Codex Orks - Informed discussion.

[Mr Mystery]

Afternoon all.

Just picked up Codex Orks, and we don't seem to have a thread dedicated to discussing what we now actually know.

If you haven't got the book, feel free to ask questions. But please, don't depend on rumours to answer questions. Use the Codex for that.

So, first up, the layout.

It's somewhat shinynewdifferent. The formal army list section? Gone. The unit description section? Gone. Instead, they've been amalgamated into one section, showing the points, upgrades, FoC slot and the fluff for the unit. Bit jarring, but then it is the first of the 7th Edition Codecies, so we best get used to it.

Then we have further oddities, such as Boss Snikrot. He's available as a stand alone Elite slot, but if you have a unit of Kommandos in your army, you can take Snikrot without expending a second Elite slot.

And that's not all. Meks and Big Meks are separate HQ slots. Meks are a piffling 15 points each, and the same stats as a Nob. You can take them as your HQ, but you can also one Mek for each other HQ (excluding other Meks, but not Big Meks) without using up an HQ slot. They must be assigned to Artillery or Infantry, immediately after Warlord Traits are determined - This means you select their unit prior to deployment beginning.

Badrukk, Zagstruk and Mad Dok Grotsnik are all HQ choices now.

Fast Attack changes? You can now take Trukks as separate slots. Which is....interesting.

Now, we have lost two Special Characters....at least.....sort of. Zogwort is gone, gone gone. Completely gone. Not in the book.

Wazdakka....well, he's the sort of. He himself is not in the book, which is disappointing for those players who converted one up. But wait! I said 'sort of' gone. You see, turn to page page 100, and we find Gifts of Gork and Mork. And amongst them? Warboss Gazbag's Blitzbike. 35 point upgrade, and it's basically Wazdakka's bike, more or less. 18" Turboboost, instead of 12" (vroom!), and gets +1 cover save when doing so. Also has Kustom Dakkablastas - 24", S6, AP3, Assault 3..... So we can still field Wazdakka, after a fashion!


And those Gifts of Gork and Mork are not those shown in the rumour thread - seems that page is from Waaagh! Ghazghkull.

Other items?

Da Finkin' Kap - Grants an additional Warlord Trait from the generic ones in The Rules.

Blitzbike - As above.

Da Lucky Stikk - It's Makari's old banner! Old, because Makari is confirmed dead. Ghaz went and sat on him. It's a Bosspole that grants +1 WS, and gives you the option to re-roll any and all To Hit, To Wound or Saving Throws. ANY. No limit. However, if 3 or more of these re-rolls generate failures in the same turn, the model is removed as a casualty, with no saves of any kind allowed. Pretty nice if you like pushing your luck!

Headwoppa's Killchoppa. +2 S, AP5, Melee, Rending, Two Handed, and Decapitating Strike (any 6's to wound have Instant Death)

Da Fixer Upperz - Special Mek tools. Instead of shooting, on a 3+ a vehicle in btb with the owner can gain back a hull point, fix a weapon destroyed, or fix an immobilised. Fairly useful!

Da Dead Shiny Shoota - 18", S4, AP6, Assault 6, Twin Linked, and Stray Shot - For each missed shot, roll a D6. On a 1, a friendly unit within 6" of the target, chosen by your opponent, suffers a S4 AP6 hit. Opponent can't choose the owner or the owner's unit.

Bit of a mixed bag there.

Right, enough waffling from me. Next poster please!

[Mr Mystery]

Just found something interesting under Tankbustas....

They're now free to target whatever, whenever, rather than having to go for Tanks. And they gain 'Glory Hogs'. A very situational rule, but potentially quite game winning. In short, if Tankbustas score 'First Blood' for you, and do so knacking a vehicle, you gain double the victory points. Not something I'd exactly bank on as a strategy, but a pleasing bonus all the same.

[John Bower]

Actually 'Da finkin' kap' is a little more specific than that, it's the 'Strategic Traits' you get one from.
Zagstruk you didn't mention he gets S8 AP2 Hammer of WRath, which is pretty cool.

There seems to be a lot of point drops too, Grots/Trukks/Deffkoptas all wend down by 5 points. Trukks appear to be Fast Attack (like buggies/Deffkoptas they have a Lightning strike icon).

[DrLove42]

Im not sure on the layout. Sure its nice to have all the units rules in one place with points. But flicking back and forward between all pages to write a list is a lot more awkward. And if you dont know the emblems for the FoC slots you wouldnt know. I missed it to begin with. Also i miss original coloured artwork from the other dexs. The photos arent quite the same

Overall i like the dex. Rules seem decent

[daboarder]

Im not sure on the layout. Sure its nice to have all the units rules in one place with points. But flicking back and forward between all pages to write a list is a lot more awkward. And if you dont know the emblems for the FoC slots you wouldnt know. I missed it to begin with. Also i miss original coloured artwork from the other dexs. The photos arent quite the same

Overall i like the dex. Rules seem decent

wait, there is NO artwork in the new dex?

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

Nope.

Overall, I enjoy the Codex, a lot easier to make army lists from.

Did any of you notice the Ork specific Force Organisation Chart?

3 HQs
9 Troops
3 Elite
3 Fast Attack
3 Heavy Support
1 Lord of War
1 Fortification

[Uberbeast]

I for one am absolutely furious with this book. It was pretty widely accepted that orks had been laboring quietly under a lot of rule-based nerfs for a while now, and were in desperate need of a boost to compensate for a playstyle that didn't really pay big dividends under 6-7th.

Instead it seems that to go along with a few gimicky new toys what they got was nerf after bum-tearing nerf. Every time I pick up the book I notice something else that lost a rule, an option, or was hiked in price. And the entire time I'm thinking, but this book was already desperately behind the power creep, why the hell did they need to nuke that as well?"

Just to name a few wtf moments: mob rule changed to be a basic ld test or orks either kill eachother or simply run off if the unit doesn't have a character or enough models, killa kans increased 15 pts and given a rules that makes them test or be shaken, cybork nerfed to a 6+ fnp and only avaiable to a few nobs and characters, kff made to affect only the actual models within 6" and no longer extends from vehicles, weirdboys generating extra warp charges for being within range of ork units but then being forced to pass a ld test on 7 or take str 2 no save wounds, painboyz removed as unit upgrades and made into a single HQ choice, shoota boys going up a point in cost, gretchin losing all special rules now being super low ld unit. Burna boyz increased in cost, tank hmers getting nerfed, nobz lost cybork and painboy options, mega nobs still useless, ramshakle rules downgraded to only reduce pen to a glance on 6, stormboyz lost their extra d6 move boost, dakkajet loses shots, bikers lose exhaughst cloud cover save for a lame +1 when turbo boosting, zzap gun nerfed again to kill more crew when rolling too high, deff-rolla made into a normal ram that does only 3d6 hits when used against a death or glory, gork-morkanauts fairly useless, lootas moved to heeavy slot, flash gitz lose armor and ignore cover for a 3 pt drop a couple exta shots and a +1 bs when sitting still, flash gitz also lose painyboy, cybork options, and gun upgrade options while going to a larger base, ghazghkull moved to a lord of war.

This is just a quick list off the top of my head. Overall a myriad of nerfs and sideways moves with nowhere near enough improvements to even compete with the old book.

The format of the book itself is also terrible. Every unit entry includes a massive color picture of models we've all seen a thousand times before, with a much reduce fluff entry and a smallish composition section which literally amounts to "go to page such and such", leading players on a bouncy romp through the new book every time they want to know what's going down with the nerfs. I'd say the new book is about 3/5th silly whitedwarfesqu picture gallery of the common dribble we've all seen a thousand times before. Don't expect much new artwork.

All the things people wanted out of a new ork book just aren't here, and in fact they're losing much of what they liked about the old one.

In my opinion this is the worst book GW has ever produced, and the first time a brand new codex update has started off on the bottom of the pile in everything from power level to layout. As a ork player for more than 20 years, I'm shocked, insulted, and infuriated by this new so-called "ork" book.

[Caitsidhe]

Uberbeast, I feel your pain. Basically they have decided upon a different way for you to play Orks. Ideally it involves the "Fungus Mungus" where you go buy (9) Troop units (maximum size preferred) and tear at the opponent. That is what they want you to do. I'm not being sarcastic, negative or "hating." I've analyzed the book and the different builds that are likely to have a decent chance in the current META and my theoryhammer says if you go pure Ork you are going to have to shovel bodies at your opponent. You can get around this, over course, by careful use of allied detachments, but if you mean to be an Orc-core army, you might as well accept now that they have rigged it that your best chance is in numbers and more numbers. Myself, I could never work with an army like this. I might collect some key Orks units via barter for a nice, effective allied detachment. In that aspect, I think Orks shine.

[DarkAlman]

I'm really on the fence with the new Dex.
I'm a KOS player and the changes for me are 50/50

On the one side, most of the specialist units have gone down in price (Tank bustas, storm boyz, nobz, lootas etc) and we got a bunch of new wargear options.
Trukks are cheaper as well.
Boyz have extra movement to get into assault across the board.
Over all my standard Ork armylist (A KOS list) has gained back almost 100 points due to these changes.


One thing I noticed is that the games designers seem to have noticed that alot of Ork weapons like the rokkits and stikkbombz were effectively worthless, but instead of making them better they effectively made them free (same cost as the std big shoota, free stikkbombz). The old staples of Lobba, Kannon and Zzap are unchanged (and still complete garbage).

The psyker has been fixed and updated, Adding Tank Hunters to the Tank bustas should have been done 2 editions ago along with other clarifications and minor changes to adjust the Orks for 6th ed (yes 6th ed, remember the old dex was written for 4th)

What I'm not particularly happy about is that my biggest demand for Orks this edition was to add staying power in assault and we've gotten the exact opposite.
We've lost our inv saves (even if a 5+ wasn't great to begin with) the 'dirty' saves on the bikes, and the KFF has been nerfed pretty hard.

The statline for the Orks hasn't been changed to compensate, still Ld7, no extra wounds or high T for characters.
They should have made Eternal Warrior a standard rule for Orks, then I would have excepted the loss of the inv saves for a fluffy solution.

The new ramshackle rule is ok, but the biggest change for me is the boyz now have to take str 4 hits on an explosion instead of str 3 and THEN have to take an extra potential D6 wounds from failing ld 7 if they don't run away outright for having less than 10 models in the squad.

The changes to the Mob rule are just INSULTING.
They basically pigeon holed the Ork army into only playing with 30 man boyz squads that can partially shrug off the extra wounds from Mob Rule.
They're forcing us to take characters in all of our squads otherwise the first time a basilisk shell lands on a mob it will have to make a LD 7 test and have a 50/50 change of running off the board!

If you play hoard, it's pretty bad for you. If you played KoS it's basically a big F*** Y** from games development.

All the units we used to rely on heavily like Killer Kanz and Nobs have been nerfed.

Force fields and Pain boyz are now mandatory because it's the only way boyz will survive long enough.


It really feels to me like this codex was written by a marine or guard player thinking "My idea of an Ork army is lots of boyz and that's the only way they should be played. And I don't like that I can't kill boyz quickly enough so I'm going to take away everything in the army that has an semblance of staying power so they are forced to take more boyz. I thought about talking to some Ork players to get there opinions, but then I decided against it and asked my fellow marine players there thoughts instead."

Really overall my feeling is that this is a big FAQ on the old codex along with a few new toys.
The kind of FAQ we should have gotten 3 years ago or on the release of 6th edition.

I'm kinda holding out for KoS dataslate that may fix a few things, but I'm not holding my breath.

I kinda get that feeling that we may have gotten nerfed overall, but I can't really believe it because we were in such bad shape to start with I didn't think that was possible...

[Uberbeast]

Uberbeast, I feel your pain. Basically they have decided upon a different way for you to play Orks. Ideally it involves the "Fungus Mungus" where you go buy (9) Troop units (maximum size preferred) and tear at the opponent. That is what they want you to do. I'm not being sarcastic, negative or "hating." I've analyzed the book and the different builds that are likely to have a decent chance in the current META and my theoryhammer says if you go pure Ork you are going to have to shovel bodies at your opponent. You can get around this, over course, by careful use of allied detachments, but if you mean to be an Orc-core army, you might as well accept now that they have rigged it that your best chance is in numbers and more numbers. Myself, I could never work with an army like this. I might collect some key Orks units via barter for a nice, effective allied detachment. In that aspect, I think Orks shine.

I actually have enough orks to play any playstyle, close to 20k points of them. I don't see even spamming max size units as viable thanks to the new mob rule. It wasn't viable before the nerf, it's certainly not going to magically start working now. All I expect to see of giant mobs of boys is them scrambling about in eachothers way, dying in record numbers thanks to low leadership and extra wounds, and then being retired in favor of unbound lists that spam the one or two things that the powergaming crowd decides work well in some bizarre allied detachment frankenlist.

[daboarder]

Nope.

Overall, I enjoy the Codex, a lot easier to make army lists from.

Did any of you notice the Ork specific Force Organisation Chart?

3 HQs
9 Troops
3 Elite
3 Fast Attack
3 Heavy Support
1 Lord of War
1 Fortification

Oh god! oh dear god, that sounds terrible. I mean even the insanely slim eldar 4th ed book had artwork....oh my god!

and who cares about the new FOC,, it hasnt been a limitation for years furthermore this edition is all about pushing unbound, there is no advantage to actually giving orks a new FOC....



edit: This is not entirely correct, the Codex still has various art work throughout, however it has changed the unit entries from unti specific art to pictures of the models, not a bad thing in and of itself, however they maintain the "showcase" section that has pictures of every model, therefore it seems superflous. Not a fan, I would much rather have had more artwork and longer background material. And no apologists that would not mean the codex would cost more, see every other hardback codex for details.

[Pyredragon]

Hey guys, been awhile since I posted and figured I'd share my thoughts on this mess. Orks were my first army and I had a lot of hope for the new book... this failed to deliver any of them. Infact I can feel GW's boney fingers digging so hard at my wallet with this book it's not funny, yes I understand they are a business, but the nerfs to drive sales is just ridiculous with this book.

The biggest thing personally that hurts is the loss of Wazdakka and Zogwort. No I am afraid the relic bike doesn't count. For one, wasn't his guns auto-cannon str on that? And two, the relic does not shift bikers to troops. It's an expensive bike with +1 str to it's guns, not worth it in my opinion. And as for Zogwort, they couldn't have thrown him a bone and made his curse one of the warp powers? He was hilariously good fun to take just for that reason.

The second thing that stings is the loss of all FoC swapping. The only reason I ever ran a Deff Dread was because my Big Mek made him a troop. Nobz got slapped in without a thought as well because they were a troop, now they have to fight over the elite slot. The rampant encouragement to run formations, double force orgs, and unbound, three things your group may not support, is highly unwelcome.

On to general nitpicking. These complaints are more based around my current area meta, your mileage my vary.

