The "right" value for a SHVY?

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by wolf90

Anyone have any additional errata, rules clarifications or FAQs that should be included but have yet to be posted?

How about fixing the value of a SHVY?

[wolf90]

I've moved this to a new thread as this is likely to be a lengthy discussion.

And for those new to the forums (or those looking for a refresher), you might peruse this thread for additional discussion on this topic.

D.

[Belle Sorciere]

I just read that thread last night.

It left me inclined to stick with D5, pending some actual play.

I mean I've never had an edition of Ogre that included SHVYs that didn't have D5. The y2k version had it.

[wolf90]

The stats for it are not changing. It is:

Attack 3 & 3
Range 3
Two AP guns
Move 3 as Ogre
Defense 5
Size 5

What has generated debate is the VP cost. Currently it costs 12 VP (or 2 armor units). There is an argument that it should cost more.

D.

[Belle Sorciere]

Ahhh, okay.

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by Belle Sorciere

I just read that thread last night.

It left me inclined to stick with D5, pending some actual play.

I mean I've never had an edition of Ogre that included SHVYs that didn't have D5. The y2k version had it.

The original SHVY was from Shockwave (1984). It was a more straightforward unit: (3/3)/3 D4 M3, no AP guns that cost 2 AU. The crux of the issue is it gained a D5, AP guns, and the potential for partial damage, but still costs only 2 AU. It is significantly overpowered for its cost, causing a lot of imbalance in G.E.V. games especially to the point that you are a fool if you _don't_ use them.

I don't have a problem keeping the stats as-is (especially with everything that's already printed; counters, etc), just make the cost for it appropriate. My gut feeling is 3 AU.

[dwalend]

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin

...[The SHVY] is significantly overpowered for its cost, causing a lot of imbalance in G.E.V. games especially to the point that you are a fool if you _don't_ use them. ... My gut feeling is 3 AU.

I think the lowest value to consider is about 2.5 AU. You'd be a fool not to use them frequently at this price, but your HVYs will get some time on the board. Choose between 5 HVYs with 20 attack factors vs 2 SHVYs with 12 attack factors, better range, and slightly better mobility.

3 AU will put SHVYs in a specialist role, but they'll still come out of the box for force concentration tactics, especially vs INF. I think that's the right value for MSLs to get some play. Choose 9 attack factors with limited mobility vs 6 with great mobility.

The one failing of the SHVY is when fighting an ogre, trying to saturate enemy weapons with a large number of targets. They're the wrong tank for the job at 2 AU. (LTs are a great choice, plus the SB vs LT match up costs the ogre a third of its firepower.)

[Desert Scribe]

Playing around with the Cobb calculator, where costs are calculated in victory points as well as armor units, a superheavy without AP guns costs 12.56 VP, rounded down to 2 AU. Add the antipersonnel, and cost increases to 14.23 VP, which rounds up to 2.5 AU. So I'm fine with either of these values when playing a scenario from the book.

I never use the tread damage for superheavies, so I'll trust the conventional wisdom that tread damage brings it up to 3 AU.

[Buzzardo]

Originally Posted by Desert Scribe

Playing around with the Cobb calculator, where costs are calculated in victory points as well as armor units, a superheavy without AP guns costs 12.56 VP, rounded down to 2 AU. Add the antipersonnel, and cost increases to 14.23 VP, which rounds up to 2.5 AU. So I'm fine with either of these values when playing a scenario from the book.

I never use the tread damage for superheavies, so I'll trust the conventional wisdom that tread damage brings it up to 3 AU.

Maybe the (house) rule should be that it's 2 AU if one doesn't use the record sheet and 3 AU if one does.

[EdwardF]

Originally Posted by Buzzardo

Maybe the (house) rule should be that it's 2 AU if one doesn't use the record sheet and 3 AU if one does.

Which is exactly how we've been playing it in ODE, with none the wiser that there's been a controversy over it.

All of our skirmishes, which have involved the SHVY, have shown it to be balanced well at 2AU, but admittedly nobody has wanted to use the 3AU/Partial rules.

At that point, we'd felt that a MKI would be a better choice at 4AU, or a SHVY+HVY combo if 3AU is all you had left to spend.