Do people want Ogors to be combined with Orruks/Grots?

[Melcavuk]

I think Ogors currently have the scope to maintain three faction in terms of Lore:

 

Beastclaws - following everwinter, nice niche for them savage and mounted low model count.

Firebellies - The Volcano lore is cool, see my own battletome for more fleshing out.

Everyone else - Ogors following the Maw, so here is where the gutbusters and maneaters recombine into a single, coherent perhaps even mercentile Ogor faction.

 

[novakai]

On ‎10‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 5:25 AM, Kyriakin said:

If a faction has a strong theme and identity, GW will get around to it eventually. The idea of just rebuilding the factions into their mish-mash WHFB forms feels like a massive step backwards and seems to be due to players losing faith/nerve/patience that their turn will come.

However, I also am beginning to feel like the game is being taken over by competitive players for whom "viable" is the only word that matters. It doesn't matter of a faction ties together thematically, so long as there are options to win. Many would accept a random assortment of units in a book called "Battletome: Things and Stuff" if said book was "viable".

I sort of agree with this, I think people are jumping to much on the Soup tome train a little too much. like I rather they do a full release Moonclan and eventually Spiderfang instead of a Grot tome because I don't think that kind of book would works at all IMO. I think people are pushing it for destruction is mainly because of GW neglecting Destruction for the last two years hasn't really help (especially when it comes to not having GHB updates) and that where faith and patience are not there.

I mean I hope 2019 is the year of destruction but I don't want to get my hopes up either

[Shankelton]

With Orruks? No, but I feel like grots can be the unifying force for destruction as a whole. Granted I'm approaching things more from fluff and lore then competitiveness/ practicality of releases. 

Personally I hate the idea of everyone loving/ worshiping Gorkamorka. Seem's so against the idea of Destruction being the polar opposite of order. I feel if they did a soup tome it would come down to treating Gork/Mork like they did Nagash and that is not at all how I personally view destruction. I'd much rather the Orruks and Ogor's have their own goals rather then everything boiling down to Gordrak and his great waagh.  That's why grots make such a great cement in my mind. Cunning and opportunistic, let them infest the dark corners of the mortal realms and be involved in both Ogor and Orruk society. You have Moonclan for a great grot only force with a cool theme, but you can have limitless little tribes and groups who get swept up into either Orruk or Ogre conflict. 

Maybe keeping Orruks and Ogors separate  means bringing back the great maw? I dunno, so long as Ogors remain a nomadic, semi-intelligent race of conquerors like the Huns/ Mongols I'll be happy. I just feel the mindless force of nature fits the greenskins more then Ogors, and I'd hate to lose the chance to write Ogors in interesting ways beyond, "They smash the things with the Orruks".

Tangents aside, Combining Ogors, Maneaters and Firebellies just makes sense.  I doubt GW would ever fully flesh out 3 different factions of that same race with their own books. Beastclaw work as their own book I think. Bias, as they are my favorite (minus Yeti's). I'd love to see a non-mounted option introduced to them to make it a little less elite but that just me, maybe even baseline Ogor's getting the keyword? Honestly I just want a new Battletome, as BCR aren't in the best spot and seeing what they did with maggotkin, legions, ect makes me salivate lol. Imagination goes wild for what cool, thematic gimmicks they could give BCR's with something like the Everwinter to work with.

 

[Mr_J_Bandit]

Surely an alliance trait that is not random and more then 4 options would make BCR a more appealing option for players.

This could be done in the FAQ and cost a relatively low amount to create and implement.

You want a variety of lists at tournaments otherwise it is boring playing the same list over and over.

[Moonlightwolf]

Beastclaw raiders already have a pretty well established identity in AoS so I can't see them being combined with others. A destruction book that contained multiple allegiances allowing some combinations would be fine but honestly I think all the destruction factions bar maneaters have the potential for fully fleshed out tomes, though perhaps a greenskins allegiance that brought them together with gitmob might be a good option for those who want that classic orks and goblins feel.

