Do people want to change O&G?

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

The website will be under maintenance this weekend (May 25st - May 27th), starting around 18:00 CET
During this time, the forum will be unavailable and downloading the rules will not be possible.
Though we will proceed as fast as possible, we are not sure yet how long the forum will remain out of reach. We might push info on Twitter if it takes more time than expected.

  • Do people want to change O&G?

    Hi all,

    Recently i though about what is happening on our green forum and I see kind of 2 factions here.
    1) People who are discontent with current state of O&G, think they are unflyffy and want some radical changes/upgrades/buffs/reworks and/or even redesing of significant concepts of our AB. Many of those are quitting or saying they will quit O&G with considerable frustration.
    2) People who want only some minor changes and rebalancings but basically want to stay things more or less as they are, saying that army is basically ok as is and discontent on suggestion of any bigger change and blocking imiedietly any idea of buff to the army.

    This is my feeling so I might be wrong. But do you guys have same feeling?

    I am persoinally in discontent part :/.

    If it is so is there a way you can think of a way to make both sides happy or at least not angry/quitting/discontent? Or maby my feeling is wron and we are all on the same side?

    Best regards
    Sklodo
    Best regards
    Sklodo

    Retireing for unspecyfied period of time. Sometime I hate the world.
  • i think we are all on the side more or less but some people want more strong buffs and other smaller buffs because they Fear that the strong ones won't happen or with a penalty on the other side.

    Im more the guy who Wants buff but suggest nerf's for the buff.


    To have some kinda Balanced Suggestions some which are not op or could create hard point increases.


    But the other thing is that some people want Orcs cheap and hordy

    And some Wants them more Elite ( and pricy -pricy)

    W/o a clear Route, we will have some issues in the Playerbase.

    For i, i See Orcs more Elite then goblins and humans but not so Elite like Saurian Warriors or Warriors of the Dark Gods.

    Orcs should give a good fight with a good amount of bodies but should out fight humans and Vermin swarm units with the same amount of models. Maybe with 25% more models on the enemy side.

    Born to fight represent this rule only for one round of combat ( first round) and then wore off. It should give Another Bonus instead of +1 s ( the +1 s should be Auto included in the Basic Profile)
    The Term Born to fight means for me, that the Unit is so in Trance while fighting that it gains stubborn til the Moment in got bashed by Another opp. Something like that. An effect that wears off after it loose similiar to the old btf.


    Orcs should be meatbags with a good counter punch in every round.

    The idea of warcries is good maybe we can divide it into smaller war shouts for unit Champions and larger war cries for Heroes

    And then there should be the mighty waaargh! Cry.


    Something like the Totem System from the Beast herds.
    But instead of Magic you activate them through a ld test? Or something else?
    Just not to copy Paste something from a different Book.
    German VS Player from near Herford :) But playin nearly all armies :)

    Playtester

  • I want the army to have a massive shake up. I have played since 4th edition when things were very different. When only the front rank could fight and if they were killed first that round they couldn't fight back. If you put down 5 wounds that was pretty good. Now you can see units slaying over 10 rank and file so they use the steadfast mechanic to counter it. It means though that elite troops rule supreme and most armies will consider core to be a tax as they aren't effective against much. The power band is very large now to the point where bunkering as many points as you can is an effective tool to winning and at worst drawing.

    In 7th edition in tournaments (Australia) they tried to address balance with points. Some armies stayed at 2400, sone were deducted 300 points (demons), some were given an extra 300 points, and the Orc and goblins a massive 600 (side note, Matt Ward wrote both the demons and O&G books, and he should never have been allowed near any rules writing department). They still sucked and were still not seen towards the top tables. 8th I didn't even play them after so many years and went chaos dwarves.

    There is an underlying idea it seems amongst warhammer players that orcs and goblins should be a bit funny, a bit clumsy, and if something good happens a reason to cheer. The culture is that orcs and goblins should be always relegated to the bottom tier. Removing Animosity was a revelation that made being competitive finally a reality, and yet some people were saying that it should have stayed. Why? Even chaos used to have animosity between the different deamon types, but that was dropped early and nobody even remembers that now. We had the whole dwarf race hate us for free. Goblins used to also fear elves for fluff reasons that made no sense!!

    If it wasn't for orcs and goblins being in so many starter box sets (4th, 6th and 7th) I'm pretty sure most people wouldn't have considered them. Like the giant rules which havent changed since 4th it's time they were shown a new lease of life and taken seriously for the first time in 20 years. Their time is due.

