Ogres play horribly in IE

Processing#6286

So, after playing Ogres for solid 60 turns, I came to the conclusion that they need a lot of work. Long post warning, TLDR at the end.

First, their biggest (and most fixable) problem - camps.

I've said it before and I will say it again, they were designed around RoC and turtling in 20 - ish settlements. That works for RoC where you don't really need to expand, but it scales horribly in IE.

You can get 7 camps in total (8 if you play Greasus) for the entire map. That's about 1 camp for 70 settlements. Even Chaos gets more Dark Fortresses than this... They are your only way to get good units and they generate a lot of money.

Solution:

Uncap the camps and make it so you can only put one camp in a province. Every 2 or 3 provinces you get a new camp capacity.

Or

Make the camps movable. Simply put a gold cost to it and make it so you can move camps around. Gold cost could scale with camp development, so you are disincentified to move them willy-nilly.

Second, and this one is less of an issue, but still is.

They are broke, like absolutely. Their settlements don't earn much, their camps do, but we have already established that 7 camps for 500 settlements isn't enough. Their camps are extremely expensive, upgrading advanced recruitment building is costly as hell and you have to manually recruit camp garrison... Why? Herdstones get super strong garrison for free. Yea, you get 60% upkeep reduction, but you still have to recruit those units...

And yes, they are supposed to make money by sacking, but so do the greenskins and they get a money building that makes 500 gold at tier 3, contrary to Ogre one that makes 150 gold at tier 3 LMAO.

Solution:

Make camps building cheaper. Buff the money making building to at least 300 gold at tier 3...

Third

Pathfinding. So many minor settlements and Ogres suffer the most. The pathfinding for large units is horrendous and Ogres's entire roster is filled with large units...

Solution:

There isn't an easy one, so I guess fighting less settlement battles would help?

The race is pretty cool design-wise, but man, currently they are much worse Greenskins.

TLDR: Camps are very limited and super expensive. Ogres are broke and have huge issues with pathfinding in minor settlements.

fenlagon

Ouch, I promised myself to use Ranald's faction picker for my first playthrough of IE and got Skrag...

Neodeinos#5871

There are a lot of caravans that go through the Mountains of Mourn, you can kill those and get loads of money that helps a lot.

Stephince#6150

Not every faction has to be able to paint the map.

tqhung87#9911

Stephince said:

Not every faction has to be able to paint the map.

Isn't that the goal of IE

GloatingSwine#8098

Ogre Camps should be able to move. That would to a large degree fix the number problem because it would free you up from using throwaway ones for army support and demolishing them as you move. (You might need a couple more for very large empires still though).

Black Arks aren't considered too powerful to float in one place and they can attack things, Ogre Camps can't even attack by themselves.

Mkeefe78#4317

Ogres also seem to struggle with increasing their number of heroes. Fire bellies and Butchers in particular. You need a level 4 camp to unlock fire Ellie’s and a level 5 to increase the cap.

Processing#6286

Neodeinos said:

There are a lot of caravans that go through the Mountains of Mourn, you can kill those and get loads of money that helps a lot.

How does that fix anything? What if I have already expanded beyond the mountains? What If Zhao and Miayo have already confederate the entirety of Cathay and are my allies?

Processing#6286

Stephince said:

Not every faction has to be able to paint the map.

Yea, that was the point of RoC and they worked well there. The entire point of IE is to paint the map (other than WEs I guess).

They don't work well in IE.

Neodeinos#5871

Processing said:

Neodeinos said:

There are a lot of caravans that go through the Mountains of Mourn, you can kill those and get loads of money that helps a lot.

How does that fix anything? What if I have already expanded beyond the mountains? What If Zhao and Miayo have already confederate the entirety of Cathay and are my allies?

Oh it's not fixing anything, I just think it's good to know as it can help a lot in the early game. You can get 30K gold from a single caravan.

Helhound#7332

I don't actually have a huge problem with them as is. I play them in a similar fashion to WoC or Welfs. A few well placed critical settlements that power an empire. Raze or sack whatever I don't intend to keep as I move along. I also play well down low into the red economically because of how much money they make from sacking and razing as they move along.

That being said, being able to move camps is an absolute must. Pack one up and set it down somewhere else to make any of the radius specific effects actually relevant. Too quickly you'll grow beyond the point where your armies are wandering a dozen settlements beyond the closest camp.

