How to make O&G into fighting CC horde.

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!

  • @Sklodo

    I agree that this won't fix all our problems. I'd want to make a couple of other tweaks too. Apologies for repeating myself, I have made these suggestions somewhere before.

    I'd replace born to fight with
    "Reckless Enthusiasm - Orcs always strike simultaneously with their opponent in the first round of combat, regardless of initiative."

    And I'd also add:
    "Competitive - Orcs gain +1 str if there is another unit of orcs engaged in combat nearby." (Haven't decided how far is "nearby")

    I'm willing to cave on that last one and just take the +1str in profile, but I thought this was a thematic and interesting way of doing it whilst keeping cost down.

    Also, let's not forget that we already know that Str and AP are splitting, so we should be talking in those terms. Personally, I'd add the +1 AP either in profile, or attached to my "Competitive" rule above. Everyone that's advocating for Str 4, are you in favour of having AP 1 as well?
  • Sklodo wrote:

    All of this are nice idea but do not solve basic problems. Only Improving break test we have to take either way.
    I don't see this as much as a problem.
    I just imagine this new special rule (-1 LD and +2 LD with kill) on the field:
    Okay, in most cases we will lose the combat and will have to take the break test. But with our special rule and with having more ranks, we are in a good shape to not fail the test 8and casue at least one wound). LD 8 without general and LD 10 with general bubble. In BSB range even rerollable. I think this is okay.

    Sometimes, our opponent will fail his attack rolls. If he fails for bad dice luck, the consequences will be a lot more dramatic than for us losing the combat. They are not steadfast. They dont get any artificial LD bonus. Depending on the amount of fail, the Break roll could be a lot more difficult to pass than for our Orcs.

    And finally, with even points, and no one fails a Break Test, our Orcs will win a battle of attrition. We have more bodies. Especially if you consider some pre-combat casualties cause by shooting or magic, we will have bodies left when our opponent lost his last man. This is how in my opinion Orcs should love a war. After a long fight, only very few Orcs are left, but all enemies are dead on the floor. Those few surviving Orcs are very proud, because they won this really really hard fight. They might even become Bosses in the next war.
  • arwaker wrote:

    Sklodo wrote:

    All of this are nice idea but do not solve basic problems. Only Improving break test we have to take either way.
    I don't see this as much as a problem.I just imagine this new special rule (-1 LD and +2 LD with kill) on the field:
    Okay, in most cases we will lose the combat and will have to take the break test. But with our special rule and with having more ranks, we are in a good shape to not fail the test 8and casue at least one wound). LD 8 without general and LD 10 with general bubble. In BSB range even rerollable. I think this is okay.

    Sometimes, our opponent will fail his attack rolls. If he fails for bad dice luck, the consequences will be a lot more dramatic than for us losing the combat. They are not steadfast. They dont get any artificial LD bonus. Depending on the amount of fail, the Break roll could be a lot more difficult to pass than for our Orcs.

    And finally, with even points, and no one fails a Break Test, our Orcs will win a battle of attrition. We have more bodies. Especially if you consider some pre-combat casualties cause by shooting or magic, we will have bodies left when our opponent lost his last man. This is how in my opinion Orcs should love a war. After a long fight, only very few Orcs are left, but all enemies are dead on the floor. Those few surviving Orcs are very proud, because they won this really really hard fight. They might even become Bosses in the next war.
    Thing is loosig combat is bad. Even on very high Ld/ On 2d6 there is like 1 in 6 chance you will loose Ld10 roll so it is not inconsequetial. Dramatic effect if enemy wiffs tootally is ok. Problem is with amout of attacs ve their armor and so on they would have to wiff several rolls preatty badly and than fail Ld roll on top of that. Not just one or two ld rolls and be compleatly wiped out.

    I totally agree about how equal-points-fights should look like. 3 or 4 orcs alive but no enemy wiped pout to the man. Thing is this usually do not happen becouse we are wiped out...

