Steve Jackson Games Forums

Steve Jackson Games Forums (http://forums.sjgames.com/index.php)
-   Ogre and G.E.V. (http://forums.sjgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Rulebook PDF Posted (http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=98614)

Steve Jackson 10-18-2012 04:29 PM

Rulebook PDF Posted
 
The 99.9% finished rulebook, as well as the Player Reference Sheet, are posted at http://www.sjgames.com/ogre/kickstar...e_rulebook.pdf and http://www.sjgames.com/ogre/kickstar..._ref_sheet.pdf. See anything wrong? Let us know in this thread.

Please don’t post the same comment here and on the parallel BGG thread, and if somebody else has already pointed out a typo, there’s no need to post “I see it too.” Of course, if a real “what does this rule mean?” question comes up (let alone a “this rule is a change from the old game and is stupid”), discussion will be appreciated!

This will be your first look at the Brandon Moore illustrations of our “portrait” supporters on the Ogre battlefield. I really like these. My thanks again to the supporters, and I hope you all survive into the next scene.

We expect to post the Scenarios book on Monday (with the rest of the portraits).

Daniel and I are still talking about a few lines in the rulebook, here and there, but only a few. He’s at Essen right now. If you’re there, drop by the Pegasus booth and say hi!

In-house checking of the counter and overlay sheets is now well along. No major problems found. We’re not going to post all 39 for comment, but we’ll put up a counter sheet and an overlay sheet so you can see them.

Buzzardo 10-18-2012 05:07 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
I just flipped through them to look at the production values. They're very nicely done.

SCUBA Hero 10-18-2012 05:20 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
7.13.2 Attacks on Ogre Treads

Question: Are multiple infantry squads in the same hex required to fire as a group, required to fire separately, or can the firing player choose how to group them?

That is, if there are three infantry squads in the same hex firing on an Ogre's treads, must they make a single roll at an Attack Strength of three, three rolls each at an Attack Strength of one, or may the firing player choose either of the above or a roll at an Attack Strength of one and a second roll at an Attack Strength of two?

buzzkill 10-18-2012 05:34 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
So cool looks fantastic!!!!!!

tomc 10-18-2012 05:41 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
It looks very nice!

sum1els 10-18-2012 05:59 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Why the fuzzy whiteness around the labels and numbers on the CRT? It just looks hard-to-read, and the fonts in the rest of the rules seem a lot more crisp. I see it's the same in the rules and on the reference sheet.

Actually, looking closer at the rest of the rules, to be consistent (and legible) I think it should be a drop-shadow rather than lightness, since it's light text on a darker background.

Other than that it looks pretty nice! I'll have to review the text in more depth later. :)

BillK 10-18-2012 06:36 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
I know this is a nitpick, but on page 4, the sample Defensive setup map--why are all of the units facing the wrong way? It appears to the eye as if the defensive units are expecting the Ogre to appear at the top of the map, not at the bottom. (For someone new to Ogre, this could confuse them.) An easy fix--if you wish to keep the text on the counters right-side-up for the reader of the rulebook--would be to rotate the map 180 degrees. At least then the counters would be facing in the "right" direction. Yeah, I know it's an aesthetic thing.

(The same thing could be done with the map on page 17.)

StormCrow42 10-18-2012 06:39 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
On page 16, the pictures of the Mobile Howitzer counters look a bit odd and have both black and gray text on them.

FireHorse 10-18-2012 07:40 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sum1els (Post 1460951)
Why the fuzzy whiteness around the labels and numbers on the CRT? It just looks hard-to-read, and the fonts in the rest of the rules seem a lot more crisp. I see it's the same in the rules and on the reference sheet.

Actually, looking closer at the rest of the rules, to be consistent (and legible) I think it should be a drop-shadow rather than lightness, since it's light text on a darker background.

Ditto. Light text on dark background requires contrast for legibility. The light glow reduces contrast.

offsides 10-18-2012 08:10 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Tackling the reference chart first, here's my nits:

1) I still think GEV rams on non-Ogre units (6.07.2) should attack with double the defense strength and not the attack strength, since rams are based on mass/momentum and not firepower. It really only affects GEV-PCs, but it really stands out to me.

2) On the Terrain chart, Town line, Wheeled units should indicate that D0 units become D1. I'm not sure if that line should be in the tracked units at all or not.

3) On the Terrain chart, Road or Bridge line, there needs to be an indication that the underlying terrain provides any applicable defense bonus. The statement "Units moving along the road ignore underlying terrain." implies that defense bonuses are also ignored, which I believe is not the case.

Otherwise, I think it looks good. Tomorrow I'll tackle the rulebook...

edelder 10-18-2012 08:34 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
This may be more appropriate for a FAQ and not the rulebook but I'll throw it in anyway.

13.02.1
River bridges are considered to be BPC-armored, and are not
affected by anything except direct attacks. Exception: An attack on
a unit on the center hex of the bridge gives an automatic, separate
attack, of the same strength, on the bridge itself.

Makes Sense. It's like spillover fire against an inanimate target or town. What about overrun attacks against units on the bridge though? Should more precise fire have such a great effect when the bridge is BPC armored?

Overall I'm loving it. Ogre was the first hobby game I played ... back in 1979.

FJCestero 10-18-2012 09:06 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
It may just be me, but I'd move 5.11.2 ("Combat involving infantry riding vehicles") to the Combat section. Something that explicitly and clearly spells out what happens to infantry riding GEV-PCs and other vehicles is needed there.

Currently all we have is 7.12.2 "Units affected by spillover fire" which doesn't raise any mental flags since infantry aboard GEV-PCs and the like are covered by the "roll one die and apply results at separate odds" rule (which is a game mechanism not mentioned anywhere in the Combat section!). It isn't until you scan the rest of Combat looking for something relevant to GEV-PCs that you drill down 7.12.2 and get "...separate spillover fire is not calculated for a tank and the infantry riding it (Section 5.11)" and follow the link because you've got nothing else to go on that you find the rules you're looking for under Movement three pages back. It's a bit unwieldy. /soapbox.

Also, in the interest of clarity, all differences between infantry riding trucks, dedicated transport like GEV-PCs, or just hitchhiking aboard a passing heavy, should be consolidated in a table or something. The current rules don't make these easy to find. I like how the CRT reference page spells out the difference between spillover fire and overrun combat, and the new terrain tables are VERY nice. Kudos to whomever, we need more of this level of clarity.

