Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

We're doing a survey on what Ogre fans most want to see added, upgraded, and/or fixed in the Ogre video game. Please respond with your top three choices of what Auroch should prioritize as they work to improve the game. Also, what new features, options, and/or material would you be excited to see? Your answers can be anything from practical to pie in the sky (Ogrethulhu, anyone?).

Aaaaand GO!

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I'll focus on the "should be fixed before all else" items

1. Fix all outstanding bugs - I’m cheating by putting these together, but they are all related-but-different. There are three general classes of bugs that need to be fixed:

a. Rules bugs - Most of the remaining issues are terrain-related, especially where road/rail is involved. A prime example is a GEV getting a road bonus moving from water to a bridge and continuing along the road. This fails on almost every level of rule regarding how bridges work (illegal move, illegal bonus, etc), but it’s also not the only rules issue. It just happens to be a very visible one. It should really go without saying that the existing rules should be solid before anything new is done.

b. Gameplay bugs - The last update tried to address some of the multiplayer issues, game save/load issues, etc. While there was improvement, I’m seeing that there are still bug reports being made related to online play. Nothing kills game acceptance faster than losing progress or being force to forfeit (and lose ranking points) because the player interaction is borked.

c. Scenario Editor bugs - Arguably one of the biggest potentials being squandered because of bugs is the ability to make your own scenarios and share them. There are so many bugs in the scenario editor that they are hard to count; it’s also a real black eye on the game right now. When someone puts hours into designing a scenario, only to have it broken or lost because of a bug, it’s a real motivation killer. We lost Tim K and all of his work (a multitude of posted scenarios) as a direct result of this (not to mention some passionate words on the subject that don’t help the brand, as it were).


2. Add the missing “standard” armor units - This is defined loosely as “Any basic armor/buildings from Ogre, G.E.V. and Shockwave” LGEVs, et al. This does _not_ include Lasers, Cruise Missiles and Crawlers. This has nothing to do with my bias against them, but rather because they add another layer of complexity the Video Game can’t easily support (LOS, and out of turn attacks on CMs for starters). It doesn’t make any sense why some of these basic units weren’t added at release. Especially the LGEV, which already has the rules in-game to support everything it needs, should be an “easy” add. Trucks and Hovertrucks might be a little harder because there aren’t any existing rules to handle their terrain movement, but I would definitely add them before CMs/Lasers. It also includes making buildings and structures that exist in the Nightfall Scenario available to the Scenario Editor.


3. Better interaction between terrain types while building - A lot of scenario development in the Scenario Creator is severely hamstrung by the fact terrain is limited. The worst example of this is the inability to have road and rail sections in the same hex at the same time. This makes it impossible to recreate some of the existing maps, and more importantly, makes it impossible to do something rudimentary like a RR crossing; a hallmark of every G.E.V. map. There is no such thing as a proper river bridge (which probably contributes to “bridge rules” issues mentioned above), leaving you to fudge things in the scenario that rely on broken rules, or you simply accepting how it should work is not how it actually works, and play around it.


Short version: I want all the canon stuff to be bug free and work as expected/defined in the rules.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Thank you for your helpful comments and detailed response.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I'd be content to have a reliable Basic and Advanced Scenario that I can play vs another human player when we want to play. (Not just reliable when neither of us signs out, and the internet stays glitch-free and happy the whole time.) (Not when the randomizer decides that's what we want to play.) Forget everything else until AurochDigital delivers that much.

After that I'd like a reliable Breakthrough, Raid, and Ceasefire Collapse that I can play against another human player when we want to play.

I don't care much about the rest - don't believe it will happen - until after those top two show up.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

GranitePenguin nuked the nail on the head.

Make the basics work right.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

More "nice-to-have" items (remember, ONLY after core bugs are squashed, please).

selectable ranked matches - Add a way to filter/select what kind of match you'd like to play, rather than have it completely random. If I only want to play a "Classic Mark V" on an Orange map, I should be able to tell the system not to match me up with a "Train" scenario on a Green map. I'd also like to be able to select a preference for Attacker or Defender.

access to the Nightfall scenarios as two-player skirmish games - Making these playable as two humans, or swapping the AI as the defense would really open up replay-ability. Maybe make it so they become available as each one is "beaten" in the campaign. That way, no spoilers, and it's an extra trophy for beating a scenario

more trophies - There's only 5 trophies available and they are not that hard to get. The game needs a lot more to keep interest. If nothing else, having more goals will make the completionists keep playing; especially for promoting online matches.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Any time :-)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Another vote for GranitePenguin’s list. I agree with everything he mentioned.

It’s like he was reading my mind...

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Thanks. Great minds, something something... :-)

I'll drop a list of more "nice to haves" to prime the pump, too. It doesn't hurt to have things "on paper" so they don't get lost. The standard "only after the basics are fixed" applies.