    Maby something like this?:

    Fighty maniacs - If orcs fight enemy unit, and this unit is in their front arc, and both sides inflict at least one casualtie this turn player can decide that both orc unit and enemy unit gain unbrekable rule for this turn. Eithe rboth units get the rule or none of them.

    That way nobody runs and orcs are happy to continue their slaugter basically sorounding enemies and fighting untill slaughter continues. Usually this will ensure mutual devastation of both units over several turns so what we hope to achieve. If to powerfull number of inflicted casualties could be upped. Do you thik it is valid idea? Not one sided and ultimatly weing entire fight on combat preformance of units not on Ld rolls of eiter side.

    Best regards
    Sklodo
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.
  • So I'm late to the party since I been lost in the warp.. but I did learn a few things!

    For one, GW made orKs the best at leadership NOT the worst in 40K. What a novel idea.
    Maybe its time T9A learned a few things from the old dog. This is not the wacky old punish yerselves army that runs from a fight because a few bodies went down and exists only as the whipping boyz of the T9A world. Thats played out.

    For once make orc leadership the best when they outnumber their foes! Let LD be reflected by the size of their WAAAAAGH! How this is done is someone else's job but linking it directly to body count and unit size would be where I'd probably start.

    Increase the combat effectiveness of characters. Even allowing bubble effects such as reroll 1s to hit/wound. Seriously no matter how many games I play I keep coming back to force multiplication and dice modification. It wins games and Orcs have NONE.
    Personally i think orc characters should be beefcakes closer to chaos lords than average joe human over there but maybe others disagree?
    I'd start here with +2 attacks for each character and/or dice mods of some sort. Elvesies and wrath marked have lightning reflexes.. greenskins have sheer VIOLENCE. Even if not overly accurate. Give characters enough attacks to mean something or let them modify dice. Anyway thats all I got for now..

    Word to yo squiggoth.
    AVOIDANCE FAILS 28% OF THE TIME FOLKS. -SE
    Undying Deathstar Construction Inc.
  • [list=1][*]
    [/list]

    Stygian wrote:

    So I'm late to the party since I been lost in the warp.. but I did learn a few things!

    For one, GW made orKs the best at leadership NOT the worst in 40K. What a novel idea.
    Maybe its time T9A learned a few things from the old dog. This is not the wacky old punish yerselves army that runs from a fight because a few bodies went down and exists only as the whipping boyz of the T9A world. Thats played out.

    For once make orc leadership the best when they outnumber their foes! Let LD be reflected by the size of their WAAAAAGH! How this is done is someone else's job but linking it directly to body count and unit size would be where I'd probably start.

    Increase the combat effectiveness of characters. Even allowing bubble effects such as reroll 1s to hit/wound. Seriously no matter how many games I play I keep coming back to force multiplication and dice modification. It wins games and Orcs have NONE.
    Personally i think orc characters should be beefcakes closer to chaos lords than average joe human over there but maybe others disagree?
    I'd start here with +2 attacks for each character and/or dice mods of some sort. Elvesies and wrath marked have lightning reflexes.. greenskins have sheer VIOLENCE. Even if not overly accurate. Give characters enough attacks to mean something or let them modify dice. Anyway thats all I got for now..

    Word to yo squiggoth.
    I like your aproach. There are some problems however regarding ld counting model a, could be quite game slowing especially if it should change in game when recivong casualties and number of units approach would heavili favour MSU game which we do not really want.
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.
  • You could say something along the lines of if the orc unit caused a wound they gain steadfast. Not as good as unbreakable, but could add a little grinding power against less resistant Opponents. That being said heavier infantry would be a natural enemy of orcs (I'm looking at you dwarves as warriors). Which depending on what lore you like orcs and dwarves are natural enemies so not being good against them seems odd. Not sure if this helped any, but just some thoughts.

    Best,
    Anubis
    US Masters, Pacific NorthWest Representative
  • in this topic O&G Character synergie
    we suggest to modify unruly by:

    unruly: Models with Unruly suffer -1 Leadership when rolling to restrain Pursuit moves and Frenzy Tests , and +1 Leadership when rolling a breaktest when they are steadfast.