Shoota boyz got more expensive but remain the obvious better choice over choppa boyz. The fact they did NOTHING to make choppa's worth taking over the fact that shoota's now cost a point extra is just a slap in the face. Now I'm taking them just to save a few points for toys elsewhere not because their better. Getting grenades for free is nice I guess, but they left the stickbomb chucka in the book as a viechle option so why? Almost everything has assault grenades now.

The loss of cybork body combined with painboyz becoming HQ's is highly annoying. I used to be able to count on my nobz going toe to toe with terminators. Now I have to hope they have enough weight of attacks on the charge to mash them to pulp. Bikes are almost required as without t5 naturally you're str8 bait. Increasing Nobs to t5 would have been fitting and fluffy seeing as it's you know a nob and help ease the loss of cybork. Now I'm reminded of Tyranid Warriors, overcosted for what they do.

The change to Mob Rule is just, meh? I loved how someone pointed out in comments section somewhere "But you can go to ground now!" Oh yeah, great a 6+ cover save and I get to stand around and be shot all over again... Yes in a certain light Mob Rule is kinda fluffy, but two of the three results are bad for most Elite squads outside of combat, and most are bad for blobs as you're pretty much guaranteed to kill a boy or two when you have to test, and you will, alot.

Ramshackle, there's no way around that this is a stupid bad nerf. Everyone screaming that viechles are so worth it now, who seem to be forgetting that glanced to death is still a thing... Also try to point out that negating that pen is a big deal, ignoring the fact it only happens on a 6+. Without Eavy Armor you're pretty much going to lose most of your boyz when that trukk gets popped by an auto-cannon. Which just leads back to GW's mentality of "Buy moar cause we made it so you have too!"

Ghaz is not a lord of war... He is a fancy warboss in mega armor... not a str d spewing titan or tank...

The relics are, just, meh? I dunno, the finkin cap could be good for a laugh, but alot of them are why bother? Headwhoppa's choppa could be replaced by a reliable Power Klaw. The shiny shoota is just an shoota with four extra shots that can kill your own dudes. The lucky stick I could see having use on a model with mega-armor and a KFF, and I guess if you're just gonna slap your big mek in a viechle the tools are a good investment.

Finally the actual book. The layout is annoying. The loss of art for the profiles is aggravating as I prefer art to the Eavy Metal teams work, while keeping the useless splash pages is just dumb. Having to flip all over the book to write an army list is even more unwelcoming. It really just feels like a mess not having the old army roster in the back.

Yes there are some winners in this book. Warbikes got cheaper, Stormboyz get to mob up to 30, The new big guns are awesome - but way overpriced, and Tankbusta's are actually worth it now. Getting to charge after running, with ghetto fleet is great, I don't believe in any of that magic pull a bunny out of your *** max distance crap people spout off about but yeah charge + run = good for the green horde.

I don't think my army is dead, but my orks were never my competitive army. I played them to mess around and push a lot of lovingly converted models across the table, which is what I now HAVE to do. Orks strength lies in numbers, and this means I get to listen to alot of "Why don't you run smaller mobs in trukks..." "You should make movement trays..." "Well your turn I'm gonna go have a nap, wake me up in an hour." You know all those jokes that are funny the first time but now you've heard it to the point you just wanna chuck models at someone.

Overall, just yeah, it's not a good book. I'm not pleased I spent fifty dollars on this and I don't even have someone to blame for the bad writing because they hide under that blanket committee term now. You should own up to your failures and critics, not hide from them, if you're tired of being told you do a bad job you should do a better job.

[sorienor]

Everything said so far is spot on. They changed things that didn't need changing, and didn't change or made worse the things that did.

There is no sane reason to get rid of the invul for characters. Especially replaced with fnp, and not even real fnp at that. The new mob rule sounds bad on paper and even worse in practice. The never-ending green tide either runs away at the first sign of trouble or kills as many models itself as you lose to the enemy. Maybe if it was d3 instead of d6 or S3 instead of S4, it wouldn't be so bad. Or ramshackle was a downgrade on a 4+ instead of a 6+.

Hypothetically you could lose an entire unit of trukk boys JUST from a combination of the vehicle explosion and a failed pinning test.

I just re-costed my last 2k list that I played a week ago. Now it's 2032pts and has already lost some of it's effectiveness (mainly due to characters not having the invul - challenges? what challenges?!?) before removing things to get back to 2k.

They took away the one thing, the ONE thing Orks had going for them ...durability. In a meta that is almost entirely shooting, having zero chance of surviving against shooting means you don't really have a chance.

Is this how the 'nid players felt in 2010?

[blueshift]

... am i insane? am i the only person digging this new book?

3x warbuggies with TL BS for .... very cheap.

3x lobbas that would be the envy of any AM infantry unit... super cheap.

I really don't mind taking all my pain boyz and MOVING THEM TO WHICHEVER UNIT I PLEASE.

Also, might I be the only person in this thread that understands that you may choose unlimited standard force orgs now? Or did I read that wrong? 1x primary and 2x combined arms should do the trick to have tons of painboyz, tons of warbosses, tons of big meks playing their usual supporting roles!

People complaining about how mobs of orks are no longer fearless.. you need a warboss with a bosspole. LD9 with a reroll is good. Take a horde detachment and you can have 3 warbosses and 90 boyz. If you sprint directly across the board and screen with crap like Killa Kanz, Morka/Gorkanauts, warbuggies, bikes, etc. you will make it into melee with a lot of green, very likely on turn 2 if your opponent holds their ground.

And another thing, Kanz with a rokkit launcha are the same price. They lost DCCW but that just seems logical. I still think a mob of 5 would soak enough fire to be very useful in almost any list.

I agree the apparent OP status of a Morkanaut with that massive KFF bubble (RAW KFF rules state you definitely have a bubble as the vehicle IS the bearer) may just be too much to resist and that certainly supports a GW money grab unit theory.

I don't feel too bad about retooling my big ork army for this new edition because it looks like I'll have a lot more models flying around causing utter mayhem on the table.

edit: my god, look at deffkoptaz! SO CHEAP

and my god, look at snikrot! "from any board edge" wahoo!

[Brad Richards]

im just gonna throw this out there. 90 slugga boyz with eavy armor and a painboy in each squad for feel no pain.. makes for some pretty survivable orks that will wreck things in combat

[Brother Sutek]

I for one am absolutely furious with this book. It was pretty widely accepted that orks had been laboring quietly under a lot of rule-based nerfs for a while now, and were in desperate need of a boost to compensate for a playstyle that didn't really pay big dividends under 6-7th.


All the things people wanted out of a new ork book just aren't here, and in fact they're losing much of what they liked about the old one.

In my opinion this is the worst book GW has ever produced, and the first time a brand new codex update has started off on the bottom of the pile in everything from power level to layout. As a ork player for more than 20 years, I'm shocked, insulted, and infuriated by this new so-called "ork" book.

Haven't seen the new Tomb King book then have you? On a more serious note I agree for the most part and am annoyed that this is how they choose to run the greenskins. I understand that they want to lower the powercreep and make money by selling more models but not much in this book really hit me with a "Wow, that's going to be fun to run" moment. It's brand new so I'll wait to see after a few months but initial feelings are to keep the Orks on the shelf and keep running my IG and DA's.

[daboarder]

Or the tyranid book

Lets be honest. This is gw and if you're not one of their pet armies then you are **** outta luck

[Anggul]

On the upside, 'ere we go is great for them. Some are questioning why Boyz didn't get cheaper but I would say 'ere we go is a good enough rule to keep them at the same cost.

Flash gitz can actually do something now with all those shots at a lower price rather than being insanely expensive for one shot each and having to pay even more points for upgrades. They're also still good in close combat as they're still Nobz, so you can roll them up blasting away and charge in to smash what's left. I don't know if they're worthwhile still when you could just have a load of Shoota Boyz, but I haven't looked at them in much depth.

The new mob rule means units that couldn't have more than 10 guys actually benefit from it now. Much less likely to run away at low numbers. You're losing maybe a couple of Boyz to pass a failed Ld check. That's pretty good I think. I would say it beats the hell out of Tyranid 'feed' but nothing should be compared to the stupidity that is the current iteration of instinctive behaviour. I can definitely see how it would start to take it's toll if you're taking multiple Ld checks on your way up the field over a couple of turns, you might actually lose a noticeable number of Boyz to it. There are a lot more viable fast elements for the army now though, so your opponent isn't going to have the option of pouring firepower into mobs on foot if they don't want the faster guys to mulch them. With 'ere we go and more efficient fast units it shouldn't take quite as long as it did to get into combat.

Cybork should always have been FnP, it was silly that bionics gave people that, but not Ork bionics. Against most things you're going to get your normal save as well as the FnP, so in many ways it's better. Worse against S8+ obviously, but they weren't going to be surviving that anyway.

Painboyz are a mixed deal. On the one hand it's annoying that they take up an HQ slot, they should have been like Meks where you get one per HQ. On the other hand you can join them to any squad rather than just being for Nobz, which is very nice indeed.

A few nice points drops. The drops for Bikers and Stormboyz are great, they make it so Nob Bikers aren't superior to normal Bikers in pretty much every way any more. Also nice for Kommandos, especially with the addition of stealth. I can understand Burnas getting an increase due to wall of death and the ability to use burnas in both modes in the same turn. Annoying for an already pricey unit but great in a 'naut or a few in a Trukk (which they can take dedicated now, hurrah!). Tank Bustas got much better along with the same boon of dedicated Trukks. Buggies seem better too.

There are a few annoying losses, but there are also a lot of really good things. As a point on the lack of FOC changes, it doesn't matter so much now that everything scores. Nobz vying for elites slots is a pain I guess.

Someone above said the bike doesn't make up for Wazdakka. Kind of does. Makes basically the same thing but the guns are more for 3+ armour killing than anti-vehicle.

Oh, and grot riggers are very tasty.

It's not great, but some things notably improved while hardly anyway was straight-up nerfed. Got away better than Tyranids anyway, not that that's a valid consolation. I would have liked Meganobz to be cheaper, but no doubt people who like Terminators are feeling the same way. Two wounds is usually better than a 5++ at least.

Edit: I somehow forgot about the Big Gunz. Traktor kannons are terrifying. I don't want my flyrant anywhere near those things. The Big Gunz in general are good except for the bubble chukka and zzap gun. I don't understand how they still keep screwing up the zzap gun. I guess bringing out fancy new models made them even less likely to make it useful again.

[Erik Setzer]

Nope.

Overall, I enjoy the Codex, a lot easier to make army lists from.

Did any of you notice the Ork specific Force Organisation Chart?

There's another one in the Ghazghkull supplement. Changes from basic Combined Arms Detachment are +1 Elite, +2 Troops, 1 Elite compulsory. You can reroll the Warlord trait if taken from the Ghaz book, and you roll a D6 for each of your units before the game (+1 for Troops) and on a 6+ they're Deep Striking.

They're options you can take in place of the CAD, and their rules replace those, so you can have a Primary Detachment without Objective Secured.

- - - Updated - - -


... am i insane? am i the only person digging this new book?

No, I've been having fun looking it over, and my talking about it has some other people wanting to hop into Orks, too. I'm going to hopefully get in a couple games next weekend (had a thing this weekend), but so far I think it's not bad. It's not a codex you can look at and immediately see something game-breaking, but I'm glad about that. It's part of the charm of Orks, we actually have a reasonably balanced army.

The numerous options between the two books with two new detachments and a boatload of formations will allow for some creative builds. Since formations are starting to be more of a thing now, it'd be nice to see tournaments allow them, but I'm find using them in pick-up games for now.

[Erik Setzer]

Okay, this looks like the perfect place for a "Let's Break the Book" list. In the style of Goatboy or whoever writes those articles where he tries to come up with a daft list.

Detachment 1: Horde Detachment
HQ: Big Mek with KFF, Mega-Armor 125
HQ: Big Mek with KFF, Mega-Armor 125
HQ: Big Mek with KFF, Mega-Armor 125
Heavy Support: 15 Lootas 210
Heavy Support: 15 Lootas 210
Heavy Support: 15 Lootas 210
Troops: 10 Boyz with Nob in Trukk 100
Troops: 10 Boyz with Nob in Trukk 100
Troops: 10 Boyz with Nob in Trukk 100

Detachment 2: Allied Detachment (Waagh! Ghazghkull)
HQ: Big Mek, Mega-Armor, 4+ KFF 150
Heavy Support: 5 Smasha Guns, max extra grew, 5 ammo runts 195
Troops: 10 Boyz with Nob in Trukk 100
Troops: 10 Boyz with Nob in Trukk 100

Total: 1850


The first three Big Meks join a unit of Lootas each, the allied Big Mek joins the Mek Gunz. Not only are they providing an inv. save against shooting attacks (including Template weapons and Barrage weapons), the Mega-Armour's Slow and Purposeful allows the Lootas and Gunz to move and fire at full BS (and even charge if they want to). The Lootas should tear apart light vehicles, flyers, and squads, and maybe even hurt monstrous creatures. The Smasha Guns can handle heavy armor and monstrous creatures on a good roll. The Boyz in Trukks can rush out to grab objectives, with the two in the Allied Detachment having the added bonus of having Objective Secured. If you feel the need for some PKs, you can ditch one Trukk mob from the Allied Detachment and give PKs to all four of the other Nobz. The Big Meks, of course, will have their MA's built-in PK.

So you walk across the table with three units firing D3x15 S7 shots (and the Mek's shoota), one unit firing five SD6+4 AP1 shots, and you have a few mobs to go snatch objectives late.

I'm sure others can come up with better, but this is funny enough.

[Steven Mather]

OK, I can't say I have ever played Orcs yet but I do like the idea of it for ****s and giggles and have the new Codex so, just as a thought, how does this sound for a new Orc Deathstar Unit?

1 x Stompa with Grot Riggers for that super hard, worry the crap out of the enemy, 20 model transport weighing in at 800 pts.

Add to this 10 x Meganobz (just about as they are bulky) all with 2 wounds, 3 attacks (armed with 2 Killsaws each - S x2, AP 2, Armourbane, Specialist Weapons) and that lovely 2+ Sv for a further 500 pts excluding any. boss poles you throw in (each model can have 1 at 5 pts each).

Ok, yes that is an eye watering £222 in English money if bought direct from GW but ask yourself, are you worth it? ;-)

[Anarchyman99]

As a Tyranid player...all I can say is try it...try everything...then if you don't have crap rolls in a game...see how things work...use the internet as a guide to the new changes....but you have to be pleased with the new codex....or wait yet again....and Orks have had a longer wait than most. Waaagh does something real now...that's I big deal....it did nothing really before. When Furious Charge changed from +1S and +1I to just +1S that's what really screwed you the most and we are not getting that back. My $.02, I have a great guy in my group that plays Orks, but he needs to learn to play them and 40K better, he almost never wins, so I say I'd make a 1250 List (we play 1250 a lot) vs the same IG list he lost against...I all but table the IG guy...we was in shock that Orks could win a game, that's with the Old Dex...the new one sounds better IMHO. ....I still want Genestealers that can charge the turn they Outflank....and Lictors that can charge the turn they hit the table....I'm not getting both.

