what is the point of Orc warbosses

[Lycurgo]

they are weak gives no special bonuses to your troops is bascailly a walking troop stats buffs but weak than a goblin warboss

[RadCon One]

Night goblin lords were the the best by a mile for them at one point due to being able to give amazing buffs like giving the entire army poison attacks, but they changed that. They are still good however.

Shamans are probably the best overall now for the greenskins due to the arachnarok spider giving them melee dominance along with free tag along archers once leveled along with their innate magic ability.

Orc warbosses have the best early melee dominance I guess, while their Wyvern mounts late game give them good mobility and cycle charge ability, but honestly? I'd agree that I am more likely to choose the other two.

[Cacomistle]

I kind of view greenskins lords exactly like you said, a walking troop stats buff. Similar story with dwarves but runelords I think eventually become good.

Shamans in theory you have the magic, but I add a troll hag to most armies and I'm not a big fan of goblin magic. By the time the goblin shaman has all the other skills I want and I can start getting magic, I could just have a leveled troll hag with magic I like better.

Greenskins lords, they just don't have great mounts like 75% of the factions in the game (wyverns suck so bad compared to dragons, and the arachnarok comes on their non combat lord). They don't get blessing of the lady and really good recruitment traits like Brettonia (also Brettonian lords just really powerful for horse heros, idk why). They don't get good abilities like runelords and warrior priests. They're not vampires (who are strong enough they don't really even need to be mounted). They're not already monsters like treemen or ancient kroxigors.

Seriously there's literally nothing good about their lords. And I don't know if they actually are, but a greenskin lord on a wyvern feels weaker than say a generic empire lord on a griphon. Or on a boar they feel weaker than an empire lord on a barded horse. Generic empire lords suck, they're just humans who don't even have faith in sigmar to give them cool abilities. But greenskins feel even weaker than that. I feel like a wyvern should be a stronger than a griphon though, and a orc lord on a boar should be about the same strength as a lord on a horse (I think they probably win the 1v1 duel, but they just feel so slow and the lack of armor makes them feel like they die so fast, whereas say a Brettonian lord just feels like they'll never go down).

I think the best use of their lords is to sit in the back where they can't get sniped by a quareller. They all go down quickly even to tier 1 units (except for the arachnarok but that's late a really high level lord).

In short, the point of orc warbosses is that the other 2 also kind of suck. But goblin ones can at least snipe characters if they aren't under pressure, and if you're going goblins they do give some melee attack buff or something. So they're better anyways.

[BigRockWall]

Agreed. Orc warbosses are inferior. I prefer night gobbo warboss, and exactly because they are an army buff stat stick. Gobbos, especially for Grom or Skarsnik, are insanely efficient. You can safely run 4-6 stacks really early in the game, more if playing crooked moon. And with red line, betta night sneakin, goblintide, scrap upgrades and tech buffs gobbo stacks can compete all game.