Next, make it clear that a super doing the splits is 3+3, not 4+2 or 5+1 as you wish. If we're going through the trouble of clarifying that tread units are not expended with movement...

OK, that's about it. Sorry if I'm being a bother.
--Francisco

wjdecker 10-18-2012 10:01 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Possibly overly pedantic, so consider these suggestions.

Page 1: "Rules Illustrated by ... Cundo Rabaudi and John Zeleznik" - needs comma to maintain serial comma consistency

In 3.01 the vehicle names are given,then the acronym, except for one . Why not do this for the GEV-PC, at least for the PC part?
3.03 - no acronym for Truck?

Outside of the Size Table (pg. 14) the abbreviation of Mark as MK. occurs only a few, apparently random, times. Why not write out Mark everywhere outside of the Size Table?

Usual practice is to write out smaller numbers (often twelve or less), then use numerals for higher numbers. I can see why you want to use numerals when referring to die results, but there is inconsistency in using numerals versus words for smaller numbers elsewhere. For example, the opening paragraph has this sentence "Playing time is
between 30 minutes and 1 hour." Convention would say that it should read "one hour." And later on in the same page (1.04) you have "In a tournament game, it is suggested that every round consist of two games, with each player attacking once and defending once." There are other occurrences of this.

7.11 Why not maintain the NDX order in the bullet points?

irthinker 10-19-2012 12:10 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Things are shaping up nicely.

In a number of wargames, changing facing costs movement points and your facing has implications. My memory of OGRE/GEV is that facing is irrelevant bu searching the rulebook does not explicitly confirm that.

While the irrelevance of facing is implied in the current rulebook (by the suggestions to slightly change facing to keep track of which units have moved or fired), it might be worth stating explicitly that facing does not affect firing nor does it cost movement points.

GranitePenguin 10-19-2012 12:16 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SCUBA Hero (Post 1460940)
7.13.2 Attacks on Ogre Treads

Question: Are multiple infantry squads in the same hex required to fire as a group, required to fire separately, or can the firing player choose how to group them?

That is, if there are three infantry squads in the same hex firing on an Ogre's treads, must they make a single roll at an Attack Strength of three, three rolls each at an Attack Strength of one, or may the firing player choose either of the above or a roll at an Attack Strength of one and a second roll at an Attack Strength of two?

See 7.07.1

Infantry can divide up its attack however you see fit. With a squad of 3, you could attack with any variation; one 3-squad, one 2-squad and one 1-squad, or three 1-squad attacks.

irthinker 10-19-2012 12:25 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by offsides (Post 1461043)
1) I still think GEV rams on non-Ogre units (6.07.2) should attack with double the defense strength and not the attack strength, since rams are based on mass/momentum and not firepower. It really only affects GEV-PCs, but it really stands out to me.

That speaks more to a game design choice, which I do not think is up for debate. However, I can refute the notion on behalf of the game designers:

The core fluff of the game is that the battlefield GEV is made possible because of super light armor, so the massiveness of the GEV is not necessarily relevant nor reflective of its defensive capability. If anything, one could use that argument to say that ramming an Ogre with a GEV should be mostly irrelevant.

However, the fluff goes on to talk about the need for tactical nuclear shells to penetrate the armor and the GEV most certainly has such munitions on board, and, presumably some sort of power supply that will explode in a very entertaining, Hollwood-esque fashion.

So, the real danger posed is by the munitions, and possibly power supply, detonating on the GEV. Therefore the offensive strength makes more sense.

In the eyes of the Ogre, we are basically talking about the game mechanical approximation of a rocket-powered gazelle* with an autocannon (with tactical nuclear shells, of course). :-D

* - with water skis :-D

GranitePenguin 10-19-2012 12:51 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Discrepancy in GEV movement by the water:

In 5.08.2, GEVs transitioning from water to land (or vice versa), must end movement for that movement phase (just like a stream). However, the terrain effects table says "Must end movement for the turn", which suggests a GEV will lose its second movement phase (like it is explicitly stated for a swamp).

The wording for GEVs and Water on the Terrain Effects Table should reflect ending movement for the phase, not the turn.

In addition: I am sooo happy that my case numbering suggestion made it in. I'm glad it was worthy of the hassle.

DeeJaye6 10-19-2012 12:54 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Page 4, Mark III Attack, 2nd paragraph:

You mention "North, Central, and South areas" here, but go on to talk about North Area and South Area, etc. Note that you did not capitalize "area" in the first mention, but you did in every other use of the word "area" in conjunction with North, Central, and South.

sqw 10-19-2012 02:27 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Ref sheet - Page 1

"The intermediate result is a D. " - to be consistent and easier to read should be "D is a disabled result" to match with the NE and X lines

Page 2:


The second page is not very clear overall - I would like to see something crisper and quicker to read/decipher:

1) Lots of referals to "same as..." which means you have to track back up the page

2) Defense strength changes should be clearer and distinct from movement changes

3) Sometimes says "no effect on movement" sometimes "no effect" - keep it simple and consistent

4) Just way too many words in general. "2MP to enter" would be clearer than "costs 2 movement points to enter"


Water: "Must end movement for turn before transitioning from land to water, or vice versa."

1) Does this mean that the second movement phase is not allowed?
2) "transitioning" should be a simpler word like "moving from land to water"


Beach: has a row of "same as clear terrain" - this should be "no effect"

Rubble: If you're sticking with "same as swamp" then Infanty is also "same as swamp"

ScarecrowKing 10-19-2012 05:01 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1461160)
See 7.07.1

Infantry can divide up its attack however you see fit. With a squad of 3, you could attack with any variation; one 3-squad, one 2-squad and one 1-squad, or three 1-squad attacks.

He was asking about treads in particular. In that case, each squad must fire separately.

-Brian

GranitePenguin 10-19-2012 07:46 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ScarecrowKing (Post 1461229)
He was asking about treads in particular. In that case, each squad must fire separately.

-Brian

Actually, the problem is it isn't clear that is the case. The rules say infantry can be grouped how you want, effectively deciding what infantry "units" with which you are attacking. It does not say each squad within the group must fire individually, or that each squad represents a "unit".

7.13.2 only says each "unit" must attack treads individually, implying that if I decide to have a 2-squad "unit" and a 1-squad "unit", I will have two attacks.

There should be an explicit description of how infantry attacks treads.

