PDA

View Full Version : Why do people want Orcs to suck?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

volair
21-07-2008, 00:05
Everyone seems to want Orcs, and even Orks in 40k, to suck. Orks finally got a good codex and became a good army; when will the Orcs in WHFB get a designer who will have the confidence to challenge his co-workers, who apparently want Orcs to remain a bad army forever, and rework them? Everytime someone complains about Orcs being bad, people of the "keep the Orcs down" movement keep saying that Orcs are supposed to be random and funny (in otherwords really poor).

Do you people realise that the game would be funner if Orcs were powerful? Even if you don't play them, it would add variety to the competitive game. Why does GW insist on keeping bad design choices in the game? When will they finally get rid of stupidity, animosity, etc... They got rid of the randomized general for high elves. That was a step in the right direction. All of these type of rules have to go bye bye.

I have made it my mission to expose the "keep the Orcs down" conspiracy. They have even corrupted the GW staff, probably with bribery, and until they are rooted out, Orcs will never be good.We need to rally people and increase awareness of this issue that is keeping our beloved army from being competitive.

Mad Cod Grotsnik is definitely a member of this "keep the Orcs down" movement. Here is one of his many quotes:

"And no, you don't sell this army of yours. You shrug your shoulders, and play like a Greenskin. Not whinge anonymously on a Forum."

Wow, great advice. Our army is terrible and we should just shrug our shoulders and continue to lose to the other armies without voicing our opinion. I will never do that, I will do everything in my power to increase awareness, and I will challenge people like you who conspire to keep people satisfied with a bad army.

Oenghus
21-07-2008, 00:28
I'm not sure if this is a joke or not -- but I have to disagree with one of the main tenets of your argument. Despite what you say, funny and random doesn't have to mean poor. Every army deals with randomness in some way. It's the nature of the game. Orcs seem to be on the far end of the Ultra-randomness spectrum, but someone has to be there...

I agree that fantasy Orcs are a bit behind the curve, but that's because they've got an older book. Everything that isn't Vampiric or Demonic is currently behind the curve (some are further behind than others, of course).

40K Orks, incidentally, are pretty damn solid.

I suppose that I shouldn't be contributing food to what may be nothing more than an attempt to troll, but I thought I'd give your post the benefit of the doubt.

volair
21-07-2008, 00:59
I'm not sure if this is a joke or not -- but I have to disagree with one of the main tenets of your argument. Despite what you say, funny and random doesn't have to mean poor. Every army deals with randomness in some way. It's the nature of the game. Orcs seem to be on the far end of the Ultra-randomness spectrum, but someone has to be there...

I agree that fantasy Orcs are a bit behind the curve, but that's because they've got an older book. Everything that isn't Vampiric or Demonic is currently behind the curve (some are further behind than others, of course).

40K Orks, incidentally, are pretty damn solid.

I suppose that I shouldn't be contributing food to what may be nothing more than an attempt to troll, but I thought I'd give your post the benefit of the doubt.

I will say that technically you are right, random and funny doesn't have to be poor. But right now it is.

Shamfrit
21-07-2008, 01:03
Do not even begin to scour a new flesh wound into a very old and tired debate. It's being done in at least four other threads on Warseer at this precise moment already. It does not need another thread.

Grinloc
21-07-2008, 01:27
There isn't really any conspiracy involved. For GW warhammer is, before anything else, a business. They just made the mistake of letting someone redesign them who wasn't up to the task (and obviously not interested in them to make matters even worse). Even for warhammer designers warhammer is to some extent (maybe even a minor one, but still) a matter of passion. Even more so when it comes to O&G's, since they are a special army, which requires a designer to know the game's dynamics from top to the bottom.

Funny and random doesn't equal poor either. Look at O&G's 6th edition. They were funny, they were random, their advantages were feared. An empire gunline player almost being heard whispering "someone help me...", when the O&G's magic phase and its "gork's warpath" came up next.
Chaos anyone? He had that big bad demon from the warp up his sleeve ready to rearrange some limbs, had to roll which one of his characters became possessed and lo and behold his tooled up lord went *poof*.

O&G's players will just have to wait for 8th edition and hope that GW learned from their mistake. That's all there is to it.

40k Orks?? Please, they are incredibly good now. Not to mention many opponents actually love playing against them, since the battles are often incredibly funny for both sides and orks aren't being punished from the start like their fantasy versions.

Fobster
21-07-2008, 01:59
Biggest problem seems to be that Orcs & Goblins make up a large part of fantasy battle population. If sales are strong then they feel no need to make the army competitive, Armies with poor sales seem to jump up the competitive curve when their book comes out but solid sellers tend to get the shaft per se.

Lord Lucifer
21-07-2008, 02:41
First, it would help your crusade if you happened to be... what's the word I'm looking for here? Ah yeah, that's it, 'Right'

The Orc army is, and has always been, a disorganized rabble. That's what Orcs ARE. Not green skin, not fungus beer, not giants and fanatics and wolves. Disorganized barbarians.
Filled with vicious, mutinous little blighters.
They should NOT drop the unpredictability, because it is their defining aspect.

The problem the Orcs and Goblins actually suffer from is the fact that for every single edition they get a release for they're either the first or second book to be released, which typically falls short before the rest of the line rights itself and generally maintains a good balance with a slow upward trend from such point on (although back in 4th and 5th ed. this trend was NOT slow!)


Lunatic rantings about conspiracies and inaccurate (and poorly articulated) arguments don't do a jot of good. Just look at the vintage 6th edition Elven Whine

DullMentalRacket
21-07-2008, 02:42
it seemed like the writer of the book was told the books were going to go in a certain direction, and they didnt. A few things did get better, just enough got worse that it made a big difference.

Shimmergloom
21-07-2008, 04:04
I agree that fantasy Orcs are a bit behind the curve, but that's because they've got an older book. Everything that isn't Vampiric or Demonic is currently behind the curve (some are further behind than others, of course).


It's not even 2 years old yet and it's already near the bottom of the barrel. Worse than almost all of the remaining 6th books save 2 or 3 and worse than any of the other five 7th edition books.

kroq'gar
21-07-2008, 04:13
Try an empire army, they are left behind the 8 ball as well (dont go screaming stanks and war alter!!!>>!!> at me, im talking a fun balanced list).

The uber characters eating hoarde armies is a little bit of an issue, but oh well, roll with te punches and bring a few warmachines.

neXus6
21-07-2008, 04:37
Difference is kroq in a balanced empire horde army you don't have a 1 in 6 chance per unit per turn of that unit doing nothing at all and the added support element of detachments and correctly priced heavy cavalry you can count on.

Now I love characterful and balanced Empire armies, just some issues with the new models have stopped me making an Empire army, and I really love Greenskins, 15 years and counting with them :D.

I will not say that Greenskins suck, because they 100% do not suck. They are just a very hard army to use and they are very unpredictable.

Now this makes them real no goes in terms of tournament play as really a whole army that could stand picking its nose during a game deciding turn is a hell of a risk, but it doesn't make them unplayable.

All it really means is you need to have about 3 units for every task you want to achieve, and 3 different plans per unit on how you are going to achieve that. Back up plans are the course of the day, sure everything might (probably will) still go badly right when you least need it too but that is par for the course when playing Greenskins.

The new animosity ain't that different from the old one the only real problem with the current Army book is Orc Boar Boyz and their Big 'Unz upgrade points cost, which is insainly high for what you get, but that just makes things like Black Orcs, Squigs and Warmachines an even more temping choice. :D

Colonel Kolm
21-07-2008, 04:51
i dont know what your problem is i have orksies in both warhammer games and i love em both, fantasy is more entertaining by its randomness i like being able to just enjoy the game and not care rather then taking my vamps and going uber powerful. and orks in 40k can be a very very strong army when generaled well

Canadian_Khan
21-07-2008, 04:53
First, it would help your crusade if you happened to be... what's the word I'm looking for here? Ah yeah, that's it, 'Right'

The Orc army is, and has always been, a disorganized rabble. That's what Orcs ARE. Not green skin, not fungus beer, not giants and fanatics and wolves. Disorganized barbarians.
Filled with vicious, mutinous little blighters.
They should NOT drop the unpredictability, because it is their defining aspect.

The problem the Orcs and Goblins actually suffer from is the fact that for every single edition they get a release for they're either the first or second book to be released, which typically falls short before the rest of the line rights itself and generally maintains a good balance with a slow upward trend from such point on (although back in 4th and 5th ed. this trend was NOT slow!)


Lunatic rantings about conspiracies and inaccurate (and poorly articulated) arguments don't do a jot of good. Just look at the vintage 6th edition Elven Whine

True enough.

I heard enough of the whining and whining and whining about how orcs are bad... I said it before... and will say it again. Warhammer is a game where you have to be a good GENERAL... so if you want to be a good GENERAL, pick an army that you would like to CONTROL... never been a big fan of the "pick the army you would love to pain" thing...

Orc ARE unpredicable... but say that to me 2000pts once defeated army... squig bounce and hit hard... goblins and their nets are real pain in the ... orcs make good targets and can hit hard... more that decent firepower... sneaky magic items.

To play the greenskins... you gotta be, in your own tru hart, sneaky. Oh, and yes, not beeing afraid to sacrifice a regiment...

Have you ever heard of the Computer game Medieval 2...total war? This is how you say what type of general you are... I, myself, will bring 1200peasants, with one big and bad general... If you go and play an elite army, than the skins are not for you.

Normaly, people you gets destroyed time after time after time often realizes two things: 1- They may not be as good of a general they think they are. 2- They may not have the best army for them. I once tried bretonnians. Well, my friend, I never lost so many games in my own life! I would not play High Elves either... too many costly elite.

My vampire count army is more or less 2000pts of Skeletons and zombies...

My future warriors of chaos army will consist in a lot of cultists ( if cultist they are ) + marauders...

I like to play these types of army... bring me skavenslaves, lotsa them, and i'll be happy to tear down any 75 miniatures army...take that with 210 minis!

Orcs are not that bad. You just have to understand how they work. The general is not there to kill... he's there to bring leadership. Big Boss are there to die in a cry of glory.... Animosity may stop you, but it will never stop completely 8 regiments in one turn...

Anyways... Time for me to finish this... No warhammer armies are bad... there are only bad generals... or generals who can't adapt the new rules... the new armies... their new armies.

Thanks for reading

Braad
21-07-2008, 05:48
While I do not agree with the orcs being bad part, I do have to say that its true that when the question of orcs and goblins competiviness comes up, there's a lot of people who say "they are just meant for fun, live with it". This never happens for other armies... Why?
Because they are meant for fun, they shouldn't be allowed to win, in the mindset of those people? For me the opportunity of scoring a massacre is a mayor part of fun in the game. (And I say opportunity, I don't need to win, but without the option of winning, its no fun at all.)
I think its a very cheap excuse to settling an argument.

@ Canadian Khan:
Oo, yes, animosity can strike 8 units at once. I once had the situation where, of my whole battle line, only one of the units that to test for animosity could move. But that was just hilarious.

OldMaster
21-07-2008, 06:03
Good riddance, Canadian!

Indeed, you need to learn how to play with Greenskins to properly use them. Thing is, they aren't as strong as the Fluff describes them, and not as strong as theylook and that's the whole illusion.

pox
21-07-2008, 06:09
as a player of both orcs and orks, I personally DONT want them to be considered "top tier." I dont want the army to be the one to beat, I dont want to own at every tournament, and I dont want to win a game and have someone say, "well, you were playing orcs (orks,) no wonder you won."

orc and ork players are kinda off kilter, and I like the old reputation of "fun" players. I'm already starting to see ork warbosses in 40k that are not proper greenskins.

and for what its worth, my new ork codex is brutal in every way.

my new orc armybook, well, lets just say I was glad to be able to field wood goblins next to my spider riders.

so, are the lists kept down to keep the power gamers at bay? I honestly dont know, but I do like the starting rep that I'm a fun player because of the army I use. then I whomp 'em good.

either way, orks is best. or orcs is best.

Jon_Irenicus
21-07-2008, 06:11
Mad Cod Grotsnik is definitely a member of this "keep the Orcs down" movement. Here is one of his many quotes:

"And no, you don't sell this army of yours. You shrug your shoulders, and play like a Greenskin. Not whinge anonymously on a Forum."

Wow, great advice. Our army is terrible and we should just shrug our shoulders and continue to lose to the other armies without voicing our opinion. I will never do that, I will do everything in my power to increase awareness, and I will challenge people like you who conspire to keep people satisfied with a bad army.

I think the good Doc meant that you should play it for fun, and in the proper spirit.

Your complaints seem out of place for 40k at least, where the codex is hailed as a very solid book with just a few "not so good" units for the competitors. I haven't tried it out, but what do you think is that would make anyone conspire against orks?

Most of the "funny" aspects are the Mekboyz, their SAG look like business and can do a lot of damage (to either you or your opponent) but I would hardly agree if you think that given the advantages, losing a 100 point character because he teleported to CC with a unit of Wyches was bad. Especially when you can obliterate a squad of Terminators with a single shot (with some luck, too :p).

I like the orks a lot, I think they're one of the most characterful races (and incarnations of orcs throughout different games). In fact I'm thinking of collecting an army, and I completely agree with Mad Doc's idea that you have to play them like an Ork and just don't care if those runtz from the loota skwadd Fingaz shot themselves in the foot again! And I'd recommend reading the Deff Skwadron comics - the Orks don't take themselves seriously, why should they? That's for their enemies.

dodicula
21-07-2008, 06:43
Am I the only one to notice this...

2 Types of threads I consistently see is why are Orcs so bad and why are Bretonnians so good. True it happens with other armies when they first come out (elves come to mind, though it seems to have died down) and time will tell with VC/daemons. But yet the Orcs, Brets persist, for years. Now the usual answer is a smug... Tey're balanced, you just have to learn how to use them/counter them (without any further clarification). But let me ask you, if its just a matter of learning/countering them, why is it consistently orcs and brets more than other armies? If they were balanced, complaints would even out, but they clearly don't, if everything is balanced why is that?

Grinloc
21-07-2008, 07:14
There isn't much to adapt to. To summarize "Either you aren't up to the task as a general or you didn't adapt".
Adapt to what? Those few dice rolls which determin if you gonna be able to use that unit at all, one which you paid points for as any other player does out there? Those few dice rolls which determin if you gonna be able to move that unit in a direction you actually want it to, but in random cases can't since the opponent forces you to move it somewhere else?

This "Either you aren't up to the task as a general or you didn't adapt" comment is to some extent probably even considered an insult by some of the former O&G's players out there, who tried endlessly to bring their greenskins up to a competitive level (especially at tournaments), only to be let down time and time again by a horrible 7th edition ruleset.

Animosity and random crazy events may be funny or halfway entertaining the first few times, but at some point they become a chore. Even more so when those events cause you to lose a battle, through no fault of your own i might add.

So maybe the "typical" (for the sake of a broad generalisation) O&G's player tends to not care about losing, as long as he has fun while doing that?
Plenty of O&G's players of 6th edition did care about winning, they did win regularily, myself included. Now 7th edition came along and those very same O&G's players still cared about winning. In the process they get put at a severe disadvantage against other armies due to game breaking animosity rules and awefully mispriced units, a disadvantage which in many cases was too difficult to overcome and suddenly they aren't up to the task?

Adapt my a**.

The fact remains that the 7th edition army book doesn't grant an O&G's player the tools to compete with the other armies at a "higher tier" competitive level. There's nothing to adapt to, either an O&G's player (one who wants to win) simply accepts this and stays away from tournaments or switches to a different army. E*ay getting flooded with O&G's armies after the 7th edition army book hit the shelves is a sure indicator that many O&G's players did switch. Don't pretend otherwise, shelving the army you enjoyed playing with for many years is not an easy task...

Being dissatisfied by the negative comments of former O&G's players and players of other armies is one thing (and defending the army is probably something which keeps this hobby going), but sitting on that high horse and saying "you aren't a member of the "green club" of adapters anymore, so quit your whining already" is a questionable way of discussing things.

@dodicula:
Indeed a valid question. One with an obvious answer unfortunately...

OT - 40k: The Orks codex is considered by many (not only Orks players) to be one of the best 40k products, which GW came up with recently. Those Orks are messing up the metagame at tournaments right about now. They aren't THE army to beat, but they surely are competing with the other armies on a decent level, something which their fantasy brothers should do too.

Slaaneshi Ice Cream
21-07-2008, 08:03
Orcs are a bit bad in Fantasy because of animosity. Honestly, they are the only army who has to roll before the turn starts just to see if their units can do what they want that turn.

In a game where movement and control of your army (leadership) are important, that really sucks for the orc player. You may get that crtical charge off, or you may roll a 1 and, uh, not. I wouldn't mind if they just tossed animosity out the window, because the way it is now can be quite punishing, and it isn't very funny after the first few times.

And I say this as a non orc player. I have a buddy who plays orcs, but recently switched the VC because he just couldn't do well with the greenskins. I'd like to see him say "Hey, maybe my orc army can do alright now" instead of dreading the animosity rolls.

I also agree that random stuff is generally not fun or exciting. For my examples look at CSM possessed, the CSM dreadnought, and spawn (40k). However the SAG is hilarious even when it blows up in your face? Why? Because the SAG has the potential to be ridiculously lethal. Not so for my examples, they either suck horribly (40k spawn), or are just ok and are outclassed by other units(possessed vs bezerkers).

DigbyWeapon
21-07-2008, 09:39
Orcs are a bit of a punching bag...its just the way it is.
I do like them though, hopefully they will get a better change but I doubt it.

Digby

chaospantz
21-07-2008, 10:28
I dont think i quite see what people are talking about when they say orks are bad. The guys that play at my store can easely field over 100 bodies on the field without having much of a problem. You have black ork and black ork charcters to deal with anamosity they have some of the quickest fast calvary in the game. I will say that Anamosity has a bad habit of failing you at the time you need it to past the most but then so do my CoK and stupidity. But then you also have orks with a toughness of 4. Maby it dosnt seem that great but most core units have the basic 3S and 3T.

Only problem i see is alot of people getting to many fanatics. Guy i usualy play against has 3 units of night gobos with 3 fanatics each wich when they go through your unit sucks and all, but i think every player of the game runs some kind of fast calv, scout, or flyer. So while the laughs at the fact that his fanatics killed 60 points of my calvery he now has to march his hole army through 9 fanatics on his half the board while i sit back and watch.

We could also go back to the old days where people did nothing but take the lvl 4 mage and some lvl 2s with the Double casting staff and spam warpath every turn with a stupid amout of power dice

Muad'Dib
21-07-2008, 10:36
I think there is a general misunderstanding between the two sides of the discussion. One side lists their complaints in regards to current O&G books. The ones that disagree mostly reply with "Duh, deal with it", and often add one of the rather senseless arguments like: "Maybe you are a bad general?", "O&G are not VC/HE/Daemons" or "O&G are a FUN! army, not a competetive one".
I think noone can deny that O&G are at the bottom of the power level, in the same way that 6th edition DE were (especially before the errata). Just by quickly glancing the book, several problems become apparent:
-Both types of Boar Boyz are terribly overpriced. (well, it was part of GW's plan to make cavalry more expensive, too bad only O&G got hit by it before they changed their mind ; P)
-Their selection of magic banners and items is rather poor, especially compared to VC, Daemons and new DE (2+ effective ward save anyone?). The save stealing goblin only items is a notable exception.
-The '6' result on animosity can ruin a battleplan, even though its supposed to give an advantage to balance the chance for '1'.
-Black Orcs are poor compared to the latest elite infantry - Swordmasters, Black Guard, Grave Guard, maybe even the core Daemons. The lack of decent magic banner(s) except War Banner doesn't help either.
-Snotlings, down from unbreakable to stubborn LD 4...what's the point ?
-fanatics got weakened greatly, maybe because Matt Ward thought that cavalry would be nerfed across all armies ? Well, this didn't really happen and with -3 to armour saves for same cost they are considerably less impressive, and they can still be lured out in same ways as before.
Please note that by stating these facts noone says that O&G can't win! They can indeed win, the problem is that when they are set against the latest armies (especially in a tournament) they start off from a rather bad position. Noone is asking for O&G to become the most powerful army with 2+ ward saves and lords eating Vampires for breakfest. Very few (one person in this topic?) are asking for animosity to be removed completely. Rather (I think) people would be happy for the most glaring problems to be fixed (some of them listed above), and this would be enough for O&G to be able to play both 'for fun', and in a competitive environment, and both sides of the discussion would be happy.

Gobbo Lord
21-07-2008, 10:52
Well said Muad'Dib. There is nothing more annoying than people saying, "Deal with it, the army is supposed to be fun". I am dealing with it as I stick to one army and have done since I started as a Little Un'. The problem is with each new release it becomes so much harder to deal with. When you read about the synergy some new armies have with each other, Heralds joining units for extra abilites, The Cauldren of Blood, Corpse Carts, even more so when you finally face these new races and from the get go its a uphill struggle, an uphill struggle with a crumbling rocky overhang and your running out of rope (If anyone says deal with it you need to become a better general I will launch a giant squig at their house).

The biggest misconception I find is what other players think of animosity and the Waaagh. People say "You get a d6 move forward whats the problem?" The problem is if you read the book its a d6 move towards the nearest visable enemy unit. One of two things is happening. Orc and Goblin players arn't reading their book properly and are just moving the units forward, or are convieniently forgetting that this is the case when they need to charge those knights and not the small unit of fell bats which is two inches closer to their extreme left.

Shamfrit
21-07-2008, 10:59
Well said Muad'Dib. There is nothing more annoying than people saying, "Deal with it, the army is supposed to be fun". I am dealing with it as I stick to one army and have done since I started as a Little Un'. The problem is with each new release it becomes so much harder to deal with. When you read about the synergy some new armies have with each other, Heralds joining units for extra abilites, The Cauldren of Blood, Corpse Carts, even more so when you finally face these new races and from the get go its a uphill struggle, an uphill struggle with a crumbling rocky overhang and your running out of rope (If anyone says deal with it you need to become a better general I will launch a giant squig at their house).

The biggest misconception I find is what other players think of animosity and the Waaagh. People say "You get a d6 move forward whats the problem?" The problem is if you read the book its a d6 move towards the nearest visable enemy unit. One of two things is happening. Orc and Goblin players arn't reading their book properly and are just moving the units forward, or are convieniently forgetting that this is the case when they need to charge those knights and not the small unit of fell bats which is two inches closer to their extreme left.

Couldn't have put it better myself. :D

Lorcryst
21-07-2008, 11:03
I know that I'm not a good general, but I try to get better.

Animosity has indeed ruined my plans several times (10 out of 11 units doing nothing for three turns in a row is a common occurence for me), but I can live with it.

O&Gs (dunno about the 40K side) have good troops ... a bit crippled by Animosity, but still good ...


But there's one thing that I cannot live with, cannot do a thing about, and that irks me to no end : the O&G 7th ed book is the ONLY book where most of the units went UP in points, while GW said that Core troops would get cheaper ... seems like the design philosophy changed just after the very first 7th ed army book (O&G) was published (the Dwarf book was a 6th ed one, albeit with some 7th ed ideas already in it), leaving the greenskins totally screwed since every book that came after it was written with a different philosophy.

O&G can win.

You just need to be a really good general, have several contigency plans for when (not if, when) your units will stop responding to your orders, and a tremendous amount of luck.

Piece of cake, eh ?

volair
21-07-2008, 12:05
I never said that Orks in 40k were not good right now; I said in my post that they are a good army. This happened quite recently however; for the longest time 40k Ork players had to put up with an army that could not compete and they got the same responses that WHFB Orc players still get today. The whole point of my post is to raise awareness of the fact that WHFB Orcs and Goblins are still being treated like 40k Orks were for so long, are unable to compete and people are telling people who play them to: "shrug your shoulders," "play a different army if you want to win," "O&G are supposed to lose unfairly when animosity rolls go bad, and why does that make you upset? It's funny." Well not all Orc players think it is funny; we want to control our army. 40k Orks finally got the codex they deserve, when will it happen for WHFB Orcs and Goblins?

Crovax20
21-07-2008, 12:11
Perhaps we all should just make units of arrer boys, chucka's, stonethrowers, doomdiver catapults...

Just imagine 200+ arrer boys lined up from one side of the table to the other :p. I mean at least a few should do some wounds shouldn't they? :p

Shimmergloom
21-07-2008, 12:16
But then you also have orks with a toughness of 4. Maby it dosnt seem that great but most core units have the basic 3S and 3T.

1. Dryads.
2. Ghouls, corspe carts.
3. Dwarfs of all types.
4. Ogres of all types.
5. Beastmen herds and bestigors and chariots. With doombull, minos are core.
6. Chaos Warriors
7. Plaguebearers
8. Saurus, Temple Guard
9. Orcs, savage orcs.

So 9 out of 15 armies have access to core T4 troops. Having T4 is nice, but not that special. And T4 with animosity and orc ld7, ws3 is certainly not as good as dryads, dwarfs, saurus, beastmen, etc.

For the 2 unsupported armies, chaos dwarfs are T4 and DoW have access to ogres and dwarfs who are T4.

If you add in core chariots with a tomb king prince or king, then they would have T4 core troops as well, but that's not infantry.

Havock
21-07-2008, 13:58
Why people want them to suck?

Same reason as the guard for 40k, people need an army to look bad so they can feel good. A 'punching' bag of some sorts.
Realism is only ever brought into 40k if it makes a point to weaken the guard, in all other instances 'it's 40k, everything is possible'.
O&G are still fun to play against though; I can't stand painting more than 20 of the same models, so I wouldn't play them :p

neXus6
21-07-2008, 15:32
I think noone can deny that O&G are at the bottom of the power level, in the same way that 6th edition DE were (especially before the errata).

Erm I think you'll find I can deny that, you can't seriously be comparing Greenskins to 6th ed Dark Elves can you? At worst they are a mid-power level. just cause you can't make an uber cheesed army like Karl Franz and the Steam Tanks doesn't mean they are lower power than Empire for example.

Just by quickly glancing the book, several problems become apparent:
-Both types of Boar Boyz are terribly overpriced. (well, it was part of GW's plan to make cavalry more expensive, too bad only O&G got hit by it before they changed their mind ; P)

I agree with this though.

-Their selection of magic banners and items is rather poor, especially compared to VC, Daemons and new DE (2+ effective ward save anyone?). The save stealing goblin only items is a notable exception.

Not having super killy magic items does not make an army bad, there are enough useful items and after that you have to use your troops.

-The '6' result on animosity can ruin a battleplan, even though its supposed to give an advantage to balance the chance for '1'.

This has been the case for almost 20 years, though yes it does happen, slightly, more frequently now. And now you have the added bonus of the Waagh to make sure at the very least your generals unit WILL be charging when you need it to.

-Black Orcs are poor compared to the latest elite infantry - Swordmasters, Black Guard, Grave Guard, maybe even the core Daemons. The lack of decent magic banner(s) except War Banner doesn't help either.

Black Orcs poor...:wtf:..Black Orcs are some of the best troops in the game 14 pts for an Orc that can choose between 1 S6 attack 5+save, 2 S4 attacks 5+ save and 1 S4 attack 3+ save in combat..and in the first round of combat those S4 attacks are S5. Yes swordmasters will probably gub them toe to toe, but at the moment Swordmasters are one of the hardest units in the game, as for GG and Daemons, they are atleast as good as those.

-Snotlings, down from unbreakable to stubborn LD 4...what's the point ?

They are not 0-1 anymore, they don't cause panic and you can take hundreds of them.

-fanatics got weakened greatly, maybe because Matt Ward thought that cavalry would be nerfed across all armies ? Well, this didn't really happen and with -3 to armour saves for same cost they are considerably less impressive, and they can still be lured out in same ways as before.

Fanatics were amazing when they ignored armour saves, they are still amazing now, yes they aren't as amazing but you cant have a whole battle plan that revolves around fanatics


Comments in bold.

sephiroth87
21-07-2008, 16:17
I think there is a general misunderstanding between the two sides of the discussion.