    Its coudl maybe be enough.
    We should aslo first agree on what we call horde ?
    Do we really want orcs play in horde formation ? or do we want orcs play with lots of unit ?
    Personnaly i prefeer seeing lots of msu for orcs, it fits better to ther large base.

    So we coudl also imagine, some synergie with other unit.
    Somehting making orcs more reliable, when they have some friendly unit nex to them.

    one two alot: To determine if an orc unit is steadfast, count the number of rank of any friendly orcs unit in a range of 6 of the unit.

    Website Team

      

    Art Team

      cas-p.net

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

  • Sklodo wrote:

    I like your aproach. There are some problems however regarding ld counting model a, could be quite game slowing especially if it should change in game when recivong casualties and number of units approach would heavili favour MSU game which we do not really want.
    Thanks! And I agree we don't need to slow the game. On the other claw I like the mass msu that greenskins can bring, as long as msu means units and not just single model msu right?


    Casp- now THATS what I'm talking about.. or in orc terms "I smelt wut yer steppin in"!
    How about this modification to your idea to take the emphasis off steadfast and put it on sheer numbers:


    unruly: Models with Unruly suffer -1 Leadership when rolling to restrain Pursuit moves and Frenzy Tests.
    Unruly units gain +1 Leadership when rolling break tests and panic tests as long as they have more full ranks then then nearest enemy unit.

    one two alot: greenhide units may instead count the full ranks of any greenhide unit within 6".


    This takes the impact of greenhide numbers out of just combat and applies it to everything in orc warfare.
    These combined would be very strong but also deceptively strong and it does encourage a mixed force over say.. only horde formation or only msu.


    And while we at it..

    Natural enemies- This model and all orcs in a unit joined by a model with this ability must reroll 1s to hit and to wound.
    (if this steps on GGIs toes too much then maybe see the next one)

    Favorit meal- When in base contact with a model with strength or toughness 5 or more (before weapons bonuses) the warlord/chief may reroll failed hit and wound rolls.
    AVOIDANCE FAILS 28% OF THE TIME FOLKS. -SE
    Undying Deathstar Construction Inc.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Stygian ().

  • Stygian wrote:

    Sklodo wrote:

    I like your aproach. There are some problems however regarding ld counting model a, could be quite game slowing especially if it should change in game when recivong casualties and number of units approach would heavili favour MSU game which we do not really want.
    Thanks! And I agree we don't need to slow the game. On the other claw I like the mass msu that greenskins can bring, as long as msu means units and not just single model msu right?

    Casp- now THATS what I'm talking about.. or in orc terms "I smelt wut yer steppin in"!
    How about this modification to your idea to take the emphasis off steadfast and put it on sheer numbers:


    unruly: Models with Unruly suffer -1 Leadership when rolling to restrain Pursuit moves and Frenzy Tests.
    Unruly units gain +1 Leadership when rolling break tests and panic tests as long as they have more full ranks then then nearest enemy unit.

    one two alot: greenhide units may instead count the full ranks of any greenhide unit within 6".


    This takes the impact of greenhide numbers out of just combat and applies it to everything in orc warfare.
    These combined would be very strong but also deceptively strong and it does encourage a mixed force over say.. only horde formation or only msu.


    And while we at it..

    Natural enemies- This model and all orcs in a unit joined by a model with this ability must reroll 1s to hit and to wound.
    (if this steps on GGIs toes too much then maybe see the next one)

    Favorit meal- When in base contact with a model with strength or toughness 5 or more (before weapons bonuses) the warlord/chief may reroll failed hit and wound rolls.
    I especially like natural enemies and favorit meal things. +1ld -1 lad seem nice and all but little inconsequential to wast on special rule with limits on special rules in army. Do not get me wrong it could be useful but as far as meta goes you can have similar avarage effect without this rule while retaining aditional special rule slot, it is mostly fluff rule. And while I am a fan of fuluff rules I dislike rules that are only or mostly fluff becouse they weake our army as a whole.
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.
  • I called in a favour with a friend to test some new alternative rules for orcs. I hope people will forgive me that I was focussed on what I think would be a decent fix rather than maybe the most popular options. Anyway I played two and a bit games. They were a bit on the casual side though.