GranitePenguin 10-19-2012 05:14 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Disabled clarification:

Units that can be disabled by terrain (eg, GEV into forest), are disabled only when _entering_ the hex, correct? What happens in the case where a unit has moved into a hex and has subsequently recovered?

Specifically, if the unit does not move again, it does not run the risk of having to roll for being disabled again, because it did not move _into_ the hex (ie. being disabled by terrain requires movement into the terrain).

That's how I understand it, but I don't know if it's 100% clear.

SCUBA Hero 10-19-2012 09:50 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
GranitePenguin and ScarecrowKing,

Thanks for the discussion; it mirrors my own thinking and confusion.

3.02 Infantry refers to "units", "squads", and "counters" - but I am unable to determine what a "unit" means in terms of 7.12.2.

(Note that I had similar confusion in earlier versions on whether or not the attacker or defender could choose how multiple squads chose to defend [individually or in groups], but that is now answered by 7.12.1 - hmmmm, that rule talks about "stacks" consisting of "several infantry units", implying that each squad must attack an Ogre's treads separately, but then goes on to say "in an overrun attack (8.00), though, each squad is always a separate unit" - which implies that under other circumstances, each squad is NOT always a separate unit - so I'm still uncertain as to the answer.)

GranitePenguin 10-19-2012 10:41 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Well, in an overrun situation, it's a special case.

Overruns are meant to simulate "taking the hill" by shoving a lot of units into a small space and resolving the battle during a movement phase. During an overrun, infantry is split up into individual 1-squad units. It represents the mobility of the infantry in very close quarters. Infantry is _very_ dangerous during overruns.

In other non-overrun cases, infantry squad size is a bit of a floater, where they can be split up or combined pretty much at will.

A "counter" is the physical board piece

A "squad" is the individual 1/1 strength item represented on the counter. The counter may have up to 3 squads on it, resulting in 1/1, 2/1, or 3/1 with a D1, D2, or D3, respectively

A "unit" in the context of 3.02 just talks about how a 3-squad is equivalent to 1 armor unit from a value perspective. It also applies to 5.02 and 5.02.2 for stacking limits.

Regarding 7.12.1 and 7.12.2, "unit" is interchangeable with "counter", but the squads are what actually matter. Think of infantry "units" as being virtual counters in most cases, where the physical counters are just convenient placeholders.

Infantry can regroup like crazy; they are actually pretty cool. It's usually advantageous when defending to have larger numbers, to increase the Defense (ie, 3/1 with a D3), but each squad can always attack individually if desired.

GranitePenguin 10-19-2012 11:04 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Just a question of clarification: GEV vs G.E.V.

G.E.V. = The name of the game, when talking about maps and such
GEV = The name of the units in the game

Is that a fair assessment? I'm just trying to establish if there are any GEV/G.E.V. inconsistencies in the text.

Andrew Hackard 10-20-2012 01:08 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1461649)
Is that a fair assessment? I'm just trying to establish if there are any GEV/G.E.V. inconsistencies in the text.

Many questions of this sort are answered in our Online Style Guide (and I've linked you directly to the "G" section of that document).

GranitePenguin 10-20-2012 08:13 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard (Post 1461670)
Many questions of this sort are answered in our Online Style Guide (and I've linked you directly to the "G" section of that document).

Always the gentleman. Thanks, Andrew. I had no idea that even existed.

GranitePenguin 10-20-2012 08:26 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by FJCestero (Post 1461081)
Next, make it clear that a super doing the splits is 3+3, not 4+2 or 5+1 as you wish. If we're going through the trouble of clarifying that tread units are not expended with movement...

--Francisco

This is covered under 7.02: "A unit with an asterisk after its attack strength may divide that strength into two equal attacks. For instance, the Superheavy Tank (6*/3) may attack with two separate 3/3 attacks."

GranitePenguin 10-20-2012 08:46 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
successive AP attacks on infantry:

The exception in 7.09 "Exception: Per 7.05.1, an infantry unit may only suffer one AP attack per turn from each attacking unit." is a bit obtuse.

The referred text in 7.05.1 "No infantry unit may be attacked more than once per turn by the Ogre’s AP, but any number of the Ogre’s AP weapons may be used for that single attack." talks only about Ogre AP specifically.

Since 7.05.1 doesn't cover non-Ogre AP, it muddies the water a bit to use it as an inclusive reference (ie "Per 7.05.1"). It is helpful to point out the special case of Ogre AP vs non-Ogre AP, though.

Suggested text:
7.09 Successive attacks. Any number of successive attacks may be made against any unit or Ogre weapon in one turn, provided that each attacking unit or weapon fires only once. Exception: An infantry unit may only suffer one AP attack per turn from each attacking unit. See 7.05.1 for Ogre-specific AP attack behavior.

GranitePenguin 10-20-2012 09:14 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
General PDF suggestion:
Please note, this is just a comment for later.

If the PDF is ever going to be released on its own, it would be helpful if rules references were links to the corresponding rule. For example:

2.01.7 Damaged town and forest has a reference to 13.01. It would be nice if 13.01 was a clickable link to actually go to 13.01

Telon 10-20-2012 05:31 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Looks great so far. Once the scenario book is posted this next week Ill play through a couple scenarios and see if i notice anything.

The CRT is just a bit hard on the eyes but thats already been pointed out.

BlackHat 10-20-2012 07:04 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
P20, Winch Chung's artwork.

lists 1206.09

Is that a date? Should it be 12.06.09?

I have never seen format for a date before.

dwalend 10-20-2012 07:26 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ScarecrowKing (Post 1461229)
He was asking about treads in particular. In that case, each squad must fire separately.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1461279)
Actually, the problem is it isn't clear that is the case. The rules say infantry can be grouped how you want, effectively deciding what infantry "units" with which you are attacking. It does not say each squad within the group must fire individually, or that each squad represents a "unit".

7.13.2 only says each "unit" must attack treads individually, implying that if I decide to have a 2-squad "unit" and a 1-squad "unit", I will have two attacks.

There should be an explicit description of how infantry attacks treads.

We've always played the way ScarecrowKing reads it: each squad fires separately. That's almost always what's best for the attacker, and it vastly speeds up the end of a game if you have enough dice. (The rare exception is when you must take out two or three treads this turn to drop movement on the next turn.)

Maybe just update the example at the end of 7.13.2: "Thus, a successful Heavy Tank attack on treads would cost an Ogre 4 tread units. Each successful infantry squad attack destroys 1 tread unit."

