PDA

View Full Version : Oh no! O&G being redone?!



Lord Of The Avatars
26-04-2009, 21:14
I have just made 1000pts of O&G and i have just heard games workshop are redoing them! That is not fair, can anyone tell me what's going to happen with them? I am pleased, but i spent 100 pounds on them! And anyways i think they look fine...

Stmr5000
26-04-2009, 21:19
Well, since they're just redoing some models, and not the whole book, you're fine. Models get revamped every now and then. It happens.

Rolo Ramone
26-04-2009, 21:21
And they need some models to be redone...

Onidan
26-04-2009, 21:24
First of all: Where did you hear that theyll get redone so soon that youd worry about them? Many rumors are floating around all the time, only a fraction of them even holds a slither of truth. Following the regular schedules O&G should not be due for at least two years Id say.

Second: Its probably just a new model release or, whats rumored as well, a small update to bring a few things back in order. A few point reductions here and there etc.

Nothing as big to make your army obsolete yet.

Lord Of The Avatars
26-04-2009, 21:25
Oh just a few like the boar boyz and such? i can see they need redoing... ty

Aurellis
26-04-2009, 21:31
There are alot of needier armies (don't get me wrong, O&G are pretty needy too) that will be released before an O&G update... these are likely to be Tomb Kings, Beasts of Chaos, Skaven and Brettonians. There's also the case of the rumoured and so called 'mystery army release'.

Whitehorn
26-04-2009, 21:32
It's not like they're turning into 8 legged wasps. Your models will be valid regardless.

Harwammer
26-04-2009, 21:41
Every army gets redone eventually.

I doubt O&G will be properly redone for a couple of years at least, even if they do they'll keep the same overall structure and image.

Before this happens they may get a couple of releases to replace some of the older models in the collection, but that will likely be just things like boar boyz.

Dungeon_Lawyer
26-04-2009, 21:44
cool more minis!

Bac5665
26-04-2009, 21:49
It's not like they're turning into 8 legged wasps.

Tell me with a strait face that an OnG army with Wasps instead of greenskins wouldn't be the best thing ever!!!

That would look like the perfect hoard army.

Avian
26-04-2009, 21:51
I have played against people younger than some of my greenskins. :D

O&G'sRule
26-04-2009, 22:42
I have played against people younger than some of my greenskins. :D

Regularly. Its not hard with some of mine.
Where did the information (the redo) come from anyway? I'd expext savage orcs, big uns, rock lobba and boar boys to be the focus of any update

Condottiere
26-04-2009, 22:42
Sounds a little premature - I would have thought that they'd save that for the 8th Edition makeover for O&G, and I somehow suspect that O&G would be the first Army Book of that series.

Stuffburger
26-04-2009, 22:51
I wouldn't fear new models coming out- 75% of the range looks fine (to me at least) and it's not like they're going to invalidate a unit with a rules update so your stuff is safe :D

Pavic
27-04-2009, 00:09
Definitely no reason to worry. Skaven are up next and current rumors indicate that TK is the next most likely candidate. Throw in OK and BoC, both which need serious help, and you are looking at late 2010 at the soonest.

Model wise, I would think that Boar Boys, Savage Orcs, and the various standard gobbos would be the most likely to receive updates. Heck, GW may even bring back Forest goblin units other than the spider riders.

TheZombieSquig
27-04-2009, 01:26
Yeah, according to rumours, there's plenty of other stuff coming out first.

And even if new stuff comes, the old stuff is still good. I use loads of old ghouls and dire wolves and they fit in seamlessly with newer models.

Bingo the Fun Monkey
27-04-2009, 04:41
Actually, an update to the book would be a good thing. Mat Ward pretty much admitted he hated facing O/G in an interview on dakka and aimed to make them more fun to play against. Not that they're not competitive now...ok they're not.

ICLRK625
27-04-2009, 04:48
Actually, an update to the book would be a good thing. Mat Ward pretty much admitted he hated facing O/G in an interview on dakka and aimed to make them more fun to play against. Not that they're not competitive now...ok they're not.

He hates playing against them? That seems a bit odd, I consider them one of the more fun armies to play against.

I can understand why some people wouldn't like playing as them, but I thought it was nearly universal fun watching Fanatics collide with one another in one giant crash.

Lord 0
27-04-2009, 04:58
It's not like they're turning into 8 legged wasps. Your models will be valid regardless.

Tell me with a strait face that an OnG army with Wasps instead of greenskins wouldn't be the best thing ever!!!

That would look like the perfect hoard army.
Not just any wasps either - 8-legged wasps. I would certainly consider playing it.

sulla
27-04-2009, 05:48
I have just made 1000pts of O&G and i have just heard games workshop are redoing them! That is not fair, can anyone tell me what's going to happen with them? I am pleased, but i spent 100 pounds on them! And anyways i think they look fine...

I'll tell you what will happen. Some models will be redone. 75% will be an improvement and 25% will be worse. Some rules will be changed. 75% will be an improvement and 25% will be worse Some units will be changed. 75% will be an improvement and 25% will be worse.

But seriously, I have a hard time envisioning what GW could do to the book to make it worse (well, maybe changing them to purple and blue 8 legged wasps), so when the book finally does get redone, it will be a good thing, not a bad one.

Frep
27-04-2009, 06:00
There are alot of needier armies (don't get me wrong, O&G are pretty needy too) that will be released before an O&G update... these are likely to be Tomb Kings, Beasts of Chaos, Skaven and Brettonians. There's also the case of the rumoured and so called 'mystery army release'.

I've never understood why people think brettonians need a redo before the orcs and goblins. There's not a single ugly model in the entire brettonian range, though a new plastic set for either Questing Knightt or a Grail Relique would be nice. Orcs on the other hand, well...savage orcs anyone?. The rules for Brettonians are far more competitive than orcs and goblins, animosity and miscasts are more damning than rubber lance syndrom. I'm not trying to pick holes here as I definetely agree with you on skaven, tomb kings and beasts, but brettonians seem to be fine from my standpoint, unless I'm missing something completely obvious (with the exception of continued power creep).

Ultimate Life Form
27-04-2009, 07:03
There's not a single ugly model in the entire brettonian range, though a new plastic set for either Questing Knightt or a Grail Relique would be nice.

:eek:

Not a single ugly model? Have you ever looked at a peasant? EVER?

And since GWs new policy is to price plastic kits the same as the metal kits theyre replacing, I cant see much of a point here, either.

Urgat
27-04-2009, 07:26
He hates playing against them?

Why of course, he's not playing them, so he can't hate playing them :p What, it seems a bit odd to you that someone not playing an army wrote its latest armybook?


:eek:

Not a single ugly model? Have you ever looked at a peasant? EVER?

What, the men-at-arms and the archers? I think they're very good, apart from the big hands.

Grimstonefire
27-04-2009, 09:30
The new plastic boar boys will no doubt form a second wave along with other things (presumably a new chariot). No idea on when that is, but given the large scale boar sculpts have been officially shown I'd expect them within the year.

Will O&G get anything else?? Well there is 8th ed next year (not officially confirmed yet though, strong rumours), so with any luck there will be some decent orcs in that. The current mono pose ones are truly a waste of plastic. Orcs seem to be in every new edition, but I guess they could do someone else.

For the main release of 8th edition O&G I would guess june - december 2011. They will not get done before any of those in the current cycle.

Ultimate Life Form
27-04-2009, 09:32
What, the men-at-arms and the archers? I think they're very good, apart from the big hands.

I was more referring to the Grail Pilgrims and their Grail Reliquae and how they will never win the annual Mr. Warhammer beauty contest.:p

zak
27-04-2009, 12:46
I have a suspicion that the Brett's may not get updated in this edition along with the WE's.

I like the current Boarboys. Considering that they aren't that great (rules-wise) if I were GW I would wait for a change of edition and make them more wothwhile to buy.

badgeraddict
27-04-2009, 13:36
I was more referring to the Grail Pilgrims and their Grail Reliquae and how they will never win the annual Mr. Warhammer beauty contest.:p

Those peasants are not supposed to be beautiful! Having said that, they are brilliant models.


I have a suspicion that the Brett's may not get updated in this edition along with the WE's.

Don't say that Zak :cries:

Ixquic
27-04-2009, 13:50
Actually, an update to the book would be a good thing. Mat Ward pretty much admitted he hated facing O/G in an interview on dakka and aimed to make them more fun to play against. Not that they're not competitive now...ok they're not.

Do you have a link to this since I'm always looking for more reasons to hate Matt Ward.

Getting new models for Orcs and Goblins seems kinda dumb at the moment. Does anyone really even play them at all with that abortion of a book? Everyone I see that trys gets frustrated and quits. I got my current O&G army from someone that sold it off in this manner. I like to play it since if you go in knowing you're using a handicapped army and still pull out a win it's a good feeling but really most people don't have the patience to struggle through it, especially with the extreme recent army book power creep. I mean why release cool new boar boys when they are way overcosted and no one uses them?

Now if they are releasing a supplement to counteract the pure stupidity of Matt Ward's evil taint to go along with cool new miniatures then that would be awesome. If they are just going to scrap 7th edition entirely and get 8th out by 2010 (with no influence from Matt or Gav) so much the better.

rtunian
27-04-2009, 15:06
Actually, an update to the book would be a good thing. Mat Ward pretty much admitted he hated facing O/G in an interview on dakka and aimed to make them more fun to play against. Not that they're not competitive now...ok they're not.

i second ixquic's request for linkage...

...and hurry, i don't want to finish burning the effigy before i know if it's true!!!

Whitehorn
27-04-2009, 15:53
Getting new models for Orcs and Goblins seems kinda dumb at the moment. Does anyone really even play them at all with that abortion of a book?

Yes and sort of.

I concluded that I want an army that is ItP to overcome my hatred and frustration of animosity.

But they're all expensive metals...

So give us plastic Savage Orcs and I'll play with the abortion :D

Malorian
27-04-2009, 15:56
Does anyone really even play them at all with that abortion of a book? Everyone I see that trys gets frustrated and quits.

I play them and I'm having a blast :D

Nathangonmad
27-04-2009, 16:02
To be honest I admit I was one of those people that got frustrated and quit OnGs but if they released plastic savage orcs the army would be alot better and I'd probably consider doing them again.

Aurellis
27-04-2009, 16:38
Why not just use your normal Orcs as Savage Orcs?

It could be quite a fun conversion job from Orc Warriors if you didn't want to do that.

Malorian
27-04-2009, 16:51
Why not just use your normal Orcs as Savage Orcs?

It could be quite a fun conversion job from Orc Warriors if you didn't want to do that.

That's what I did... just add war paint after...


But having an actual savage or sprue would be nice.

sroblin
27-04-2009, 17:57
It's funny, I don't play Orcs and Goblins very often, but they seem a blast to me. I will concede that the over-priced cavalry and elite infantry suck and the army list could have been better done, but the rest of the army is pretty fun I think and you can get a lot of meaty units for the points. The fact that animosity effects happen twice as often is a bit of a design flaw that should have been more obvious, too I suppose, but the waagh rule really gives the greenskins a useful and highly tactical card to play.

This might just be reflecting my taste for a conventional army full of blocks of troops and cheap support units rather than monster-riding power lists of terror-bomb deathstar-cavalry doom, but what can I say to excuse my antiquated preferences?

Ixquic
27-04-2009, 18:46
The problem is there's a 1/6 chance during the WAAAGH that your unit takes D6 wounds. Nothing is more frustrating than calling a WAAGH and having your expensive unit of boar boyz explode. That kind of thing is just malicious and serves no game balance. There's not enough positive wacky randomness to offset the incredibly negative randomness. For instance there's a .3333 chance your archers aren't going to shoot well a turn (either squabbling or running off the hill they are on). What possible benefit does the army have that offsets that? The magic is weak to decent but the miscast table is brutal.

It runs into the problem that it doesn't matter how many average units you have, they are never going to beat an elite Deathstar (especially when they even aren't controllable one third of the time), unless you go crazy with chariots or something. Even then you better hope they do well on the charge and kill everyone since nowadays everything is either stubborn or unbreakable. It's a problem with the stupid super unit theory of book design that Gav seems to love in his 7th edition armies.

Malorian
27-04-2009, 19:27
The problem is there's a 1/6 chance during the WAAAGH that your unit takes D6 wounds. Nothing is more frustrating than calling a WAAGH and having your expensive unit of boar boyz explode. That kind of thing is just malicious and serves no game balance. There's not enough positive wacky randomness to offset the incredibly negative randomness. For instance there's a .3333 chance your archers aren't going to shoot well a turn (either squabbling or running off the hill they are on). What possible benefit does the army have that offsets that? The magic is weak to decent but the miscast table is brutal.

I'd say the game balance comes in that it forces you to go horde (which is what orcs should be). But if you do like pricy boar boys then you just have to accept that either 1 in 6 games they will get hurt by the Waaagh, or you could just put the general in the unit and have them Waaagh every time.

Their miscast table is brutal, but when they give you nice things like the spirit totem and the staff of sneaky stealing, why take magic at all?... oh ya, that waaagh spell that can win you the game! But if you want to go that way then you have to accept the risks. You just can't blame the book for the WoC item that came out much later.


Deathstars are stupid and if people would simply use draw tactics* on these players we would see a lot less of it in regular play and in tournaments.


*Edit: In case it isn't clear, draw tactics are what you use to try and get a draw. You place large pieces of terrain that block movement or give you a place to hide, and you stay out of combat using cheap throw away units to keep the nastiest units away. If done right a draw should be a sure thing, and even in tournaments where you don't place terrain, the draw/minor win that you force on your opponent will mean they will do worse in the standings. So if all of a deathstar opponent's did this he would simply come in middle of the pack after a tournament of frustratingly useless games, while the rest of the players have only one useless game.

Ixquic
27-04-2009, 20:45
If I want an elite Orc army I should be allowed to do it within reason, not punished with a decent chance my expensive unit is going to kill itself. Boar boyz aren't even good enough to call "elite" by the standards of any other army when they are one of the weakest heavy cavs in the game unless you REALLY load them up and make them savage big 'uns.

Even without the Puppet increasing the chances, having 2-4 on the miscast table insta-gib your wizard is ludicrous. 5-6 there's a really good chance your goblin will flat out die and he'll probably at least take 1 wound. The average roll he forgets the spell. WAAAGH! comes with the balance that not only do you have to charge whatever is the closest (so if your opponent is smart you'll hit worthless stuff) but you can't use your warmachines for two turns. When VC get Vans Dance for casting cost 7 (recastable) and Nurgle level 1 is brain bursta, but it's an auto-wound there's no reason for that table to be the way it is. It could be wacky but not be so mean. Making mages unable to cast if a unit squabbles is just that little extra bit of "screw you."

