The first and largest home of the Ogre Kingdoms — preserved.
Filter by date range
Standalone from the search box above — this queries Pagefind
directly and checks each result's date itself, since the packaged search
widget can only match a single exact date, not a range.
Interesting changes coming to 40K, seems they want you to be able to field almost any kind of army you like. Wonder if this'll carry over to the next edition of Fantasy too?
Jimmy06 May 2014
Very interesting. Will be good to see how the community has reacted to it in a few months time when the dust settles. Would that be 7th edition then?
"Nec sorte nec fato"
Ogre Battles!
Tactica: Sabretusks Tactica: Gnoblars
DrunkenAussie06 May 2014
These new rules are just going to increase the powerlevels of the already powerful armies. For example you will be able to field 8 riptide. But from what I can tell the psychic powers are more like the magic phase of fantasy
Ogres, cause whats better than livin in the snow and drinking
Gutlord Inquisitor06 May 2014
Well there were some rumours a while back about fantasy having something similar. Several "levels" of choice with how you build your army. Even if those rumours were made up, it seems to have hit the target with how 40K has been going. I can well imagine that WFB will go in a similar direction. You can choose to use the % system or throw it out the window. What's odd about this is it seems to provide bonuses to the FOC style of play so one player can bring anything and the other player a FOC. I doubt it'll actually work to balance the game but it'll be interesting to see what they've come up with.
DrunkenAussie06 May 2014
This % system will stop certain thing from being spammed but is unlikely to nerf the armies that could use a nerf, namely Tau crisis suit spam and Eldar serpent spam
Ogres, cause whats better than livin in the snow and drinking
Sazel06 May 2014
Didn't 40k just get updated like, last year? Why so soon with a new edition? or is this more of a "6.5" ruling?
I think this whole "unbound armies" shtick's a good way to encourage people to buy more mini's, because then you can just cherry-pick the best models from every army book/codex and then be unstoppable. Hopefully there will be penalties for doing this (like minuses to leadership or lack of "command" or something weird, idk much about 40k lol).
I hope they don't do this to Fantasy. I'm sure that if they did, though, I'd still play, but I'd feel like I'd be missing out if I didn't dump more money into the company... Although, having a Nurgle DP hanging out with my Ogres would be fun
33 Gnobs! Over 3 Packs of Trappers! Woot! Gibblet, Nibblet, Crunchybit (from Slaughtermaster achievement)
New book WLD: 20/10/2 - Yay tourney wins and random game win!
MasteroDisaster06 May 2014
So 40k will have the option to throw force organisation out the window?
I didn't think the game could sink any lower! I really hope this isn't implemented into WHFB because it'll basically kill the game for me altogether.
just-josh06 May 2014
So 40k will have the option to throw force organisation out the window?
I didn't think the game could sink any lower! I really hope this isn't implemented into WHFB because it'll basically kill the game for me altogether.
Agreed! I have spent most of the day browsing the various forums, and seeing not only people's opinions on this, but the frankly ludicrous lists that will now be possible... Whose up for a tooled up Commander and 8 Riptides? Or Fateweaver and 187 Horrors? Or maybe a Chaos Terminator Lord and 27 Obliterators? It's just plain ridiculous.
If Fantasy were to go this way, that would be my cue to step away from it. Not because of the lunacy (because on the face of it, I quite like the concept and can get behind it to a certain extent from a canon perspective!), but because of the motive behind it...
JJ
Resident Smiley Spam Artist and Fastest Fingers in the Stronghold.
Raising the forum's smiley count, one post at a time, since 2008
Quote from: Shadowlord on Mar 11, 2013, 01:57:18 PM
After all, painting 100 night goblins is something you do in the morning just before you are off to work.
And I think you missed a 0 when you wrote 11 armies. The correct nr should be 110 armies I would think, based on your painting speed.
Gnoblar_Herder06 May 2014
Ah, *sigh* and this is exactly why I have jacked in playing 40k. What a ludicrous mess.
And I thought the new rule book only came out about 18 months ago...a new one so soon? Obviously the current 40k book doesn't centre on the buying of huge numbers of models enough.
G_H
Gutlord Inquisitor06 May 2014
So 40k will have the option to throw force organisation out the window?
I didn't think the game could sink any lower! I really hope this isn't implemented into WHFB because it'll basically kill the game for me altogether.
Agreed! I have spent most of the day browsing the various forums, and seeing not only people's opinions on this, but the frankly ludicrous lists that will now be possible... Whose up for a tooled up Commander and 8 Riptides? Or Fateweaver and 187 Horrors? Or maybe a Chaos Terminator Lord and 27 Obliterators? It's just plain ridiculous.
If Fantasy were to go this way, that would be my cue to step away from it. Not because of the lunacy (because on the face of it, I quite like the concept and can get behind it to a certain extent from a canon perspective!), but because of the motive behind it...