[The Sovereign]

My two main disappointments are Mob Rule (of course) and the nerfing of Ghaz. He needed the 5++ as he'll likely be stuck in with the likes of an Eldar avatar or Marneus Calgar. A 6+ FNP is just useless against heavy hitters like that.

[John Bower]

Well, just found out last night reading it that 4 out of my previous 5 warbosses are now just so much scrap plastic. The Black Reach Warboss is no longer valid; to have power klaw and combi shoota you must have mega armour; it's not 3 options it's just 1 for 40 pts. Looks like I need 2 boxes of meganobz now. :(

edit: my bad, that will teach me for reading it when I'm tired. They are there under melee weapons and ranged weapons.. Sorry.

[Ghostofman]

I'm trying to keep an open mind about the new dex. I'm annoyed that characters don't allow the FOC to be shuffled around, but I can get over that. And I suspect between the new FOC, and whatever is in the expansion books that might resolve itself in the long run.

What does kinda get me is the new format. While I don't really like or hate the format itself, as someone whose worked in print I see a lot of stupid little cost saving tricks (Photos of minis are cheaper then paintings, big photos reduce the amount you have to pay writers, compressing the wargear into consolidated catagories you can reference instead of listing them with the unit reduces writing and page count, ect.)

While I don't blame GW for trying to save money, or think they are about to declare bankruptcy, that kind of nickle and dimeing of their own product doesn't give me a ton of confidence either....

[InterrogatorBlythicus]

I see a few common responses her that are as follows:
1. WAAAAHH they didn't put in the rules that I wanted to make them the most OP army.
2. WAAAAAH I'm going to have to change my list and play style (I play WoC and so no sympathy from me)
3. To early to tell yet but I am not optimistic (fair call)
4. Too early to tell but I am optimistic.
5. **** yeah experimentation time. (Good on you)

If you are 1 or 2 then suck it up. The game isn't made with your pet desires in mind, and I am yet to see a codex that is unplayable or impossible to win with (even tomb kings). The only people that really lose here are the same people who always lose, TFC and WAAC guys. And seriously, who gives a sautéed rats arse about them. I enjoy these games the most when screwing around with new ideas and that is the way the game was meant to be

[Uberbeast]

Yeah, I'm three turns into a game with spacewolves vs my orks and the mob rule is already wreaking havok with truck mobs, tank bustas, lootas, and bike units. The flash gitz got a lucky ap 1 roll and wiped out a unit of terminators and were then wiped out by bolter fire from two grey hunter units and a pair of frag missle toting skimmers thanks to not having their 4+. Kanz are dying left and right, gretchen fled after losing 1/4 casualties...

This really doesn't feel like a new book, just another edition of warhammer shooty, 'kay.

[Thaldin]

I'm guessing the days of specials allowing swapping of FoC slots is gone with the advent of the unbound army. (Not arguing for or against it, just an observation.)

[daboarder]

I see a few common responses her that are as follows:
1. WAAAAHH they didn't put in the rules that I wanted to make them the most OP army.
2. WAAAAAH I'm going to have to change my list and play style (I play WoC and so no sympathy from me)
3. To early to tell yet but I am not optimistic (fair call)
4. Too early to tell but I am optimistic.
5. **** yeah experimentation time. (Good on you)

If you are 1 or 2 then suck it up. The game isn't made with your pet desires in mind, and I am yet to see a codex that is unplayable or impossible to win with (even tomb kings). The only people that really lose here are the same people who always lose, TFC and WAAC guys. And seriously, who gives a sautéed rats arse about them. I enjoy these games the most when screwing around with new ideas and that is the way the game was meant to be

Fork out the time and money mate. That is not an insignificant investment.

Oh and maybe less hypocrisy. See I fail fo see why a "oltimisitc" too early to tell view is somehow better than a pessimisitc too early to tell one. Particularly given the companies past history and the money involved.

[Erik Setzer]

Fork out the time and money mate. That is not an insignificant investment.

I've played Orks since just before 2nd edition (was too young early in Rogue Trader days). I still have enough Orks to make a 2nd edition army with 7th edition rules, and then enough of the more recent models to have a "Waagh!" themed army (various clans working together) and a Blood Axe army, and that's even with losses in a couple of house fires.

Yeah, I've got the time and money invested, and it's why I'm going to be as optimistic as possible until it's broken out of me. This is my favorite army. The day the new codex came out, people could have sworn I was getting married or something, I was that excited.

As much as I love my Orks, I know what they aren't and never will be, and that's a tournament-changing army. If I want to always win, I'll play something like Space Marines, especially being cheeky and allying with IG; or I'll combine Eldar and Dark Eldar. But I want to just play to have fun most of the time. If I can get that, just that one thing, out of the Orks, I'll be happy.

I won't be able to test them until Saturday, but for the next few weeks, the time and money I have dedicated ask me to show patience.

[Uberbeast]

Here's a fun update on my earlier game concerning mob rule:

Load of tank bustas with a nob in a truck, truck explodes killing several they take a pinning test and fail, mob rule result inflicts d6 casualties. These casualties cause a moral test for taking quarter casualties, they fail and mob rule has the nob whack another d6 models randomly alocated including himself. Unit is decimated. And the whole process took far longer than just failing a moral test and being pinned, or regrouped from later and not lost all my tankbustas.

Also a failed tank shock moral test can cause mob rule nonsense as well as pinning weapons, fear causing monsters...

So all those dedicated transports people are so happy about getting for there specialized units... DEATH TRAPS.

[InterrogatorBlythicus]

Fork out the time and money mate. That is not an insignificant investment.

Oh and maybe less hypocrisy. See I fail fo see why a "oltimisitc" too early to tell view is somehow better than a pessimisitc too early to tell one. Particularly given the companies past history and the money involved.

Firstly, if you have been playing Orks for as long as it would seem you probably have most of the work done.

Secondly, what hypocrisy. The only point of view I said were bad were the people on the WAAHmbulance. I don't think the is anything wrong with having the "Too early to tell" view whether your optimistic or pessimistic about it. My approach has always been the last category (experimentation boner).

The reasoning is simple: I have more fun playing with my mates, screwing around and finding ways to screw up there favourite mechanics and forcing them to come up with new things. And a new book gives me all sorts of chances to do that.

People like Uberbeast just annoy me. People who expect their new book to be at the top of the pile when it's released fail to realise one crucial thing. If GW was to do that, and they were fair to everyones books, you'd just be *****ing that some new book is OP because your book can't keep up. Rather than be willing to adapt their playstyle and lists, and apply the sort of thinking that this game requires to get the most out of it, they sit there and throw a hissy and expect the world to cater to their demands instead. Sorry kids, never going to happen.

Bottom line, people like that don't want a balanced game, they just want the imbalance to be in their favor.

[Mr Mystery]

Here's a fun update on my earlier game concerning mob rule:

Load of tank bustas with a nob in a truck, truck explodes killing several they take a pinning test and fail, mob rule result inflicts d6 casualties. These casualties cause a moral test for taking quarter casualties, they fail and mob rule has the nob whack another d6 models randomly alocated including himself. Unit is decimated. And the whole process took far longer than just failing a moral test and being pinned, or regrouped from later and not lost all my tankbustas.

Also a failed tank shock moral test can cause mob rule nonsense as well as pinning weapons, fear causing monsters...

So all those dedicated transports people are so happy about getting for there specialized units... DEATH TRAPS.

Moral of the story? Try to avoid your Trukk getting all shot up, rather than just not taking them?

And frankly, I don't believe these reports are from a game. Not only are you showing a staggering level of incompetence (seriously, why weren't your Lootas, big, expensive troops those, in cover? Once in cover, who cares if they have 'Eavy Armour on or not?

Your Trukk scenario above? Nope. Not in one of your first games. It's all possible sure, but I don't buy it. You came in claiming the sky is falling, and now you're posting up stuff which just happens to be worst case scenario. Funny that.

P.S. Just for pedantry....decimation means '1 in 10 killed'. I think most people would be more than happy if decimation is all that happened to their units every turn.

[Wolfshade]

The thread stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little and it will be moderated. But hope remains, if friends stay true.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

The grammar in this thread sickens me. xD

[Charon]

Once in cover, who cares if they have 'Eavy Armour on or not?

Serpents, Wyvern, half of the Tau army, Whirlwinds,.... so basically any bread-and-butter unit from any codex against horde armies :D

[Caitsidhe]

Moral of the story? Try to avoid your Trukk getting all shot up, rather than just not taking them?

Care to tell him "how" to manage this? :D Since the main point of the Trukk is to deliver a load of Orks for close combat, it stands to reason the Trukk must be moving toward the opponent and thus be taking fire. Not to put to fine a point on it Mr. Mystery, but such advice is meaningless if you don't provide him with the magic Golden Ticket that somehow makes such advice practical.


And frankly, I don't believe these reports are from a game. Not only are you showing a staggering level of incompetence (seriously, why weren't your Lootas, big, expensive troops those, in cover? Once in cover, who cares if they have 'Eavy Armour on or not?

I have already tabled an army from the new Ork codex. While the Orks did not kill as many of their own as I did, they did a fair job of it. I'd have to give them credit for 25% of the kills. :D


Your Trukk scenario above? Nope. Not in one of your first games. It's all possible sure, but I don't buy it. You came in claiming the sky is falling, and now you're posting up stuff which just happens to be worst case scenario. Funny that.

I didn't play him, but my opponent did hobble two of his own units when the Trukks blew up. The odds on it are quite good. My own view, given the new rules, is that Orks are better off not going near a vehicle. They are almost as fast without one.


P.S. Just for pedantry....decimation means '1 in 10 killed'. I think most people would be more than happy if decimation is all that happened to their units every turn.

You understood his meaning just fine, so this bit was just petulant. We both have a good command of vocabulary so that should make you happy.

[Mr Mystery]

Obvious pedantry was pointed out.

As for the Trukk thing? Perhaps attempt to use intervening cover to reduce incoming fire power?

His specific example of the Lootas? Taken down by Bolters - Very much suggests they were out in the open. Really? Really really?

The odds are reasonable on asploding trukk syndrome, yes. But note that this chap came in bemoaning everything, and then posts up an alleged report of everything that can go wrong, going wrong, and apparently it's all the book, because it can't possibly be his. Or entirely made up.

[Charon]

So basically you had to make a whine post, whining about how bad his whine post is?

The truck is still a vehicle. Unless you are plaing with huge line of sight blockers there is hardly a way to reduce anti tank fire by such an amount that it becomes unrealistic to pop an av10 vehicle. Basically a single serpent is nearly overkill.

[Uberbeast]

Moral of the story? Try to avoid your Trukk getting all shot up, rather than just not taking them?

And frankly, I don't believe these reports are from a game. Not only are you showing a staggering level of incompetence (seriously, why weren't your Lootas, big, expensive troops those, in cover? Once in cover, who cares if they have 'Eavy Armour on or not?

Your Trukk scenario above? Nope. Not in one of your first games. It's all possible sure, but I don't buy it. You came in claiming the sky is falling, and now you're posting up stuff which just happens to be worst case scenario. Funny that.

P.S. Just for pedantry....decimation means '1 in 10 killed'. I think most people would be more than happy if decimation is all that happened to their units every turn.

-Removed
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/faq.php?faq=termsmaster#faq_bolsrules

Seriously?! I just said that people don't speak like this to others unless they expect to get in fights or they just don't go out in public and you edit my post? Good job mod, real smooth.

[Uberbeast]

People like Uberbeast just annoy me. People who expect their new book to be at the top of the pile when it's released fail to realise one crucial thing. If GW was to do that, and they were fair to everyones books, you'd just be *****ing that some new book is OP because your book can't keep up. Rather than be willing to adapt their playstyle and lists, and apply the sort of thinking that this game requires to get the most out of it, they sit there and throw a hissy and expect the world to cater to their demands instead. Sorry kids, never going to happen.

Bottom line, people like that don't want a balanced game, they just want the imbalance to be in their favor.

Actually it's attitudes like this one that I find most despicable. You say you're annoyed with people who only want to win and expect their book to automatically trump everyone else's. What you don't admit is that the ork book has been languishing for years and each consecutive edition of the game has had an every increasing negative impact on this out of date codex.

The truth is people like you rush out and try to grab whatever the current "best" codex is, they spend endless hours netlisting and trying to come up with the most over-powered cheese build they can think of and then commit their time and resources into that build so they can steamroll everything in sight. They cannot understand any reason for wanting a new list to be better than crap beyond their own view of powergaming, and they hate when GW overpowers a new book because it threatens the previously established meta that they are already concentrating on.

It's the height of hypocrisy when these power-gaming clowns then decide that it's unfair for someone who has been laboring for years with an outdated edition-nerfed codex to want it improved on, as all they have been sitting there helplessly watching their army get worse and worse edition after edition. When instead the new book comes out and it's a huge mess, people like Blythicus rush out and attack the unhappy ork fans, "how dare they want to threaten the powerbuilds like eldar and tau!" All an ork's good for is providing a bumbling npc character to blast off the tabletop so these fragile ego power-gaming hypocrites can feel good about themselves.

It's just discusting to me that anyone would be so pathetic and unfair as to attack an unhappy ork player for not liking what is his lot in life: to wait through another 7 years being cut to pieces by the same power-gaming net-bullies who ridicule them for their just anger at GW for easily one of the most poorly written books they have ever produced.

[Caitsidhe]

My own personal view is that forums exist for people to discuss, debate, whine, go on tangents, stand on soap boxes, and/or generally vent their spleens. It is a given. Anyone who whines about whiners is being, for lack of a better word, foolish. The most common definition in the common vernacular for a forum is: "a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged." Thus it is a near certainty that people will disagree. Why whine about whiners when 1) defining a whine is entirely subjective, and 2) forums exist to service exactly that kind of thing? :D

Don't get me wrong. I think people who whine about whiners are just entitled to vent their spleen (see definition above), I just think they are being hypocritical and extending themselves into less and less tangible subjects. I am always tempted to immediately post about he most abusive list I can think of so I can say to both types, "would you like a little cheese with that whine?" Before I go too much further on my tangent, I will pragmatically point out that a new book just came out. It is only natural that a wide variety of positions would emerge. Let them have their say. Given this is Games Workshop and the new Codex is always purposely designed to screw people out of using models that were good in the previous, it is to be expected that there were going to be some very unhappy campers.

The new codex wants you to field a lot of footsloggers. The new Force Org is designed to encourage that. The change to vehicles is a punitive measure to make sure you spend your points on bodies rather than rides you already own. :D It doesn't take a genius to see what they intend for you to do. I think it is very unfortunate for Ork players. I think it will be unfortunate for me too because for at least the next six months I will have to play against armies of Orks as people try to give them a go. This means LONG tedious games wherein the "Fungus Mungus" makes it return. It takes a long time to setup. It takes a long time for them to move. I takes forever to resolve every combat. In general, it takes forever to reach the same outcome every time.