* min/max scenarios - this is actually one that’s pretty important (to me, anyway). I’d like to see the ability to start a scenario with less than the maximum AU. I should be able to select _up to_ the maximum force, not be forced to use all my AUs. This was really annoying while making my tutorial videos, and it would be a great way to allow for handicaps (the classic example being a mark III attacking with only 10 AU defending instead of 12 AU for an “experienced” player).

* The ability to play/share/edit posted scenarios - Right now, the Scenario Editor is only useful for local play. This is a huge failing because the whole point is to share the scenarios. If you can’t download a published scenario and:

1. customize it for yourself to make a derivative of it
2. play online against another person that also has it downloaded

you are missing the point. The _only_ thing you can currently do is download a published scenarios and play by yourself against the AI. That’s a very limited use of it that does not breed acceptance or a willingness to play it.

* better AI - The current AI is not good. It has significant issues understanding what’s important during a game, making _very_ poor decisions when choosing between “win the objective” and “squash this gnat.” The AI needs some real work. At the very least, make it settable to give it more brute force time to decide what to do. I’d like to see a revamp of it that allows for serious players to have a challenge if they want one.

* Hotkey customization - all the hotkeys are currently fixed. I’d like to see the ability to set them however you want.

* Better chat system - Relying on the Steam chat system is rough (even Jake at Auroch has complained about it to/with me while playing). It requires you to be friends in order for it to work, but there is _no way_ to identify the person you are playing in a random game to even send a friend request to them. It makes playing random match games very impersonal. You can’t even send a simple “good game” to them. It would really help to grow the community if people could actually talk/chat while in-game without having to spend time hunting them down in Steam’s crappy interface.

* Get all the “Official” scenarios - We are missing a lot of scenario content. Heck, we are missing scenario MAPs. The current official content is pretty light, and due to the already-mentioned limitations in the scenario editor, we can’t even make them on our own.

* better scenario victory conditions - The current conditions are very limiting. they assume the only way to have a win is based on VP counts. It doesn’t allow for hitting objectives, secondary objectives, etc.

* multi-map scenarios - With the size being limited to 40x40 (or less), we can’t even have a basic G.E.V+Shockwave map.

* More than two players - A 3 or 4 player game would be really cool (admittedly, this one is out there a bit) Obviously, this is related to access to more of the Original scenarios (body blow, etc)

* Reskinning/painting armies - Everyone is all about colors and factions. Having more than just the Red and Blue available, and ideally faction logos (pink ARF, anyone?) would be cool.

* Mods - Being able to mod games is apparently “a thing.” Just being a variation of reskinning units to look like WWII units wouldn’t be interesting to me at all, and being able to introduce custom rules would be weird, too, but a LOT of people seem to think it’s a requirement for a “good” game to be allowed to hack it up. I don’t follow this, but I’m not the target audience for mods anymore. I like my Ogre Black, thank you very much.

That said, having classic (or ODE) counters as an option would be really neat, and would look a lot better in a stack than the current weird hex shape thingy.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Bugs are all three of my items right now. After trading screenshots with dwalend I'm boggled just how out of synch the two sides of a scenario were. I'm wondering how many of my "timed out" wins were somebody who saw a ridiculous situation on the screen and gave up.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Ogrethulhu sure ! But can we get it either in the ODE 3d or even in a 2D with a canon set of rules first? I have about 4 sets of rules regarding it that I have played with .
As for the video game, I'd have to agree with most about the AI. Why was the older Origins AI so much more challenging. Maybe concentrating on the standard Ogre game with one AI and a separate one for the GEV? Would it even work better to separate the two into 2 separate games top improve the play. I'm speaking from an advanced user viewpoint and not of the more knowledgeable IT players we have in abundance here.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

It's so broken that a discussion of improvements feels extremely premature. Further, I think it distracts from the one thing only Ogre on-line can offer over me playing solo on the dining room table - or firing up the old game in a DOS emulator. I can have a real, potentially very experienced opponent, without having to find a free evening or weekend afternoon. Vassal - for all its weird lumps - delivered that much.

I think the list should be:

1) Make two-player games actually work by fixing the game state-related bugs. (This constellation of bugs is very likely a hard-to-fix design flaw. From the logs it looks like broken distributed CQRS. I haven't done packet analysis to see what traffic should be flowing.)

2) Let me choose which scenario to offer to play, and which side, when playing a multiplayer game with a stranger.

3) Let me challenge a specific player to a specific scenario.

Get that working with the Basic, Advanced, and MkIII-on-defense scenarios first. Then on to GP's list after that's actually working.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I haven't had time to play much lately, and never managed to find an opponent online when I did so I don't know first-hand how well/not well that works, but I think the #1 thing Ogre needs is GranitePenguin's #1 - fix the bugs, both rule-related and gameplay thereof - and that really needs to be the top, middle and bottom of the priority list until it's done. After that, everything that everyone has said (except maybe Ogrethulu, I'm fine without it) is a good idea, with making 2-player online Ogre scenarios work better at the top of that list.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I'm going to have to jump on the bandwagon here.