    Without a ground up rebuild they will dry up, no new players will take them on when their best rule pales in comparison to a lot of other armies.
  • O&G are going to change. Some will think it's too much, some will think it's not enough. It's an outlier army, along with some others like VC, OK, UD, and ID. It's harder to make it fit within the framework of the BRB because of that, but I can assure you people are trying to make this book the best it can be. There is a lot of love for this army in the game designers and background folks.

    Your input is heard, but it's easier to hear if it's positive, focused, fair minded, and presented without hyperbole. As I said before, I'm not a forum cop, but I should also tell you that I stop following threads when they turn into arguments and/or endless complaint rants. I'm a volunteer, and I already spend way too much time on this. I simply don't have time to scroll through walls of text that contain little or no new content. Communication is two way, you should think about how the listener responds as well as how you want to present.

    Again, up to you. I won't be back to this thread. You can try to get the other ACS attention this way, I cannot speak for them, but it doesn't work for me.

    O&G Community Support


    "I see you are a man who likes to talk. That is good, for I am a man who likes talking to a man who likes to talk." - Caspar Gutman
  • Personally I think this is a good idea for a thread even if it is not read by the staff team. At least we will understand a bit more about each other's views.

    In answer to the main question "would I like to see change?" the answer would be yes but I do not believe the doom and gloom that surrounds a lot of the threads about how bad we currently are. In terms of statistics we seem to slightly underperform in singles and slightly over perform in team events. I only play singles so would like to see a boost but so does every sub forum I suspect and I don't want this to result in power creep as every race claims they are underpowered and demands constantly more powerful troops. We do need at the very least to sort out some internal balance issues though, which in itself would be a buff as long as the bits that are working well currently are not nerfed.

    I think our army should primarily be a mixed arms horde army. So hordes of shooting, hordes of chaff, hordes of combat troops, war machines, characters etc. I'm sure it is frustrating when people like me argue against S4 2A basic orcs with hatred and various other buffs but this is not through a desire to prevent change, but it would result in caps on unit size, high points per model and a move away from horde armies. The kind of buffs I want to see are those that make hordes more viable, so advantages for big units, reduced frontage for "horde" formations, fight in extra rank bonuses etc. That is not to say that we shouldn't also have semi elite troops but I don't think we should be competing for the best elites, or the best characters, or the best war machines, we should be competing for the best hordes.

    The other thing which often holds me back from being more pro change, is when the justification for change is presented in such a exaggerated fashion that it is just ridiculous e.g. unit x is complete junk, if I play against this army I auto lose, this character dies 90% of the time. I've played with most of the options in our book and most of them are perfectly usable, maybe not optimal, but certainly usable. We need to be rational in our arguements and I suspect they would be taken a lot more seriously.
  • I think OnG is at about the most fun and balanced it has ever been. I wouldn't want to make fundamental changes to it from here. I am all for small boosts to units that need them but I wouldn't want to make any new power units that define the faction. All the units that ARE strong enough at the moment are those units that I love. I wouldn't trade a weaker Gargantuala for stronger orcs or accept shorter range on goblin bows for better characters. This won't happen for small changes in power but big buffs wouldn't just diversify the army and fix internal balance but would make it overall stronger. Stronger by more than a small amount would invite nerfs elsewhere which is my bigger concern.

    There is also a difference between not making changes and wanting different changes to the ones you want. I want buffs to goblin sneakyness and subterfuge, I want more options on how to customise characters. I also want changes made slowly and cautiously.

    There are fundemental difference between the way people see armies as well. For me, the big aspect is to play a Jack of All Trades army. The problem is that we are a jack of some trades armies and need that broader coverage.

    I think that we have different concerns as well as we have other concerns. I play BH for example, I am especially keen to avoid OnG having too strong an overlap with this army - very keen to ensure that we find our own path. This is a reason why I would reject many suggestions that close this gap too much.

    I also think it is wrong to say that ideas are dismissed immediately. Very often the same tired ideas come back again and again. They have been mulled over for a long time. The ideas that are dismissed are often dismissed after a lot of debate and sharing of views. They are not dismissed out of haste.
  • I'm for change. Specifically in the mele and horde side. The statics might show that orcs aren't that lame. IMHO, the list show otherwise.

    The army has become one of the best gunlines ot there, and this disgusts me. My view of orcs is the green tide, a force of reckoning. Not the persians of 300 with limitless arrows.

    Personally I'm at the buffwagon side, wit the orc/eadbasher merge (WS3 S4 BtF), some kind of buff to comon orc (AP1 maybe... It is ridicullous than common orcs with metal weapons hit like savage orcs with bones and wood) and some buff to characters too.

