Posted by PaddyMick on 2015-06-07 18:04:52

That probably puts them into teir 2? I like them as underdogs. Replace snots with gobbos would be all thats needed I think (but flings would be cool - you could have either but not both on the same team for 'good' or 'bad' ogres).

Posted by bghandras on 2015-06-07 18:07:04

Ogres are actually also weak. Their problems go beyond the snotling. Ogres are overpriced. I am confident that a 10k price drop would do no harm to any meta, including the tabletop. Dropping 20k is also not a terrible idea, but that may put them over the top on human and pact rosters. Would still be ok on the current Ogre roster.

Posted by MattDakka on 2015-06-07 18:51:49

Ogres' cost should be dropped from 140k to 120k and Snotlings should be replaced by 30k Gnoblars 6 | 1 | 3 | 7 Dodge, Stunty, Right Stuff.
As alternative, keeping the Ogres at 140k and replacing the Snotlings with ordinary Goblins should work too.

Posted by Sammler_der_Seelen on 2015-06-07 18:55:21

ogres was fine with gobbos,get rid of the snots and the team is again possible to play.

Posted by SkavenLordVinshqueek on 2015-06-07 19:05:14

+1 on Sammler's comment.

Posted by Arktoris on 2015-06-07 19:08:30

went with mercs to get rid of the "master blaster" complex the team has. Lizardmen already have that theme, so deviate and give them some more strength superiority at the sacrifice of the ogres having no G access and mercs less rr ability. Also keeps with the human theme as ogres don't associate with goblins on their team or orcs and flings hang around humans.

flings are essential for the TTM.

Posted by Roland on 2015-06-07 19:14:58

0-12 ogres?

Posted by BillBrasky on 2015-06-07 19:24:32

0 - 8 Ogres
0 - 12 Goblins
0 - 1 Dragon Ogre (6 7 4 10, No Hands, Claw, MB, Wild Animal, Frenzy) 250k

Posted by MattDakka on 2015-06-07 19:39:49

According to the latest WHFB fluff Ogres associate with Gnoblars.

Posted by bghandras on 2015-06-07 19:47:23

What would be the statistic of a gnoblar?

Posted by MattDakka on 2015-06-07 20:00:26

Gnoblars
MA 6
ST 1
AG 3
AV 7
Dodge, Stunty, Right Stuff.

30k

Posted by Kam on 2015-06-07 20:07:19

Just let me play a Treemenz team...

Posted by Shraaaag on 2015-06-07 20:19:29

The best idea so far, is IMO switching snotlings with gnoblar (which are slightly weaker than goblin players). If you just switch the snotlings for goblins, you'll just have another goblin team with more reliable positionals (ogres with no loner).
It didn't quite make sense to me back in lrb4, where ogre team was 0-12 ogres and 0-6 goblins, while goblins had 0-2 Trolls and 0-16 goblins. Shouldn't these two teams be in the same tier bracket?

Posted by Cavetroll on 2015-06-07 20:48:36

I remember in 2nd edition that Snotlings were so small you could have 2 on the field for every 1 'position' they filled on the team. That's probably too powerful, but maybe the ability to field an extra snotling for every 2 on the pitch; i.e. if you are starting with 6 ogres and 5 snotlings, then after the kickoff 2 more could run onto the pitch from the dugout.

Posted by JimmyFantastic on 2015-06-07 20:52:50

0-16 brogres. 90k but ag1.

Posted by MattDakka on 2015-06-07 21:17:12

MA 6 Gnoblars would be a small-big boost, OTT would be suddenly easier.

Posted by Strider84 on 2015-06-07 21:25:49

Snots are awesome for Tabletop... I would love a price decrease on the rerolls or the ogres though.

Posted by JimmyFantastic on 2015-06-07 21:28:10

or how about ogres cost 120k, snots cost 10k, could have a starting team of 8 ogres 4 snots no rr

Posted by bghandras on 2015-06-07 22:39:59

I don't think it is overpowered roster or team build. Keep in mind that all ogres should cost the same, including pact, and human. I think there is a chance that an ogre for those teams would be too much for 120k.

Posted by MattDakka on 2015-06-07 22:58:55

A Loner Ogre should be cheaper than an Ogre without it.
A team with 0-8 Ogres could be nice too but the biggest problem is clawpomb.