#1: Fix the basic Ogre game bugs: Mk III Attack, Mk V Attack, and Mk III Defense should be 100% rules-perfect and as close to 100% operable online as possible.

#2: Fix the G.E.V. map bugs: All units should be interacting with terrain properly and all scenarios should be 100% rules-perfect.

#3: Expand to the full game: All units and scenarios from the board game should be available and working, and players should be able to create their own games - and share them, and play them against each other - freely according to the board game guidelines.

And a caveat:

#1A: DON'T SWEAT THE AI. I know some folks would like a good robot to play against, but Ogre is a complicated game for AI. Beyond the basic Ogre scenarios, I say focus on getting PvP working first and foremost.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

While that's certainly easier, the reality is a good AI is going to be important for long-term casual play that doesn't require coordination between people. Especially when I want to control what scenario I want to play, I will be playing against the AI 80-90% of the time.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

same here!

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Hey everyone - thanks for taking the time to report issues and prioritise the outstanding ones.

Just a gentle reminder to be as thorough and detailed as possible. With rule inconsistencies, let us know which rule is/isn't working. If it's suggestions for content added, be as specific as possible :)

Thanks all, it's hugely appreciated!

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Oh, you will get details (most of mine you already have). The context of this post was a priority list. I think it’s pretty safe to say already-reported bugs are the priority.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Looking back I see I played 26 hours of the new video game and the last time I played was in December. Why did I stop playing? There way nothing left to play. I finished the Nightfall campaign and then... nothing.

My all time favorite scenario, Raid, is not available. My second all time favorite scenario, Great Patriotic War (https://web.archive.org/web/20070702...iotic-war.html) is not possible. The multi-player doesn't have any games I want to play, mostly Ogre scenarios (least favorite) and the fan created scenarios are all variations of Ceasefire Collapse.

So my asks would be:

1. Fix the map and scenario creator and let me have reinforcements, command posts, victory conditions, turn limits, etc..

2. Fix the multi-player. Remote turn by turn or live play. Let me talk and communicate with my opponent (I had some amazing Cyberboard GEV games in the past and the chat feature was a big part of it).

3. Fix the bugs and bring on the LGEVs.

Thanks for asking.

TK

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Update 1.5.14

• Multiplayer network fix - this should fix a number of issues related to quitting and re-entering MP games, and dealing with spikes and/or drops in connectivity.
• Ogre should be able to spend 1M and ram the infantry it's already on. Previously, the game would not let you ram a hex if there was more than 1 enemy unit on it.
• Fixed some terrain rules related with water and bridges - units moving under a bridge now STAY under the bridge (cannot move under a bridge and then on to land in the same move). Water and Bridges no longer provide the same bonus within one movement phase, and being on a bridge now only applies the movement bonus to the roads coming off either side of it. Moving onto a bridge hex from either side, rather than the connected edge, means the unit is still in water.
• Pathfinding / movement path issue where clicking a destination hex, cancelling, and then deciding to move to this hex, would result in a single-click moving the unit, rather than double-clicking as it should be, is now fixed.
• As per a request, we've moved the Version Number from the bottom left of the Home screen (behind the Logging In overlay) to the bottom right of the same screen, so it should always be immediately visible.

An absolutely MASSIVE thank you to everyone who has provided feedback, suggestions, logs, screenshots etc. to help us track down these issues and those that have been fixed up to this point, some of which have been very tricky to replicate and track down.

We appreciate it all :)

There are a few known issues which we'll continue to work on fixing, and of course, if you find any yourself, let us know by the usual channels.

Thanks again!

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Yes and here's the next update for you!

1.5.20.0

Rules fix

• Superheavy Tanks and Ogres now correctly ignore rubble and can no longer become stuck.

Multiplayer:

• Fixed bug in multiplayer where camouflage stacks did not correctly refresh for both players.
• Fixed bug with disabled units not recovering correctly in PBEM games.
• Fixed bug with train message box causing issues during Async gameplay.
• Network code has been improved and steps have been taken to validate commands between the player and the server, we discovered some rare occurrences (0.0005%) of network calls becoming corrupted and causing multiplayer games to break.

General bug fixes:

• Moving or deleting a single squad of infantry during deployment no longer shows the context menu if they are a squad of 2 or 3.
• Fixed bug where deployment selection states were not always updating correctly.
• Fixed bug in deployment where units occasionally became un-selectable after moving.
• Fixed bug where it was possible to spend a unit's cost multiple times during deployment.

There is another one incoming in a couple of days too!

Thanks all for input and patience! (and special thanks to GranitePenguin for coming online in the wee early hours to play a game with us!)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Verified. YAY!

