ish hexes), throw a d6. On a 5 or 6 the sub is detected and the sub counter is moved to it's real location. d6 for direction (in the direction of one of the six surrounding hexes) up to d6 (or d3?) hexes away at the choice of the sub owner.

[dylango]

Since folks are putting their $0.02 in for the Sea Ogre name, might I humbly suggest Megalodon.

[Bowser]

I'm really intrigued in following this thread! I've felt that this has been an area that the original Ogre/G.E.V. has been lacking in for a long time. This seems to me to be the most promising effort so far.

Just to add a comment: Someone needs to address "combat" (if it can be called such) between subs and underwater Ogres.

Also, I'd sure like to see a unit or class of units based on the following picture: (10th from the top of page, 5th from the bottom). Tristan,
I'd especially like your thoughts on this picture.

http://panpacalliance.tripod.com/id19.htm

-- Doug Pearson