[Mayple]

I've always enjoyed the relationship between grots (gnoblars) and ogors. Now that gnoblars are no longer their own thing, and instead a type of grot, as well as the point of ogors and grot factions being able to ally, but not ogors and orruks - I do think there's a precedence for at least ogors and grots to be combined on a greater level than they currently do. One of the biggest selling points of Gutbusters to me is in fact that they make use of both ogors -and- grots, in what seems a very believable symbiotic relationship. Would not mind that being expanded more upon in the future

[Shankelton]

On 10/21/2018 at 10:04 AM, kenshin620 said:

Well I actually also doubt BCR and Foot Ogors/Gutbusters will come back together (outside of maybe an actual Icebrow unit). As a reminder FEC are still very much separate from Legions of Nagash (though Nighthaunt is a different story, but then again LoN is a strange Battletome compared to more typical books even to the likes of Beasts of Chaos).

Heck Soulblight is an allegiance in LoN book....and yet is still very much limited to the Soulblight keyword. Which is really....strange.

And even the specific themes within AoS can be altered from the original WFB concept. I'm still surprised that elf assassins aren't with DoK, literally back in WFB being the "male version" of Witch Elves (though I think there can be female ones) .

(Though I still have a 20% belief grots might actually be one book.)

 

I think the only AoS battletome/allegiance I can think of that will become "obsolete" will be Skaven Pestilens (and also the Skyre rules). Theres just waaay too many hints Skaven will recombine.

I think your right, Highly unlikely that BCR and Gutbusters would ever merge. I was looking at warhammer community earlier today and noticed how they had the factions represented. I think that'd be a pretty good indication how they intend to address the factions going forward. I think BCR really only need 1 more kit to be ok (Plus a a new book). Maybe make it a grot kit that could be built as a few different flavors of grot to cover a few armies. Add in a few customization bits and have the gitmob be your generic, vanilla grot that finds itself press ganged or following the other armies around. Baring that, maybe some new beast that follows the Everwinter. BCR just needs some kinda chaff to help on the objective game.

Regardless, I think when we finally get moonclan that will give a good idea what to expect as destruction going forward. If they reinvigorate the line to plastic, update squigs and give a few new goodies I might just hold off on BCR and go with them! haha

[Uffe]

Ogurs + grots
Bonesplitters + spiderfang
Moonclan+trolls
BCR + few chaff models
IJs+Orruks

Could be fun combos

[Pitloze]

I personally don't see a point in merging Ogors with the Greenskin races. Even in the lore Ogors and Greenskins are rivals. I would like to see Ogors, Greenskins (including IJ and BS), Grots (mostly moonclan) and Troggoths be the four main races of destruction.

For the Ogors I would like to see a Fire (that "Hawaiian" theme floating around) and Ice (BCR) theme combining all the Ogors into one BoC style tome. I'm not going to suggest new models here. I think most of the BCR players have vented about that enough. And there is not much to go on regarding a Firebelly faction but it's save to say it will include some fire magic.  This is my suggestion:

1. Gutbusters will incorporate Man-eaters. The Man-eaters will take on Hero roles so there are more foot hero's .

2. Gutbusters become the baseline of the tome. With the possibility of giving Beastclaw Raiders and Firebelly tags to Gutbuster units.

3. Going full BCR or Firebelly would speak for it self. But for mixed armies I would like to see the destruction 'high risk, high reward' theme to stay. Kinda like Braggoth's Beasthammer there could be 'Rival' system. But more straight up + and -. So if a BCR unit or tagged unit is near a Firebelly model they will enjoy a movement buff, but also a decrease to save. And visa versa for the Firebelly unit.

4. This is just a crazy suggestion. But if the Firebellies get an Everwinter style event like a heat wave or a volcano (would be a cool scenery piece). You roll on both the Everwinter table and the 'Heatwave' table. Highest result happens, lowest does not. But if you roll the same result on both something truly destructive should happen that affects everything on the table. Maybe some mortal wounds, maybe some stat negatives. But something that would make both you and and your opponent to fear it.

Ogors in any flavor will always be an elite army. But having more things to consider on the table other than just getting first turn and hope for the best would benefit the quality of the army greatly.

 

 

[Luzgurbel]

BCR needs all their troops being plastic. Furthermore, they need also a couple of new options.