Iron_Crown#5779

Map painting doesn't work? Great!

Processing#6286

Iron_Crown said:

Map painting doesn't work? Great!

It's the whole point of IE...

GloatingSwine#8098

Processing said:

Iron_Crown said:

Map painting doesn't work? Great!

It's the whole point of IE...

But the internal politics and faction management is so rich!

HarveyJames#1968

they did improve the ogre contracts.. maybe not enough?
i found it odd for greasus that his mechanics didnt include vassals..he is the overtyrant = all ogres pay him tribute right in the Lore? .. isnt that basically vassals?
also they reduced the aversion too enable more trade right?

Pocman#6295

Stephince said:

Not every faction has to be able to paint the map.

Not painting the map and being able to play the map are 2 different things.

Helhound#7332

Processing said:

Iron_Crown said:

Map painting doesn't work? Great!

It's the whole point of IE...

I would argue map painting isn't always the point. Some factions work better subjugating others, some just have their own little square and everyone else can gtfo, some work better with a complex set of defensive alliances, some just want to see the world burn. Map painting is only an option.

Ogres are an example of a faction I never truly set out to paint the map with. Too many factors working against it. They can't be everywhere at once, and doing so discourages them from using one of their key advantages. They're neutral with basically everyone. Pick a faction next door to you and dedicate your time and effort towards being their friend. Raze everyone around them to give them room to expand, set up camps in their territory, and just generally ingratiate yourself into their empire. Then you've an ally who acts as a wall, pays you to be there, and has territory all around your camps for easy pickings when you finally decide to eat them too. Ogres having free reign diplomatically and no meaningful connection to most territories gives you a lot of control over which factions succeed on the map, and which you bully for profit.


All this being said still agree camps should be able to be packed up and replaced at cost.

Zyllos#5582

HarveyJames said:

they did improve the ogre contracts.. maybe not enough?
i found it odd for greasus that his mechanics didnt include vassals..he is the overtyrant = all ogres pay him tribute right in the Lore? .. isnt that basically vassals?
also they reduced the aversion too enable more trade right?

He sort of does, with a special building at Greasus's Great Hall. But it affects everyone other than just Ogre's specifically. And he gets a lot of plus diplomacy bonuses to Ogres around him with some stat lines and technologies. My current Greasus campaign, I had almost every minor Ogre faction around me either in some type of military alliance or vassal.

Regardless, the camp system is an issue because you can't relocate them once you have built them up at all. Instead of camps costing money to move around, I think they should be able to move around just like an army, but make their movement short with no bonuses to movement (except with maybe tech).

This will make the camps like roving bands of Ogres that slowly move around, nomadic like.

Zyllos#5582

I think camps, too, are a problem. Cost too much money and time to relocate.

Instead, I think they should just have normal movement, like an army, but make their movement very short and they don't get movement bonuses for techs to armies. But, there should be a few techs that does increase the camp's movement.

This will make them slow roving bands of Ogres, moving around nomadic like.

#705863

I like the camp over setelments, all other races do the settelment system so why do it.. again? You can earn alot of money food and everything from camps they are like immobile black arcs. Like why do you need a reinforcement box following you around the map?

bli-nk#6314

Helhound said:

I don't actually have a huge problem with them as is. I play them in a similar fashion to WoC or Welfs. A few well placed critical settlements that power an empire. Raze or sack whatever I don't intend to keep as I move along. I also play well down low into the red economically because of how much money they make from sacking and razing as they move along.

That being said, being able to move camps is an absolute must. Pack one up and set it down somewhere else to make any of the radius specific effects actually relevant. Too quickly you'll grow beyond the point where your armies are wandering a dozen settlements beyond the closest camp.

I don't know if a tier 5 camp should be that easy to move... I'd be fine with tier 3 and lower keeping all buildings and moving for a cost but if a higher level camp moves it loses its higher tier buildings.

Along with moving camps the Ogres should have a way to add camp capacity- I think the current limit is 7 or 8? That was plenty for RoC but IE has 500 regions and a longer Ogre campaign will probably get to 10-14 armies, not every army needs an accompanying camp, but if half are tier 5 and would lose tiers to be moved, that would only leave 3-4 camps with the current limit when Ogres would play better with the ability to get up to 6-9 tier 3 camps + the immobile ones.