    Alternative rules
    Orcs get lethal strike and count as horde whilst 7+ wide

    I felt that Orcs needed a little bit more killing power, even as a cheap PPM unit. Lethal strike helps the Orcs lose less badly vs heavy infantry and cavalry. The horde rule is because I feel Orcs should still win through weight of numbers but power per unit length of frontage is just too low.

    In all games I fielded my Orcs as common orcs with hand weapon and shield. In both games I fielded two blocks of 49 orcs each.

    Game 1 was vs dwarfs.
    A "fair" fight with dwarfs was always something that orcs would never win. Not by quite some margin. In this battle the orc blocks got shredded by missile fire although not enough that they were not able to make it to combat. So Orcs like this still (unsurprisingly) cant face off vs dwarf elites. Vs rank and file they were pretty scary. Dwarfs were packing enough armour that lethal strike meant something and the born to fight rule meant that they could hold their own on round 1 of combat. Unfortunately dwarf leadership meant that my one chance to break them failed. I lost one of the combats that the orcs were in although the results here were very, very close. If I could have taken another couple of models away with shooting beforehand this could have all gone very differently. The other combat i won, but with massive casualties.

    Overall impression here was that this was a sound fix and made the unit competitive. One thing I found is that this set of rules doesn't stop the army falling apart. Even if you win a fight there is a good chance you will lose a lot of bodies. Once the orcs lose the benefits of the fight in extra rank from horde then they are not much better than they ever were and a much depleted orc unit is pretty pathetic.

    Secondly, even at only 7 wide a horde formation still sucks vs small elite units with 10cm frontage. You are still having at least one file of the unit not being able to attack and it doesn't seem an efficient use of points in that combat. This isn't the good kind of FiER that elite spears can get for a lot of attacks on a small frontage.



    Game 2 was vs my own HbE army
    In this game I raise the PPM for extra orcs by 1. Although I won the first game it was by a narrow margin but I felt I had made a number of mistakes.

    This came as a bit of a shock. Lethal strike is worth a lot less against enemies that are lightly armoured (who knew?) and the HbE can field some stupidly powerful elite infantry. Of course by filling up my core with combat orcs i had much, much less shooting than i normally would have. I lost the chaff war to superior shooting - although I blame the big blocks of orcs for this in part - they are pretty damn wide and it makes it difficult to keep things within 12 inches of the general. My big blocks were generally evaded for most of the game whilst all my expensive or mobile targets were whittled down - possibly foolishly I declined a charge when there was a countercharge that would have hit my flank. One block of orcs scored some points by eating a few small sacrifical units. The other one took a few shooting casualties but after much of the rest of my army was fleeing of dead got triple charged in on turn (it did not end well).

    New learings: OK, this helps orcs but maybe doesn't "fix" the army as you still need enough shooting to handle glass hammer units. Having a unit be a little more scary to cavalry was nice, only if the cavalry is moving at more than twice the speed you don't ever get to chose to fight them - I suppose it stopped some otherwise reckless charges from happening. The chances of you getting a countercharge off with a unit of this frontage is pretty small. Big blocks of M4 infantry are just tough to make work without enough shooting or magic enough to make the enemy come to you.

    I knew already, but shields tend to suck against elves - especially spear elves. Parry is diminished and the extra point of armour helps CR but isn't going to do much to change the outcome of the combat.

    Finally low initiative is still a big deal. In any combat losing models first can hurt. As a 7 wide horde going below 21 model in the unit starts to lose you attacks. Going second just means one fewer round where you get the benefits of the extra rank.


    Game 3 was a Dwarf rematch but didn't finish.

    My opponent had learned from the first game what to do. He focused shooting on my chaff (as normal, I suppose) then took up defensive positions for countercharges with his dwarfs. This worked pretty well for him - a cheap unit to the front that wasn't going to break easily, narrow formation to limit casualties. Once the born to fight had worn off the next round then the more expensive units came in to support. It was tough generating the kills needed. Though the game didn't finish, it is fair to say things were not going my way.