Any good Deathstar list will have enough shooting, super fast units or monsters to deal with people trying to play for a draw. An orc army that tries to do that will inevitable have a few units that decide to run forward while the lighter stuff is shot to death, eaten by monsters or magiced off the table. Mork's Spirit totem is great but once that unit takes a few bolt thrower hits those dice start to dry up. I've seen people try horde orcs and they always end up bottle necking and losing. There's only so much space on the table and having lots of average units isn't an advantage.

Urgat
27-04-2009, 20:55
I'd say the game balance comes in that it forces you to go horde (which is what orcs should be).
Heh? Do you seriously believe that it's a good excuse? That it's cool that you lose troops, since it forces you to take more troops? I can't really believe it, but if you are, you might as well suggest that elite troops that test for animosity be removed from the armybook, no? Because as it stands, you seem to imply that these troops have no place in the list, apart from dying and therefore convincing you that you shouldn't use them...
It would be a sad day indeed, when the supposedly varied O&G army list (that's supposed to be one of its strong points, no, the variety?) is reduced to forcing players to just play one kind of list.


But if you do like pricy boar boys then you just have to accept that either 1 in 6 games they will get hurt by the Waaagh, or you could just put the general in the unit and have them Waaagh every time.
So, either suck it up or take only one? Man :/
Ah sorry, I forgot random is fun, last time I lost my 6 boars to declaring a waaagh (yep, I managed to lose 6 the last time I called for that stupid rule, then I've learned better, and I don't win less w/o, it seems, thanks god it's not mandatory, at least), I almost gagged myself from laughter.


Their miscast table is brutal, but when they give you nice things like the spirit totem and the staff of sneaky stealing, why take magic at all?... oh ya, that waaagh spell that can win you the game! But if you want to go that way then you have to accept the risks.
Now that plainly annoyes me. Not particularly that post, it's something in general. The "it's fine, you got X spell". Am I the only one who doesn't get to choose his spells? I read so many posts about tactics based on spells or something. About all the posts about orcs tend to go "yeah but Waaagh spell is amazing, I win everytime thanks to it". Her sorry what?
Now please people tell me if I'm mistaken, but, first of all, you have to have an orc shaman to have that spell (so forget about the staff of sneaky stealing). Then, at best, you have 4 out of 6 chances to have that spell. Now it's funny, but most of these people who claim Waaagh is so cool also swear only by a black orc general. So no great shaman, just a regular one. make it level two, and these 4 out of 6 chances drop to 2. That's much less likely, right? How can someone claim that Waaagh magic is fine since we have that one spell, which is linked to so many constraints that it's not even funny (not mentionning the fact that awesome, game-winning spell makes you move an incredible 3" average, and will screw all your warmachines)? I mean, really? Oh, I forgot the great point that it also moves fanatics. Those people seem good, managing to get all those fanatics about 3" away from a unit so they can take advantage of that. because you cast Waaagh just to move the fanatics, regardless of the rest of the army. Or I'm a really bad player, because with the animosity and the random movements of the fanatics, I can't manage to have them all in a good position to take advantage of that spell. Ah but you can do it, in theory, so the spell is, might I dare say, overpowered.
But there's this spell, so the fiasco table, which will most likely kill your shaman one third of the time, is fine? How many chances does the regular fiasco table has of killing a sorcerer again? Ah but no other spell list has spells half as good as the waaagh spell... right?
Seriously, I mean, do the people who claim that Waaagh is so awesome really even use it? With the high casting value combined to that fiasco table? I'm dubious >>

Why the hell am I ranting about that again? PLease ignore me.


Deathstars are stupid and if people would simply use draw tactics* on these players we would see a lot less of it in regular play and in tournaments.
General comment here, but I'm wondering what it is about that current trend, talking about deathstar units like they were something new... I've seen these so called deathstar units since 5th edition, and back then I've seen some that would quite simply ground the toughest ones we can make these days...

Malorian
27-04-2009, 21:00
If you want an elite orc army go ahead, but you WILL be punished for not going the way the designer wanted you to go, just like a bret player could go peasant heavy.

A 1/36 chance of miscasting isn't worth crying about until you are against WoC. Just keep in mind that when warmachines get that 1/36 result (misfire followed by a 1) they explode and are dead all of the time (sometimes even more often than 1/36) and can be worth a lot more than some night goblin shaman.

We are placing terrain... I place a large wood (making to stay 12 inches from the center like the book says) in each half of the board, then deploy everything deploys in said woods. Go ahead... try and get better than a draw ;) Or in a tournament? Everything holds back and I run my wolf riders in front of your deathstar. If you move I flee and you only move at half speed. If you stop to shoot you haven't moved said deathstar and you gained 60 points while my 35 point spearchukkas are probably gaining me a lot more ;)


Orc players have to stop thinking doom and gloom and start thinking more about how to use the things they DO have.

Ixquic
27-04-2009, 21:03
General comment here, but I'm wondering what it is about that current trend, talking about deathstar units like they were something new... I've seen these so called deathstar units since 5th edition, and back then I've seen some that would quite simply ground the toughest ones we can make these days...

What kinds could you get in 6th? I don't think anything there could rival the hitting 2s wounding on 2s, 4+ regen Graveguard or the ASF Blackguard that rerolls all hits and is ItP and stubborn but I'd like to know if I missed anything egregious.

I'm totally with you on the spells being a poor justification for army weaknesses since you're 100% right on how you can't rely on getting a spell you want unless you are certain races with certain magic items/abilities.


If you want an elite orc army go ahead, but you WILL be punished for not going the way the designer wanted you to go, just like a bret player could go peasant heavy.

A 1/36 chance of miscasting isn't worth crying about until you are against WoC. Just keep in mind that when warmachines get that 1/36 result (misfire followed by a 1) they explode and are dead all of the time (sometimes even more often than 1/36) and can be worth a lot more than some night goblin shaman.

We are placing terrain... I place a large wood (making to stay 12 inches from the center like the book says) in each half of the board, then deploy everything deploys in said woods. Go ahead... try and get better than a draw ;) Or in a tournament? Everything holds back and I run my wolf riders in front of your deathstar. If you move I flee and you only move at half speed. If you stop to shoot you haven't moved said deathstar and you gained 60 points while my 35 point spearchukkas are probably gaining me a lot more ;)


Orc players have to stop thinking doom and gloom and start thinking more about how to use the things they DO have.

Just because the designer (Matt Ward) couldn't balance a book if his life depended on it doesn't mean that I should be punished for taking a unit. There is no balance for how boar boys work and saying that his vision for a horde army with no heavy cavalry is the reason makes no sense.

Casting on 2 dice is stupid for the majority of Goblin spells since they are mostly 8+ to cast and you won't get them off reliably. Casting on three dice gives you about 7-8% of miscasting which is nothing to casually ignore as statistically insignificant. Regarding orc magic most of the decent spells require 3 dice as well, although Bash 'Em Lads is a good value for 6+.

There's a 50% chance I will get the first terrain piece and that forest goes in a corner as will the third. Regardless there is typically enough shooting to go through the wolf riders once they try to set up failed charges. I will go down the flanks around the trees with my Vargulfs, Hydras, etc and chew through your flanks. Goblin Wolf Riders will be a hindrance for one turn until they are shot off the board. If I'm playing VC I will simply use Vans Dance to move the unit that failed its charge; if I'm playing a shootier list I will just shoot them so they are too small to rally. I guarantee I can destroy enough stuff to get through to a minor victory and contest your sides of the board.

Of course this is all meta-gaming stuff that we can't actually prove just by talking on a message board. The book is notably bad and needs work so there really isn't anything to debate there. No one is saying it is impossible to win with the army, but saying it's an ok book because it can win occasionally or force draws is wrong. Most people find it incredibly frustrating, including long time Orc players like me who have been with the army since 4th edition. That's not an appeal to my great wisdom or anything but the list has had it's elements of wackiness before and still been decent. This is not the case now.

Urgat
27-04-2009, 21:10
Orc players have to stop thinking doom and gloom and start thinking more about how to use the things they DO have.

Or, less risky, don't use them at all. So shamans for dispell only, and waaagh rule (and spell, and lord orc shaman) left in the closet. Oh lookey! That's what I do already :D


What kinds could you get in 6th? I don't think anything there could rival the hitting 2s wounding on 2s, 4+ regen Graveguard or the ASF Blackguard that rerolls all hits and is ItP and stubborn but I'd like to know if I missed anything egregious.

Nah, you missed nothing, you just misread, I said 5th ed, not 6th ;) 6th was the best edition imho, nothing too crazy, pretty well balanced aside from a few silly things (like the DE, but they're getting their revenge now :).

Malorian
27-04-2009, 21:10
I also wouldn't go for an army that hopes to get a single spell (and I don't) but there are people out there (I've read the battle reports) that do, and when they get that spell great things happen.


Urgat, you know the answers. You know how to make an orc list that wins. Why complain about the things that don't work?

Nuada
27-04-2009, 21:12
I don't play Orcs and Goblins very often, but they seem a blast to me....you can get a lot of meaty units for the points. The fact that animosity effects happen twice as often is a bit of a design flaw that should have been more obvious, too I suppose, but the waagh rule really gives the greenskins a useful and highly tactical card to play.

Yeah totally agree i enjoy using orcs. I like to take massive blocks of orcs. My most expensive troops (apart from wolf riders) are savage orcs with additional choppas (10 points)
I think the waaagh spell is much better, if you can get it off of course.

I'm surprized the rumours are out about certain orc figures though. They haven't even done the 3-ups for them yet, but they're doing them soon-ish :D

Malorian
27-04-2009, 21:15
Maybe orcs are the 'mystery army' :)

O&G'sRule
27-04-2009, 21:16
Yeah totally agree i enjoy using orcs. I like to take massive blocks of orcs. My most expensive troops (apart from wolf riders) are savage orcs with additional choppas (10 points)
I think the waaagh spell is much better, if you can get it off of course.

I'm surprized the rumours are out about certain orc figures though. They haven't even done the 3-ups for them yet, but they're doing them soon-ish :D

The waagh spell is great, but it does somewhat wreck your artillery as they have to leg it forward too

Malorian
27-04-2009, 21:18
The waagh spell is great, but it does somewhat wreck your artillery as they have to leg it forward too

Which is why it works so well on armies without it and just a bunch of units designed to wreck the opponent on the charge (savage orcs with xtra choppa).

Urgat
27-04-2009, 21:21
I also wouldn't go for an army that hopes to get a single spell (and I don't) but there are people out there (I've read the battle reports) that do, and when they get that spell great things happen.

And when they don't get it, what do they do, concede, lose badly?
Honestly, the (very) rare times I'm going magic offensive with an orc shaman, I much prefer getting warpath, it's more random in a good way: it can hurt you, AND it can hurt the enemy. Everything random in the army (in the game) should be fair. Take animosity, let's say the 6 is fine since it's good and bad (makes you move forward, but in a wrong direction if your opponent is wise - I don't think it's fine, it annoyes me more than the 1), well, the 1 should be the same, good and bad at the same time, dunno, squabbling makes your unit not move, but at the same time it goves something good as well (something charging a squabbling unit takes impact hits coz the greenskins are already fighting before they even arrive, something like that). There, random, fun, fair.
Hey, not a bad idea actually :p
Note that I don't actually mind the 1 result at all, I've been dealing with it since 15 years ago. But do I miss the 1 makes you roll on the animosity table? Heck yeah, the bloody new system is horrendous.

Tadite
27-04-2009, 21:21
I pray to god this is true.

Would be nice for the O&G not to be a complete joke.

Malorian
27-04-2009, 21:25
And when they don't get it, what do they do, concede, lose badly?
Honestly, the (very) rare times I'm going magic offensive with an orc shaman, I much prefer getting warpath, it's more random in a good way: it can hurt you, AND it can hurt the enemy. Everything random in the army (in the game) should be fair. Take animosity, let's say the 6 is fine since it's good and bad (makes you move forward, but in a wrong direction if your opponent is wise - I don't think it's fine, it annoyes me more than the 1), well, the 1 should be the same, good and bad at the same time, dunno, squabbling makes your unit not move, but at the same time it goves something good as well (something charging a squabbling unit takes impact hits coz the greenskins are already fighting before they even arrive, something like that). There, random, fun, fair.
Hey, not a bad idea actually :p
Note that I don't actually mind the 1 result at all, I've been dealing with it since 15 years ago. But do I miss the 1 makes you roll on the animosity table? Heck yeah, the bloody new system is horrendous.

They are based on armies that when you charge you win and when you get charged they lose, so with out that spell they get charged and lose more often but not all the time.


Again, you KNOW the ways to counter the bad wheel of a 6 (put units side by side so they can't wheel) so why complain about it? Why not teach the new orc players that don't know about it? You are acting more like a troll here than anything else.

Nuada
27-04-2009, 21:30
The waagh spell is great, but it does somewhat wreck your artillery as they have to leg it forward too

Yeah, if i'm going for a fairly magic-heavy waaagh list (one lvl4 and two lvl2 orc shamans with 3 power stones in 2,500) i never take war machines. I usually take 4 orc boar chariots and 4 snotling pump wagons, and as Malorian has pointed out also 3 units of sav orcs with extra choppas, and two big units of orc boyz with extra choppas.

It's nice being able to charge with your whole army itp.

Don't always use that list, it just makes a nice change :)

rtunian
27-04-2009, 21:32
an elite orc army?
is that like a fast dwarf army?
or a horde elf army?

if you don't like how the army plays, don't play it! neither should you try to play an army counter to its strengths and then complain that the army isn't strong where you want it to be. yes, the o&g book has more unfortunate things that can happen, and greater movement handicap than anyone else. that is part of the army. blame the authors!

it's folly to look at other armies and say "why cant it be like that or that or that" because the answer is simply "it's not supposed to be"

terrain placement is part of the game. if the enemy is setting up a bottleneck, you can make fortifying that position difficult/impossible before deployment. terrain management is part of the game too. yes, o&g has unpredictable movement. that's just part of the handicap! that's why the units are cheap, so you can have alot of them. while this increases the odds of failure, it also increases the average count of successes.

maybe some more plusses need to be added to make the army more enticing, i don't know. i would rather see things fixed that are broken than trying to 'even the field' by making o&g as broken as some of the others.

edit: my goodness, 12 posts while i typed :p

sirbone
27-04-2009, 21:33
Is 8th edition likely to be a full overhaul? I've just spent a load of money on 7th edition rules and armybooks and models to suit 7th edition orcs. Bloody bloody 'eck.

selone
27-04-2009, 21:37
It's pure speculation to be talking about a new book/edition yet :) Anyways you'd be mad to go magic heavy imo in anything other than friendly games where you knew your opponent :p

Malorian
27-04-2009, 21:39
Is 8th edition likely to be a full overhaul? I've just spent a load of money on 7th edition rules and armybooks and models to suit 7th edition orcs. Bloody bloody 'eck.