This is extremely true.

There ARE two sides of the discussion, and both of them don't often make sense to each other. One side likes the book, knows it has problems, but copes with it and still manages the occasional win. You still see some people with the "get over it, they're supposed to suck" mentality, but it's not the majority opinion (just the one that gets the most attention).

The people who actually like the orcs and goblins book usually don't like ALL of it (me included). The main issue is what some people have suggested: the guy who wrote it just didn't get the army. In interviews, the stuff he was proudest of was the stuff that he simplified. Animosity, fanatics, squigs, night goblins, magic items, and magic were all cut drastically down and simplified from the 6th edition book, with the extra saved space being used to pimp the new plastic Giant model. The fluff was sparse and looked like he banged it together over a weekend. The book felt like a gutted version of the 6th edition book.

Some of the stuff would cost about right without animosity, but it should be cheaper if it's random. The army is hard to control and about once every three or four months, I get frustrated by a game I should have won (and then lost due to their rules) and play another army for a week or two. Then I get my greenskins back out because they're the most fun I have with any of my fantasy armies. Plus, some players don't understand the fun of playing the underdog.

Most of the people who like the army know these things. The army is random, quirky, and occasionally frustrating as hell. I would love to have a rewrite of the book clarifying and fixing a lot of the mistakes that Mat Ward made, some extra magic items (especially good arcane items boosting the magic phase and magic armor).

With that said, the army is not NEAR as bad as some of people make it out to be. As someone who has played several games per week with the army over a number of years, the army can win against most other armies if you play a balanced list. There's no power list in the book, just a solid one with a lot of models and very basic characters and magic items.

The other side of this argument seems to be pretty negative about the book, but I think that many of them actually love the orcs and just want some better rules. This is perfectly understandable. But what I don't understand is that many of them say that the orcs are the most horrible army ever, that they can't win, that they can't do well against competitive lists. They can, but their rules put them at a disadvantage. I can admit the problems of the list if some of the people who think they suck will start posting battle reports where they have used the army. I would like to see people who hate the book be humble enough to occasionally troll the tactics forums and post things other than "orcs and goblins suck, get a new army." Every once in a while they do and their tactics make sense (when your read between the lines of the snarky comments and sarcasm). Maybe spend some time doing something productive and learning how to overcome the disadvantages, rather than just throwing away an army that has a great background and is a lot of fun, but just has a mediocre book.

My two cents.

Chadjabdoul
21-07-2008, 16:35
We don't want orcs to be as reliable or powerful as chaos warriors. We still want them to be fun and unpredictable. our problems lie with rules that have clear mistakes and are even unfluffy.

The Waagh is supposed to be a beneficial rule. Yet it can wipe out a small unit of overly priced boarboyz. That's like sufferring the results of a really nasty spell. And you caused it to your own army!! By having your general trying to lift their spirits!! How is that justified?

Similarly putting bl. orc characters is supposed to help your units avoid squabbling. By potentially killing d6 of them!! While when facing an enemy a black orc hero will make 3 attacks.

Never before would animosity cause orcs to kill each other, unless you managed to roll two 1s in a row for a unit. Which was so rare that it was actually kind of fun. Now, once every six turns a black orc character KILLS (doesn't just slap them around) his own troops.

Also, as stated above, a 6 animosity result was meant as a beneficial rule yet many generals have experienced cases where they would have prefferred to roll a 1 and not move at all than end up out of the way, blocking other units.

Beneficial rules that generals opt not to use (eg. waagh in a cavalry heavy army) have clearly something wrong with them.
Funny thing is that a well thought errata would not take too long to come up with, would not cost GW any money to make, would satisfy a lot of O&G generals who rightly complain about a badly written book, and yet... we all know that GW will not do it, not because they can not, but because they want us all to wait a few years just to pay for a new book. Until then, they are counting on people like Mad Doc to tell us all that we are a bunch of whiners who can't have any fun with the game (despite us opting to play with the most fun army in the game)

Conotor
21-07-2008, 16:41
Orcs are the most challengeing army for me. They are already very powerfull. No other army can put out the same amount of S5 or S6 shooting/living projectiles. They also have the best infantry in the game.

EvC
21-07-2008, 17:24
It says it all that the best thing about the O & G army is their shooting. You'll find the best lists out there minimise the most characterful rules in the army i.e. animosity, which also tells us a lot. It's a shame that they gave the job to someone who never played Orcs (Similarly with High Elves- Adam Troke stated that the new book made him want to start an army, wtf?!). They need an update, but there's only a few aspects that are really troublesome. Animosity just needs a revamp and Black Orcs need to stop killing so many of their fellows (I've played games where I just sit back and have my enemies kill themselves and run away). I know players who won't even call the Waaagh! because on average it will wipe out a unit of fast cavalry (Or at least render them useless), imagine it affecting Boar Boyz, which are already massively overcosted?! I can't remember the last time a game against Orcs gave me a worry and I play a lot against many opponents. I think it was 6th edition High Elves- and since the 7th edition book came out, no chance of losing.

Gobbo Lord
21-07-2008, 17:56
Orcs are the most challengeing army for me. They are already very powerfull. No other army can put out the same amount of S5 or S6 shooting/living projectiles. They also have the best infantry in the game.

Infantry that one turn a game wont move and another turn potentially moves out of posistion is the best infantry in a game based about tactical movement! Infantry that is the same points as a Dark Elf equally equipped yet has overall worse stats. Wow. The misconceptions continue.

Lorcryst
21-07-2008, 19:04
Infantry that one turn a game wont move and another turn potentially moves out of posistion is the best infantry in a game based about tactical movement! Infantry that is the same points as a Dark Elf equally equipped yet has overall worse stats. Wow. The misconceptions continue.


This. So painfully true. But to understand how horrible it is, you need to have suffered from it yourself.

Sun Tsu wrote "the best laid plans won't survive contact with the ennemy" ... the O&G version of that is "your battleplans won't survive your first Animosity phase".

There are three ways, traditionnaly, to circumvent "bad" Animosity rolls :

- Take lots of units that don't check : Black Orcs (Special); Trolls, Giants and Pump Wagons (Rare) and Snotlings (don't count as Core), so no, it's not possible to make a legal army list that way.

- Take Black Orcs characters ... that will kill your own troops if you roll a 1, that don't project a "zone of pacification" anymore, that loose half their special rules if you equip them with a magic weapon, and that cannot be shamans ... not really practical.

- Take lots of units ... with the increased point costs across the whole army, not really doable anymore.


In the end, that makes an army that is crippled by its special rules, that require good tactics to work, but that won't let you use said tactics a third of the time (yes, a result of "6" on the Animosity roll can actually be detrimental).

But still, I love the greenskins. Maybe one day I'll be good enough to actually win with them despite their special rules, AND lucky enough to avoid having half of my army locked in internal struggles/headlong charges toward baiting units ... but I think that the 8th ed of Warhammer and a good O&G army book will be published before that !

semersonp
21-07-2008, 19:11
orcs and goblins...

i don't know if someone in a position of gw power wants them to suck...

i don't know if there is an global underground flagellation society who enjoys playing a hindered army list...

i do know that i love o + g and from what i've seen the greenskins attract the most enthused and skilled players...

yeah, 1/3 of the time your units are doing things they werent supposed to be doing but one can use this as an advantage... opponents are thrown off by it and the proper placement of your boys can ensure victory almost every game... 'cept when your general's unit suffers animosity on turns 2 - 4 but hey, them's the breaks :p

i am a voice for parity and would like to see our cavalry set right and a few other tweaks but i will put in my thoughts while continuing to lead my green avatars to glory on fields of flock... so if you are truly incensed about o+g being put upon... take them up, show the world they can win!

join us, join the waaagh!...

you'll find it makes you smile a lot more as you cast your troops about :)

sulla
21-07-2008, 20:01
1. Dryads.
2. Ghouls, corspe carts.
3. Dwarfs of all types.
4. Ogres of all types.
5. Beastmen herds and bestigors and chariots. With doombull, minos are core.
6. Chaos Warriors
7. Plaguebearers
8. Saurus, Temple Guard
9. Orcs, savage orcs.

So 9 out of 15 armies have access to core T4 troops. Having T4 is nice, but not that special. And T4 with animosity and orc ld7, ws3 is certainly not as good as dryads, dwarfs, saurus, beastmen, etc.


I would rate orcs as better than Ogres (overpriced), beastmen (overpriced bestigors, s3 gors who have limited access to SCR and can't deny ranks), Chaos warriors (overpriced except for certain marks), Plaguebearers (very poor unit without a herald) and saurus warriors (overpriced). Even ghouls are only better than orcs IMO because they are invariable fielded in armies with summon ghouls, spammed invocations and vanhel's and the helm of uber-WS. Only dwarf warriors come out ahead in comparison without adding in characters.

Perhaps characters are where your list really lacks? GW obviously didn't want too much protection in the O&G list but maybe they didn't make them hitty enough in return? Hard for me to say since when I face them, there are always bucketloads of gobbo artillery, fanatics and magic but just a couple of big orc units led one of the special character orcs. And those special characters are pretty good.

Muad'Dib
21-07-2008, 20:12
Erm I think you'll find I can deny that, you can't seriously be comparing Greenskins to 6th ed Dark Elves can you? At worst they are a mid-power level. just cause you can't make an uber cheesed army like Karl Franz and the Steam Tanks doesn't mean they are lower power than Empire for example.

That's the point of arranging O&G them at lower power level. Empire has more powerful troops - like STANKs, great cannons or 1+ save cavalry, thus, regardless if you call it cheesy, competetive or overpowered, Empire is still higher in power level then O&G. It does not mean that Empire armies will wipe the floor with O&G - it means that in a 2k battle, the Empire troops will be more numerous/better for their points, and Empire heroes will be equipped with more useful magic items - Arch Lector on War Altar anyone?

Not having super killy magic items does not make an army bad, there are enough useful items and after that you have to use your troops.

I never said it makes the army bad, I just pointed out that O&G items are both less powerful, and the items that ARE viable pale in comparison with the newest toys like 2+ effective ward save, the 'pick any lore and get all spells' powers from VC and Daemons or Slaaneshi Siren power. The magic standards situation in O&G not only makes the army weaker, but is also a clear example of GW inconsistency - seeing how many different, and, more importantly, USEFUL, banners VC, DE and Daemons got. The Goblin only magic banners and many magic items seem like a flashback to 6th edition when it was the norm for armies to have amazing standards like "adds +d6 US each round" (which was changed to "doubles US"...note this is a fear causing army) or magic weapons "creates 1 skeleton per every wound caused" (now they have one that heals 1 wound of anything in the unit, including rising back Blood Knights).
The other 3 O&G banners and a handful of magic items (Kickin Boots, the Eadbutt bound spell) are decent, but both their numbers and potential is toned down, compared to the latest books - in which GW did a generally good job in ensuring that most, if not all, of items are useful, and that you can take a variety of combinations. O&G didn't get as lucky.

This has been the case for almost 20 years, though yes it does happen, slightly, more frequently now. And now you have the added bonus of the Waagh to make sure at the very least your generals unit WILL be charging when you need it to.

You're right, the Waaaagh! option might balance the higher chance of units acting out of control. Don't play O&G, so can't comment.

Black Orcs poor.....Black Orcs are some of the best troops in the game 14 pts for an Orc that can choose between 1 S6 attack 5+save, 2 S4 attacks 5+ save and 1 S4 attack 3+ save in combat..and in the first round of combat those S4 attacks are S5. Yes swordmasters will probably gub them toe to toe, but at the moment Swordmasters are one of the hardest units in the game, as for GG and Daemons, they are atleast as good as those.

Let's compare Black Orcs with other elite infantry.
Black Orcs, 14 pts. for: M4, WS4 , T4, S4, LD8, choppas, get all weapon options (still can only use one, can't change them during combat), 4+ non-CC save, no animosity (though this is the norm, rather then something units should stand out for having)

Ironbreakers, 13 pts. for: M3, WS5, T4, T4, LD9, 3+ non-CC save, large selection of runic standards (including doubling US and being immune to fear and terror), can always march

Grave Guards, 12 pts. for: M4, WS3, S4, T4, killing blow, magical attacks, banner that can give them +1 hit, synergy with Helm of Command (gives WS 6/7), immune to psychology, causes fear, crumbles instead of breaking, can be raised, can get AFS from core choice (Corpse Cart)

Black Guard are harder to compare because of the elf statline, but take a look at how many special rules they stacked on them - ItP, Stubborn on LD9 and eternal-hatred. At the same time they can still fight with 2 re-rollable S4 attacks - and, having higher WS and re-rolls, they are better at fightning in a direct comparison to AHW Black Orcs.

Plaguebeaers are weaker then Black Orcs, but with Herald giving them regeneration, they are definitly a better buy for 12 points. Herald makes them more expensive though.

Still, I would say that Grave Guards, Black Guard and Ironbreakers are noticebly better then the Black Orcs. The Orcs are simply overcosted for what they can do - and the fact that they pay for all two (three with shield) weapon options while only being able to use one is a rather poor ability. If they use choppa, they are not using the GW, which is included in their rather high relative cost. Ironbreakers get 2+ save, Grave Guard are undead and have killing blow combined with +1 hit banner, Swordmasters are WS6 A2 ASF - i would say that these things enable those units to better fill their elite infantry niches - staying power in case of Ironbreakers, Graveguard and Black Guard and ability to kill for Swordmasters. Black Orcs can take a charge with T4 and 3+ save (note though that they have no chance of stopping something like Blood Knights or Dragon Princes - while Blackguard or regenerating Plaugebears can do it), and can hit hard (though I don't know if you can call 1 S6 / 2 S4 hard anymore) - but they don't excel in any of these two uses, and as such, are simply not worth 13/14 points in comparison to other elite infantry.

As I said about the magic items, Black Orcs would be 'fine' in 6th edition - when elite infantry was overcosted compared to pretty much anything else. With the current new books, they are a poorer choice. I'm not saying that you cannot do anything with Black Orcs, but in comparison with other elite infantry they are at a disadvantage.

They are not 0-1 anymore, they don't cause panic and you can take hundreds of them.

With 3 wounds per 20 points (around 7 points for a T2 wound?) I still fail to see their use. Redirecting charges/screening could be one, but Snotlings being ItP are not as flexible as Wolf Riders, who are not so much expensive.

Fanatics were amazing when they ignored armour saves, they are still amazing now, yes they aren't as amazing but you cant have a whole battle plan that revolves around fanatics

I don't think people ever based their battleplans on fanatics - something that can be lured out, can totally miss, can kill itself in various ways and bounce through your troops already has enough disadvantages in my oppinion. They don't always hit - and when they hit something, it SHOULD hurt. Currently it only hurts fast cavalry and weak fliers. They were needlesly weakened and kept their previous point cost - in the same way that Boar Boyz were buffed, but were made more expensive.



Comments in bold ;).

Also, to me it seems that while writing the book Matt Ward constantly watched out so that he creates NOTHING that could in ANY way be 'cheesy'. And thus things like Black Orcs killing troops, Waaagh! killing troops or LD4 Snotlings were born. Compare this to Daemons being able to mix all Gods together, VC characters with extra points for (repeatable through the army!) powers or A7 always re-roll Hydra. (with 6 re-rollable S3 AP attacks from elves as well, just in case you can't break this regiment with just Hydra). I'm all for eliminating 'must take' choices - I hated it when in 6th edition the only DE rare I saw on tables were maxed out bolt throwers, and someone taking Hydra was looked upon as "hey, this guy is not really gonna win". But in O&G this went too far, and units got needlesly nerfed, and the amount of army building combinations that are part of Warhammer (especially if someone goes to tourneys) got toned down.

neXus6
21-07-2008, 20:32
I can't help but agree that it seemed as if GW decided to test releasing a very balanced list with Greenskins and then just went "Sod it" and returned to the normal progression of army books.

If Matt Ward did this off his own back then I highly commend him for trying to break the trend of one-upsmanship that seems to exist between army designers, while keeping within the same loose framework of "balance." The Orc and Goblin army book is amazingly characterful and balanced...alas none of the other books have been written in the same way.

etancross
21-07-2008, 20:32
I will say that technically you are right, random and funny doesn't have to be poor. But right now it is.

You know why I agree with this statement? Because when I make the argument about the things that hold Orcs back, there is always some joker who says “I love the funny random things orcs do”, “it makes them fun and funny and orcs are supposed to be funny”.

To that I say, how funny is it in a close game in the bottom of the 6th turn and you have a GAME WINNING flank charge on a unit of something and you have animosity and don’t go anywhere? So that 24 man strong unit of boys just f’n sits there and you lose the game……

Or how about you have a fanatic go flying into your own units and kill 5 – 6 wolfriders that you were using for bait and switches? Or You roll for animosity and get a 1 but have a black orc in the unit so you have him assault his own unit so you can still move and that bastard kills everything he hits?

All of these things and MANY MANY more horror stories of supposed “funny” things have happened to me in games….. Were they funny at the time? HELLLLLLL NO! Do I look back on them and laugh now….. HELLLL NO! (well maybe one or two).

I love Orcs and look forward to playing them again soon but for the love of all that’s good GW needs to get rid of Orc animosity.

Grinloc
21-07-2008, 21:22
Pretty much the only halfway decent troops choice for its points cost is the orc boy. Everything else of infantry and cavalry is overcosted and hampered with *tralala* rules.
Wolf riders one of the fastest fast cavalry in the game. Errm, how? All typical fast cavalry units got 9" movement and can do everything better than the gobs.
One might say "but they pay for that in points". Sorry, but this is far from the truth. This silly situation gets even worse due to the most recent example. The DE dark riders, the best fast cavalry in all of warhammer, just got a points drop. Now they cost 4 (!) points more than an equally equiped wolf rider and those 4 points more stand for: No animosity (so not refusing to move or even potentially blowing up all by themselves), +2WS, +1BS, +2Ld, hatred. So by shamelessly comparing single units out of two totally different armies...that's worth 4 points? Interesting concept.

BO awesome? Yes i'm an annoying bastard, another comparison coming right up. BO for what they do 14 points. Black Guard? M5, WS6, S4, T3, 5+AS, Ld9, stubborn, ItP, ETERNAL hatred, all that for...2 points...less. The DE player can be a naughty boy/girl and even make them unbreakable.
Witches? COK? It just gets worse by the minute.

Now sheathe your forks and candles. What i'm trying to get at: When looking at the recently released army books, there's one thing which worries me. Considering O&G's can barely hold their own on a competitive level against the 6th edition army books it will most likely only get worse for the O&G's players, not better. All those upcoming 7th edition army books will include similar power increases and points cost reductions will go along with it.

Matt Ward is only partially to blame for this mess. It also is an apparent major screwup in GW's managment. All those players can hope for is that history doesn't repeat itself once 8th edition comes around.

When a new potential warhammer fantasy player comes to this forum to ask about the experience of others and which army to choose (or he just decides to read the threads about such a subject and doesn't "say" a word), i surely wouldn't stand there glorifying an army on how funny and awesome it is, when in reality it gets spanked around on a tournament level. Heaven forbid that new player might be primarily interested in winning, even more so with a funny army as O&G's should be. Fact is the O&G's don't provide the winning part the way they are.

Playing with a funny army and reasonable expectations of victory should never EVER be seperated from each other. No f'in matter how "awesome" it may seem due to personal opinion when looking at the present status of game balance. There's nothing "awesome" about it right about now. Nothing, for the warhammer community as a whole.

Crovax20
21-07-2008, 22:03
As discussed in the other topic about revising green skins, most players seem to want the following:

Black Orcs shouldn't do d6 str 5 hits to its own unit. A reroll or d3 str 5 hits seem to be more appropiate..

Animosity, the 1 isn't the problem its the 6. A result of 6 leads to your carefully crafted battleplan been laid to waste while the 6 should be beneficial. Solution? Make the unit just move d6 anywhere it wants. Archers should instead get a d6 range bonus and not move at all.

Point value should be relooked at. Other armies have far superior troops for only a point or 2 more... or sometimes even less points.

Magic item list is bad and needs to be looked at as well.

Thats about it and after wading through page after page it seems like the right thing to do in my opinion.

Muad'Dib
21-07-2008, 23:03
Matt Ward is only partially to blame for this mess. It also is an apparent major screwup in GW's managment. All those players can hope for is that history doesn't repeat itself once 8th edition comes around.



I can't help but agree that it seemed as if GW decided to test releasing a very balanced list with Greenskins and then just went "Sod it" and returned to the normal progression of army books.

If Matt Ward did this off his own back then I highly commend him for trying to break the trend of one-upsmanship that seems to exist between army designers, while keeping within the same loose framework of "balance." The Orc and Goblin army book is amazingly characterful and balanced...alas none of the other books have been written in the same way.

I don't think the unbalances that exist through Warhammer, and are so apparent in O&G, are part of any plan. Only one word comes to my mind in regards how books are written in Warhammer in regards to forming a balanced system (and Warhammer 40k as well, don't know about LOTR) : idiocy. Most of the stuff is, frankly speaking, done without any coherent plan or consequence - Lizardmen get 9 move magic item for 25 pts, VC get it for 10 pts. O&G get 5+ ward save for 30 pts, Dark Elves get a 2+/3+ one for 35 pts. In units costs it's harder to spot such senseless stuff, but even there we got cases that defy rules established in the system - new Daemon Princes come to mind, with their amazing 75 pts gifts allowance (they are a LORD choice) and Chaos Marks that give no benefits other then to buy some less crappy gifts for this allowance, and, last but not least, is their ridiculous point cost when compared to Greater Daemons from the same list.

I could go on and on, but I think there is enough GW 'whinning' going on already. The point is, that O&G got hit by two wrecking balls - one was the sudden - and brief - change in writing philosophy; but I don't think Matt Ward is to blame - he tried to write a book without cheese in like of double Steam Tank or Lector on War Altar with Speculum. (including even such characterful rules as your character killing his own unit - and no, it's not the spell from the old Slaaneshi lore !) Not his fault that after O&G came the, let's call them, 'slightly more powerful' books...

The second wrecking ball is the general GW attitude to writing rulebooks that I listed few examples of before - despite having written around 20 (close to 30?) army books already since 6th edition, they still haven't learned to fairly price the most basic units (as in, cavalry, infantry, elite infantry) and magic items. Maybe it's not enough playtesting, maybe Warhammer is such a complicated system that they get lost within so many variables (yet players can figure out what is 'good' or 'cheesy', and what is 'weak' or 'useless' right after first solid rumours start appearing - surely they are sneaky, WAAC gits!)
Or maybe the guys at GW just don't care much - after all, we all play for fun!

Heretic Burner
21-07-2008, 23:43
The problem isn't so much as anyone wants O&G to be horrific (aside from GW apologists who see nothing wrong), its that nobody at GW particularly cares overmuch to see them succeed. They simply don't have anybody well placed in the organisation that actually cares much about the Greenskins at all. Oh sure they'll proclaim how they always enjoy playing or playing against an O&G force but lets be honest - nobody cares for them like Alessio cares for Skaven.

So what happened? Matt Ward gets dumped on the book with absolutely no credentials whatsoever. The train wreck that resulted clearly wasn't given the attention it deserved, there is no way certain units are even remotely playable in their current form from a rules stand let alone being balanced. Absolutely no effort has been put forward by the company to repair the damage (ie an update in White Dwarf, a get you by list until the next update, etc) when the problem is clear to virtually everyone (aside from those already mentioned aplogists). Simply put, nobody cares.

Well GW are rapidly finding out their complete apathy isn't sitting too well with their customers. With the company swimming in red ink you would think now would be the time for GW to go into overdrive to appeal to their rapidly dwindling customer base. However has anything been done? At this point even a blatant lie - "Oops, flubbed that one lads but we're working hard on it" - would be at least some concession to their loyal customers. No such luck so far.

Grinloc
21-07-2008, 23:54
Muad'Dib, that's an interesting thought process, i'm honest here btw. So maybe the GW army book designers don't coordinate the "updating process" across all armies with each other within an edition? Not to mention the writers of army books possibly having their favorite armies. That's why i think this would be a major managment screwup.

No matter if this is actually true, by all things dark (DE reference, yes ty :)) i sure hope it isn't, there's one thing which bothers me:
If it really was Matt Ward's idea to create an O&G's army free of "cheese", how could he even consider doing that while knowing fully well, that there are many armies out there which have plenty of "cheese" in comparison? Not to mention all the armies, which got updated after the O&G's, received a power increase across the board?
What would effectively be the result? The greenskins' revision becoming collateral damage for his idea of "for the better of the game"?

Sorry, but that would be an excuse. There is no reason to cut Mr. Ward any slack. Both him and GW made a serious mistake and they seem to have no intention to explain themselves (=publishing a revision, like the DE got in 6th).

Conotor
22-07-2008, 00:15
Infantry that one turn a game wont move and another turn potentially moves out of posistion is the best infantry in a game based about tactical movement! Infantry that is the same points as a Dark Elf equally equipped yet has overall worse stats. Wow. The misconceptions continue.

Im talking about night goblins with nets. 3 points/model allows u to have so many units that if one fails, another can just take its place.

Also, orc stats are FAR better then elf stats. T4, and S4 on turn 1 is WAY better then high ws and i.

Orcs also have the best magic weapons I have ever met.

Warhammerrox
22-07-2008, 00:45
I don't normally bother with adding to online debates like this, as it's completely a waste of time, us players just knocking the same ball back and forward to each other is pointless, nobody who matters will ever read this and like others have said earlier, nobody seems to care...

I'm an O&G player who started back up in the latest edition after having a hiyatus from the hobby for a while, started back in the old days of Rouge Trader 40k....

I have not won a game yet...! Not ONE... Doesn't matter who I tilt against, Lizzies, Daemons, Vamps, Dwarfs.... Always ends the same, whether it's inferior troops, animosity, or blorc "quelling"...

Unfortunately, the current book doesn't seem to give me many, if any, tools to aid me, terrible pricing of units, what's with the 4pts Night Goblin with spear, when a human with spear is 6pts, the human spear man gets light armour and shield, the Night Goblin gets no light armour and a negative difference of 3pts in 2 stats areas.... eh???

The pricing of other troop choices as already discussed here is also quite flabbergasting, so DE Dark Riders are to be a mere 4pts dearer than Wolf Riders for all those stats increases and abilities..... Sure, Elves across the board could do with a points break, but not when we see clearly inferior troop types given a points increase that makes no sense.

The other subjects of our terrible options choices for our characters and the total afterthought that is the magic items section I find is more an insult to the players of our army that have spent good hard cash on these figures just to loose at any and all points....

Unfortunately, we seem to be unable to build strong lists to match the strong lists of other gamers, Dwarfs, Vamps, Daemons, etc... No matter what we deploy against them we are outclassed.

Even the options we have that are very good and that do give us a fighting chance are badly interpreted, fanatics and nets come to mind here.

I think GW has been "working" on the O&G concept for long enough now to realise certain things DO NOT WORK in their current forms, the Animosity and Fanatic concepts come to mind here.

Vast swathes of this book need re-structuring, from basic points cost, upwards. While they are at it, they can write a proper book with proper explanations of the rules given, ie, blorc 'armed to da teef', failed Waaggh rolls and 25% casualties... The shortcomings of this book are manyfold.

Unfortunately for me I am unable just to drop a couple of hundred quid on some seemingly powerful, well written and perfectly winable Vamps, Daemons or even DE so I am stuck with the white elephant of fantasy that is the current Orc book, the lads and I are moving onto kiddie-kay with it's new release, so I plan to spend less time in the fantasy world and spend more time back with my beloved Dark Angels.

I just can't be bothered pi**ing up a wall and spending more money on the Orcs while I try to figure out a winning formula. Hell, I'll just settle for a competitive formula that doesn't seem to revolve around planning an army build around as many fear/terror causing units I can while limiting the amount of units that have to take an Animosity test every turn... Very UN-Orcy.

Keep plodding lads... It might get better in 8th edition...

