remmus said:

Because they are almost as bad as Orks when it comes to shooting. I would therefore scrap his BS together with his comrade and gave him S/T TB of 4 etc. to compensate and make him real Ogryn we know from wh40k fluff.

Shadow Walker said:

Ogryns aren't bad shots. They're not great shots, but at BS3 they're not Ork-level terrible either. 

Still they do not need BS aptitude but they need more strenght and toughness. Now they are weaker and less tougher than Ork Nob which is unfluffy.

Vechicles size in Adversaries&NPC chapter should be changed according to IG vechicles size from latest update.

Shadow Walker said:

I for one welcome the BS aptitude, makes Ogryns darn good heavy weapons users (like seriously, stick a heavy stubber in a Ogryn with high BS skill and he can run around with the other players like a rifleman on steroids!)

all in all, in my book the BS aptitude is a good way to ensure players can get out of the streotype swamp by not having there Ogryn being a dumb bruiser….now he can be a dumb gunman X-)

Yes, have the enemy's vehicle reflect the size change as well; I still don't think Sentinel ought to be enourmous.

As for ogryn having Bs scrap this, we already got enough Bs related specialists now.

Ogryns can shoot, I'm cool with this, but they're not good at it.  BS aptitude makes very little sense to me.

Thaddux said:

In TT they're no worse than any other IG model (BS 3). Ogryns are not Orks, and the only real concern with their ability to shoot is their tendency to be just as likely to bash an enemies face with their weapon.

Having one of the two aptitudes is pretty much equal to having BS 3, having neither is like BS 2. Talent wise, this does cheapen a few "odd" talents for an Ogryn, but if you consider the high chance they won't meet the agility pre-req, some of them make sense. Storm of Iron indeed does make sense for them. Arms Master is a trash talent anyway (since you can just buy the training. Also, for Ogryns, it must have Ogryn proof. They pretty much start with all the trainings they will ever need)..

TWW is "ogryn-like", but there aren't any instances of ogryn-proof pistols (Only remote option would be a ripper gun with Extra Grip. Some mighty fine cheese you got there).

Hip Shooting is very ogryn-like, but unlikely they would hit the 40 agility.

Ambidextrous is a bit odd. The Agi pre-req could possibly be hard for them, also, its very hard to justify (only useful for dual wielding melee weapons. In other words Truncheons, as all the others are two-handed).

Eye of Vengence is a bit of an odd one for them, but it seems more luck oriented than anything. I could see an Ogryn getting that one lucky shot.

Target Selection in wording might seem strange, but given how often an Ogryn is in melee, it makes sense they eventually become quite good at not hitting their buddies.

Lasgun Battage/Gunslinger/Sidearm are pointless for an Ogryn (no Ogryn-proof pistols or lasguns).

Crack Shot/Mighty Shot can be described in many ways, and more ways to deal more damage is certainly ogryn-like.

Sharpshooter, Marksman, Independent Targeting, and Deadeye shot are not very Ogryn-like, sure, but tend to be less meaningful with the Ogryn-Proof restriction.

Clearly, to maintain an Ogryn's ability to shoot, Ballistic Skill is a more appropriate aptitude over Finesse.

WittyDroog said:

You couldn't have missed my point harder if you had tried.

The fact that some of the pre-generated can't be created using the existing regiment creation rules is a tiny, insignificant problem.

The fact that FFG has completely ignored every single piece of feedback regarding the regiment creation rules and have given no indication of why? A PROBLEM BIG ENOUGH TO DRIVE A PLATOON OF BANEBLADES THROUGH.

Emperor Castaigne said:

Maybe I just completely missed something, but… what problems? The biggest concern I remember reading was having 1 leftover point, which was addressed. I know there's some controversy about some people thinking Aptitude-granting bonuses are inherently better than other options, but I haven't seen anyone complaining about anything regarding commander type, homeworld (besides wanting mixed regiments), etc. I certainly haven't seen any issues brought up that are the magnitude you are describing: most people seem very happy with the regiment creation system. Perhaps I'm just stupidly missing something, though, so please expand on what you're talking about.

Maybe there should be a way of making weapons Ogryn-Proof. :P

Thaddux said:

That's a very interesting idea, but as a GM I'd be very careful what I'm putting in an Ogryn's hands, and so would the Munitorum Quartermaster.

HTMC said:

Well, for example, we have no rules for Rough Riders, but we have Hunting Lance weapons stats.  Drop Troops are missing valks, which are as basic a peice of kit for them as the Chimera is for Mech Infantry.  Armored Company doesn't make much sense (To me, anyway) unless you throw out the Comrades rules and have a party of pretty much nothing but Operators manning a single tank. (Not that this is bad, mind you, it can be fun, but seems to make little sense in the context of the regiment creation system.)

In the case of Armor, as an example, most of the Doctrines make zero sense, or have little use.  Price requirements mean that the few that do make the least bit sense are too expensive to take.

So, you either have to take less then three doctrines, or use one as a dump stat.

HTMC said:

I'm talking about the thread I made pointing out flaws in the Regiment Creation chapter:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=690826

and this other thread discussing Doctrines:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=678779

and this other thread suggesting being able to include penalties in order to receive more points to use elsewhere:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=678141

There are probably other discussions as well, but those are the ones I tracked down just now.

Also, I found where I got the impression that the Regiment Creation rules weren't quite finished. N0-1_H3r3 posts in these two threads:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=673852

N0-1_H3r3 said:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=671149

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Considering how much influence the choice of regiment is going to have on the game you play, it seems worrying how one of the only two pieces of official-ish feedback I've been able to find consists of "It worked differently when I wrote that".

There's been no word on what the rest of the squad (and the Comrades) are supposed to be doing in Reconnaisance or Hunter-Killer regiments where the squad gets one Sentinel Walker to share. Or why Hardened Fighters is superior to Warrior Weapons despite being the cheaper doctrine. Or whether regiments with Demolitions as a doctrine should have Tech-use as a starting skill (or be able to use Tech-Use as a Trained Skill when Crafting or dealing with Explosives, as another suggestion was). Or if you can change what counts as your Main Weapon for the two extra clips provided by the Well Provisioned doctrine (such as a Commissar's Bolt Pistol or a Heavy Gunner's specialist weapon).

I still maintain that the Lasgun Overload setting is either too expensive for the improvement, or too weak for its cost. Its alright as it is on laspistols churned out from mass-produced laspistol mass-production factories, but when you start hitting rare, high quality las technology, quad ammo + unreliable is just too much for what SP weapons could just pick up as special ammo.

Likewise, Good and Best quality Ranged Weapons could use a little something.

I am very happy to see the Hunting Lance made useful though. Combined with good strength and charge talents [I could easily see being mounted give bonuses to this as well] someone on a bike or creature could really put a hole in things. Solid alternative in packs to power weapons too if you can't get your hands on them.

Can punch through rear Chimera armour, with some lucky damage rolls right now. About damn time.

Please change the Primitive quality, to better reflect its usefullness on primitive armour. Thank you. (As I said many times before, you know how to change the wording).