Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

the_emperors_renegade wrote:Don't play them if you don't like 'em man.simple as that...

That is astoundingly useless advice. Simple as that.

Skinnattittar wrote:

the_emperors_renegade wrote:Don't play them if you don't like 'em man.simple as that...

That is astoundingly useless advice. Simple as that.

No, it's not.

I like my ogryns. I don't care if they cost as much as a terminator, I like the models and I'll play with them if I want. Presumably, so will The_Emperors_Renegade. It's a completely valid viewpoint.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Skinnattittar wrote: I will do whatever I please over PMs and then ask you to kindly keep your twitty comments to yourself (yes, this is civil, if you were to pull something like this in real life, I would probably have harsher words. No need to yell at someone for kindly asking another person to elaborate on their opinion). If he wants to bring it onto the thread, he is more than welcome to PM me back to address it over the thread.

Ok, this is OT, but I think a lot of people would agree that taking an argument from a public thread to a private discussion is a bit harsh. He was right to post your PM.

Skinnattittar wrote:I don't know what other thread you are talking about, this is the thread I started for this topic with no prior knowledge of any RECENT similar threads.

Apologies. The first thing in your first post is a quoted opinion. I therefore assumed you were quoting from SOMEWHERE. Apparently the quote box was just for fun. My bad....

Skinnattittar wrote:I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that Ogryns were nigh worthless. You can't take them for fluff's sake because they are too expensive for their usefulness, they will be a major hindrance to the rest of your list. You can't take them to fill a niche because they don't.

If you thought it was pretty common knowledge, then starting another thread about it doesn't really add anything. And you can take ANYTHING for fluff reasons....

Perhaps my standards are too lofty, but I can not stand completely away from any blame. My original post was in You Make Da' Call and was intentioned on being satirical, so it was intentionally brief. It seemed several people took it quite serious and lodged their own statements (which seemed to be of kind not satirical).

My initial lapse, of course indefensible, aside, statements need context and justification, or how can they be taken seriously? Taking a comment "off thread" is supposed to be personal, but that does NOT mean it is meant to be offensive. If someone has a bit of food stuck in their teeth it is extremely rude to announce to everyone present that this other person has an offending particle of mange-ware, something they perhaps are not aware of. Instead it is polite to carefully whisper to them. Since there is no 'whisper' feature online, PM are the best supplement, and most likely part of their intent. I also never said he was wrong to post it, nor what it contained was in anyway embarrassing/something I wouldn't say in public. It didn't need to be said in public, I felt it was a more one-on-one comment, so I sent it over PMs. I do not need to try and ridicule others online for my entertainment, nor do I need to start a thread to attract people to try and bring them down, there is already plenty of that going around. Taking someone aside is far from harsh, there wasn't even an argument yet, as there was not enough shared information to make a discussion!

No, the quote box was not for fun, I was quoting myself. The following paragraph directly addressed that.

I felt it was pretty much common knowledge that Ogryns were poorly priced/pointed since, well, their complete lack from competitive Tournament lists. Yes, you can take anything allowable in the codices for fluff purposes, but even at 40pts a model, Ogryn are too much of a burden on the list for even fluff. It is not so much a question of "all points for glory" but the volume of points being taken for fluff.

We are not talking about putting a powerfist on your Commander because it fits the fluff you have built for you army. You are only burning five or ten points more than what a powerfist is worth for a Guardmen. Ogryns are comparable to buying multiple of the same weapons for a character waste of points! You can only ever use one and you can't lose them, so not point in buying them! If I want just my Ogryn models running about I can mount them on "scenic" bases, trade out their weapons, and call them Sentinels (another part of an Ogryn themed list where 'Mega Ogryn' are armed with heavier weapons and power-suits)!

Face-to-face, I have never met an Imperial Guard player who can honestly say, in 5th Edition, they have taken Ogryns into battle and later thought it was a good idea. A good friend and fellow loyal servant of the Emperor held onto his Ogryn as long as he could, but after every battle, when asked what his biggest weakness had been, his answer was always "all those points I dumped into my Ogryns." Admittedly, it was pretty nice when they charged into a group of Firewarriors and used them for squeaky stress toys.

Skinnattittar wrote:
" Admittedly, it was pretty nice when they charged into a group of Firewarriors and used them for squeaky stress toys.

Made me laugh.

Your math hammer was a bit situational and incomplete. For one thing no none is going to take 4 squads without any upgrades; that's just stupid (I played against a guy who tried it and he got monkey stomped) . also they would have to be in a combined squad (as often a liability as not) or all very close.
And most importantly you forgot to see how many survive to hit the MEQs. One ten man assault squad is 190 points let's set up a fight between them and your improbable 40 man combined squad with no upgrades and the same unit fighting 5 ogryn.

Assault marines shoot pistols: 4 dead guardsmen/ 2 wounds on an ogryn.
Assault marines charge: 9 dead guardsmen/3 wounds (one ogryn)
NOW Guardsmen/ogryn get to swing guardsmen kill 1.9 marines/ ogryns kill 1.32 marines

Yes guardsmen killed more marines but guess what- they still lost. By SEVEN. The ogryn also lost but they are stubborn and so will most likely stick around.