Warhammerrox
22-07-2008, 01:00
Im talking about night goblins with nets. 3 points/model allows u to have so many units that if one fails, another can just take its place.

Also, orc stats are FAR better then elf stats. T4, and S4 on turn 1 is WAY better then high ws and i.

Orcs also have the best magic weapons I have ever met.


"Im talking about night goblins with nets. 3 points/model allows u to have so many units that if one fails, another can just take its place."

>>> A 5 up save unit on hand weapon and shield is not something you should be vaunting, no sir. If Nets were better envisioned, to something like, 1pt per model and not a blanket cost that favours huge units and not small units, they would be better, but spending points on a unit with no save to talk about just to transport some nets around the countryside is quite ludicrous...


"Also, orc stats are FAR better then elf stats. T4, and S4 on turn 1 is WAY better then high ws and i."

>>> Unfortunately not, especially not when them aforementioned Elves happen to be striking 1st with Great Weapons, or hitting you senseless with a flurry of hatred fuelled attacks. Lets see how many of those amazing Orcs are stood when it comes to their turn to strike on the 1st round of combat? You obviously have very limited experience of Orcs? seeing as my experience of my Orcs has shown me there is frequently nobody left standing except for the champion...


"Orcs also have the best magic weapons I have ever met."

>>> Magic Weapons are good with, unfortunately we have no mundane or magical armours to keep us alive to get much benefit out of them magic weapons past the 1st encounter with enemy characters... DE Assassins anyone???

Gobbo Lord
22-07-2008, 01:11
Im talking about night goblins with nets. 3 points/model allows u to have so many units that if one fails, another can just take its place.

First of by giving Night Goblins Nets you are increase their points values from three points. If the unit is 35 strong you have increased them to 4 points each. If it is 20 strong, the minimum size, which you would have to take to have "so many units another one just takes its place" it makes the goblins close to 5 points each, and for that, you can get an orc which is much more usefull.

And about Goblins taking another units place, is this in some sort of line you have arranged your units in, having so many units another can take ones place requires a few things.

It requires cheap troops, it requires units which can get out of the way, can move when needed etc, and have a high enough leadership to not run off when the unit they are "replacing" is destroyed. Greenskins are not good for this, in fact they are the worst.

Elves will get the charge against orcs more often than orcs will charge them due to their 2 inch longer charge range. Rerolling misses with weaponskill 4 means they will not miss many times, they are rerolling and hitting on threes. Elves will have 5 warriors in combat for every 4 orcs due to the base size. So that extra strength in the first round of combat will be from your champion and possibly one other survivor. YOu can argue that orcs can charge if they call a waaagh, this has many disadvanages. Waaagh could leave them sat there and taking d6 wounds. They could move forward 1 inch. They could wheel and present their flank to the intended unit as they can see some shades to the right. Elves have none of these problems and are garaunteed to charge if they are 10 inches away.


orc stats are FAR better then elf stats

Orcs have +1 toughness. And +1 strength for ONE round.
Elves have +1 Base Movement, +1 weapon skill, +1 balistic skill and +1 leadership.

Please explain how the Orc has FAR better stats, i would love to hear the reasoning behind this. It is higher by one point on one statistic. The Elf is higher by one point on 4 statistics. Even without the fact the Orc wont move for one turn a game and the Elf is either rerolling misses or always striking first the Elf still comes out on top.

Grinloc
22-07-2008, 03:01
Gobbo Lord, i'm not sure if discussing these matters is of much use. On some occasions the other side of these debates tends to believe their greenskin units are among the best of their respective category. It seems the O&G's army in random cases turns some people into "defenders of their beloved army against any non-believers" with a "i can't hear you" attitude to go along with it.

I by no means want to offend and i apologize in advance, in case this offended anyone here.
It's just that occasionally these discussions come across as such. These discussions (doesn't have to be about O&G's, rather all armies in general) are about "high tier" viability of armies and their lists, not about "laid back private battles against friends who don't push their armies towards the limit", where the greenskins' shortcomings are maybe harder to notice than in tournaments.

Non-O&G's players have no reason to bash/attack anything, so there's no reason for the current (seemingly) "underdog of Warhammer" to get defensive. Noone wants O&G's to suck, they were an essential part of this game long before most people here started playing and they still are. But threads about discussion, "number crunching" and finding ways to improve them turning into a pit where "polished dirt" starts to fly are rather pointless for getting any benefit out of them.

Voodoo Boyz
22-07-2008, 03:22
Hey look at the bright side, Matt Ward learned his lesson and doesn't write underpowered army books anymore. I mean he just gave us the Demons of Chaos book....:D

Honestly, it still makes me laugh ever time I open the Demon book and see his name and then go back to look at the O&G book afterwards.

neXus6
22-07-2008, 03:23
Erm...I think you'll find there is reason to get defensive when people are saying the army I have collected for 15 years is the worst in the game, totally rubbish, suck...etc...when that is clearly nonsense.

Yes they are not top tier but to be honest I don't give a damn about tourney armies where's the fun in abusing your list to the point where it is in tears and begging to stop being raped. :rolleyes:

Grinloc
22-07-2008, 03:59
Hey look at the bright side, Matt Ward learned his lesson and doesn't write underpowered army books anymore. I mean he just gave us the Demons of Chaos book....:D

Hehe, that's true.



Erm...I think you'll find there is reason to get defensive when people are saying the army I have collected for 15 years is the worst in the game, totally rubbish, suck...etc...when that is clearly nonsense.

Yes they are not top tier but to be honest I don't give a damn about tourney armies where's the fun in abusing your list to the point where it is in tears and begging to stop being raped. :rolleyes:

The thing is the other armies provide viability for both playstyles. There's no reason why O&G's shouldn't. Also when looking at those tournament numbers O&G's are unfortunately indeed the worst in such a gaming environment.
You may not care about these tournaments, which is fine, but there are O&G's players out there who definately do care about such things. Even people who switched to other armies, but who are still searching for things/updates/revisions which could make their former army "tournament-viable" again. A few of them are probably venting their frustration Mr. Ward caused them and they have every right to do so, no matter if other people want to hear it or not.

TheDarkDuke
22-07-2008, 04:05
Ive said this time and time again around here. Everyone seems to have an army they just figure out how to use, and use it well. I for one look at my three fantasy armies: High Elf, Ogre Kingdoms and Skaven. My rough win percentage is:

High Elf 70-75%
Ogres 90-95% (Have yet to loose a game with them, tied a few)
Skaven 0% (Have yet to win, and barely drawn many ties)

Now based on the normal cries of cheese etc. and we all know that those cries of cheese mean that there is no other factors other then those comments being 100% true, my %'s should look more like this:

High Elf 85-90%
Ogres 10-20%
Skaven 45-55%

Other then that we all know everything is broken, just look at these forums 2 or 3 times a week. Everything in the game is broken... unless that is your green. Again I will end with the quote:

It Ain't Easy Being Green.

Dranthar
22-07-2008, 04:05
All I can say is that I've been playing an non powergaming (eg. only 4 fanatics), all-goblin list since the latest O&G book came out, and I've been winning around 75% of my games.

I guess that means that either I'm some kind of supreme tactician compared to my opponents (haha), or the O&G book isn't nearly as crippling as some of the full time pesimists here like to loudly proclaim.

I'd agree that they're not as brain-dead easy to win with as (eg.) Daemons or Vampire Counts, but it's by no means crap.


Oh, and giving nets to NGs is the equivalent to giving them +1T and (in most cases) +1AS to EVERYONE in the unit and EVERYONE engaged with the same enemy unit, including Lords/Heroes. I've found it improves their survivability extremely well for the cost.

Muncher666
22-07-2008, 05:31
So really, all the O&G book needs is some points dropping and a few little tweaks here and there. I've never had any real issues with the rules of the book - if there is one thing that bugs me it's the inability for night goblins or vanilla goblins to take magic standards, making you waste a hero choice and spend an awful lot to get something like the RR banner (stubborn, 50 points, goblins only [!]).

All this being said, I enjoy my goblins immensely, even if they are a bit too expensive for what they do. It frightens me when an empire army can out horde me with better troops. :(

But my biggest issue with the Orcs and Goblins book is the background. The actual book is really bad. The fluff is far too short. They left out the Once and Future Git, for christ's sake!

What really annoys me about Matt Ward, the writer of the O&G book, is that he's written really good books since then and before then. It was just so lifeless. I don't think silly armies should be written by serious people. :)

Allan.

Shimmergloom
22-07-2008, 05:33
Nets are useless against, shooting, magic, killing blow and S6 or more combat attacks(of which nowadays there are more and more). Plus they do not work 17% of the time, instead they give you -1S instead.

So no, it's not the equivalent of T4. Is it better than using a common goblins? oh yeah. Is it better than using an orc. No.

Dranthar
22-07-2008, 06:19
Nets are useless against, shooting, magic, killing blow and S6 or more combat attacks(of which nowadays there are more and more). Plus they do not work 17% of the time, instead they give you -1S instead.

Killing blow and S6 have exactly the same effect against T4 as it would against T3 with nets, so no difference there.

Nets give no bonus against shooting and magic, sure, but when you take a decent-sized unit of goblins, shooting and magic very rarely puts much of a dent into those units anyway. So yes there's a difference, but it's a difference that you shouldn't really be caring about.

The -1S can be a pain, but it rarely happens. Unlike everyones favorite whipping boy (animosity) nets will only be rolled for 2-3 times per game, if even that. So while you'll fail the net roll now and then, it will generally only happen to a given unit every 2-3 games.
There's also the fact that most of the time they're just crappy goblins getting -1S...or were you actually expecting to kill something with your goblins?

I certainly acknowledge that nets come with a certain risk attached, but is the risk worth the potential reward? Hell yes, and my opponents tend to agree.

kroq'gar
22-07-2008, 12:00
Why is noone complaining about the 6 point, t4 morningstar wielding boyz that can still parry.
To take an earlier comparison.

Night goblin spearman- 4 points
Empire spearman- 6 points (w/shield)
orc w/shield- 6points

Orc beats the spearman silly (hits 4's wounds 3's spearman gets 6+ save, vs hits on 4's, wounds on 5's and a 4+ save).

Said it once, say it again. Try empire people. Sure, they look OK in tourney results, but thats because they have some VERY narrow power builds "gee... gunline of dual stanks/franz."

My army gets just as whipped as orcs against most new things- whats that, your vargulf can regenerate... whats that, i cant flank? whats that, empire ld is terrible?

Animosity may suck sometimes, but it keeps your opponent off guard (you leave wider margins, do NOT rely upon units failing animosity).

Crovax20
22-07-2008, 12:17
Why is noone complaining about the 6 point, t4 morningstar wielding boyz that can still parry.
To take an earlier comparison.

Night goblin spearman- 4 points
Empire spearman- 6 points (w/shield)
orc w/shield- 6points

Orc beats the spearman silly (hits 4's wounds 3's spearman gets 6+ save, vs hits on 4's, wounds on 5's and a 4+ save).

Said it once, say it again. Try empire people. Sure, they look OK in tourney results, but thats because they have some VERY narrow power builds "gee... gunline of dual stanks/franz."

My army gets just as whipped as orcs against most new things- whats that, your vargulf can regenerate... whats that, i cant flank? whats that, empire ld is terrible?

Animosity may suck sometimes, but it keeps your opponent off guard (you leave wider margins, do NOT rely upon units failing animosity).

well at least they can attack with 2 ranks and have no animosity, nor a black orc wiping them out. :D

(I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about btw, just started playing Warhammer as O&G :angel:)

Gazak Blacktoof
22-07-2008, 12:31
Quite so Crovax. The spearmen have several advantages over the boyz and the two units are fairly evenly matched. It might be that the spearmen even have a slight advantage once the full effects of animosity are taken into account.

kroq'gar
22-07-2008, 12:38
Quite so Crovax. The spearmen have several advantages over the boyz and the two units are fairly evenly matched. It might be that the spearmen even have a slight advantage once the full effects of animosity are taken into account.

Like?

You can take two small orc regiments to negate detachments, and if you stand and bicker, charging spearmen dont get two ranks..

Shimmergloom
22-07-2008, 13:45
Taking 2 small orc regiments to negate detachments is foolhardy. You don't take 10 orc units against shooter armies like empire unless you want them to be shot to bits. Basic Orc Boyz vs Empire state troops are balanced vs each other. But basic Orc Boyz are not balanced vs any other core troops.

Why in the world are people talking about orcs parrying like it's some sort of special rule only for them?

EVERYONE CAN PARRY. Orcs stupidly didn't have the rule in 6th edition. So whoopdedo, they corrected that in 7th. But that's not a special rule that only orcs have. Every foot troop with a shield can parry. And with the abundance of S5 and S6 troops hitting the table these days, that parry is meaning less and less.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
22-07-2008, 13:55
Choppas, before 7th Edition, were not Hand Weapons. Ergo, if you took a 2nd Hand Weapon, you lost the S bonus. And you could not Parry with them either.

Now you can. And you wonder why they went up in points slightly? Hmmmm. I wonders.

Gazak Blacktoof
22-07-2008, 14:30
Like?

Higher Initiative, detachments, fight in two ranks and no animosity.

Either unit attacking the other is likely to result in a draw. The only factor that affects the overall result of the batle is then the reliability of the two units. The spearmen are clearly superior in this regard. They wont advance across your own line or stop when you want them to charge.

As I said, there's not much to choose betweent he two units but I'd say the spearmen were actually a marginally better unit though its not worth spilling blood over.

Shimmergloom
22-07-2008, 20:31
Choppas, before 7th Edition, were not Hand Weapons. Ergo, if you took a 2nd Hand Weapon, you lost the S bonus. And you could not Parry with them either.

Now you can. And you wonder why they went up in points slightly? Hmmmm. I wonders.

High Elves before 7th edition, could not always strike first. No wonder why they went up in points. No wait, they went down or stayed the same across the board.

Dark elves before 7th edition, could not re-roll misses from hatred, it's no wonder they went up in points, oh wait. They went down too.

Well Black Knights did not have ethereral movement before, so that's certainly why they went up...oh they went down too.

Ok, but at least hydras went up in points when they got regen...damn.

Daemons? no they got a standard 5+ ward and superpowers with heralds for free.

Empire? Went down in points too.

Dwarfs? points decrease + heavy armor standard.

Ok, wait found it. Boar boyz. The choppa rules clearly meant they should get a points increase. Which they did. Good job GW.

Well there you have it. Points increases when you get new beneficial rules are clearly the norm. Wait. Choppa bonus is only for models on foot?

*^@#!

Shamfrit
22-07-2008, 20:34
High Elves before 7th edition, could not always strike first. No wonder why they went up in points. No wait, they went down or stayed the same across the board.

Dark elves before 7th edition, could not re-roll misses from hatred, it's no wonder they went up in points, oh wait. They went down too.

Well Black Knights did not have ethereral movement before, so that's certainly why they went up...oh they went down too.

Ok, but at least hydras went up in points when they got regen...damn.

Daemons? no they got a standard 5+ ward and superpowers with heralds for free.

Empire? Went down in points too.

Dwarfs? points decrease + heavy armor standard.

Ok, wait found it. Boar boyz. The choppa rules clearly meant they should get a points increase. Which they did. Good job GW.

Well there you have it. Points increases when you get new beneficial rules are clearly the norm. Wait. Choppa bonus is only for models on foot?

*^@#!

Rofl, funny, laugh out loud and so painfully true.

Why has it taken me so long to realise this :evilgrin:

Mireadur
22-07-2008, 21:58
i think the main issues are the overpricing of bigguns, goblins (of all kinds), boar riders and black orcs (yes black orcs are overpriced too), the unability to use black orc leaders on certain units (i guess they really wanted black orcs in infantry units) and the crappyness of most magic items.

However i find magic pretty decent because now you get huge bonuses when your units are fighting while will be very strange you get penalties when they flee since this will happen normally happen with units smaller than 20minis.

they fixed some totally useless weapons too (spears, bows) by lowering their point cost and made choppas useful. (still think spears should be free exchangeable though)

Warboss Antoni
22-07-2008, 22:19
As an Ork, Orc, Hordes of Chaos general, I can tell you random is only "fun" when you have power behind it. The Shock Attack Gun has huge potential. You can wipe out half a terminator sqaud with a roll of 7 and a good scatter, and at the same time you can teleport yourself across the table. You have the potential to do damage, but you also have the potential to do some random negative effect. With Orcs and Goblins, theres isnt much power behind the randomness. The whole learn to play with animosity is just saying, "I hope I don't get a 1 and ruin the game for me". It's not fun to have your spider riders fail and block your entire army from moving behind it, especailly when your facing a strong shooting army shooting up your army from a hill.

Sure, orc infantry may be good on paper, but people need to start taking into account the entire army. Sure, Orcs are better then spearmen of an equal points value ( no attachments, ect, both have command ), but there's a whole list of things the orcs don't have:
1. Shooting. Don't even say Arrer Boyz ( not that their absolutly terrible, just weak compared to most archers/gunmen ect. ).
2. Strong War Machines. Yes, spear chukkas are cheap, but they dont have the punch of a cannon. Lobbas are god too, but again not a cannon.
3. Effective Charecters. Other then for the leadership bubble of a general ( which O+G oh so need so much ), there is no point in taking a boss. Greenskin magic is decent ( well in my opinion ), but you basicly need it, otherwise your getting raped.
4. Coherency. You can have your spearmen charge a unit. You don't have to live on the hope you don't roll a one and screw yourself over.

Mozzamanx
22-07-2008, 22:50
I think the current book can be salvaged, with 2 simple rule fixes.

- Animosity only comes into play on a roll of a 1. If they are affected, roll on a second table- 1 means the unit hits itself (D6 hits? 2D6?), 2-5 means they squabble, and a 6 means you MAY CHOOSE to either have a full march move, or not move at all and bicker.

- Black Orc units and heroes have a 'bubble' of 6". Any unit within this bubble may reroll failed Animosity checks. If they still fail, then the Boss will get stuck in as normal.


Of course, they could use several more changes to bring them up to other new armies, but these 2 should certainly make them at least competent.

Gobbo Lord
22-07-2008, 22:56
High Elves before 7th edition, could not always strike first. No wonder why they went up in points. No wait, they went down or stayed the same across the board.

Dark elves before 7th edition, could not re-roll misses from hatred, it's no wonder they went up in points, oh wait. They went down too.

Well Black Knights did not have ethereral movement before, so that's certainly why they went up...oh they went down too.

Ok, but at least hydras went up in points when they got regen...damn.

Daemons? no they got a standard 5+ ward and superpowers with heralds for free.

Empire? Went down in points too.

Dwarfs? points decrease + heavy armor standard.

Ok, wait found it. Boar boyz. The choppa rules clearly meant they should get a points increase. Which they did. Good job GW.

Well there you have it. Points increases when you get new beneficial rules are clearly the norm. Wait. Choppa bonus is only for models on foot?


Shimmergloom. You have presented a nigh on perfect piece of wording there. This is why Orc and Goblin players are angry (Note they are still Orc and Goblin players). I defy anyone to argue against what you have said there.

Plus look at it this way. If all of 6th edition was perfectly balanced, and then one armies points went up and gained a dubioous special rule to boot, whilst all of the other armies points went down and they gained definite positive new rules to boot (ASF, Hatred, Ethereal Movement, Heralds gaining super bonuses for joining units) Then surely that 6th edition balance has been broken. Seriously you have spelled it out right there. Anybody arguing your point is just stubborn. Its there in black and white, nothing you said isnt true, they are facts, pure simple facts.

Crovax20
22-07-2008, 23:04
I think the current book can be salvaged, with 2 simple rule fixes.

- Animosity only comes into play on a roll of a 1. If they are affected, roll on a second table- 1 means the unit hits itself (D6 hits? 2D6?), 2-5 means they squabble, and a 6 means you MAY CHOOSE to either have a full march move, or not move at all and bicker.

- Black Orc units and heroes have a 'bubble' of 6". Any unit within this bubble may reroll failed Animosity checks. If they still fail, then the Boss will get stuck in as normal.


Of course, they could use several more changes to bring them up to other new armies, but these 2 should certainly make them at least competent.

Personally I'd like the animosity table to stay as it is, with the following change. On a 6 you roll a d6 and get to move the unit anywhere you want, so none of this closest enemy crap. If the unit is ranged, like arrer boyz etc they will add d6 range (or str if you want something real nasty) to their bows instead. Saves dicerolling and can actually make ranged units slighty better + solves the bad things happening when you roll a 6.

skuller
22-07-2008, 23:14
I been playing o& since storm of chaos so Im new compared to other players here and yes i was running back there an all black orc list back on those days then new edition came and unfortunatelly my well discipline army got converted to rambling mob. I being readint taht some player haven been able to win games and Im completly shock i cannot say that Im undefeted but have a good 50/50 ratio of wins from time to time I will run into an army that I will run a lot of trouble dealing with it mostly my biggest problem is to overcome regen without fire.

And yes my battle plans are always foiled because my unit decided to charge in the wrong moment or stay mumbling about last night soap opera...and the fact that Im able to miscast at least twice every turn but hey when the boyz charge and hit the way they're supposed to do so there are no fancy point ears, mummies, hummies, ogres, lizards, chaos hummies that will not suffer from my choppas.
Oh and I alwyas go 100% orc, either regular, savage or black.

My main complain on the other hand is the lack of fire to deal with regen (did I mention this before) and maybe the ability to have scouts.

Other than that I have tons of fun everytime my warpath hits 2-5 units, my giant gets his pants full of goodies, and I roar my waaaagh (the only way it works....peeps from my game group will testify that all other games are stop when I waaaaaagh )

Conotor
23-07-2008, 01:48
Quite so Crovax. The spearmen have several advantages over the boyz and the two units are fairly evenly matched. It might be that the spearmen even have a slight advantage once the full effects of animosity are taken into account.

With waaaagg, the orcs can rather easily get the charge, and with 2 hand weapons, they can smash most infantry units.

If u hate animosity, take black orcs. They can outfight sarri, and are very adaptable.

Conotor
23-07-2008, 01:50
I think the current book can be salvaged, with 2 simple rule fixes.

- Animosity only comes into play on a roll of a 1. If they are affected, roll on a second table- 1 means the unit hits itself (D6 hits? 2D6?), 2-5 means they squabble, and a 6 means you MAY CHOOSE to either have a full march move, or not move at all and bicker.

- Black Orc units and heroes have a 'bubble' of 6". Any unit within this bubble may reroll failed Animosity checks. If they still fail, then the Boss will get stuck in as normal.


Of course, they could use several more changes to bring them up to other new armies, but these 2 should certainly make them at least competent.

Anamosity is the only thing that stops orcs being the most OP race in the game with heir awesome stats and low point cost.

redrum
23-07-2008, 02:29
EVERYONE CAN PARRY. Orcs stupidly didn't have the rule in 6th edition. So whoopdedo, they corrected that in 7th. But that's not a special rule that only orcs have. Every foot troop with a shield can parry.

I know it's nitpicking but it's actually the hand weapons that allow troops to parry, not the shields. Plenty of troops have shields but can't parry.

Muncher666
23-07-2008, 03:58
I think the current book can be salvaged, with 2 simple rule fixes.

- Animosity only comes into play on a roll of a 1. If they are affected, roll on a second table- 1 means the unit hits itself (D6 hits? 2D6?), 2-5 means they squabble, and a 6 means you MAY CHOOSE to either have a full march move, or not move at all and bicker.

- Black Orc units and heroes have a 'bubble' of 6". Any unit within this bubble may reroll failed Animosity checks. If they still fail, then the Boss will get stuck in as normal.


Of course, they could use several more changes to bring them up to other new armies, but these 2 should certainly make them at least competent.

I think that animosity should, on a roll of a six, be able to take a leadership test to prevent a waaaagh move if need be. As it currently stands though, the animosity rules are nice and simple. Adding an additional table to it is just counter intuitive. No offense, but animosity is the least of the O&G army worries. Someone put it well earlier when they pointed out that an Orc with a Choppa is two points more than a Night Goblin with a Spear. That's just ridiculous. Goblins should go down in points so they can become more disposable, to everyone involved. They are the original horde army staple. Now they're nearly as expensive as a human soldier. Ugh.

If Night Goblins and regular goblins were 3 points with spear and shield, swappable to hand weapon and shield or bows for no extra cost - the core troops would be fixed. Still allow an upgrade for light armour on goblins for an additional point per model. Make gobbo chariots 2 for 1 again.

Half the cost of an orc for a diminunitive (sp?) goblin with similar armament makes sense to me, when you factor in animosity. The points cost for everything should factor it in. Orc boys are the only ones that seem to reach that. In an interview Matt Ward said he felt goblins 'made off like bandits', I believe - I would like to know what wacky plant he was smoking that day.

Allan.

Grinloc
23-07-2008, 05:03
When 8th edition comes along GW better make forest goblins (with a scout rule) return into the list. It's bad enough the greenskins can get severly hurt by scouting skirmishers, but as of today the O&G's army can't do a thing about it when an opponent puts his scouts into difficult terrain (like woods) at the end of the deployment phase.

O&G's without scouts is uncalled for and unimaginative.

Shimmergloom
23-07-2008, 05:13
well they can waste a character slot and give that one item that doesn't always work to them that makes them a scout. So they can do something. It's just not advisable.

Crovax20
23-07-2008, 07:50
Anamosity is the only thing that stops orcs being the most OP race in the game with heir awesome stats and low point cost.

Have you actually bothered reading in this thread? It has been pointed out many times that other races get better stats, for nearly the same point cost.

Hvidponi
23-07-2008, 09:18
IMO the orc army book (fantasy) is in its current state one of the best books made for warhammer... Its solid, fun, and most choice seems to be equally good (pumpling snot wagons sucks, but ok)... If only all the other armybooks where that well balanced...

Gazak Blacktoof
23-07-2008, 09:33
With waaaagg, the orcs can rather easily get the charge, and with 2 hand weapons, they can smash most infantry units.

If u hate animosity, take black orcs. They can outfight sarri, and are very adaptable.


OK what you've done there is pick a completely different unit with a different points cost.

Incidentally I don't hate animosity. It is as I said a disadvantage. If you play warhammer thinking its anything else you'll get a good kicking every time you play greenskins.

Calling a successful Waaagh! relies on luck, good generalship and timing. I used to think it was a real boon to the army but its massively situational and relies just as much on the disposition and placement of your opponent's forces as it does on the three factors I just mentioned.

EvC
23-07-2008, 10:24
I know it's nitpicking but it's actually the hand weapons that allow troops to parry, not the shields. Plenty of troops have shields but can't parry.

Every model has a hand weapon, so therefore any model with a shield can parry. You fail at nitpicking ;)

ninjaska
23-07-2008, 11:12
Oi,
I think that the biggest problem is, that we (GW and me) have diffrent sense of humor. There, in Nothingam, randomness is funny. Not for me. Probably when Matt Ward step in casino he LHAO.
Animosity, squig hoppers move, fanatics move or giant attack are not funny. They are time wasting.
When I'm checking animosity for my 10 units, then stupidity, then rolling for the distance of snotling pump wagon... my enemy is not smiling. He is yawning. He is going out for cigarette.
There should be only one or two units with special/funny rules.
Instead of rolling for animosity there sholud be LD test IF there is no enemy in LOS. Orks are race which loves fight, so why they just sit and watch enemy which is next to them???
Giants? They have three or four diffrent tables for their attacks?

Mad Doc Grotsnik
23-07-2008, 11:33
So, once again, the complaints are about long standing rules and units affected by said long standing rules.

And you started O&G why?

Every Orc and Gobbo player I know of, personally, plays them for precisely the reasons you dislike them. Because all the randomness makes them a *challenge*

If I wanted a no-brainer powerhouse, I'd play stunties. But no, I want a force that challenges my tactical wit as much as it challenges my opponents. Hence I came to Orcs and Gobbos.

*everything* people whinge about on this is mere opinion dressed up as irefutable fact, and I object to that!