    How much can you read into 2.5 fairly casual games? Maybe not too much. I think that this might work for overall power level for orcs if there are other buffs so that there is also access to effective cavalry and synergistic support. Without this they are still a poor relation to other core melee units in other armies (some like BH and WotDG you would expect to be much better - others like elves should probably be on par on a unit by unit basis. Were the orcs a scary infantry block? - yes. Worth the 450 pts? - didn't really seem like it but maybe with adjusting strategy and support it might work.
  • Throgg- cool idea man! I'm always game for testing home brewed ideas.
    I don't get why you went for 7 wide instead of 8 though, which seems like the logical progression.. at least to me:
    20mm = 10 wide
    25mm = 8 wide
    40mm = 6 wide

    On lethal strike, I like the idea and I personally adore LS, but I feel like greenskins would not have precision so instead they would have a different version. In fact check this:

    Blitz Attack
    If a Close Combat Attack from a model part with this special rule rolls an unmodified '6' to Hit, that Hit becomes 2 Hits instead.

    Not quite hatred but its solid and would occur every round. Idk just spitballing..
    AVOIDANCE FAILS 28% OF THE TIME FOLKS. -SE
    Undying Deathstar Construction Inc.
  • Stygian wrote:

    Throgg- cool idea man! I'm always game for testing home brewed ideas.
    I don't get why you went for 7 wide instead of 8 though, which seems like the logical progression.. at least to me:
    20mm = 10 wide
    25mm = 8 wide
    40mm = 6 wide

    On lethal strike, I like the idea and I personally adore LS, but I feel like greenskins would not have precision so instead they would have a different version. In fact check this:

    Blitz Attack
    If a Close Combat Attack from a model part with this special rule rolls an unmodified '6' to Hit, that Hit becomes 2 Hits instead.

    Not quite hatred but its solid and would occur every round. Idk just spitballing..
    Well it depends how you interpret lethal strike. If orcs excessive force enables him to straight up decapitate his foe that could count as lethal strike. Your blitz idea is good to but lethal strike is better to deal with opponents that usually are impossible to deal even with IO.
    Best regards
    Sklodo

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

    What about orcs in a horde have LD 10 base? Still let's them lose and be modified, but boosts the arrangement.
    Problem is that if you loose cc even with superior numbers and steadfast you still have a chance of failing break check, and horde is much easier to disrupt or deprive of steadfst than unit 5 wide. And when that happens casualties often mean auto break. Basically units effective in cc are those that win consistently and are forcing break tests on others. Enemy will sooner or later fail their test and you have chance for geting free points. That is why I liked ideas of halving orc casualties or giving both orcs and their enemies unbrekable. That way they could win by attrition, which is something that only dwarfs can do right now due to ridicioules amounts of armor and not taking casualties in effect. This would enable orcs to take casualties but do not care that much about them.

    Best regards
    Sklodo
    Best regards
    Sklodo

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

    Neither Lethal Strike nor LD 10 fits to my image of Orcs.

    Can we find something that more shows raw aggression and unruliness as well as total ignorance of life?
    Hmm. I had thought lethal strike was a good option as it was fairly neutral. In the quest for simplicity I thought using a pre existing rule would be the way to go and something to offset the S3 in a close combat unit would be good. Flavour-wise I had thought this rule to be fairly neutral - just a great big blow that kills someone instantly, smashing through armour. I also wanted an AWSR that, again for simplicity, could work for characters as well as R+F troops.

    For the Ld 10 - I think that I kind of agree. Ld measures more than just the likelyhood of running away. The unruly panic boost was actually pretty good for narrower hordes. I could see that making a difference. I do think that something needs to be done regarding breaking from combat too easily. Not sure what the right answer is.

    As for why 7 wide rather than 8 - simply because this gives a bit of a narrower frontage whilst still feeling like a Big-Bum Wide Unit.