JLV 10-20-2012 07:57 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
I'm coming late to this party, but so far it looks pretty good. No point in re-listing what other people saw, and I didn't see anything else that we haven't already discussed! Good job to Steve, Daniel, Fox and the whole crew!

DeeJaye6 10-21-2012 02:36 PM

Defense Strength v. Defensive Strength
 
For the majority of the rules book, the phrase is "defense strength," as it is first introduced in the first figure on page 7 which illustrates a unit counter. However, there are notable places in which it is written as "defensive strength," including in the paragraph directly following that figure.

3.01
3.03, Truck (TK)
7.14.1 (both are used)
9.03.2
13.02

Recommend doing a find/replace on the entire phrase, as the word "defensive" is correctly used elsewhere in the rules.

Find: "defensive strength"
Replace with: "defense strength"

DeeJaye6 10-21-2012 03:44 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
In Section 3.01, for Heavy Tank, why is "Main Battle Tank" capitalized? It should not be.

GranitePenguin 10-21-2012 08:16 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dwalend (Post 1461898)
We've always played the way ScarecrowKing reads it: each squad fires separately. That's almost always what's best for the attacker, and it vastly speeds up the end of a game if you have enough dice. (The rare exception is when you must take out two or three treads this turn to drop movement on the next turn.)

Maybe just update the example at the end of 7.13.2: "Thus, a successful Heavy Tank attack on treads would cost an Ogre 4 tread units, and each infantry squad attack destroys 1 tread unit."

Whether you have played that way or not, or that statistically, attacking with 1-squad at a time is best, isn't the issue. The issue is that the rules do not clearly state that you MUST attack with squads individually.

Updating the example in 7.13.2 as you have suggested would not clarify that at all. We still need explicit information on what constitutes an infantry "unit" in the context of attacking treads (ie, is a unit = counter, or is a unit = squad). Most text in the rules implies that unit = counter; in which case, attacking as a 3/1 or 2/1 infantry would be allowed.

FireHorse 10-21-2012 08:42 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Pg. 9, Ogre War Room info box: "A free Ogre app for iOS, Android, and Windows Phone is available through apps.sjgames.com."

Maybe it's a superficial quibble, but that address only redirects to http://www.sjgames.com/apps/ — so why not just give the real address? (Or conversely, set up apps.sjgames.com to actually work, instead of redirecting.)

GranitePenguin 10-21-2012 09:12 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Terrain Effects Table...

Clear, Crater, Ridge Hexside, Stream Hexside and Railroad do not have rule location references, but the rest of the terrain types do.

Rubble: refers to 13.01, which says "Ogres and Superheavies treat rubble as clear terrain. Other units treat rubble as swamp." That includes Infantry and trucks, so why not just have "Same as Swamp", instead of the repeated text?

Towns: Why is "D0 units become D1." listed only under Heavy Tracked Units? This would make more sense under Light Tracked Units (eg, MCP), or Wheeled units.

Mentioned by sqw on the reference sheet, but it also is in the rules at 7.11 and Page 24's CRT:
"The intermediate result is a D. " - to be consistent and easier to read should be "D is a disabled result" to match with the NE and X lines

CoachAsher 10-22-2012 02:35 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
In 1.01, the quotation marks around "feel" don't seem to be necessary, as the word is not used in a peculiar way. Same thing with "handicap" in 1.04; that seems to be a pretty standard use of the word. In 1.03, "program" seems to call for them because one is not literally "programming" the Ogre.

Asher

gev 10-22-2012 04:44 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by FireHorse (Post 1462281)
Pg. 9, Ogre War Room info box: "A free Ogre app for iOS, Android, and Windows Phone is available through apps.sjgames.com."

Maybe it's a superficial quibble, but that address only redirects to http://www.sjgames.com/apps/ — so why not just give the real address? (Or conversely, set up apps.sjgames.com to actually work, instead of redirecting.)

As long as it works... apps.sjgmaes.com is easier to type in, and what it does after that is not very important (as long as it's not malware).

wsu 10-23-2012 07:59 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
7.02 says that Attack Strength and Range are on the left side of the counter, but the Red howitzer picture in 3.01 has the Attack stats on the right side.

GranitePenguin 10-23-2012 09:17 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Proofing the Ogre stat sheets...

While thinking about Ogre AP (7.05.1) and whether the AP have a range for attacks (yes, I know they do, but the rules don't say so anywhere), it occurred to me that the Ogre stats (for any of the weapons) are not part of the rules.

I know they are available online, but will we get a chance to see the sheets to look for any issues there?

wsu 10-23-2012 09:38 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
The end of 9.01 and the beginning of 9.02 seem redundant.

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 01:46 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DeeJaye6 (Post 1461167)
Page 4, Mark III Attack, 2nd paragraph:

You mention "North, Central, and South areas" here, but go on to talk about North Area and South Area, etc. Note that you did not capitalize "area" in the first mention, but you did in every other use of the word "area" in conjunction with North, Central, and South.

In the cases you describe, Area is capitalized when it's part of the name of a specific area (eg, North Area). The "North, Central, and South areas" phrase means the areas named North, Central and South.

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 02:16 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
When attacking a bridge, it is stated that "Fire on all of its hexes can be combined for effect." Does that mean that multiple units may fire at different parts of the bridge to get combined attack strength (eg, the river bridge is D8; two GEVs attack the SE hex and two more attack the NW hex, for a combined attack strength of 8 to get a 1-1 attack)?

I know it's been worded like this forever, but I'm not sure it's clear what it means.

Additionally, if a bridge is destroyed (especially the river bridge), do all hexes become "bridge out" hexes that behave like rubble, or just the hexes that were targeted? My example above suggests all three hexes would become "Bridge Out" hexes, but what about targeting the center hex and the SE hex? Would the NW hex also be rubble?

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 02:23 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Section 3, page 7:

"2-D (flat) counters" and "3-D counters"
are hilighted in red, but have no ending Period like most of the rest of the item callouts (eg, 3.01).

I don't know if that is specifically wrong, as they appear to just be hilights in a sentence, but the layout is not consistent with the rest of the rules.

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 06:17 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
5.07.1 Road Bonus
"It may not use the additional hex to leave the road, ram, or overrun."

That last part is new; does that mean you can't use it to ram or overrun, even if you are continuing on the road? Why would the road bonus specifically disallow that?

