Game Description
“ | Gameplay summons to mind a futuristic nightmare of desperation and exhilaration, where rumbling machines unleash barrage after barrage of titanic weaponry and the inexorable advance of a soulless giant can only be stopped by zinging swarms of self-sacrificing martyrs. | ” |
—Erick Wujcik |
Ogre uses a hex map depicting barren terrain with only ridgelines and large, radioactive craters as obstacles. The defender sets up his forces in the more congested part of the map and the Ogre enters the opposite side at the beginning of the game. The basic version of the game has the attacker using a single Ogre heavy tank (referred to as a "Mark III Ogre"), while the advanced scenario gives the attacker the larger, more powerful "Mark V Ogre" tank versus an increased number of defenders. The defender is allocated a certain number of infantry and 'armor units', but gets to decide the exact composition of his own armored forces.
The different types of units encourage a combined-arms approach with each type being better than the others in different aspects. Heavy tanks have high attack and defense with moderate speed and low range. Missile tanks have moderate attack and defense with moderate range and low speed. G.E.V.s ("ground effect vehicles"—roughly, heavily armored hovercraft) have very high speed (moving twice per turn), low attack, low range, and moderate defense. Howitzers have very high attack and range but are easily destroyed (once an attacker has managed to get close enough), immobile, and expensive. However, according to the game's designer, this balanced mix of units wasn't quite right in the first edition; the second edition sped up heavy tanks, slowed down G.E.V.s, and changed the defender's purchasing from 'attack factors' to 'armor units' (everything is considered equivalent, except howitzers, which are worth two of anything else).
Read more about this topic: Ogre (game)
Famous quotes containing the words game and/or description:
“I hate that aesthetic game of the eye and the mind, played by these connoisseurs, these mandarins who appreciate beauty. What is beauty, anyway? Theres no such thing. I never appreciate, any more than I like. I love or I hate.”
—Pablo Picasso (18811973)
“Why does philosophy use concepts and why does faith use symbols if both try to express the same ultimate? The answer, of course, is that the relation to the ultimate is not the same in each case. The philosophical relation is in principle a detached description of the basic structure in which the ultimate manifests itself. The relation of faith is in principle an involved expression of concern about the meaning of the ultimate for the faithful.”
—Paul Tillich (18861965)