Are you a tournament player?

If not it won't matter. If you are it probably will only force you to modify what you already have.


I'm sure they aren't going to change the army to the point that orcs and goblins won't have a place ;)

Urgat
27-04-2009, 21:39
an elite orc army?
is that like a fast dwarf army?
or a horde elf army?

No, it's pretty different: the list is full of (supposed) elite troops: the two boar units that come as normal and big'uns, the black orcs, the big'uns on foot. It's not like it's a minor part of the book, it's more than certain armies have as core choices... So they're there for show?


Urgat, you know the answers. You know how to make an orc list that wins. Why complain about the things that don't work?
because I don't like it when I should be able to do so many things with such a big list, but the shortcomings of its special rules simply prevent me from doing so. I'd like to try lots of lists, but I know i'm bound to fail if I do so. It is annoying.




Again, you KNOW the ways to counter the bad wheel of a 6 (put units side by side so they can't wheel) so why complain about it? Why not teach the new orc players that don't know about it? You are acting more like a troll here than anything else.

(sorry, I'm typing too much, there's a big lag between my posts andf yours)
Because even if I know about that, I don't do it. You can't just keep a straight line for the whole battle, can you? My wolf riders will dash towards things like heavy cavalry, my trolls will do the same and won't wait for units that have squabled (stupid or not, they will move forward), and the rest will try and get positioned according to the enemy's troop movements. There's no neat line to be kept there. Animosity itself will shatter this line pretty quickly, so unless you move forward to a crawling pace, waiting for the squabbling units, forcing the units that got the 6 to wait for them and so on, that's a recipe for catastrophe.
Nah, you want to know how I do it? I kill lines of sight with my fast cavalry, because it doesn't really matter if they move 1D6 in any direction, or I kill it by facing buidlings or forests or whatever until I'm confident my troops won't be sent in a random direction because of a stupid die that was supposed to help us but ended up being a liability instead. I'm basing a great deal of my strategy on countering the 6 result!
There's only one reason I do well with my army: it's because I'm not using expensive units, as you say. Just gobs, lots of units, so that somehow, a handful of units might do what I want they to do during a turn. No shiny blorc general (like hell I'm paying more points to counter animosity), no shiny waagh rule (like hell I'm killing of my troops for free, the only one happy with it is the guy in front. That rule is useless for gobs anyway), no shiny spells ( with my Ld, I want to avoid panis, so dispelling is way too precious for me to try my luck with my shamans, unless I've somehow locked the enemy's magic). Just gobs gobs and more gobs, on foot, on wolf, in charriots, on squigs, with nets or with light armour and shields, well, gobs (and trolls :D). yeah orcs are good, they're good value, the choppa is awesome, but for the same amount of points I get more gobs, and they always seem to do the job better for me :)

Well anyway we've gone completly off topic there, if you want to continue discussing this, we should do it via PM, otherwise I'm fine with calling it quits.

And so, to come back on topic, I'd welcome a new edition very happily, and I have more than 7500 points of greenskins (well, I had that last time I updated my excel page, but I've added things since then...). Wouldn't bother me one bit, all the contrary :)

W0lf
27-04-2009, 21:40
8th edition is still just a rumour, no doubt it will happen but no one yet knows when.

Nuada
27-04-2009, 21:42
It's pure speculation to be talking about a new book/edition yet

Yeah there isn't any O&Gs books being released, just some figures to be made in plastic

Storak
27-04-2009, 22:33
If you want an elite orc army go ahead, but you WILL be punished for not going the way the designer wanted you to go, just like a bret player could go peasant heavy.

it is completely obvious that the "designer" didn t understand the O&G army at all. it is also obvious that the army design changed significantly, since the release of the O&G book.

i simply can t believe that anyone wouldn t immediately understand how bad boarboys or big uns are.

apart from not being useful as a list, they aren t useful even in a list!


A 1/36 chance of miscasting isn't worth crying about until you are against WoC. Just keep in mind that when warmachines get that 1/36 result (misfire followed by a 1) they explode and are dead all of the time (sometimes even more often than 1/36) and can be worth a lot more than some night goblin shaman.

there is not a single spell worth casting (with 2 dice) in the little waaagh list. (possibly the worst list in the game anyway). the useful spells in the big waaagh require more dice as well.

the problem isn t the bad miscast table, the horrible spell(s) (lists) and the animosity having an effect on shamans. it is the combination of all of it.
and the WoC items are just making it even worse..


We are placing terrain... I place a large wood (making to stay 12 inches from the center like the book says) in each half of the board, then deploy everything deploys in said woods. Go ahead... try and get better than a draw ;) Or in a tournament?

i don t think that the terrain part is a legitimate tactic. and i don t know, whether most players expose their lists, before placing terrain.
but apart from that, all that O&G can do, other armies can do as well and mostly better.

those skirmishing deathstars (or a fast one, or one ignoring terrain) will eat the orcs hiding in the forest. so will dragons, daemons or hydras, and terror might already seal the fate of your plan.


Or in a tournament? Everything holds back and I run my wolf riders in front of your deathstar. If you move I flee and you only move at half speed. If you stop to shoot you haven't moved said deathstar and you gained 60 points while my 35 point spearchukkas are probably gaining me a lot more ;)

most armies can afford a deathstar and some shooting that can handle unsupported wolfriders.
the hope that you will be outshooting your opponent is a pretty bizarre one.


Orc players have to stop thinking doom and gloom and start thinking more about how to use the things they DO have.

tournament results show, that you are the only one who manages to do this...

orcs need a rules "redo" as fast as possible! the army is dead in competitive games.

Crovax20
27-04-2009, 22:53
God I hope GW updates the O&G rules. I am seriously starting to dabble into an empire army by now. The book should have randomness in it but let it be good and bad! Also, what on earth was the designer thinking when forcing artillery crews to abandon their pieces and archers running forward so their fire is useless.

a 6 result on waagh should have allowed chucka and archers to count their BS one higher than normal instead of forcing them to move up and perhaps other artillery crew you can add or detract 2 inch from the scatter dice... basically gork/mork guides the rock/arrows!. And for movement it should be D3 + 4 extra movement. Result of 1 should be squable and allow the unit to move 2 inch forward as the mob stumbles forward in the brawl.

Then make the point costs up to date, change the magics a bit and the army would be really cool and nice

O&G'sRule
27-04-2009, 22:59
But do I miss the 1 makes you roll on the animosity table? Heck yeah, the bloody new system is horrendous.

Totally disagree with that, the old table was terrible. But I like the impact hits idea

W0lf
27-04-2009, 23:02
Remove 6 on the animosity table.
Allow wizards to cast when in a unit that fails.

Make big uns and Black orcs 2 pts cheaper
Make cavalry units 4 pts cheaper across the board
Reduce Goblins to 2 pts again and make nets 45 pts
re-do the whole magic lore + items near enough.

Grimstonefire
27-04-2009, 23:15
GW said after the DE mid cycle revision that they would not do that again. So it will be at least 2 years I'm afraid.

selone
27-04-2009, 23:55
On the face of it lets show em was a great idea, in reality its awful. It lengthens the game duration even more and moving uncontrollably a random amount is not a good thing :)

Kalec
27-04-2009, 23:59
Remove 6 on the animosity table.
Allow wizards to cast when in a unit that fails.

Make big uns and Black orcs 2 pts cheaper
Make cavalry units 4 pts cheaper across the board
Reduce Goblins to 2 pts again and make nets 45 pts
re-do the whole magic lore + items near enough.


Just remove animosity completely, and fix the magic gubbins. Book fixed.

w3rm
28-04-2009, 01:31
Tell me with a strait face that an OnG army with Wasps instead of greenskins wouldn't be the best thing ever!!!

That would look like the perfect hoard army.


That my friend is getting sigged!

The only models I want is new sav orcs and new boar boyz! Gimmi my boars!

Jabroni the Wise
28-04-2009, 05:54
Remove 6 on the animosity table.

Are you serious? Free movement is an awesome bonus and its let me get that little push ahead I need to shove out my Fanatics. If anything, there needs to be a choice of what you can do with the 6 of Animosity, like increasing a stat.

Also, calling for Waaaghs should not have War machine crews running off as well.

Urgat
28-04-2009, 07:19
Are you serious? Free movement is an awesome bonus and its let me get that little push ahead I need to shove out my Fanatics.

Yeah, me too, that 6" free movement gives just the right amount of movement for my unit of gobs to step on its own fanatics it has released the previous turn :p Yeah, it has happened to me quite a bit, too. On of the reasons why I don't take fanatics anymore, actually.

Storak
28-04-2009, 07:32
Are you serious? Free movement is an awesome bonus and its let me get that little push ahead I need to shove out my Fanatics. If anything, there needs to be a choice of what you can do with the 6 of Animosity, like increasing a stat.

when you play it right (and your opponent does as well), then it is not a free move.

at the current point level, a roll of a 6 should indeed give a completely free move of d6 inch, and a roll of a 1 should give the option to charge if possible.

Urgat
28-04-2009, 07:38
and a roll of a 1 should give the option to charge if possible.

No, that's not animosity. If you want to balance it with a charge, at least make it that the unit must charge if it squabbles and there's something at charge range, like frenetic troops. That should be applied to stupid troops, too, in fact.

Shimmergloom
28-04-2009, 12:21
The easiest fix for animosity is to allow black orcs and black orc characters within 6" of a unit that has rolled a 1 or 6 to re-roll the result, instead of killing their own troops. And also make a roll of 6 be a free d6 inch move in the direction of the players choice and not forced toward the nearest enemy.

The Waaagh! special ability and Waaagh! spell needs much larger overhauls though.

Ixquic
28-04-2009, 12:22
One thing is if a unit does the D6" movement thing it should be ItP for the rest of the movement phase not just for that stupid D6". The amount of times someone puts something that close to your unit so that you'd actually benefit from the ItP is incredibly rare.

Gazak Blacktoof
28-04-2009, 12:25
Just remove animosity completely, and fix the magic gubbins. Book fixed.

Removing animosity basically turns them into shabby green humans.

Bad idea.

O&G'sRule
28-04-2009, 12:30
Just remove animosity completely, and fix the magic gubbins. Book fixed.

No, book turned into a different army. Animosity is part of O&G's, if they removed the unreliability I would stop playing them

Conotor
28-04-2009, 12:35
Oh just a few like the boar boyz and such? i can see they need redoing... ty

U can still use old modles...

Conotor
28-04-2009, 12:36
Removing animosity basically turns them into shabby green humans.

Bad idea.

Removing animosity would give them the best infantry in the game.

maze ironheart
28-04-2009, 12:37
Just remove animosity completely, and fix the magic gubbins. Book fixed.

I aggree on this as 40k orks don't use animosity and they fight amoungst themselves as well I also say the following I would like to see.

1)Reduce the points on nets and fanatics or make them better.

2)Reduce points on orc boys and savage orcs and both Boar boys and savage boar boys and black orcs and the big un upgrade on all.

3)Make some of the goblins have less casting value to cast some of the spells

4)Have better magic items

theunwantedbeing
28-04-2009, 12:43
I laugh at Orc&Goblin players whinging about animosity.
My dark elves would love to have animosity.
Extra d6"? Hell yes!

As for things like nets and such
I'de happily pay more for nets and fanatics in my DE warriors than Goblins do!
They're soo incredibly useful at turning rubbish goblins into something that's really very tricky to deal with.

Waagghhh is also unbeleivably useful as well.

selone
28-04-2009, 12:48
I tell you what theunwantedbeing if you play me you can have my army animosity, job done, we're both happy :)

Urgat
28-04-2009, 12:54
I laugh at Orc&Goblin players whinging about animosity.
My dark elves would love to have animosity.
Extra d6"? Hell yes!

But you can try it, if you want. Next battle, roll for animosity with all your units, see how it goes. yes, your repeater crossbowmen too, of course. What shouldn't test would be the warmachines (including cauldron and charriots), hydras, lone characters (on monster or not) and, let's say, black guards. The rest tests.
Your sorceresses can't cast spells if it's in a unit that squabbles, obviously. Xbowmen get -1 to shoot if you get the 6 result, too, of course.
You tell us how it went.

Lordmonkey
28-04-2009, 13:11
Orcs aren't hard enough, thats the problem. Why they are superior to an empire soldier in terms of only toughness i'll never know.

I suppose +1str in the first round kind of sways it... still! >: |

theunwantedbeing
28-04-2009, 13:15
The 1/6 chance is worth the risk, I risk the same odds for stupidity and that has worse results.
The no moving/shooting/casting puts me nearer the enemy and screws up my movement.
There is no ability to be nearer the enemy so be more in charge range either.

-1 to shoot huh?
Then I'll be moving 5" nearer the enemy then.
They then need to be a minimum of 17" away from me to be sure I cannot get into short range of them to mitigate the -1 for having to move.

My fast cav now have a 1/6 chance of being able to move even faster

Win win really.

Oo...if I use the orc&goblin rules am I allowed to give my troops choppa's?
That'de certainly give me a major boost in effectiveness.

Urgat
28-04-2009, 13:24
My fast cav now have a 1/6 chance of being able to move even faster

Yeah, and average of 3" faster. It also has a 1/6 chance to not move at all, so you lose up to 18" on that turn. That doesn't seem to bother you. Anyway, I was serious, do try it, I'm sure your opponent won't mind. If you want to try it ask your friends about the choppas, but remember that only orcs on foot have access to it (orcs, savage orcs, black orcs, that's it)... It's not like it's an army wide rule or anything.

Shimmergloom
28-04-2009, 13:54
Removing animosity would give them the best infantry in the game.

lol.

Everyone else already has way better stats for about 1pt more per model as it is. Somehow animosity is what is giving greenskins that 1pt discount?

Maybe an orc should be 10pts each without animosity. and goblins should be 30pts each.

Never mind that marauders are 4pt with higher stats and better special rules across the board. Or Dark Elves are 6pts with higher stats and better special rules. Just keep believing that those crap stat goblins are only being held back by animosity and not the ws2, ld5 or 6, I2 and fear elves. Or orcs who are still M4, WS3 and LD7.

selone
28-04-2009, 14:05
The 1/6 chance is worth the risk, I risk the same odds for stupidity and that has worse results.
The no moving/shooting/casting puts me nearer the enemy and screws up my movement.
There is no ability to be nearer the enemy so be more in charge range either.

-1 to shoot huh?
Then I'll be moving 5" nearer the enemy then.
They then need to be a minimum of 17" away from me to be sure I cannot get into short range of them to mitigate the -1 for having to move.