Can't wait.
Happy to help. Love seeing the momentum pick up. :-)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I've started leaving the app up for anyone who wants to start a game. IOW, if you start a game with selenite, you'll have to wait until I get home from work / wake up to see a response.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Did you pick up a game?

I kept mine open for about 15 minutes before leaving work, open again now.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Nope. It was "finding players" when I got home. Closed app, restarted it, still searching.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I've had a pair of hopeful twitches this evening, but no luck. Steam thinks I have a pending move, but not Ogre. Two more logs to Jake.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I've got it open to search now, too. I'll be very hit-and-miss this weekend. I'll be away from the house a lot, but leaving it up.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Selenite was able to deploy a good defense, but I'm not able to finish deploying my ogre. Bugs are stopping me from running over his tanks tonight.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

We're a few turns in without major glitches. Minor glitches include that twice now it's told me it's my turn but when I got to the game board it was still his.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

This is a known issue which will be addressed in the next patch. Thanks for pointing it out though, I can see how this is a bigger problem when playing asynchronously with someone.

Thanks

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

This probably means it's your opponent's turn at the moment Dwalend - the game is sometimes wrongly displaying who's turn it is due to the assignment of which player is attacker and which is defender when players match.

We're working on a fix for this which will be included in the next update.

Thanks, and apologies for any confusion or inconvenience caused.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Thanks, looking forward to the fix.

We have made a few more turns progress in the current game. Including figuring out who's going to win.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

The real bug you should be complaining about is rolling just one 5 the whole game - INF vs tread - in turn 7. I've been actively avoiding giving you opportunities, but one of those 1:1 shots should have connected with the MB last turn.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Sounds like an accurate model of the game to me. During my demo games last week, I watched endless misses happen in both games. The one player couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat.

Unfortunately, bad streaks of rolls are reality.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Keeping my opponent from rolling the dice is a favorite tactic - you used it on me with that SHVY in that last game of Breakthrough.

I really thought it'd played out last turn. I'm overdue for a bad streak in my game with selenite.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

As said before, that's the most accurate part of the simulation.

I'm not worried about streaks at this point. I don't think you need to hit anything to make it to the CP at this point. Nice work maneuvering to have the double crater split my line. I should've dropped back to avoid that.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Thanks. I didn't expect to get far on the west flank. I'd just hoped to pick off a GEV, then draw your tanks through the craters before your tanks rolled up and stripped the MB and M3 away.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Selenite and I finished our game - first time for me to get all the way though with a real opponent! Thanks!

Jake - at what point do you want to hear about minor bugs? (Like Selenite's name only showing up intermittently vs "Unknown Player?.)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Overall, are things looking better at least?

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Yep, game went fine.

I noticed my log of previous games has been wiped, so that game is the only one listed now.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

That's great to hear!

Happy to receive minor bugs now, we'll look at them and prioritise accordingly :)

Best to send them directly to me if that's ok, with logs and screens as usual. For anyone who doesn't have my contact details, I can be reached at jake@aurochdigital.com

Thank you

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I would like to see an official statement about what the game is actually intended to finally be when it is finished.

With a list of objectives and their chances of being able to be done and completed and fully implemented and a guestimated completion timeline and the status of each one.

What are the games capabilities based on the engine being used?
How much more can be done with the game within the games capacity?
For example, what features can be implemented with the Scenario Creator and what can't, and why? If we had a better sense of these things, we could make better suggestions based on what can and can't be done or may be able to be done.

All of this would be nice to have conveyed to us in more detail, even when some of the answers are "we can't do that because the Game Engine and/or the way we programmed the game won't allow us to implement that.
Or, "We can try, but are not sure if it is possible to be fully implemented. We will keep you updated on the progress as we have more info on this."

Can we have such a list made so we have all of this in one place to view as it is updated? Otherwise it's spread out all over between the STEAM Forums and here and difficult to keep everything in perspective.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

[QUOTE=Tim Kauffman;2198912]I would like to see an official statement about what the game is actually intended to finally be when it is finished.

That is an entirely reasonable and sensible request. We are already working with Auroch to put together an official State of the Game message, which we will release as soon as the details are worked out.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Sounds great. Looking forward to it. :-)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

[QUOTE=Alain H. Dawson;2199348]Thank You.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Quick note to say - we're doing an update next week. Some shader additions, some UI fixes. Then we'll come back to this topic - not forgotten!

Thanks

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Awesome. Thanks! :)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Hi all. Tomas from Auroch Digital here.

I wanted to speak with you about the current status of development for the Ogre video game, and what current plans are.

From our viewpoint, Ogre is largely free of major bugs. We define major bugs as Class A and Class B bugs. Class As are crash bugs: hangs and issues that stop a game progressing. Class Bs are major issues that don’t stop a game from being played and / or have a workaround.