JJ
Thing is, most people will adopt for pick-up-games whatever the tournaments use. I doubt either for 40K or WFB unbound armies - whatever the alluded-to advantages to FOC armies turn out to be - can possibly be considered balanced enough for competitive play. So tournaments will stick to battle-forged play and this will trickle down to most games.
After all, Apocalypse and Storm of Magic throw open the possibilities but this isn't a major issue as most games stick to the normal format and if you agree to one of these games you know what you're getting into.
The only wrinkle is that if this is presented as "default" way of playing - like allies - then people will expect to play that way even at tournaments but I think there will be enough of a push-back on this that we won't see it being a common way of playing. Of course I said the same thing about allies in 40K when the 6th ed rumours came out so what do I know?
MasteroDisaster07 May 2014
So 40k will have the option to throw force organisation out the window?
I didn't think the game could sink any lower! I really hope this isn't implemented into WHFB because it'll basically kill the game for me altogether.
Agreed! I have spent most of the day browsing the various forums, and seeing not only people's opinions on this, but the frankly ludicrous lists that will now be possible... Whose up for a tooled up Commander and 8 Riptides? Or Fateweaver and 187 Horrors? Or maybe a Chaos Terminator Lord and 27 Obliterators? It's just plain ridiculous.
If Fantasy were to go this way, that would be my cue to step away from it. Not because of the lunacy (because on the face of it, I quite like the concept and can get behind it to a certain extent from a canon perspective!), but because of the motive behind it...
JJ
6 Obliterators and 10 Helldrakes... Nuff said?
Necrotix07 May 2014
So 40k will have the option to throw force organisation out the window?
I didn't think the game could sink any lower! I really hope this isn't implemented into WHFB because it'll basically kill the game for me altogether.
Agreed! I have spent most of the day browsing the various forums, and seeing not only people's opinions on this, but the frankly ludicrous lists that will now be possible... Whose up for a tooled up Commander and 8 Riptides? Or Fateweaver and 187 Horrors? Or maybe a Chaos Terminator Lord and 27 Obliterators? It's just plain ridiculous.
If Fantasy were to go this way, that would be my cue to step away from it. Not because of the lunacy (because on the face of it, I quite like the concept and can get behind it to a certain extent from a canon perspective!), but because of the motive behind it...
JJ
Thing is, most people will adopt for pick-up-games whatever the tournaments use. I doubt either for 40K or WFB unbound armies - whatever the alluded-to advantages to FOC armies turn out to be - can possibly be considered balanced enough for competitive play. So tournaments will stick to battle-forged play and this will trickle down to most games.
After all, Apocalypse and Storm of Magic throw open the possibilities but this isn't a major issue as most games stick to the normal format and if you agree to one of these games you know what you're getting into.
The only wrinkle is that if this is presented as "default" way of playing - like allies - then people will expect to play that way even at tournaments but I think there will be enough of a push-back on this that we won't see it being a common way of playing. Of course I said the same thing about allies in 40K when the 6th ed rumours came out so what do I know?
^ emphasis added
Herein lies the problem. GW don't give any consideration to competitive play. They want you to buy the models, so allowing you to play with whatever the hell you want makes perfect sense from a marketing point of view. I've already given up on Fantasy, this has just made my decision to leave 40k much easier. GW and me are done.
8th Edition New book Win Rate 4-1-0 8th Edition Old book Win Rate 3-0-0
Best Hellheart Result - 3 Dead Vampires + change
MasteroDisaster07 May 2014
I've already given up on Fantasy, this has just made my decision to leave 40k much easier. GW and me are done.
It's sad to hear that, unfortunately I'm not too far behind you at the moment. For me 40k started dying during 5th ed with the mechanized madness that was going on. From then onwards 6th killed it good. I just REALLY hope WHFB doesn't go in a similar direction. Hopefully GW wont give me a reason to walk away from their games completely.
Necrotix07 May 2014
It is sad. This is a company I've been playing games from for over 20 years, it breeds a kind of perverse brand loyalty as they started me off in gaming. However, the company as it is now is such a far cry from what it was in the early to mid 90's (my golden era if you like) I can't and won't support them any more. Plus, the shelf space I'll reclaim will certainly bag some serious wife points. Rather than 1-2 games per session with my friends I'll be able to play so much more with the competition being so huge now.
8th Edition New book Win Rate 4-1-0 8th Edition Old book Win Rate 3-0-0
Best Hellheart Result - 3 Dead Vampires + change
Jimmy09 May 2014
I see the new rules as an opportunity to bang out some tiny games with my brother as we left the game back in 4th edition due to frustration. Could be good times up ahead but keep in mind we're certainly not tournament minded players, very much focused on the 'garage' hammer.
"Nec sorte nec fato"
Ogre Battles!
