The "right" value for Mk.I, Mk.II, Heavy Drones?

[Cat]

Back in the 'right value for SHVYs' thread and various other discussions around the web, we've touched on the question of points value for the Mk.I and Mk.II's.

In our gaming group, we've happily settled on 15VP for the SHVY. To date, we haven't settled on points for the small Ogres. Generally, we've been rounding the points down and offering them as a package deal with a bigger Ogre in multi-player scenarios where each player gets a choice of some sort of Ogre.

Now that I'm working on handy unit reference cards, its time to firm up houserules for the Ogre points.

They officially stand at:
Mk.I, 4AU, 25VP
Mk.II, 8AU, 50VP

I'm currently leaning towards:
Mk.I, 3.5AU, 20VP
Mk.II, 7AU, 40VP
This is about the range we've been using in our package deals for Ogre choices.


In related Ogre pointing, the rules note that the Vulcan Drones are over-priced at 16VP to reflect rarity. But when the rarity excuse is used, that pretty much limits unit usage to 'when assigned by scenario'. 16VP is also a very unusual number choice that doesn't work at all for unit swapping.

At the very least, the Heavy Drone should be dropped to 2.5AU/15VP for swapability.

Considering that 16 was set at deliberately over-priced, I'm leaning towards dropping them to 2AU/12VP. This is still a high cost, but may see Drones used more in choice of units.

[hcobb]

Has there been some massive rule change to nerf the Mk I down from the 4.5 AUs I measure for it? Are people just not using it right or is there some special tactic against it I haven't considered?

[Cat]

Now that you mention it, Mk.Is were getting neglected in favour of SHVYs at 12VP. Now that our group has gone over t SHVYs at 15VP, that may well have corrected the cost issue. If I get a chance, I'ld like to squeeze in some playtest slugfests of SHVYs v. Mk.Is v. Mk.IIs.

[hcobb]

Ignore the SHVY for the moment and just setup a Raid or Breakthrough defense then play twice against that defense. Once with all GEVs attacking and once with a Mark I replacing four of the attacking GEVs.

[woodchuck]

Originally Posted by hcobb

Has there been some massive rule change to nerf the Mk I down from the 4.5 AUs I measure for it? Are people just not using it right or is there some special tactic against it I haven't considered?

It might be a tactical thing, a degunned Mk I has to ram in order to do any damage and ramming works better with just Ogre's ramming rules as GEV's overrun rules make it easier to strip the Mk I's treads.

[Cat]

Originally Posted by woodchuck

It might be a tactical thing, a degunned Mk I has to ram in order to do any damage and ramming works better with just Ogre's ramming rules as GEV's overrun rules make it easier to strip the Mk I's treads.

That could well have been a factor in why the smaller Marks fell out of favour for us too. We default to using "stacking" (as many minis as fit in a hex with piling them on top of each other) and the Overrun rules. Mk.I and IIs do get shot up hard with defensive fire when initiating overruns; bigger Ogres can soak up a lot more of that.

I'll meditate on maybe defaulting to the Ramming rules instead which do have the added benefit of quicker and easier resolution. Units rarely remain stacked once they're in combat range (other than GEVs piling up for their fire phase, and then dispersing), so some rules tweaking to allow an Ogre to ram as many units as are in a hex if it can ram at least one of them upon entering that hex and spends a movement point for each unit rammed after the first one would address the 'don't mix Ramming and stacking' proviso. That would also provide extra incentive not to remain stacked in the presence Ogres.

In the rare case of multiple surviving units in the hex that might otherwise choose to remain there and fire at the Ogre on the following turn, applying friendly spillover fire would act to discourage that sort of thing.

Will try a Raid or Breakthrough with a Mk.I when I get a chance (that does sound fun too).

[Misplaced Buckeye]

Originally Posted by Cat

That could well have been a factor in why the smaller Marks fell out of favour for us too. We default to using "stacking" (as many minis as fit in a hex with piling them on top of each other) and the Overrun rules. Mk.I and IIs do get shot up hard with defensive fire when initiating overruns; bigger Ogres can soak up a lot more of that.

I'll meditate on maybe defaulting to the Ramming rules instead which do have the added benefit of quicker and easier resolution. Units rarely remain stacked once they're in combat range (other than GEVs piling up for their fire phase, and then dispersing), so some rules tweaking to allow an Ogre to ram as many units as are in a hex if it can ram at least one of them upon entering that hex and spends a movement point for each unit rammed after the first one would address the 'don't mix Ramming and stacking' proviso. That would also provide extra incentive not to remain stacked in the presence Ogres.



In the rare case of multiple surviving units in the hex that might otherwise choose to remain there and fire at the Ogre on the following turn, applying friendly spillover fire would act to discourage that sort of thing.

Will try a Raid or Breakthrough with a Mk.I when I get a chance (that does sound fun too).

Your logic at least on the board game scale seems a little off. Since each hex represents 1.5 km and each turn represents 4 minutes The ability of that overruning Ogre(of any type) would be limited by time and distance to be effective. kinda the reason I can't see an Ogre doing multiple overruns just because it has movement points remaining. A more logical rule has always seemed to allow the overruning Ogre to use the remaining movement point to either modify the die roll or subtract from the damage done to it's treads from doing the action. Comments? I can see your logic on a mini scale off the ODE boards or assuming that the board grids don't represent the distance stated ( like trying to cram more than one mini in a square seems odd to me. with minis we try to ignore the hexes and just respect the terrain).

[Misplaced Buckeye]

This is kinda the reason I don't use the minis when using the hex system on the ODE boards. I go back to the 3d units. Makes life simpler for me. Or maybe I'm just simple minded(LOL)

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by Misplaced Buckeye

Or maybe I'm just simple minded(LOL)

You are just "focused" ;-)

[Cat]

For my own tastes, I prefer playing on a hex grid because it really speeds up movement and combat, and I prefer playing with miniatures because they look much better than cardboards and are much easier to identify everything on the board at a quick glance. While I enjoy playing many different miniatures games, I prefer not to play Ogre as a pure miniatures game with terrain; for me that gets too fiddly with too many little units and such short move and range distances where a little accidental nudge is more likely to make a big difference.

I've never given any concern to the time and distance scales. This is not a game of crunchy realism. To the best of my understanding, those numbers were just pulled out of the air purely to give flavour text. I'm fine with that.

A movement point equals some abstract amount of time available to an Ogre every turn. Makes sense to me that it can spend each of those points moving across hexes or rolling back and forth across any number of speed bumps inside its hex.

Whether or not to use stacking is a personal choice given in the rules. Choosing to use miniatures instead of cardboards doesn't have to remove the stacking choice. Partial stacking of what fits in a hex without actually stacking them on top of each other is a simple and visually satisfying choice.