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 06:51 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
6.07.3 Ramming by Superheavies. A Superheavy may ram Ogres or other armor units as if it were an Ogre Mk. I (see 6.05). It suffers a 1-1 attack. If optional rule 13.07 is in use, it also loses treads as a Mk. I.

Is "it" the superheavy? This isn't clear.
Perhaps change it to:
6.07.3 Ramming by Superheavies. A Superheavy may ram Ogres or other armor units as if it were an Ogre Mark I (see 6.05). The Superheavy suffers a 1-1 attack. If optional rule 13.07 is in use, it also loses treads as a Mark I.

What is the result of the superheavy ramming if it does not destroy the target? I assume it then follows 6.08?

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 07:29 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
7.12.3 Spillover against terrain. If the optional rules for damaging and destroying terrain are being used, spillover attacks are also rolled against the defending unit’s hex. See Section 13.01.2.

There's good information for spillover fire on terrain, and on units when an armor unit it targeted, but there isn't anything clear on spillover if the original target is the hex.

Since spillover is defined this way:
7.12 Attacks on stacked units: spillover fire. When units are stacked (that is, when more than one counter is placed in the same hex), they may be attacked as follows: The attacking player declares one of the counters to be the “target” of the attack.
It looks like there is no such thing as "spillover by attacking the hex." Is that true, and does it need to be explicitly stated?

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 09:02 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
8.06 Movement and stacking before overruns. Since an overrun takes place during a movement phase, more than five units may participate in an overrun attack. However, the stacking limit of 5 units must be observed at the end of the movement phase, even if the attacker must lose units to comply.

There is nothing in the rules that states how the attacker loses units in this situation: die roll, attacker's choice, defender's choice, etc?

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 09:18 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
9.06 Collisions.

The text "Collisions." is not colored Red

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 09:29 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
9.07 Reinforcements from the train.
If a train counter is destroyed, each infantry squad on board suffers a 1-1 attack; survivors are free to move on their next turn. Armor units suffer a 1-1 attack, and survivors are considered “stuck,” as if they were in a swamp.
Does this mean all armor units, regardless of whether they would normally be stuck in swamp or not, or just heavy tracked units?

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 10:04 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
11.04.3 Ramming buildings.
"Some other units can ram buildings, per the Size Table on
p. 14. A Heavy Tank or Superheavy may ram once per turn. It
undergoes a 1-2 attack when it rams."
This is similar to 6.07.3 listed earlier, although "It" is more obviously the HVY or SHVY in this case. Maybe it's just the wording (maybe the "when it rams" part makes it clearer), but both may be worth reviewing.

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 10:13 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
12.02 Standard Lasers.
A “standard” laser turret is a ground emplacement. It has a range of 30 hexes. Its line of fire is blocked by ridge hexsides or any raised terrain – i.e., forest, swamp (assumed to contain trees), towns, or rubble.
"Line of fire" is not well defined. Is it a straight line as defined by using a straight-edge, or a straight-line path (as straight as hex map staggered line can be)?

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 10:25 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
13.01.2 Spillover and overrun damage to terrain.
"When overrun combat takes place in an undamaged hex, the hex becomes damaged as of the end of the overrun, regardless of the size of the combat."
What happens if the overrun combat takes place in an already damaged hex? Does it just remain damaged, or does it turn to rubble?

GranitePenguin 10-24-2012 10:33 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
13.04 Mines
"A mine explosion affects only the unit setting it off. Armor units are destroyed"
What about the case where a stack of units is being moved? It is common to move a stack at the same time. How do you determine which unit is affected?

Hilgendwarf 10-25-2012 02:47 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Well, I just started looking through the OGRE information today (a complete newcomer to the game) and I don't fully understand from the rules how you decide what units to put out at the beginning of the game. Page 4 of the rules mentions both Attack Strength and Armor Points, and I'm not following it all very well. Maybe if you explained a little more or talked about the initial board setup a little more I'd get it.

GranitePenguin 10-25-2012 07:31 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hilgendwarf (Post 1464112)
Well, I just started looking through the OGRE information today (a complete newcomer to the game) and I don't fully understand from the rules how you decide what units to put out at the beginning of the game. Page 4 of the rules mentions both Attack Strength and Armor Points, and I'm not following it all very well. Maybe if you explained a little more or talked about the initial board setup a little more I'd get it.

Great to see you here. It's always good to get a fresh set of eyes on things. We old salts often forget there are people that don't have these definitions burned in. :-)

Ok, so referencing the following from Mark III Attack:
"The defending player gets 20 squads of infantry (that is, 20 points of attack strength, in any combination of counters), and 12 armor units. Note: Light Tanks and Light GEVs count as only half an armor unit. Howitzers, Mobile Howitzers, and Superheavies cost double."
20 squads of infantry (20 points of attack strength): Each squad of infantry has an attack strength of 1. Infantry can be combined on the counters, up to 3 squads, so that the maximum attack strength of an infantry counter could be 3.

12 armor units: For starters, it's armor units, not armor points. Keeping that straight will probably help with understanding. In general, an armor unit is a counter, and most are worth 1 armor unit for setup. If something is sufficiently large or small, it will cost more (or less) to the total unit selection, hence the Note: Light Tanks and Light GEVs count as only half an armor unit. Howitzers, Mobile Howitzers, and Superheavies cost double.

All that said, I do agree that a new player has no concept of any of this in section 1. This is the first time they are seeing most of these terms; they need to be guided to related sections for clarification. Maybe refer to 7.02 for attack strength, 3.01 for what an armor unit is, and 3.02 for what infantry is and how it can be combined.

What about something like the following for the first paragraph of Mark III Attack:
This represents an Ogre attack on a heavily guarded command post. Use the original Ogre map, which is orange. The defense sets up first. The defending player gets 20 squads of infantry (see Section 3.02) (that is, 20 points of attack strength (see Section 7.02), in any combination of counters), and 12 armor units (see Section 3.01). Note: Light Tanks and Light GEVs count as only half an armor unit. Howitzers, Mobile Howitzers, and Superheavies cost double. No Cruise Missiles allowed!

Hilgendwarf 10-25-2012 08:16 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
That supplement was very beneficial. It makes more sense to me now. Specifically directing me to the rules about Attack Strength and Armor Units cleared that right up.

KhyberJoe 10-25-2012 11:02 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
7.14.4 - Ogres cannot fire missiles while underwater?