Tactica: Sabretusks Tactica: Gnoblars
Belchfist Beastkiller09 May 2014
I'm seeing things similarly to Jimmy here. I know the game needs to remain balanced, but this allows for fantastic scenario based games and things that would in all likelihood happen in the 40k universe at some point, somewhere.
Not only that, but these 'incredible' lists we see of just the best units actually have a major downs that I believe we're ignoring due to the potential threat of such lists. Most of these units have an inherent weakness: either their very unit type limiting their effectiveness in game regarding objectives (particularly if objectives are constantly changing and unpredictable due to the new rules, meaning players will quickly grow tired of obliterating the enemy but still losing). It is these inherent and inevitable weaknesses that an army full of option will exploit and eventually overcome.
Show me an army of 6 Obliterators and 10 Heldrakes that can take and hold multiple objectives against a skilled opponent or protect a hostage etc. It is possible, but should provide an interesting arguably intuitive new twist rather than shatter the game dynamic.
It will also make the game more accessible I believe which is their intention. If you love dreadnoughts but hate painting marines, your enthusiasm will soon wane when you have to paint loads of marines to field your favourite models.
My favourite ever WF battle report was an entire army of Empire against something like 9 solo characters from the Warriors of Chaos book. Amazing theme and story throughout. I believe the Empire won't that even though they were all killer builds...
Belchfist Beastkiller Mountaineater the Everhungry
Warriors of Chaos (Tzeentch mostly) http://www.ogrestronghold.com/forum/index.php?topic=25064.0
Daemons http://www.ogrestronghold.com/forum/index.php?topic=9274.0 Ghark Ironskin and tribe http://www.ogrestronghold.com/forum/index.php?topic=8002.0
Hragged11 May 2014
1. 4ed consolidate in to combat is in 2. If you fail to cast a power you can't cast it the rest of the game 3. Every unit including vehicles will now score 4. Unbound armies may not contest objectives 5. Lords of war are in 6. Escalation and stronghold remain as they are now 7. Vehicles will be harder to kill the chart changes once more. 8. The book will come out in 3 options Art like warhammer visions, Fluff book, and one that only contains rules and that one is about as think as the current SM book. 9.difficult terrain is just -2 inches 10. Wound allocation has changed a bit.not super clear as to how. 11. D-weapons toned down but he was unclear as what that meant so from the sounds of it they will still be super ugly. --
Blue Sun Ogres http://www.ogrestronghold.com/forum/index.php?topic=9188.0
Chuck Norris was the fourth wise man and gave Jesus his favorite gift, a beard. The other wise men were so hacked off, they got Chuck Norris removed from the bible. Mysteriously, they all later died of Roundhouse kick related injuries.
Loran13 May 2014
I heard this unbound stuff described as cool, as you can now field any model you want!!! So there's no reason why not to love this new thing!
While it does sound groovy, but it won't remain balanced. However, I am with Belchfist here. I probably won't be playing the unbound games that often, but it does give the opportunity to play fun scenarios
I will reserve judgement until I've read the rules, but this is not necessarily a completely bad thing. A money-grabbing scheme, probably, but we've gone through that discussion a couple of times already
- Loran
<+Hyarion> "Loran may cause addiction to mindless online games"
Quote from: just-josh on Feb 19, 2014, 03:32:28 PM
You seem to be challenging me for the title of Smiley Overlord with all your smileys
Gutlord Inquisitor13 May 2014
Well I assume some major advantages to bound armies. If unbound armies can't take objectives without taking regular Troops and can't contest objectives that's something of a big downside. You can bring your leman russ tank company, but unless it has some Troops it won't be able to take or contest objectives.
Now there's probably utterly abusive Unbound combos that can either take objectives just fine or is so broken it'll scour the board of troops, but at least on a first glance objectives might be the way to at least vaguely make this work.
Sazel13 May 2014
Well I assume some major advantages to bound armies. If unbound armies can't take objectives without taking regular Troops and can't contest objectives that's something of a big downside. You can bring your leman russ tank company, but unless it has some Troops it won't be able to take or contest objectives.
Now there's probably utterly abusive Unbound combos that can either take objectives just fine or is so broken it'll scour the board of troops, but at least on a first glance objectives might be the way to at least vaguely make this work.
My only issue with this is that Unbound armies essentially change the essence of the game. Oh, I can't get objectives? Fine, I'll delete your side of the board anyways.
It feels like too little of a "balancer" to keep FOC armies from being annihilated each game. They just have to hope that their cover saves and bad dice rolls allow them to be in control of one or two objectives before the random game turns end, whilst the enemy pummels them with the best of the best there is.