    Oh, and redesign of 90% of magical items.
  • I've played OnG since 2004, and I have to say they are in a better place than they were in 8th, but they do need some work, maybe be a bit more focus.

    My biggest annoyance when playing them in 9th is Trolls, so rarely do they do anything, because there stupid you can rarely get them were you want and when you do get them into combat they normally die by the combat res.

    That one thing aside, i think OnG work best with stuff like the born to fight rule, so i want things more like that, in core stats there mostly fine (although the universal low Initiative can be annoying).I would also like a reason to take a unit of vanilla goblins with spears, most of the time its night goblin bowmen with fanatics or go home.

    So basically give us buff by way of cool new rules/abilities, and rethink any unit that people just front take.
  • My idea of an orc army is say a unit of say 25 black orcs or ead bashers flanked by several big horde units of common orcs. On the sides boar boys, giants and trolls. The orcs don't have to be super powerfulI, in fact their stat line is fine by me, but their numbers should count. At the head a fearsome warboss and a bosses to maintain order. If the army worked without a single goblin I'd be thrilled with that. A tough sea of green that grinds home or goes home.

    Personally I've never liked really mixed race armies. 2 or 3 types max is what I prefer. Armies with all three goblin types and at least 2 orc types always seemed weird to me and incoherent. Like a fractured confused force that lost an identity of how it plays.

    When they introduced ogre kingdoms and beast herds they instantly created 2 armies that encroached on the way an orc and goblin were supposed to play. They're not going to change which is great, but we now need our own style back.

    Night goblin themed armies worked because they were the most complete. I would just like to see orc armies work the same way with their own distinct style that separates them from beasts and ogres.

    This does include our own magic and magic items back as well.
  • I actually think each orc and goblin unit in isolation are well though out and balanced on the whole. There are unit types in the game which don't impress me like some skaven units with excessive special rules each and since when did dwarves get so quick!!!

    I think items like lances if they could strike first would instantly fix boar boys. And shields deflecting half of a warbosses or greater demons attacks is just wrong. The 4+ to be hit seems wrong if you're getting hit by a force that would smash that shield to bits.

    It just feels like our army got left behind, and bandaided up each new edition.
  • @sgu97bjd summarized very well my opinion. I'd like to add that I'm open to consider big changes where the background is very different from GW's, if it makes things better. There is more than one good way to make the army evolve.
    As long as the changes are reasonably balanced, gives us a unique identity and finds a use for > 99% of miniature collections out there, I am open to any idea, even those which go against my current vision of the army.
    The core issue with O&G subforum discussions is found in two things: a) different preferences as to what aspect we should most emphasize (different visions) and b) communication (exaggeration on one side, excitement killing on the other). We have to overcome that and promote both positivity and reasonable arguments to make this forum a better place to be in.
  • I think the normal Orc powerlevel should be somewhere between Beast Herd Wildhorn and EoS Heavy Infantry. Their main role is tarpit, chaff, archer, shaman bodyguard. Being only slightly more expensive than Goblins, but with slightly more power and durability. I think the current Orc unit is rather good at this. It needs only a small price reduction and its fine.

    But like Dwarfs, Orcs should as well have those Core-Elite unit (let us call them Eadbashers for a while until we find a better name), more expensive than normal Orcs but with more close combat power. Those are not archers, not shaman bunkers. With their power somewhere between Longhorn and Imperial Guard, they are helpful but still cheap infantry. In this role, they need higher model count and removal of unit number limitation.

    Iron Orcs should be our strongest and most expensive infantry, with a power level above Longhorns, but still weaker than Wasteland Warriors.

    Goblins should be weak, but not as cheap as some people want. I would like to make the gap between Orcs and Goblins slightly smaller. Goblins could get some close combat buff of any strange kind, as long as it fits background wise. Bonus to initiative, bonus to movement, bonus on flank attacking, something that is helpful and makes sense.

    Our Warrior Characters should be strong. Not as storng as WdG Lords, but stronger than Dwarven and Elven Lords. The gap between our normal soldiers and our characters can be large to achieve this. Especially Goblin Characters I would buff. They can be real badasses with nasty tricks, symbolized by some kind of special rule tbd. They can be more expensivethan now. Maybe they are only good in their units, when they feel strong and superior. Alone they suck maybe. Goblin characters power level should be somewhere between Elven Lord and Human Lord.