[Wolfshade]

Perhaps my previous nudge was a little too subtle.

Keep this on topic.

Hint: The topic is the Ork Codex

[Caitsidhe]

Perhaps my previous nudge was a little too subtle.

Keep this on topic.

Hint: The topic is the Ork Codex

My apologies. I thought I had linked my comments to it enough, but I will do so more directly. If you are an Ork player, put your Trukks on the shelf. Statistically they will do more damage to you than provide any benefit. This isn't a complaint, just a truism. The Def'Roller is still functional, but do not rely on Transports in general.

[Path Walker]

Who are all these supposed Ork players who weren't using multiple huge mobs of boyz??!

[Caitsidhe]

Who are all these supposed Ork players who weren't using multiple huge mobs of boyz??!

None of the Ork players in my area relied upon the Fungus Mungus. Key units in Trukks and Nob Bikers have been the "go to" armies in the State of Texas for some time. From what I read on the internet and battle reports, it wasn't isolated to Texas. :D In other words, people naturally gravitated toward quality over quantity. Huge mob Ork armies have been losers for some time, and they are logistically a pain since they double the duration of pick up games, and simply make finishing a round in a tournament impossible.

[Charon]

None of the Ork players in my area relied upon the Fungus Mungus. Key units in Trukks and Nob Bikers have been the "go to" armies in the State of Texas for some time. From what I read on the internet and battle reports, it wasn't isolated to Texas. :D In other words, people naturally gravitated toward quality over quantity. Huge mob Ork armies have been losers for some time, and they are logistically a pain since they double the duration of pick up games, and simply make finishing a round in a tournament impossible.

This sums it up pretty much. Dispite the "educated" opinion of 2 forum members, 120 - 160 orcs CAN be gunned down before they do any measurable damage AND tripple game length.

[Path Walker]

Tournaments don't count.

[Wolfshade]

Tournaments do count, they are just another way that the game is played.

When I play with my orks I tend to barrel them up in trukks with a nob and head them straight forwards. And bikerz and storm boyz (though that is more that I love the model than it is effective). I've not played them with the new dex yet so I shall wait and see how effective this is.

[Uberbeast]

None of the Ork players in my area relied upon the Fungus Mungus. Key units in Trukks and Nob Bikers have been the "go to" armies in the State of Texas for some time. From what I read on the internet and battle reports, it wasn't isolated to Texas. :D In other words, people naturally gravitated toward quality over quantity. Huge mob Ork armies have been losers for some time, and they are logistically a pain since they double the duration of pick up games, and simply make finishing a round in a tournament impossible.

This in a nut-shell. I was pretty much forced away from horde blobbing during 5th edition's parking lot leafblower days. 6th edition's nerfs to cc, boost to shooting, and removing casualties from front pretty much saw me playing fewer games overall. 7th edition wasn't looking any better, but I was really excited for the new book. My collection is vast enough that I can run any build or formation the book has to offer. Unfortunately, I don't see anything but the wildest unbound allies lists working thanks to mob rule.

[Path Walker]

Sorry, I meant to say, that deriding the opinions of two forums memebers and then taking on the wisdom of tournaments, where there are few lists you'd see in a casual game between friends (which make up the majority of 40k games played), and due to the random nature of Orks confilicting with the general mindset of tournament players fewer Ork armies, isn't really a valid way of judging how Orks play.

Orks are varied, hugely so, you can swarm with them, fast attack in trukks and buggies and planes, use lots of walkers and 7th unlocks this even further, I played by first game with the new codex on Saturday, against another Ork player, he was heavy of boys and had Ghazkull, I went mostly walkers with a Stompa, Gorkanaught and dreads and Kans (love those 6 kan mobs now!) and only 2 mobs of 20 boys, it was a blast, didn't bother with points values, just took stuff till it looked about about fair (he also took 2 knights but we decided they were looted and could go within 6", mainly because we forgot they couldn't one turn), we drew a lot of attention in our local GW, which hosted 2 full Ork games that day, with another guy facing off against the staffs Space Wolves and utterly overwhelming them.

If you play Orks (as I have for 22 years) you get used to things not quite going as planned, but its worth it for that time your Lootas get 3 shots when you need them too and your Flash Gits are AP1 and waste some terminators. You just have to shrug and laugh when it goes wrong.

The Mob Rule is fine, it could go badly, yes, but most times it'll kill one boy, its fluffy and really, how many armies in the game should ignore the morale phase? It was getting silly, hardly any armies had to worry about morale, I think its good that it makes a come back, the old Mob Rule was too much, this balances it out nicely and gives another boost to big mobs of boyz over other choices.

[Charon]

Sorry, I meant to say, that deriding the opinions of two forums memebers and then taking on the wisdom of tournaments, where there are few lists you'd see in a casual game between friends (which make up the majority of 40k games played), and due to the random nature of Orks confilicting with the general mindset of tournament players fewer Ork armies, isn't really a valid way of judging how Orks play.

Orcs are in fact much less random than most other armies. The more dice you roll (and orcs roll a lot) the more you get to roll averages. So no. No random nature conflicts as small elite armies are way more random.

Even in a casual game with friends (which I have most of the time) you will see Whirlwinds, Wyvern batterys, Ordnance Tanks, Knights,... all perfectly suited to deal with mass armies.
I dont say that a green tide wont work at all. But reinforcing this "160 orcs cant be stopped!" with an "except by tourney armies" also implies, that these 160 orcs would be a WAAC list as some forum dwellers deem it "unstoppable"

[Path Walker]

Orcs are in fact much less random than most other armies. The more dice you roll (and orcs roll a lot) the more you get to roll averages. So no. No random nature conflicts as small elite armies are way more random.

Even in a casual game with friends (which I have most of the time) you will see Whirlwinds, Wyvern batterys, Ordnance Tanks, Knights,... all perfectly suited to deal with mass armies.
I dont say that a green tide wont work at all. But reinforcing this "160 orcs cant be stopped!" with an "except by tourney armies" also implies, that these 160 orcs would be a WAAC list as some forum dwellers deem it "unstoppable"

Thats not how randomness works in the game for Orks, as I explained to you last time your tried to bring that up. When you're rolling for the Strength, number of shots or AP for a Unit, the sheer number of dice you roll for attacking in meele doesn't really matter.

[DarkLink]

No, literally, the more dice you roll, the less random you are. It's basic statistics. Flip a coin and you're 50/0 on whats it's going to be. Flip a thousand, and very, very close to 500 will be heads and 500 tails.

When a Space Marine with a lascannon takes a shot, it's a tossup what the result will be because each single dice has a solid chance of failure and you have a very small number of trials. When you roll buckets full of dice, you converge to the average so your 30 Ork Boyz will actually reliably get average dice, unlike the Space Marine.

[Path Walker]

No, literally, the more dice you roll, the less random you are. It's basic statistics. Flip a coin and you're 50/0 on whats it's going to be. Flip a thousand, and very, very close to 500 will be heads and 500 tails.

When a Space Marine with a lascannon takes a shot, it's a tossup what the result will be because each single dice has a solid chance of failure and you have a very small number of trials. When you roll buckets full of dice, you converge to the average so your 30 Ork Boyz will actually reliably get average dice, unlike the Space Marine.

Yet, the real random elements of the Ork army, like the guns for Lootas and Flash Gits, aren't rolled in buckets, they're once per unit.

Its also overstating to say that rolling buckets of dice in a game of 40K would tend towards average, it wouldn't have that pronounced an effect, overall, the sample size is still quite small, and the dice, 1000 coin flips would not produce close to 50% distribution, its more like 100,000,000 before you get good correlation.

So, as we're not rolling enough to reliably tend towards the average, the dice for Orks can swing either way on a given check, which, because they roll so many, can have a pronounced effect on a particular turn of the game.

[Erik Setzer]

Who are all these supposed Ork players who weren't using multiple huge mobs of boyz??!

< Waving hand >

I started playing seriously in early 2nd edition, where Ork units were 5-10 guys. Then in 3rd edition, I started using 16 Boyz in a mob: Nob, 12 Boyz with slugga and choppa, and 3 big shootas, rokkits, or burnas. It wasn't just me picking an arbitrary number: though I was running that size prior to reading this, Adi Wood and Andy Chambers both noted that as a good unit size for Orks.

So, for someone like me, it's still hard to get used to 30. Most of my mobs aren't painted up in sizes that large. I'm still having trouble building a mob above 20, because I feel that's enough to have weight of bodies while still having the ability to maneuver. Being able to actually get around the board to get stuck in is kind of important.

I should also note I play Blood Axes, so we tend to do a bit more in-depth consideration of unit tactics than "throw a lot of bodies straight forward!"

[DarkLink]

It would depend on how you want to define close. At 1000, it would be pretty small, but that's missing the point. I'm not disagreeing that some elements are pretty random, just that Charon is right that if you roll lots of dice, you converge more.

[Erik Setzer]

This sums it up pretty much. Dispite the "educated" opinion of 2 forum members, 120 - 160 orcs CAN be gunned down before they do any measurable damage AND tripple game length.

It was actually playing against another guy's Orks that convinced me how bad they were in 6th. I have a tendency to do some off-the-wall lists for fun, so seeing them lose badly (or sometimes win really well) wasn't a real shock. But this one guy had a pretty solid Ork army, designed for tournaments and "all comers," and he wanted to play my Space Marines. I made an "all-comers" list which meant it had some stuff that wasn't that useful against him (i.e. wasted points on flakk missiles, but, again, it was supposed to be two "all-comers" tourney-style armies fighting). He looked like he had a bit of a chance, but I just focused fire and picked targets and his army ended up crumbling hard. The thing that hurt him most was that I'd only shoot his big Boyz mobs down to around 10-15 models, then let them assault me. I could Overwatch with bolters to kill another one or two, then strike first and kill some of them, while they wouldn't get much past my 3+ armor. He'd lose combat and be down low enough for it to be a Ld test, the mob would run, I'd overrun, it was done for. And I was using basic Tactical Squads. It was disheartening to watch, I really felt bad for him. Good player, though, and he gets into the spirit of Orks so I'm glad he's sticking around.

[DarkLink]

Battlewagon orks with some nob bikers and Ghaz were actually pretty good, but other than that one build orks have been pretty terrible since like 4th edition now.

[Ghostofman]

Battlewagon orks with some nob bikers and Ghaz were actually pretty good, but other than that one build orks have been pretty terrible since like 4th edition now.

Actually, unless I'm missing some key point, with some minor tweaking the Nob Bikers are still pretty brutal....
They have a 3+ cover save when Turboboosting and Jinking. (right?) So that first turn they are on the board they won't be easy to hit.
And a BigMekcycle (which can be the blitzbike if you want) with KFF can add a 5+ Inv save... and/or a Paincycle for FNP... So now they are pretty tough...
Usual grab bag of kombi and melee weapons for that hard punch and situational flexibility...Rokkits Klaws and Skorcha's are fun...
Other kit for bonuses and buffs...

Can Snikrot join them to allow an outflank? I want to say yes, but it doesn't feel right...

Anyway, there ya go... may take some getting used to, but a potentially nasty piece of work... still burning a lotta points, and if I'm right about snikrot and you go whole squig you'll be taking 3 HQs, which has it's drawbacks in the Detachment Command Benefits area/Unboundedness, but it's doable...

I do kinda hope I'm missing something though, that seems a little off...

[DarkLink]

I know almost nothing about the new codex, so it could be so.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

Snikrot can only join Kommandos, as per his "Red Skull Kommandos" special rule.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, Snikrot is an elite choice.

[Ghostofman]

Snikrot can only join Kommandos, as per his "Red Skull Kommandos" special rule.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, Snikrot is an elite choice.

So he can and so he is. Otherwise, I think I'm still good though right?

[Wizzardx3]

So the main complaint that I'm hearing is over Mob Rule?
I think that taking a Mob Rule once per phase is ok... like the example before however, taking up to 3 in a phase is pretty devastating.

Question though: How does the Looted Wagon compare to the other HS options in the codex?

[xxlantzxx]

Pretty excited to try out my new Ork army its been 15 years since I've played them, Gotta say the mob rule seems pretty harsh but i guess that just means boss poles are pretty mandatory now

[Lexington]

So, I just got my Warboss Edition box today. Couple things:

1) That Great WAAAGH detachment is going to be great. It'll be my second detachment choice (after an Ork Horde main, because yay extra HQ choices, and forced Challenges are for boo) in any Ork army.

2) There's almost no reason to take Zagstruk without also taking his Vulcha Squad formation, which has a piddly minimum of fifteen Stormboyz total and a bunch of free special rules to boot. Plus, it can have three Nobz (not including Zagstruk) if you're feeling saucy. Mean assault unit with some real punch.

3) Sort of a similar bag for Snikrot's Red Kommandoz, though at a twenty-Kommando minimum, it's a little less of a must-take.

4) Every other formation is characterful and fun, if not as much of an auto-include for certain army types. This might be the best Codex Supplement yet. Nice job, GeeDubz.

[DarkLink]

Boss poles don't really do much to save you. All the results are bad.

[Houghten]

So, I just got my Warboss Edition box today. Couple things:

1) That Great WAAAGH detachment is going to be great. It'll be my second detachment choice (after an Ork Horde main, because yay extra HQ choices, and forced Challenges are for boo) in any Ork army.
I dunno... it's hard to beat the "Objective Secured" Troops you get in a regular Combined Arms Detachment.


2) There's almost no reason to take Zagstruk without also taking his Vulcha Squad formation, which has a piddly minimum of fifteen Stormboyz total and a bunch of free special rules to boot. Plus, it can have three Nobz (not including Zagstruk) if you're feeling saucy. Mean assault unit with some real punch.

Alternatively, you can take Zag himself, three Nobz and eighty-seven regular Stormboyz. All in one unit of DOOOOOM that's nearly a 1000-point army by itself.

Not that it could be a viable army by itself because it would auto-lose at the end of Turn 1, on account of having to start in Deep Strike and having no rule to let it do so on Turn 1. Also I have no idea how big a clear area you need to Deep Strike 91 bases without mishapping.


4) Every other formation is characterful and fun, if not as much of an auto-include for certain army types.
The Bully Boyz are certainly the best way to run Meganobz. Fearless means they don't give a zog about "Da Boss iz Watchin" and the free +1WS is dead good 'cos they can't normally take a Waaagh! banner. Sure, a minimum of 15 Meganobz is a minimum of 600pts but when they're not eating any of your Elites slots, why wouldn't you take three units of Meganobz?

Scouting Battlewagons are also pretty hilarious, especially when you realise that Scout confers Outflank. "Surprise! There's a killkannon behind your lines!" Again, five of 'em is a bit pricey but on the other hand they're not taking up any of your Heavy Support slots (and if, like me, you've converted a bunch of different ones, having the chance to show them all off at once is pretty sweet).