Posted by harvestmouse on 2015-06-08 00:17:02

Problem with this team is that you need to fix it so it's still weak. As if an ogre team takes off, they're devastating. I think most are terrified of an unstoppable Ogre team. Lots and lots of ways to fix/improve the team though.

1. Increase the amount of ogres to maybe 8 or 10, however give them loner.
2. Go warhammeresque and make the team somewhat like the Stunty team. Lots of ogre positionals with Gnoblars.
3. Replace the snotlings with goblins (go back to their Oldheim Ogres roots). It brings them above goblins yes, but goblins get weapons.
4. Improve snotlings, most importantly improve titchy. Or give them diving tackle for free. Snotlings should have some sort of 'group' rule, it's their niche thing.
5. Make 2 of the ogres 'blitzers'. Increase of ag and ma by 1.

The worst thing for me about the team is that using snotlings takes them away from their Oldheim roots. I think also 2 major nerfs on a team that wasn't overly successful, without too much testing was major overkill.

Posted by Wreckage on 2015-06-08 01:15:14

st1 players for 10 k more but can't dodge on a 2+... sounds like a terrible improvement..

Posted by MattDakka on 2015-06-08 03:19:59

MA 6, AV 7 and no-titchy is a great improvement.
More effective tackle zones and they can withstand some hits.

Posted by Catalyst32 on 2015-06-08 07:32:45

10k or 20k drop in Ogre Price
0-8 Ogres
0-4 Goblins
0-16 Snotlings

Posted by Deniz87 on 2015-06-08 10:37:29

since we are talking about OGRE teams....I think the majority of the players should be OGRES. So...kind of going back to LRB4.

Posted by bigbullies on 2015-06-08 10:48:39

max 8 ogres and leave the snots I love my 3die uphill blocks then we fouls :D

Posted by Kam on 2015-06-08 14:24:43

Get rid of the Ogres and bring back the "2 for 1" rule for Snotlings.

Posted by Wreckage on 2015-06-08 16:15:11

"More effective tackle zones and they can withstand some hits."

Good, because they are going to have to withstand a hell of a lot more hits.

Posted by MattDakka on 2015-06-08 16:54:44

Since the average 2d6 roll is 7 the difference between AV 5 and 7 is meaningful and MA 6 is great, if one of them manages to get +AG or +MA suddenly you have a good ball carrier for an Ogre team.
Try to 1TTD with a MA5, then try the same with a MA6, it would be a great improvement.

Posted by garyt1 on 2015-06-08 22:57:34

Catalysts suggestion is decent as the Ogres need at least some s2 support, and with that support being able to modify tackle zones.
Also, yes Ogres should drop at least 10k.
Ogres really suffer v clawpomb. Especially when their support is removed so easily with a tackle player, or even just s3 block players.
Loner for Ogres would be appalling.

Actually just removing really stupid and making the Ogres 10k cheaper would make them a bit more competitive. Still not good.

Posted by harvestmouse on 2015-06-08 23:27:06

I don't think Loner would have a massive impact on ogres tbh. Ogres are notorious for playing with low amounts of rrs.

Really Stupid? Now that would be a killer.

I play a troll/snotling team, that's niche is regen all round and an apo. You really have to think about RS at every moment.

Posted by Harad on 2015-06-09 10:16:25

I've playtested this a bit at low TV although accept it may be flawed at high TV but I like:
As many ogres as you like.
No team rerolls under any circumstances.

I've found it produces scary teams as you'd hope which can win but which offer a different challenge and are bound to fail often enough that they won't become too dominant.

Posted by harvestmouse on 2015-06-09 12:03:06

I kind of like that, it's a bit lrb 4. Where a Jesp and Emp ran ogres with no rrs. Do you run 11 ogres?

With trolls I run 'as many trolls as you like' as you have to manage the RS, so would never take that many.

Posted by Harad on 2015-06-09 15:10:51

Yeah ultimately, you get to more than 11. I don't even have snotlings on the roster (it's an ogre team). I play little knockout tournaments and they never get that far but you can see how they could win if the stars aligned for them. For me this mirrors the success they have in the fluff.

It's a pretty good balance because even if they have some good players, a couple a turn are going bonehead and if those are your ball carriers / blitzer you are often in real trouble. It's also very hard to stall with norerolls and bonehead.

I wonder if at high TV you could end up with a few ball carriers with +AG and surehands causing problems but I find them a really fun balance.

Posted by harvestmouse on 2015-06-09 19:26:54

Well I'd think pro would come before sure hands.