My fast cav now have a 1/6 chance of being able to move even faster

Win win really.

Oo...if I use the orc&goblin rules am I allowed to give my troops choppa's?
That'de certainly give me a major boost in effectiveness.


Lol, its d6 (plus 5 if you choose to move) and you'll be at least -1 for moving and -1 for multiple shots IF you get into close range then you're no further than 12" away from the enemy, of course you could get this result when you were already at close range or heavens forbid within d6 of the enemy, simultaneously on 1 turn theyll be doing absolutely nothing. You're either playing devils advocate or mad if you think animosity good on missile troops.

Also the same for fast cavalry, you think moving d6 inches straight towards the enemy and possibly charging something you don't want to and squabbling and doing nothing even if an enemy is right next to you is a good thing?

I can see the argument even if I think its a weak one that animosity has benefits but using the examples of missile troops which are affected the worst by animosity is crazy.

BTW no you can't use choppa's unless of course my arrer boyz can have repeater crossbows etc etc, the point put to you was for you to try using orc anomisity for say 10 games. Particularly try it against me ;)


P.S apologies for saying lol on warseer :( I really did laugh, though. I've also posted possible animosity changes on this new thread- http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3518906#post3518906

Malorian
28-04-2009, 14:27
tournament results show, that you are the only one who manages to do this...

orcs need a rules "redo" as fast as possible! the army is dead in competitive games.

I'll ignore the rest (we've argued over it enough) and comment on this bit.


Obviously the tournament results show the exact opposite. The fact that you have orc players going to tournaments when people like you claim it's like bringing a fish to a gun fight show that there are people out there giving it a try. People out there aren't just staying at home crying that their army isn't all powerful and are instead trying their best to use what they have.

In my experience I've seen some orc players be crushed at tournaments to the point it was a wasted game for their opponent, but I've seen this from every other army too.

Orcs may not be the best suited to win standard tournaments, but they are competitive and anyone who comes up against my orcs and think they are going to have an easy ride are in for a big surprise :evilgrin:

sheck2
28-04-2009, 14:27
It's not like they're turning into 8 legged wasps. Your models will be valid regardless.


Wicked...where can I buy those :)

It's like Dwarfs on bears...and bears on dwarfs...either way its cool.

Warlord Ghazak Gazhkull
28-04-2009, 14:51
Orcs may not be the best suited to win standard tournaments, but they are competitive and anyone who comes up against my orcs and think they are going to have an easy ride are in for a big surprise :evilgrin:

I know the feeling, I faced a guy who read several topic's about how underpowered greenskins where. And it was the 3rd battle from a 3battle tournament, and I was on table two and he faced me. He was playing with empire( war altar and steam tank). In t4 only a units swordsmen was alive. I completly kicked his ass.

And I would really like a new book, bring back the old annimosity, extra big boss for each 1000pts and 2pts gobbos and I'm already happy.

Greetz

Ben
28-04-2009, 18:23
Orcs aren't underpowered. Some units in the book are badly done (boarboyz are overcosted, and arguably so are standard goblins and big 'uns) but army is still viable. While it isn't at the level of power of some recent releases, it is still a fun army to play.

Urgat
28-04-2009, 18:40
Yeah, for all my arguing in this thread, I don't believe one second that my army isn't viable ( it certainly seems easier to win with them than with my ogres...). It's just that it seems it takes so much more effort to win than with another army that it sometimes makes me a bit moody about some things in the book. That and apart from hoppers and netters (well, night gob, as usual, poor common gobs don't even get to be named anymore in this edition, another GREAT idea that makes rules so much clearer - anyway it's a big fail, everybody keeps calling common gobs common gobs, no matter what Ward seemed to want), my goblins got such a big smack in the face compared to the 6th ed book. Really, 7th edition is the orc era edition.

Shimmergloom
28-04-2009, 20:42
It would be great to have an orc and goblin book instead of 6th which was a goblin book and 7th which was a orc book.

O&G'sRule
29-04-2009, 00:22
It would be great to have an orc and goblin book instead of 6th which was a goblin book and 7th which was a orc book.

I disagree, my night goblins almost always outperform my orcs and black orcs

selone
29-04-2009, 02:14
I disagree, my night goblins almost always outperform my orcs and black orcs

Does your nightgoblins out performing black orcs mean that this edition of the 7th book doesn't favour orcs across the board?
I think orcs are a fairly solid choice btw, thought I might try a unit of hard grots for a change. :)

I think the consensus on orcs is fairly clear- they're not at the power of 'recent books' often meant to be the trio of tournament terror which aren't that new nowadays. Yet you can still win games and orcs still see some tournament use, though the people that use them to tournies are less l;ikely to be beleiving they will win the tourny.
I can't see though why we can't wish for a new book to redress the balance and give some character to the army. I almost feel like I'm playing a crosss between empire and lizardmen with animosity :D

sherman0815
29-04-2009, 09:05
For tournaments we use a system that's called "lore of akito" which works quite well and is mainly accepted by the tourney scene, because lots of people helped developing it. These "lore" disallowes the most broken items and combinations of the top-armies. Now a second system is slowly coming to the tournaments, called the "balancing system". Armies are devided into three categories: Cat.A: Vamps, Demons, DE Cat.C: O&G, Beasts, Ogres, DoW Cat.B: the rest. In addition to the akito lores, Cat.A start with 2k point, Cat.B with 2150 and Cat.C with 2300. Furthermore Cat.C armies have some more options e.g. take an additional hero or take 150 more points.

This is just a short overview, but the system(s) work well. Last tournament Beasts got 1st, OnG 2nd with the first "A" army on 9th place.

What i am trying to say is, if GW screws the game up, the community has to take over ;)

Urgat
29-04-2009, 09:33
Mmh... While I agree that, say, against a demon tournament list, O&G would have it very tough, doesn't your system sounds a bit harsh? Let's take my exemple again:
demon versus Orcs and goblins:
demon army -> 2000 points, not allowed certain combinations of items. ok, fine.
but then, against it you pit:
Orcs and Gobs -> possibly 2450 points? You know how many more full UNITS I can field with 450 more points? Six units of wolves with bows and musicians, for instance. Six! Or three full units of 30 night gobs with full command and netters... I mean, I know VC and DE and demons are tougher than my greenskins, I admit I haven't faced demons and the new DE yet, but I do have faced VC, and I win against them... if you give me all these bonuses, unless dies are really against me, no doubt I'll kick their asses senseless. That's pretty harsh, imho. No wonder the first category A army only classed itself 9th. I'd be more convinced if you had, dunno, one of each in the top 5.

sherman0815
29-04-2009, 10:03
I get your point, but you have to consider the "akito-restrictions" wich still apply. I know i didn't write them before. Here's a quick overview:

- no dragons or greater demons
- same core unit max. 3 times
- same elie max. 2 times
- same rare not twice
- max. 8 PD in magic phase
- max. 3 charriots
- max. 4 warmachines
- max. 4 flying units
- max. 5 cavalry units with armor 6+ and from these only 3 with 4+ armor

And then you got your race specific restrictions.

maze ironheart
29-04-2009, 11:31
I don't have a problom with O&G's and I usually have fun win or lose but when I lose cause 1 or 2 units decide to fight for a turn or 2 I it just wanted to post my thoughts on what could make them more fun.All I said was orks don't have to worry about animosity but they fight against each other and they are greenskins too and come on would it really be a huge difference if they did not have animosity thats what I ment.

Urgat
29-04-2009, 12:01
Yes, it'd make a huge difference? Not that I want animosity gone, mind.

sirbone
29-04-2009, 12:27
Strength 4 for orcs. It doesn't make sense that huge green monsters have the same strength as weedy little elves and puny humans.

Leogun_91
29-04-2009, 13:14
Strength 4 for orcs. It doesn't make sense that huge green monsters have the same strength as weedy little elves and puny humans.Meaning S5 first round of combat, boosting Blorcs to S5 giving them S7 when wielding Gweaps. S3 (4 first round) for common and S4 (5) for stronger ones (Blackorcs and Big unz) is fine but I would change Big Unz to be "no more big un units than common boyz of the same type" (so one un upgraded unit of orcs alows one big un one) possibly make them not count towards minimum number of core.

Nuada
29-04-2009, 13:20
Meaning S5 first round of combat.

Or instead change or ditch the choppa rule. So the orcs would be exactly the same in the first round of combat, but more effective if engaged in combat for a few rounds.
There will always a few problems. It'd annoy me because spears will be amazing, and i've got loads of orcs with additional choppas

selone
29-04-2009, 13:53
I don't think orcs should be strength 4. Whilst they are stronger than a human yes S4 is a bit hard to justify in game terms. It would as said make spears better if they lost their choppa bonus which you suspect they would as a) s5 on the first turn woudl be fairly good and b) you gte the feeling the choppa business was supposed to be the half way point anyways.

Malorian
29-04-2009, 14:25
Strength 4 for orcs. It doesn't make sense that huge green monsters have the same strength as weedy little elves and puny humans.

I think this would make sense.

I mean look at those arms and compare them to str 3 humans and elves. Now compare them to str 4 lizardmen. Orcs should be stronger.

The only problem is that if their strength was raised they would probably also be 1 more point per model...

Shimmergloom
29-04-2009, 14:28
Just decrease the cost of big'uns and black orcs like everyone wants and you already have all the S4 orcs you could really want.

Keep basic orcs at S3.

Malorian
29-04-2009, 14:46
Here's a thought: make the big uns thing a bonus like what the DoC heralds give. Something like:

Each warboss must join a unit at the start of the game and may not leave that unit during the game. The unit (not warboss) counts as big uns and gets +1 str and WS.

Eh? Can you taste the big'un night goblins? :D

Shimmergloom
29-04-2009, 16:06
not letting a character leave a unit is a horrible idea. Every enemy will know to just pound that one unit into the ground to take out your general.

Being able to move your general or indeed any character from unit to unit is an essential part of warhammer. Your suggestion just hurts greenskins even more than their horrible current rules do.

I'd much rather your choice of warboss give you small army wide benefit(s) like a goblin warboss allows a goblin unit to take a magic standard, or a black orc warboss lets a unit of black orcs count as core, things like that.

Tie your general choice into the fluff, with smaller benefits instead of crazy super daemon benefits.

Simply dropping the the cost of black orcs and the big'un upgrade cost to 2pts, for 7pt big'uns or 9pt big'uns with 2 choppas(vs an 11pt saurus who gets cold-blooded, no animosity and better armor it works out fairly well and is much better than the current situation) will allow you to field your S4 orcs, without having to increase the cost of basic orcs just to accomidate the S4 you feel they should have.

rtunian
29-04-2009, 16:22
nice ideas shimmer:
-fluff-based general 'rewards'
-cheaper biguns that don't test for animosity

both are non-overpowered improvements that make sense

something i was thinking of was a throwback to older edition, with a twist...
-(every 1k) extra special & rare if army is all orcs
-(every 1k) extra hero & special if army is all gobs
-(every 1k) extra special if army is mixed

the "every 1k" part might be excessive. perhaps a flat "one extra, if..." for all three makeups regardless of army size would be less overpowered and more appropriate. another alternative would be "up to 1999 gets one extra" and then "2k+ gets 2 extra"

W0lf
29-04-2009, 16:24
If there are no orc characters then you may have a 5th character slot.

Remove 6' on the animosity table.

They both could be errataed.

Btw is it just me or do people all say orcs > gobbos in 7th yet all i see is night gobbo armies?

selone
29-04-2009, 16:29
They're a lot of night gobbos around because of bfSp and because they were quite good in 6th apparently. Nevertheless a core of orcs is more advantageous than a core of night goblins imo.

Geofreak
29-04-2009, 16:30
Btw is it just me or do people all say orcs > gobbos in 7th yet all i see is night gobbo armies?

Over supply of Battle for Skull Pass night gobs. They're everywhere, so it's quite easy to build a whole army of them on the cheap! Just because they are around in greater numbers does not mean they are better!

Shimmergloom
29-04-2009, 17:05
Here was some of my changes that I made to the composition that I have posted in many of these threads the past 2 or so years.

1. Black Orc general: 1 unit of black orcs may be core.
black orc special rule: quell animosity. any unit containing black orc character whether he is the general or not, may re-roll a failed animosity(maybe stupidity as well) test or that character just makes that unit immune to animosity. Maybe: When added to a unit of black orcs, the black orcs become immune to fear and terror as long as the character remains part of the unit. In order to give a reason to put a black orc character in a unit of black orcs instead of always in a regular orc or goblin unit.

2. Orc or Savage Warboss general: One unit of boar boyz(but not big'uns) may be core. For the savage general just replace orcs with savage orcs.

3. Orc Great Shaman: Is immune to the affects of animosity if his unit fails. For savage shamans same as above, but savage shamans of every level also will give +1 to the ward save of any savage unit they join as well as gaining +1 to their own ward save as long as they are in a unit of savage orcs.

4. Goblin General: 1 unit of goblins, wolfriders or spider-riders may have a magic standard up to 50pts. Goblin chariots are 2 for 1 special choice.

5. Night Goblin General: 1 unit of night goblins may have a magic standard up to 50pts. Mushrooms: shamans may eat a mushroom after casting dice have been rolled to add D6 to the casting roll, a roll of 1 is an auto-miscast. Night goblin warboss or shaman acting as general also has 1 mushroom that may be eaten before rolling for any leadership test. This adds +D3 to the leadership roll to a max of 10.

Fear Elves: Any goblin unit of infantry, cavalry or chariots fear any elf unit that they do not outnumber by 2 to 1. However the goblin unit may use the leadership of any orc character within 12" for the fear test. They fear the orc(s) more than the elves.

Nuada
29-04-2009, 17:15
I think this would make sense.

I mean look at those arms and compare them to str 3 humans and elves.

Oh come on! Look at the high elf white lions they're str4, they look much stronger than orcs :p

Charistoph
29-04-2009, 17:19
Animosity:

If a Greenskin unit is within 6" of another Greenskin unit of the same size (Goblins to Goblins, Night Goblins to Night Goblins, Orcs to Orcs, etc), then they test. If they are within 6" of a Black Orc (character or unit) or the army's General, then they are quelled and don't test.

Any unit that charges because of Animosity, does not do any Psychology rolls for that charge or that combat. Subsequent combat does require standard Psychology rolls, though. This does not replace the units Terror test.

Any units that are in combat because of Animosity double the effect of the Waaagh!!! on Shamans.

Gives you a way to keep out of it, but also gives you a reward for allowing Animosity in.

O&G'sRule
29-04-2009, 17:30
Does your nightgoblins out performing black orcs mean that this edition of the 7th book doesn't favour orcs across the board?


