Taking Away Ogres

[Redfang]

To address Redfangs original post

3) Take away ogres from Dwarf teams, and give the dwarfs two extra psoitional players (troll slayers seem to be the best replacement) like the elves got

Yes to lose the Ogre. No to the additional players. They do not need them. Possibly a Deathroller big guy would be a satisfactory sub, but again could probably wait for the secret weapons. But at least that is fluff friendly option and Fun.

I also hoped the Secret Weapon rules would take care of that. But as they stand now; a Deathroller for 80k which you loose after a few games, I'll swallow my pride and take the ogre.
Dwarfs might do well without ogre, but if you can have a player who can blitz/block your cage free of some annoying black orc with two dice, and then give you an assist against the next black orc, I'll take it.
Also, ever seen an Ogre blitz into the corner of your cage assisted by black orcs? That's not funny with low agility, not enough guard in place and no High Strength players!

4) Take away ogres from human teams (they don't really need them anyway)

I cannot agree. They are almost the only team that should have them. Norse and Chaos and the Gobbos (at double cost) also fall into this category. Norse because that is their thing vs blodge of Amazons.

OK, maybe the humans was stretching it a bit, but they should do fine without ogre; they have fast catchers, OK throwers and nice blitzers; they don't need to play a strength game...

R

[Redfang]

Dwarves should'nt get nor blitzers, runners nor slayers. A completely new position should be introduced. Perhaps some sort of an improved longbeard.

I also thought about it, but muttering something similar on this board once resulted in a lot of negative answers...

I think that if the high and dark elves get a compensation the Dwarfs should also. They are already the team with the least positional players (except for some of the Deathzone teams such as Chaos...). Giving them Blitzers would (I think) increase their overal Agility too much, giving them too much scoring players. It also wouldn't help much against opposing Big Guys. Therefore I'd say Slayers; they are already a relatively sensitive player in a Dwarf team (targetted + low armour) and they would help with blocking big guys.
(Remember that when a slayer gets blocked he's still only Str3!)
Having 4 frenzied players isn't a problem in Norse teams either

R

R

[narkotic]

More Slayer?

Don't forget that the only positional players that are broken according to the player generation rules are Troll Slayer and Wardancers (too much Skills/Traits). If those two types would have turned up in a new team they would have been tweaked down (or the price further increased).

[rwould]

I agree. Ogres are too prevalent on the pitch.

I would drop them from the Orc, Dwarf, and Norse rosters. And cost double for Gobbo's and Halflings.

I think the Dwarves do deserve two more positional players. From the current player rosters Blitzers would be the best choice, but I'd like to see Dwarf Blockers make a re-appearance.

Richard

[Redfang]

Yes, something similar to a Dwarf Blocker would be very nice. We could call it an Iron Breaker and give it maybe:

3 4 1 10 Stand Firm

Maybe drop the AV to 9 and give it a different skill, tackle for instance

But I don't think this will ever happen.

R

[martynq]

I'd like ogres to be taken away from norse, orcs, and dwarves (without compensation), and cost double (be priced that way on the roster and increase the TR proportionally) for goblins and halflings.

I agree with Zombie.

Dwarves definitely don't need ogres, orcs should take trolls and are good enough without a big guy. I'd like to see gobbos still to be able to take an ogre, but costing double should be the downside.

Martyn

[rwould]

I'd say the Dwarf Blocker should have guard. I'd agree with the AV 9. Not sure on whether they should start with Block. Probably a bit too good with it but....

How about

3 4 1 9 Block, Guard, Thick Skull

and cost 90k?

[Redfang]

I forgot Thick Skull...

I don't think he should start with block, apparently the general conviction is that any player starting with Str4 and Block is overpowered. Maybe Tackle and Guard, then...

R

[Blackscale]

Still looks overpowered. Strength 4 players like Sauri and Chaos Warriors start with no skills, so it would be better to drop the new dwarf's strength to 3 and keep skills like block and stand firm.

[Redfang]

And then we'll just have a slightly different Longbeard...

R

[Darkson]

For fluff reasons I'd keep the Ogre on the Norse team (there's ogres in Norsca)

I still prefer the mino for fun

[Ghost of Pariah]

The best way to cure the ogre/dwarf problem is to make a new "big guy" for the dwarfs.

Stone Golem, Pneumatic Robot, Iron Golem, whatever...

[Colin]

Yea, I think we covered that idea before. I like that idea, but I also came up with another one. You could have special ogres for the dwarf team, call the dwarven ogres (or dwarf ogres). Smaller sized ogres (could be either shrunken down ogres, or really pumped up dwarves, dwarves on steroids....shudder) Anyway, I have a 1ed ogre mini that I painted up for one of my dwarf teams, he looks good. He's much smaller than any other ogres produced later, so fits well with dwarfs. For fluff, just say they were bred by dwarf engineers to help with heavy work in mines and sometimes used in BB team (so rare). Just give them -1 to MA and ST and adjust the price accordingly.

[Ghost of Pariah]

Iron Breakers?

0-2 Iron Breakers 3 4 1 10 Mighty Blow, Stand Firm, Thick Skull 110K

[Redfang]

Yeah, something like that would be really nice, although I can imagine that giving a Str4 player that much skills from the beginning might make him overpowered...

Not sure...

R