GranitePenguin 10-25-2012 11:31 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by KhyberJoe (Post 1464281)
7.14.4 - Ogres cannot fire missiles while underwater?

Correct. It's been that way since the beginning:

G.E.V. 1st Ed - 6.113 Water.
An infantry unit in a water hex may not attack; its defense strength is unaffected. A GEV on water attacks and defends normally. An Ogre submerged in a water hex may not attack. It may not be attacked except by Howitzers, Mobile Howitzers, and Ogre missiles. Furthermore, all attacks made against the Ogre are at half strength.

GranitePenguin 10-25-2012 05:23 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Road + Terrain effects
7.14.3 Defensive terrain and roads. A unit on the road gets the full defensive bonus of the terrain in its hex.
The terrain effects table does not make this clear:
Any unit which begins its movement phase on the road, and stays on the road for the entire movement phase, may take a bonus movement of 1 extra hex. If taken, the extra hex MUST be used on the road. Units moving along the road ignore underlying terrain.
Either add text to the description, or reference 7.14.3 somehow on the terrain effects table, for example:
Any unit which begins its movement phase on the road, and stays on the road for the entire movement phase, may take a bonus movement of 1 extra hex. If taken, the extra hex MUST be used on the road. Units moving along the road ignore underlying terrain, but do get the defense bonus (7.14.3).

GranitePenguin 10-25-2012 05:51 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
The text for Ridge hexside effects conflicts:
2.02.1 Ridge hexsides. Heavy black markings along hexsides indicate ridges of loose debris that block movement. Only Ogres and infantry may cross ridge hexsides. Units may fire over ridges.
5.08.3 Ridges do not affect Ogres and Superheavies. Other heavy tracked units may not cross ridges.
If SHVYs are allowed in Ogre map games, these should match; ie, 2.02.1 should be changed to include SHVYs:
2.02.1 Ridge hexsides. Heavy black markings along hexsides indicate ridges of loose debris that block movement. Only Ogres, Superheavies and infantry may cross ridge hexsides. Units may fire over ridges.

GranitePenguin 10-25-2012 06:00 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
5.08.3 Swamp

The terrain effect table says 2 movement points to enter for heavy tracked units, but 5.08.3 has no text to support this.
A heavy tracked vehicle entering a swamp hex must roll one die; on a roll of 1 or 2, the unit is stuck. Place a “Stuck” marker on it. A stuck unit may fire its weapon(s) normally, but may not move for the rest of the game.

GranitePenguin 10-25-2012 06:17 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Ok, I think this is the last thing...

The terrain effect table has visual column separators for the shaded rows, but the white rows have no separators. It's not strictly needed (its reasonably obvious what text goes with what item), and I'm not sure what would look better, but it just feels a little "off" looking at it.

offsides 10-25-2012 09:31 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1463929)
5.07.1 Road Bonus
"It may not use the additional hex to leave the road, ram, or overrun."

That last part is new; does that mean you can't use it to ram or overrun, even if you are continuing on the road? Why would the road bonus specifically disallow that?

I kind of see the reason for not allowing a ram (Section 6 rules), but I don't see why it can't be used for an overrun (Section 8 rules). I know that post-overrun the road will be cut, but until then the road bonus should be available to any unit that can use it. Since using the bonus means that those units can't move post-overrun anyway, the fact that the road is cut shouldn't be a problem...

offsides 10-25-2012 09:54 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Finally getting to the rulebook, so here's what I've got that isn't already covered:

2.00.3 Map Overlays - Are ridge/no ridge hexsides the ONLY hexside overlays allowed? Or are other hexside overlays allowed? If other hexside overlays are allowed, you might want to change the text to not imply otherwise.

3.04.1 Ogre Record Sheet - The image is tilted, which looks really bad in the PDF. Not sure if that's an issue (and I'm assuming it'll look fine when printed), but the lines look really bad (at leas in my PDF viewer, which I will grant most people don't use (Okular on F16).

6.07.2 GEVs ramming armor units - I still think that ram damage should be based on defense strength (i.e., mass) rather than attack strength. It just makes more sense to me than basing ram damage in a suicide attack on how strong the guns are...

13.07 Partial Damage for Superheavies - On the SHVY record sheet, why do the AP guns have boxes? There's no way for them to get lost separately, and it adds confusion as to which guns are being referred to for a 1,2 result.

That's all I'm seeing right now, otherwise it looks real good! Also, I want to say a HUGE thank you for adding the clarification on how to combine fire phases in 4.03.

GranitePenguin 10-25-2012 09:56 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by offsides (Post 1464617)
I kind of see the reason for not allowing a ram (Section 6 rules), but I don't see why it can't be used for an overrun (Section 8 rules). I know that post-overrun the road will be cut, but until then the road bonus should be available to any unit that can use it. Since using the bonus means that those units can't move post-overrun anyway, the fact that the road is cut shouldn't be a problem...

Well, the inference is that somehow ramming or overrun is special movement and the road bonus can't be used to reach a unit in order to initiate either. If your target is on the road hex in front of you, what makes it special that disallows using the road bonus?

GranitePenguin 10-25-2012 10:24 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by offsides (Post 1464628)
3.04.1 Ogre Record Sheet - The image is tilted, which looks really bad in the PDF. Not sure if that's an issue (and I'm assuming it'll look fine when printed), but the lines look really bad (at leas in my PDF viewer, which I will grant most people don't use (Okular on F16).

I think that's just you. Looks ok to me, and printed will probably be fine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by offsides (Post 1464628)
6.07.2 GEVs ramming armor units - I still think that ram damage should be based on defense strength (i.e., mass) rather than attack strength. It just makes more sense to me than basing ram damage in a suicide attack on how strong the guns are...

Actually, defense strength isn't necessarily just a mass measurement. I've always understood it to represent a combination of armor/maneuverability. That said, it is a bit weird that GEVs are somehow special in this regard. Basically, they are the only thing smaller than a SHVY that is fast enough (and big enough) to be able to ram other units, but how does that make them that potent in a ram?

Somewhere else it was suggested that GEV ramming damage is a factor of the powerplant exploding during a high speed impact, justifying attack strength that way. I'm not so sure I buy that, either. I'm also not sure that's enough to justify a 1-1 on the train. I mean, a GEV = SHVY in a ram on the train and everything else is a 1-2?

I'd like to hear some of the rationale behind this, too.

