> Here are a few things I'd like to hear your opinions about:
>
> 1)Ogre conning tower. This is supposed to hold the Ogre's long range sensor
> suite, so destroying or damaging it is bound to have some effect other than
> a potential flashback on 7+. I propose the following change to the damage
> table:
> 1-4: Sensor dome damaged. The Ogre has a -1 to-hit penalty to all weapon
> attacks until repaired.
> 5: Sensor dome destroyed. The Ogre has a -1 to-hit penalty to all weapon
> attacks for the rest of the game.
> 6: Sensor dome destroyed and there's a sensory feedback overload. Roll once
> on the Cybernetic damage table.
This looks good, I'd keep the armor at 1+ to keep non-AP troops from
being able to destroy it. Otherwise it's fine.
> 2) AP weapons are IMO too effective; 5+ to-hit should be enough.
Here are my current thoughts.
IIRC, Titans have the anti-infantry ability which equates to 1 in 6
of all non-elite infantry just die attacking them (1 in 3 of elite).
Most titans have a CAF around 12+, and most infantry
around 2+. So it'll take at least 3 infantry to get through to
do some damage. So 18 infantry.
Against an Ogre MK V with full APs (keep in mind that AP's are the easiest
weapon to destroy on an Ogre) (Mk V I think has 24 * 2 dice worth),
you can expect to kill 24 infantry stands outright. Each additional
stand is (above the 24) is guaranteed to get through.
Making it 5+ cuts the number of infantry stands down to 16 killed, 2
attacking.
There are two factors which come out in favor of the Ogre:
One is that ground infantry will only do tread damage (not nearly as
effective as leg damage is on a titan).
The second is that the next turn, the Ogre
can grind up the infantry in it's treads (assuming it still has
some treads left).
My current thought is that 5+ would probably be okay. But might
leave an Ogre more open to infantry swarms (especially a softened
up Ogre). I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing though.
> 3) Heavy tank: I'd increase the range to 100cm and decrease the save modifier
> to -2.
Not 100% sure about this. I can see changing the save modifier to -2 (since
-3 is a pretty good save modifier for a tank), but increasing the range
to 100cm makes it significantly better than the leman russ (which I
used as a base to design the Heavy Tank against). The goal was
to make it slightly better than the Leman Russ. Looking back
on it ... it is ... in just about every regard. Perhaps too much so.
I'd be a little tempted now to drop the CAF to +2 (the light tanks
to +1, drop both the GEV's by 1 as well), and decrease the save modifier
to -2 (and the AP (like all AP's) to hit on a 5+) and leave the ranges
the same.
This means it'd be more comparable to a Leman Russ, except with a +1
save, a slightly better main battery (2 dice with save mod of -2,
instead of a dice at -2 and a dice at -1), and a slightly better CAF
(+1).
> 4) Ogre main battery should IMO have +2 to damage rolls.
I've got no problem with this.
> 5) Shields; this is a real pain. On the other hand the technology certainly
> existed during the Dark Age of Technology, but OTOH the Ogres are already
> VERY durable so game balance might well be ruined even with increased cost.
> What do you think?
I'd leave them out. Sheilds would make Ogres too Land-Train like. (Perhaps
the developers of Ogres never discovered Void Shields (and it's the reason
they lost out against Titans)). Or something like that.
The fluff I came up with for the Ogre worlds was that they were caught
in a null-warp space anomoly, and all warp based phenomina (including
shields) were unknown.
Although I will admit, that everytime I look at the conning tower, I think
of some sorta shield generator.
> Jyrki Saari
Some random thoughts,
DarylL
Received on Tue Dec 11 2001 - 22:27:34 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:28 UTC