Captain_Rex#1635

Ogres aren’t designed to paint the map. You are supposed to have a very compact home turf and then focus on raiding and mercenary contracts.

Sagez#6761

It's sad that in the last blog CA wrote, as I remember, that they are quite happy with Ogres. Well, there a lot of problems with them and as Ogre fan I don't want to wait several years for their rework!

GloatingSwine#8098

ArneSo said:

Ogres aren’t designed to paint the map. You are supposed to have a very compact home turf and then focus on raiding and mercenary contracts.

Which are both rubbish. Raiding's always been rubbish and the payment for contracts doesn't scale really at all, it'll be half a turn's upkeep if you're lucky.

Fingolfin_the-Golden#2157

tqhung87 said:

Stephince said:

Not every faction has to be able to paint the map.

Isn't that the goal of IE

Processing said:

Stephince said:

Not every faction has to be able to paint the map.

Yea, that was the point of RoC and they worked well there. The entire point of IE is to paint the map (other than WEs I guess).

They don't work well in IE.

Not the point, unless you are doing a domination game.

I never paint the map except with Khorne.

You guys….

Sagez#6761

GloatingSwine said:

ArneSo said:

Ogres aren’t designed to paint the map. You are supposed to have a very compact home turf and then focus on raiding and mercenary contracts.

Which are both rubbish. Raiding's always been rubbish and the payment for contracts doesn't scale really at all, it'll be half a turn's upkeep if you're lucky.

maybe every contract should also reward the player with an item, better contract->better item

Captain_Rex#1635

GloatingSwine said:

ArneSo said:

Ogres aren’t designed to paint the map. You are supposed to have a very compact home turf and then focus on raiding and mercenary contracts.

Which are both rubbish. Raiding's always been rubbish and the payment for contracts doesn't scale really at all, it'll be half a turn's upkeep if you're lucky.

With raiding I meant sacking settlements. That can give you up to 30k gold if it’s a well developed Capital city. So lots of money.

Pr4vda#6038

I'm playing a Greasus IE campaign in VH, and I'm having a lot of fun ! I'm somewhere turn 80 and first power. I did not really had any problem with money. Greasus Hall is very powerful, and I trade from the very beginning with Cathay, some small OK tribes and I've between 2000/3000gold each turn. I'm surronded by many foes, but it is great for the challenge.

However, I agree for a long time that OK could get better mechanics.

Camps should be able to move, indeed. Ogres camps are supposed to be nomadic. Make them slow, but movable. And improve their radius with each level.

Contracts are really bad. You should get contracts from more than 3 factions. It should be an entire menu where you can pick multiple contracts, and ask for bigger loot if your reputation is high. You should really act like a mercenary, and get a lot of gold and food for that. Right now I've not make a single 1 in 80 turns. They are not worth it at all.

Greasus is bad. He's a good tank, but he can't hit and his very slow. Tbh I prefer a standard Tyran than him lol

Finally, I would like to have the possibility to get more 'Big Names'. I like them, but only 4 for each Lord or hero ... meh ... and also give some to the ogre "wizards".

rorgfist#5055

There are mods to expand camp capacity if you are interested.

From simple mods that just eliminate the cap, to mods like the one i have that allows you to increase your camp capability in +1 for every camp at level 5 you have,

DarthEnderX-#6513

Stephince said:

Not every faction has to be able to paint the map.

Disagree. If you don't want to, then you don't have to. But every race should at least have the option.

Bogdanov89#9316

Being able to move camps is 100000000000000% a must.
Makes no sense that you destroy the camp and start from zero every time.

Factions that relied on sack/raze in ROC campaign absolutely suck in IE because:
- distances between cities are huge, meaning your usually negative upkeep shreks you.
- no teleport stance is a huge downside from these aggressive factions on IE
- large number of cities are from major factions which have powerful armies and usually good capital garrisons
- scales horribly with time, gold/turn is king of lategame and most TWW3 sack/raze factions lack it (ogres, skarbrand etc).
- utter nerf of replenishment which leads to your map progress being further slowed down, meaning more upkeep spending.

In order to function in IE the raze/sack factions need proper constant income, similar to how all factions in TWW2 that focus on raze/sack still have proper income via some method (undercities, slaves, gskin income buildings etc).