[Baron Wastelands]

For me, BCR doesn’t need chaff units. Neither, really, does Gutbusters. Otherwise all armies will just start to feel the same (big monster, check, chaff tarpit, check, hard hitting infantry, check, etc). I like the individual way that these armies play - I like the feel of an all mounted army, tbh (even though, as has been said, BCR doesn’t need to be that), and would run an all monster BCR if restrictions allowed. I like the elite feel of Gutbusters without gnoblars, and enjoy the challenge these different playstyles bring. 

Nor does BCR need more units in general, imo. It would nice to have plastic yhetees and plastic sabres, but mainly because I don’t like the yhetees models, and finecast is too expensive. With accessible models for these, I suddenly have a lot of variety in my BCR builds. And of course the book is feeling a little tired and could use an update, but compare that to Gutbusters who don’t even have GHB traits and abilities. 

I’m not even convinced that Gutbusters needs more units, if maneaters and firebellies are subsumed. I mean, I love new models for my favourite armies, who doesn’t, but they are fairly playable as is. With a new book (yes, a Gutbuster tome ?) we’d be rocking again. And while the idea of Hawaiian ogors is fine, and would make sense to develop the firebelly theme, I don’t want to lose the Mongolian mercenary theme that I fell in love with. 

In short, the Mortal Realms is a big place. The more specialist armies and themes, the richer the world, and the more diverse the games. I don’t mind that the Everwinter stole all the big beasts away from my tyrant, because it was a cool (ha ha) theme, and suddenly I had two armies out of one, forcing me to rethink my approaches. Grand alliances give people soup armies, so combinations are easy. It’s tighter themes that are hard, and they have their place.

[amysrevenge]

I think there's a big difference between what I'd like to have, and what I can reasonably hope for, and what I actually expect (and one darkest fear).

1. Like to have:  Individual battletomes and new kits for everyone - Gutbusters, Greenskins, Spiderfang, heck Firebellies, Gitmob, etc.
2. Reasonably hope for:  3 soup books.  One for Orruks, one for Ogors, one for Grots.  Possibly subsuming some or all current Battletomes, probably keeping them separate.
3. Actually expect:  1 soup book, with some things falling through the cracks.  Possibly subsuming some or all current Battletomes, probably keeping them separate.
4. Darkest fear:  nothing at all (continue with GH updates for a while, hopefully).  Keep current Battletomes as-is.

If I had to guess the percent chances of each of those actually happening, I'd guess:

1. 1%
2. 9%
3. 55%
4. 35%

[Pitloze]

3 hours ago, Baron Wastelands said:

?For me, BCR doesn’t need chaff units. Neither, really, does Gutbusters.

 

If you want any hope at winning, they do. Even if it's just for capping objectives. Let alone let your beasties survive longer than a hot second.

[Baron Wastelands]

6 minutes ago, Pitloze said:

If you want any hope at winning, they do. Even if it's just for capping objectives. Let alone let your beasties survive longer than a hot second.

I’m not arguing that either of these armies are currently top tier competitive (though no hope of winning seems a bit strong ?). Just that the answer is not to make them a vanilla army in order to compete. 

[Mayple]

3 hours ago, Baron Wastelands said:

I’m not arguing that either of these armies are currently top tier competitive (though no hope of winning seems a bit strong ?). Just that the answer is not to make them a vanilla army in order to compete. 

Don't really need to "make them vanilla" at all. They already have chaff. That's what their grots are for Unless you're suggesting we remove the grots from ogor factions entirely, which I'd say is not only drastic, but entirely unneccessary. 

Either way, they do require chaff to compete - there's no way around that. That chaff might even come in the form of their regular footslogging ogors, but -some- throw-away unit is absolutely required to go fist to fist with "competitive" factions. Even in a best-case future scenario where Thundertusks/Stonehorns starts counting as 20 models each for the sake of capturing objectives, they're still going to need some troops to aid them in the process of maneuvering the battlefield.

Are Beastclaw Raiders/Gutbusters unable to win anything? Heck no.

Are they severely outgunned, outmatched, and handicapping themselves by not allowing themselves to take anything that even remotely looks like chaff? Yeah. Objectively so. 