Gobbo Lord
23-07-2008, 11:41
Anamosity is the only thing that stops orcs being the most OP race in the game with heir awesome stats and low point cost.
Have you actually bothered reading in this thread? It has been pointed out many times that other races get better stats, for nearly the same point cost.

Conotor is showing why people think there are no problems. Even though in this thread he is presented with evidence based on stat lines and the fact that the Orcs and Goblins went up in points whilst every other book went down (Including Shimmerglooms funny yet startlingly true redition of what each army gained) he still believes that Orcs and Goblins have "awsome stats and low pont cost".

This is a remnant of the army from how it was over two years ago, yes, they used to have good stats compared to their points in 6th edition. This was because everybody else had more expensive troops in comparison. Yet nowadays everybodys troops are decreasing in points AND gaining new army wide rules. Making the Orcs and Goblins, whose points went up in their most recent reworking, far less favourable in comparison.

However some people, as Conotor has shown us, will still believe that the Orcs and Goblins are the cheapest infantry in the game considering their "awsome stats" because that was, for many many years how the army worked. It has not been this way for two years. You can show people hard evidence of all cavalry decreasing in points and gaining extra rules compared to boar boyz, who increased in points and gained the possibility of taking d6 wounds as part of their new rule. You can spell it out as Shimmergloom did. You can compare an Orc and Dark Elf equipped the same for the same points and point out the Dark Elf has higher Stats in four categories and hatred whilst the Orc has higher Stats in one category and wont move for one turn of the game and people will STILL say that Orcs are the best troops for their point. Its like they refuse to read what is being said....


*everything* people whinge about on this is mere opinion dressed up as irefutable fact, and I object to that

Mad Doc, im sorry but i point you to Shimmerglooms post. You can not argue against it as it is fact, not opinion.

Dwarfs decreased in points
Empire decreased in points
High Elves decreased in points and gained ASF
Vampires decreased in points and gained numerable power dice and uber combinations
Black Knights decreased in points and gained Ethereal Movement
Deamons gain super abilities when their Herald join units for free
Dark Elves decreased in points and gained Hatred
The Hydra decreased in points and gained Regeneration

Wolf Riders and Boar Boyz increased in points and gained the possibility of taking d6 wounds added onto their animosity rule (Yes animosity was always there and was a fact, i accept that, but it never used to kill d6 of your men)
Goblins increased in points for no benefit
Fanatics stayed the same points but lost ignore armour saves and gained the ability to be taken out by a hill
Black Orc champions increased in points and lost a point of strength
Savage Orc Big Uns lost the ability to take a magic banner.

All of the above is not opinion. I do not think this is the case, it is the case. Ill say again. If 6th edition was balanced then how do you explain the above.... The only way this would be explainable was if in 6th edition Orcs and Goblins were the very best army and no other army could compete against them. So they made them worse whilst buffering up the other armies to try to level the playing field. BUt we al know this is not the case...........

......(waits for someone to say Orcs have the cheapest, most awsome troops or even worse, try to argue that Orcs did used to be too powerfull and thats why the points increase was only for them)

Fire Harte
23-07-2008, 11:57
Well said Mad Doc, orcs and gobbos are a true challenge, and those whiners who comment about how they can make better rules are wrong, because the design team know what they are doing and understand what sort of army the orcs and goblins are. No the reason I continue play orcs is because they are truly fun and a challenge for both sides of the gaming board. If you state you don't like randomness, then don't play orcs and goblins. besides the animosity table never bothered me much any way. The giant only has two tables to his attacks because his/her attitude towards the combat will be affected by the type of enmy he/she is attacking. Fanatics take up about 2 minutes of time, and animosity even less. So its not the rules that make players leave a game for a ciggarette, its the player IMO.

Chadjabdoul
23-07-2008, 12:54
Mad Doc, you have not really read anything in this thread have you?
There have been NO complaints about longstanding rules. ALL the complaints in this thread focus on the following:
Stupid unjustifiable rules that came when Ward tried to be funny (1 in 6 units killing themselves when waagh is called, Black orc characters killing their troops to quell animosity), and points values AFTER several new armybooks were released.

Every orc and goblin general here likes their army's random nature.
It just became apparent (if you need evidence simply read other pepople's posts instead of closing your ears and shouting: GW is great, you're just whining, go play dwarfs) that the game is no longer balanced. Points values is what makes the game balanced, and if you think that a d.elf spearman should only be 2 points more expensive than a goblin spearman then the problem lies with you and not with everyone else.

I have been playing orcs since the 4th ed armybook was released (1993 or something) and never before have I felt the need to complain about lack of balance.

Muad'Dib
23-07-2008, 13:56
Well said Mad Doc, orcs and gobbos are a true challenge, and those whiners who comment about how they can make better rules are wrong, because the design team know what they are doing and understand what sort of army the orcs and goblins are.
I read this 3 times, and I'm still not sure if it's sarcasm or not.
Have you read the comparisons between O&G/other armies units which I and few other people listed? Because they show clearly that GW does NOT know what they are doing.
Have you ever compared special rules and magic items that other armies got (while, as others noted, getting a decrease in points!) to the "fun randomness" that "true" O&G players seem to enjoy so much?
You really think that it's good design for 'beneficial' rules to kill your own units?

Note: If it was sarcasm, then I apologize.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
23-07-2008, 14:01
Blah blah blah.

And once again, you, like all people aimlessly complaining, are focussing solely on the negative, neatly ignoring the positive.

Yes, 1 in 6, statistically speaking* will take a few wounds. Oh noes! End of teh Wurldz! That worried about your Boarboyz? Stick the general in them. But of course, that means you are without his leadership and nobody does that. Well, I'm rather afraid they do that quite a lot. Gets your boss into combat nice and quick with a bodyguard of nutters intent on killing stuff. Thus, with one enemy unit reliably taken down, and your General marauding behind enemy lines, they will be stuck between rock and hard place.

Orcs and Goblins got 2 boosts with the advent of 7th Edition. Panic. You now need to flee through, not past, friendly units to force a panic. So, thats one traditional weakness no longer there. Choppas now count as Handweapons, so you can shield, and still get their bonus with dual-wield.

But of course, again, this is a positive outlook and clearly wrong.

Dark Elf Spearmen die just as easily as the Gobbo dies just as easily as the Spear wielding Elf to missile fire. Add in that the rest of the Dark Elf options aren't cheap. But hey, again, I'm just looking at the big picture rather than 1 dimensional arguements used to back up alleged broken stuff.

Fanatics did change slightly, yes. But they will still carve up infantry nice and quick, and kill enough Knights to make a difference.

O&G have massive amounts of synergy and variety in their list. Thus, certain aspects cost more to limit how many options any given list might have open to it. You can have dirt cheap characters, cheap spell casters, or you can go for a slightly tougher boss and employ an Orc, with the subsequent raise in points. Other armies do not have this luxury. You have your characters, and they are all much of a muchness in powerlevel. Yep, even Daemons. Their 'cheap' characters are the Heralds, which outside of their list, aren't all that cheap.

Orc spells changed somewhat. Me, I quite like the opportunity for a Waaagh! ever now and again. Seems like fun to me. But hey, I'm being realistic. I know I won't get it off every time, or even every game. But I do know my opponent will block it. Nobody wants an Orcy horde bearing down on them even faster.

The Ladz are just as they always have been. Something have gone up, others have gone down (in terms of effects etc..)

Are you honestly telling me that since the new book has come out, your precious win ratio has gone down a significant amount?

*Regarding 'statistics' and 'probability' I'm not Mathematician (though my teacher did say I was gifted in it, I could never be arsed) but I am pretty sure these fields of Mathematics cannot really be applied accurately in the context of the game, as there simply aren't enough rolls of the dice for probability and statistical chance to balance itself out...

Crovax20
23-07-2008, 14:24
Blah blah blah.

And once again, you, like all people aimlessly complaining, are focussing solely on the negative, neatly ignoring the positive.

Yes, 1 in 6, statistically speaking* will take a few wounds. Oh noes! End of teh Wurldz! That worried about your Boarboyz? Stick the general in them. But of course, that means you are without his leadership and nobody does that. Well, I'm rather afraid they do that quite a lot. Gets your boss into combat nice and quick with a bodyguard of nutters intent on killing stuff. Thus, with one enemy unit reliably taken down, and your General marauding behind enemy lines, they will be stuck between rock and hard place.

Orcs and Goblins got 2 boosts with the advent of 7th Edition. Panic. You now need to flee through, not past, friendly units to force a panic. So, thats one traditional weakness no longer there. Choppas now count as Handweapons, so you can shield, and still get their bonus with dual-wield.

But of course, again, this is a positive outlook and clearly wrong.

Dark Elf Spearmen die just as easily as the Gobbo dies just as easily as the Spear wielding Elf to missile fire. Add in that the rest of the Dark Elf options aren't cheap. But hey, again, I'm just looking at the big picture rather than 1 dimensional arguements used to back up alleged broken stuff.

Fanatics did change slightly, yes. But they will still carve up infantry nice and quick, and kill enough Knights to make a difference.

O&G have massive amounts of synergy and variety in their list. Thus, certain aspects cost more to limit how many options any given list might have open to it. You can have dirt cheap characters, cheap spell casters, or you can go for a slightly tougher boss and employ an Orc, with the subsequent raise in points. Other armies do not have this luxury. You have your characters, and they are all much of a muchness in powerlevel. Yep, even Daemons. Their 'cheap' characters are the Heralds, which outside of their list, aren't all that cheap.

Orc spells changed somewhat. Me, I quite like the opportunity for a Waaagh! ever now and again. Seems like fun to me. But hey, I'm being realistic. I know I won't get it off every time, or even every game. But I do know my opponent will block it. Nobody wants an Orcy horde bearing down on them even faster.

The Ladz are just as they always have been. Something have gone up, others have gone down (in terms of effects etc..)

Are you honestly telling me that since the new book has come out, your precious win ratio has gone down a significant amount?

*Regarding 'statistics' and 'probability' I'm not Mathematician (though my teacher did say I was gifted in it, I could never be arsed) but I am pretty sure these fields of Mathematics cannot really be applied accurately in the context of the game, as there simply aren't enough rolls of the dice for probability and statistical chance to balance itself out...

I totally agree! O&G were top tier last edition and needed to be brought back in line with the other races. GW slightly nerfed O&G and slightly buffed the other races to make sure O&G don't win every tournament.

Oh wait....

Fobster
23-07-2008, 14:36
Blah blah blah.

And once again, you, like all people aimlessly complaining, are focussing solely on the negative, neatly ignoring the positive.

Yes, 1 in 6, statistically speaking* will take a few wounds. Oh noes! End of teh Wurldz! That worried about your Boarboyz? Stick the general in them. But of course, that means you are without his leadership and nobody does that. Well, I'm rather afraid they do that quite a lot. Gets your boss into combat nice and quick with a bodyguard of nutters intent on killing stuff. Thus, with one enemy unit reliably taken down, and your General marauding behind enemy lines, they will be stuck between rock and hard place.

Orcs and Goblins got 2 boosts with the advent of 7th Edition. Panic. You now need to flee through, not past, friendly units to force a panic. So, thats one traditional weakness no longer there. Choppas now count as Handweapons, so you can shield, and still get their bonus with dual-wield.

But of course, again, this is a positive outlook and clearly wrong.

Dark Elf Spearmen die just as easily as the Gobbo dies just as easily as the Spear wielding Elf to missile fire. Add in that the rest of the Dark Elf options aren't cheap. But hey, again, I'm just looking at the big picture rather than 1 dimensional arguements used to back up alleged broken stuff.

Fanatics did change slightly, yes. But they will still carve up infantry nice and quick, and kill enough Knights to make a difference.

O&G have massive amounts of synergy and variety in their list. Thus, certain aspects cost more to limit how many options any given list might have open to it. You can have dirt cheap characters, cheap spell casters, or you can go for a slightly tougher boss and employ an Orc, with the subsequent raise in points. Other armies do not have this luxury. You have your characters, and they are all much of a muchness in powerlevel. Yep, even Daemons. Their 'cheap' characters are the Heralds, which outside of their list, aren't all that cheap.

Orc spells changed somewhat. Me, I quite like the opportunity for a Waaagh! ever now and again. Seems like fun to me. But hey, I'm being realistic. I know I won't get it off every time, or even every game. But I do know my opponent will block it. Nobody wants an Orcy horde bearing down on them even faster.

The Ladz are just as they always have been. Something have gone up, others have gone down (in terms of effects etc..)

Are you honestly telling me that since the new book has come out, your precious win ratio has gone down a significant amount?

*Regarding 'statistics' and 'probability' I'm not Mathematician (though my teacher did say I was gifted in it, I could never be arsed) but I am pretty sure these fields of Mathematics cannot really be applied accurately in the context of the game, as there simply aren't enough rolls of the dice for probability and statistical chance to balance itself out...

Your matt ward aren't you? C'mon just admit it.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
23-07-2008, 14:43
Sadly not, other wise I'd have said so.

I'm just your average gamer who see's the futility in whining anonymously.

volair
23-07-2008, 14:47
Blah blah blah.

And once again, you, like all people aimlessly complaining, are focussing solely on the negative, neatly ignoring the positive.

Yes, 1 in 6, statistically speaking* will take a few wounds. Oh noes! End of teh Wurldz! That worried about your Boarboyz? Stick the general in them. But of course, that means you are without his leadership and nobody does that. Well, I'm rather afraid they do that quite a lot. Gets your boss into combat nice and quick with a bodyguard of nutters intent on killing stuff. Thus, with one enemy unit reliably taken down, and your General marauding behind enemy lines, they will be stuck between rock and hard place.

Orcs and Goblins got 2 boosts with the advent of 7th Edition. Panic. You now need to flee through, not past, friendly units to force a panic. So, thats one traditional weakness no longer there. Choppas now count as Handweapons, so you can shield, and still get their bonus with dual-wield.

But of course, again, this is a positive outlook and clearly wrong.

Dark Elf Spearmen die just as easily as the Gobbo dies just as easily as the Spear wielding Elf to missile fire. Add in that the rest of the Dark Elf options aren't cheap. But hey, again, I'm just looking at the big picture rather than 1 dimensional arguements used to back up alleged broken stuff.

Fanatics did change slightly, yes. But they will still carve up infantry nice and quick, and kill enough Knights to make a difference.

O&G have massive amounts of synergy and variety in their list. Thus, certain aspects cost more to limit how many options any given list might have open to it. You can have dirt cheap characters, cheap spell casters, or you can go for a slightly tougher boss and employ an Orc, with the subsequent raise in points. Other armies do not have this luxury. You have your characters, and they are all much of a muchness in powerlevel. Yep, even Daemons. Their 'cheap' characters are the Heralds, which outside of their list, aren't all that cheap.

Orc spells changed somewhat. Me, I quite like the opportunity for a Waaagh! ever now and again. Seems like fun to me. But hey, I'm being realistic. I know I won't get it off every time, or even every game. But I do know my opponent will block it. Nobody wants an Orcy horde bearing down on them even faster.

The Ladz are just as they always have been. Something have gone up, others have gone down (in terms of effects etc..)

Are you honestly telling me that since the new book has come out, your precious win ratio has gone down a significant amount?

*Regarding 'statistics' and 'probability' I'm not Mathematician (though my teacher did say I was gifted in it, I could never be arsed) but I am pretty sure these fields of Mathematics cannot really be applied accurately in the context of the game, as there simply aren't enough rolls of the dice for probability and statistical chance to balance itself out...

You fail to address any of the issues presented in this thread in any meaningful way. "A few wounds" to boar boyz is significant, so don't try to pretend that it isn't a serious disadvantage.

The only unit in the entire army book that is costed appropriately is the regular Orc Boy,all others being overcosted. Furthermore the army suffers horribly from its special rules such as animosity and stupidity without a proportional decrease in point cost of the units. Even if these rules were taken away with the rest of the army book remaining the same, the army would still be low in the power scale compared to the other armies.

Statistics and probability can be applied to anything where chance is involved. If you think it useless in warhammer, then you misunderstand what statistics is and what it is useful for. I understand what you are saying, you aren't likely to see average results unless you roll a lot of dice. The point is simply to know the averages, and that knowledge is powerful and important to recognize imbalances in the game and for gauging your chances of winning engagements. Poker players use statistics for a reason.

Muad'Dib
23-07-2008, 14:54
Blah blah blah.

And once again, you, like all people aimlessly complaining, are focussing solely on the negative, neatly ignoring the positive.

I assume you are going to list the positives, then

Orcs and Goblins got 2 boosts with the advent of 7th Edition. Panic. You now need to flee through, not past, friendly units to force a panic. So, thats one traditional weakness no longer there. Choppas now count as Handweapons, so you can shield, and still get their bonus with dual-wield.

Everyone, including Empire (who has same LD as O&G) benefits from the new panic rules. I don't see how a change to a general rule is something positive for O&G book specifly, if it applies to everyone.
In regards to choppa - yes, this is the one buff O&G got. Now they will finally be able to get 3+/4+ saves for their infantry, and the offensive power of move 4 AHW Orcs is a danger to everyone...not.

Dark Elf Spearmen die just as easily as the Gobbo dies just as easily as the Spear wielding Elf to missile fire. Add in that the rest of the Dark Elf options aren't cheap. But hey, again, I'm just looking at the big picture rather than 1 dimensional arguements used to back up alleged broken stuff.

Actually, the rest of Dark Elf options are better for their points then the O&G options. Black Guard is cheaper then the worse Black Orcs, Hydra is cheaper then the Giant (and, it opposition to Giant's randomness, it can re-roll it's attacks every round...), Reapeter Xbows put Arrer boys to shame, all fighty characters can re-roll hits (O&G have magic weapon for 25 points that allows them to do that). Won't compare Cold Ones and Boar Boyz, but I'm pretty sure that Cld Ones would turn up better...I'd rather have stupidity on LD 9 (11 % fail chance) then animosity (16 % fail chance)

Fanatics did change slightly, yes. But they will still carve up infantry nice and quick, and kill enough Knights to make a difference.

I like how you call a direct nerf 'changed slightly', as if there was some hidden benefit in it. There isn't - they just got weaker for no decrease in points. And it is rather debatable if fanatics, which
1. have to hit first, rolling random distance
2. can be lured out by cheap fast cavalry
3. roll d6 random hits
Will 'carve up infantry nice and quick' or 'kill enough knights' (especially Empire 1+ save ones)

O&G have massive amounts of synergy and variety in their list. Thus, certain aspects cost more to limit how many options any given list might have open to it.

Care to list this synergy ?

You can have dirt cheap characters, cheap spell casters, or you can go for a slightly tougher boss and employ an Orc, with the subsequent raise in points. Other armies do not have this luxury. You have your characters, and they are all much of a muchness in powerlevel. Yep, even Daemons. Their 'cheap' characters are the Heralds, which outside of their list, aren't all that cheap.

On cheap combat characters, you have a point - the Goblin Big boss is cheap for 3 S6 attacks on a wolf. However, as you no longer get a free slot, you are quite limited in using this option - unless you are set on fielding all goblin army with max LD 7. Thus, fielding those cheap characters won't net you more then 50-100 points at a time, and with this small gain comes the 'luxury' of having WS 4. On cheap spell casters - I disagree. Goblin Shamans are only 15 points less then Empire Wizards, which is not that impressive. And O&G lack magical tricks, like a good choice of bound spells, that would enable to make full use of cheap spell casters.

Orc spells changed somewhat. Me, I quite like the opportunity for a Waaagh! ever now and again. Seems like fun to me. But hey, I'm being realistic. I know I won't get it off every time, or even every game. But I do know my opponent will block it. Nobody wants an Orcy horde bearing down on them even faster.

If I recall, you had the Waaaagh! spell in 6th edition, so I fail to see how this is a change. In regards to O&G magic, they lost their item allowing to double cast spells - another nerf.
Also not sure if you can even call an Orc army 'fast'...I think that's term reserved for Elf/Slaanesh Daemons...

The Ladz are just as they always have been. Something have gone up, others have gone down (in terms of effects etc..)

What has gone up ? Choppas got fixed so they are actually useful as an army rule, rather then serving mostly to lower your save as they did in 6th edition ? What else ?

Comments in bold.

Warlord Ghazak Gazhkull
23-07-2008, 15:00
Well I still find them playable, and I still win a lot with them. In fact I even win against these new powerhouse armies. I agree that the OnG didn't get the best book but at least if we win they can't say we are cheesy players.

On a side note in the february this year I have won the Tournament of cheese 2008 in my local club with goblins. I faced a list with 2 tanks, a thorek gunline and an fighty orc army. I won those games not because the fact I had superior troops but trough tactics.

Also the waaagh can be a deadly affair for the army but I had once against bretts that I called a waaagh and all my units charged forward and in the magic fase I got of a total power waaagh, the brettonian army was whiped out at the end of my turn. These things can only happen when you play greenskiins.

Greetz
G

Storak
23-07-2008, 15:12
Yes, 1 in 6, statistically speaking* will take a few wounds. Oh noes! End of teh Wurldz! That worried about your Boarboyz?

yes. because the enemy tends to shoot at them. losing 2 extra boar boys is really a bad thing, especially with an expensive char in the unit.


Orcs and Goblins got 2 boosts with the advent of 7th Edition. Panic. You now need to flee through, not past, friendly units to force a panic. So, thats one traditional weakness no longer there.

this change is NOT limited to O&G. as our low leadership forces us to form a crowd around our general, i actually think that O&G don t benefit the most from this change..


Choppas now count as Handweapons, so you can shield, and still get their bonus with dual-wield.

yes. that is the positive change in the new book. it is a ONE COMBAT TURN advantage. don t forget it.


Dark Elf Spearmen die just as easily as the Gobbo dies just as easily as the Spear wielding Elf to missile fire. Add in that the rest of the Dark Elf options aren't cheap. But hey, again, I'm just looking at the big picture rather than 1 dimensional arguements used to back up alleged broken stuff.

yes, and the orcish repeater x-bows will cut them down. uups, no, orcish bows are rather lucky if they kill 2 over the whole game...


Fanatics did change slightly, yes. But they will still carve up infantry nice and quick, and kill enough Knights to make a difference.

ok. above you said, that orcish boars shouldn t worry about D6 S5 hits (with no save sometimes). now you think that D6 S5 armour piercing hits will make a difference on knights. strange.


O&G have massive amounts of synergy and variety in their list.

no. i cant spot the synergy. please explain some of it, that no other army has!


*Regarding 'statistics' and 'probability' I'm not Mathematician (though my teacher did say I was gifted in it, I could never be arsed) but I am pretty sure these fields of Mathematics cannot really be applied accurately in the context of the game, as there simply aren't enough rolls of the dice for probability and statistical chance to balance itself out...

hm. things will balance out over battles. you wont get 3.5 hits per fanatic hitting, but over several battles , that is the avearge that you ll see. the concept is pretty simple. think about it.

Chadjabdoul
23-07-2008, 15:55
I'm just your average gamer who see's the futility in whining anonymously.

At least people here "whine" about something that to some extent affects their lives (especially if you like tournaments).

You, on the other hand whine about something that has no effect in your life whatsoever (people complaining about a badly written armybook).

Is GW paying you? If yes, consider yourself lucky, that's a pretty easy going job you got there.

Gobbo Lord
23-07-2008, 16:02
will take a few wounds. Oh noes! End of teh Wurldz! That worried about your Boarboyz?

So Boar Boyz take d6 WOUNDS with no save allowed and its no big deal


Fanatics did change slightly, yes. But they will still carve up infantry nice and quick, and kill enough Knights to make a difference.

But enemy knights taking d6 strength 5 hits with -3 save, wounding on 2s and being saved on a 4+ is enough to make a difference. HAHAHA

You sir are talking utter nonsense. You have directly contradicted yourself. Every army benefits from the new panic rules. And orcs gaining the ability to parry is fixing something that didnt make sense before.

redrum
23-07-2008, 16:02
Every model has a hand weapon, so therefore any model with a shield can parry. You fail at nitpicking ;)

Lol, right you are. Dammit nitpicking is one of the only things I'm good at ;)

Mad Doc Grotsnik
23-07-2008, 16:09
Stick the Warboss in with the Boarboyz, no more wounds.

Or, here's a though, use the Boarboyz superior movement to get them into combat before you call the Waagh. Not terribly hard to achieve.

silashand
23-07-2008, 16:10
I will say that technically you are right, random and funny doesn't have to be poor. But right now it is.

I disagree. I think perhaps the Orcs are not up to par with the Daemons & VC now, but they are hardly a bad army in any context. There are numerous ways to mitigate the randomness factor to the point where it doesn't affect them at all if you want to build your list that way. However, if you want all your units to be just as reliable as Black Orcs, then I think that's like saying no army should have units that suffer from Stupidity either. No, Orcs are not a bad army at all and for the most part they improved considerably from the last book and I know at least one player who wins with them regularly, even vs daemons.

Sorry, but I don't agree with your statements at all.

Cheers, Gary

volair
23-07-2008, 16:17
I disagree. I think perhaps the Orcs are not up to par with the Daemons & VC now, but they are hardly a bad army in any context. There are numerous ways to mitigate the randomness factor to the point where it doesn't affect them at all if you want to build your list that way. However, if you want all your units to be just as reliable as Black Orcs, then I think that's like saying no army should have units that suffer from Stupidity either. No, Orcs are not a bad army at all and for the most part they improved considerably from the last book and I know at least one player who wins with them regularly, even vs daemons.

Sorry, but I don't agree with your statements at all.

Cheers, Gary

They are a bad army in every context.

The randomness factor will always affect them.

Reliable or not, we want them to be, on average, on the same power level as the other armies.

The new army book is worse than the previous army book.

An anecdote of one player winning consistently is insignificant.

volair
23-07-2008, 16:21
Stick the Warboss in with the Boarboyz, no more wounds.

Or, here's a though, use the Boarboyz superior movement to get them into combat before you call the Waagh. Not terribly hard to achieve.

The bottom line is that Boar boyz are overcosted. And by the way, if a unit requires a lord or hero in order to be effective, though I am not convinced that even then they are effective comparatively, that in itself is a disadvantage for obvious reasons.

Shimmergloom
23-07-2008, 17:10
Stick the Warboss in with the Boarboyz, no more wounds.

Or, here's a though, use the Boarboyz superior movement to get them into combat before you call the Waagh. Not terribly hard to achieve.

Who else is forced to do that? Do you have to stick a grand marshal in a unit of empire knights or an elf prince in a dragon prince unit or a herald in a unit of bloodcrushers or a vampire in a unit of black knights or a chaos lord in a unit of chosen knights, so they don't take have to worry about taking D6 wounds from their own special rules?

And this ignores the fact that he'll do nothing to stop them from failing animosity during non-waaagh! turns when the unit rolls a 1. Unless he's a black orc, in which case you are back to killing your own troops again.


Wolf Riders and Boar Boyz increased in points and gained the possibility of taking d6 wounds added onto their animosity rule (Yes animosity was always there and was a fact, i accept that, but it never used to kill d6 of your men)
Goblins increased in points for no benefit
Fanatics stayed the same points but lost ignore armour saves and gained the ability to be taken out by a hill
Black Orc champions increased in points and lost a point of strength
Savage Orc Big Uns lost the ability to take a magic banner.



It's actually even worse than that. Goblins lost the ability to generate power and dispel dice. As did wolf riders(more rare, but possible). Orcs of all types mounted and infantry, lost the ability to generate dispel dice and the ability to generate power dice was doubled in number of orcs needed, which effectively took this ability away from most black orc units and boar boy units. And black orc units lost the quell animosity rule which would keep your center in line and was much more preferrable to a 3pt cost increase and a stupid armed to the teeth special rule which is a purely tournament special rule, and then we have been repeatedly told that tournaments should not be the guiding force behind choosing greenskins or any army.

Goblins also lost their shield for lt. armor, which was another 'hidden' nerf.

Basic Orcs were terrible in 6th edition. All they needed to do, was give them the parry, the +1S for one round, vs only on the charge and double the cost to generate dispel and power dice.