We say “largely”, as with any complex system, there will be ones we don’t yet know of, or ones that we think we’ve done but under a new set of conditions may reappear. We are aware there are Class C and D bugs in the game (as in most games), which are minor visual / UI issues that are noticeable sometimes (a Class C) and really minor visual issues that most players won’t spot (a Class D).

There are also of course improvements and additions that we would like to make; new content that either enhances the existing game or brings new content that is not within the current scope of the project.

What is that scope? Basically, it’s what you see now.

When we started the project we had huge ambitions to get absolutely everything Ogre in the game, and more. We had set points throughout the development where we’d assess the current work list, how much of the resources and budget were left, and define what we should focus on and what we should drop into the backlog. We kept the core plan - the base original Ogre game, GEV rules, multiplayer, a new campaign and Steam Workshop.

Backlog content became things that were either a bit more complex to implement or things that we felt were of less importance to have when we had to make choices about our budget. Our hope was that post-launch we’d be able to return to the backlog and start ticking things off. However, none of us knew that Steam Direct was coming...

As I’m sure many of you are aware, the game is sold primarily via Steam. Steam has 90% of the PC games market, so it’s the key platform for anyone creating computer games. A few months before launch Steam decided to change to a new system called Steam Direct where anyone could, for $100, buy a release slot for Steam. This change, only a couple of months before Ogre released, changed the Steam environment dramatically for the worse. In 2016 there were 4,207 games released on Steam and developers were worrying about how this was impacting them - 2016 was a hard year for releasing games. In 2017 this number almost doubled to 7,672.

Ogre did well for the difficult environment it released into, which is a testament to the strength of the original tabletop game and all the hard work that went into our digital adaptation, but it did not nearly do the numbers we had forecast for it back in 2015.

What this means is that Steve Jackson Games and Auroch Digital have yet to recoup our original investment in the title. I believe the game will make its money back and get into profit eventually, but not right now. Because of this, spending additional development money is something both Steve Jackson Games and we have agreed that we just can’t afford to do right now.

We’re also going to continue our ongoing support, i.e. answering questions, investigating problems, and promoting the game to bring new people into the world of Ogre. If major issues appear, we will of course fix them.

I understand this will be disappointing for some of you, and both companies really wish we could pour more time and resources into the title. But it’s sadly not feasible right now, so we wanted to be transparent about the status of the project, and that additional content is not currently planned.

Any questions on this, do please post them and I’ll do my best to answer…

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

It's unfortunate that we won't see new content, but if the money isn't there, it isn't there.

The main question I have is what class do Rules errors fall under? I assume they are Class B, since they don't break the game, but they are not cosmetic issues, either. IIRC, there are still some outstanding issues around movement (e.g, how ramps connect to roads in town doesn't work right) that are pretty annoying and really mess up gameplay. When the rules don't work as expected, it makes things "interesting."

With that said, what's the level of active development we can expect to see to fix those remaining "not working as intended" rules?

Thanks for keeping us all informed.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

That's a good question. We've generally bumped rules errors up to a B as you suggest. A few rules differences are there for the asynchronous nature of the game. The one area that is a concession to how the digital game works is this issue of edges of tiles. Basically we had to make a call on how it would be implemented early on that gave us advantages in other development areas, so giving us scope to do more, to code the tiles in a way that made these edge cases something we'd have to live with. As with other aspects, success on Steam would mean we could re-do that component. However without that, we'd have to add a lot of instability into the game to fix. Not idea, but pragmatic from a dev POV.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Thanks for the honest answer. "It can't be done economically and this is why" is one of those answers I hate to hear as a user but love to hear as a customer; because it means the company has a plan to stay in business.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

That's an amazing statement I'm going to steal (if that's ok?) for a presentation on 'the steampocalypse'...

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I understand the difference between "different because we made a conscious decision" and "different because we missed something." The first one is reasonably documented in the in-game details (Train speed management, etc). Is there a list of the other ones that can be shared in some capacity?

What I'd really like to understand is what Class of issues are still known about that need to be addressed that active plans to fix are in place? I've been slowly going through my personal backlog of what I've reported to see what's still outstanding, but it would be nice to know what I should be spending my time on instead of trying to hit everything (it's not a small list).

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

We keep a list of all reported issues. I'll go though them and pull out this data with notes on why that call was made. Bear with me, that's not a super-quick task...

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I'm sure it is. Don't kill yourself dredging all of it up. :-)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I totally understand that there's not really money for development at this time, but I"m concerned that one of the things that is passively hindering the ability of the game to grow beyond a certain point is the missing core units (IIRC, that would be LGEVs and GEV-PCs), which are needed to recreate a number of "classic" and more recent scenarios, especially the ones in the scenario books. I'm curious as to what level of development would be needed to actually add them since I would think that simply adding additional unit types should be relatively simple, though I acknowledge that not knowing the ins-and-outs of Ogre development it's probably more complicated than I realize. Even if GEV-PCs were too hard due to INF carrying/stacking, LGEVs would be a huge win. Would you guys consider adding them sooner rather than later, even if it's not right away?

