• Registered: 2006-08-07
  • Posts: 161

Topic: The OGRE test.

So, in the general experience of just about everyone, how well does this game balance with numerous low-cost units versus a single (or few) big ones? I'm designing a scenario set, and this has come up as an issue.

  • Registered: 2006-10-02
  • Posts: 44

Re: The OGRE test.

Well, this is an hard question.

A single monster is "easy" killed by various low troop. I mean, the nastiest monster have 3 attack, that at best hit at 50%, so to kill one unit (3 wound) must wait 2 turn.

Four 2 attack element can do 2 (front) + 6 (flanks) + 4 (rear) = 12 attacks... so there is loss of wound every turn, depending on monster defense. Now, the monster can kill some element, but in the long run is overthrow.

On the other side there is the monsters with low defense, a bunch of wounds and stats not so brillant. Since they have no morale they are very underpriced, so you can put a lot of them, taking the number disadvantage from a better point of view.

My 0,02 cents big_smile

  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 811

Re: The OGRE test.

I wouldn't recommend it.  You can try, but our experience with Ogre-like force make-ups has been less than fun.

It was a conscious design decision, we didn't like the idea of a single warrior (of any race, size, or class) being able to wade through thousands of enemies and come out unscathed.

The problem with making a monster-only army is that you have to have the command points to run all those monsters.

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 287

Re: The OGRE test.

The design intent of the system is that single individuals or monsters will be pulled down and overwhelmed by military units - it is mass combat. However, we did some testing once out of curiousity on how effective we could make a monster. The obvious abilities, such as undead, have the best chance of influencing things, and give a good account of themselves.

So, in my experience a well designed single monster will be pulled down screaming defiance and taking a large swath of enemy elements with it.


Now, that said, on the table in our games single monsters have proved consistently effective in that they invariably draw attention - often lots of attention - because it takes a committed effort to get the surrounding effect that Zerloon describes so well. And failure to address a large monster can result in it eating its way through units suprisingly fast with good dice. So the monsters are used to pin the enemy and then supporting units pounced on the force attacking them. Works a trick.
(I wrote a mini essay on that somewhere... I should dust it off.)

Boreal war mammoths have been some of the best examples on our tables, because I have two painted up and a nice horde at my disposal (though I have predominantly played orcs lately... hhhmmmm). The mammoths must draw attention or their trample will carry them right through a foe and cause no end of suffering (been there done that). And I am not afraid to pour command points into a single monster to run amok, to which Jim can attest.