I dunno, it almost seems that only FOC should go against FOC, and Unbound against Unbound, and just not cross the lines. It'd be the only way to keep each game "fair". (As "fair" as any dice-based game can be, of course lol)
33 Gnobs! Over 3 Packs of Trappers! Woot! Gibblet, Nibblet, Crunchybit (from Slaughtermaster achievement)
New book WLD: 20/10/2 - Yay tourney wins and random game win!
Eire16 May 2014
To be honest, I thought the same thing with Apocolypse when it first came out. Seemed really wonky, kinda broke the traditional mold of the game for me by playing it, fliers came in, it was all sorts of odd. Why I stuck with Fantasy back then. Granted I still have my Blood Angels, but we'll see how this new stuff looks and feels when playing.
I'll have to see the penalties to Unbound armies because there will have to be some hefty ones in order to prevent outlandish lists just destroying other normal army lists.
GW did take a HUGE hit to stocks at the start of the year (dropped nearly 25% in about a day in January). Reasons are unknown to me. Early March it bottomed out, and has been slowly crawling back up since then. When you have the CEO that openly says "We run a tight ship, and do our damnedest to get more sales," that pretty much sums up what they are trying to do... sell more models.
Unbound armies will allow them to sell, in my opinion, their high priced finecast models in bulk and clear out the storerooms of backlogs that they might have by making things more appealing.
I still wonder why they dropped a fairly static army (Dwarves) and then turned around and dropped another Fantasy army with high mobility, lots of shooting, lots of Scouts, and Ambushers. Sorta like, hey look shiny, oh look even shinier, all within about 4-5 months? But we go back to his statement, do our damnedest to get more sales, and it makes sense.
8th edition: 4-6-1 (as of Dec 2013)
God_of_the_Gnoblars25 May 2014
This is how you know they're running out of ideas. They want to introduce something new and shiny to keep people interested in the game, but what they fail to realize is that we're interested in a challenging, fair, and playable table top game. This just ruins strategy and flavor... Unbound is something you do with your friends for fun. It shouldn't ever be an actual rule...
The enemy of my enemy is my double enemy.
Gut magic: The art of eating what nobody else wants to eat, just to see what happens.
MasteroDisaster27 May 2014
This is how you know they're running out of ideas. They want to introduce something new and shiny to keep people interested in the game, but what they fail to realize is that we're interested in a challenging, fair, and playable table top game. This just ruins strategy and flavor... Unbound is something you do with your friends for fun. It shouldn't ever be an actual rule...
This!! OH GOD THIS!!!
I couldn't agree with you more!
Tajar The Cleaver31 May 2014
This is a childs idea of improving the game.
Considering that much of GW's consumer base is made up of children and young teens; few ever commit them selves to the hobby and buy models on a whim. My impression is that GW are gradually dumbing down Warhammer (40k in particular as it's the more popular product) in an attempt to keep the younger crowd interested... Which in a way is a kick in the teeth not only for us, but many of the younger lads out there who do genuinely enjoy the hobby. I remember when I was young, my two favorite units were your standard chaos marine tactical squad and Khorne Berzerkers. I never felt the need nor saw the attraction in spamming big powerful monsters or machines, made it feel less like an army and more like a game of dnd or advanced pokemans.
I've come to adore WHFB and I really hope that terrible changes to the rules such as this one never finds its way to fantasy.
Jimmy02 Jun 2014
So now that it's been out for a little can someone give there opinion?
"Nec sorte nec fato"
Ogre Battles!
Tactica: Sabretusks Tactica: Gnoblars
michaeljohn04 Jun 2014
I have played 1 game so far (woo!) and i absolutely love the new mission card thingies. They really want you to step up your game, you have to change your plan constantly if you want to win. The psychic phase can be really overpowered but a small houserule can keep this from happening.
lbisson05 Jun 2014
I agree with MJ. I love the tactical cards. They really add something to the game that was missing before. Daemons are really the only ones that can really abuse the hell out of the psychic phase. Luckily I don't have many of them in my local area. If I have to play them though I think capping the dice at 12 like we do in fantasy would keep things in check for the most part.
Mr. Cthulhu05 Jun 2014
I haven't tried a game yet, but I hear that the psychic phase can be terrifying, like an invisible wraithknight (snapshots, cannot directly fire with flamers [as far as I'm aware], and no blasts), Iron arm on everything giving straight up +3 instead of d3, and hordes of daemons rushing your face every turn... or it can be AWESOME and completely destroy their psyker after they try one ability. (I play Tau...hahaha)
They call me MR. Cthulhu! AAAAAHHHHHHH!
Jimmy05 Jun 2014
Interesting, from all accounts the mission cards have certainly been a welcome addition and add a sense of dynamic play to the game which is fantastic. The Psychic phase however, that's a whole different issue!
Opens a new GitHub Issue pre-filled with a link back here — sign in with GitHub to post. If someone already restarted this thread, please add to that issue instead of opening a second one.
