Balance and Design Patch Ogre Khan Feedback - Please Read First Post!

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

  • Balance and Design Patch Ogre Khan Feedback - Please Read First Post!

    Hello Ogre Khan Community!

    This is the first of two threads for collecting feedback from the community for this year’s Balance and Design Patch. We are collecting information about what fixes are needed for the Ogre Khans, from both the community of faction-players and the community at large.

    What are we looking for?
    • Which units or items or special rules just “don’t work” and will “never work” no matter how cheap they will become;
    • This can include such things as Hereditary Spells (such as with BH) which likely won’t be helped by a lower casting value;
    • We are not looking for things like Thyroscutus, which after several point drops did see usage.
    • Please identify issues only, this stage is not for suggesting solutions.
    Here are the rules:
    • One (1) post per person. That post can be edited;
    • Absolutely no discussion in this thread (any discussion will be deleted); please use the General Discussion thread for any comments;
    • Propose max. 3 issues.
    Please remember, this is a thread ONLY for people playing the army. Your posts may be curated. There is another thread (found here) for players not playing the army. Only post once in both. Feel invited to also post in other armies threads for nonplayers of that army.

    This thread will stay open as long as necessary, as determined by the ACS, who will distill the suggestions into a list. RT will then take this list to a set number of issues and add redesigns to lower highly complex units/items/special rules.

    Please use the following format:

    Suggestion/Item or Entry in Question
    Non-point based change
    Rationale:

    Display Spoiler
    A short 1-2 sentence explanation, or bullet points about why you think this entry is a problem.

    OK Community Support

    VC Community Support

    Vision Team


    Active Armies: OK, VC
    Inactive Armies: HE, OnG

    I had such high hopes for you.” - Alex Trebek

    The post was edited 4 times, last by Lakonas ().

  • Entry - Scrapling Trappers
    Problem - Dont fulfil their role (they need 10 march for this imo) and their special rule is very long and convoluted.
    Points can't fix? - Nope, already cheapest entry in the book


    Entry - Thunder Cannons
    Problem - Usually hit on 5+ or 6+. To hit on 4s often means you cant move them and probably getting charged next turn cause of it. Also no swiftstride is bad.
    Points can't fix? - Would have to be much cheaper and that wouldnt make any sense.


    Entry - Bombardiers
    Problem - Usually hit on 6+ or maybe 5+ for one turn before getting charged (plus no spells or character/item abilities in the book to improve this). Cover is what really kills this unit for me. They're human cannons what they shoot with, so maybe ignore cover like those cannons?
    Points can't fix? - Already decently priced imo.


    Entry - Tusker mount option
    Problem - It adds very little to being on foot, in some cases its actually worse.
    Points can't fix? - imo it would have to almost free to be worth it. Ideally they should be allowed to join Tusker Cav units (but only them, and current max 1 hunter per unit stays), and the mount should be something like a Great Tusker, with 1 extra attack, 1 more offensive, and march 16.
    "Please don't touch the Ogre Khans slim book."

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

  • entry - shaman:
    Problem: nearly all lists use single shaman master as other magic options are too expansive.
    Can points fix this : maybe yes, but project seemed to move the other way last update
    Can a new design fix this: also yes (via discount for second mage or weaker mage profile on apprentice/adept (see gobbos where master has a wound extra compared to others)
    :OK: :O&G: :HE:

    the destroyer of friendship, the harbinger of thrown coffee cups and the mother of all game disputes: line of sight
  • Entry - Tusker Mount
    Problem: Adds very little to the Mammoth Hunter riding him and reduces options of where to put him
    Can points fix this: Already very cheap and very rarely taken, even in fluffy lists.
    Can a new design fix this: Yes - allow him to join units
  • 1) scraplaunchers
    they still get the letal strike attribute even when miss. Makes the unit far more reliable and cost effective while staying near its competitors price from other books, even immovable and squishy ones

    2) I havent seen any yetties nor that one ambush counterpart since the very start of t9a. they look to me like not the most obvious choice because of that

    3) mercs with poison pistol aren't contendent for like a decade now

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Danila ().

  • Rock auroch mount option for hunter - a monster with a pricy hero who kills chempions using s7 ap4 impacts.

    Ritual bliodletter - if it does not work with impacts it will never be taken. Shamans mainly can kill chaff, and they do by impacting with the rest of unit.