I think it means night goblins are just as viable as orcs for almost any scenario, so I don't agree this book is the "orc book". It doesn't favour orcs any more than it should imo. I know I don't like taking an orc unit without a night goblin buddy unit to give them the fanatic screen. Goblins with nets are effectively T4 5turns/6, so they can match orcs in that way too

Malorian
29-04-2009, 17:38
Oh come on! Look at the high elf white lions they're str4, they look much stronger than orcs :p

Forgot about that one :D :p

Shimmergloom
29-04-2009, 19:35
I think it means night goblins are just as viable as orcs for almost any scenario, so I don't agree this book is the "orc book". It doesn't favour orcs any more than it should imo. I know I don't like taking an orc unit without a night goblin buddy unit to give them the fanatic screen. Goblins with nets are effectively T4 5turns/6, so they can match orcs in that way too

The nets do not help them vs shooting or magic in the slightest. And in effect 7th edition has turned into a shooting and magic game.

The answer to every super unit that shows up now is to just shoot it with yer cannons!

Also a unit of 25 night goblins with nets works out to 110pts. 25 orcs are 125pts. For 15pts you get always +1T, +1S round 1, +1WS, +2LD, don't fear elves and get to ignore goblin panic, along with getting to add up to 2 more ranks for the bonus when declaring Waaagh! and the ability to gain an extra power dice to the pool if 20 or more orcs are in combat.

Even tooled up with both units having full command and the orcs having shields the difference in points for what you get makes orcs a better deal, easily.

Nets are a neat little bonus, but they in no way make a night goblin comparable to an orc.

Malorian
29-04-2009, 19:44
Well you have to also remember that those net effects help out the characters too. So a warboss in that unit basically has T6 (T7 with the armor of gork) and a better armor save.

And for that 15 point difference you get 5 more night goblins which gives you outnumber and allows more losses before you lose ranks (important for spirit totem).


But other than for characters I would take orcs (and do!).

Shiodome
29-04-2009, 20:42
isn't the 'str' statistic about the ability to apply strength more than just pure force.

WS - the ability to get a blow past the opponents guard
STR - the quality of the blow when it lands

you can be a big muscled scary orc, but if you're flailing about with your chunky arms and hammering glancing blows off sloped helms and curved breast plates you're not gonna do as much damage as the weaker human swordsman putting all his weight behind the point of a skillful swordthrust.

maybe :P

Malorian
29-04-2009, 20:48
Sounds more like you are talking weapon skill if you are talking about hitting your opponent with any skill.

I would be fine if orcs were WS 2 and str 4.

Shiodome
29-04-2009, 21:18
well no, the bit where i mentioned weaponskill is the bit where i was talking about er... weaponskill?

W0lf
29-04-2009, 21:27
orcs at ws 2 is a ridiculous idea.

They are a race that lives to fight... if anything they should be WS 4 S4 T4.

Dungeon_Lawyer
29-04-2009, 21:28
just flush the whole animosity rule down the toilet where it belongs.

Charistoph
29-04-2009, 21:33
Sounds more like you are talking weapon skill if you are talking about hitting your opponent with any skill.

I would be fine if orcs were WS 2 and str 4.

Um, no. BS 2, yes, WS 2, not for such a combat oriented race.

WS is about getting the hit. STR is how much damage you do with the hit. STR lets you penetrate armor, WS doesn't.

A WS 1, STR 10 model is sorta scary until you realize a Halberdier or a Handgunner could out duel him and score more hits. True, it would only take one hit to take that State Trooper out, but he'd have a difficult to get that hit in.

Malorian
29-04-2009, 21:40
Well bar room brawlers love to fight too but they aren't exactly skilled fighters.

This is kinda like how I see orcs: love to fight and have the muscles and build to back them up (str and toughness) but they ain't no swordmaster ;)

selone
29-04-2009, 21:43
Honestly WS 3 S3 with choppa's is fine, folks :)

Urgat
29-04-2009, 21:59
Well bar room brawlers love to fight too but they aren't exactly skilled fighters.

This is kinda like how I see orcs: love to fight and have the muscles and build to back them up (str and toughness) but they ain't no swordmaster ;)

WS is also about being hit. I can't picture orcs being easy targets for a mere human. Those orcs might be waving their choppas around unskillfully, but I can't imagine it being easy to sneak through that whirlwind of attacks.

Malorian
29-04-2009, 22:03
WS is also about being hit. I can't picture orcs being easy targets for a mere human. Those orcs might be waving their choppas around unskillfully, but I can't imagine it being easy to sneak through that whirlwind of attacks.

That's a good point.


I'm just really saying I'd rather see them changing to WS 2 and str 4 rather than them gaining str 4 and having to pay more for them.

And selone, ya they are fine now, I just wish their str stat matched those big arms they have :)

selone
29-04-2009, 22:25
Aye thats true they look muscular but then again so do ogres even more so, I'd mention kroxigor too but a load of lizardmen players angry at their reduction of strength would jump on me ;)
WS 2 and S4 might be better game wise as ws 3 is not a good ws to have anymore although ws 2 would be hitting a lot of elite infantry on 5's now

bigunns
29-04-2009, 23:14
i dont know but at the moment im not too agitated from the orcs handicap ..... ibelieve it just akes a better general who can think on his feet to make them usable..... i men i have been destroyed by some armoes but all in all it's because i made my own mistakes.... in my opinion OnG has some cool siege weapons.... doom diver takes care of the faster deadlier cavalry ... i have played dark elves and in my opinion (Although i know im going to get the hammer for this) are squishy ..... my friend plays them and im not sure why they are one of the top armies other than being magic heavy ... they cost quite a bit of points and in reality 1 unit of big blockers stopps a nice unit and lets it et flanked... animosity tho annoying doesnt affect me too much but every army has their own quirks.... i mean in tomb kings if your heirophant dies yourarmy dissapates... tha would annoy me a little more than charging more or sitting in one place

all and all i just feel it's a roll with the punches amy that you need o laugh a yourself when using. because complaining about it is rather useless

W0lf
29-04-2009, 23:39
Its not that orcs need better generals to win (they do) its the fact that no matter how well you play animosity can lose you games...

This is the real issue with orcs n gobbos.

O&G'sRule
29-04-2009, 23:45
The problem with taking orcs up to S4 is that so much has come down in S and T over recent years, S6T5 giants are just stupid for example without mentioning ogres or kroxigors. Therefore theres no room to make the orcs S4 as the large things are only that. The gaps in stats across the game are very narrow nowadays. An orc being the same strength as a goblin is ridiculous, but an orc shouldn't be as strong as an ogre either. A man or a rat or a skeleton should not be 1 strength and toughness lower than a large creature but they are. A bloodthirster,the embodiment of khornes rage, is the same strength as a dark elf with a 2 handed sword, madness

W0lf
29-04-2009, 23:51
The diffrence people dont see is that;

A kroxigor with S4 is infact 3X stronger then a orc with S4. He has 3 attacks for a reason.

Likewise a chaos warrior with 2 S4 is on average ~16% more killy then a saurus warrior with 2 S4.

Likewise a Dark elf with GW is not at all as strong as a bloodthirster. Ignoring attack number hes as EFFICIENT and brutal at scoring fatal wounds.. whats so crazy about that?

A Chaos lord is not strong then an ogre. Hes better at killing.

O&G'sRule
29-04-2009, 23:56
Its not that orcs need better generals to win (they do) its the fact that no matter how well you play animosity can lose you games...

This is the real issue with orcs n gobbos.

It can, but hatred (for example) can lose you games as you have to persue into dodgy areas, same with stupidity, it can cost you a game at a vital moment. But DE players are pretty happy with their rules. I know hatred is a far better advantage than the good side of animosity but it still can cost you games
It really shouldn't be about winning all the time anyway, it should be about sitting round with some mates having a bit of a laugh. And that is something O&G's excell at, alot of the time because of the unreliability. I don't think O&Gs have to have a better general to win, they just require people to play them rather than just talk about the theory of them, but never actually using them, which is what I get the impression of alot on here

W0lf
29-04-2009, 23:59
1. Hatred is something you control and has obvious benefits. Animosity dosnt imo.
2. Stupidity is indeed in the same kind of position.. exeptthey are LD9 and the whole army isnt stupid. If the whole DE army was stupid they wouldnt be half as competitive.

O&G'sRule
30-04-2009, 00:07
The diffrence people dont see is that;

A kroxigor with S4 is infact 3X stronger then a orc with S4. He has 3 attacks for a reason.

Likewise a chaos warrior with 2 S4 is on average ~16% more killy then a saurus warrior with 2 S4.

Likewise a Dark elf with GW is not at all as strong as a bloodthirster. Ignoring attack number hes as EFFICIENT and brutal at scoring fatal wounds.. whats so crazy about that?

A Chaos lord is not strong then an ogre. Hes better at killing.

You're correct in looking at it like that, the whole stat line in general does make up for weaknesses in some cases as you've said, I agree. But I still think the gaps are too small and allows no room for manouvre when rewriting armybooks. In all honesty, do you really think a highly trained elf would be as "efficient" at killing as a 10+feet tall 1000000s of years old creature of pure death? Being S6 they just allow no room for other things to be stronger. I know you will point out the number of attacks again, but still, its not right.

W0lf
30-04-2009, 00:45
No and i agree but with a D6 system only so much can be done.

After all i think its more crazy that S5 -> S10 are exactly the same against a T3 model in terms of wounding.

sroblin
30-04-2009, 01:09
Really? I think that just basically reflects the theory that either way a T3 model is basically dead when hit by things S3 or S5- except for a flat 17% chance that it got really lucky and the target is nicked or whatever.

Gazak Blacktoof
30-04-2009, 01:09
animosity can lose you games...

This is the real issue with orcs n gobbos.

I don't see that being too different to any of the other rolls that can lose you the game. I don't like the way in which animosity makes lose though, the bonus movement is just too uncontrollable.

My suggestion (bear in mind its the early hours of the morning) is that you fail only on a 1.

Goblins only ever squabble.

Orcs squabble if they're not in charge range, if they're in charge range they must charge but ignore psychology.

A character in the unit allows you to reroll the dice- no matter the result so you can try to whip them into a frenzy.

Calling a WAAAGH gives you bonus movement that turn for all your units that don't squabble and all units can re-roll to hit in combat (too good?).

Shamans in units that are squabbling are more likely to miscast or suffer worse miscast effects.




Strange idea

Big Orc units in combat generate power dice.

Bigger Goblin units in combat generate dispel dice.

Greenskin units except those led by black orcs must always pursue- they're the only sensible greenskins, even warbosses get carried away.

Shimmergloom
30-04-2009, 03:38
Greenskin units except those led by black orcs must always pursue- they're the only sensible greenskins, even warbosses get carried away.

lol. So not only should they have animosity, but they should also have the only drawback to hatred, without the benefits of hatred.

lol.

bigunns
30-04-2009, 03:44
Its not that orcs need better generals to win (they do) its the fact that no matter how well you play animosity can lose you games...

This is the real issue with orcs n gobbos.

very true and i think your the only one who got what i meant by general ..... if the person playing the army fully understands they are completely unreliable (sp?) then he can further advance his tactics based on his units being idiots and sitting there or running after a unit of dark riders or any other unit infantry cant possibly catch ......

but on the up hand truthfully you dont have to move all your units every turn (or at least i haven't seen the rule for it) although very static i say run your fast cavalry up flanks and move the goblin, snotling, expendable and ect units up and have the "better" units tail for a flank .... there fore if 1 unit fouls up it just set you a block for you to flank but then again theory as stated before.... every one has their own play style so i feel if your play style doesn't coincide with a drasic army such as orcs and goblins then pick another.... easy as that correct?

Storak
30-04-2009, 06:27
very true and i think your the only one who got what i meant by general ..... if the person playing the army fully understands they are completely unreliable (sp?) then he can further advance his tactics based on his units being idiots and sitting there or running after a unit of dark riders or any other unit infantry cant possibly catch ......

but on the up hand truthfully you dont have to move all your units every turn (or at least i haven't seen the rule for it) although very static i say run your fast cavalry up flanks and move the goblin, snotling, expendable and ect units up and have the "better" units tail for a flank .... there fore if 1 unit fouls up it just set you a block for you to flank but then again theory as stated before.... every one has their own play style so i feel if your play style doesn't coincide with a drasic army such as orcs and goblins then pick another.... easy as that correct?

this is simply false.

a major problem with animosity is, that those fast cav units tend not to move.

the random nature of O&G movement makes it impossible to keep a straight battle line. this is a serious disadvantage against any player who knows what he is doing.

animosity obviously simply wasn t factored into the cost of our units.

the quickest fix i can think of is:

1. squabble can be avoided by a charge. (a forced charge is a really bad idea, it would ruin our fast cav)

2. "we ll show em" moves are real free moves, not towards the closest enemy.

3. no d6 S5 hits on Waaaagh squabble. (ruins our cavalry)

Urgat
30-04-2009, 07:59
I don't see that being too different to any of the other rolls that can lose you the game. I don't like the way in which animosity makes lose though, the bonus movement is just too uncontrollable.

My suggestion (bear in mind its the early hours of the morning) is that you fail only on a 1.

Goblins only ever squabble.

Orcs squabble if they're not in charge range, if they're in charge range they must charge but ignore psychology.

A character in the unit allows you to reroll the dice- no matter the result so you can try to whip them into a frenzy.

Calling a WAAAGH gives you bonus movement that turn for all your units that don't squabble and all units can re-roll to hit in combat (too good?).

Shamans in units that are squabbling are more likely to miscast or suffer worse miscast effects.




Strange idea

Big Orc units in combat generate power dice.

Bigger Goblin units in combat generate dispel dice.

Greenskin units except those led by black orcs must always pursue- they're the only sensible greenskins, even warbosses get carried away.

So, what you're doing is increasing the disparities between gobs and orcs, and make black orcs even more mandatory and regular orc bosses even more useless? But I took note it was early in the morning so I won't blame you for that :D (am I not nice?).
Anyway, that's one of the things that annoyes me in the list: certain choices are so obviously better than others. When is the last time you've seen a orc general? Unless you really, really want to not have quell animosity (general in boar unit, that's pretty much the only reason I'd see for that), the black orc is always better. Better stats, better gear, quell animosity. Sure it's more expensive, but it's not like you can't save a handful points here and there in a greenskin army to get one. Thanks god there's the savage orc general who's also pretty good, or we'd never ever see anything else than black orcs I believe.
Same goblin characters: what's the point in a night goblin hero? what's the point in a common goblin shaman? Common goblins are not bad compared to night goblins, but then night gobs have two unit upgrades (nets, fanatics).
Savage boar boyz are way better than normal boars (no lack of redirecting units in the greenskin armies, so frenzy isn't really a problem) while being only a fraction more expensive. With the wolf charriot going 1 for 1, the boar charriot is almost always better, better LD, won't fear elves, hits MUCH harder. Sure the wolves are faster, but a 14" distance isn't slow either.
Stone trolls?
Compare big'uns and black orcs?