In any event, I appreciate the update and the transparency - honesty even when it's not what I want to hear is always preferred over telling me lies to make me happy in the short run.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Why some (seemingly obvious) units were left out is probably in that list of decisions we will eventually get to see. It probably isn't a rules thing, since the rules are pretty modular and already exist. It feels more like an art budget question.

But again, that goes back to the timeline of when certain things came into being. If you design chronologically, you would get everything that was in Ogre and G.E.V., but that's obviously not how it was thought out. The ODE rules were taken as a whole and units were picked out of that combined resource, where their "historic" placement doesn't matter.

I'd be very interested to hear the thought process on unit selection.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

This game has ceased being developed. The only work being done anymore is fixing "major" bugs and no new content will be added(.) No units, no Command Post for the Scenario Creator, nothing.

The games greatest asset, with the most potential to move this IP forward, the Scenario Creator remains unfinished forevermore.

Here's a example of what continues to go wrong with this game since it's inception...I suggested a map exporter so we can export our maps we make in the Scenario Creator for use on the table top which was implemented. I exported a map from a Scenario of mine, but before I did, thankfully noticed some of the lines on the hexes not being properly made which made the map look bad. So I went in and edited them to a proper standard and then printed the map which turned out nicely because I fixed the issue superficially.

Now in recent news here, I find that such bugs are lowest class from the following statement: "We are aware there are Class C and D bugs in the game (as in most games), which are minor visual / UI issues that are noticeable sometimes (a Class C) and really minor visual issues that most players won’t spot (a Class D)."
In other words, this issue is trivial and since I'm probably the only one who would ever notice it, it won't be fixed. I also recently sent a log report about a basic functionality UI issue in the Scenario Creator, which I had sent last year and it persists.

But, since only "major" bugs are ever going to be considered for fixing, none of this really matters.

I find it really shameful that just a few months ago we were asked what we would like to see in the way of improvements, issue fixes, ect, to now be told that none of it matters anymore.

Nothing has really changed a year since it's release other than ironing out bugs that never should have been along for the ride of it's release. This game was unfinished on launch day and will remain so from now on and neither SJGs or AUROCH DIGITAL will change that.

So this is what a million dollar KICKSTARTER for OGRE can produce? Please don't tell me nobody made any money from this, it's insulting.

The power core for this game that could have propelled the IP further was never properly designed, built and implemented which would require the funding needed to do so which was never there from the beginning and never will be. That's what really happened here.

The Scenario Creator will remain in it's current unfinished state...congratulations, you just hamstrung your own IP. This game, at it's core is Scenarios! There will never be a better opportunity than this Scenario Creator. But that doesn't matter anymore. Such a shame it all shook out like this. So much potential squandered and left abandoned.

I'll continue to enjoy the STEAM OGRE game and Scenario Creator within the limits of it's unfinished condition.

A sincere Thanks to SJGs and AUROCH DIGITAL for what was accomplished. I would like to applaud this game, but unfortunately it must only be a golf clap.

KEEP THOSE TREAD UNITS ROLLING!

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

The purpose of the game on Steam was the ability to play a game on Steam -- not to use it as a development engine for the board game. The Scenario Creator was a nice touch, but clearly not absolutely necessary to play the game itself.

I'm going to guess that none of the KS money went to the Steam game- The KS money went to the KS game, and other developments over the years. The ODE box sold for about a hundred bucks -- shipping alone was astronomical. SJG offered the ODE version at a steep price cut out of love for the game.

So the fact that the Steam game was a SG from the KS was fulfilled, but very likely not with KS money.

SJG makes board games, physical products, not video games. They experimented, did pretty well with it, and now can't pour further funds into it for practical reasons.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Of of the units that we didn't get time to add in, most are pretty straightforward to add yes. They need 3D models creating from the AutoCAD files, a bunch of connectors and textures adding so they work with the game system. More the issues that that it still takes time, which costs.

Some of the units - for example the cruise missile - are not complex 3D models, but do need a new game system, which in turn takes code time and then in turn takes testing time for how it integrates into the main system (SP and MP).

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Of of the units that we didn't get time to add in, most are pretty straightforward to add yes. They need 3D models creating from the AutoCAD files, a bunch of connectors and textures adding so they work with the game system. More the issues that that it still takes time, which costs.

Some of the units - for example the cruise missile - are not complex 3D models, but do need a new game system, which in turn takes code time and then in turn takes testing time for how it integrates into the main system (SP and MP).

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Sorry to hear that Tim - we did update to fix that bug. If you're still having issues with it, get us the log and we'll take another look. Thanks.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

So as development rolled onwards, we're always in a process of examining what we've got left to do, what are risk areas and what is coming in as planned. So there is an ongoing process of having to move things from the development plan into the backlog as we move forward. So we didn't take a single decision for all of them, rather ongoing decisions, like 'dang the UI is proving to be more complex for overun edge cases, we need more art and code time, so what are our options?'. (That's not an exact quote, but you get the point!)

