Frenzied Orcs idea.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is here! You can read all about it in the news.

Our beta phase is finally over. Download The Ninth Age: Fantasy Battles, 2nd Edition now!

  • Frenzied Orcs idea.

    Hi guys.

    As promised I am making thread on frenzy for orcs idea.

    What is the idea:

    Idea is simple enough. Give all orcs frenzy rule. Prtiod.

    Why is this idea good for:
    Several things will benefot from this rule:
    1) Background - Orcs suppose to be unruly, hard to control, savage and dangerous creatures. Right now they are non of those things really, but frenzy with its second attack and nececity to charge any visible target would go a long way towards making this feel right.
    2) Orcs are kind of meh now in CC (big base, low A output). One of ideas to make them viable was to give them 2A. This would do it but with downsides (being forced to charge/ovverun out of position, posibility of loosing textra attak if loosing combat) that would compensate and not made it OP (possible further balancing could be needed to).
    3) This would also help IO who are kind of elites but lack this second attac to compete with heavy hitters of other armies, especially as they are 25mm based..

    What repercution would it have for our units:
    If this would constitute merging feral orcs in some manner is another matter and will not be discussed here. I will not consider removing of greenhide races too. At least not here as I like idea but it is beside frenzy fr orcs point.

    Obviously all goblin units would not be affected but some of their interqaction with rest of the army will. I will ommit units that will not change much in my opinion.

    Lords of fighting - Not much change here all characters beside feral one would gain +1A/. Feral one would only get 5++ ward so propably some repricing would be in order. Taking mounts especially wyverns would be more risky as with longe range bainting opotunieties would increase.

    Orc shaman - basically same as with lords.

    Lords of snekin/withcdoctors - Goblins will not get anything out of this deal. But their prominence will rise somewhat as they will be alternative choice for generals/supporting chractrs if player would prefer character easier to control.

    Orcs - This might put CC orcs on the map finally. Maby they would be worth wile as CC not only as shooty gunline. Potentially this could make orcs suitable for prime CC blocks with goblin support/chaff/manuvering duties. Basically units of frenzied orcs would be used as ferals are used now.

    Edbashers - same as with orcs/ propably will be merged either way.

    Boar riders - Posibility to be baited would be a problem for this guys for sure. Second attac at their I of 2 would not be very conseqential but if some of them survived 2 lance attacs can put a hurt on many things more than 1. Lets say you have 5 of them. Usually you will loose 1 or 2 minimum after chargfing something. That is going from 5 orc and 5 boar attacs to 3 and 3. With this you would go from 10 orc and 5 boar A to 6 orc and 3 boar. much better especially with bonus S from lances and btf. Not game breaking but could help.

    Goblins - as with characters. Goblin usefulness would shift a little. You could not depend on orcs working flanks or going after objectives so in places where control is more important you would actually prefer goblins more than orcs even in close quoters situations.

    Iron orcs - Would be better as elite hey are not quite now. 2A is basicaly theme that is showing in discussions about them for a long time. And this would be hopefully balanced way to do it. With their good LD they would be relatively unlikely to get out of control even outsoide IP/BSB reroll bubble but would still have to ovverun and could loose this attack wich would be decent tradeoff IMO.

    Mounted edbashers - see edbashers.

    Orc boar chariot - A little bit less controll for a bit more uph on the riders. Seem like decent trade. as Boar riders with its higer movement it would be easier to bait but its superior T and decent AS usually let it stay alive for a turn (unless hitting wrong target).

    Goblin raiders - Will stay as they are chaff. Still some more shenenigans could be implemented like using them to wall of your own units to prevent premature frenzy charges and than chage them to make room.

    Goblin wolf chariot - More diversity betwee this one and boar chariot as it would be better controlled but with much less combat power.

    Gnasher dashers/gnasher heard - Not much change here. They would be a little more prominent as controlable CC capable unit but their glass cannon status would not change.

    Grotlings. As wolf raiders they could be used to wall off frenzied units but their short range would make them unreliable in thet role.

    Screwerer/greenhide catapults. - hopefully with better CC orcs gunline playtyle will be less prominent so their prominence should go down too.

    What do you think?

    Best regrads
    Sklodo
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.
  • Sklodo wrote:

    Lords of fighting - Not much change here all characters beside feral one would gain +1A/. Feral one would only get 5++ ward so propably some repricing would be in order. Taking mounts especially wyverns would be more risky as with longe range bainting opotunieties would increase.
    I would add Iron Orc LoF gets <'Ear Da Boss> (something like: Unit with IO LoF may reroll failed Frenzy test. If it does unit receives d3 S5 hits).

    Sklodo wrote:

    One of ideas to make them viable was to give them 2A. This would do it but with downsides (being forced to charge/ovverun out of position, posibility of loosing textra attak if loosing combat) that would compensate and not made it OP (possible further balancing could be needed to).
    You forgot to add that it would be cheaper that just giving 2A.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Armywide Signature Spells - Check! Maybe you could add something more? Success! We got Hereditary Spells!

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Altao ().