    Hoardmaster - if you take it you want a fighty character, so you will enchant a weapon, so you just payed 50pta for plate armour+1 weapon of choice.

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

    • Hereditary Spell:
    The boosted version is pretty useless, it needs a design change to make it more valuable.

    • Tuskers:
    Make them 2-5 models, simple change that would make them more versatile (lower price + smaller unit boundary)

    • Mounts in general:
    Give OK characters more mounts to play with and make them able to join units (tuskers for exemple)

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

    1. weak magic, often it is one shaman, there are no other sources, and the second shaman is very expensive
    2. scraplings do not compete with other core units, weak compared to similar infantry of other armies
    3. Yetis need improvement. Can points fix this : maybe yes, but I think it would be better to give them another rule (5+ regen or hatred)
  • A quick reminder to post your 3 ideas here before September. Also, if you have friends who play Ogre Khans who don't regularly post on the forums, please direct them to this thread. The more feedback we get the better!

    OK Community Support

    VC Community Support

    Vision Team


    Active Armies: OK, VC
    Inactive Armies: HE, OnG

    I had such high hopes for you.” - Alex Trebek
  • 1. Give the tusker mount a purpose other than just plus 1 move and fear. Reroll impact hits and stomps maybe. Otherwise it will just keep going down in cost until it's nearly free which is a goofy thing to see.

    2. That's.. it? OK are a pretty good book. Some other folks don't like ritual bloodletter but it's not expensive... and if you're lucky the effect is massive. 1 veil per wound is crazy good.

    Edit - maybe battlescarred. Some entries are just better than others. Either make it selectable before the game (like the herald) or put a price to each one.
  • 1) Tusker mount: same reasons as others have posted

    2) Tusker Cavalry: this is more of a feeling issue than a balance issue. They don't feel like 50x100mm cavalry. We had discussions in Brainstorm thread that they should at least get 'Tall' (already tall) and probably and extra wound so they look the part of big 50x100mm cavalry.

    3) scrapling trappers: i think points drop can make the unit work. But if it cant go any lower than its a problem with movement because the sabertooth tiger does the same role with much better movement.

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

  • 1) Mount options for our chars besides Hunter.

    Why do we not have even a single one? Because of legacy reasons? That sucks. (Special)Tusker (Remember the old WD Suppliment models?) or an Scrapling-Palanquin (Greasus is still a very nice model)

    2) Non-shooting Mercs

    As mentioned before, they see no play at all. Easiest solution would be if they are not equipped with pistols, they can select 3 battle scares.

    3) Hoardmaster

    Worthless? Can get a 4+/4+ for 70p and can take a magical weapon. Can get a 2+ for 50p and can take a magical weapon. If we would be able to combine with a mount to reach 2+ with weaponmaster, fine. But not like it is right now.
  • Zwei wrote:

    1) Mount options for our chars besides Hunter.

    Why do we not have even a single one? Because of legacy reasons? That sucks. (Special)Tusker (Remember the old WD Suppliment models?) or an Scrapling-Palanquin (Greasus is still a very nice model)



    2) Hoardmaster

    Worthless? Can get a 4+/4+ for 70p and can take a magical weapon. Can get a 2+ for 50p and can take a magical weapon. If we would be able to combine with a mount to reach 2+ with weaponmaster, fine. But not like it is right now.

    I quote these two and add:

    3) Shaman: never seen more than one in any list. Just to expensive. Maybe a weaker version on adept (-1t, -1 os/ds and ld) could be great!
  • 1) I agree with all said regarding tusker mount. It cannot be solved just by point adjustment, because it already costs less than some races pay for simple horse which is funny. Ability to join tuskers would be great but tusker star with lygur's tongue or two magic banners could be too powerful. Simply stronger mounted cowboy would be also great, but anyway this guy needs role and some love

    2) Bombardiers. One of few units in game which additional models cost more than initial ones. Their fire potential is questionable but possibility to split fire while costing less imo kills big blocks of this gun guys. If that was done because of possible flaming swords buff - it doesn't work because -1t from more popular tauma does more or less the same but works for any number of shooting units. Additional models should drop in price. A cheaper version with ogre crossbows would also be nice.

    I tried to think of more issues but honestly i want to say that you guys did great job of internal balance. Every unit has its role and is playable. I like variety of playstyles this book provides while overall performing really well competitively.