Comments on 6-1 Rules

[dsal]

Question: If players choose to use the (fast, simple) Ramming rules on the GEV map (where stacking is allowed) how does 6.06 Reducing Infantry work? If there are 15 squads of infantry divided into 5 3/1 units is EACH unit reduced by one strength point OR is only 1 strength point lost regardless of how many squads are stacked in the hex?

[offsides]

Originally Posted by dsal

Question: If players choose to use the (fast, simple) Ramming rules on the GEV map (where stacking is allowed) how does 6.06 Reducing Infantry work? If there are 15 squads of infantry divided into 5 3/1 units is EACH unit reduced by one strength point OR is only 1 strength point lost regardless of how many squads are stacked in the hex?

It's a valid question, but realistically the ramming rules don't work if stacking is allowed. Otherwise, how do you handle an Ogre ramming a stack of 5 GEVs (for example)? I think that the simple solution is to make Section 6 Require a stacking limit of 1, even on the Advanced (GEV) maps...

[dsal]

Originally Posted by offsides

It's a valid question, but realistically the ramming rules don't work if stacking is allowed. Otherwise, how do you handle an Ogre ramming a stack of 5 GEVs (for example)? I think that the simple solution is to make Section 6 Require a stacking limit of 1, even on the Advanced (GEV) maps...

In the example you give I would assume that the Ogre could ram 1 GEV and spend a 2nd movement point to either ram a 2nd GEV or the same GEV a 2nd time.

I like your solution to the problem! If players have the option of using the simpler ramming rules on the GEV map they should also have the option of using the simpler stacking rules as well. Somehow it never occurred to me to play the basic "Mark III attack/Get the CP" Ogre scenario on the GEV map using the Ogre rules (but with the addition of terrain effects).

[offsides]

Originally Posted by dsal

In the example you give I would assume that the Ogre could ram 1 GEV and spend a 2nd movement point to either ram a 2nd GEV or the same GEV a 2nd time.

I think you just answered your own question - if the Ogre can only ram 1 armor unit even if there's more than one in the hex, then they can only reduce 1 INF unit even if there's more than one in the hex.

Originally Posted by dsal

I like your solution to the problem! If players have the option of using the simpler ramming rules on the GEV map they should also have the option of using the simpler stacking rules as well. Somehow it never occurred to me to play the basic "Mark III attack/Get the CP" Ogre scenario on the GEV map using the Ogre rules (but with the addition of terrain effects).

I think it won't really work as well as it does with Overruns, but it's probably still worth giving a shot. It certainly does add a lot of value to the INF, even without stacking...

[Failure16]

For me, I would simply roll 1D6 and count down the stack (rerolling on any number that does not apply) to see who is the unlucky recipient of the Ram attack. My reasoning is this: someone is going to get smushed and there are a lot of variables that are unseen by the players given the game-scale. Game mechanics-wise, it is simple and effective, allowing play to move on almost without pause.

[offsides]

Originally Posted by Failure16

For me, I would simply roll 1D6 and count down the stack (rerolling on any number that does not apply) to see who is the unlucky recipient of the Ram attack. My reasoning is this: someone is going to get smushed and there are a lot of variables that are unseen by the players given the game-scale. Game mechanics-wise, it is simple and effective, allowing play to move on almost without pause.

Why does the Ogre have to accept a random target for ramming? That really makes no sense. If you allow basic ramming on stacked units, the Ogre should still get its pick of who it rams per normal ramming rules. I just think that it makes more sense that if you're going to use the basic ramming rules, you should use the simpler stacking rules as well. Overruns make no sense without stacking either, so there's symmetry there as well...

[dsal]

Originally Posted by offsides

I think it won't really work as well as it does with Overruns, but it's probably still worth giving a shot. It certainly does add a lot of value to the INF, even without stacking...

There is some precedent for using the Overrun rules without allowing stacking. The rules for the OGRE NINJA in the OGRE Book required that it use the overrun rules vs. infantry even in basic OGRE scenarios where stacking is not allowed.

Personally I've always found the the GEV Overrun, Stacking & Spillover rules to be a bit of a hassle. It would be nice to have the option of using the GEV map without them. Of course all of the GEV scenarios assume you're using these rules. Perhaps in the future Steve could author a few GEV scenarios that use just the basic OGRE rules?

[Failure16]

Originally Posted by offsides

Why does the Ogre have to accept a random target for ramming? That really makes no sense. If you allow basic ramming on stacked units, the Ogre should still get its pick of who it rams per normal ramming rules. I just think that it makes more sense that if you're going to use the basic ramming rules, you should use the simpler stacking rules as well. Overruns make no sense without stacking either, so there's symmetry there as well...

Because the question was how to integrate the Ogre Ramming rules while using GEV Stacking rules. If you want to use both (well, if dsal, or anybody else does), I personally think that rolling a die and choosing a target at random is the path of least resistance, given that both rules are in effect.

My 'in-universe' justification for the random roll is that instead of a single target in a hex (as in Ogre), there are now up to five elements. They will all be scattering to beat the band and it will be a toss-up who the Ogre manages to catch due to vagaries of terrain, human crew experience, initial element placement within the hex, and pure, unadulterated luck on the part of both parties.

Think of it as a chance to add a little spice into the game. The mixing of two rulesets makes it already an odd duck, so why not have some fun with it?

[Elberon]

Being a tad lazy in not reading through 11 pages of rules walls so please forgive me if already covered...

In the optional rules could the AU values of other units be listed underneath the Ogre ones (or listed in with the unit descriptions rather than bedding in with the unit descriptions).

Also could a AU equivalent be included for things such as laser turrets and towers (they're in Ogre Miniatures) and possibly for super command posts over normal CP. This would make scenario designing a lot easier for those who wish to do so......

Chris