The "right" value for a SHVY?

[dwalend]

Originally Posted by wolf90

These issues may be ameliorated by implementing the "Fuzzy Fuzzy rule": no force may be comprised of greater than 25% of the same unit.

25% is a severe limit. It's hard to make a force that mixed work well together - there are only 8 official armor units in the game. That limit comes too close to proscribing the force every time.

The usual smash-the-CP house rule is no more than 75% the same unit.

15 VP is about right. Try hitting enemy SHVYs hard and early to overcome that D5 when you have lots of guns. My frustration with that is it dictates my opening tactic overmuch.

Another option is to permit groups of units based on where they were originally published: Ogre had HVYs, MSLs, and GEVs. GEV added LTs. Shockwave added SHVYs, LGEVs, cruise missiles, and lasers. You could argue that SHVYs invite cruise missiles.

[Cat]

Originally Posted by selenite

I'm leaning more toward 2.5 AU than 3 AU for SHVYs.

Yes, the AU cost thingy does have its limits. It was a nice streamlined approach in the early editions, but I'm not sure the nostalgia value is worth the limitations now.

I'm certainly quite willing to houserule the costs of SHVY and Mk.I, especially with a hoped for arrival of Mk.I and Mk.II minis in a not too distant KS. 2.5 and 3.5 (20 points-ish?) respectively seem worth a go

[TheAmishStig]

I've been playing with it in a faux scenario since I got back from training with the dog, and the "Advanced" superheavy is a real monster of a thing.

A stand-up fight between an Advanced Superheavy and a Mk.I does not end well for the Mk.I...it's under-gunned, and firing at 1-2 odds while the SHVY fires at 1-1 means the SHVY usually wins by attrition. The Mk.I can increase its chances by ramming, but because of the Advanced Superheavy's "Cannot be destroyed by ramming when disabled", that (across about 3 hours of play) leaves the Mk.I too damaged to threaten much else. M2 with no primary battery and 9 Treads remaining is a lot less intimidating than a healthy Mk.I, and that's a good-case scenario.

With that, I officially retract my post from Tuesday morning. My initial conclusion was incorrect...the Mk.I does not have the staying power to press the attack long enough for "If it can't..." to come into play against an "Advanced" superheavy. Against the standard Superheavy, it fares better because a single X kills and Disable + Ram = Dead is a viable tactic on a micro scale [one on one, it still doesn't have the treads to do that against a swarm of the things], but the 1-2 odds still hurts.

Meanwhile, one hit from the SHVY's gun at 1-1 takes rams / overruns out of the Mk.I's arsenal until the movement advantage is leveled back out. A second takes the Primary Battery off, at which point the either superheavy can pick the Ogre apart at its leisure.

Because of that, I'm coming around to one of two ways of thinking...one or both of which I'm prepared to see picked apart by someone with access to better statistical tools or better versed in tactics and metagame of the GEV maps / rules, because I would not call my current tests thorough or broad:

2.5-3AU standard / 4+AU Advanced

-- or --

Advanced goes "true" partial damage: 2 cannons at 3/3/4 (or even 3/3/3), 2 AP at 1/1/1, 18 TU, still susceptible to D results, and its value gets recalculated from scratch...which means the D5 on the regular version becomes representative of "Difficult to knock it out in a single salvo", not "difficult to damage period".

Neither one seems like a very attractive proposition from a business standpoint because it means re-issuing rulebooks, record sheet cards, or both...but those are the ideas floating around in my head after this discussion, reading all 17 pages of Henry's thread from 2010-2012, and spending my entire evening blowing up a medium-sized country's GDP worth of Mk.Is and Superheavies. Take them as you will.

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by Cat

I'm certainly quite willing to houserule the costs of SHVY and Mk.I, especially with a hoped for arrival of Mk.I and Mk.II minis in a not too distant KS. 2.5 and 3.5 (20 points-ish?) respectively seem worth a go

One of the biggest reasons to nail this down is to have _official_ rules about cost value. You can't house rule the Steam version.

[Cat]

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin

One of the biggest reasons to nail this down is to have _official_ rules about cost value. You can't house rule the Steam version.

Ahh. I never looked at the Steam version. By and large I have successfully avoided playing any computer games. I paint way too many miniatures to ever acquire another time-sink hobby!

But I am glad the Steam is there if it might finally bring a little better balance to the point costs.

[GranitePenguin]

The "advanced" partial-damage SHVY also does not exist _at all_ in the Steam version.

[Tim Kauffman]

"The Mark I was intended as a battle-line unit, but proved not to be cost-effective in that role. Although it was hard to kill, it was too easy – relative to the huge cost of the cybernetic brain – to put it out of action. However, the Mark I remained in regular production as long as the Combine lasted, simply because it was the only Ogre small enough to be transported by conventional means. It proved to be effective as a light raider unit in terrain where human troops did not perform well, such as remote jungles and tundra. Perhaps a
larger Ogre would have been even better . . . but often they couldn't get there."

OGRE MINIATURES Page 9

[selenite]

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin

One of the biggest reasons to nail this down is to have _official_ rules about cost value. You can't house rule the Steam version.

Plus there's a whole bunch of games at conventions, which need a standard. If some guy flipping through the rulebook says "Hey! A superheavy is only supposed to cost two!" I want a webpage labeled "Optional SHVY Rules" or something I can show him to explain why I taught him something else.

[dwalend]

Originally Posted by TheAmishStig

...Because of that, I'm coming around to one of two ways of thinking...one or both of which I'm prepared to see picked apart by someone with access to better statistical tools or better versed in tactics and metagame of the GEV maps / rules, because I would not call my current tests thorough or broad:

2.5-3AU standard

That's about where I landed, too, after really digging deep during the ODE edits. I like 2.5 - 15 VP - because of its vulnerability to big ogres. The green map really favors the SHVY over the lighter units, and those AP guns prevent INF from being the right response in a rock-paper-scissors triangle.

Advanced goes "true" partial damage: 2 cannons at 3/3/4 (or even 3/3/3), 2 AP at 1/1/1, 18 TU, still susceptible to D results, and its value gets recalculated from scratch...which means the D5 on the regular version becomes representative of "Difficult to knock it out in a single salvo", not "difficult to damage period".

I like that approach. The optional rules for the Advanced SHVY I found too fiddly. Ogre already has a good set of component attrition for, well, ogres. I eyeball it at 2 X 3/3/2 cannons, 2 X AP at 1/1/1, and 15 or maybe just 12 treads. (That sweeps away the "5 is a big prime number" problem neatly under the rug.)

Even that might be too tough. To defeat the standard SHVY I'd want to plan three 1:1 attacks vs D5 - which means bringing 15 attack factors. The results of that are a 1 in 27 chance of the SHVY being unscratched, 1 in 9 of being disabled, 23 in 27 of being X'd (and with 15 of those giving an extra attack or two). To attrite above proposal to just APs and M2 means bringing 24 attack factors. I think that makes up for not having to bring all the attack factors at once, in groups of 5, but would want to play it a bit.

I'd also like to see some official two-gun variants on the MkI platform. A pair of 2/3/2 cannons might be more versatile than the single 4/3/4. Certainly the above pair of 3/3/2/ guns would be an improvement.

[pzmcgwire]

The immunity of the Superheavy to single GEVs and Light Tanks at D5 now seems to make them overly strong. Maybe a revised CRT with Odds down to 1-4 should be considered. I read that Steve's original layout of the Ogre CRT before publication went down to 1-4 odds.

The 1-3 column could have a D on 5 or 6 and the 1-4 with a D on a 6.