  • Altao wrote:

    Sklodo wrote:

    Lords of fighting - Not much change here all characters beside feral one would gain +1A/. Feral one would only get 5++ ward so propably some repricing would be in order. Taking mounts especially wyverns would be more risky as with longe range bainting opotunieties would increase.
    I would add Iron Orc LoF gets <'Ear Da Boss> (something like: Unit with IO LoF may reroll failed Frenzy test. If it does unit receives d3 S5 hits).

    Sklodo wrote:

    One of ideas to make them viable was to give them 2A. This would do it but with downsides (being forced to charge/ovverun out of position, posibility of loosing textra attak if loosing combat) that would compensate and not made it OP (possible further balancing could be needed to).
    You forgot to add that it would be cheaper that just giving 2A.
    Of course synergies and other related stuff could and should be added, but this is poliminary idea so I have not touched that here.

    Well yess it would be cheaper than giving flat 2A becouse it comes with SIGNIFICAT downsides. You are of course right. Downsides of frenzy are quite massive. I do not know to what extent they compensate for extra attack, but clearly unit with flat 2A is far superior to similar one with frenzy:
    1) You have to ovverun so often you cannot turn to face enemy that will charge you or prepar for next turn, which is hudge deal.
    2) You have to pass test or you are forced to charge nearest eligable enemy. Of course this test can be made easier or rerolled so chance can be decent but still it is there and on multiple units some are bound to charge when distance is not optimal.
    3) Your units can be baited to charge chaff and than overrun to present enemy with jucy target.
    4) This attac can be easily taken away if you loose combet and your unit will not regain it. And than you are stuck with all the drawbacks but no benefits.

    After reading what I wrote I am starting to consider if this is not actually a nerf.... So maby flat 2A would be better? Again we are at crosroads fluffy versus effective. Like with animosity.

    Best regards
    Sklodo
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Sklodo ().

  • I don't mind the option of having orcs with frenzy, as long as we get viable, offensively adequate orcs without it.

    I remember the bad old days of animosity and have no desire to relive dumb luck taking over my movement phase and suiciding my unit forward.

    If nothing else it will further undermine the aggressiveness of the army. Without a general and a BSB it will hurt a lot... So you play safe so your characters can stay alive and let you continue to make choices - so leading from the back becomes the new role for the orc.

    Alternatively you just shove everything forward, every game and hope for the best. May as well just roll a die at the start to see who wins - same number of meaningful decisions you get to make and saves you time.
  • The problem is this has all the downsides that we used to have with animosity.

    - you can't mitigate against it
    - It makes our already under performing cavalry even worse
    - it screws up the most important phase in the game when it goes wrong
    - it makes getting late game objectives quite tough when you might have no leadership bubble and you just to be in the right place and not charging off somewhere

    When I have suggested alternative animosity mechanisms in the past the most important aspect of them imo is that they are optional NOT compulsory. If a player doesn't want his whole game screwed up by it he shouldn't have to.

    Having something like the Beast Herds drunk / sober rules would be better where you could choose whether your troops started the game frenzied or not and then during the game you get the option to turn them all frenzied if you want to (but you obviously can't choose to unfrenzy them).

    Let's not have a return to the days when our whole army has the potential to make suicide charges and we can't stop it. At least at the moment we can choose not to take feral orcs.
  • Well option to take frenzy seem good idea. Background whise or even adds to orcs unpredictability. It might work that player declares it after setting up for example to add even more randomness :). Still I have reservations if all those downsides are not to much for 1A that can be taken away.
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.
  • I've thought about something like it but I don't think I'd be keen on this at all. I'd be even less inclined to take orcs. Even with a second attack they still strike last with low weapon skill and from the second round strength. I just don't think it's a mechanic that would work, but if you do want it you can ways do it now anyway.

    I'd prefer a lead by example mechanic that encourages the warboss to get into combat, and when he does all orcs get some sort of bonus. I don't know weather that just gives the army stubborn all around or whatever it is, but that's the sort of thing I'd prefer which still encourages everybody getting into combat ASAP.
  • I'm not keen, mostly as I'de prefer to see Orcs get more of a strength boost and Frenzy granting an extra attack would be a hindrance to that.
    It also means more players would be inclined to take smaller units, rather than larger ones which doesn't really fit how I see the army as something that uses numbers to it's advantage.

    The idea may get people more on board with Animosity as a viable re-introduction since it will undoubtedly allow for a more controllable army than what one where everyone is frenzied does.
  • theunwantedbeing wrote:

    I'm not keen, mostly as I'de prefer to see Orcs get more of a strength boost and Frenzy granting an extra attack would be a hindrance to that.
    It also means more players would be inclined to take smaller units, rather than larger ones which doesn't really fit how I see the army as something that uses numbers to it's advantage.