It's a bit sadening that we get so many choices, but a good third of them is always ignored.

Lord Of The Avatars
30-04-2009, 08:17
Urrrr guys back on topic please thankyou:p

PenalTrooper
30-04-2009, 08:37
I'd like to see a new Warboss figure - stating the obvious but the current figure is far too small, looks like a real runt alongside the Black Orcs! Think of it, a Warboss the same size as the Ork Warboss from AoBR!

sirbone
30-04-2009, 08:50
I think something needs to be done about our choice of magic items too. In comparison to the last book it's really dire- there are only a handful of things that jump out at you, whereas the rest are clearly there to add 'character', though as an Orc general this 'character' is very often just a byword for 'fudging up the entire army with comedy misfiring and explosions'- that includes the waaagh magic table, many of the magic items, animosity, stupidity, not to mention the lack of any ItP troops.

It is a fun army, no doubt, but there are times when you just want to play a straight game, and you can't justify what the dice rolls are doing to your carefully assembled force. From the fluff, it doesn't make sense for EVERYTHING in the O&G army to be so unbelievably unreliable (Black Orcs, something that should be a huge bonus, an elite fighting force, now are too expensive points/moneywise for too little output, whilst Blorc bosses end up slaughtering your key units).

If Orcs suffer these rules so terribly, can we not introduce rules for all Elves to turn up late to battle because they're busy looking at themselves in mirrors- and the same applies for dwarves (though not really, m3 is enough of a handicap) who should spend time arranging their beards and drinking hearty tankards of ale... and Chaos units should disappear into unknown vortexes JUST BECAUSE.

Erm. I don't think I was trying to make a point there, it's just early morning misdirected idiocy. Apologies... though perhaps comedy suggestions for other army handicaps could lighten the mood of all our angry orc generals.

Urgat
30-04-2009, 09:09
not to mention the lack of any ItP troops.

Savage orcs, squigs, snotlings? that makes five units, seven if you count the big'uns too. Plus three hero choices. Not too shabby in the ItP department. Giants are terror and ignore panic from all other troops beside other giants, so if you forget missiles and spells, they're pretty much ITP too. You can basically fill all your core, special and rare choices with ItP troops.

W0lf
30-04-2009, 10:15
Btw about animosity beinjg included in price i think it is in soem places but not in others, no?

Orc boyz seem to have animosity included in the price whilst gobbos and boar boys certainly dont.. no?

Urgat
30-04-2009, 10:27
Well, boyz and boars baffle me. If you take into account the choppa rule for the boyz, and a possible animosity discrepancy that makes it arguably worse for boars, I can't quite figure out why the boars are so expensive compared to foot boyz.

Gazak Blacktoof
30-04-2009, 12:02
lol. So not only should they have animosity, but they should also have the only drawback to hatred, without the benefits of hatred.

lol.


Orcs are supposed to be a bit unruly and I like the idea that they go chasing after things. As benefits you have the generation of magic dice and the ability to waaagh.

You'll also note I put it in the strange ideas section at the end, and its the last one of those too.

Something more constructive than "lol" would be appreciated as they were just a couple of ideas thrown out in the early morning.



Urgat, yes, I thought that made sense as they're portrayed as being quite different in the background, perhaps the animosity result is a little harsh but it can be better in some respects. Sometimes its simply better to hold the line. One of complaints I've seen in this thread is that goblins can step on their own fanatics and I know I'd rather have my weedy missile \nd spear armed units hold position than charge a unit of chaos warriors.


I don't have as big a problem with the current animosity as some people do, what I don't like is that it can directly kill your expensive troops and it causes units to cross each others' paths which can mess up far more of your line than if they stood still.

Some people don't want animosity at all which as far as I'm concerned means they don't like greenskins.


@Lord Of The Avatars
Sorry for the off topic post, my last one, however I think the main topic is done now.

W0lf
30-04-2009, 12:13
I like greenskins, i hate animosity.

For me orcs are more of a warlike barbarian race then some comical fungi.

Storak
30-04-2009, 12:49
Btw about animosity beinjg included in price i think it is in soem places but not in others, no?

Orc boyz seem to have animosity included in the price whilst gobbos and boar boys certainly dont.. no?

orc boys perform in combat very similar to empire swordmen. they have a minor advantage in the first turn (choppa, about 0.5 extra wounds, depending on who got the charge. still the majority of results would be either a draw or a loss for the orcs) and then they are simply the same.
orcs have an advantage against shooting, but empire has much better shooting that the O&G army.

the swordmen come with a positive special rule (detachments), while the orcs have animosity.

so no, i don t think that animosity was factored into the cost of orcs.

Shimmergloom
30-04-2009, 12:57
Orcs are supposed to be a bit unruly and I like the idea that they go chasing after things. As benefits you have the generation of magic dice and the ability to waaagh.

You'll also note I put it in the strange ideas section at the end, and its the last one of those too.


Well I had to assume it was a complete joke that you would put out ideas that made greenskins even more unreliable than they are.

Generation of magic dice is basically a joke rule, as you will rarely have that many orcs in combat. And the ability to waaagh! is even more of a joke when you have to pray before every roll that you aren't about to lose D6 of your boar or hopper models that you paid through the nose just to field.

Storak
30-04-2009, 13:09
Savage orcs, squigs, snotlings? that makes five units, seven if you count the big'uns too. Plus three hero choices. Not too shabby in the ItP department. Giants are terror and ignore panic from all other troops beside other giants, so if you forget missiles and spells, they're pretty much ITP too. You can basically fill all your core, special and rare choices with ItP troops.

this looks good on paper. but effectively the savages pay a heavy price for ItP, as frenzy comes with its own disadvantages.

and gobbos come with some additional fear, compensating parts of it as well.

i thought about this recently, after a game against daemons. i tried both, ItP and non-ItP approach (i always face the Ld-2 banner...) and neither one realy works.
i don t have a full explanation, but here is my first take at it:

1. the ItP units are pretty expensive. by using ItP troops, the O&G army sacrifices its biggest advantage: numbers.

2. the disadvantages of ItP (no "break and flee") are especially bad for O&G, who mostly rely on this tactic. beating the test by high Ld is often simply better, as it leaves more options.

3. in other armies, ItP seems to be a trademark of elite units (for example some death stars), that can stand against anything. the O&G ItP units are not of this type.

Storak
30-04-2009, 13:15
Generation of magic dice is basically a joke rule, as you will rarely have that many orcs in combat.

all too true..



And the ability to waaagh! is even more of a joke when you have to pray before every roll that you aren't about to lose D6 of your boar or hopper models that you paid through the nose just to field.

basically calling a waaaagh costs 20+ points, and might possibly be devastating.

i doubt that many players would use it, if you offered them that rule.

it is the same with black orc quelling animosity. basically he is paying for this ability AGAIN, by killing points.

Urgat
30-04-2009, 13:22
this looks good on paper. but effectively the savages pay a heavy price for ItP, as frenzy comes with its own disadvantages.
Well, maybe, but the point was that O&G had no ItP units, and I just pointed out that they actually have more ItP units than many armies (dwarfs, bretonians, skavens, empire, ogres, elves of all kinds). That's all there is to my post.

Storak
30-04-2009, 13:30
Well, maybe, but the point was that O&G had no ItP units, and I just pointed out that they actually have more ItP units than many armies (dwarfs, bretonians, skavens, empire, ogres, elves of all kinds). That's all there is to my post.

my reply wasn t meant to be criticism. i was just trying to explain, why those orcish ItP units most likely will fare even worse than normal orcs...

selone
30-04-2009, 13:40
I just lost 12 models to it last night including 4 hoppers :(

I made a big post about animosity but the way I see it is-

Orcs and goblins would not dominate the competitive scheme without animosity. However animosity is part and parcel of the greenskin's character so it should stay.
These two things being equal clearly animosity has to be changed.

It's not just that animosity can zog you over its that its time consuming, too lethal and poorly thought out.
It can take me 5-10 minutes every turn to resolve my animosity and thats an extra 30 mins-hour per game.
Theres a 2/6 chance any missile armed troops will behave in a disadvantageous way, same arguably sayable for fast cav too. ItP troops arent immune to animosity.
Black orcs do d6 S5 hits on a unit squabbling whereas they only have 3 attacks at base strength 4. Squabbling on a waagh makes you not only unable to act but also take d6 wounds with the very real possibility you could lose an entire unit of cavalry.

They need to tone done the amount of animosity casualties by whichever way I and other people have suggested, to make ItP troops immune to animsoity and to either absorb the lets show em into the waagh, into the result of a 1 or just make it a standard 4" to hurry up the turn.

Storak
I'd take a unit or 2 against demons depending on the size- not too much so that you're fighting demons without a fair numbers advantage but a unit or 2 definetly will pay dividends.

Harwammer
30-04-2009, 13:53
My fix for animosity:

roll:
1, may still declare charge; otherwise same
2-5, as is
6, may move upto d6; otherwise same (i.e. the move is optional). Alternative rule: the unit may make an immediate additional normal move (no march, charge, formation change, etc).

Squabble on Waaagh!: unit takes 1 str 5 hit per rank.

There, animosity doesn't prevent your greenies from charging (stupid rule), doesn't have to screw up their lines (stupid rule) and doesn't wipe out entire cav units on the Waaagh! (stupid rule).

It may sound OP compared to the current rules, but really animosity is still costing more movement than it gives per game (-8+3.5=-4.5 overall).


I hope when the book is redone animosity is treated something like the above; in its current incarnation animosity is frustrating and makes the game less fun for both sides.

maze ironheart
30-04-2009, 13:53
Well hopefully we'll get someone who actually plays O&G writting the book who understands what O&G players want no offence to the other writter.

rtunian
30-04-2009, 14:27
screw the writer who screwed us, imo.

edit: how bout some content?
i added my .02 into the rules development forum, but since we are talking about how to improve animosity here (and here is where the views are..) here goes

animosity becomes a 2d6 roll instead of a d6
2,3 = squabble
4-10 = plan's a good'un
11,12 = let's show'em!

the rules for squab and show'em stay the same, so you still have discipline failure (11,12) and discipline critical failure (2,3). the reduced instance of any failed effect counters the need to rewrite/rethink/rebalance the effects, and imo "the easiest path is the one most likely to be trod"

for the math-challenged, yes, the count of results is still 1/3 bad things, but the probability is actually 1/6, due to the compounding nature of 2d6 vs d6. there are 36 combinations of 2 6 sided dice, and 3 of the combinations are 2 or 3, and 3 of the combinations are 11 or 12, so 6 of 36 combinations fail, which is 1/6, half the likelihood that you would fail under the current system

Urgat
30-04-2009, 14:29
waaargh

Waaagh please, waaargh is when you roll 1 on anything else than Ld tests :p

Harwammer
30-04-2009, 14:33
Duely noted and edited :)

Edit: just switching the table to 2D6 may be a good idea too, but it just makes animosity less likely than fixing what is annoying about it.

Malorian
30-04-2009, 15:01
Seems to me even the most avid orc haters would be happy if you kept animosity the same and just make the 6 result "move D6 inches towards an enemy unit" and had black orcs quell a 1 with a leadership test rather than hitting anyone.

O&G'sRule
30-04-2009, 15:06
No and i agree but with a D6 system only so much can be done.

After all i think its more crazy that S5 -> S10 are exactly the same against a T3 model in terms of wounding.

You could sort that by making anything over double the toughness of the defending model is auto wound, therefore your S7 or S9 weapons are reflected in their severity without being too common like killing blow has become

Malorian
30-04-2009, 15:09
You could sort that by making anything over double the toughness of the defending model is auto wound, therefore your S7 or S9 weapons are reflected in their severity without being too common like killing blow has become

Then again you get to the point that if you hit a spider with a shoe or a sledge hammer it's going to do the same amount of damage, but there is still a chance your aim will be slightly off and you'll just crush a leg.

O&G'sRule
30-04-2009, 15:20
thats why a spider would be T1 and you as a man would be S3 ;)

Urgat
30-04-2009, 16:25
Then again you get to the point that if you hit a spider with a shoe or a sledge hammer it's going to do the same amount of damage, but there is still a chance your aim will be slightly off and you'll just crush a leg.

Yeah but that's because of their crazy spider senses, they got WS8 :p

valdrog
30-04-2009, 16:41
Nothing more frustating than having outmanuverd your opponent and get beautyful positioned flank+rear charges ,and then have all 4 units fail their animosity rolls ...

Malorian
30-04-2009, 16:51
Nothing more frustating than having outmanuverd your opponent and get beautyful positioned flank+rear charges ,and then have all 4 units fail their animosity rolls ...

Luckily that happens as aften as having 4 units get a 6, which outs them in a beautyful position ;)

A lot of the time I find it doesn't matter at all (a unit that is sitting around gets a 6 or 1 and either stays there or moves back) and the times it screws you over does tend to be a bit more than it helps but thankfully being a horde army it just means you do a task with unit 2 rather than unit 1.

Storak
30-04-2009, 17:46
Luckily that happens as aften as having 4 units get a 6, which outs them in a beautyful position ;)

sorry, but this claim is simply nonsense. an extra 3.5 inch move is barely more than the extra 2 inch that many foot troops have above orcs anyway. on cavalry it is even worse.
and it isn t a free move that gives them a nice position, but the direction is massively restricted.

and this doesn t include fast cav units charging and bows leaving their positions.

the chance of 4 or more units squabbling out of 12 is a pretty shocking 13%. on average it will happen during one turn nearly every game.


A lot of the time I find it doesn't matter at all (a unit that is sitting around gets a 6 or 1 and either stays there or moves back) and the times it screws you over does tend to be a bit more than it helps but thankfully being a horde army it just means you do a task with unit 2 rather than unit 1.

funny, but in my games i tend to move every unit every turn.

and i really hate the "bring two units to do the task of one" phrase. somebody came up with it, and it gets endless repetition, like many false things.

those extra units cost points. they aren t free. extra fast cav often simply is additional free points to your opponent, against a shooty army.

extra units need deployment space. often units hinder each other already. quite a lot of units require a combined charge of orcs anyway. brining two additional units along simply is impossible.