Now, that doesn't mean one must aim for a competitive army, and in doing so force themselves to stock up on grots and such. Quite the opposite, actually. But ignoring the components that is involved in having one is not a solution either

[Baron Wastelands]

BCR don’t have chaff. They didn’t have chaff in aos1, and were highly competitive on release. They don’t need to be mixed with Orruks or grots to make them great again. I get that the game has changed, but I’d be sad to see all armies have access to effectively mirror units, that’s all - and that’s all I meant by vanilla.

Gutbusters have grots, I don’t want to take them away, but I also don’t think they need them. If 12 ogors are chaff, then I entirely concede your point; but I was discussing in the context of mixing everything into a soup battletome.

The reason these armies aren’t “competitive”, in the usual tournament sense of the word, is not because of a lack of new units. It’s entirely fixable with better traits, abilities, etc. At least that is my contention, and I stick by it ?

[Mayple]

@Baron Wastelands

Yeah, we're more or less in agreement  I also completely agree with the orruk part of your argument. Orruks and Ogors have no business running around together, unless it's in some new bizarre, yet unseen master/slaver kind of relationship (akin to the chaos dwarves of old) - I do feel the Grots have a much more natural relationship with the ogors though. Not Beastclaw Raiders, I'll admit, since they're more about beasts than having an actual army, so to speak. For them, I wish the Frost Sabres were better geared towards taking hits for their beastmasters, or better at either dishing out damage, or simply maneuvering onto objectives. As it stands, they excell at absolutely nothing, and are too expensive in both points and money to really do anything extensive with

In general I absolutely agree that not every army should have the same tools - but in the case of Beastclaw Raiders, I don't think they have any tools at all beyond having big behemoths, which most other factions can match them, if not outmatch them on too. If they either managed to excell at a secondary thing, whatever that may be, or their whole behemoth schtick got refined, then I think they'd be all fine and dandy. 
 

To illustrate, something along the lines of increasing the behemoth maximum cap for Beastclaw Raiders (allowing them to do what they do better than anyone else), and/or, as mentioned earlier, giving the Thundertusks/Stonehorns the ability to count as 20 models for the purpose of capturing objectives. Wouldn't neccesarrily fix the issue, but maybe you see what I mean with pushing them more towards excelling at what they're meant to do/be. In the absence of gaining new units, at least. Which I suppose we also agree on, since that'd fall under better traits/abilities, etc

As for Gutbusters, the grots included in their roster is too lovable to let go, and really serve as the very best of the best when it comes to chaff due to how Tyrant command abilities interact with them. That being said, they are (luckily) not a mandatory inclusion, since you can get away with using regular ogors as chaff as well, with slightly more difficulty The Greasus Goldtooth (rip) model embodies the Ogor/Grot relationship I very much enjoy in the Gutbuster faction. 

[rattila]

I would really dont mind the fact that gnoblar could be wiped out of gutbusters; because they dont need chaff units (in the fluff). They are not an army nor a unified people, but a multitude of tribes. So they dont fight the same way an actual army does, but like a bunch of alpha male who just want to show who is the best. I would find more logical to have a lot of different allegiance and artfact to show that than some more units.

However i do agree that several units need new mini... And maybe have 2-3 more heroes.

[MrFouly]

Do I want Ogors to become part of the Orruks faction. No. Do I think they will be? No.

Do I think Ogors and Beast Claw Raiders will be combined into one battletomb at some point? Yes. Would I like them to be? Yes.

[CaptainSoup]

This is a very interesting thread with lots of different opinions and takes on the current state of Ogres and how they should or shouldn't be addressed. As much as I would like to chew on each person's take on the topic, I'll have to boil it down to a few points.

I think the biggest contention for any old world units/factions is what plan does GW have for them. Should they consolidate units into a single tome and create proper synergies from that? What about older tomes and their units, should they be part of it too? What happens to the fluffy themes of certain units? If we could get a more concrete idea or head space into what GW's plan is for these outlier factions then this conversation would be much different. 

Perhaps if we back up a bit and think of what would be best for GW's bottom line (making da' monies) and what they have already done we can get a more down to earth idea of what might happen to the Ogres.

For one thing, GW wants to sell models. Best way to do that is to introduce an entirely new model range and tome attached to them. Destruction is certainly due theirs. Depending on the theme they might incorporate older models or even better make new sculpts of old models. Though that may not be the case for all models since some are regularly re-packaged as if they were just continuing the existing range. This can create all sorts of new lore and themes because let's be honest, factions without tomes are pretty lackluster lore attached to them.