[Krefey]

Ok. A few things:

Mob rule. I see this rule more to help inspire more thematic armies of Orks. It promotes larger mob units with a boss nob ork to beat the boys over the head to keep them in line. Taking D6 S4 hits when you're a mob of T4 boys isn't really that bad. Even if you roll 6 hits, on average you'll lose 3 boys. Not really that bad all said and done. The only annoying part is the random allocation of the hits.

Ghaz - he gained eternal warrior (which people seem to have missed), so he's even harder to kill now.

Buggies, cheaper and now get outflank as well, meaning they will be able to survive to get a solid first round of shooting in before any return fire happens

Flash gitz, even better now

Grot riggers or vehicles is awesome. It will not die? Bring it on.

Traktor kannons. What flyers? In fact mek guns in general are pretty awesome now. Not sold on the bubblechukka though.

Warbikes are cheaper. Yes, they lost the cover save, but if you turbo boost, they will get a 3+ cover save. Next turn you should be in combat anyway.

Wazdakka and Zogrot missing - I didn't see a lot of Zogrot around in the first place, but they are both mentioned a lot, which leads me to think wait for a supplement.

Stormboys...wow. So much cheaper now.

Kommandos now get stealth.

meganobz. You can join a painboy to them now to give them that 5+ FNP. Join Grotsnik to them and they get a 5+ FNP and they get rampage which gives them an extra D3 attacks against most enemies since they will tend to be outnumbered in most cases. Kill saws are also pretty awesome, trade in a shooty weapon for an extra CC attack and armourbane? Sure.

Glory boys for tankbustas is pretty sweet for a possible extra VP. A large mob of 15 or so should not have too much trouble taking out a vehicle, even with the new damage table. They also gained the tank hunters rule. Double bonus.

Grots got slightly cheaper for their base cost. Squig hounds make grots have a poor mans version of mob rule.

Shoota boys really did need that +1 point over slugga boys. Some people may claim it doesn't make a difference, but I think it does. Someone already mentioned that they took plain sluggas to save points to get more toys. They can now take as many units of eavy armoured boys instead of just one.

Weirdboys...their powers are pretty awesome. Bonus, psychic checks are no longer Ld based, so they aren't penalised by their low Ld value.

That about sums it up from a quick skim through for me.

[Houghten]

They also gained the tank hunters rule. Double bonus.

I think you mean "got back." 3rd Edition Tankbustas had the original Tank Hunters rule.

[Krefey]

I think you mean "got back." 3rd Edition Tankbustas had the original Tank Hunters rule.

Tomato, tomatoe :P But still an improvement over the last codex.

[Caitsidhe]

I haven't seen much languishing with Orks before now. I've still had plenty of games against Orks that I have lost. Maybe it's just the way you play your army. It tends to be the most adaptable people who make the most of any book.

You haven't? :) I suppose this could be an Australian thing because I assure you that they have been languishing in the United States and by all accounts in most other places too. Until this new Codex came out I think I've played one game against Orks in the last year. With the new book there are the ever hopeful trying stuff out. The light is going out of their eyes real fast.


If I was doing this I wouldn't be playing Dark Angels and Tyranids in 40k, and I wouldn't be using Orcs & Goblins, Wood Elves and Warriors of Chaos in fantasy. All my lists are built around a fluff narrative that I come up with for each army, because that's what I like to play and paint. The closest I come to net listing is talking about potential builds with my friends. Fact is I don't like always steam-rolling, it's boring after a while, I'd prefer a challenge. I have never seen a book come out that was super powerful with no weaknesses, so I don't care when new powerful stuff does come out.

You haven't? You have NEVER seen a new Codex come out that was super powerful compared to the rest? Your credibility just took a serious hit with me.

- - - Updated - - -


Tomato, tomatoe :P But still an improvement over the last codex.

I suppose this is a matter of opinion, but I'm not at all sure "how" it is an improvement.

[Krefey]

I suppose this is a matter of opinion, but I'm not at all sure "how" it is an improvement.

How could it not be an improvement? Last codex they didn't have tank hunters, now they do? Being able to re-roll failed armour penetration rolls, especially when you're hitting on 5's seems pretty good to me.

[Caitsidhe]

How could it not be an improvement? Last codex they didn't have tank hunters, now they do? Being able to re-roll failed armour penetration rolls, especially when you're hitting on 5's seems pretty good to me.

Who cares about Tank Hunter? :D Not to put too fine a point on it but killing vehicles hasn't been (nor is it now) that hard with or without that Special Rule. If you really want to kill Armour, that hardly makes a huge difference since you have to hit in the first place. If you really want to kill Tanks (if they are that big a problem in your META) a small allied detachment would serve you a hell of a lot better. The new codex is full of gold star garbage, i.e. price reductions which are meaningless and things like that rule which sound good but which do very little in application in the average game.

I'm a pragmatist. I care about what happens in the average game on a regular basis. Probability is a harsh mistress. Orks can only win a game by managing to get into close combat or somehow holding objectives against those that would shoot them off said objectives or push them off. On the whole, Orks just got easier to kill and scare off. That is all that matters. Giving Orks a rule that makes them more likely to hurt Armour "if" they hit is cold comfort. Winning games isn't about what "might" happen. Winning games is about what does happen every single game.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

I for one am on the fence about the book. I use wazdakka... have a custom (forgeworld) model converted that was a gift from a good friend. So for me before I even roll dice i have already lost a character and now have to try and figure out what to do with my list. My force was built with bikes in mind i was able to take wazdakka and use his rule to make my bikers troops. I personally do not want to have to use regular orks in a speed freak list. I wanted bikes and Bikes and now that is gone. ( apparently I haveto wait and hope for a suppliment)

I helped a buddy test out an ork list last saturday night 2k. He used a standard ork list. 4 large units of orks maxed out a unit of nobs 2 warbosses and a warphead. then he took a dreak some kans and a battle wagon. He faced off against my world eaters and at the end of the day the orks took out a land raider killed 15 cultists and the game was called on turn 3 after kharn a lord with the relic axe and 18 berserkers tore 70+ orks to pieces. after that my opponent was just defeated. He was all pumped and excited to play his orks but after watching and seeing how they have changed it took out all the wind in his sails.

I know that its only one game but it was enough to make him pretty much shelve his army :/ that was not my intention but it's one gamer's perception which in turn is his reality. Now attacking someone because you think the codex is amazing or good and someone else thinks it's bad or the worst ever isn't going to change anything. Each player will have his or her own reasons for liking or hating the book.

Me and my own personal opinion are that I have not had enough time to play the book or to even really dig in and digest the changes with in it to form an opinion. My feelings with it are not optomistic as I mentioned above with the lossof how i was playing my army in the previous 2 editions.

[Erik Setzer]

and the game was called on turn 3 after kharn a lord with the relic axe and 18 berserkers tore 70+ orks to pieces. after that my opponent was just defeated. He was all pumped and excited to play his orks but after watching and seeing how they have changed it took out all the wind in his sails.

That's been Orks for at least the last two editions, though. They can't take on Space Marines in numbers higher than about half a squad. I saw a 30-Ork mob disintegrate to the remains of a unit of Grey Hunters, right after I watched a 20-Ork mob do the same when *I* charged them the turn prior. I know people think 'eavy armor is expensive, but it's practically a must if you want your Boyz to have any survivability, otherwise bolters and even basic close combat attacks just wreck them.

Of course, Shoota Boyz went up in price, and Lootas were moved to Heavy Support, so trying to do a shooty list is harder now, despite it being the way to go.

- - - Updated - - -


Ghaz - he gained eternal warrior (which people seem to have missed), so he's even harder to kill now.

The opposite, actually. Before, his Adamantium Skull said he ignored Instant Death, which meant it just didn't count against him. Eternal Warrior's wording is that you take one wound only, but ID still counts as ID, which negates FNP. So now that he's relying on a FNP save, he doesn't get it against ID. I know the situations that'd pop up are rare (S10 or Force Weapon, stuff like that), but it does mean he's actually less survivable.

[DarkLink]

Just to clarify, last edition he didn't get FNP because of his adamantium skull either. That hasn't changed. They just reworded it for clarity's sake.

[Ghostofman]

I for one am on the fence about the book. I use wazdakka... have a custom (forgeworld) model converted that was a gift from a good friend. So for me before I even roll dice i have already lost a character and now have to try and figure out what to do with my list. My force was built with bikes in mind i was able to take wazdakka and use his rule to make my bikers troops. I personally do not want to have to use regular orks in a speed freak list. I wanted bikes and Bikes and now that is gone. ( apparently I haveto wait and hope for a suppliment)

I helped a buddy test out an ork list last saturday night 2k. He used a standard ork list. 4 large units of orks maxed out a unit of nobs 2 warbosses and a warphead. then he took a dreak some kans and a battle wagon. He faced off against my world eaters and at the end of the day the orks took out a land raider killed 15 cultists and the game was called on turn 3 after kharn a lord with the relic axe and 18 berserkers tore 70+ orks to pieces. after that my opponent was just defeated. He was all pumped and excited to play his orks but after watching and seeing how they have changed it took out all the wind in his sails.

I know that its only one game but it was enough to make him pretty much shelve his army :/ that was not my intention but it's one gamer's perception which in turn is his reality. Now attacking someone because you think the codex is amazing or good and someone else thinks it's bad or the worst ever isn't going to change anything. Each player will have his or her own reasons for liking or hating the book.

Me and my own personal opinion are that I have not had enough time to play the book or to even really dig in and digest the changes with in it to form an opinion. My feelings with it are not optomistic as I mentioned above with the lossof how i was playing my army in the previous 2 editions.

The (not so warm and fuzzy) feeling I get when it comes to specialized lists is that GW has trashed them all, at least in their old form.

With unbound and (almost) everything considered scoring, there is no longer a need for making X unit a Troops choice anymore. So a Wazdakka list is now just supposed to be an unbound list with a warboss on the uberbike and lots of bikers instead of boyz. You can still claim objectives and tactical objectives with em. You just can't make a CAD out of it and had objective secured. It's annoying, but the Ork Horde Detachment in the codex doesn't have ObjSec either. I'm taking that as a hint.

I know "But Ghost, no one will play Unbound, because it sucks, and was made up to allow GW to push more sales on us, and is for cheaters that want to show up with an army composed entirely of land raiders!"

Yeah... it is... but it's also not going anywhere for a while, and GW is going to still assume you are playing unbound in all future codex and supplements. So better to just get used to it, because the next Army updated is probably gonna be in the same boat, and the one after that, and the one after that...

[daboarder]

Gw itself has been baning unbound lists at their own events.

[Caitsidhe]

Gw itself has been baning unbound lists at their own events.

<laughs> What a shock.

[Krefey]

Who cares about Tank Hunter? :D Not to put too fine a point on it but killing vehicles hasn't been (nor is it now) that hard with or without that Special Rule. If you really want to kill Armour, that hardly makes a huge difference since you have to hit in the first place. If you really want to kill Tanks (if they are that big a problem in your META) a small allied detachment would serve you a hell of a lot better. The new codex is full of gold star garbage, i.e. price reductions which are meaningless and things like that rule which sound good but which do very little in application in the average game.

I'm a pragmatist. I care about what happens in the average game on a regular basis. Probability is a harsh mistress. Orks can only win a game by managing to get into close combat or somehow holding objectives against those that would shoot them off said objectives or push them off. On the whole, Orks just got easier to kill and scare off. That is all that matters. Giving Orks a rule that makes them more likely to hurt Armour "if" they hit is cold comfort. Winning games isn't about what "might" happen. Winning games is about what does happen every single game.

Sorry, but if you have an army that doesn't hit things very often, then why would having an ability that increases the odds of doing damage when you do hit be bad / not worth it? Sure you could take an allied detachment, but what if you don't want to? What if you want to field a pure Ork army because they don't tend to ally with anybody as per the background / fluff? Based on your posts, I would be incliend to think you fall into the more competitive / tournament player side of the player base. So I get why you think about options like that.

From what I've seen of the changes, yes they are slightly easier to scare off than before. They are slightly easier to kill now that you can't have 5 units of 30 boys getting a 5++ save from the kustom forcefield that is only in range of one model from each unit (because that wasn't a bit OP at all). Having said that though, the changes reflect the background / fluff better. Making the army feel more like it is described in all the material written about them. I understand that from the perspective of someone who plays the game competitively, that's a negative, but from my point of view, that's a plus. It has certainly rekindled my lvoe for the greenskins. So much so that I'm consdiering putting together a sizeable ork force.


Gw itself has been baning unbound lists at their own events.

<laughs> What a shock.
I've said it before, but that's not a surprise. The rules are a *framework*. This means that GW have provided a set of rules that allows players to choose which elements they want to include for their games and which they don't. Plus it's hardly a change from how tournaments have been run since forever. There have always been aritficial restrictions put in place ever since the old rogue trader tournament system.

[daboarder]

S
I've said it before, but that's not a surprise. The rules are a *framework*. This means that GW have provided a set of rules that allows players to choose which elements they want to include for their games and which they don't. Plus it's hardly a change from how tournaments have been run since forever. There have always been aritficial restrictions put in place ever since the old rogue trader tournament system.

sorry but no, a product that is this expensive is not a framework

Change it to suit your own desire and group, but dont try justifying BS with "its MEANT to not be a finished product"

[Krefey]

sorry but no, a product that is this expensive is not a framework

Change it to suit your own desire and group, but dont try justifying BS with "its MEANT to not be a finished product"

There are plenty of framework options out there that are official products for use in the real world (i.e. how to structure companies, support models etc). They aren't "complete products" as you say, but they give the companies the tools they can then use to develop the system that works best for them. This isn't a new concept to the world.

The core rules are there (i.e. movement, shooting, close combat, psychic phase, unit types etc.) Those are the core mandatory components of the game that you need to be able to play. Those are the "finished product" as it were.

The allies matrix, the missions etc are the framework. They are the provided guides on how you can play the game, not how you *must* play the game.

[Caitsidhe]

I understand that from the perspective of someone who plays the game competitively, that's a negative, but from my point of view, that's a plus. It has certainly rekindled my lvoe for the greenskins. So much so that I'm consdiering putting together a sizeable ork force.

So you enjoy being a Red Shirt (Star Trek reference)? :D Getting your face kicked in as opponent after opponent curb stomps you has rekindled your love of the greenskins? :D You are a masochist?

[Erik Setzer]

Having said that though, the changes reflect the background / fluff better. Making the army feel more like it is described in all the material written about them.

If they did that, the Warboss would be one of the scariest HQ options in the game. Read through the section on the various Waagh! uprisings. It's not all that rare that an Ork Warboss can lead the way in personally rampaging through ridiculous numbers of Space Marines. Heck, there's one story where these Space Marines got a Warboss and his Orks into an area, destroyed all the bridges to get out, then attacked them in this "trap" they'd laid... and ended up getting over three companies' worth of Marines wiped out just in that fighting alone, before the Orks got out and then went finding more Space Marines to wreck while adorning their trophy poles with Marine helmets. You think that would ever happen in-game?