Seems to me even the most avid orc haters would be happy if you kept animosity the same and just make the 6 result "move D6 inches towards an enemy unit" and had black orcs quell a 1 with a leadership test rather than hitting anyone.

as i am quite sure that this was addressed to me, i ll quote myself and see, whether you can spot the difference:

the quickest fix i can think of is:

1. squabble can be avoided by a charge. (a forced charge is a really bad idea, it would ruin our fast cav)

2. "we ll show em" moves are real free moves, not towards the closest enemy.

3. no d6 S5 hits on Waaaagh squabble. (ruins our cavalry)

for a start, a real free move wouldn t punish our puny shooting, as the unit would be free to NOT move at all...

selone
30-04-2009, 18:14
Seems to me even the most avid orc haters would be happy if you kept animosity the same and just make the 6 result "move D6 inches towards an enemy unit" and had black orcs quell a 1 with a leadership test rather than hitting anyone.

When you say 'orc haters' do you mean-

People that hate playing agains orcs
People that would hate to play using orc's
People that use orc's but hate them
People that use orcs but hate animosity
or People that use orcs but hate the current animosity rules

because they're 5 very different groups of people :) I'd put msyelf as group 5 btw ;)

Malorian
30-04-2009, 19:33
When you say 'orc haters' do you mean-

People that hate playing agains orcs
People that would hate to play using orc's
People that use orc's but hate them
People that use orcs but hate animosity
or People that use orcs but hate the current animosity rules

because they're 5 very different groups of people :) I'd put msyelf as group 5 btw ;)

Well with Storak here to act as a prime example, you have the type that (apparently) plays orcs yet hates everything about them. I could go more into it but I'm sure the Malorian vs Storak debates are well known.


In general though you don't find anyone who hates play against orcs but as far as 'orc haters' go you have all 2-5 to different degrees. However a positive change to the animosity rules should make the majority of them happy.


@ Storak:

-3.5 extra inches is all you need to threaten those M5 units, and even M6/7 units really have to be careful as you never know when one of those units will jump out at you.
-If the D6 movement is enough to get fast cav into combat then it's your fault for putting them that close
-What orc power gamers use archers anyway? Might as well be talking about the drawbacks of forsaken...
-You might hate the idea of two units for every job, but when you make the list a horde you have that anyway.
-That comment on how to make orc haters wasn't directly aimed at you. You have several other 'haters' under your wing and while there is always the anti-boar boyz/black orc/whatever hate, the animosity ALWAYS comes up. So if we want to make the most of you haters shut up and start enjoying your army that would be the logical start.

Storak
30-04-2009, 19:57
@ Storak:

-3.5 extra inches is all you need to threaten those M5 units, and even M6/7 units really have to be careful as you never know when one of those units will jump out at you.

actually this will typically only help on a single turn: the one when you are closing in. rolling a 1 or 2 then, will still leave you at a disadvantage against those M5 units...


-If the D6 movement is enough to get fast cav into combat then it's your fault for putting them that close

you might not have realised it so far, but animosity happens at the start of the O&G movement phase, AFTER the enemy moved.

apart from that, to seriously misdirect or block anyone, i must basically always get closer than 6 inch.


-What orc power gamers use archers anyway? Might as well be talking about the drawbacks of forsaken...

i know that you don t play a lot against daemons. please try it once.


-You might hate the idea of two units for every job, but when you make the list a horde you have that anyway.

the idea that you automatically have 2 units available is even more stupid than the "two units" idea in general. after a turn of shooting/magic, you are often lucky if there still is ONE unit of fast cav...

Malorian
30-04-2009, 20:26
@Storak

-It only needs to matter for 1 turn, and because of this you opponent has to be few careful with their movement, this can lead to you being able to move back and have another round of shooting before combat.

-I'm very aware when animosity happens, but are you trying to say that people will throw their units in front of orc fast cav for the 1/6 change of a forced charge? Either they are wasting a tough unit to do this or taking a real chance with a weak unit. Either way your fast cav (which would have been up march blocking or redirecting) has done it's job.

-Maybe if you took more combat troops instead of archers against deamons you wouldn't be complaining so much.

-Again maybe you should be finding ways to stop that magic rather than complaining about it. Either way I always have two blocks on both flanks to double up there, and I have two units of fast cav to march block and redirect along with a troll to do the same. This amount of doubling up for roles has worked very well, so maybe take a few notes and try a few new things for a change.


You know I still haven't seen an army list or battle report from you... do you actually seriously even play? Is there anyone else on warseer from your group that can confirm you even play orcs?

Warboss Antoni
30-04-2009, 21:53
Cool, you like the book. The majority of gamers hate it. I go to my local GW, the only ones playing them are noobs or people who just want to play. I have an entire orc army - I love the models, but the book is trash. Cool, you like it, but greenskins are hardly ever played because the book is so terrible. It has shunned lots of players away, and closeted armies. Why should I have to go out of my way, come up with crazy unreliable tactics and hope for good luck? I spent lots of money on this army ( it's a horde ), and it's currently unplayable. I can bring it out, but I just won't have fun. Random doesn't equal fun when the outcomes range from **** to mediocre. Orks in 40k have been done well - look at lootas. d3 shots at their targets. It doesn't break the unit ( 10 shots is as common as 30 ), and any outcome can still produce a result. Look at the Trukk destrcution table for another example, or Wierdboys.
Instead our idea of random is "here roll a die. There goes the game." It's not fun for any player, maybe the oponet cuz hes getting an easy win. But I can vouch for many orc players that the book just sucks. It kills the spirit of the army.

Malorian
30-04-2009, 22:02
"Unplayable" is so wrong it's not funny. Even when I played against deamon players in tournaments (khorne, nurgle wall, LD bomb, mixed) I may have lost more times than I won, but in each game I put up a hell of a fight to the point that people walking by thought either it was a tie or I was winning for most of it.

The problem is that some people (apparently you included) expect (and think they deserve) an update like the orks did in 40k. Everything should be cheaper, everything should be better, new tricks, take away the bad, etc...

Pull out your army, try out some new tactics and lists and find a way to win with what you have! (for fun one day take 8 spear chukkas and 2 doom divers and laugh as you blow your opponent to bits).


I'll agree with Storak that you shouldn't plan to win any tournaments with orcs, but to think they are unplayable is just closed minded and foolish.

sirbone
30-04-2009, 23:20
I'm fairly sure that most people who play orcs in any competitive way quickly learn to think ahead when things go wrong. Of course I know I know I know I know how annoying these rules can be, but you did decide to collect orcs in the first place- if you wanted an easy ride, you should've picked HE, DE or Chaos.

I personally play orcs because I know for every bad game I have where I'm buggered by our very debilitating ruleset, I'll have a game where things go my way, and I get those Big Uns with additional h/w into combat with their general's bodyguard, and I win the challenge and I hack their ranks to bits and... ha. Yes. I'm sure we all, as O&G generals, have our moments of "oh my word, it went right".

It's like supporting an underdog in sports (something which I do in several different sports)- I don't really 'expect' the win, but I'll claim I knew it was coming when it does finally arrive. Maybe.

(Though I agree that you shouldn't have to be light hearted and risk-taking to play with a particular army. We should be able to fight a fair fight, like most other armies. Maybe. Ha)

selone
30-04-2009, 23:49
I'll agree with Storak that you shouldn't plan to win any tournaments with orcs.

Hell has frozen over, all we need know is for storak to say "I agree with malorian you can take orcs to a tournament and take demons to the wire" and my monitor will probably explode.

Warboss Antoni
30-04-2009, 23:57
I don't want Ork treatment for my army. That was merely an example to prove random doesn't neccessarily equal fun. And how I wanna put the army down on the table without getting frustrated and actually enjoy it. And considering how books are shaping up now, with OandG on the bottom tier, maybe they desrve a power creep treatment?

O&G'sRule
30-04-2009, 23:58
When you say 'orc haters' do you mean-

People that hate playing agains orcs
People that would hate to play using orc's
People that use orc's but hate them
People that use orcs but hate animosity
or People that use orcs but hate the current animosity rules

because they're 5 very different groups of people :) I'd put msyelf as group 5 btw ;)

You missed one
People that never actually use orcs so have no actual game experience but have read online that they aren't very good so join a bandwagon because they think it makes them look bright

selone
01-05-2009, 00:07
I'm fairly sure that most people who play orcs in any competitive way quickly learn to think ahead when things go wrong. Of course I know I know I know I know how annoying these rules can be, but you did decide to collect orcs in the first place- if you wanted an easy ride, you should've picked HE, DE or Chaos.

I personally play orcs because I know for every bad game I have where I'm buggered by our very debilitating ruleset, I'll have a game where things go my way, and I get those Big Uns with additional h/w into combat with their general's bodyguard, and I win the challenge and I hack their ranks to bits and... ha. Yes. I'm sure we all, as O&G generals, have our moments of "oh my word, it went right".

It's like supporting an underdog in sports (something which I do in several different sports)- I don't really 'expect' the win, but I'll claim I knew it was coming when it does finally arrive. Maybe.

(Though I agree that you shouldn't have to be light hearted and risk-taking to play with a particular army. We should be able to fight a fair fight, like most other armies. Maybe. Ha)

The thing is I do have a bit of an underdog part in myself and if I could restart WHFB I would never restart with the 'big 3' and I have no problems playing with 'weaker' lists, I'd even play Ogres :D But alas I picked up the goblins from BfSP and went from there (as I played 3rd ed orks in 40K and found them fun I preferred them to the dwarfs which I played in 5th ed FB)

My biggest complaint about Orcs isn't their background, their power level (or lack of), their horde style or lack of ubar items/units it's that they turned a fairly good list with lots of character and yes potential for things to go wrong bigstyle into a mediocre army with neutered character and an irritating animosity rule.

I'd actually think, having thought about it, I wouldn't mind a skaven style army which is- horde like orcs, has disposable troops like goblins and big gribblys like trolls and can damage your own guys but makes up for that for having great destructiveness.
That is if I didn't hate their background, SaD and I still havent forgiven andy chambers for his 4/5th ed skaven with the plague censer bearers of doom even though it was what 10 years ago that book was made?

Anyways I digress I'm for a new book not because I want to be as powerful as demons (which I'd hate more than their current level) or want to turn orcs into empire lite with no character and not because I'm an orc hater as Mal might say. I'm for a new book because I'd like a new book with rules that make sense with a streamlined animosity which can mean they squabble but also, rarely, give me good benefit, a book full of character and background and not 30 pages of adverts of pretty models or something, a book where I may win a competitive tournament even if I'm not the power level of the big 3 but must of all I want a book that characterises the Orcs written by someone that has played with them and understands them both how they should play and what they would do on a battlefield and I want Morglum necksnapper in the book because da east is green. :skull:

O&G'sRule
01-05-2009, 00:11
I understand the Skaven comparison, but Skaven used to be as ridiculous as daemons are now, I don't want an O&G army like that thanks. This Orc and goblin book is FAR better than the previous one, so I don't get all the griping

selone
01-05-2009, 00:14
Neither do I if your read what I wrote :) I have to confess I never played Orcs 6th ed- I played them in 5th ed and 7th but I missed 6th. I do think there can't be that many people who complain about orcs being weak who haven't used them. Maybe that don't use them anymore, but haven't ever used them? Why would you complain about an armys weakness that you haven't used?

EDIT
I can understand someone not having played Orcs saying orcs dont look very powerful or I think they aren't very good but to complain is not the same as to detract or criticise. To complain normally indicates personal experience with the subject. It really would be weird if say storak had never used Orcs in 7th ed.

O&G'sRule
01-05-2009, 00:20
the last book was a mess, the current one did a great job in tidying it all back up again so that every special rule doesn't take 15 minutes trying to get your head round it. I get the impression that was the main focus. I'm not sure there was 2 books for 5th and 6th was there? cant remember, the only old one I look at (for story) is 4th. I like the current animosity rules, best so far, I don't want to have to roll on 2 tables (effectively) to know what my goblins can do before I start thinking about moving as it was before. I hear at a recent tournament Orcs came 5th or something, so they can do it, its just no one talented enough takes them to tournaments as its easier to write a Daemon or VC list of doom

selone
01-05-2009, 00:23
There was a book before 6th ed whether that was made in 4th or 5th ed I'm unsure. I'll just go get it now :D

EDIT
Rick priestley 1993 so 4th then.

with good old gorfang rotgut and oglok the 'orrible and azhag the slaughterer actually having animosity protection that made sense.

O&G'sRule
01-05-2009, 00:39
There are ways you can tidy the army up without changing (for me) the best and clearest animosity system so far, give the army better SC's, better magic items, especially bound items, make boar boys useable. Forest goblin troops would be nice, and goblins should be back down to 2.5 points each. Its just a tweaking it needs not an overhaul. Some rules are great, nets for example are brilliant, BO quell animosity is simple and no arguing about whether in range or not , great, Squigs + hoppers are great, maybe give the goblin an attack (especially on the hoppers) but thats it. Fear elves is the blanket rule that is just unecessary

W0lf
01-05-2009, 00:48
Btw the tourny orcs came 5th in was pointless.

Out of the 'Terrible trio' the highest rankking was 9th. Basically stuff was comp nerfed into oblivion for top tier armies.

IIRC orcs got an extra 500 pts whilst Daemons/Vamps/DE had nearly all their competitive options removed/limited.

O&G'sRule
01-05-2009, 00:54
ok fair enough, but that just means O&Gs are at a disadvantage vs the top 3 (2 imo)just like everyone else, hardly means their bad

Shimmergloom
01-05-2009, 01:00
Seems to me even the most avid orc haters would be happy if you kept animosity the same and just make the 6 result "move D6 inches towards an enemy unit" and had black orcs quell a 1 with a leadership test rather than hitting anyone.

I would be happy with that.

But they could leave the test itself the same but just put quell animosity back to it's old way of quelling within 6" where you just re-rolled 1's and that would make me just as happy. I can deal with animosity being a problem.

What I hate is that not only is animosity worse this edition, but they made it worse, they raised the points for almost all troops and they made they made quell animosity worse all at once.

It was complete overkill.

Meanwhile let's look at the other books and how they dealt with their 6th edition weaknesses?

Dwarfs got undispelable magic, movement runes, no more 0-1 miners and better armor, better elites and runes to help deal with their problems with fear causers.

Empire kept core knights, got cheaper core units to encourage their use. Got better characters who give benefits to units they enter, instead of killing them(who'd take a warrior priest if he did D6 S5 hits to his unit on a roll of a 1 each turn?).

HE got ASF, cheaper units, more powerful elites. Extra specials and rares.

VC got admittedly worse core, although cheaper core. But lost their bloodline weaknesses. Got new superpowered units and monsters. And had everything under the sun named as a vampire to help quell their inability to march like other troops can. Along with really powerful magic.

DoC. they got everything under the sun.

DE. Cheaper troops, hatred, great magic items to help the survivability of their frailer characters. Armor piercing as a boost to their shooting. Super-powered monster.