So it goes roughly..

Not complex in rules terms, but art time. (mainly Light GEV, GEV-PC, Fencer,Doppelsoldner & Trucks) However I felt these were the least 'iconic' of the games units so when we had to make hard choices on art, I moved these into the backlog.

Theen more complex units (mainly Cruise Missiles, Vulcan & Combat Engineers, Ogrethulhu) all needed more rules (so code) as well as art time and also were newer, so less iconic part of the game. So again, when push came to shove they got moved into backlog. With these the scenarios connected to them also got moved into backlog.

I'm still gutted about Ogrethulhu being in backlog :(

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Once we get more resources for the game - we will of course talk to people here about what they'd like to see in the game. Agree they would be a win. Ogre has a way to get into profit, but it will get there. We have discussions with SJGames about other means that could be used, however they all still need inputs of investment that are hard to commit to now. We're all still busy promoting the game - that's our focus now - more Ogre fans.

Much appreciate your input and candor too!

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

That all sounds reasonable. "Level of iconicness" is an interesting approach to unit selection.

Somehow, I'm not surprised at your disappointment. Not sure why I think that. ;-)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Thanks for the further info. I would suggest that as far as units go, LGEVs, GEV-PCs, Trucks and Hovertrucks (in approximately that order) would be the top priorities. Fencers and Dopps, while nice, can be strategically approximated by Mk IV and Mk VI Ogres (though tactically they are very different), making them less critical to scenario design albeit still important. I totally get the difficulties in modeling things like Cruise Missiles (and Lasers!), Vulcans, etc., and agree they fall significantly lower on the "must have" list. Hopefully things will fall into place such that you can surprise us with at least a couple new units at some point. :)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

AUROCH says otherwise:

The Scenario Creator is part of the core plan(.)...as it should be. I would argue it IS the core.

After posting my previous post, I went to STEAM and found a post from AD stating it had been fixed...fired up the game and tested it and it works flawlessly now. It had plagued me since the games launch. Thank You for this fix! Very much appreciated. :)

Is the map lines issue I reported considered less than "major"? If you have people exporting maps using the wonderful new map exporter feature, I would hope it is considered important enough to fix.

What specifically are these "improvements and additions that we would like to make; new content that either enhances the existing game or brings new content"?

It has been mentioned Cruise Missiles and Lasers can't be included that it would require a different engine...that speaks to the limitations of the engine the current game is using. Which becomes another topic.

Even if you had sufficient funding to do everything we all could hope and access to a engine, ect that would allow it's creation, does that not mean this current game would at some point have to be abandoned because of it's limits and a different, newer version would have to be made? For example, the current game can't have lasers in it, but the new version could.

Any projections you can speculate on as to when the game may turn green and more funding and development begins? Nobody will hold you to anything, it would just be better than absolutely having no clue whatsoever out here in the wild.

Much appreciated. :)

So, there is hope???

In what ways is the STEAM game currently being "promoted"?

"inputs of investment" is the only thing that will attract more OGRE fans. This entire game is unfinished, literally. It's in some weird transitory limbo between not being enough of what it actually is (missing basic units/ ect), while also being more of what it could be (Scenario Creator/ Campaign games/ Online Play) and yet not enough of that either. It's like some awesome hot rod that was stopped being worked on and is missing parts but still drivable not firing on all piston because funding was cut so it's missing a piston among other things.

Just please finish this awesome game you started...don't let it become another "could have been a much better game" because that does the opposite of attracting new fans. Acquire the resources to finish what was started and only then will you have any right to expect new fans. OGRE deserves better than the current state of affairs with this game and we all know it. Whatever has been lacking pre and post launch needs to be remedied without mercy and only then will the game have the chance it deserves. So, put those tread units on the OGRE!

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Take it with my blessing

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Right so summarizing a lot of test and issues for brevity we've got the main areas of:

• Ramps in/out of water - Technically a but allowing Scenario Editor to place swap next to beach, but we decided to leave this in so people can play with it.
• Tile Edges - When we made the call to not put in cruise missiles, this included not adding destroyed hexes, as this was one of the major areas that added a lot of extra development and we'd have had to cut other features. So we had to compromise on structurally how we handles hexes, road and rail. What this meant is that some of the detailed rules on tile edges could be be added either leaving some of these areas not in even though they don't explicitly relate to cruise missiles.
• Large/Small Bridges - As above this relates same pragmatism so we added these into backlog. Again this means rules not explicitly related to those areas are currently no in scope.
• Splitting INF during Overun attacks - We did allow this at first, but the UI stacking was messy and created a bunch of issues, so we took the call that we'd just not put this in for now as per full rules.