    The prices for our units should be low enough to make people play all units availible, but not to create any must-haves. Do not look to closely to other factions and their prices. Direct comparisons of prices between armies are difficult, because each army has different circumstances in how units can be used. Prices for exactly the same unit could be different in different armies, and this could be good.

    Our shooting with bows should be limited via some own category, I think. Don't misunderstand me, I think OnG should definitively not be a pure close combat army. Bows should be a fundamental part of our concept, either playing Orcs or Goblins or both. But atm bows are too much, too unlimited bows. We need a limit somewhere at maybe 60 bows per army.
    My Proposals for : O&G Religion
  • Shimsham wrote:

    My idea of an orc army is say a unit of say 25 black orcs or ead bashers flanked by several big horde units of common orcs. On the sides boar boys, giants and trolls. The orcs don't have to be super powerfulI, in fact their stat line is fine by me, but their numbers should count. At the head a fearsome warboss and a bosses to maintain order. If the army worked without a single goblin I'd be thrilled with that. A tough sea of green that grinds home or goes home.

    Personally I've never liked really mixed race armies. 2 or 3 types max is what I prefer. Armies with all three goblin types and at least 2 orc types always seemed weird to me and incoherent. Like a fractured confused force that lost an identity of how it plays.

    When they introduced ogre kingdoms and beast herds they instantly created 2 armies that encroached on the way an orc and goblin were supposed to play. They're not going to change which is great, but we now need our own style back.

    Night goblin themed armies worked because they were the most complete. I would just like to see orc armies work the same way with their own distinct style that separates them from beasts and ogres.

    This does include our own magic and magic items back as well.
    I really have to agree, and with Shlagrabak too, it would be good to see, the other sub races of green get some more flavor and play style.
    The two sides that people talk about i think would be united if we had a changed list, i think that its just such an iconic army that some people have so much memory of that they are afraid to lose that.

    I think though if we make the sure that all the sub factions can function as mini armies in there own right, and makes sure there is a reason we would want to pick each one, i think it would solve the problem for the feel of the army. So you would have a reason ( at tournament competitive reason) you would want to run an army of mostly common goblins or common Orcs donst have to be super competitive just at least so its not useless.

    We have a big opportunity when the new version of 9th comes out as well, with WS split into two, we have more to play with for our stats, perhaps Orcs can get a big OS (offensive skill) buff to make them more competitive etc. We just need some new life and imagination into the Green Tide!
  • arwaker wrote:

    Now that WdG lost Troll, we are the omnly ones left with them. Why not make them part of the Greenhide Race? Trolls yre yours the clumsy stupid cousins of Orcs. They eat everything lying around, therefore they get the coor of the landscape they live in.
    Hmm That's true. It would fit and it would please me immensely.

    It might surprise no one that I would love a Troll King in our army.
  • Throgg wrote:

    arwaker wrote:

    Now that WdG lost Troll, we are the omnly ones left with them. Why not make them part of the Greenhide Race? Trolls yre yours the clumsy stupid cousins of Orcs. They eat everything lying around, therefore they get the coor of the landscape they live in.
    Hmm That's true. It would fit and it would please me immensely.
    It might surprise no one that I would love a Troll King in our army.


    OMG the WdG have lost their trolls ooo, well i have to Agree this means OnG should take the poor things in, a Troll character would be a nice fit to show this. But again Trolls need to be more playable a troll Character could perhaps babysit them better than the orcs can.
  • My argument for O&G is that we should be a mix of really powerful base stats and crazy special rules.

    Point for point Orcs should have one of the best stat lines. However this is balanced by having no synergy outside of magic. A 300 point orc unit should punch the teeth in of a 300 point Halberd unit, however if those Halberd have distracting, lightning reflexes, and hatred...they should kick the orcs teeth in.

    With the offense/defense split orcs should have good offense and bad defense, probably a 4\2 spread. This should create an army that hits like a ton of bricks bit whose only real defense is a middling toughness. We kill but we also die.

    Orcs should have few or any special rules. This includes dropping Born to Fight with Waaaaargh!!! Really being the only special rule applying to Orcs.

    To compensate for no special rules Orcs should have a good spread of special weapons. Including paired weapons, halberd, and potentially great weapons (unsure aboit the last one).

    Orcs 20 models for 140 14ppm after
    Offense 4
    Defense 2
    Strength 4
    Toughness 4
    Initiative 2
    Attacks 2
    Leadership 7

    Equipment:
    Light armor

    Weapon options:
    Halberd 4ppm
    Paired weapon 2ppm
    Spear 2ppm
    Shield 2ppm

    Goblins are mostly fine as is. Prolly radical redesign of forest gobbos but that is about it.