Edit: Incidentally, if it said "twice the defense strength", the value would still be the same. ;-)
I'd still like to know the reasoning, though.

offsides 10-26-2012 12:24 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1464646)
I think that's just you. Looks ok to me, and printed will probably be fine.

I was more thinking about how the PDF would look in on screen, I know it should print fine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1464646)
Actually, defense strength isn't necessarily just a mass measurement. I've always understood it to represent a combination of armor/maneuverability. That said, it is a bit weird that GEVs are somehow special in this regard. Basically, they are the only thing smaller than a SHVY that is fast enough (and big enough) to be able to ram other units, but how does that make them that potent in a ram?Somewhere else it was suggested that GEV ramming damage is a factor of the powerplant exploding during a high speed impact, justifying attack strength that way. I'm not so sure I buy that, either. I'm also not sure that's enough to justify a 1-1 on the train. I mean, a GEV = SHVY in a ram on the train and everything else is a 1-2?

I'd like to hear some of the rationale behind this, too.

Trains have to stay on the track - derail them, and they go boom. Thus, if the velocity of a GEV hitting the train is enough to knock it off track even a little bit, the train falls down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1464646)
Edit: Incidentally, if it said "twice the defense strength", the value would still be the same. ;-)
I'd still like to know the reasoning, though.

That's true for GEVs and LGEVs, but not GEV-PCs (1/2 D2), which have even more mass than a GEV and about the same powerplant, just less built-in weaponry. Also, it doesn't make sense to me that a hovertruck couldn't do at least some damage by ramming, though I would buy an argument that they don't have the precision handling needed to run into anything mobile. But realistically a fully loaded hovertruck running into a building should theoretically do at least 1 die damage, even if an empty one does nothing...

GranitePenguin 10-26-2012 07:32 AM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by offsides (Post 1464671)
That's true for GEVs and LGEVs, but not GEV-PCs (1/2 D2), which have even more mass than a GEV and about the same powerplant, just less built-in weaponry.

True, but remember, we are talking about straight GEVs, not LGEVs or GEV-PCs (since only GEVs are specifically called out). The logic I am assuming is being used is:
LGEV: 1/2 D1 M4-3 - has the speed, but too small
GEV: 2/2 D2 M4-3 - has the speed and is big enough
GEV-PC: 1/2 D2 M3-2 - might be big enough, but too slow
Quote:

Originally Posted by offsides (Post 1464671)
Also, it doesn't make sense to me that a hovertruck couldn't do at least some damage by ramming, though I would buy an argument that they don't have the precision handling needed to run into anything mobile. But realistically a fully loaded hovertruck running into a building should theoretically do at least 1 die damage, even if an empty one does nothing...

As for the hovertruck, I see that as a light GEV-PC. Even though it actually has a D1 (less than a GEV-PC), it's too slow (GEV-PC speed) and too small (size of a truck). However, it's worth pointing out that Hovertrucks used to do damage to buildings (Shockwave 5.043).

In any case, the point is the ramming logic for GEVs is hinky (even though it's been more or less like this for a long time).

dwalend 10-26-2012 12:46 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1461745)
successive AP attacks on infantry:

The exception in 7.09 "Exception: Per 7.05.1, an infantry unit may only suffer one AP attack per turn from each attacking unit." is a bit obtuse.

The referred text in 7.05.1 "No infantry unit may be attacked more than once per turn by the Ogre’s AP, but any number of the Ogre’s AP weapons may be used for that single attack." talks only about Ogre AP specifically.

Since 7.05.1 doesn't cover non-Ogre AP, it muddies the water a bit to use it as an inclusive reference (ie "Per 7.05.1"). It is helpful to point out the special case of Ogre AP vs non-Ogre AP, though.

Suggested text:
7.09 Successive attacks. Any number of successive attacks may be made against any unit or Ogre weapon in one turn, provided that each attacking unit or weapon fires only once. Exception: An infantry unit may only suffer one AP attack per turn from each attacking unit. See 7.05.1 for Ogre-specific AP attack behavior.


7.05.1 needs at least a light touch, too. It doesn't cover the case for multiple Ogres (or superheavy tanks or the like) and could refer to infantry squads for no penalty.

Maybe:

7.05.1 AP weapons. Antipersonnel weapons are
effective only against infantry (including special infantry types)
and D0 units such as a regular (unarmored) CP. No infantry squad
may be attacked more than once per turn by a single units’s AP, but any
number of the attacking unit’s AP weapons may be used for that single attack.

chademe 10-26-2012 02:43 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
I haven't played Ogre in over 20 years, so going through the rules now is like learning a new game.

The ramming rules have me a bit confused.

Are there rules for armor units ramming other armor units, or armor units ramming GEV units, etc? What about GEVs ramming trucks and so on? Maybe the size table on page 14 needs to be expanded with these other options.

Can the train ram? Obviously the target would have to be on the track at the time, but it's possible.

Also, I assume that when an Ogre rams a transport unit, the transport unit is destroyed, but I didn't see it explicitly mentioned anywhere.

GranitePenguin 10-26-2012 02:59 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chademe (Post 1464900)
Are there rules for armor units ramming other armor units, or armor units ramming GEV units, etc?

yes...
6.07.5 Ramming by other units. Units other than those specified (ie, GEVs and SHVYs) are not maneuverable and/or heavy enough to ram, unless the target is the train, as described in Section 9.05.
Quote:

Originally Posted by chademe (Post 1464900)
What about GEVs ramming trucks and so on? Maybe the size table on page 14 needs to be expanded with these other options.

Hmm... actually, no, there isn't anything about GEVs ramming trucks (or much of anything ramming trucks), but...
6.07.2 GEVs ramming armor units. Regardless of the specific GEV type, the GEV is always destroyed. The other unit suffers an attack of twice the GEV’s normal attack strength. This may not be combined with other attacks.
Quote:

Originally Posted by chademe (Post 1464900)
Can the train ram? Obviously the target would have to be on the track at the time, but it's possible.

Not exactly, but Section 9.06 covers collisions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chademe (Post 1464900)
Also, I assume that when an Ogre rams a transport unit, the transport unit is destroyed, but I didn't see it explicitly mentioned anywhere.

What do you consider to be a transport unit? GEV-PCs are covered by armor units, trucks and hovertrucks, as mentioned before, are somewhat lacking (although I think a hovertruck is considered an armor unit).

