08-20-2018, 08:17 PM | #151 |
Ogre Line Editor
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Plainfield, IL
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
This isn't exactly a Fuzzy Wuzzy issue, but it does demonstrate a failing of unit design. Remember, the result of the GEV Fuzzy Wuzzy was a change in the unit that was unbalanced (changing the GEV from M4 to M4-3). It does not logically follow that if there's a balance issue, we should change nothing. By your logic, the unit should be changed to fix the problem. We can't change the unit, so we should change the cost.
__________________
GranitePenguin Ogre Line Editor |
08-20-2018, 08:27 PM | #152 | |
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Lancaster, PA
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
Quote:
Mk.I Pros: - "True" partial damage - Tread Unit damage when ramming - Immune to "D" results Mk.I Cons: - Single "regular" weapon system - Expensive in game terms [25VP, or 4AU] - Expensive in in-universe money [AI core] Superheavy Pros: - Higher non-AP A rating - Two "regular" weapons systems - Cheap in game terms [12-18VP, 2-3AU] - Cheap in in-universe money [crew-served] Superheavy Cons: - Susceptible to D results - Possible to one-hit kill in both 'Normal' and 'Partial Damage' forms - Can disable or destroy itself when ramming
__________________
Andy Mull MIB Agent #0460 Ogre 134th Battalion Lancaster, PA Imgur: https://agent0460.imgur.com/ Last edited by TheAmishStig; 08-20-2018 at 08:31 PM. Reason: Adding context; several new posts since hitting 'reply' |
|
08-20-2018, 10:45 PM | #153 |
Join Date: Jun 2010
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
I'm going to do something that is generally a bad idea in my position . . . express an opinion at odds with the established canon.
As I've previous posted (often!), I believe the SHVY is grossly undervalued. I think it should be a 3 AU unit (at least!) and that's without the partial damage optional rule (that sucker is a 4 AU unit). These issues may be ameliorated by implementing the "Fuzzy Fuzzy rule": no force may be comprised of greater than 25% of the same unit. This greatly dilutes the effect of SHVYs (I don't feel like it's enough, but it is a start). All of this said, there are arguments contrary to my position which merit consideration. But I will never fault a group that implements a "+1 AU cost" house rule to whatever version of SHVY they are using! D.
__________________
Proud sponsor of Ogre KS $4.5k Sheet #3 - Bringing the Vatican Guard, a Tiger-striped mercenary unit, and of course pink GEVs, to a game near you! Orders may be placed here. |
08-21-2018, 09:34 AM | #154 | |
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Lancaster, PA
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
Quote:
A follow-up question, with the note that this is not asking for any statement in any official capacity, just bouncing ideas off somebody who knows the game better than I do: - If Steve said 'You know what, you're right', would this only apply to Green Map situations? I don't have anything concrete, just gut instinct, but at 4AU for a PD Superheavy that makes it the same cost as a Mk.I...the only ways I see the Superheavy beating a Mk.I on the orange map often enough to be seen as peers is a fluke of the dice or extreme tactical error. But I'll yield that there's very possibly something I'm missing. If it can pull a string of NEs on '1-1 when rammed' attacks, a string of NEs on 1-2 pot-shots from the main gun, and a string of low rolls on the ram damage itself long enough to get a mobility advantage, then it can win. If it can't...
__________________
Andy Mull MIB Agent #0460 Ogre 134th Battalion Lancaster, PA Imgur: https://agent0460.imgur.com/ Last edited by TheAmishStig; 08-21-2018 at 03:53 PM. |
|
08-21-2018, 03:43 PM | #155 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Lancaster, PA
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
Though it does bring up something: the rules say a D affects the unit normally, additional Ds have no further result...then immediately clarifies that Ds don't scale to Xs.
Does that also mean that while Disabled, a PD Superheavy also treats Ds as NEs, or does the 'Disabled on...' clock reset but nothing else happens? If the former, I may have to amend the previous post since I wasn't banking on "It's going to recover unless you auto-kill it".
__________________
Andy Mull MIB Agent #0460 Ogre 134th Battalion Lancaster, PA Imgur: https://agent0460.imgur.com/ |
08-21-2018, 05:44 PM | #156 | |
Join Date: May 2007
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
Quote:
I'm beginning to come around to that 3/4 AU thing... |
|
08-21-2018, 05:46 PM | #157 | |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Minnesota
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
Quote:
(It'd be nice to have the videogame offer adjustable pricing, but that's way down on my wish list for it.) |
|
08-21-2018, 06:51 PM | #158 | |
Ogre Line Editor
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Plainfield, IL
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
Quote:
__________________
GranitePenguin Ogre Line Editor |
|
08-21-2018, 07:15 PM | #159 | |
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Lancaster, PA
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
Quote:
"Ignores D while disabled" does boost its defensive abilities a bit [compared to 'there are so many ways to disable it, which sets it up for easy squishings]. I'm gonna have to rethink that earlier opinion, maybe they're closer on the orange map than initially thought.
__________________
Andy Mull MIB Agent #0460 Ogre 134th Battalion Lancaster, PA Imgur: https://agent0460.imgur.com/ |
|
08-21-2018, 08:45 PM | #160 | ||
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Pennsylvania
|
Re: The "right" value for a SHVY?
Quote:
No, it can't run down the entire 4 points worth of units in one turn you didn't mention. If a normal Superheavy is in the battle the 2 points remaining after purchasing the Superheavy were spent on additional unit(s) the MARK1 has to deal with. Which could be, for example: x2 GEVs, x4 Light GEVs, or...ANOTHER Superheavy, ect. Ram that. If a "13.07 Partial Damage for Superheavies" (Record Sheet SHVY) is in the battle the 1 point remaining after purchasing the Superheavy were spent on additional unit(s) the MARK1 has to deal with. Which could be, for example: 1 GEV, x2 Light GEVs, ect. Or, Ram that. Combine fielded their own Superheavies after Paneurope did. That suggests to me their MARK1s were developed and fielded with hubris, evidenced by the fact 23 years later they saw how effective Paneuropes Superheavies were generally compared to a Mark1 and made their own. Quote:
By the way, the original OGRE Reinforcements had MARK1s at a cost of 5 AU. It was also a "Combine only" OGRE... We now have a early Last War Superheavy and a later Last War Superheavy (if you play with both), or you can choose to only have one in your OGREverse. That said, I conclude Steve has this all correct now and suggest we leave it as is.
__________________
"So I stood my ground...my only hope to die as I had always lived-fighting" John Carter of Mars Last edited by Tim Kauffman; 08-21-2018 at 09:41 PM. |
||
|
|