Instead they went overboard and nerfed EVERYTHING to sell more orc boyz regiments that had been sitting in their warehouses collecting dust. While lying to the players that every army was going to be brought into the same line. So that when this new army book arms race started, no one would remember about greenskins anymore. They would be yesterday's news. Buy our new Daemons! Don't forget to stock up on your regenerating chaos knights coming this fall!

Znail
23-07-2008, 17:26
Why are you focusing on the unit you dont like? You have 4 cavalry and 3 chariots to pick from, just dont use the 1 you think costs too much! O&G have a huge number of diffrent units so one or two bad apples hardly matters. O&G have a fairly obvious upside and its the quality of the cheap units. An army made up only of the most expensive O&G units wont do that well so why compare only the highest cost units? And from a tournament perspective so doesnt it realy matter if one unit is overcosted or not as if you aim to win so will you play towards the strenghts of the army list.

skuller
23-07-2008, 17:27
They are a bad army in every context.
Please explain why theyre a bad army in every context you have a couple of good units that they can perform good

The randomness factor will always affect them.
Exaclty randomness is part of the army and will always affect the O&G use more BOs units to nullify this effect, if you dont like the randomness of the army try using lizzies or stunties then and pint them green

Reliable or not, we want them to be, on average, on the same power level as the other armies.
And they are used properly, My blorc, savage big uns and big uns have been able to carve thorugh almost every army except longbears
everyone mention that the Blorcs will are worst troop type than lets say black guard
but on a 25 black guard unit vs a 25 blorc unit
bG on the charge
6 attacks from the BG hitting on "3" will hit 4 then rerolling the 2
total of 5 hits, needed "3" killing 4 or the beasties
considering that the champ survived 3 attacks back hitting on "4"
hitting 2 and wounding 2 killing 2 elves
test is made at - 3
second round will look the same or worst for the blorcs if theyre were able to stay
Blorcs charging BG
11 attacks hitting on "4" hitting 6 wounding on "2" killing 5
lets say the champ surived two attacks back hitting "3" 2 hits wounding on 3
1 blorc die
so elves have to take test -5
second round will be interesting if the elves stay
This is on an average roll of dice


The new army book is worse than the previous army book.

Completly disagree on this one you can have 4 untis of big uns against only one on the previous, blorcs are no longer 0-1, choppas can work with shields
blorcs carry great weapons and add choppa, arrer boys went down on points and count as troops, we have spider riders, your characters can ride chariot wituout using special slots....dude blorc heroes just cost as one hero.

An anecdote of one player winning consistently is insignificant.
I have heard of a couple of us that win some lose some and still are happy with the orcses and it does count


comments are on bold

Mozzamanx
23-07-2008, 17:36
Your combat example is wrong, Black Guard have 2 attacks.

Thats 11 attacks, meaning 7-8 hit. With rerolls, thats another 2-3 hits. Str 5, means a 3+ to wound, so thats a good 6-7 wounds. Unless we remove all hitting power by using shields, to save 2-3. Hurrah, we only lose 4 a turn, and that's if we take the defense route.

Black Guard will SHRED Blorcs so fast it's not funny. And they are cheaper. And they can have an ASF banner.

EDIT: Woops, Black Guard wound on 3's. My bad.

volair
23-07-2008, 18:08
Your combat example is wrong, Black Guard have 2 attacks.

Thats 11 attacks, meaning 7-8 hit. With rerolls, thats another 2-3 hits. Str 5, means a 3+ to wound, so thats a good 6-7 wounds. Unless we remove all hitting power by using shields, to save 2-3. Hurrah, we only lose 4 a turn, and that's if we take the defense route.

Black Guard will SHRED Blorcs so fast it's not funny. And they are cheaper. And they can have an ASF banner.

EDIT: Woops, Black Guard wound on 3's. My bad.

Black Guard actually have base strength 3 and gain a +1 from their halberds, for a total of 4 strength. Even so, they are indeed superior to black orcs.

EvC
23-07-2008, 20:09
The new army book is worse than the previous army book.

Sadly true! I was playing a game a few months back, and my opponent was using Orcs and Goblins, and I was shocked to find my army was really suffering. He was doing all kinds of crazy stuff, said his animosity table was different, was re-casting magic (multiple foots of gork every turn - OUCH!!!)... and then I cottoned on. He was using the 6th edition rulebook. No wonder I was struggling, he wasn't using the badly weakened 7th edition rulebook. I was actually quite impressed at the tough game I was having, which isn't something that has ever happened facing 7th edition ORcs ever before!

Muad'Dib
23-07-2008, 20:11
so elves have to take test -5
second round will be interesting if the elves stay
This is on an average roll of dice

Are you aware that Black Guard are Stubborn on 9 LD? Get your facts straight before trying to make comparisons.
So it does not matter the slightest if Black Orc win the first around after charging - next turn, with higher I and 2 attacks each, Black Guard will shred Black Orcs, who chose to forgo shields for extra hitting power.
Also, saying "O&G unit X always works for me and I win 80 % of my game" means nothing for this discussion. The unit working could be a combination of good generalship on the part of O&G player, luck, specific scenario or mistake on his opponent's part...
If you trying to prove that O&G are not low power level, then pull out some facts rather then anegdote - because just as well I could list some games when I saw Orc infantry outfought and outmounvered, but what's the point ?



Completly disagree on this one you can have 4 untis of big uns against only one on the previous, blorcs are no longer 0-1, choppas can work with shields
blorcs carry great weapons and add choppa, arrer boys went down on points and count as troops, we have spider riders, your characters can ride chariot wituout using special slots....dude blorc heroes just cost as one hero.

The Big'Uns, chariots not costing slots and no 0-1 choices changes are not O&G specific - all armies got buffed in this way AFAIK.
If you are happy about Arrer Boyz, so be it. I fail to see how S3 BS3 24" ranged troops with animosity benefit an army mostly known for it's CC...
Spider Raiders are indeed a welcome addition.
Black Orc heroes also lost the thing that propably made them cost 2 hero slots - S5 - which was combined with T5. They are not that much better then Big Bosses now, and that's why they cost 1 hero slot (esentially a Big Boss with +1 WS). They also lost their anti-animosity aura for a much worse rule.

skuller
23-07-2008, 20:55
@Muad'Dib sorry for the wrong info ...but stating that the orcs are the only ones that work because of the randomness of dice rolling, luck, mistake or good generalship can apply to any other army you can still roll low to hit/wound and ur enemy pass all his saves
But whats the point of arguing that orcs even if not as overpower as the new VC and Deamons and now DE still work, i can tell hundreds of times I won (probably like 50+ or so games) and all the times that I really lost badly even in the second turn against tomb kings if people are adamant to state that the orcs and gobbos suck .. Im guessing this is a perspective/point of view debate people are married to their opinion and nothing we or you say will change this, again I play O&G because I like their unpredictivness and their crazy stuff the do every other round....with that in mind every time I lose I can always say yeah my danmed boys didnt perform the way therye supposed but if i win i have the entire satisfaction to tell my opponent in your face even with this dudes chatting beteween themselves (actually i just do that to my freind Chris) but anyway if someone doesnt like the way their orcs perform trade/sell them for stunties, lizardmen or beast of chaos and paint them green and voila your army will behave the way your want them to do. And if you dont pm i may have something to trade ur orcses for my army is over 5000+ and still growing
If you enjoy your o&G with all the crazy rules and randomness good for you.

Storak
23-07-2008, 21:33
@Muad'Dib sorry for the wrong info ...but stating that the orcs are the only ones that work because of the randomness of dice rolling, luck, mistake or good generalship can apply to any other army you can still roll low to hit/wound and ur enemy pass all his saves
But whats the point of arguing that orcs even if not as overpower as the new VC and Deamons and now DE still work, i can tell hundreds of times I won (probably like 50+ or so games) and all the times that I really lost badly even in the second turn against tomb kings if people are adamant to state that the orcs and gobbos suck .. Im guessing this is a perspective/point of view debate people are married to their opinion and nothing we or you say will change this, again I play O&G because I like their unpredictivness and their crazy stuff the do every other round....with that in mind every time I lose I can always say yeah my danmed boys didnt perform the way therye supposed but if i win i have the entire satisfaction to tell my opponent in your face even with this dudes chatting beteween themselves (actually i just do that to my freind Chris) but anyway if someone doesnt like the way their orcs perform trade/sell them for stunties, lizardmen or beast of chaos and paint them green and voila your army will behave the way your want them to do. And if you dont pm i may have something to trade ur orcses for my army is over 5000+ and still growing
If you enjoy your o&G with all the crazy rules and randomness good for you.

you are ignoring facts. pure numbers show, that Orc boar boys are bad for their points.

i wont buy a new army, just for GW to mess them up next edition. sorry.

Shimmergloom
23-07-2008, 21:41
The Big'Uns, chariots not costing slots and no 0-1 choices changes are not O&G specific - all armies got buffed in this way AFAIK.
If you are happy about Arrer Boyz, so be it. I fail to see how S3 BS3 24" ranged troops with animosity benefit an army mostly known for it's CC...
Spider Raiders are indeed a welcome addition.
Black Orc heroes also lost the thing that propably made them cost 2 hero slots - S5 - which was combined with T5. They are not that much better then Big Bosses now, and that's why they cost 1 hero slot (esentially a Big Boss with +1 WS). They also lost their anti-animosity aura for a much worse rule.

lol, I know. I mean a 1pt point drop for orc arrez is completely equal to repeater crossbows going down 1pt and getting hatred and armor piercing. Or High elf archers going down 1pt and getting ASF. Or thunderers getting +1 to hit. Or outriders throwing out bucketfuls of dice when they fire at you, or treemen now being able to stand and shoot with their auto-hit strangleroot.

Black orcs lost the thing that made them count 2 slots? Well what did vamps and greater daemons lose that made them count 2 slots and a rare(for GD's) cause none of them are taking up extra slots anymore. But black orcs lost their special quell rule, went up in price and the big bosses and bosses were made -1S.

As for spiders, they are great. For 6th edition. In 7th unit after unit is getting released that outclasses them. Spiders and hoppers were something greenskins needed in 6th to combat skirmish-hammer. Now they finally got them 1 edition later. I guess by 8th edition greenskins will actually get usable magic and their elite troops will be brought in line with everyone else's 7th edition elites, which is the 7th edition buff for every other army, while the other 8th edition armies get fleets of 40k starships to rain down death from above.

Mireadur
23-07-2008, 21:44
guys... are Black guard really cheaper than black orcs?....

Shamfrit
23-07-2008, 21:47
I guess by 8th edition greenskins will actually get usable magic and elite troops, which is the 7th edition buff for every other army, while the other 8th edition armies get fleets of 40K starships to rain down death from above.

Sigged :D

Crovax20
23-07-2008, 22:00
lol, I know. I mean a 1pt point drop for orc arrez is completely equal to repeater crossbows going down 1pt and getting hatred and armor piercing. Or High elf archers going down 1pt and getting ASF. Or thunderers getting +1 to hit. Or outriders throwing out bucketfuls of dice when they fire at you, or treemen now being able to stand and shoot with their auto-hit strangleroot.

Black orcs lost the thing that made them count 2 slots? Well what did vamps and greater daemons lose that made them count 2 slots and a rare(for GD's) cause none of them are taking up extra slots anymore. But black orcs lost their special quell rule, went up in price and the big bosses and bosses were made -1S.

As for spiders, they are great. For 6th edition. In 7th unit after unit is getting released that outclasses them. Spiders and hoppers were something greenskins needed in 6th to combat skirmish-hammer. Now they finally got them 1 edition later. I guess by 8th edition greenskins will actually get usable magic and their elite troops will be brought in line with everyone else's 7th edition elites, which is the 7th edition buff for every other army, while the other 8th edition armies get fleets of 40k starships to rain down death from above.

Well we can always hope on a revision, and than when 8th edition comes Deamons and VC go first, and than O&G get the uber stuff :p

After all there is always a random chance that they might actually bother and fix stuff. And we all love random chance ^^

Shimmergloom
23-07-2008, 22:03
guys... are Black guard really cheaper than black orcs?....

Base cost is 13pts for both. I think most people give black orcs shields to make them 14pts each, which is why it's said they cost more.

But for 13pts each, black guard have +1M, WS, A and +2I and +1LD base.

Black orcs have +1T and +1S base.

The black guard have hatred and stubborn. Heavy armor and halberds to give them +1S making them equal to the black orcs base.

Black orcs have heavy armor and great weapons to give them +2S or 2 choppas for +1A and +1S(for one round). Black orcs have the potential, but not 100%(because your general still has to be alive and not fleeing and there's no telling if the units in front of the black orcs will pass their Waagh! test or not wheel in front of your black orcs) to move D6" toward the nearest enemy.

Black guard are clearly better, simply for the stubborn on 9. But they aren't the scariest thing black orcs are going to see for similar points cost. GW may be able to get away with it if we also didn't have books coming out who had 2A ASF swordsmasters, ASF white lions, 4+ ward, fear causing ASF pheonix guard, bloodletters with 5+ ward, unbreakable, S5 base, causing fear for less than black orcs, plus extra powers when a herald is in the unit, or killing blow, re-raiseable grave guard with all the trimmings(unbreakable, fear) and on the horizon chaos warriors with potential for regen or killing blow, cause fear, poison and who knows what else.

As it stands, black orcs were nerfed, everyone else powered up. Just like the rest of the greenskin army.

Mireadur
23-07-2008, 22:51
It looks like the pricing on the BG was made after doing some math hammering against HE elite infantry (their super low resilience facing the ASF makes them dead fodder). The problem is that it automatically flagged them as overpowered against any other unit in the game (without ASF that is).

Just another proof about how bad decission ASF rule was.

Znail
23-07-2008, 23:29
You need to look at an entire army when you compare troops. This is very obvious when you compare Bloodletters with Black Orcs. The Bloodletters may look good at first glance, even if the orcs can put out double the attacks and the same str first round. But you need to consider that there are no cheap daemons (Bloodletters are as cheap as they come) nor much ranged units (only the Flamers). So the Black Orcs can hide behind cheap orcs or goblins from the Daemons only ranged unit while the Bloodletters have to wither the fire with only T3 and a 5+ ward save as only protection. This is rather easy 12 points to kill.

O&G'sRule
23-07-2008, 23:32
Orcs are a great fantasy army, the second best balance in the game behind the empire. The problem is they will never work for tournaments as they will always let you down at crucial points of a game with the animosity, which you can't afford against top opponents. But theyre still the most amusing army out there, everyone like playing against them or with them.

Heretic Burner
23-07-2008, 23:36
Truly a ghastly rule that absolutely shredded any consideration of initiative value point pricing for every army before HE. Dismal.

Of course this isn't the first time we've seen such monumental advantage a rule can make against one army while being effectively nullified against another. 6th edition VC had a long period of absolutely ruling the tournament scene. Against the armies released at the time the huge psychology advantage proved to be a tremendous asset. Later books introduce enormous ItP units that effectively made those psych advantages (and the points costs paid for that advantage) meaningless. Thus we saw the fall of the VC as a top tier army replaced by newer books. Not to say they perform poorly overall, they certainly don't, simply completely imbalanced against some armies and a steep uphill battle against others.

With O&G it is a steep uphill battle against all armies however the BG rules simply don't help. GW must be aware how poor their decision must be, and this ham-fisted way of correcting against a broken rule is no way to go about things. At this point one bad army book released after the next is like a runaway snowball picking up momentum and making the problem worse, and worse, and worse.

If GW had any foresight they'd finally put their foot down and say enough, a mistakes were done and we need to correct it. Sadly recent history suggests that foresight is completely absent in GW.

O&G'sRule
23-07-2008, 23:40
Daemons have no (proper) shooting abilities so have to come at you, you just have to make sure you've used your spear chukkas, orc archers and rock lobbas to good effect and caused chaos by drawing them into your fanatics. Played daemons last week with O&Gs and beat them 2700pts to 380. So theres definately no inferiority complex

Kalec
23-07-2008, 23:51
Daemons have horrid amounts of magic, and flamers. They are perfectly happy to stay back and blast your army to pieces.

O&G'sRule
23-07-2008, 23:59
Daemons have horrid amounts of magic, and flamers. They are perfectly happy to stay back and blast your army to pieces.

Nah, morks spirit totem in a big unit of orcs, and 2 shamens each with 2 scrolls deal with anything they can do early on, by then you should have whittled them down a fair bit

Shimmergloom
24-07-2008, 00:28
You're going to run out of scrolls by their 2nd turn at best. And 8 dispel dice cannot deal with 15+ power dice. But luckily you registered a new account to come in here to tell us there's no imbalance, so it must be true.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 00:41
You won't deal with everything, but they will fail to cast some, they will misscast a few and if you can make sure you just get rid of the real nasty ones and let the ones that take away a few goblins go, it generally works, as long as you hit the army hard by the end of the 2nd turn. Daemons are high points because of the magic, so if you restrict their magic the high points value makes them expensive so you should hopefully overpower them.
No army is perfectly balanced, but O&Gs aren't bad.

Shimmergloom
24-07-2008, 00:48
I suppose if you're going to cling to the hope that the daemon will miscast and be dumb enough to target his nasty spells at goblins instead of giants, black orcs or boar boyz, then daemon magic is nowhere near as potent as orc and goblin war machines.

The daemon player is also probably hoping you'll shoot at his bloodletters, which will still shrug off 1/3 of any wounds you manage to inflict and still not panic, instead of shooting at his bloodthirster, horrors or bloodcrushers.

kroq'gar
24-07-2008, 00:53
You're going to run out of scrolls by their 2nd turn at best. And 8 dispel dice cannot deal with 15+ power dice. But luckily you registered a new account to come in here to tell us there's no imbalance, so it must be true.

Ironically... undead and deamons cant really get that many dispel dice. Infact, their magical defense is pretty terrible most the time. If you fight fire with fire, you can get off just as many spells as them.

To go magic defensive and expect to negate a phase they obviously spent more points on than you isnt really fair.

For example, my skaven grey seer killed around 100 gouls, and a vampire thrall, and then stomped some more with his bell.

I almost won that game, cept his grave guard kept being reraised from 8 to 20.... for about 4 turns.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 01:04
lol, sorry for disagreeing with you, us newbies that have been using O&gS for 15 years should know better. The O&G book is a match for anything, of course their character weakens them a bit, but you can't take it away from them, thats the point of the army, theyre about having a laugh, and surely the first rule is to have fun, no? Personally I like the unreliability.

semersonp
24-07-2008, 01:23
again, no one "want Orcs to suck"...

orcs + goblins are... misanthropic...

the fun of the army comes from the fact that they are the bug zapper which draws the best generals from fantasy/40k...

we are continually drawn by their inspiriting presence - burned beyond recognition when the bob of chance swings away from us...

only to pick ourselves up off the porch of warhammer to take to the 4x6 field yet again...

no one can call us overpowered... many can call us mad...

but we call ourselves overjoyed to command a troop of unsound warmongers... some of whom who paint themselves with unctuous berries and believe so stridently in their gods that such artwork ACTUALLY grants a ward save... some of whom are tiny imitators who perceive the chariots of their bigger brethren and gather bits of plywood to charge across the battlefield at random intervals in order to rain death upon those who are not greenskinned... some of whom are hulking definitions of brute strength and seek battle, always battle... if the enemy be in reach, fine... if not then a comrade near at hand will do...

so yeah, it would make sense to have animosity come into play if no visible enemy unit were around but... well, but nothing... lets learn how to ride the wave of comparatively underpowered fail that is the 7ed O+G armybook while we auger for rules to bring us somewhere near par with the rest of the races...

o+g... :)

Conotor
24-07-2008, 03:14
I still have no sean any issue with O&G exept anamosity, and their numbers allows u to make up for that. Just move 2 units of wolf riders in case 1 messes up.

Anything with better stats then them usually get shot down very effectivly by their amazing siege and fanatics.

Ward.
24-07-2008, 03:43
You, on the other hand whine about something that has no effect in your life whatsoever (people complaining about a badly written armybook).
See now I really have to use this as an example, I'll be one of the first to say the new books sucks and they should never have let someone that doesn't play fantasy touch the orcs and goblins book without supervision.

But you're assumption that the book is poorly written is based upon the fact that the army book was intending to be highly competitive, where as it was clearly intended to be a "fun" book to use (yes it could have been both but I don't think anyone at GW ever intended to produce something like the new VC or daemons).



Is GW paying you? If yes, consider yourself lucky, that's a pretty easy going job you got there.
People who work for GW are rarely allowed to go on forums, or are usually let go shortly after.

anuburos
24-07-2008, 03:50
I honestly love my O&G army! It's a completely mounted list and increases to amaze me everytime I play. Sure it's not a tournament army, but it is by far waaay more fun to play than any tournament army that I have made. The biggest beef I have with my army is that I wish chariots didn't auto destruct by S7 and they could march, but that's every army.

kroq'gar
24-07-2008, 04:25
If you are calling for removal of animosity, then you have the wrong army. You want dependable then DONT PLAY THE UNDEPENDABLE ARMY.

Its akin to me wanting reliable weapons for my skaven. Everything ranged attack in a skaven army can blow up/hit the user. I play skaven because i accept it. I dont want dwarven precision, i want mayhem.

If you want diciplined combats then play a chaos army.

The new book has some flaws, but then again, so does empire (mounted knights with GW for example, or the fact greatswords cant even take a magical banner without an empire general, whom still sucks. At least your Black Orcs can).

Your characters turned monstrous, your boyz are good, your chariots are good... your magic is still deadly. Sure vanilla boarboyz are a little overpointed, and your suffer a little powercreep... but we all are as well. Even the alledged all powerful ASF HE dont come off so well against deamons or undead.

silashand
24-07-2008, 06:43
They are a bad army in every context.

Suffice to say I disagree entirely. If you don't like the army, play something else. They are and continue to be one of the most popular armies in WFB and I fail to see how if your claims were true that would be so.

Cheers, Gary

Crovax20
24-07-2008, 07:46
I still don't see the point issue adressed.
Can anyone explain to me why the O&G units went mostly up in cost while the other new books have mostly seen point decreases, and have gotten better stats/rules.

It seems to me that this hampers O&G the most, since we have to rely on lots of units to do the job and now everyone, but O&G, effectively can field more units on the field that are also getting better rules and stats.

I really don't get how some people don't see the problem. If O&G units are going up in price, and other armies go down in price and O&G get rules that mostly blow up their own army (plans), while others get rules that really help a lot.O&G wasn't already one of the best armies in the last iteration.... then surely you can see that O&G got worse by quite a margin since the last book.

Anyhow, I'm not saying its impossible to win, rather that when two equally skilled opponents meet eachother the O&G player will most likely always loose.

Gazak Blacktoof
24-07-2008, 10:36
You need to look at an entire army when you compare troops. This is very obvious when you compare Bloodletters with Black Orcs. The Bloodletters may look good at first glance, even if the orcs can put out double the attacks and the same str first round. But you need to consider that there are no cheap daemons (Bloodletters are as cheap as they come) nor much ranged units (only the Flamers). So the Black Orcs can hide behind cheap orcs or goblins from the Daemons only ranged unit while the Bloodletters have to wither the fire with only T3 and a 5+ ward save as only protection. This is rather easy 12 points to kill.

There speaks a man with no experience of commanding greenskins. Placing units physically behind eachother when animosity is involved is simply a bad idea.

Its also next to impossible for any block unit to screen another from a unit of skirmishers!

Mad Doc Grotsnik
24-07-2008, 11:11
You're going to run out of scrolls by their 2nd turn at best. And 8 dispel dice cannot deal with 15+ power dice. But luckily you registered a new account to come in here to tell us there's no imbalance, so it must be true.


Yes, because post count is a sign of wisdom and truth.

Hey, look, my postcount dwarfs yours. Does that mean you are going to bow to my superior knowledge?

Of course not. Because post count simply shows how much noise a person makes online, not the quality of it.:rolleyes:

Makaber
24-07-2008, 11:26
Allright, I don't want to get too involved in this thread, because frankly it makes me a bit angry. I do want to speak up in defense of the Black Orcs though. You mention yourself how Animosity is the jinx of the problem, yet continiously put down the one unit without this problem. On what basis? Point by point comparison with other troops. I'd go as far as to say this line of argumentation displays an inherent lack of understanding of the fine game that is Warhammer.

When is the last time you played a game of Warhammer consisting of two opposing armies made out nothing but one-model units of infantry? When you were 10 and that was all your allowance could get you? Well possibly. I've been there myself. But for me, this is a stage I put behind me a good while ago, and so should you (soon).

Warhammer isn't played mano-a-mano style between Black Guards and Black Orcs. It's played with units, which should be the basis of comparison. Also, it's played (pretty much all of the time) in a context involving several of these units (in what many would call an "army").

Now, yes, in a straight-up unit to unit brawl, there's a good chance a Black Guard unit would win out over an equal-points Black Orc unit. However, if they were up against an equal-points unit of Empire Knights, I'd put my money on the Black Orcs, because they could swap to Great Weapons for a greater chance of punching through armour. See? That's called "versatility", and is one of the things you pay points for. (And please don't start a direct comparison about how Empire Knights would slaughter Orcs or whatever, because I just pulled an example out of a hat to prove a point, not to start a math team skillfest.)

Secondly, if you shoot bows at Black Guard, the Black Guards die. They have T3 and a 5+ Save! How can you compare troops and not account for the fact that they have the structural integrity of cardboard? Black Orcs, on the other hand, sports a healthy T4 and a 4+ Save, Hoo-Rah!!

Finally, how Black Orcs killing their own troops are such a disaster. On average, this will happen one time per battle. On average, this will inflict 3.5 hits, 2.31 wounds? Solution? Buy 2 more Orcs in the unit. That's 12 points. Cheap.

Gazak Blacktoof
24-07-2008, 11:50
@Makaber

Who are your comments directed at?

jpf1982
24-07-2008, 12:38
Okay; okay... We get it; so our book is kinda sloppy and needs help. How about those of us who complain too much (I generally include myself in this window) go and do something about it. Let's put our collective brains together and try and come up with a list that can be competetive. I know animosity hoses us more now than before; but surely we can figure something out. I have created a thread in the tactics section of the forum that I'll link to at the bottom of this post. If anyone cares to be productive about our army instead of just being angry you are welcome to come and help me figure out a way to make us at least compete against some of the other armies in the game.

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2806300#post2806300

Mad Doc Grotsnik
24-07-2008, 12:41
Well, you can either game with the old book instead of the new one.

This will mean you lose things like Choppas being able to Parry etc. Sure, you can't use it in a Tournament, but hey, thems the breaks.

Or, you can just keep plugging away with the current one, accept there are things you don't like, and move on.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 12:48
nice idea, but I've just found an army that works against everything and posting it on here would just give too much oportunity to find a weakness to opponents. Skarnik is the best general though in my experience, despite his leadership. O&Gs aren't at all sloppy, its just about expecting things to go wrong so you don't leave yourself open. I do find though that they're an extremely offensive army, with little defensive ability due to the fact that they will probably leg it off the board if you play them that way, so use your magic users defensively. picking the anti magic items seems to balance it out a bit.

Grinloc
24-07-2008, 12:50
See now I really have to use this as an example, I'll be one of the first to say the new books sucks and they should never have let someone that doesn't play fantasy touch the orcs and goblins book without supervision.

But you're assumption that the book is poorly written is based upon the fact that the army book was intending to be highly competitive, where as it was clearly intended to be a "fun" book to use (yes it could have been both but I don't think anyone at GW ever intended to produce something like the new VC or daemons).


People who work for GW are rarely allowed to go on forums, or are usually let go shortly after.

Matt Ward doesn't play WH Fantasy? I never heard about that before. Can anyone confirm that?

So "highly competitive" and "fun" should be exclusive to one another? Or only when it comes to greenskins? Is being an O&G's player a way of safely avoiding any accusations of "power creep" or "cheese"? Just by design? Please.

When looking at the other army books they are clearly both. The "fun" part is only a matter of preference. But on an overall balance scale GW is responsible for maintaining a basis of both "fun" and "competitive". For many people it's the g'damn point of this hobby. Avoid that devil "personal opinion" and realize it's also plenty of O&G's players out there who expect both.