If there are things not part of those you think we should have done, let me know and I'll look into it.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

We're using the 3D models as they are here. So what you're seeing in the export is what is in the game (though the other game lighting/rendering code impacts on it's look). We'd need to write a system to trace a line over the existing hex lines.

Given the resources we'd like to add everything that is/has been officially published for Ogre and a bunch of new idea. Sadly we don't have those resources.

It's not a limitation on the engine, sorry if I gave that impression. The current engine could be made to do everything. Sure some areas of code would need updating etc. But the core framework can do it. All this can be done - with more time and money. That's sadly our limit.

It's going to take a while. I can't really give exact answers, but it's a while hence taking the time to make the statement.

We take part in Steam sales, there's been promotions with other re-sellers like Humble. We've done the competitions. We took part in the Steam board-game sale/promo recently. We're planning to do more streaming. But other things in the background. Steam remains a hard marketplace though. There is no easy route to exposure on Steam.

Thanks for taking time to get me your thoughts :)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I think this is an error to associate destroyed hexes with CMs. Not only are CMs rare in a physical game, destroying a hex is integral to winning games, especially when INF are involved. Rubbling a town hex to drop the D value of INF is often critical. Having a hex be damaged by overruns is also an important after-effect. Granted, that particular case is mostly covered by simply cutting the road (since damaged terrain doesn't change the terrain effects), but it does make it one step closer to rubble. This isn't to say CMs don't destroy terrain, obviously; I'm simply stating that 95% of terrain destruction comes from normal fighting.

While terrain destruction rules are optional rules (so it's easy to justify them not being in the game), it's usually _all_ terrain destruction, not pick and choose destruction.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I want to second GP's assessment of terrain destruction. The ability to rubble town hexes to make it easier to hit INF is sometimes the only way to kill them with any reasonable certainty. It also affects GEVs and other units that can be disabled by rubble but not town hexes, not to mention the possibility of heavy tracked units getting stuck in rubble. I understand how terrain destruction can seem like it's especially pertinent to Cruise Missiles, but realistically it's a lot more important than they are.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

CM != Terrain Destruction can be further illustrated by a couple facts about when they appeared in the rules

1. Terrain Destruction: G.E.V. 1st Ed - 1978
2. Cruise Missiles: Shockwave - 1984

The ability to destroy terrain precedes CMs by several years (literally near the beginning of time).

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Where does adding alternate maps to scenarios stand? For example, I'd love to play Ceasefire Collapse on G1/S1/S2.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

I think the closest you are going to get is if you make your own scenario for it (within the limitations of the scenario creator, of course). You can get a reasonable approximation in most cases that way (but it's not a trivial amount of effort).

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Thank You for this confirmation, and especially for leaving it in the game! I can't really see where it would be a bad thing to have kept in the game. It became a topic for a new terrain hex when it was discovered and made a Scenario possible that was a lot of fun iterating into something playable. Maybe it has enough merit to be made official someday.

I'll be iterating QUAGMIRE and republishing a final version soon Thanks to this news. I planned keeping it pulled because I didn't know what would come of this "bug" and the uncertainty it caused.

So, to confirm, the answer is no fix until more funding?

If so, and it will persist unfixed, please put a note somewhere letting people who are about to export maps know the hex lines lack the integrity they should have when printing a map.

Are Command Posts in the Scenario Creator not to be done until more funding is available? Just that "small" addition would really open up so many new Scenario possibilities.


Ok. Thanks for clarifying.

So, there is hope then... :)


Awesome.

You're welcome, and Thank You for keeping those tread units rolling!

Thank You for all the effort continuing to go into the game. You have restored my enthusiasm.
You have a real gem here that just needs some polish and more funding to take it where we all know it can go.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Sadly that stands as other content additions; we need to get more resources for the game first. Sorry :(

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Duly noted. I've added to our list for when we're in position to add more content.

Thanks, as ever :)

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

Yes, when we have more funds for the game, we can start to look at what can be done. We'll, of course, let you all know before so it can be discussed and I can then give indications of what is possible within that... Thanks.

Re: Survey: Top Priorities for Ogre VG Improvement
 

A friend just purchased OGRE on STEAM and played through the NIGHTFALL Campaign and really enjoyed it. He called up later and we played Ceasefire Collapse and Breakthrough. Had a fun time of it. We are planning a rematch soon.

However we hope to see more content become available. We are both disappointed Custom Scenario games cannot be played multiplayer online. The ability to do that would be a solid foot forward for the game as it would open up and encourage new Custom Scenarios to be made and played multiplayer online. This is the main component that can and will help grow the game and give it more replayability, thus also generating more interest and game play which will ultimately generate more purchased games as more people take a look and want to buy the game. We need the momentum this can generate.

I know this has been discussed before and the answer is no more development until more sales and more funding...but let me just ask...what would it take to get Custom Scenarios playable as multiplayer online? This would be a clear and concise goal to achieve and implement.