I ma not arguing that ogryns are a great unit. but I think if they were slightly cheaper and/or had higher Ld they would be.

A lot cheaper. They're worth 25 points each right now. 30 if you're pushing it. Any more and I'll just bring more guns.

Yes, you can take anything allowable in the codices for fluff purposes, but even at 40pts a model, Ogryn are too much of a burden on the list for even fluff.

I disagree. Why? Because there is no such thing as a burden on a fluffy list. The whole point of a fluffy list is that is not designed with efficent or effective gameplay in mind. Therefore the points cost is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if I lose EVERY game, I took my 3 squads of Ogryns because my regiment is from an Ogryn world. I didn't take a look at them, and think to myself, 'Hmmmm, Ogryns are too much of a burden on the list for even fluff.' I think, 'Wow, I should take 3 squads of Ogryns to field a regiment made up primarily of Ogryns!'.

I rest my case.

Oh, and I don't think Ogryns are too bad on the battlefield.

*waits for nerdrage and head explosion from Skinnattittar due to lack of justification*

Ketara wrote:The whole point of a fluffy list is that is not designed with efficent or effective gameplay in mind. Therefore the points cost is irrelevant.

That's nonsense.

Fluff and power should be congruent. The more fluffy your list, the more powerful the list should be. Just because GW is both incapable and unwilling to write rules this way doesn't mean we should constrain ourselves to such thinking.

Ketara wrote:*waits for nerdrage and head explosion from Skinnattittar due to lack of justification*

Why should he bother responding if you're going to pre-emptively dismiss his posts with ad hominems, strawmans and tired old get-out-of-argument-free internet buzz-words like 'nerd-rage'?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Why should he bother responding if you're going to pre-emptively dismiss his posts with ad hominems, strawmans and tired old get-out-of-argument-free internet buzz-words like 'nerd-rage'?

Because Nerd Rage is delicious and powers my Evil Attack Panda Cloning Machine of Doom™

What a lot of people seem to be missing is the purpose of a discussion like this, especially when said discussion is in the Proposed Rules forum. Not the "I like it the way it is" forum, or the "Let's do it the way GW does it" forum, but the Proposed Rules forum.

Someone made the (useless) comment "I like Ogryn. If you don't like them, don't use them" (or words to that effect). The reason that is a useless comment (and a trollish comment in this specific sub-forum) is because it is defeating the purpose of the thread. Someone wants to propose new rules for Ogryn or a fix for a perceived problem with Ogryn, therefore the only responses to this should be people offering different suggestions or critiquing the ones being made.

"I don't think it needs new rules" isn't helpful.

As another example from the Guard Codex - Storm Troopers. I love Storm Troopers. I've got my 6 10-man Squads of Storm Troopers and 6 Valkyries to carry 'em into battle. I've charged down equal numbers of Khornate Chosen, faced down T8 W8 homebrew Daemon Princes with them, set up gun lines vs Marines and Orks with them, hammered into Tau with them. And you know what? Most of the time they've failed. Horribly. They're a terrible unit, and have been for over a decade. The current Guard Codex went and made them even worse, by adding 6 points to their cost all for the 'benefit' of AP3, something that means oh-so-very little in the Cover-Save rich environment that is 5th Ed.

But I still love 'em to bits. Great models. Great story and action behind them. Great fluff.

Now, say someone were to start a thread like "Storm Troopers are crap - how can we fix them?" and I replied with:

"Well I love 'em! If you don't, just don't use them!!!"

Can't you see how utterly useless that comment is? How it fails to address the OP's question or challenge at all? How it adds nothing to the discussion besides a meaningless opinion devoid of logic or reason?

Wouldn't "Well, I love my Storm Troopers, but if you were going to improve them I would..." be better? Wouldn't "I don't really agree with your proposal, and here's why..." be more useful?

Statements made in a vacuum are just that - vacuous - or as Shakespeare once put it - full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Or to put it into the internet's vernacular - if you have nothing intelligent to add, then STFU.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Ketara wrote:*waits for nerdrage and head explosion from Skinnattittar due to lack of justification*

Why should he bother responding if you're going to pre-emptively dismiss his posts with ad hominems, strawmans and tired old get-out-of-argument-free internet buzz-words like 'nerd-rage'?

I am more wondering why he thinks I would even nerd-rage. Thus far I think my blood pressure has raised nill and my BMP hasn't even fluttered, inlcuding from getting up. Though I suppose efficiency of thought and disclosure can be quite unnerving for those unused to it, and may seem quite intense. Though I will assure everyone, I would not be posting here if I were not finding this entertaining. It is as much an exercise in logic as it is a battle for reparation.

As for Kentaro's post, he does have some justification in his beliefs, but they are unfortunately intangible. Can you really justify a good "fluffy" list just because it has certain units? No, I would skirt along with HBMC's post and say that a fluffy list is also an effective one, or at least potentially competitive, or else they will never get used. It would be like owning a really nice vintage car that everyone wants to see you driving around, but it runs so poorly and is constantly making it impossible to drive that you don't even take it out of the garage. It is still a nice vintage car, but taking it out is more trouble than the reward.