There's just one thing i can't understand:
Did i read it correctly (to some extent between the lines so to speak) that some O&G's players actually prefer it that way?
When clearly losing a battle against a (balance wise) superior army they shrug it off, thinking "ah well, just the random nature of my greenies. maybe next time"?

And next time winning against the same superior army it provokes some kind of nonverbal "chest beating", along the lines of "wohoo, beaten the disadvantagous odds"?

For the O&G's player to "beat the disadvantagous odds" he primarily needs luck on his dice rolls at crucial moments (like animosity checks) to have a halfway chance of winning. But this has nothing to do with the skill of a general, but rather with the number of failed animosity and psychology checks.
Since the opponent wants to win the battle he will attempt to exploit the O&G's weaknesses, which unfortunately is rather easy to do. Scouts and flyers come to mind.
An experienced O&G's player fights a battle in anticipation of winning (or at least managing a draw) and a random number of failed 1d6 and 2d6 checks (only have to be a few to make a big difference) essentially say "no, you won't". Where is the "fun" in that?

*Edit*: It's either playing with the 6th edition book or a mix of 6th edition book with 7th edition special rules being brought into it bit by bit.
Not so much about points values, since they require careful balancing.
More along the lines of playing with 6th edition magic and magic items entirely and for example attaching the choppa rule to the orc boyz of 6th edition.
Black orcs of 7th edition with the "dwelling bubble" of 6th, etc....

From what i heard/figured most O&G's players here don't attend tournaments (?), so this shouldn't be too great of a deal. Maybe analyze these alternative rules ideas here on warseer and then present them afterwards to the friends those O&G's players frequently play against. Figuring this game's community would be vastly more capable of reasonable army balancing than "Naughty Matty" could ever hope to be.

jpf1982
24-07-2008, 12:58
nice idea, but I've just found an army that works against everything and posting it on here would just give too much oportunity to find a weakness to opponents

If this is the case than in my opinion you shouldn't even be part of this post.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 13:00
Despite the animosity, low leadership problems with the army, no I wouldn't say theyre at a disadvantage. There are alot of strengths to make up for it.
I wouldn't say I prefer the army being unreliable, but it certainly makes for entertaining games, as long as you can laugh at your army and don't get stressed by it. I certainly prefer them to a dwarf army that just sits at the back blowing holes in your army with artillery, but never moves. I hate playing dwarfs

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 13:06
If this is the case than in my opinion you shouldn't even be part of this post.

Hey I'm not writing an army for anyone, thats part of the fun of the game. And anyway, I've found an army that works for my style, it might not work for you. For example I've just read a post from someone that says he uses an entirely mounted army, that wouldn't work for me. I never seem to get boar boys to get their points back, but he obviously gets more success.

jpf1982
24-07-2008, 13:10
Hey I'm not writing an army for anyone

I'm not asking you to give us every detail of your list or strategy on how you use it to win. I'm asking for people to be constructive and perhaps help come up with an idea for a simple core army that should be competetive. Something that isn't a list in itself, but more just something that should push a person in the winning direction that they can use to build on and give their own flavor.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 13:24
I use Large units of night goblins, Black orcs and Orcs. Backed up by spear chukkas, a giant, a stone troll (essential vs VC's and tomb kings as theyre most devastating spells affects all of your units, which means the stone troll can use its magic resistance2), Use fanatics wisely, and deffo take nets for your NG's. A small unit of wolf boys or spider riders, depending on terrain.

Ozorik
24-07-2008, 13:31
There isnt much inherently wrong with O&G.

Yes there are some costing issues and a few other things but not that much.

On the animosity issue I have no problem with it causing casulaties as quite frankly thats what would happen. There should be a bigger pay off on the other side of the scale though, maybe an additional attack if the unit manages to make a charge that turn or something.

Unreliability is fine providing that for every time you lose a game due to your troops unreliability you win a game due to their unreliability. Frustration creeps in when there isnt enough of a pay off. Either that or there is a significant points rebate.

Isolated unit comparisions are pretty worthless as no unit acts in isolation. Yes black orcs may not be particuallry awe inspiring but they arent particualry underpowered either.

kroq'gar
24-07-2008, 14:21
post count simply shows how much noise a person makes online, not the quality of it. - sigged.

One point for this forum. Are you all going to blame the list or your command of it? You can win, hope is not gone. Man-up and deal with being an underdog. I know it brings out the best in me.

Muad'Dib
24-07-2008, 14:30
. I do want to speak up in defense of the Black Orcs though. You mention yourself how Animosity is the jinx of the problem, yet continiously put down the one unit without this problem. On what basis?

On the basis that, as a unit of supposedly elite infantry (note they are in specials) they are much worse in comparison to other elite infantry. Nn some cases (Swordmasters) they have much worse stats, in other cases (Black Guard, Grave Guard) their "Armed to da Teeth" rule looks very weak compared to ItP 9 LD Stubborn or Undead raisable in d6 per cast/magical Killing Blow. They also have very small selection of magic standards, but that's a problem of O&G as a whole.


Point by point comparison with other troops. I'd go as far as to say this line of argumentation displays an in herent lack of understanding of the fine game that is Warhammer.

Yet this is the only way we can compare the armies - unless you prefer anegdotes in style "well, I saw O&G win a lot so they are fine". If units play simillar roles to Black Orcs in other armies, then it is logical that we compare to see if Black Orcs can hold their own in this role.


Warhammer isn't played mano-a-mano style between Black Guards and Black Orcs. It's played with units, which should be the basis of comparison. Also, it's played (pretty much all of the time) in a context involving several of these units (in what many would call an "army").
You might want to read one of my posts when I focused more on how weaker Black Orcs are in their role (both as an anvil and a hammer) compared to Grave Guard, Black Guard, Swordmasters, Ironbreakers and Plaguebearers. Also note that, AFAIK, the poster who first pulled out a one on one brawl between Black Guard and Black Orcs was trying to prove Black Orcs superior, and failed. (because he forgot two little tiny facts that make Black Guard so much better)



Now, yes, in a straight-up unit to unit brawl, there's a good chance a Black Guard unit would win out over an equal-points Black Orc unit. However, if they were up against an equal-points unit of Empire Knights, I'd put my money on the Black Orcs, because they could swap to Great Weapons for a greater chance of punching through armour. See? That's called "versatility", and is one of the things you pay points for.

Well it's pretty sad that even with this 'versatility' Black Orcs prove to be worse.
Black Guard will go through the Empire Knights (non inner-circle ones) much faster - due to hitting on 3+, higher I, re-rolling hits and 2 attacks. True, Black Orcs get extra armour penetration, but they will have much less hits because they are hitting on 4+ with only 1 attack.
Both units will hold the Empire Knights pretty easily, but Black Guard are more reliable due to Stubborn and much better fightning ability in subsquent rounds. Note that they are also cheaper by 1 point in comparison to the Orcs.
You also seemed to forget to mention that on top of their stats, Black Guard are 9 LD ItP Stubborn always re-roll to hit - I think this stacking of special rules is superior to the option of taking both GW and AHW...
If you want to make it more fun, you can give Black Guard the AFS banner while Black Orcs get the Banner of Butchery...You decide what's better - keep in mind that Black Guard ALWAYS have 2 attacks.



(And please don't start a direct comparison about how Empire Knights would slaughter Orcs or whatever, because I just pulled an example out of a hat to prove a point, not to start a math team skillfest.)

I think if decide that you are gonna 'defend' Black Orcs, you should do better then pull examples out of your hat, especially when those examples prove that Black Orcs are in fact worse then Black Guard. What's the point of listing comparisons if we don't back them up with facts ?



Secondly, if you shoot bows at Black Guard, the Black Guards die. They have T3 and a 5+ Save! How can you compare troops and not account for the fact that they have the structural integrity of cardboard? Black Orcs, on the other hand, sports a healthy T4 and a 4+ Save, Hoo-Rah!!
I could counter this by saying that Black Orcs can't take a charge from anything that hits harder then A1 S5 - while Black Guard, as long as one of them stands, will most likely hold likes of Dragons, Dragon Princes and Blood Knights. Due to Stubborn, they can also hold against flank attacks until help arrives - while Black Orcs will propably break.

Note: I'm not saying that Black Orcs are useless, or that they can't win a fight, or that they can't contribute to battle plan. I'm only pointing out that, point for point, the recent army books have troops that - regardless if you compare them in a direct fight or in how they fit into their roles - are much better then Black Orcs.

Storak
24-07-2008, 14:35
Now, yes, in a straight-up unit to unit brawl, there's a good chance a Black Guard unit would win out over an equal-points Black Orc unit. However, if they were up against an equal-points unit of Empire Knights, I'd put my money on the Black Orcs, because they could swap to Great Weapons for a greater chance of punching through armour. See? That's called "versatility", and is one of the things you pay points for. (And please don't start a direct comparison about how Empire Knights would slaughter Orcs or whatever, because I just pulled an example out of a hat to prove a point, not to start a math team skillfest.)

no need for math. you think those knights would charge a Ld9 STUBBORN unit?

ps: your math of course was false. the black orcs will still perform better using 2 choppas during first turn. and further turns shouldn t be a problem...


Secondly, if you shoot bows at Black Guard, the Black Guards die. They have T3 and a 5+ Save! How can you compare troops and not account for the fact that they have the structural integrity of cardboard? Black Orcs, on the other hand, sports a healthy T4 and a 4+ Save, Hoo-Rah!!

if you give the shield to the orcs, they are 1 point more expensive than the guard.

all these comparisons need to take the rest of the army into account. (or so i am told, all the time..)
have you ever tried to kill anything with orcish bow shots?


Finally, how Black Orcs killing their own troops are such a disaster. On average, this will happen one time per battle. On average, this will inflict 3.5 hits, 2.31 wounds? Solution? Buy 2 more Orcs in the unit. That's 12 points. Cheap.

just 12 extra points, for our pretty expensive black orc chars? that is a steal!

but it slightly limits the units, that you can place them in, doesn t it?

----------------

final point: black guard, are what i would call a unit full of "versality". black orcs aren t. (and they are the best, among the orc elite infantry....)

kroq'gar
24-07-2008, 14:47
- sigged.

One point for this forum. Are you all going to blame the list or your command of it? You can win, hope is not gone. Man-up and deal with being an underdog. I know it brings out the best in me.

Yes... i just quoted myself (first for everything). Feel to be convientently ignored.

Next. Ever tried to kill anything with an empire bow... its exactly the same, minus the armour & the choppa.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 14:53
Points cost take into consideration how they fit into an army, not just what their statlines are, to an orc and goblin player black orcs are worth their points because of things like immunity from panic caused by all other green skins, also they are reliable, which is invaluable in this army. Give them the banner of butchery and they have 2 or 3 attacks for a turn anyway. Black guard are limited to 20 models which means you are going to lose at least 1 rank bonus before they get in combat which is a weakness the orcs don't have. Plus Dark elves are an expensive army, its harder to pay 13 points for a model in that army than it is to pay 13 in an O&G army

Muad'Dib
24-07-2008, 14:54
Next. Ever tried to kill anything with an empire bow... its exactly the same, minus the armour & the choppa.
I think that's why Empire has crossbows, handgunners, cannons and two war-machine rares...So they don't have to use the bow...

Mad Doc Grotsnik
24-07-2008, 15:00
But lets not forget the Gobbo Bolt Throwers. Dirt cheap, two to a slot...and bound to hit something sooner or later!

And thats the thing about an army with vareity. Units and models are priced within their army. It's not so much the individual costs, as what you can take as well as them. Orcs might seem a bit overpriced, but then, the General can flood the field with Gobbos if need be. Orcy Artillery is surprisingly cheap. There are two classes of Chariot, one of which is a 2 for 1 slot as well, as fairly cheap for what you get.

Storak
24-07-2008, 15:00
Next. Ever tried to kill anything with an empire bow... its exactly the same, minus the armour & the choppa.

archers are skirmishers, with an option to scout. as you have been told already, empire has some other options on shooting.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 15:02
You can't really compare empire with anyone, they are by far the most balanced. If you take in the DOW options, the army literally has every option you could want, maybe no decent skirmishers, but hey thats no loss.

Storak
24-07-2008, 15:04
Points cost take into consideration how they fit into an army, not just what their statlines are, to an orc and goblin player black orcs are worth their points because of things like immunity from panic caused by all other green skins, also they are reliable, which is invaluable in this army. Give them the banner of butchery and they have 2 or 3 attacks for a turn anyway. Black guard are limited to 20 models which means you are going to lose at least 1 rank bonus before they get in combat which is a weakness the orcs don't have. Plus Dark elves are an expensive army, its harder to pay 13 points for a model in that army than it is to pay 13 in an O&G army

so many errors, so little time. the black guard are ItP! and stubborn. sounds pretty reliable to me. and i am sure that they have some banners as well. (and champion has options for magic items..) are you seriously taking elite infantry in blocks bigger than 20?
13 points are 13 points (14, btw for the black oc with shields..) a spearman is the same price as an orc. the claim that 13 points are more for them is pretty bizarre.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
24-07-2008, 15:08
The point he is trying to make, and you are so neatly side stepping, because it derails your little rant is as follows.

Black Guard - Block of Troops, with Hatred. Quite effective against Infantry, moderately so against Cavalry, pretty much stuffed and doomed to a lingering demise against big monsters. Very dependable though, even for an Elf unit.

Black Orcs - Block of Troops with Armed to Da Teef. No matter what they might come across, they, like Slayers, are equipped to deal with. Fighting Infantry? Two Choppas. Fighting Heavy Infantry (there is no Elite, just Heavy) then Choppa and Shield, or Two Choppas if your feeling risky!. Fighting well armoured or just big stuff? Great Weapons. In the context of THEIR LIST, they are awesome. No Animosity, no drawbacks. Solid and Dependable.

But hey, you just keep comparing Apples and Oranges.

Storak
24-07-2008, 15:10
But lets not forget the Gobbo Bolt Throwers. Dirt cheap, two to a slot...and bound to hit something sooner or later!


rather later. they are good, but cost 5 points less than a dwarfen one. (with the bully)



And thats the thing about an army with vareity. Units and models are priced within their army. It's not so much the individual costs, as what you can take as well as them. Orcs might seem a bit overpriced, but then, the General can flood the field with Gobbos if need be. Orcy Artillery is surprisingly cheap. There are two classes of Chariot, one of which is a 2 for 1 slot as well, as fairly cheap for what you get.

basically all of this is false as well. orcs are (at least) normally priced. gobbos are horribly expensive. the price of the artillery is rather normal. you wont save more than 30 points.
the only "chariot" that is 2 for 1 slot is the pump wagon. it isn t a good choice.


Black Guard - Block of Troops, with Hatred. Quite effective against Infantry, moderately so against Cavalry, pretty much stuffed and doomed to a lingering demise against big monsters. Very dependable though, even for an Elf unit.

ld 9 STUBBORN! they are very good against EVERYTHING.


Black Orcs - Block of Troops with Armed to DA Teef. No matter what they might come across, they, like Slayers, are equipped to deal with. Fighting Infantry? Two Choppas. Fighting Heavy Infantry (there is no Elite, just Heavy) then Choppa and Shield, or Two Choppas if your feeling risky!. Fighting well armoured or just big stuff? Great Weapons. In the context of THEIR LIST, they are awesome. No Animosity, no drawbacks. Solid and Dependable.

please do some basic calculations before posting nonsense like this. "armed to da teeth" is a moronic "bonus". the orcs are best using 2 choppas 99% of the time.

the flexibility that you guys see in the rule is a MYTH!

"no animosity" is an advantage in the orc army? that one is funny!

Mad Doc Grotsnik
24-07-2008, 15:12
Oh, I see what your doing. Your adding to the base cost, to get a skewed result. Not really a fair arguement. With the Engineer, the Dwarf Bolt Thrower is 20 points more, before you tool him up.

Have you ever tried the units you knock? Or is this just perceived wisdom from the Interwebs?

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 15:15
when you have to pay for the DE expensive characters, the fact you need to pay more for your core units than an O&G player you have to pay more for your artillery, you suddenly have less points to spend on special, that is why there is a difference. I'm sure if you think about it you can see that, no? And yes I do take larger than 20 unit with black orcs. Any army that depends on the numbers still being there when they get in combat should in my opinion

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 15:20
leadership 9 and stubborn in indeed a useful thing. however, that doesn't stop the inevitable 10+ roll. You know it happens, just when you think your roll is accademic out comes the nightmare. For example the number of times I roll 1's for armour saves with my terminators in 40k is ridiculous

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 15:28
The hatred rule has a flaw, in that you have to pursue fleeing troops. so whats to stop me putting a unit of wolf riders up against the black guard, inevitably running away (probably not being caught) whilst forcing your black guard where they don't want to be, with a large orc unit or 2 able to go in the flank?

Muad'Dib
24-07-2008, 15:32
Black Guard - Block of Troops, with Hatred. Quite effective against Infantry, moderately so against Cavalry, pretty much stuffed and doomed to a lingering demise against big monsters. Very dependable though, even for an Elf unit.
"Quite effective" against infantry ? They massacre any infantry, except HE.
"doomed to lingering demise" against monsters ? Which monsters ? Minotaurs/Ogres ? I don't see how S4 A2 hititng on 3+ with re-roll can't hold their own against monsters that hit them on 4+. Especially as they are not bothered by fear or said monsters charging them on flank.
If you mean big flying monsters, what infantry is NOT doomed while fightning them?



Fighting Infantry? Two Choppas.
That's impressive. Black Orcs, a 'heavy infantry' unit, can deal with infantry ! :rolleyes:



Fighting Heavy Infantry (there is no Elite, just Heavy) then Choppa and Shield, or Two Choppas if your feeling risky!.

The problem is, that Black Orcs won't 'deal' with heavy infantry, no matter how much you will promote their 'versatility'. Against Black Guard, they will still lose 2-3 Orcs while killing 1-2 Elfs in return (and the Elfs are still cheaper and Stubborn/ItP). Swordmasters will massacre them. Ironbreakers and Graveguard will hold them indefinitely (Ironbreakers, with superior save and WS, will slowly grind them down, while Graveguard can hold their own while at the same time being riseable, and they also have +1 hit banner - both of these units are also cheaper).



Fighting well armoured or just big stuff? Great Weapons.

WS 4 A1 is not very impressive while dealing with 1+/2+ save knights, even with S6. Though maybe it's awesome in the context of O&G book...
They can deal with Ogres. Maybe. Against Minotaurs/Dragon Ogres (WS4) - I wouldn't say so.
Hope your 'big stuff' doesn't include Dragons and the likes, cause Black Orcs will just die to them.



In the context of THEIR LIST, they are awesome. No Animosity, no drawbacks. Solid and Dependable.

I think that's the core of the problem. Within O&G list, a very weak unit is considered awesome. That tells something about the power level of the book as a whole.
Yes, Black Orcs are 'solid' compared to your bog standard Orcs. Compared to Ironbreakers, Black Guard or Grave Guard ? I dare to disagree. They would be fine for 11-12 pts - and they would cost that much if the book would be written now. With their current cost, they simply don't have anything special - save the one turn +1 S with choppas, if you manage to charge. Compare that to bonuses other heavy infantry get.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 15:44
As I said above, hatred is not reliable, not as bad as frenzy, but still flawed. And I'm sure you're not suggesting that we're using troops to take on the big stuff (not to wound it anyway). Black orc Big bosses with something like shagas screaming sword deal with most things. The line of fanatics from the goblins next to them is handy too

Mad Doc Grotsnik
24-07-2008, 15:48
Choppas give +1S regardless of who charged.

Dragons, Manticores, Griffons etc.. will have to think twice about charging Black Orcs. Sure, they stand to make a mess, but I try not to engage units capable of doing reliable damage to them. Far too precious for that!

And Orcs and Goblins are *All* about the combos. You outnumber the enemy, so use that to your advantage. Fear loses it's edge somewhat when you're not outnumbered, so try to get a couple of units in. You have some fairly nippy units, so use them to slow the enemy down a bit, somewhat mitigating your Animosity. If you are giving the enemy something even vaguely resembling a fair fight with Orcs and Goblins, you are doing something wrong. Consider keeping some Night Gobbos close to the Black Orcs. When something charges the Big Guys, they risk triggering the Fanatics, neatly reducing their ranks, and making your win in the ensuing combat that little bit easier....

Muad'Dib
24-07-2008, 15:52
As I said above, hatred is not reliable, not as bad as frenzy, but still flawed.
If we are talking abour reliability, how about animosity? If you are saying that Black Guard will chase Wolf Riders, I could as well say that Wolf Riders might roll a '1' or a '6' (pretty big chance during the 2-3 turns while they will be trying to pull the trick on Black Guard.
If you are trying to bring 'look at armies as a whole approach', I might point out as well that Reapeter Bolt Throwers/Xbows/Dark Riders/Harpies might neutralize your Wolf Riders.




And I'm sure you're not suggesting that we're using troops to take on the big stuff (not to wound it anyway).
Well, I wasn't the one that brought big monsters to the comparison (rather, it was a person trying to prove Black Orcs are 'awesome') :rolleyes:



Black orc Big bosses with something like shagas screaming sword deal with most things.
I hope this is a typo, cause a W2 T4 hero will get his ass handed by 'most things'. Even if he gets lucky and 1) gets 2 or more characters in the 12" radius 2) gets the charge 3) isn't stopped by funny stuff like reverse ward saves or AFS.



The line of fanatics from the goblins next to them is handy too
You mean they are handy for one turn before most of them kill themselves ?

Mad Doc Grotsnik
24-07-2008, 15:55
IF my opponent wants to waste his Reapers on Fast Cavalry, he is more than welcome. Rather than shooting at the really 'ard stuff...

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 16:04
Exactly, all hypotheticals, I was just giving you an example of a way round the hatred, with an 18 inch charge maybe 24 with a 6 on animosity, backed up by a second turn waagh, and you'll find those darkelves are in danger faster than you might expect. In reality, both units can beat each other. Both have flaws that can be exploited, but that doesn't make one bad and the other good. And fanatics often only need 1 turn, though if you take enough, theyre there long enough. and against armies with small expensive units, they really are lethal. Not to mention the panic they cause the opposing general who's trying to avoid them to start with

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 16:05
IF my opponent wants to waste his Reapers on Fast Cavalry, he is more than welcome. Rather than shooting at the really 'ard stuff...

lol exactly, and damn it will just have to be the other 65 point unit of wolves then.

volair
24-07-2008, 16:28
lol exactly, and damn it will just have to be the other 65 point unit of wolves then.

Unless a 55 point unit of Harpies has anything to say about that.

EvC
24-07-2008, 16:50
Don't forget your Wolf Riders are taking fear tests on top of animosity to charge Black Guard :D

Grinloc
24-07-2008, 16:59
Competitively O&G's have dire problems in the mobility department against numerous armies, especially elven ones. Their fast cavalry (both types) are primarily there to have a "fight" for mobility superiority.
Now those elven bolt throwers don't have the multiple shot penalty anymore and two of those (2 for 1 slot) should be expected. Those two BT's with their multiple shots will on average kill 4 out of 5 riders at long range.

Now getting one of those fast cavalry units effectively eliminated in one shooting phase, effectively making the player start to lose this mobility battle, should be just considered collateral damage? Plenty more where that came from? This situation doesn't even consider the other shooting and mobile units the opponent brought to the battle. Like empire scouts, shadow warriors, shades, harpies, DR, etc.
In any typical warhammer battle this is a very very bad thing to happen. Now add to that the animosity special rule and it becomes definately easier for the opponent to outmanouvre the RnF greenskin units.
The average chance of RnF units squabbling requires fast elements to lessen the resulting mobility disadvantage. If those fast elements aren't there to a viable degree the movement phase starts to get dominated by the opponent. All things/dynamics considered this is probably the most devastating thing which can happen to a player.

Makaber
24-07-2008, 17:05
The problem is, that Black Orcs won't 'deal' with heavy infantry, no matter how much you will promote their 'versatility'. Against Black Guard, they will still lose 2-3 Orcs while killing 1-2 Elfs in return (and the Elfs are still cheaper and Stubborn/ItP). Swordmasters will massacre them. Ironbreakers and Graveguard will hold them indefinitely (Ironbreakers, with superior save and WS, will slowly grind them down, while Graveguard can hold their own while at the same time being riseable, and they also have +1 hit banner - both of these units are also cheaper).

Yes, but then again, your example is massivly unfair. You're taking a unit whos strength is well-rounded versitality, and comparing it against the uttermost ends of the spectrum. What unit won't get massacred by Swordmasters? None. What unit will outlast Graveguard? None. That's setting standards too high.

Furthermore, why do people always pull up the extremes in the first place? Swordmasters are one of the most specialisted units in the game, being absolutely awesome in close combat, but they offset this by being ridicilously frail to everything but. In a game where units have different niches, something has to be best (ie. most specialised) in a certain field, and Swordmasters happens to be the best at theirs. Black Orcs aren't, but neither are they too expensive to field with a decent rank bonus, and most importantly, they're not T3 with a symbolic armour save.

EvC
24-07-2008, 17:11
Who would you like us to compare Black Orcs to? Chaos Warriors? No, can't do that, they're T4 with a 2+ save, that'd be unfair. Dwarfs? Well, that's not fair either. Tomb Guard? No, they're nearly as bad as Grave Guard. Phoenix Guard? That's just not cricket, with all their abilities. How about an Empire Greatsword? I think we've finally found an "elite" infantry unit that Black Orcs can beat in combat! Gork be praised! So how much does a Greatsword cost, anyway?

Makaber
24-07-2008, 17:13
Who would you like us to compare Black Orcs to? Chaos Warriors? No, can't do that, they're T4 with a 2+ save, that'd be unfair. Dwarfs? Well, that's not fair either. Tomb Guard? No, they're nearly as bad as Grave Guard. Phoenix Guard? That's just not cricket, with all their abilities. How about an Empire Greatsword? I think we've finally found an "elite" infantry unit that Black Orcs can beat in combat! Gork be praised! So how much does a Greatsword cost, anyway?

Now you're just being difficult on purpose.

EvC
24-07-2008, 17:18
Yes, my post is difficult. It's asking you to think with an open mind, and consider things you don't want to consider. Give it a try, it won't hurt.

Storak
24-07-2008, 17:21
Now you're just being difficult on purpose.

i don t think he is.

i would really like to have real answers to this questions:

1. what elite infantry do you think is inferior to black orcs and will be beaten by them? (factor in point costs)

2. against what unit will black orcs perform clearly better (close combat!) than black guard?

3. against what unit will black orcs use their 2h weapon instead of one of the other options?

Shimmergloom
24-07-2008, 17:54
The hatred rule has a flaw, in that you have to pursue fleeing troops. so whats to stop me putting a unit of wolf riders up against the black guard, inevitably running away (probably not being caught) whilst forcing your black guard where they don't want to be, with a large orc unit or 2 able to go in the flank?

I like it when people consistently point out the flaw in hatred while ignoring the flaw of rolling a 6 on the animosity chart.

I wish I had the flaws of hating everyone instead of squabbling when the enemy is 2 inches away or wheeling and showing my flank to the empire knights because some hunter archers are closer and on the corner of my LOS.


But lets not forget the Gobbo Bolt Throwers. Dirt cheap, two to a slot...and bound to hit something sooner or later!

And thats the thing about an army with vareity. Units and models are priced within their army. It's not so much the individual costs, as what you can take as well as them. Orcs might seem a bit overpriced, but then, the General can flood the field with Gobbos if need be. Orcy Artillery is surprisingly cheap. There are two classes of Chariot, one of which is a 2 for 1 slot as well, as fairly cheap for what you get.

10 pts more for a dwarf bolt thrower that's also 2 for 1, has stubborn dwarf crew instead of goblins, can entrench, can have engineers who are far better than bullies and can have runes put upon them to give them S7 or Flaming attacks, etc.

yeah. That's even.