HOC. They lost 2/3rds of their book, so in exchange they got most of the beast book, got the best cannon fodder units in the game. Can now freely mix the different factions in the army, even the magic items.

Lizards. At the very least someone somewhere listened and nerfed krox, sallies and skinks to some degree. On the other hand, now they can take a bajillion stegadons and gave the temptation for their players to spam terradons now instead of skinks.

So when you look at the other books, most of them had weaknesses taken away. And the others had old power builds replaced with newer ones.

I think you can imagine if Giants became special. Super giants were rare and super giants could be goblin shaman mounts along with fanatics forcing panic tests with any wound caused on the enemy. There's probably be alot less complaints about the army.

O&G'sRule
01-05-2009, 01:05
VC got admittedly worse core, although cheaper core.

Worse? really? with the gouls?

Shimmergloom
01-05-2009, 02:02
Ghouls were a very cheap skirmish screen before. I think many will argue that is very preferrable to them being ranked, which zombies and skellies already are.

warlord hack'a
01-05-2009, 09:41
I would be happy with that.
And had everything under the sun named as a vampire to help quell their inability to march like other troops can. Along with really powerful magic.


well, if you realize what sun does to vampires, it was more likely: everything NOT under the sun named as vampire ;-). But I agree completely, the O&G book is not underpowered, the other books are overpowered..

Urgat
01-05-2009, 10:12
This Orc and goblin book is FAR better than the previous one

No it's not?
The only better things are the boyz , the hoppers and the nets, the rest got nerfed. Woopeedoo. Well, ok, 6th ed introduced Grimgor, so it can be blamed for that >>
What I particularly dislike with the new book is the little waaagh for gobs and big waaagh for orcs. The old way was way better, with spells actually adapted to the level of the casters, and not power lvl 8 spells mini save the first one for goblin spells, sillyness like that.


the last book was a mess, the current one did a great job in tidying it all back up again so that every special rule doesn't take 15 minutes trying to get your head round it. I get the impression that was the main focus.

Yes, we know, Ward spent half the white dwarf article when the army was released boasting about how he'd keep the fanatic rules on one page. So now we go fanatics dying to terrain features, common goblin/goblin/all goblin mix ups and so on. Weeeh for streamlining.


. I'm not sure there was 2 books for 5th and 6th was there? cant remember, the only old one I look at (for story) is 4th.

There was a 4th/5th edition, a 6th edition and the current one. How can yuo argue that the new one is better than the old one, if you don't even know if there was a 6th ed one or not? :confused:



with good old gorfang rotgut and oglok the 'orrible and azhag the slaughterer actually having animosity protection that made sense.
Oglok the 'orrible? Not in my book: there was Azagh, Gorbad, Grom, Skarsnik, Morglum, and Gorfang, nobody else iirc.

-Grimgorironhide-
01-05-2009, 11:35
Mabye make animosity only affect units that are 10+ strong. This would eliminate it for normal cav units and other specialised unit.

cheers.

Shimmergloom
01-05-2009, 12:55
There was an Oglok da' orrible in my 4th edition book(which was the same as the 5th edition one, greenskins did not get a new 5th edition book). I think a much later printing of the book removed him though.

He was morglum's 2nd in command or something.

selone
01-05-2009, 12:55
Oglok the 'orrible? Not in my book: there was Azagh, Gorbad, Grom, Skarsnik, Morglum, and Gorfang, nobody else iirc.

Page 98
Oglok the 'orrible

He could be used as a big boss or warlord and had stats between the 2. Leadership of a warlord, wounds of a bigboss etc. Was cheaper than a warlord came with no items or special rules, but eh definetly existed matey.

valdrog
01-05-2009, 13:19
One thing i wished they wouldve kept from the old book was the 2 for 1 Goblin Characters if you had ONLY gobling characters. Gobbo characters are some of the weakest in the game and it made taking an all gobbo list worthwhile and competitive.

I hate the Waaagh rule that on a 1 the unit takes d6 hits, i've lost sooo many units of savage orc boarboays that way that is not even funny.

The book needs some revising, i've been playing O&G for 11 years now and this is the worst book for them. Animosity is waaaay to unforgiven right now, i like the old way better cause if i rolled a 1 i still had a chance to make something good come out of it.

The little Waaagh magic is the stupidest thing ever, it goes from power lvl 5 first spell..to power lvl 8 second spell and so on !! it makes getting a spell off VERY hard, specially if you are playing an all gobbo army cause you need the BSB and then you are stuck with 1 or 2 shamans that almost nvr get a spell off.

They need an upgrade, and by upgrade i dont mean a DoC or VC upgrade, but something to make the army a bit more forgiving if something doesnt go your way, because as they stand now, you miss a couple of animosity rolls..it could spell doom for you.

maze ironheart
01-05-2009, 13:46
One thing i wished they wouldve kept from the old book was the 2 for 1 Goblin Characters if you had ONLY gobling characters. Gobbo characters are some of the weakest in the game and it made taking an all gobbo list worthwhile and competitive.

I hate the Waaagh rule that on a 1 the unit takes d6 hits, i've lost sooo many units of savage orc boarboays that way that is not even funny.

The book needs some revising, i've been playing O&G for 11 years now and this is the worst book for them. Animosity is waaaay to unforgiven right now, i like the old way better cause if i rolled a 1 i still had a chance to make something good come out of it.

The little Waaagh magic is the stupidest thing ever, it goes from power lvl 5 first spell..to power lvl 8 second spell and so on !! it makes getting a spell off VERY hard, specially if you are playing an all gobbo army cause you need the BSB and then you are stuck with 1 or 2 shamans that almost nvr get a spell off.

They need an upgrade, and by upgrade i dont mean a DoC or VC upgrade, but something to make the army a bit more forgiving if something doesnt go your way, because as they stand now, you miss a couple of animosity rolls..it could spell doom for you.

Exactly I had a 2000pt game against a tzeentch daemon army and when I was close enough to attack the horrors they decided to beat themselves up rather then charge the enemy and got nuked by magic.I started playing O&G's when 7th edition came out I do love playing with them and they do have funny moments.But when they pick the most stupid moments to fight each other then it just gets silly the enemys right their save beating yourselves up later when you don't have enemys to fight.Their is just alot of things that hurt you rather then help if a cavalry unit fails a waaagh D6 wounds and that will kill your cavalry units.

O&G'sRule
01-05-2009, 13:54
No it's not?

There was a 4th/5th edition, a 6th edition and the current one. How can yuo argue that the new one is better than the old one, if you don't even know if there was a 6th ed one or not? :confused:

lol, getting old, it was a long time ago. All I know (for sure) is the last book is worse than this one, whether in my attic there are 3 or 4 old books I wasn't sure, I knew there was a 6th, but I wasn't sure if there was one in between 4th ed and the previous ed, I buy all army books so one of them might have been another O&G book

Urgat
01-05-2009, 14:41
Page 98
Oglok the 'orrible

He could be used as a big boss or warlord and had stats between the 2. Leadership of a warlord, wounds of a bigboss etc. Was cheaper than a warlord came with no items or special rules, but eh definetly existed matey.

He's not in my amrybook, what the heck ><


One thing i wished they wouldve kept from the old book was the 2 for 1 Goblin Characters if you had ONLY gobling characters. Gobbo characters are some of the weakest in the game and it made taking an all gobbo list worthwhile and competitive.
Wasn't two for one, it was a additoinal one per 1000 points. 2 for one would have been a bit too much :p


I hate the Waaagh rule that on a 1 the unit takes d6 hits, i've lost sooo many units of savage orc boarboays that way that is not even funny.
1D6 wounds, not hits, that's the problem :p (with no save, even. That would be a magic item, that'd probably cost 75 points at least...)


The little Waaagh magic is the stupidest thing ever, it goes from power lvl 5 first spell..to power lvl 8 second spell and so on !! it makes getting a spell off VERY hard, specially if you are playing an all gobbo army cause you need the BSB and then you are stuck with 1 or 2 shamans that almost nvr get a spell off.
Yeah, the little waaagh is stupidely hard to cast, but, sorry to go OT, but I'm not sure I see the need for a BSB in a goblin army. You reroll break tests with a BSB, so break tests is at best general Ld-1. At best. What do you expect to achieve, reroll or not, with that? I never field a BSB with my gobs, it's completly pointless. End of OT.


lol, getting old, it was a long time ago. All I know (for sure) is the last book is worse than this one,

For sure? Cheaper goblins that came with shields by default (big difference if you think about it), better magic, better magic items (we actually had magic heavy armours !!!), 2 for 1 wolf charriots, the free gob hero fotr all gob armies, easier animosity table, a quell animosity that didn't kill your troops, fanatics that served their purpose (anti heavy cavalry defense) and I'm probably forgetting a lot of things, but making a list is rather pointless now. No, the previous book was better than the current one, that's for sure, excepted for what I listed above. If I weren't so fond of my hoppers (and, admitedly, the way they were handled previsouly was a real hassle, the herder/hopper mix deal), I would ask my friends if I could use the 6th edition book instead. And I'm seriously thinking about it, in fact, because now that I think about it, it might have been a hassle, but it was fun, the old hoppers bouncing everywhere. The plain fact is that I was more successful with the 6th edition book than I am with the 7th edition one. I think that alone convinces me, at least, that the previous book was more powerful.
Now, if it was more powerful, does it mean the army was less fun (the usual argument to say that O&G are fine)?

selone
01-05-2009, 14:46
Clearly urgat you're not an orc veteran like shimmergloom and I ! Whats the publishing date on your book?

valdrog
01-05-2009, 14:53
Yeah, the little waaagh is stupidely hard to cast, but, sorry to go OT, but I'm not sure I see the need for a BSB in a goblin army. You reroll break tests with a BSB, so break tests is at best general Ld-1. At best. What do you expect to achieve, reroll or not, with that? I never field a BSB with my gobs, it's completly pointless. End of OT.

BSB with the Red banner is essential, your troops ARE going to break, and with the number of units we got they will go through a couple of them, having the BSB help them rerroll those Panic tests is very important. Who wants to see their army fail a cascade of panic tests and run off the board ? :). Besides, the BSB gives you a chance to save a unit, i rather take that chance than none.

Meant to say D6 wounds not hits :)

And yes, the characters were an xtra one every 1000 points, which meant 2 extra ones at 2250 which what i always play :) . 2 for one were the wolf chariots !

Urgat
01-05-2009, 15:18
Clearly urgat you're not an orc veteran like shimmergloom and I ! Whats the publishing date on your book?

Don't know, I don't have it at hand, but it's the french edition, this might explain that.


BSB with the Red banner is essential, your troops ARE going to break, and with the number of units we got they will go through a couple of them, having the BSB help them rerroll those Panic tests is very important. Who wants to see their army fail a cascade of panic tests and run off the board ? :). Besides, the BSB gives you a chance to save a unit, i rather take that chance than none.
The reroll won't help much with such low Ld, that's my point. I prefer to take more dispel shamans and lessen the chances of having to take panic tests in the first place. It seems to work ok for me, at least.

Malorian
01-05-2009, 15:27
The reroll won't help much with such low Ld, that's my point. I prefer to take more dispel shamans and lessen the chances of having to take panic tests in the first place. It seems to work ok for me, at least.

Well with the general in range it's not too bad (better anyway), and with things like the new salamanders running around you can't always stop the panic tests...


If I was to do a goblin horde I would certainly take that BSB.

Shimmergloom
01-05-2009, 16:27
Yeah for all goblin armies the ability to take 4 shamans, a general and bsb made the army more viable.

The main problem with goblins this edition is that they were nerfed in so many areas. This is not the case of a nerf in one area.

Goblins had the following done to them:

1. +1pt in cost. regular goblins also lost their shields for inferior light armor.
2. Goblins lost access to the big waaagh! spells and had the casting number increased for their spells.
3. Goblins no longer can generate power or dispel dice.
4. Wolf riders +2 pts(spiders essentially are +3 pts eventhough they didn't exist before, since wolfs were 10pts before and are now 13 w/spears, which spiders are forced to take).
5. Goblins lost the extra big boss(not shaman, many cheated and used it to take shamans which created the myth that the extra big bosses were overpowered) per 1k points.
6. Goblins lost the 2 for 1 chariots.
7. Fanatics greatly nerfed.
8. Goblins also hurt by the worse overall animosity rules that plague all greenskins.
9. Night goblin shamans lost their free mushrooms.
10. Goblin chariots and war machines now also fear elves.
11. Squig herds lost the ability to take lots of cheap night goblins in the unit to make them more effective. And yes the old squig bomb needed to be nerfed, but since we are listing all the nerfs, this is included.
12. All goblin units which are testing for animosity have a 17% chance that they will lose D6 models during a Waaagh! Highly detrimental to fast cav and hopper units.

On the opposite side these are what you might call buffs:

1. squig hoppers are now an independent unit again.
2. nets can be better than the old nets(although I much preferred paying 8pts for 4 nets a unit, then being forced to pay 35pts to get nets for a whole unit which ceases to make them a cheap fodder unit).
3. fanatics can always come out in the direction you want them to now.
4. Goblin characters can ride in chariots without taking up an extra special slot.
5. Goblin infantry units have a 17% chance of getting a we'll show'em result during the Waagh!

So the bad, just terribly outweighs any bonuses they got. I'd really only count squig hoppers and spiders(although they are overpriced) as being the real bonuses to goblins.

Meanwhile common orcs at least were treated more fairly.

Common orcs:

1. lost the ability to generate dispel dice.
2. have the ability to generate power dice doubled from US10 to US 20.
3. can parry with a choppa and shield(hooray they got a 6th edition rule in 7th edition!)
4. get the +1S on foot in round one of a combat, with 1 or 2 choppas instead of just 1 and instead of only when they charge.
5. orc characters can ride in chariots without taking up an extra special slot.
6. big'un upgrade doubled for both foot and boar orcs.
7. boar boys regular +4pts.
8. orc shamans can all access the big waaagh! now.

So 4 buffs, 4 nerfs.

Mireadur
01-05-2009, 20:25
Very nicely put shimmergloom, Just adding 1 point to this part:



On the opposite side these are what you might call buffs:

1. squig hoppers are now an independent unit again.
2. nets can be better than the old nets(although I much preferred paying 8pts for 4 nets a unit, then being forced to pay 35pts to get nets for a whole unit which ceases to make them a cheap fodder unit).
3. fanatics can always come out in the direction you want them to now.
4. Goblin characters can ride in chariots without taking up an extra special slot.
5. Goblin infantry units have a 17% chance of getting a we'll show'em result during the Waagh!



Forgot to mention that doomdivers are more accurate now (although at 1st glance could appear to be the opposite).