[Charon]

Do you think 4 space marines taking on multiple squadrons of guard would ever happen in-game?
Or a scorpion Exacrch duelling with a hive tyrant and slaying him in close combat? Or an Autarch one-shotting a Trygon?
Do we see a single guardsman killing a chaos cybot ingame? Or an Avatar single(bloody)handed scything down a full tyranid force for days?

Fiction is fiction.
The only thing I can blame on them in this regard is that some armies dont "feel" like in the fiction (Tyranids are no endless swarm of beasts but a couple of elite monsters) but I would not give to much on individual glory moments... they are always overexaggerated. By the amount of blood in the books, Ultramarines would have been long extinct... they mess up numbers pretty hard.

[odinsgrandson]

Good point, Charon. In White Dwarf 300, GW actually made an answer to why the fluff doesn't look like it takes place in their game (apparently, they hear questions on that a lot). They made the Codex Unapproved "Movie Marines" army list (they compared their fiction to a Hollywood blockbuster action movie).

I think it accurately represents space marines as they appear in the fluff. A ten man squad of marines with a rhino is 1500 points- and they could probably take on a force twice that size. The bolters act more like assault cannons, a lascannon hits every model in a line and insta-kills minis regardless of their toughness.

The only trouble is, the game has had a tremendous power creep since the rules came out (in the 4th edition) so they're not quite as broken as they once were (Movie Marines used to be the only guys to get a 3++ save, for example).

They're still pretty broken though.

[Path Walker]

sorry but no, a product that is this expensive is not a framework

Change it to suit your own desire and group, but dont try justifying BS with "its MEANT to not be a finished product"

Except it is a framework, thats what its sold as and, like many games, thats what people want, look at D&D, its the same deal. If you don't like it, suck it up or quit.

[Uberbeast]

I really don't think you can just say that the new rules represent the fluff better and leave it at that. You're forgetting that this is still a war game and that as players we like to have a fun game, not a simple reenactment of orks killing eachother and dying in droves.

If they wanted to put more negative rules into the codex like mob rule and cowardly grots then they should have had a corresponding points decrease as they were losing value and so you should get more orks overall. Instead lots of things that got nerfed either with the codex itself or with the 7th edition core rules stayed the same point cost, lots of units that kept the same rules went up in point cost, and many of the units that went down in point cost actually lost rules and abilities that were worth more then the decrease in points.

The end result is that the ork codex is a mix of nerfs, overpricing, sideways moves, and a lack of cohesion that will not live beyond the individual player's enthusiasm for fluff. What's more it doesn't leave me holding out much hope for other future codices like Dark Eldar, which is another book that has suffered from new edition nerfing.

[Caitsidhe]

Except it is a framework, thats what its sold as and, like many games, thats what people want, look at D&D, its the same deal. If you don't like it, suck it up or quit.

Actually, "framework" is your word. It is NOT sold that way. It is sold as a set of rules.

[Charon]

Except it is a framework, thats what its sold as and, like many games, thats what people want, look at D&D, its the same deal. If you don't like it, suck it up or quit.

I really like the D&D comparison because it shows how bad the rules are.
D&D has a TON of rules. Tight rules for EVERYTHING. You can feel free to leave as many rules out as you want. I hardly know anyone who plays D&D with full rules. D&D is overloaded with rules.
40k is not. 40k barley has basic rules and these are contradicted and invalidated by other rules. You decide which rule goes first by an arbitrary case to case basis. You cant just ignore rule because this makes the entire framework collapse. D&D has modular rules. 40k has only a few. You can decide to ban SC, Allies, LoW, Fortifications,... but it will never have the same clarity and support as D&D has.
And if any issues arise, there is the game master to solve it.

[DWest]

D&D or any other tabletop RPG also has one other huge difference to 40k- authority. The Game Master is a rank above the players, and tells them how the game will be played, with the implication, "if you don't like it, door's on your left". In a standard game of 40k, you don't have that level of authority; both players are on equal terms. A Tournament Organizer works similarly to a Game Master, and a good TO can mitigate most of the problems with a ruleset, but you can't really put on a tourney every time you want to have a game.

The second problem is investment; D&D players and 40k players are both emotionally (and monetarily- every D&D game I've been in that goes for a decent length of time has seen lovingly converted and painted minis for the PCs show up) in what they're playing, but again there's a difference: With an RPG, the players usually don't make their character until after the GM has revealed what the tweaks to the rules are. By comparison, 40k is pushing players to buy the big shiny kit, whether it's a Stormraven or a Knight or a Void Shield Generator or Ghazkull, and thereby get the players to force all the rules to stay in play.

[daboarder]

Actually, "framework" is your word. It is NOT sold that way. It is sold as a set of rules.
I can just see "framework rules" becoming the new internet cliche now that "modeling company" has been regularly destroyed

[Caitsidhe]

I can just see "framework rules" becoming the new internet cliche now that "modeling company" has been regularly destroyed

My favorites, now destroyed or debunked are "modeling company" and "beer & pretzels game". Framework does seem to be the new talking point that the shills are throwing around.

[Krefey]

If they did that, the Warboss would be one of the scariest HQ options in the game. Read through the section on the various Waagh! uprisings. It's not all that rare that an Ork Warboss can lead the way in personally rampaging through ridiculous numbers of Space Marines. Heck, there's one story where these Space Marines got a Warboss and his Orks into an area, destroyed all the bridges to get out, then attacked them in this "trap" they'd laid... and ended up getting over three companies' worth of Marines wiped out just in that fighting alone, before the Orks got out and then went finding more Space Marines to wreck while adorning their trophy poles with Marine helmets. You think that would ever happen in-game?

Yeah, but the same piece of fluff says they severely underestimated the number of orks that were there, hence why they got overwhelmed.


So you enjoy being a Red Shirt (Star Trek reference)? :D Getting your face kicked in as opponent after opponent curb stomps you has rekindled your love of the greenskins? :D You are a masochist?

No, I enjoy the armies having a greater degree of unique flavour to them that more closely matches what is in the background. You can still make a decent and solid list with the codex that can take on msot armies.


Actually, "framework" is your word. It is NOT sold that way. It is sold as a set of rules.

Pretty sure they use the term framework in the opening pages of the rulebook, not having it on me, I'll have to double check when I get home though. The only reason I've used the term is because I believe GW has used it.


I really don't think you can just say that the new rules represent the fluff better and leave it at that. You're forgetting that this is still a war game and that as players we like to have a fun game, not a simple reenactment of orks killing eachother and dying in droves.

If they wanted to put more negative rules into the codex like mob rule and cowardly grots then they should have had a corresponding points decrease as they were losing value and so you should get more orks overall. Instead lots of things that got nerfed either with the codex itself or with the 7th edition core rules stayed the same point cost, lots of units that kept the same rules went up in point cost, and many of the units that went down in point cost actually lost rules and abilities that were worth more then the decrease in points.

The end result is that the ork codex is a mix of nerfs, overpricing, sideways moves, and a lack of cohesion that will not live beyond the individual player's enthusiasm for fluff. What's more it doesn't leave me holding out much hope for other future codices like Dark Eldar, which is another book that has suffered from new edition nerfing.

You can still win games with the list. As I pointed out the biggest things that people seem to be complaining about as nerfs don't really change that much. Mob rule is rarely going to decimate a mob unless you're unlucky. On average you'd be getting 3-4 hits which means 1-2 dead orks. Not a horrible price to pay to pass the check if you happened to fail the initial Ld test.

The kill kanz, sure, you can take a test, but if you have a large mob and a deff dread nearby, you pass on a 1+. Have only one of those two options and it's a 2+. Even if you fail, it's only a shaken result. Which doesn't stop you moving, firing snap shots and assaulting.

I'm curious as to what you feel got nerfed though, apart from those two (and probably Ghasghkull too). If you've covered it earlier, let me know so I can have a read over it and see if I agree with your points or not.



My favorites, now destroyed or debunked are "modeling company" and "beer & pretzels game". Framework does seem to be the new talking point that the shills are throwing around.

As opposed to all the whigners and whiners who are always claiming GW has ruined the game and that the sky is falling?

[DarkLink]

Complaining about perceived whining isn't exactly classy either.

If you charge a premium price for something (which GW absolutely does), the people buying it should expect to get a quality product. That's not always what GW does. In the case of the rules, you have to make up your own sometimes. Now, having options isn't a bad thing, but each set of options should be clearly defined and fully functional. Instead, GW gives you a bucket full of bolts and expects you to enjoy trying to build a swing set out of it. For the price they charge, the swing set should come with an attached playground. It doesn't mean that you can't play a good game of 40k, but it does warrant justifiable criticism for those who expect good value for their money.

[Krefey]

Complaining about perceived whining isn't exactly classy either.

If you charge a premium price for something (which GW absolutely does), the people buying it should expect to get a quality product. That's not always what GW does. In the case of the rules, you have to make up your own sometimes. Now, having options isn't a bad thing, but each set of options should be clearly defined and fully functional. Instead, GW gives you a bucket full of bolts and expects you to enjoy trying to build a swing set out of it. For the price they charge, the swing set should come with an attached playground. It doesn't mean that you can't play a good game of 40k, but it does warrant justifiable criticism for those who expect good value for their money.

I don't disagree that GW product is priced higher than it really should be. My purchasing has certainly dropped considerably over the recent years as a result of the prices. I also agree that the rules aren't 100% perfect. I do think that for the most part, their products (at least the miniatures) are generally better than most (not all, Infinity sculpts are, imho, superior to GW apart from how finicky they can be to assemble) other options out there. The production quality of their books has increased a lot from what I've seen, so you're paying for better quality books than you used to get (sure, still not great value for money).

It has taken a while for me to just relax about it all. I used to play tournament 40k exclusively. I liked having a more rigid and defined set of rules in place. Part of me still does as I like having a definite set of rules to follow. But when it comes to 40k, I've since become a lot more relaxed about it all. It's not worth getting worked up over a game of toy soldiers that is supposed to be something I am doing for fun. As a result in my change of focus on how I approach the game, I'm somewhat more relaxed and accepting of the various flaws in the game. I can just talk it over with my opponents if something comes up and move on. For the outlay in price, I get hundreds of hours of entertainment out of the rules. Did I like having to fork out more cash for a new set of rules after just less than 2 years? Not really. If they do it again, I will probably think twice about buying the new rules again or consider splitting the cost with some mates if we still want to stick with the GW part of the hobby.

I think I've prboably extrapolated and waffled on too much arleady.

[DarkLink]

Funnily enough, in the past I've said the exact same thing about GW's models (they're high quality, but some manufacturers like Infinity have surpassed them in some ways). Balance isn't the only issue with GW's rules, it's that they're very, very clunky and that GW tends not to adequately address a lot of known issues that have been around for literally years. In the end, it all works out, but it certainly deserves a lot of the flak it gets. Though as I understand it, the rules team is under pretty strict orders from on high that instead of thoroughly playtesting, they're supposed to pump out rules and then move on to the next thing. So it's not necessarily Phil Kelly's fault every one of his books seems OP on release, but devolves into a monobuild that struggles to keep up after five or six more books have been released.

[Krefey]

I think that it is also partly to do with the desire to try and keep the rules viable for existing codexes. There is only so much they can change before they end up making too many options in a codex written for a previous edition obsolete or just plain broken (not as in OP broken, but as in not working broken).

It wouldn't surprise me that they have a limited play testing window. Even if they play test as the rules develop, they hardly have the luxury of years to develop and play test the new rules and all the possible interactions.

[Uberbeast]

I think that it is also partly to do with the desire to try and keep the rules viable for existing codexes. There is only so much they can change before they end up making too many options in a codex written for a previous edition obsolete or just plain broken (not as in OP broken, but as in not working broken).

It wouldn't surprise me that they have a limited play testing window. Even if they play test as the rules develop, they hardly have the luxury of years to develop and play test the new rules and all the possible interactions.

Honestly though, when you've been in the business as long as GW and you would think it was just a matter of course to make good rules even before playtesting. So many other companies crank rules out and nothing ever seems to be as imbalanced as GW and they don't have anything like the resources, community feedback, or long standing product line to draw on.

My issue is that most casual gamers could come up with better, more balanced rules than the GW design team does. You can often tell the glaring issues with a new GW product the moment you read it, and you're wondering how anyone could have allowed it to happen. I almost think they are forced to just brainstorm out a set number of ideas and then the publishing team just randomly picks ideas off the board and loads them into a book.

[Krefey]

Honestly though, when you've been in the business as long as GW and you would think it was just a matter of course to make good rules even before playtesting. So many other companies crank rules out and nothing ever seems to be as imbalanced as GW and they don't have anything like the resources, community feedback, or long standing product line to draw on.

My issue is that most casual gamers could come up with better, more balanced rules than the GW design team does. You can often tell the glaring issues with a new GW product the moment you read it, and you're wondering how anyone could have allowed it to happen. I almost think they are forced to just brainstorm out a set number of ideas and then the publishing team just randomly picks ideas off the board and loads them into a book.

Do you remember when Dystopian Wars originally came out? I don't want to sound rude, but I don't think it's as easy as a lot of people think it is. There was a recent kickstarter...Sedition Wars I think it was, the rules for that were also abysmal. It's not unique to GW games. I also don't think GW games are as bad as a lot of people make out, but yes, there are definitely WTF moments. The rule set that they released originally was a steaming pile. The problem with the GW rules is that they do have a narrow selection of people they run things past. And it's all in house, has been since 2nd ed. It's easy for people who have been looking over things for the development of it to overlook something. Ideally they should be getting two teams to work on any rules. One team to design them initially then another to go over it with a fresh set of eyes not having worked on any aspect of the initial development. Not being on the inside, I don't know how they work on their development though.

[odinsgrandson]

GW has, for a long time, fostered an attitude of non-competitive competition among their player base. I mean, we've got a lot of words and acronyms for players who try to win too much (employing cheesy combos and exploiting the best options in their codecies).

The attitude is that game balance is up to the players, not the game designers- and leads many to believe that GW isn't actually trying to create a balanced game.

It may be true, or maybe they try and fail (as you suggest) but the perception is certainly there.


D&D or any other tabletop RPG also has one other huge difference to 40k- authority. ..

Yeah, it's a PVP game, and therefore competitive in nature. Each game ends with one player "winning" and another player "losing" and there's a social expectation that players will try to "win."

With 40k, there's the attitude that trying to win too much is immoral, but we still expect each player to try to win within the hazy boundaries of non-cheesy game play.

[Uberbeast]

Do you remember when Dystopian Wars originally came out? I don't want to sound rude, but I don't think it's as easy as a lot of people think it is. There was a recent kickstarter...Sedition Wars I think it was, the rules for that were also abysmal. It's not unique to GW games. I also don't think GW games are as bad as a lot of people make out, but yes, there are definitely WTF moments. The rule set that they released originally was a steaming pile. The problem with the GW rules is that they do have a narrow selection of people they run things past. And it's all in house, has been since 2nd ed. It's easy for people who have been looking over things for the development of it to overlook something. Ideally they should be getting two teams to work on any rules. One team to design them initially then another to go over it with a fresh set of eyes not having worked on any aspect of the initial development. Not being on the inside, I don't know how they work on their development though.