The grudethrower and the rock lobba cost EXACTLY the same base. For all the same advantages that the grudgethrower has.

The dwarf cannon vs the doW cannon a greenskin can take is 5pts difference and special vs rare. That's not even either.

Greenskin artillery is by no means and by no way cheap. it's the same cost as dwarf shooting with none of the advantages. And the dwarf book came out BEFORE the new greenskin book. So there's none of this new direction BS. This was purposely done.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
24-07-2008, 17:57
Do you, or do you not, pay for the Engineer, more than the Bully. Do you, or do you not, pay for the Runes, to give it a boost, without increasing it's survivability? OH YEAH! You do!

And actually, Greenskins can't take Dogs of War...ever...not in the book see?

Purposefully done? Hardly. Pete Haines wrote the Dwarf book, and he is a noted Games Design *****. +1 to hit on Handguns? Pour quoi?

Muad'Dib
24-07-2008, 18:19
Choppas give +1S regardless of who charged.
True, but if Black Orcs are the ones to be charged by elite infantry/cavalry, they will usually lose 2-3 of their numbers. With only 2-3 Orcs remaining, I doubt that 1-2 attacks that will hit (even with the choppa benefit) will make much of the diference. Thus, the Choppa bonus is neglible unless Orcs are the ones to get the charge. (unless you choose to use AHW while taking a charge)


Dragons, Manticores, Griffons etc.. will have to think twice about charging Black Orcs. Sure, they stand to make a mess, but I try not to engage units capable of doing reliable damage to them. Far too precious for that!
I don't see how Black Orcs pose any threat to a large flying monster. Even without taking the lord into account, the monster will strike first, hitting with 3 attacks, wounding with 2, killing 2 orcs. 2 Orcs will return attack, one hitting and then dealing one wound to the monster. Wow. And that's without taking the lord on top into account. I don't see how this is reliable damage.


And Orcs and Goblins are *All* about the combos. You outnumber the enemy, so use that to your advantage. Fear loses it's edge somewhat when you're not outnumbered, so try to get a couple of units in. You have some fairly nippy units, so use them to slow the enemy down a bit, somewhat mitigating your Animosity. If you are giving the enemy something even vaguely resembling a fair fight with Orcs and Goblins, you are doing something wrong. Consider keeping some Night Gobbos close to the Black Orcs. When something charges the Big Guys, they risk triggering the Fanatics, neatly reducing their ranks, and making your win in the ensuing combat that little bit easier....
Thanks for the great advice (even though I don't play O&G)...
The fact that you are able to use the O&G units together doesn't change the base facts that the troops you are using are still overpriced and lack special abilities which the newest army books have gotten, mostly for free. Really, what army is not about 'the combos'? I could defend every crap unit by saying "just put few blocks of infantry on it's flanks and march block the enemy and your good to go with your X". For example let's make the Black Guard seem better when we "look at the larger context of the army" :

"Worried about Black Guard breaking every infantry block on charge ? No problem, just use your Bolt Throwers / pop a Black Horror to take away their ranks, while hitting the flank/march blocking with Dark Riders!" ...but what's the point?
The fact that your fanatics *might* (remember, they are quite random and not that cheap) weaken enemy doesn't change the fact that Black Orcs are still a sad excuse for an elite infantry unit.

In regards to war machines - yes, O&G bolt throwers are 10 points cheaper then Dwarf ones. That's same situation as with 'cheap' heroes - yes, you save some points. Do you save much, especially take into account the much better Dwarf crew? No.


Yes, but then again, your example is massivly unfair. You're taking a unit whos strength is well-rounded versitality, and comparing it against the uttermost ends of the spectrum. What unit won't get massacred by Swordmasters? None. What unit will outlast Graveguard? None. That's setting standards too high.

And that's the problem with Black Orcs - they pay points for something that, most of the time, doesn't matter. They are still average at taking a charge - they will be broken by every above average cavalry (Grail Knights, Dragon Princes, Blood Knights, normal cavalry with a hero, Cold One knights - they have hatred with WS 5 now). They are average at damage dealing - WS 4 A1 is simply not enough.
And we come to the point when we relalize that Black Orcs are not the average - they are well below the average standards for an elite/heavy infantry unit. You might call them 'jack of all trades masters of none'...but in reality, they are not impressive if any of the 'trades' - be it dealing damage, or holding a charge.
I pull examples like Grave Guard and Swordmasters because in Swordmasters case - they are 1 point more for a very high increase in anvil ability (AFS) and damage dealing (WS 6 S5 A2). In Grave Guard case, they are cheaper then Black Orcs for much better staying power.
I also pulled out the Black Guard example - a unit that is not (yet?) regarded as an 'extreme' - and Black Orcs proved to be worse then Black Guard.

Makaber
24-07-2008, 18:37
1. what elite infantry do you think is inferior to black orcs and will be beaten by them? (factor in point costs)

2. against what unit will black orcs perform clearly better (close combat!) than black guard?

3. against what unit will black orcs use their 2h weapon instead of one of the other options?

1) Again with the "inferior". There are 14 different armies, with at least as many different types of elite infantry. These work in vastly different ways. I can tell you how this will go: I'll say your premise is flawed because you want an example that takes place in what I like to call a "tactical vacuum", a theoretical fight between two units with absolutely no outside interference. Then I'll indulge you and mention a few examples of what Black Orcs would prevail against in such an unrealistic and pointless scenario, one of which will be, say, White Lions. You'll then point out that "nah-ah!", While Lions are Stubborn and are as such a lot better. I'll point out that you're the one who insisted on the stupid unit-against-unit comparison in the first place, get mad, say "screw this thread!", and go play Halo instead.

With that in mind, and because I kinda want to play Halo anyways, here's a couple of examples of units that I feel Black Orcs are as good as, or just plain better than, in a "tactical vacuum" fight: Bestigors, probably at least one of the Dwarf elites, Greatswords, White Lions, Phoenix Guard, Chaos Warriors, Saurus Warriors, Ironguts, Stormvermin (thee hee!), Tomb Guard, probably Grave Guard as well, Bloodletters.

I guess it also hinges a little on what you define as "elite".

2) Again, stupid "tactical vacuum" comparisons. Black Guard are T3 and packa 5+ save. I wouldn't fight them with Black Orcs; I'd wittle them down with stupid bows. Dark Elves are "the latest thing". I've played Warhammer for long enough to remember how every single time a new army is released, something in it is hailed as The Greatest Unit Ever, a status that typically lasts for about a month, until people figure out how to deal with it.

Black Orcs aren't better than Black Guards in close combat, and I never said they were. I could turn your argument on its head and say that every single unit in the game sucks because they're not as good in close combat at Swordmasters, but I won't because it's stupid.

Anyway, Black Orcs are better than Black Guards against Tomb King Chariots. There's your stupid example.

3) Just to pull an example out of a hat, a Black Orc will do better with a Great Weapon than two Choppas if fighting a Treeman. I'm sure there are a couple of other examples as well.

Znail
24-07-2008, 18:42
i don t think he is.

i would really like to have real answers to this questions:

1. what elite infantry do you think is inferior to black orcs and will be beaten by them? (factor in point costs)

2. against what unit will black orcs perform clearly better (close combat!) than black guard?

3. against what unit will black orcs use their 2h weapon instead of one of the other options?

Why would you only factor in close combat? Doesnt T4 and 4+ save have an advantage against missile fire over T3 and 5+ saves? I consider the abbility of a close combat unit to survive until close combat to be part of the over all quality.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
24-07-2008, 18:45
Apparently not. That might disprove his claims.

But enough of this. Surely this thread has come to a natural end now? Same arguments, same counterarguements. If it gets any more circular, I think I'll throw up.

semersonp
24-07-2008, 18:48
i get the feeling there's not a whole lot of quality control that happens during army book production for fantasy...

disconnects in background, description oddities, ill written rules and the like... its almost as though no write has the whole world in mind, just the minuscule bit they are carving out at the moment with no relation to the whole...

its not awful... its just not what it could be with a bit of effort... imagine synchronized histories and well conceived campaigns all fought by armies that had their own strengths/weaknesses centered around an even power level...

i like the orc + goblin book... i like it a lot... it has its powerful bits, its weak bits and its lousy bits... real parity...

i just wish other army books in this edition had followed the same path - imagine it... :) all warhammer forces remaining separate but equal with no massively underpriced / overpriced units...

orks in 40k are amazing at the moment, as they should be ;P... fantasy orcs and goblins are a great, fair army... its just that they're coming up against armies that have begun a slightly heightened game - asf, cheaper cav, etc and they lack that little bit of oomph to make their competition truly equal...

oh, and animosity... i love the idea of animosity, i even have markers for it... but its current incarnation is not well thought out... why would an orc fail to charge into the flank of high elf spearmen 30 yards away because he is 'squabbling'... the orc to his left will be there when the battle is over, the elf ahead is a rare treat and he's endured days of marching for this moment... or even the striding forward option - gripped by green madness a unit will wheel across battle lines to get nearer to a distant unit of archers simply because they are 1 foot closer than those soon to be charging knights... sigh :eyebrows:

how hard would it have been to NOT have every unit do something problematic 1/3 of the time... i understand the idea, in fact i laud it... but it seems as though a rough draft were drawn up, a few tweaks made and then 'good enough' was stamped on it and it was shipped...

anyway, i think people know their fair share of orc + goblin generals... and they fear for the great waaagh! that will destroy the warhammer world should we get a powered playbook to field troops from :p

keep rocking the green horde :D

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 20:09
I get the feeling some people want all the races to be exactly the same just with different names, really strange arguments being put forward here

Storak
24-07-2008, 20:35
1) Again with the "inferior". There are 14 different armies, with at least as many different types of elite infantry. These work in vastly different ways. I can tell you how this will go: I'll say your premise is flawed because you want an example that takes place in what I like to call a "tactical vacuum", a theoretical fight between two units with absolutely no outside interference. Then I'll indulge you and mention a few examples of what Black Orcs would prevail against in such an unrealistic and pointless scenario, one of which will be, say, White Lions. You'll then point out that "nah-ah!", While Lions are Stubborn and are as such a lot better. I'll point out that you're the one who insisted on the stupid unit-against-unit comparison in the first place, get mad, say "screw this thread!", and go play Halo instead.

see, that is why i put a testable criterium there: "and will be beaten by them"

now i am very curious: how would the black orcs beat the white lions?


With that in mind, and because I kinda want to play Halo anyways, here's a couple of examples of units that I feel Black Orcs are as good as, or just plain better than, in a "tactical vacuum" fight: Bestigors, probably at least one of the Dwarf elites, Greatswords, White Lions, Phoenix Guard, Chaos Warriors, Saurus Warriors, Ironguts, Stormvermin (thee hee!), Tomb Guard, probably Grave Guard as well, Bloodletters.

quite a nice list, with several units that are considered underpower as well. (bestigors, stormvermin..) and they still are very similar in power to the black orcs.

you chose a lot of very resilient units (stubborn..). they will survive the first, and the black orcs will have to handle them without the choppa bonus in later turns, and they will often strike last.

so tell me, how will the orcs win against the bloodletters?



2) Again, stupid "tactical vacuum" comparisons. Black Guard are T3 and packa 5+ save. I wouldn't fight them with Black Orcs; I'd wittle them down with stupid bows

i am really curious: how many elven units have you "wittled down" with orcish bows so far?


Dark Elves are "the latest thing". I've played Warhammer for long enough to remember how every single time a new army is released, something in it is hailed as The Greatest Unit Ever, a status that typically lasts for about a month, until people figure out how to deal with it.

this is nonsense. noone made the claim that they are the biggest unit ever. instead, they were brougght up as a unit that the orcs can beat. they can t.



Anyway, Black Orcs are better than Black Guards against Tomb King Chariots. There's your stupid example.

thanks for a stupid reply. the chariots shouldn t charge either of those units. it isn t very likely to charge the stubborn elves.
good luck with your fear test.


3) Just to pull an example out of a hat, a Black Orc will do better with a Great Weapon than two Choppas if fighting a Treeman. I'm sure there are a couple of other examples as well.

i don t have my woodelf book around, but i assume that this is (somewhat) right. how many orcs will strike back after the tree attacked? any other examples that jump to mind?

volair
24-07-2008, 20:36
I get the feeling some people want all the races to be exactly the same just with different names, really strange arguments being put forward here

There are many ways to make races unique whilst simultaneously being balanced. Balanced just means they are all competitive amongst each other. Orcs&Goblins could be unique without animosity, and they could be balanced with animosity. It takes imagination or intelligence, respectively. Apparently O&G have yet to get a designer who has either traits.

Shimmergloom
24-07-2008, 20:37
Do you, or do you not, pay for the Engineer, more than the Bully. Do you, or do you not, pay for the Runes, to give it a boost, without increasing it's survivability? OH YEAH! You do!

And actually, Greenskins can't take Dogs of War...ever...not in the book see?

Purposefully done? Hardly. Pete Haines wrote the Dwarf book, and he is a noted Games Design *****. +1 to hit on Handguns? Pour quoi?

You are talking again in complete fabrications.

Dwarfs have numerour rules that increase the survivability of the machine. So that's a complete lie to say that you pay for runes without increasing it's chances to survive. Getting a re-roll to a misfire result does definately increase it's survival chances. Getting a rune to make it in hard cover, most definately increases it's survivability. Entrenching the machine which is a free special rule most definately increases its survivability. Having a stubborn crew on LD9 for free, most definately increases its survivability.

An engineer is 15pts. base +5pts for a handgun or +5 for a brace of pistols.

Bully is 5pts. Bully can only make the goblins immune to goblin panic and fear elves, with +1LD for any tests. otherwise he's a normal orc.

Engineer is +1WS, +1BS, +2LD a unit champion and stubborn just like the regular crew. Plus he lets them re-roll misfire results on the misfire table. That's a hell of a lot of advantages over the bully.

Stick your head in the sand all you want, but dwarf machines are incredibly better than greenskin machines for very small points differences higher. And in the case of the lobba vs grudgethrower, they are the exact same cost.

Greenskins don't have cheap troops. Most troops are cheaper or cost only minimum amounts more for tons of benefits.

They don't have cheap elites, an immense amount of elites have come out that are virtually the same cost or even cheaper, with massive benefits over black orcs or big'uns.

They don't have cheaper war machines. Dwarfs, hobgoblins, empire and DoW all have better and cheaper machines. And high and dark elves completely outclass them in shooting as a whole.

They don't have cheap cavalry. Their cav has massive liabilities, while everyone else is coming out with cav cheaper than or 1 or 2pts more than they cost, with tons of benefits.

And they don't have cheap destructive magic. Most magic users are no more than a handful of points more, without having to worry about losing magic phases to animosity, or a a massively worse miscast chart to deal with and if they miscast they have plenty of items that let them ignore the miscast to choose from.

Get your head out of GW's sandbox and look around.

Storak
24-07-2008, 20:40
Why would you only factor in close combat? Doesnt T4 and 4+ save have an advantage against missile fire over T3 and 5+ saves? I consider the abbility of a close combat unit to survive until close combat to be part of the over all quality.

yes. and i have said it before: survivability against shooting is the real advantage that orcs have.

the problem with this advantage is, that you need to consider the shooting capability of the armies as well. orcs don t shoot well.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 20:45
There are many ways to make races unique whilst simultaneously being balanced. Balanced just means they are all competitive amongst each other. Orcs&Goblins could be unique without animosity, and they could be balanced with animosity. It takes imagination or intelligence, respectively. Apparently O&G have yet to get a designer who has either traits.

As a LOOOOOONG time O&G user I honestly think the only thing wrong with the book is the lack of background (bestiary starts on p.16, whereas DE's its p43) and the fear elves rule. That is annoying and unnecessary. Animosity is just something you learn to deal with, and I enjoy it

volair
24-07-2008, 20:56
Dark Elves are indeed significantly less resilient than not only O&G, but the vast majority, if not all of the armies in the game. That is actually the principle disdvantage of Dark Elves, it is basically their animosity. What makes the new Dark Elves a good army, in stark contrast to O&G, is that they have advantages that can be utilized to win games, whereas O&G don't.

Gazak Blacktoof
24-07-2008, 20:58
I don't want to get dragged back into this thread as its turning into a bitch fest so I'll just correct the most glaring of the factual errors (there are several).


And actually, Greenskins can't take Dogs of War...ever...not in the book see?


This simply isn't the case, please download and read the dogs of war rules.

Muad'Dib
24-07-2008, 21:15
I get the feeling some people want all the races to be exactly the same just with different names
And exactly what's the point of this hyperbole ?
Noone here wants O&G to become 'cheesy'.
Noone here wants them to get same rules as HE, DE or VC
Very few people (1?) want Orcs to lose their animosity rule.
Rather, what people have problems with, are the glaring issues in the army book, like
1) overpriced Boar Boyz and Black Orcs, especially in comparison to the latest army books
2) the '6' on the animosity table - removing it would make the troops 84 % reliable as opposed to 66 %.
3) little tweaks, like lowering cost/buffing Fanatics, giving some meaning to Snotlings (LD 4 Stubborn ?) or fixing the Quell Animosity rule
It won't tear out the 'fun' out of your army.
It won't make them point and click army.
But it will make the O&G book more balanced overall.
And I agree with Gazak, this thread is turning into a flaming fest.

Shimmergloom
24-07-2008, 21:34
Everyone thinks if you make any changes then you make them cheesey. No one is asking for black orcs to give regen to the unit they are in. Just that they don't start killing their own troops when they quell animosity.

There's a huge enough difference in the special rule that gives your units regen or killing blow, or cause fear or extra ward save power, vs just letting the unit be immune to animosity without killing his own troops.

There's tons of other little changes that need to be made. None make greenskins superpowered or even reliable. They just make them horrible. If you're going to give greenskins the disadvantage of animosity, then the points costs need to reflect this. And they do not do this anymore. That is plain as day to anyone who has seen or played against any of the new 7th edition armies.

Fredmans
24-07-2008, 21:45
Back to the topic of the title: I find that few people want Orcs to suck, and that most players really enjoy fighting against orcs & goblins. That is enough for me to stick with the greenskins. I have played Skaven and Wood elves before, and those armies were certainly better, but not at all as rewarding to play with or against. A lot, and I mean a lot has been said about the shortcomings of the latest army book in this thread and others. However, I do not think that O&G is in the same position as the Dark Elves in 6th, and do not count on a revision any time soon. With the exception of VC, and possibly Daemons (yet to find out), I find that most battles are even and satisfying. We play all-comers' lists, which might explain some of my gripes.

These are some of the issues I struggle with, and find restrictive in my army decisions:

Goblin fear elves: Although characterful (to some), I think Goblin Ld in itself portrays their cowardice. With the addition of elves, Goblins fear almost everything your opponent can muster. In my gaming group, there is only one army that my Goblins will not fear. The majority play elves or field fear-causing armies (and there are a lot of them these days). This makes Goblin Chariots and small goblin regiments nearly useless.

Animosity is fine, just take 2 of every unit: I read it a lot on forums like this, but this argument can only come from someone not familiar with the O&G book. O&G:s are not 50% cheaper than other armies' units, not even close. I find that an O&G army that suits my playing style is about the same size, or even smaller, than a balanced Empire army (some infantry, some cavalry, some cannons). I do have a higher unit count, though.

Banner/item combos: These are seriously lacking in the O&G book, and abundant in later books. The number of goblin banners alone is an insult to Black Orc generals, and makes you wonder what GW:s drug policies look like.

/Fredmans

Gazak Blacktoof
24-07-2008, 22:04
I find that an O&G army that suits my playing style is about the same size, or even smaller, than a balanced Empire army (some infantry, some cavalry, some cannons). I do have a higher unit count, though.

/Fredmans

This is exactly the way the games I play are setup. My army is never really any bigger than my friend's empire army but I usually have a couple of additional deployment choices because of detachments.

EDIT: I played a game this afternoon against dwarfs and scored a massacre result. We both knew who we were fighting against and I told my friend I wouldn't be using any magic.

There was one really lucky combat where my savage orc boss held up a dwarf lord for 3 rounds of combat thanks to his 6+ ward save. My war machines completely failed me though, I've had a long run of bad luck with them and they spent the entire game rolling misfire results though thankfully neither of them junked themselves.

Apart from the savage orc boss my two units of squig hoppers proved invaluable in tearing through one dwarf flank eliminating two war machines and a unit of quarrellers before helping me to destroy the dwarf lord and his longbeards.

O&G'sRule
24-07-2008, 22:28
This is exactly the way the games I play are setup. My army is never really any bigger than my friend's empire army but I usually have a couple of additional deployment choices because of detachments.

EDIT: I played a game this afternoon against dwarfs and scored a massacre result. We both knew who we were fighting against and I told my friend I wouldn't be using any magic.

There was one really lucky combat where my savage orc boss held up a dwarf lord for 3 rounds of combat thanks to his 6+ ward save. My war machines completely failed me though, I've had a long run of bad luck with them and they spent the entire game rolling misfire results though thankfully neither of them junked themselves.

Apart from the savage orc boss my two units of squig hoppers proved invaluable in tearing through one dwarf flank eliminating two war machines and a unit of quarrellers before helping me to destroy the dwarf lord and his longbeards.

A massacre? Impossible, the orc and goblin army cant beat anything, apparently:evilgrin:

Gazak Blacktoof
24-07-2008, 22:35
Well I did have two units of bigunz with the upgrade as 2 pts/ model (trial house rules).

redrum
24-07-2008, 22:38
A massacre? Impossible, the orc and goblin army cant beat anything, apparently:evilgrin:

I just read through this entire thread and nobody is saying that. Comments like that don't further the discussion at all.

The fact of the matter is that both sides of this are taking extreme positions. There are some great units in the army, not everything is overcosted/underpowered. However for people to try to deny that there is anything wrong with the list is just as close minded as saying it's all wrong. There are some overpriced units, animosity needs some tweaking. It's not all terrible but it's not all sunshine and rainbows either. Much like everything else the truth is somewhere in between.

volair
24-07-2008, 22:40
A massacre? Impossible, the orc and goblin army cant beat anything, apparently:evilgrin:

You are sadly mistaken if you think that is what anyone in this thread believes. The whole point of this discussion is to raise awareness of the FACT that O&G are comparitively weak. That doesn't mean it is impossible to win, it means only that the army is at a disadvantage. That says nothing of the skill of two people playing a game somewhere out there in the world, near or far from my computer. For all I know all of these orc players who are winning in these anecdotes are facing againsts total newbies or just flat out bad players.

Storak
24-07-2008, 22:40
A massacre? Impossible, the orc and goblin army cant beat anything, apparently:evilgrin:

let us look at a (slightly) bigger picture, shall we?

http://oz-vagabonds.net/results2008.php

orcs start with place 25.

this is an interesting look at battle scores (http://www.wargamerau.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=55937&st=0):


Beasts 55.5
Bretonians 62.2
Chaos Mortals 36.5
Daemons 81
Dark Elves 41.3
Dwarves 59.3
Empire 58.4
High Elves 66.8
Lizards 66.8
Ogres 54
Orc n Gobs 55.4
Skaven 50.2
Tomb Kings 68
VCs 60.7
Woodies 60.6

yes, some armies came out worse. but none of them had a new book. (and it is pretty much the same list of weak armies, over and over again..)

---------------

i am still looking forward to an explanation, on how black orcs win a combat against bloodletters...

Quetzl
24-07-2008, 22:41
I wish there could be a couple more armies like O&G's, they're just a pleasure to play against cos they'iz well ard' and dey just nutz like. But yeah I just think they lighten up the game, there's too many serious armies in this here hobby - I'd say OgreK's aren't too serious but not as epic as the Orcs.
O&G's do however come across as being very unpredictable, I suppose they've got a mind of there own which is great if you're in it for the laughs but if you really want to win - then stay away. I just think they don't always listen to their commander, you've gotta love em when they just sorta can't be bothered to charge cause they saw something shiny, or some reason similar :)

Warhammerrox
25-07-2008, 01:12
Well, with comments like the above no wonder we don't get anywhere... I'm sure your Lizardmen army enjoys filling those animosity failed Orcs units with poisoned attacks while the Orc General flounders around trying to deal with your scouting/skirmishing shenanagins... I know my Orcs can't deal with them for prizes !!!

In my opinion, it seems to me lots of players like the current Orcs being slightly nerfed as it gives them a virtually guaranteed win in the current army book arms race...

'Oh teh nooooooooes' who am I playing today?!! Oh no it's HE, table full of strikes 1st SMs and WLs then... Oh no, it's Vamps, magic phase full of spam after spam of ION... OH NOOOOooo it's Daemons, can't get past the army full of highly impressive Flesh Hounds who are cheap as chips and who are backed up by hard to kill Plague Bearers and their super hero Heralds....

Eh, wait a minute... Somebody with O&G, thank GOD, an easy win, over priced tat units and p*ss weak characters.... "Hey, Orc guy... Over here!!!!!"

:wtf:

All I can say is, if we keep whingeing and whineing enough like Dark Elf players used to do, we might get taken notice of also...

What's good for the goose is often just right for the gander...

Chadjabdoul
25-07-2008, 03:14
There was a point in time when this thread actually looked constructive and informative. Then too many people started coming up with specific examples (such as bl.orcs' great weapons actually being useful against treemen) used to prove their point. Problem is they neglect (or refuse to listen to, or succesfully counter) the few valid problems people rose at the first pages of the thread.

Someone even suggested that O&G should sit back and try to outshoot the dark elves because they have T3. Obviously someone who has never played with O&G.

Others suggested that orc artillery is good. The best thing about orc artillery is that it doesn't suffer from animosity. It will never win you any games on its own while using up your precious special choices.

Others point out effective magic. It seems that in 6th edition (a period when I was out of the hobby) greenskin magic was actually an effective weapon. I don't think that's the case anymore, which doesn't bother me much since I always thought that O&G are all about the close combat.

To all those thinking that Armed to da teef (which is paid for in points) is a good rule, do you ever waste points for multiple weapon options on your units? Would you give a unit both add. h. weapons and gr. weapons on your own? Personally, I would never do that.

I imagine this might be my final post in this thread, it's getting tiring and actually proves the OP right (there are some people who want O&G to suck apparently) so I'll sum it up with why I find the latest armybook as badly written.

1) Fluff. Very little and uninspiring. Also makes the goblins look like they are really sufferring by orcs bullying them. If that was the case, the two races would not be living together. They two are symbiotic, both gaining from living together, gobbos aren't just useless slaves in a tribe.

2) Ward came up with a number of rules to benefit the greenskins, and counter the negative results of animosity (waagh, 6 on animosity table). These rules have ended up actually hindering the greenskins even more (read earlier posts in this thread if you need proof). In addition, putting a bl. orc character in a unit to quell animosity can end up with more negative than positive effects.

3) New armybooks released have made a good number of O&G units (goblins, wolf riders, boar riders, big'uns, black orcs) overpriced.

4) Magic item list is pretty bad. Items with similar effects turn up in other army books for lower points, and certain magic items (goblins only banners) are almost unusable.

Fixing this stuff would not make the O&G overpowered. It would not make them reliable. It would not stop them from being a fun army.

So many people have jumped on this thread claiming that O&G are fine as they are, ignoring several posts with well supported arguments pointing out flaws in the armybook, that it makes me think that sadly the OP was right. There's people who want O&G to suck.

Voodoo Boyz
25-07-2008, 04:49
So many people have jumped on this thread claiming that O&G are fine as they are, ignoring several posts with well supported arguments pointing out flaws in the armybook, that it makes me think that sadly the OP was right. There's people who want O&G to suck.

Pretty much every time you see a post about how "well if you don't want to deal with animosity don't play the RANDOMNESS army", you're seeing tacit approval of O&G being a sub-par army.

Honestly, part of GW's problem is that they've pigeonholed certain segments of armies into being a certain way rules wise which really just makes them suck (or makes them overpowered).

O&G's - must have animosity. This will generally make them suck, unless they have a viable way of mitigating the problem, like they did with the last book.