    The idea may get people more on board with Animosity as a viable re-introduction since it will undoubtedly allow for a more controllable army than what one where everyone is frenzied does.
    why people would prefer smaller units?
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.
  • I love the idea, also the last one letting them control their failed charge movement a bit. Only concern is that it would encourage spam of 10-15 man units, that just charge forward hoping to hit some flanks. But very orcish. Heck i even love that to, like a horde version of wasteland warriors. Hopefully there will be a fix to "heavy" cavalry in 2.0 that will help the now frenzied boarboys.
    and I still believe; Light infantry should fight and shoot in 3 ranks, FREE command groups for EoS units. Imperial Guards should have weaponmaster and both parent and support, and that halbardiers should wear heavy armor. Brace for impact should be changed to, or there should be an extra order: " Have at THEM!" The unit gain battle focus.
    For Sunna and the Emperor!!
  • Yes that is the point. Every orc gets frenzy. They will be rather easily controlled around the BSB.
    IMO much cooler than any other weird unruly/animoisity rules.
    and I still believe; Light infantry should fight and shoot in 3 ranks, FREE command groups for EoS units. Imperial Guards should have weaponmaster and both parent and support, and that halbardiers should wear heavy armor. Brace for impact should be changed to, or there should be an extra order: " Have at THEM!" The unit gain battle focus.
    For Sunna and the Emperor!!
  • Smythen wrote:

    Yes that is the point. Every orc gets frenzy. They will be rather easily controlled around the BSB.
    IMO much cooler than any other weird unruly/animoisity rules.
    If any animosity - like mechanic is nececery at all.

    Theorox wrote:

    So...instead of being able to choose between orcs with frenzy and orcs without frenzy you want us to be forced to take orcs with frenzy?

    Theo
    Ye basically that is general idea. I am not so sure about that tho. Maby as an optiion on all ork units?
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.
  • I like the idea. I would however make Iron Orcs not have Frenzy and be the reliable orc unit. Iron Orcs are disciplined and shouldn't be frenzy baited/forced to overrun imo.

    Besides the frenzy on all orcs, I would also like to add that Orc's with frenzy are counted as a horde when 8 wide. I keep coming back with this rule as I realy think it will help out orcs.
    :O&G: :VC: :KoE:

    Homebrew Army: The Lycanthropes
  • Sklodo wrote:

    theunwantedbeing wrote:

    I'm not keen, mostly as I'de prefer to see Orcs get more of a strength boost and Frenzy granting an extra attack would be a hindrance to that.
    It also means more players would be inclined to take smaller units, rather than larger ones which doesn't really fit how I see the army as something that uses numbers to it's advantage.

    The idea may get people more on board with Animosity as a viable re-introduction since it will undoubtedly allow for a more controllable army than what one where everyone is frenzied does.
    why people would prefer smaller units?
    frenzy has the most impact on smaller units, both with providing the highest number of additional attacks and via the ability to retain frenzy/ being immune to panic so not caring if smaller units die.

    Actually, reading this thread makes me wonder if a cascading force of minimum sized feral orcs wouldn't be great- multiple chances for the born to fight & immune to LD issues for a good chunk of phases. Ive been wanting to pick up another army... maybe feral orcs MSU is an option.
  • I think feral orc MSU is a both cool and viable strategy, yes you miss out on some of the more delicate advantages of the MSU style. But you get launch an assault of 6 frenzied units in the face of your opponents army while moving around with other units. VERY WAAAGH!
    and I still believe; Light infantry should fight and shoot in 3 ranks, FREE command groups for EoS units. Imperial Guards should have weaponmaster and both parent and support, and that halbardiers should wear heavy armor. Brace for impact should be changed to, or there should be an extra order: " Have at THEM!" The unit gain battle focus.
    For Sunna and the Emperor!!
  • Its a ton of potential attacks and even makes big stabbas intriguing. Having 4-6 min sized units with stabbas and paired weapons supported by cavalry and maybe spider riders for redirection might actually be an anti-MSU MSU list. I can even see multiple wyvern riders being fitting due to flanking potentials and 18" leadership support.

    It's actually an attrition army that would have a ton of scoring options.
  • CogitoBandito wrote:

    Sklodo wrote:

    theunwantedbeing wrote:

    I'm not keen, mostly as I'de prefer to see Orcs get more of a strength boost and Frenzy granting an extra attack would be a hindrance to that.
    It also means more players would be inclined to take smaller units, rather than larger ones which doesn't really fit how I see the army as something that uses numbers to it's advantage.

    The idea may get people more on board with Animosity as a viable re-introduction since it will undoubtedly allow for a more controllable army than what one where everyone is frenzied does.
    why people would prefer smaller units?
    frenzy has the most impact on smaller units, both with providing the highest number of additional attacks and via the ability to retain frenzy/ being immune to panic so not caring if smaller units die.
    Actually, reading this thread makes me wonder if a cascading force of minimum sized feral orcs wouldn't be great- multiple chances for the born to fight & immune to LD issues for a good chunk of phases. Ive been wanting to pick up another army... maybe feral orcs MSU is an option.
    it would be interesting, however I would worry about the lack of defence and low initiative. Paired weapons can only do so much.

    As part of a more general alpha strike army it might work. Add chariots and goblin archers with mad gits to thin out numbers, clear chaff and break steadfast and it might work.