You're comparing two new games by dinky developers to the giant powerhouse of gaming and it's decades long established flagship product and trying to say GW shortcoming are somehow excused? I wasn't laying an obscure trivia contest for other game failures, I was simply stating that the guys at GW have every advantage when it comes to games development, and yet they fall far below the quality margin when it comes to their rules.

[daboarder]

GW has, for a long time, fostered an attitude of non-competitive competition among their player base. I mean, we've got a lot of words and acronyms for players who try to win too much (employing cheesy combos and exploiting the best options in their codecies).


GW runs tournaments........

[Krefey]

You're comparing two new games by dinky developers to the giant powerhouse of gaming and it's decades long established flagship product and trying to say GW shortcoming are somehow excused? I wasn't laying an obscure trivia contest for other game failures, I was simply stating that the guys at GW have every advantage when it comes to games development, and yet they fall far below the quality margin when it comes to their rules.

My point was addressing your comment that any group of casual gamers could apparently come up with a better rule set. I was providing examples of games that didn't. I just don't think it's quite as easy as you like to think it is.

[Caitsidhe]

My point was addressing your comment that any group of casual gamers could apparently come up with a better rule set. I was providing examples of games that didn't. I just don't think it's quite as easy as you like to think it is.

Fact is a group of actual players could (and have) come up with better rules. People who actually play games rather that companies who just try to sell them, are the experts.

[Ghostofman]

GW runs tournaments........

And doesn't care who wins, or how. They are marketing events, plain and simple.

[daboarder]

And doesn't care who wins, or how. They are marketing events, plain and simple.

And yet...unbound lists are usually band

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

Where did the informed Ork discussion go? :(

[Caitsidhe]

Where did the informed Ork discussion go? :(

Heh. People have started playing them and are at a loss for words. Everything that can be said about them has been said over the last three editions.

[daboarder]

now, now cait.

we can't know that. Not for roughly another 3 months.....

Unless of course you meant all that in a good way, in which case of course, feel free to share your opinion, it sounds very valid


Did I do that right?;)

[John Bower]

GW has, for a long time, fostered an attitude of non-competitive competition among their player base. I mean, we've got a lot of words and acronyms for players who try to win too much (employing cheesy combos and exploiting the best options in their codecies).

The attitude is that game balance is up to the players, not the game designers- and leads many to believe that GW isn't actually trying to create a balanced game.

It may be true, or maybe they try and fail (as you suggest) but the perception is certainly there.



Yeah, it's a PVP game, and therefore competitive in nature. Each game ends with one player "winning" and another player "losing" and there's a social expectation that players will try to "win."

With 40k, there's the attitude that trying to win too much is immoral, but we still expect each player to try to win within the hazy boundaries of non-cheesy game play.

Dunno who you play D&D with but if they're playing like that it's just wrong... It's meant to be working together as a team. WH40k is PvP, albeit on a grander scale.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

I've won a couple of games with my new Orks. One against Tau, the other against Marines. Good fun. My Battlewagon is one of the most awesome models that I've built.

[Erik Setzer]

The problem with the GW rules is that they do have a narrow selection of people they run things past. And it's all in house, has been since 2nd ed.

Not quite. In 3rd edition they had a much more open group of playtesters. Problem is, someone walked off with some of the playtest codices and they ended up spread to the many corners of the Internet. They weren't enthused with that, so they tightened things up, but still had playtesters that weren't actual GW employees (just they had to make sure it was people they could actually trust). And then one day they started getting uber-paranoid about everything, and suddenly the playtesting became only in-house and they shut down as much flow of information as possible, even to their own store managers. With the current release schedule, there's no way their limited development staff can try to give each new release a proper amount of playtesting, so here we are today.

They don't just need to bring in more people to test, they also need more time to test, which means slowing down the releases of new rules.

- - - Updated - - -


GW runs tournaments........

They pretty much started the 40K tournament scene. The major tourneys grew out of the GW Grand Tournaments (people wanted versions closer to home, so independent versions known as IndyGTs sprang up, which became the tourneys we have today). GW also created the Rogue Trader Tournament system, which is why people in this town got used to tournaments pretty much every month. And then GW did 'Ard Boyz, which was just "bring unpainted models and throw out your nastiest army list and do your best to literally WAAC"... and that was that. It went over so poorly that they swung the pendulum in the opposite direction completely.

- - - Updated - - -


I've won a couple of games with my new Orks. One against Tau, the other against Marines. Good fun. My Battlewagon is one of the most awesome models that I've built.

What tricks and units did you use? Share some Orky wisdom!

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

I had 3 units of Boyz with shootas in Trukks, a big mob of 30 foot slogging shoota Boyz, some Flash Gitz in a Trukk, 5 Mek Gunz with Kustom Mega-Kannons, 6 Killa Kanz, a Warboss with some gubbins, some Meganobz, in a Battlewagon, and like 4 Weirdboyz, because I could. Some other stuff.
Wiped out the enemy both times.

Turns out that Riptides don't like taking 15 armour saves.

[Pyredragon]

So, you won with unbound? Cause there's no way you can squeeze 4 weirdboyz into that as a battleforged list. Even with the ork special force org of 3 hqs and 9 troops you can't make that legal with only four troops as the special force org would require 6 troops total to double up on.

Great, good to know we can win if our opponents aren't sticklers for battleforged...

[daboarder]

Turns out that Riptides don't like taking 15 armour saves.

?? did you mean invul? because unless your rolling absolutely red hot (or dark brown seeing as this is your opponents rolls) a 2+sv model shouldn't give a damn about 15 saves, thats 2 MAYBE 3 wounds

[odinsgrandson]

Dunno who you play D&D with but if they're playing like that it's just wrong... It's meant to be working together as a team. WH40k is PvP, albeit on a grander scale.

Um... I think we're in complete agreement, so I must have made my point poorly.

What I meant to say is that D&D is actually a very poor comparison for game balance (as is any tabletop RPG against a tabletop war game). Because RPGs are cooperative (even the GM) and war games are PVP. I believe that GW's attitude towards their game balance is too much like a non-competitive RPG- and not as a competitive tabletop miniatures game.

In D&D it is important that all players in the group make characters at about the same power level (ie- either they all munchkin together or they all make misfits together). Balance can be fudged a bit by the DM when it comes up.

In 40k, both players should try to defeat their opponent. But as a community, we have developed the attitude that we should be balancing the game like in D&D- and we have loads of terms for people who play too winningly like, Cheesy, Beardy, WaaC and others.

I've found this attitude of "game balance is on the player's head" coming from GW (in White Dwarf, for example). And I think that's just a shame.

[Ghostofman]

When it comes to game balance they probably don't really have much of a choice, at least not without doing major ground shaking changes across the board and taking extreme risk.

The company isn't big enough or have the resources to fully and extensively playtest every dex to the level needed to ensure total balance. Even farming it out to the playerbase proves too hard because then the dex ends up on the internet before it can hit store shelves (GW has never really "got" the information age, but that's a rant for elsewhere). Additionally to get a solid balance you'd have to develop a new ruleset and all new codexes in parallel to avoid a single rule tweak from having a chain reaction that gives one codex a buff and another a nerf. Then you've got to release all the dexes at the same time as the ruleset. Then just to be sure, they'd have to be willing to things like adjust individual unit rules and point values in the errata.

Every one of those points has a critical flaw that hurts GW, where the "sorta balanced, but you gotta make the final call yourself" model they have now is at least functional from the perspective of keeping GW afloat.

[DWest]

The company isn't big enough or have the resources to fully and extensively playtest every dex to the level needed to ensure total balance.
Games Workshop made 7.7m£ net profit on 60m sales last year. That argument doesn't hold water. Furthermore, it's not like anyone is asking for a massive, exhaust-every-possible-permutation; we just want a "does this even make sense?" check when they change things, and we're not getting that. It's very hard not to assume that GW is being run incompetently; looking at the amount of typos, day 1 erratas, and other embarrassing mistakes (I count 7th edition in this category as well; the rules are virtually identical to 6th, with the exception of the Psychic Phase, it doesn't begin to justify being a new edition, nor does it justify leaving us hanging for a year on FAQs because they were going to go into this book), it doesn't paint a pretty picture.

This goes double for the idea that "we can't let the playerbase playtest it; they'll just leak the rules"- 1) GW already leaks like a sieve; 2) of course if you just hand out the playtest materials randomly you're going to get leaks; 3) the playerbase will self-select your ideal playtesters for you- just look at who's on the top tables at the various major tournaments. Simply by being there, those players have proven that they can identify and exploit unanticipated rules interactions, they can keep a secret (at least, hiding their tricks until it's time to use them), and they can handle standing around a table for days on end till the job's done.

[DarkLink]

Actually, it was significantly more than that. I believe their total revenue a year or two ago was 250 million USD. The £60 might be a quarterly number.

[Defenestratus]

Games Workshop made 7.7m£ net profit on 60m sales last year. That argument doesn't hold water.

You seem to think thats a lot. For a single person, thats certainly a lot of money to throw around and spend on seemingly infinite resources. I work in a department of a larger company that makes about that much every quarter in gross revenue, and there are less than 30 of us which includes executive management.

Implying that revenue indicates internal resource elasticity is not logically sound.

[Path Walker]

I love when the game design geniuses and the business specialists come out to talk about how bad GW are.

[Charon]

I love when the game design geniuses and the business specialists come out to talk about how bad GW are.

Dont worry. They have their paladins at hand who defend their ruleset no matter how many pyrovores, mutilators or mandrakes they do.
It must be really hard to do a reality check as a "game designer" and ask questions like "does this unit make sense? Is this unit fun to play? Does the proper use of the unit feel rewarding?"

[DWest]

You seem to think thats a lot. For a single person, thats certainly a lot of money to throw around and spend on seemingly infinite resources. I work in a department of a larger company that makes about that much every quarter in gross revenue, and there are less than 30 of us which includes executive management.

Implying that revenue indicates internal resource elasticity is not logically sound.
Implying that they can't afford to acquire additional resources and staff when they have a profit of that size is not sound either. At one point in time, the point of profit was to make a company *grow*, not simply be stuffed into management's pockets as they run for the exit, but this isn't a criticism of GW in particular, it seems to be the default mode of operation any more.

The gross and net I quoted was from their December 13 half-year statement. In any case, 7.7m net on 60m gross is a profit margin of 12.8%. Consulting a chart of profit margins by sector (from here (http://www.businessinsider.com/sector-profit-margins-sp-500-2012-8)), that puts GW significantly ahead of the S&P 500 average of 9%. They can afford to hire a proofreader.

[DarkLink]

They could afford it, but it may not bring them enough money to make it worthwhile. At least, that's how they currently feel, it seems.

[Defenestratus]

Implying that they can't afford to acquire additional resources and staff when they have a profit of that size is not sound either. At one point in time, the point of profit was to make a company *grow*, not simply be stuffed into management's pockets as they run for the exit, but this isn't a criticism of GW in particular, it seems to be the default mode of operation any more.

The gross and net I quoted was from their December 13 half-year statement. In any case, 7.7m net on 60m gross is a profit margin of 12.8%. Consulting a chart of profit margins by sector (from here (http://www.businessinsider.com/sector-profit-margins-sp-500-2012-8)), that puts GW significantly ahead of the S&P 500 average of 9%. They can afford to hire a proofreader.

The simple fact of the matter is if GW decided that thoroughly playtesting their rule sets is a value driver instead of a cost driver, they would invest more in it.

As it is, from GW"s perspective, testing rules is simply an opportunity cost to creating new ones to package in a book and sell...

Its just like QA processes in any other business. Your XYZ Corporation business is Widgets, not QA of Widgets. You do QA on Widgets because if you didn't, a certain percentage of Widgets would hit the market defective or of substandard quality and you would lose consumer value comparisons. QA takes time, time is money and if time is being spent on what amounts to checking work that's already been done, then you're losing out on the revenue if those resources were instead creating new products.

As for hiring a proofreader, I'm 100% positive they already do have a proof reader. It appears that their editorial processes need improvement.

[DWest]

My question is- are they competent enough to spot when playtesting does switch over to a value driver, and how much longer can they keep afloat just on people buying the models regardless of the rules?

The next half-year financials should be coming out soon, yeah? It will be very interesting to see how this "models, then rules" release schedule has done for them.

[odinsgrandson]

When it comes to game balance they probably don't really have much of a choice, at least not without doing major ground shaking changes across the board and taking extreme risk.



True. It would probably require a full re-boot of their core book and all of the forces to go with it. Ala 3rd ed.

And that would alienate a lot of players all at once, and it would probably take a long time for it to really bring in new players.

Whether they have the resources, I don't think they can afford to make a change like that.

[daboarder]

True. It would probably require a full re-boot of their core book and all of the forces to go with it. Ala 3rd ed.

And that would alienate a lot of players all at once, and it would probably take a long time for it to really bring in new players.

Whether they have the resources, I don't think they can afford to make a change like that.

they built it, they should damned well fix it

[Erik Setzer]

Well, I'll touch on the subject of QA with Ork stuff, to tie it into the original topic.

Aside from the typos that show up in places in the Ork codex for the Kindle (i.e. there's a pair of capital W's in the middle of a sentence for no reason), a more annoying problem has been finding errors with the instructions for various kits. I just assembled a new set of MegaNobz, a Blitza Bomma, and a pair of Deff Dreads, and each set of instructions had somewhere that a part number was wrong. One case was as "harmless" as getting the numbers of a pair of pieces that'd be attached to each other wrong; another had a typo in the first digit of a part number; yet another had the wrong number entirely for a part and I had to look really hard at the part on the sprue and compare it to the illustrations to make sure it was the right part. If I wasn't so experienced at assembling kits, I might have run into serious issues there. That's just not cool.

And any amount of playtesting at all would have told them Knights needed to cost more and shouldn't be an entire army, and that Invisibility shouldn't have gotten into the rulebook in that format.

[Stoeks88]

So I know this is an old stand by, but it think a great build for a unit is:
Warboss (135)
Bike
Lucky stikk
PK

Big Mek (120)
Blitzbike
KFF

Painboy (80)
Bike
Orderly

10 x Nob bikers with 3 x PK (525)

I think this has some real potential if you start turbo boosting around to steal objectives especially.

[Uberbeast]

Speaking of the ork book and typos: pg 53, kustom mega-blasta 5 pts, kustom mega-slugga 10pts. Seems a little fishy to me.

[Stoeks88]

Speaking of the ork book and typos: pg 53, kustom mega-blasta 5 pts, kustom mega-slugga 10pts. Seems a little fishy to me.

Except for the fact that the sluggardly is a pistol which grants you that additional melee attack if you also have a melee weapon. Just a thought.

[Mr Mystery]

Dunno, it might seem strange, but Kustom Mega-Slugga can be used as a second close combat weapon.