Undead - Cause fear & are unbreakable, as well as healable, and have access to movement spells. This means they'll always have a leg up, depending on how powerful you make their magic phase be.

Dwarfs - Always will have M3. This means they will generally be an underpowered and boring faction.

Elves - T3 all the time. Great, and not even extra armor to compensate for the low T all the time. So when a designer tries to make them "not suck this time around" we get stupidity like ASF as an army wide rule. Wait, how'd they make the WE not suck? That's right, they gave them T4 (or better) Tree's to take instead of the Elves.

It's stupid things like this that sort of link the rules to the fluff in wierd ways just because "it's always been that way" for Warhammer. And unless they change from it, we're going to be stuck with either the same old problems or some kind of ham-fisted "fix" to work around an inherent design limitation.

Dwarf Runelord 45
25-07-2008, 05:14
Everyone seems to want Orcs, and even Orks in 40k, to suck. Orks finally got a good codex and became a good army; when will the Orcs in WHFB get a designer who will have the confidence to challenge his co-workers, who apparently want Orcs to remain a bad army forever, and rework them? Everytime someone complains about Orcs being bad, people of the "keep the Orcs down" movement keep saying that Orcs are supposed to be random and funny (in otherwords really poor).

Do you people realise that the game would be funner if Orcs were powerful? Even if you don't play them, it would add variety to the competitive game. Why does GW insist on keeping bad design choices in the game? When will they finally get rid of stupidity, animosity, etc... They got rid of the randomized general for high elves. That was a step in the right direction. All of these type of rules have to go bye bye.

I have made it my mission to expose the "keep the Orcs down" conspiracy. They have even corrupted the GW staff, probably with bribery, and until they are rooted out, Orcs will never be good.We need to rally people and increase awareness of this issue that is keeping our beloved army from being competitive.

Mad Cod Grotsnik is definitely a member of this "keep the Orcs down" movement. Here is one of his many quotes:

"And no, you don't sell this army of yours. You shrug your shoulders, and play like a Greenskin. Not whinge anonymously on a Forum."

Wow, great advice. Our army is terrible and we should just shrug our shoulders and continue to lose to the other armies without voicing our opinion. I will never do that, I will do everything in my power to increase awareness, and I will challenge people like you who conspire to keep people satisfied with a bad army.

And Skaven are not anymore random than them but people still manage to use them well. I know a ton of players who play Orcs well and know how that accidents can happen so they plan for it. But you can never plan for every thing its just part of the game you never know what your opponents are going to do you can only predict it.

Kalec
25-07-2008, 06:18
The difference is: Skaven can choose to take risky units or not. Unless you limit your OnG army to just units that do not suffer from animosity or units joined by black orc characters, it is unavoidable.

Quite frankly, I fail to see how anyone can support animosity when the best way to play OnG is to circumvent their fluffy rule.

coldblooded3k
25-07-2008, 06:24
You are sadly mistaken if you think that is what anyone in this thread believes. The whole point of this discussion is to raise awareness of the FACT that O&G are comparitively weak. That doesn't mean it is impossible to win, it means only that the army is at a disadvantage. That says nothing of the skill of two people playing a game somewhere out there in the world, near or far from my computer. For all I know all of these orc players who are winning in these anecdotes are facing againsts total newbies or just flat out bad players.

Your right its to raise awareness that they are "comparitively weak".
But after reading most of this forum(skipping the nitpicking:rolleyes:) most people seem to be taking this as either a forum to troll a cheap shot or a place to, pardon the pun, Squabble.

I know we're Greenskins but darn even Grimgor would get tired of this fighting, at least behead your opponent so he can't talk... wait computer... cut off his fingers!!

True Tornments shouldn't be the basis of a Army's Compasition, but making Tornment wins all but rare as a Dwarf at a Elvish bar is a tad depressing.
All i would to see change is some kind of Animosity change to make it less sure thing "holy crap and more of a situational holy crap.I'll admit if all i wanna do is win torneies i would play a second army:evilgrin:. But making a second army that IMHO is no way cooler than the greenskins just to win occasionally :wtf: is too much on my Pocket/Time/Intrest

I'll stick to my small Skirmish and Campaign games. :D

Varath- Lord Impaler
25-07-2008, 07:58
How about they make squabble allow you to still do things in the game such as move (no marching)

Ozorik
25-07-2008, 08:43
O&G's - must have animosity. This will generally make them suck, unless they have a viable way of mitigating the problem, like they did with the last book.

Undead - Cause fear & are unbreakable, as well as healable, and have access to movement spells. This means they'll always have a leg up, depending on how powerful you make their magic phase be.

Dwarfs - Always will have M3. This means they will generally be an underpowered and boring faction.

Elves - T3 all the time. Great, and not even extra armor to compensate for the low T all the time. So when a designer tries to make them "not suck this time around" we get stupidity like ASF as an army wide rule. Wait, how'd they make the WE not suck? That's right, they gave them T4 (or better) Tree's to take instead of the Elves.

With any game with so many factions/races/whatever there has to be something to differentiate each one. People complain about animosity yet O&G are defined by their ill discipline which animosity represents. Black orcs will restore order by breaking heads so the casualties that they casue are completely justified.

Currently animosity needs tweeked but it should never be removed.

Lotho
25-07-2008, 08:54
Keep animosity but when your in sight and a reasonable range of enemies (something like 6-10inches?) animosity doesnt apply (why fight each other when theres a better fight just ahead?). Also if they run forward on a animosity roll, allow them to move as the player chooses, not to nearest visible enemy.

Shimmergloom
25-07-2008, 17:30
They could also make the animosity roll on 2D6 to decrease the chances of a fail.

2-3 = squabble
4-10 = fine
11-12 = Extra D6 movement.

8.33% chance to squabble instead of 16.7%
8.33% chance to get D6 movement instead of 16.7% chance to move D6 toward the nearest enemy.

About 83% controllable vs only 66% controllable as they are now. And the good result is almost never bad. It can still be bad in some cases as it forces you to move in some situations where you may not want to move(mainly hurts arrez), but at least you won't be forced to move in wheels toward the nearest enemy.

Make black orc warlords make the unit they are in immune, while black orc big bosses only do D6 attacks to the unit and you have a much better animosity ruling that still hurts, but much less so.

Crovax20
25-07-2008, 18:42
I'm not sure about a revision... but I'm guessing next army book in a year or 100 will see some point reductions, more magic items and a rewrite of the animosity rule.
1 squabble
2-5 fine
6 waagh, move your unit d6 freely or if your unit has ranged weapons you may add d6 to their weaponskill and range instead. (The power of the waagh guides the arrows!)

I'd love to see that happen, actually gives you a chance that your gobbo's or arrer boyz will kill something :p

Oh and rolling a 1 when you call waagh will only result in d3 wounds. And black orcs will only do d3 str5 hits.

That would be nice :p

Lorcryst
25-07-2008, 19:43
Whoa, I get away from my intartubes connection for two days, and a thread that I left at it's third page, with a good debate going on, has devolved in a monster ... a quick skimming of the 8 pages I've missed tells me that it's mostly "YES they do ! NO they don't ! YOU must suck then ! Not as hard as yo momma !" ...

Unsubscribed :cries:

FigureFour
25-07-2008, 21:09
I just read through all 11 pages of this and was highly disapointed.

Not ONE conspiracy was exposed. Where are the Top Secret files? Where are the moles? The defecting agents? The secret backalley meetings?

Seriously. Most of us are aware that Orcs (and many of the other 6th ed armies) are looking a little shabby these days. Even the staunch Orc defenders seem to be mostly reacting to people trying to tell them that their favourite army sucks (certainly not an intelligent discussion about game balance).

There's no conspiracy. Old army books tend to do worse then new ones. I hope you guys get a shiney new book soon, until then enjoy what you've got however you can.

Lorcryst
25-07-2008, 21:31
I said I was out, but I need to clarify something for FigureFour : the current O&G book is a seventh ed book, it was the first published for the current rules.

And if you really thought that the Ward-train-wreck was a 6th ed book, then that proves the point indeed that this book needs to be redone ...

kroq'gar
26-07-2008, 03:44
Lets start another forum (again) so we can all argue orcs (again) and use the same points (again).

Muncher666
26-07-2008, 04:50
MDG, I've noticed you have consistantly ignored the overpricing of goblins in your comments. Is there a reason for this?

Allan. (I think a lot of this could be fixed if they brought back half points. :P )

Heretic Burner
26-07-2008, 06:23
Lets start another forum (again) so we can all argue orcs (again) and use the same points (again).

Sounds like a plan to me. After all, what else is there to do? O&G are currently next to unplayable so we might as well entertain ourselves until whenever GW actually does something about them.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
26-07-2008, 12:03
MDG, I've noticed you have consistantly ignored the overpricing of goblins in your comments. Is there a reason for this?

Allan. (I think a lot of this could be fixed if they brought back half points. :P )

Because I have covered that in numerous other threads about the same subject.

6th Edition. A unit flees/breaks/panics *near* your unit. Take a Panic test. This could cause a ripple test down the entirety of your line.

7th Edition. You have to flee *through* the friendly unit to cause panic.

This is a pretty major bonus to a low leadership army like Gobbos, as you are taking far less panic tests overall. This means that you now have to actually kill the little blighters the old fashioned way, rather than just chasing off a fair proportion of the cowardly Grots.

Hence, they went up a point. But of course, I am wrong because again I'm not being negative and I clearly work for GW and may indeed be Matt Wards Mum.:eek:

Crovax20
26-07-2008, 12:33
Because I have covered that in numerous other threads about the same subject.

6th Edition. A unit flees/breaks/panics *near* your unit. Take a Panic test. This could cause a ripple test down the entirety of your line.

7th Edition. You have to flee *through* the friendly unit to cause panic.

This is a pretty major bonus to a low leadership army like Gobbos, as you are taking far less panic tests overall. This means that you now have to actually kill the little blighters the old fashioned way, rather than just chasing off a fair proportion of the cowardly Grots.

Hence, they went up a point. But of course, I am wrong because again I'm not being negative and I clearly work for GW and may indeed be Matt Wards Mum.:eek:

Except a lot of units in the new books have gotten cheaper as well, and got the benefit of this rule and are better statwise than gobbo's

Storak
26-07-2008, 13:43
This is a pretty major bonus to a low leadership army like Gobbos, as you are taking far less panic tests overall. This means that you now have to actually kill the little blighters the old fashioned way, rather than just chasing off a fair proportion of the cowardly Grots.

Hence, they went up a point.

brilliant analysis. this major bonus is the reason, why common goblins have become a must have in every O&G army. with the panic bonus, they are a steal at this price!

Gazak Blacktoof
26-07-2008, 13:59
Because I have covered that in numerous other threads about the same subject.

6th Edition. A unit flees/breaks/panics *near* your unit. Take a Panic test. This could cause a ripple test down the entirety of your line.

7th Edition. You have to flee *through* the friendly unit to cause panic.

This is a pretty major bonus to a low leadership army like Gobbos

Actually thanks to the way greenskin panic works goblins didn't receive a huge benefit from the new rules. Goblins fleeing past or through orcs doesn't make a bit of difference.

In my experience the rule that benefited greenskins the most was the near immunity to psychology of troops already locked in a combat- units in neighbouring combats can break and not create a ripple effect.

I often use a single unit of ranked goblins because they don't panic my boyz deployed behind (and to the side) of them. Even if the goblins run off at an angle and move through the boyz they don't take a panic test but that's because they're goblins not because of the new panic rules.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
26-07-2008, 14:31
Goblins fleeing past Goblins does make a significant impact for all Goblin players. That force gained a massive boost.

And the other tactic of picking on the Orcs to get rid of the Gobbos is also gone.

That is why they went up a point. I am not trying to justify why other troops have come down though.

Don't get me wrong, if I was offered a new Orc Book which was ridiculously upgunned where Gobbos and everything else was cheaper, I'd jump at it. However, I simply do not feel the current book is anywhere near as bad as people make out!

volair
26-07-2008, 14:57
Goblins fleeing past Goblins does make a significant impact for all Goblin players. That force gained a massive boost.

And the other tactic of picking on the Orcs to get rid of the Gobbos is also gone.

That is why they went up a point. I am not trying to justify why other troops have come down though.

Don't get me wrong, if I was offered a new Orc Book which was ridiculously upgunned where Gobbos and everything else was cheaper, I'd jump at it. However, I simply do not feel the current book is anywhere near as bad as people make out!

Try playing them in a tournament or more generally just against some good players and you will very quickly see that they are outclassed.

Crovax20
26-07-2008, 15:01
Goblins fleeing past Goblins does make a significant impact for all Goblin players. That force gained a massive boost.

And the other tactic of picking on the Orcs to get rid of the Gobbos is also gone.

That is why they went up a point. I am not trying to justify why other troops have come down though.

Don't get me wrong, if I was offered a new Orc Book which was ridiculously upgunned where Gobbos and everything else was cheaper, I'd jump at it. However, I simply do not feel the current book is anywhere near as bad as people make out!

Well, so you do agree the book is weak compared to the new books? I don't think its suuuuper bad, but when I take a look into the new army books well.... I feel I made a good choice picking O&G because when I loose I can blame it on the army books :p

Mad Doc Grotsnik
26-07-2008, 15:01
I do play against good players.

I never play in Tournaments as I despise power gaming.

The strength of the Orc and Goblin book, and it's appeal, as far as I'm concerned, is the sheer variety of it's troops and options. Thus, once I have a big enough collection, I can field new and interesting combinations, keeping it fresh.

If you don't feel it's up to Tournaments, then I feel sorry for you. But that does not make it a bad book. It just points out that most Tournament winners are powergaming knobends who will go for the book most easily abused!

volair
26-07-2008, 15:09
I do play against good players.

I never play in Tournaments as I despise power gaming.

I think you need to stop being so narrowminded and realise that there are many games that go on involving players who are better than you and everyone you have ever played against. In such games, such as those that occur in tournaments, O&G have a low chance of winning. You can call it cheese if you want, but army building is an important factor in warhammer and part of being a good player is making a good army that is competitive. If your opponents lose a lot to you, it simply means that they are, by definition, not good players, because they either made armies that are so terrible that they are actually worse than your O&G army, which is an amazing feat of incompetence, or they have less skill than you when playing a game.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
26-07-2008, 15:19
Then we again have a fundamentally different approach to the game.

Warhammer is not, never has been, and with any luck, never will be, very well suited to Tournaments.

I play against players, not army lists or army books. There is a thread on here entitled 'This Is How I Roll' which is about my interpretation. Please go and have a read to see why I'm afraid we are butting our heads against different walls.

To me, the 'art' of Warhammer gaming is using whatever you decide to bung in your army and still having a fair chance at slapping the opponent silly. I do enjoy the odd massacre, but if my opponents are constantly being drubbed by me to a silly degree, I'm either playing the wrong people, or using a list so horrific that it's sucking all fun out of the game. I will win with my experience and tactics, not a powerlist.

So, as I said, please go have a shufty at the thread. It's not a statement about how one should game, just an explanation of how I game.

Shimmergloom
26-07-2008, 16:10
Goblins fleeing past Goblins does make a significant impact for all Goblin players. That force gained a massive boost.

And the other tactic of picking on the Orcs to get rid of the Gobbos is also gone.

That is why they went up a point. I am not trying to justify why other troops have come down though.

Don't get me wrong, if I was offered a new Orc Book which was ridiculously upgunned where Gobbos and everything else was cheaper, I'd jump at it. However, I simply do not feel the current book is anywhere near as bad as people make out!

It's been 2 years, but I am sure I remember that the old rule was that the fleeing unit had to outnumber the unit it was fleeing near(4 inches from) to cause a panic test. This was already rare. What is not rare is the new rule which states that any unit that is US5 or more and flees through you, will cause a panic test. I make more panic tests now with my goblins than I did in the past. I would rarely test in the past, because if you take 25-30 goblin units, one takes casualties and flees, well it does not outnumber the majority of my remaining units and still needs to be 4 inches at the start of the turn from a unit to cause a panic check. And it worked for orcs too. I almost never would need to take a test for my goblins cause orcs were fleeing nearby, cause my goblins would almost always outnumber the orcs anyway. Now 5 orcs run through my goblins and it's panic test time.

Now a unit of 3 wolfriders fleeing through a unit of 30 night goblins will cause the night goblins to panic. This is much, much worse.

Like another poster said, the beneficial main rulebook rule is the one that you do not take psyche tests when you are in combat. But again this benefits everyone and benefits other armies much more than greenskins, since their units are all much more likely to hold on in a combat than a unit of goblins is. Who is most likely to get a boost here? A unit of goblins who will probably be beaten in combat and break anyway or a unit of clansdwarfs who will likely win or hold out in their combat, but having to take that extra psyche test might push their luck into failing it and running, when otherwise they could stick around for quite a while?

And that is all beside the fact that EVERY army is subject to this rule. Not just greenskins. It's not a greenskin special rule that you only test for panic if US5 flees through you. So it does not in the slightest explain why nearly every greenskin unit went up in price and got worse rules, while every new book has had several units go down in price and get new positive special rules tacked on top for free.

Gazak Blacktoof
26-07-2008, 16:16
Goblins fleeing past Goblins does make a significant impact for all Goblin players. That force gained a massive boost.

And the other tactic of picking on the Orcs to get rid of the Gobbos is also gone.

I never found that particularly effective. Goblins almost always outnumber orcs so they didn't need to test most of the time.

EDIT: The fleeing units of US 5+ point is a good one Shimmergloom, personally its not something I've ever really experienced problems with. It ovioulsy depends on how you position your troops and how mobile your opponent's panic/ terror causing models are.

Grinloc
26-07-2008, 16:21
Then we again have a fundamentally different approach to the game.

Warhammer is not, never has been, and with any luck, never will be, very well suited to Tournaments.

I play against players, not army lists or army books. There is a thread on here entitled 'This Is How I Roll' which is about my interpretation. Please go and have a read to see why I'm afraid we are butting our heads against different walls.

To me, the 'art' of Warhammer gaming is using whatever you decide to bung in your army and still having a fair chance at slapping the opponent silly. I do enjoy the odd massacre, but if my opponents are constantly being drubbed by me to a silly degree, I'm either playing the wrong people, or using a list so horrific that it's sucking all fun out of the game. I will win with my experience and tactics, not a powerlist.

So, as I said, please go have a shufty at the thread. It's not a statement about how one should game, just an explanation of how I game.

I think a dedicated tournament player (of all kinds, "cheese"-"powerful", one or the other or inbetween) would call that "warhammer light". This "laid back" way of playing and army list composition isn't a bad thing by all means, but it's the basis of the general problem.
In the blue corner we have the "random army of the day", agreeing to cut low on the power.
In the red corner we have the O&G's, who don't really need to sign this agreement cause they don't have this "power" in the first place.

Near the end of my O&G's "career" (playing with them very rarely nowadays) we had a similar approach to the issue in my gaming group, for the sake of having an interesting battle, to provide fun for both sides. After all, getting walked over repeatedly gets old pretty quickly and spoils the fun for the opponent (actually this is just equally important).
Now since i revived my DE army (7th edition) there's no need for this agreement anymore, since the army itself is perfectly capable of competing at a high level.
In my opinion this is the very source of the problem. The "going light on your opponent" itself is an appaling case of game balance managment and customer care. Being an O&G's player, just to 100% avoid any accusations of "cheese/powercreep"? Frequently being forced into the role of the underdog, just to make the occasional victory taste a lil sweeter? :eyebrows:
Despising tournaments (and their army lists) is fine. Not being able to compete in those tournaments certainly isn't.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
26-07-2008, 16:22
The old GOGO trick eh? With units of Gobbos cunning put next to Orcs, Then Orcs, Then Gobbos (hence GOGO) yep, that worked to a degree, but I could still panic 1 unit and have the chance of 2 more units heading to the hills as well.

And with that now gone...well, hopefully you see my point.

Crovax20
26-07-2008, 17:22
I do play against good players.

I never play in Tournaments as I despise power gaming.

The strength of the Orc and Goblin book, and it's appeal, as far as I'm concerned, is the sheer variety of it's troops and options. Thus, once I have a big enough collection, I can field new and interesting combinations, keeping it fresh.

If you don't feel it's up to Tournaments, then I feel sorry for you. But that does not make it a bad book. It just points out that most Tournament winners are powergaming knobends who will go for the book most easily abused!

Personally I'm not too fussed about tournaments. I took O&G because of the background and the huge variety in units. I just can't help but love looking at their mini's and laugh (in a positive way). I prefer to play an army that has character, and O&G unlike (imho) VC and DoC etc.

Seriously with a punchline like, Da only good stunty is a dead stunty, an’ da only fin’ betta dan a dead stunty is a diein’ stunty who tells yer where to find ’is mates

whats not to like!

Shimmergloom
26-07-2008, 18:44
No it would not, because your orc units were not going to outnumber the goblin units, so the goblins simply would not care if the orcs were fleeing and the orcs already didn't care. The only things that would care is if you had a unit of goblins fleeing near another unit of goblins and it outnumbered them. But since if you did have a unit of orcs in-between the 2, they would already be more than 4 inches apart, so the goblins would not care.

And if for some reason you did not, those goblins would still need to outnumber the other goblins to cause a panic test, which was rare.

Now they no longer have to do so. So when your cannon shoots at my orcs, kills 6 and causing a panic test, if they flee, they have to flee directly away from the cannon, which will almost always be off center at an angle from the orcs and not directly in front of them. Therefore those orcs are fleeing at an angle and fleeing through the goblins. So while the goblins will outnumber the orcs, now they have to take a panic test. In the past they did not.

The rules are not better for them now in this regard. They are worse.


I prefer to play an army that has character, and O&G unlike (imho) VC and DoC etc.

Which is GW's fault. Why continue to make armies that cannot be both? For one thing VC and DoC have PLENTY of character and even better fluff. So that's a non-issue. What they don't have is balance and what they do have is overpowering rules and complete absences of worrying about psychology or taking break tests. Which is the primary reason they do not have the 'fun' factor.

Crovax20
26-07-2008, 19:21
Meh I don't like any other race, but O&G... well and perhaps Skaven. I guess I'm a sucker for weird stuff

roadkill
26-07-2008, 19:42
/rant

You know what isn't fun.

New player vs warhammer store munchkin.

New player vs VC

Experienced player vs High Elves

"oh you've charged me with a unit I cant possibly beat because I cant hurt because I don't have magic weapons, great, now I sit here for 5 turns and lose slowly".

Great...

"Oh you always strike first so no matter how much better at playing the maneuvering/feint game and at judging distances than you, you are still going to get the same effectiveness & have 50% chance of beating me even though you are crap?"

Great...

both of these are non-random and very un-fun.

Orks & Goblins have a very good chance of winning any single game, but they are unreliable, and inconsistent.

Infact take away animosity & O&G have some great bargains in their army list!
Infact take animosity away & they are over-powered.

New, Mediocre, or experienced play vs non-random orcs.
"oh so you have vastly superior numbers to me, how am I possibly going to win?"

"Oh there is a degree of randomness which makes this fair?, cool that sounds fun"

All the other armies need more randomness, not less.

Randomness is fun, if you want to prove how "cool" you are by winning over and over again, go play chess. Oh wait you don't want to do that? why? ahh you LIKE a disguised unfair advantage? whoopy-doo.

So we need more randomness not less.

Cannons need to blow up,
Ghosts need to disappear and re-appear & scatter,
spells need to misfire,

/end rant

Mireadur
26-07-2008, 20:42
Your idea about ghosts is certainly good. A real pity gav didnt come up with such a thing since he is for sure one person who loves than kind of stuff.

Shamfrit
26-07-2008, 21:03
It makes you wonder though...despite not having played Greenskins before EVER ( I used to be a High Elf Player and strongly had IRL repulsions to anything that wasn't, well, a High Elf...took gaming too far I didz!) why I choose the two horde armies of fantasy...clunky, very unreliable, very two sided armies who're currently at the bottom of the pecking order...

Pure Fluff....absolutely, and Fluff makes the game, not the dice.

Torga_DW
26-07-2008, 21:19
I don't want any armies to suck. Totally massacreing your opponent isn't a fun game. I prefer close battles with victory coming down to the wire.

Grinloc
26-07-2008, 23:01
Infact take away animosity & O&G have some great bargains in their army list! Infact take animosity away & they are over-powered.

It's been stated time and time again that O&G's don't have any great bargains in their army list, not even if they weren't having animosity. The only halfway decent one is the orc boy. Without animosity O&G's would definately not be overpowered. Better? Obviously. Read the O&G's army book and ignore animosity for a second. Then go buy those VC, CD and DE army books and take a look inside. Those three armies (and some others) are playing a different game nowadays.


"oh so you have vastly superior numbers to me, how am I possibly going to win?"

"Oh there is a degree of randomness which makes this fair?, cool that sounds fun"
What you are referring to here is O&G's 6th edition.


All the other armies need more randomness, not less.
The randomness of an army full of knights. The randomness of HE, an army focused on martial skill and precition. The randomness of vampires, who annoyingly refuse to die of old age, so got plenty of time to improve their skills. Anything else?
Bretonian special rule, called "the package brawl":
A bretonian lance formation getting into an argument about who has the biggest lance, causing them to fall from their horses, forcing them to wait for their peasants to lift them on top of their horses again. The peasants get to "take a peak", so they will announce the winner (who then becomes the unit champion with all the bonuses, for free of course).
A true blockbuster of randomness...


Randomness is fun, if you want to prove how "cool" you are by winning over and over again, go play chess. Oh wait you don't want to do that? why? ahh you LIKE a disguised unfair advantage? whoopy-doo.

So now it has come to the point of insulting other players for their preferences? Little hint: The ones responsible for your demise are sitting in Nottingham. Though they probably didn't notice your "chess" remark.
You apparently know how fun it is for a player to play against a specific army, one which occasionally can even defeat itself without much effort from the opposing side? Yeah, definately some great fun to be had in such a battle. Not. For either side. In such a case the term "a waste of time" fits rather nicely.


Cannons need to blow up,
Ghosts need to disappear and re-appear & scatter,
spells need to misfire,

Other than the ghosts those things definately do happen.

EvC
26-07-2008, 23:36
Played Orcs and Goblins at a tournament today. 8 levels of magic, Black Orc Big Boss, 2 Giants. Thanks to Night Goblins squabbling for two turns my opponent's magic phase was reduced to 6 levels and manageable. I let the Waaagh! spell go off, which lead to the demise of his Great Shaman and Big Uns, though it did cost me a unit of Shadow Warriors. The most powerful spell in his arsenal, and it resulted in his loss because I put a unit of High Elf Spearmen in front of his Big Uns. And I rolled poorly, too- but getting 2 kills was all I needed. All he had left at the end was 5 Orcs. Perhaps that was just a brilliant tactical move on my part, though, putting an average unit of mine in front of his finest and strongest unit?

The two Giants were a pain, but were dealt with easily enough in the end. Imagine a Wood Elf army though, with Treemen for 80 points more and all the extras they get for that...

Grinloc
27-07-2008, 01:05
Played Orcs and Goblins at a tournament today. 8 levels of magic, Black Orc Big Boss, 2 Giants. Thanks to Night Goblins squabbling for two turns my opponent's magic phase was reduced to 6 levels and manageable. I let the Waaagh! spell go off, which lead to the demise of his Great Shaman and Big Uns, though it did cost me a unit of Shadow Warriors. The most powerful spell in his arsenal, and it resulted in his loss because I put a unit of High Elf Spearmen in front of his Big Uns. And I rolled poorly, too- but getting 2 kills was all I needed. All he had left at the end was 5 Orcs. Perhaps that was just a brilliant tactical move on my part, though, putting an average unit of mine in front of his finest and strongest unit?

The two Giants were a pain, but were dealt with easily enough in the end. Imagine a Wood Elf army though, with Treemen for 80 points more and all the extras they get for that...

Well to be fair, HE spearmen being average depends on perception and army matchups. To O&G's those spearmen are certainly anything but average.

Zombie lover. and the matching :skull: to go along with it!