Another option would be to just wait for the next GHB. Why Ogres haven't got any updates aside from point changes is anyone's guess, and while being in the GHB doesn't mean you'll never get a tome, the chances probably don't look good.

They could always go the currently favored route of a single tome for each individual (or mostly individual) faction. While that may look good on paper, trying to balance all those tomes without suffering  from tome (cough cough Codex) creep could be a big issue (unless they group multiple ranges together). This will also take the longest to produce and in my opinion the least likely to happen currently (but hey I'm just a skeleton, I'm wrong lots of times ?). 

Lastly they could just ignore the model range(s) and let it rot into obscurity. This is the most pessimistic approach, but would save GW the most money (which part of the bottom line). GW probably doesn't want to keep a sub par model range from the old times if they don't have to. It's easiest just to keep them on life support with occasional point tweaks to keep the fan guessing. 

What's my take on it you ask? Probably a mixture of the four, though I'm a fan of the first option because it is what would make the most people happy in my opinion. GW is probably working on all sorts of things right now that could encompass some or all of our ideas. Let's just hope they don't get too carried away in the process.

[novakai]

1 hour ago, rattila said:

I would really dont mind the fact that gnoblar could be wiped out of gutbusters; because they dont need chaff units (in the fluff). They are not an army nor a unified people, but a multitude of tribes. So they dont fight the same way an actual army does, but like a bunch of alpha male who just want to show who is the best. I would find more logical to have a lot of different allegiance and artfact to show that than some more units.

However i do agree that several units need new mini... And maybe have 2-3 more heroes.

IDK about that since they rebase those Gnoblar on their own separate bases when that new Ogor boxes came would signify that the Gnoblar would still be part of Gutbuster in the future. (also the Scraplauncher option is run by Gnoblars).

I do hope though that the Tyrant and Butcher get a plastic version eventually.

[Ollie Grimwood]

I don’t think we’ll see any of the factions that have  Battletomes melded in a Legions of Nagash type thing.  Although I do tend to play a mixed destruction force most of the time I do like that there is the option to play very distinct specific faction armies. 

The various Destruction forces do seem to offer a lot of potential in terms of variation and narrative potential. Firebellies as a counterpart to the Ice based BCR, or mercenary/pirate/ brigand expanded Maneaters  

Basically Destruction seem to me have a lot more potential for expansion than boney dead things or rotting fleshy dead things. So I believe they’d be better served with proper battletomes rather than a “we need time to come up with stuff” stopgap soup book 

[sorokyl]

8 hours ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

I don’t think we’ll see any of the factions that have  Battletomes melded in a Legions of Nagash type thing.  

 

They've already shown us they are willing to overlap battletomes. 
LoN overlaps FEC and Nighthaunt a bit. 
BoC overlaps with Tzeentch. 

So I could totally see them including BCR ogors in a Ogor soup tome  (that resembles BoC), and having a tome with multiple allegiances (Grot tome with unique allegiances for Moonclan, Spiderfang, and generic) 

[novakai]

2 minutes ago, sorokyl said:

They've already shown us they are willing to overlap battletomes. 
LoN overlaps FEC and Nighthaunt a bit. 
BoC overlaps with Tzeentch. 

So I could totally see them including BCR ogors in a Ogor soup tome  (that resembles BoC), and having a tome with multiple allegiances (Grot tome with unique allegiances for Moonclan, Spiderfang, and generic) 

it very limited overlap though, Both the majority of Nighthaunt and FEC are functional armies by themselves and are separate of LoN as with Tzeentch and BoC.

[amysrevenge]

BCR is a bit of a special case, though, as they are both a very small faction, and a very old Battletome (that has been, under the last 2 GH formats, in pretty rough shape competitively speaking).  I think they could very successfully do an Ogor soup book, include all 4 Ogor factions in it, and still maintain the flavour of the current BCR army.  Beast of Chaos shows us the way.  Separate keywords, separate allegiance abilities, separate traits and artefacts, largely separate battalions, but easy combining at an army level. 

I would greatly prefer this to a Destruction soup book.

But I still think a Destruction soup book is more likely.  One that doesn't include BCR in it.