I agree that ramming and weaker units is not covered very well. For example, ti doesn't really make sense that something like a GEV would be destroyed by ramming a D0 truck.

chademe 10-26-2012 03:19 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

6.07.2 GEVs ramming armor units. Regardless of the specific GEV type, the GEV is always destroyed. The other unit suffers an attack of twice the GEV’s normal attack strength. This may not be combined with other attacks.
Maybe this needs to be titled "GEVs ramming other units."

Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1464912)
What do you consider to be a transport unit? GEV-PCs are covered by armor units, trucks and hovertrucks, as mentioned before, are somewhat lacking (although I think a hovertruck is considered an armor unit).

I was looking at section 3 where the units seem to be categorized. That section basically divides everything into armor, infantry, transport, or ogre units. Not having played in so long I'm not sure how often these other situations come up, but I thought I'd ask about them.

dwalend 10-26-2012 03:27 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Here are changes for 3.02 as I suggested on the scenario PDF thread. I also added a sentence to smooth out the transition for special cases of a D result.

3.02 Infantry (INF).Infantry wear powered “battlesuits” which
greatly increase their mobility and provide some radiation and
shrapnel protection. The scenario setups specify the number of infantry squads each side starts with. Infantry counters represent 1, 2, or 3 squads.
Infantry counters are 2/1 on one side, and either 1/1 or 3/1 on the
other, for ease in splitting or recombining squads.
A 3-squad counter is the equivalent of one armor unit for both stacking and
victory points. In the starting scenarios no more
than three squads of infantry can occupy one hex, and all infantry in a hex must be grouped together as one counter. Note that the defense strength of each infantry counter is equal to the number of squads. Safety in numbers!
Most infantry are “regular” INF squads. Specialist infantry, as
described below, have extra cost and capabilities but otherwise
perform as regular infantry.

All types of infantry can combine in groups of up to three squads
for defensive purposes when in the same hex. Any two squads can defend together at D2, and any three squads can defend at D3. If an attacker gets a D result then one squad in the group is destroyed. If an attacker gets a D result against a mixed stack of infantry, roll randomly to see which squad
is lost.

GranitePenguin 10-26-2012 03:31 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chademe (Post 1464924)
Maybe this needs to be titled "GEVs ramming other units."

I was looking at section 3 where the units seem to be categorized. That section basically divides everything into armor, infantry, transport, or ogre units. Not having played in so long I'm not sure how often these other situations come up, but I thought I'd ask about them.

Ok, so Trucks and Hovertrucks are transport units, and nothing in the rules says anything about the results of ramming a transport unit, whether by an Ogre, a Superheavy or GEV.

GranitePenguin 10-26-2012 03:39 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dwalend (Post 1464928)
If an attacker gets a D result then one squad in the group is destroyed. If an attacker gets a D result against a mixed stack of infantry, roll randomly to see which squad
is lost.

That isn't going to work, for two reasons.

1. The defense predetermines how the squads are combined during an attack (See 7.12.1)
2. A attack is always explicitly called out ahead of time (See 7.08)

So it will always be clear exactly what infantry is being affected during a given attack.

dwalend 10-26-2012 03:43 PM

Re: Rulebook PDF Posted
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin (Post 1462269)
Updating the example in 7.13.2 as you have suggested would not clarify that at all. We still need explicit information on what constitutes an infantry "unit" in the context of attacking treads (ie, is a unit = counter, or is a unit = squad). Most text in the rules implies that unit = counter; in which case, attacking as a 3/1 or 2/1 infantry would be allowed.

Actually the rules text bounces back and forth between a unit being a counter and a unit being a squad. (I also spotted tread unit.) Counter, unit, and stack are ambiguous in the rules, and the text uses the term group as well. (Ug. A big, late change.)

I suggest a change to 7.13.2 to clarify that none of Ogre weapons, armor units, or infantry squads may combine fire when attacking Ogre treads. Steve, if you want the rule to be different --infantry counters fire-- then that change can be independent of the rest and confined to 7.13.2. Also, let us know if you want a conversation about superheavy tanks combining their two attacks on treads.

I suggest the following:

Change the scenarios from '"strength points" to "number of squads" and update 3.02 as I suggested in my previous post.

3.02.2 Heavy Weapons Teams (HWT). Specialist battlesuit
squads, with rules to be added as an online bonus.

3.02.3 Combat Engineers (CENG). Specialist battlesuit squads,
with rules to be added as an online bonus.

5.02 Replace "In all cases, the basic infantry unit is the 3-squad counter." with "For stacking and victory points an infantry squad counts as 1/3rd of an armor unit."

5.02.1 Original Ogre map scenarios. In scenarios on the original
Ogre map stacking is limited. Armor units may not be stacked; that is, only one armor unit at a time may occupy each hex. A maximum of three squads of infantry may occupy each hex. Armor units may not be stacked with infantry squads. (This limitation is for speed of play. If you try an Ogre Map scenario with stacking, be sure to use the spillover fire rules in
Section 7.12, too.)

5.11.3 replace "unit" with "squad"

7.05 Attacks. Each armor unit and infantry squad ...

7.05.1 replace "unit" with "squad"

7.09 Successive attacks.... Exception: Per 7.05.1, an infantry squad may only suffer one AP attack per turn from each attacking unit.

7.12.1 Attacks on stacked infantry. When a stack
containing several infantry squads is attacked, the defender may
determine how they are grouped. ...

7.11 Attack resolution. ...

When an infantry group receives a D
result, it is immediately reduced by one squad.

7.12.1 Attacks on stacked infantry squads. When a stack
containing several infantry squads is attacked, the defender may
determine how they are grouped. For instance, 5 squads of infantry
could be attacked as a 3 and a 2, or as a 2, 2, and 1, or as five 1s
. . . etc. It is up to the defender to determine how the squads are
deployed; the attacker then decides which will be the target. However, in an
overrun attack (8.00) each squad is always a separate target.

7.13.2 ... Each armor unit, Ogre weapon, or infantry squad attacking treads must do so individually. Thus, a successful Heavy Tank attack on treads would cost an Ogre 4 treads.

Example of play on p 17: replace "infantry units" with "infantry squads"

8.04 Resolving an overrun attack. When an overrun takes
place, all infantry groups ...

10.04 ... Replace "infantry unit" with "infantry squad" .

12.08 Spillover fire. Replace "infantry unit" with "infantry squad"

p 24, CRT: ...When an infantry group receives a D result...


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.