[Path Walker]

they built it, they should damned well fix it

Except they don't think its broken, you are the one with the problem, not GW. They're happy with their product, as are the majority of their customers.

[Erik Setzer]

Except they don't think its broken, you are the one with the problem, not GW. They're happy with their product, as are the majority of their customers.

I doubt the majority are happy about a lot of errors floating around, more that they just can't be arsed to actually say anything, given that Games Workshop has shut down practically all means of communication with customers and has demonstrated that they don't care if you're happy or not so long as they already have your money.

[Path Walker]

I doubt the majority are happy about a lot of errors floating around, more that they just can't be arsed to actually say anything, given that Games Workshop has shut down practically all means of communication with customers and has demonstrated that they don't care if you're happy or not so long as they already have your money.

Except that wasn't at all what he or I were talking about, good job.

[Mr Mystery]

I doubt the majority are happy about a lot of errors floating around, more that they just can't be arsed to actually say anything, given that Games Workshop has shut down practically all means of communication with customers and has demonstrated that they don't care if you're happy or not so long as they already have your money.

Can't be arsed, or don't care that much? Hmm. I wonder which it is?

[Path Walker]

Can't be arsed, or don't care that much? Hmm. I wonder which it is?

But but, if I am full of impotent nerd-rage at what I perceive to be failure based on my own impossible and often contradictory personal preferences not being fully and completely addressed by a company that produces a product, then surely every single other person must feel exactly the same way??

[Stoeks88]

Seriously, aren't there enough threads devoted to GW hate. Can we please leave my precious orks out of this. Is it not exhausting being so mad/upset/disappointed all the time. Some of us can look past editing errors and simple things that don't actually matter and rejoice in a new orks book. Kind some pleasure in life people, cut out the doom and gloom please. Heck, you might actually enjoy playing a game, which is supposed to be fun.

[Path Walker]

I['ve played with the new Ork codex and loved it, love the tactical objectives, the weirdboy powers and even the change to Mob Rule, i think its more fluffy, I can't think of a single thing I don't like. The only possible thing is that there are just too many cool things I want to try and Formations I want to give a go to.

[Uberbeast]

I['ve played with the new Ork codex and loved it, love the tactical objectives, the weirdboy powers and even the change to Mob Rule, i think its more fluffy, I can't think of a single thing I don't like. The only possible thing is that there are just too many cool things I want to try and Formations I want to give a go to.

;) you're darling!

[daboarder]

Seriously, aren't there enough threads devoted to GW hate. Can we please leave my precious orks out of this. Is it not exhausting being so mad/upset/disappointed all the time. Some of us can look past editing errors and simple things that don't actually matter and rejoice in a new orks book. Kind some pleasure in life people, cut out the doom and gloom please. Heck, you might actually enjoy playing a game, which is supposed to be fun.
Well when people try posting positive threads they are usually ignored wholesale. typically the only ones who actually positively contribute are those who are usually accused of negativity in other threads.

[Krefey]

Well when people try posting positive threads they are usually ignored wholesale. typically the only ones who actually positively contribute are those who are usually accused of negativity in other threads.

Not sure I'd call that a "positivve" contribution. But each to their own. Maybe forums should start a "complain about GW here" thread.

[daboarder]

Not sure I'd call that a "positivve" contribution. But each to their own. Maybe forums should start a "complain about GW here" thread.

I was more referring to that when we start threads like these.

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?45735-Maelstrom-Missions-Lets-Make-Em-Narrative
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?46701-Daboarder-s-Chaos-Terminator-List-Tactics&p=434356
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?45941-Daboarder-s-How-To-s-Pustules-and-Barnacles
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?45321-Daboarder-s-How-To-s-Daemonette-Style-Marine-Mammary-Glands
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?45001-Daboarder-s-How-To-s-Bloated-Limbs

Then all those people who constantly b*tch and moan about others being "negative" are nowhere to be seen. But say anything that could be labeled as criticism and they come out of the woodwork complaining about some imaginary lack of positivity.

[Krefey]

Fair enough. I must admit I'm a bit jaded due to being a moderator on another forum where there are a few particular users who will constantly come into any GW related thread just to make derogatory or negative comments about GW in the guise of "helping people do better hobby" by finding "better alternatives".

[daboarder]

Its all good mate

[John Bower]

I['ve played with the new Ork codex and loved it, love the tactical objectives, the weirdboy powers and even the change to Mob Rule, i think its more fluffy, I can't think of a single thing I don't like. The only possible thing is that there are just too many cool things I want to try and Formations I want to give a go to.

Ditto; My Orks have seen off 2 armies so far with the new rules; one of which was Crons. :)

[Path Walker]

Ditto; My Orks have seen off 2 armies so far with the new rules; one of which was Crons. :)

Had some great games, nids, Tau, other Orks, all great fun and I got to use totally different armies every time. I love it.

[Stoeks88]

Well when people try posting positive threads they are usually ignored wholesale. typically the only ones who actually positively contribute are those who are usually accused of negativity in other threads.

I think that is because people tend to try to find the inflammatory, argumentative, confrontational topics because they are bored and are looking for a good scrap instead trying to have and informed, friendly, informational discussion. It does tend to get annoying that it seems to take, on average, about 7-10 posts for a topic to get completely off course (see rail-roaded) by GW haters who think that it is just plain tomfoolery to enjoy playing 40k, which is funny. I personally don't have that kind of time/energy to convince people that their game of choice can no way be fun. Just plain crazy, but alas, to each their own I guess.

[DaPlebbeH]

After buying the Codex and Supplement and playing a few game's with I find them good, using the formations are really useful giving me more options to play around with going to a tournament end off the month will be interesting on how they will do or don't do

[Uberbeast]

After buying the Codex and Supplement and playing a few game's with I find them good, using the formations are really useful giving me more options to play around with going to a tournament end off the month will be interesting on how they will do or don't do

The Ghaz supplement is actually decent, but I'm still amazed at the beating the normal ork codex took. It really pisses me off that they planned these two books together and decided to make one a pile of nerfs and the other stand out in every way as superior. They had such a good framework to go with from the last ork codex. Why would they just go through and systematically nerf nearly everything in a book that was already an out of date underperformer? It really shows that GW is intentionally forcing 40k into a "pay to win" game where buying one book isn't good enough and you have to go out and play premade lists (formations) full of expensive models you don't otherwise need in order to keep from being someone's punching bag.

I'll bet everyone looking at those new formations is thinking to themselves: "okay, I need another of these, and two more of these..." I myself have a massive ork collection of everything they offer for the range except the new gork/morkanaughts and I would still need to add stuff to run some of these formations.

As formations and supplements provide an ever increasing advantage; prepare to see the same armies over and over again. Copy paste-pay to win.

[DaPlebbeH]

The Ghaz supplement is actually decent, but I'm still amazed at the beating the normal ork codex took. It really pisses me off that they planned these two books together and decided to make one a pile of nerfs and the other stand out in every way as superior. They had such a good framework to go with from the last ork codex. Why would they just go through and systematically nerf nearly everything in a book that was already an out of date underperformer? It really shows that GW is intentionally forcing 40k into a "pay to win" game where buying one book isn't good enough and you have to go out and play premade lists (formations) full of expensive models you don't otherwise need in order to keep from being someone's punching bag.

I'll bet everyone looking at those new formations is thinking to themselves: "okay, I need another of these, and two more of these..." I myself have a massive ork collection of everything they offer for the range except the new gork/morkanaughts and I would still need to add stuff to run some of these formations.

As formations and supplements provide an ever increasing advantage; prepare to see the same armies over and over again. Copy paste-pay to win.

I agree on what your saying like urself I have a silly ork army and I have spead abit on the new models, but some off the new models are really nice altho I wish I didn't buy 2 morkanauts only thing I do regret, as for the nerfs I sort off don't mind too much just made me play a different way to what I use to play instead off having i.e a unit off 10 nobz geared up i'll just take 7 meganobz just for the better armour save for mob rule. Mek guns I just get a 15 point mek and stick him in with them so they have a little better LD you get what I mean.

The Ghaz supplement is really good in the formations as well as the mork and gork gifts I think there just as useful to the normal codex witch will make lists interesting over time.

As a long term ork player I still will keep playing hands down as orks are my fab army even with the nerfs it will change the way I play and to be honest I really like it instead off doing the same spam list over and over as I will be trying everything out until I find the list I want.

[Caitsidhe]

The marketing strategy is simple, instead of a single Codex you are now pretty much forced (if you want to have a decent chance anyway) to buy 2-3. The main book gets it in the throat, being "nerfed" and rather poor. The supplements, most of which have no more than two to three pages of actual rules, offer back things they took away from you in the main book as well as new perks. The point is to sell you 2-3 times the books for your codex than before. If you look carefully, you will see that Games Workshop might have to change its name to Books Workshop soon. In so far as releases are concerned, they have put out a hell of a lot more books than models over the last year.

[Uberbeast]

Don't forget to buy White Dwarf to get your looted wagon too.

[Me not Weedy]

As someone who has collected Orks since they came out in 3rd edition my perspective is mostly geared towards modelling and painting. The new kits are pretty great in my opinion. Except for that painboss. That is an ugly, boring model.

One of my chief gripes is the construction instructions. The one that comes directly to mind is the Gork/Morkanaut. There were a couple of the diagrams that had wrong numbers or wrong parts.

Rules-wise, my two biggest issues are the new Mob rule; lots of other people have hit on my issues so I will not labor those points again. The second is the lack of options for taking a KFF. But that is a comp-laint I have with the last Codex; I have a boat-load of meks from the 3rd edition with KFFs and no means to use those models. :/

[Erik Setzer]

One of my chief gripes is the construction instructions. The one that comes directly to mind is the Gork/Morkanaut. There were a couple of the diagrams that had wrong numbers or wrong parts.

Just had to deal with that with the Meganobz, Deff Dread, AND Bomma kits. One of three would have been bad enough, but all three of them having errors was just ridiculous.

[Uberbeast]

Several games in and many times through the codex and I am still discovering things. Killa kanz are now str 7 close combat not str 10. Kan klaws are +2 str, not double it. That's three strikes against a unit that was already fairing badly from 6th and 7th rules nerfs. (-3 str reduction, pts increase in base cost and most weapon upgrades, cowardly grots rule) Then there is the need to take larger units of them and have a dred to babysit.

[Smellofwetdog]

That's 2 books that have been milquetoast on their own with competitive supplements, guess we'll see if this trend continues. 2 I could say were just bad design or accidental, 3 occasions of this is a deliberate strategy.

[Blackcloud6]

Don't forget to buy White Dwarf to get your looted wagon too.

What issue is this in?

[Uberbeast]

A recent one; I don't know the number off hand.

[Path Walker]

Killa Kans are awesome and Deff Dreads are great too! Played a 1500 game last night and decided to use 3 Kans and a Dread, Kans are great for popping rhinos, the Cowardly Grot rule really isn't that bad at all, people are really over stating it, and they're smaller, their Klaws should be worse!

The dred was easily my man of the match, taking out a Land Raider, Typhus and a hovering Heldrake in CC, that thing is a monster.

[Uberbeast]

Killa Kans are awesome and Deff Dreads are great too! Played a 1500 game last night and decided to use 3 Kans and a Dread, Kans are great for popping rhinos, the Cowardly Grot rule really isn't that bad at all, people are really over stating it, and they're smaller, their Klaws should be worse!

The dred was easily my man of the match, taking out a Land Raider, Typhus and a hovering Heldrake in CC, that thing is a monster.

Seriously, don't players in your area have autocannons, or anything else that shoots? Everything about these mediocre 2 hullpoint paperbag gets worse but you're liking them better than ever. They're slow, they're fragile, they cost too much, they're under armed, and they're the only vehicle in the game that isn't straight up fearless. There is optimistic and then there is just plain trolling. If kanz and dreds are the best performers in an ork list then someone in your gaming group is doing things wrong.

[Charon]

In an environment where people use Rhinos, Mandrakes, Mutilators or Hormagaunts, Kanz could surely be the one eyed ruling over the blind.

[Blackcloud6]

A recent one; I don't know the number off hand.

Thanks, but I am looking for the issue number. Anyone know this?

[Mr Mystery]

Thanks, but I am looking for the issue number. Anyone know this?

First or second Orky issue.

[Blackcloud6]

First or second Orky issue.

I found it WD #21.

[Mr Mystery]

Cool :)

[Erik Setzer]

What issue is this in?

White Dwarf #21, IIRC. My copy's not on me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure that's it. The bad thing is that you'll either need to find a local retailer with a copy still, or ask someone with it to photocopy the page for you, because the GW stores are told to ditch their unsold copies, including issues with limited time rules (which is absolutely ridiculous for those people who can't get into a shop for week, for whatever reason, i.e. medical emergency or job).

[Blackcloud6]

White Dwarf #21, IIRC. My copy's not on me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure that's it. The bad thing is that you'll either need to find a local retailer with a copy still, or ask someone with it to photocopy the page for you, because the GW stores are told to ditch their unsold copies, including issues with limited time rules (which is absolutely ridiculous for those people who can't get into a shop for week, for whatever reason, i.e. medical emergency or job).

Thanks, if I can't get a physical copy, I'll get a digital one.

[Path Walker]

Seriously, don't players in your area have autocannons, or anything else that shoots? Everything about these mediocre 2 hullpoint paperbag gets worse but you're liking them better than ever. They're slow, they're fragile, they cost too much, they're under armed, and they're the only vehicle in the game that isn't straight up fearless. There is optimistic and then there is just plain trolling. If kanz and dreds are the best performers in an ork list then someone in your gaming group is doing things wrong.

Yeah, we must be doing things wrong, because my friends and I have played a lot of games and enjoyed ourselves.



I love Kan models, i have 6 of them, with 3 more coming in stormclaw, I have 3 Deff dreads, I love them too, they're Orky as hell, guess what, Kans aren't supposed to tank wounds all day, they're supposed to be fragile and pop off, its the fluff and I enjoy it.



Also i love the idea that because an autocannon can reliably strip off a Hull point from the unit, my opponent must have an unlimited supply that he's bringing to bear on the Kans, because thats what you do with them, isn't it, you play on an empty table, devoid of cover and just march your Kans at the enemy autocannons like it was the charge of the light brigade!

And the opponent has nothing else to fire his autocannons at either! He has the perfect weapons to counter each of my units and has range and line of sight to them every turn. This Top Trumps bollocks doesn't work out on the table sorry, he had obliterators, but only 3 of them, on the same flank as the Kans took, his lascannons only manager to take off one hull point from them before there were boyz assaulting them. Its a war, not a sterile assessment of numbers, maneuvering and luck have a really big part to play.

[lets_get_em_boyz]

This is a sad sad read.

[Uberbeast]

Yadda yadda.

Okay, here's the thing... You're an outlier statistic. Anyone who consistantly uses a poor unit will eventualy get a "good" performance from them, especially if they aren't used to getting more from the other units in their army. You use a sub-par unit, and get a good game with it due to whatever meta you play or just dumb luck. Then you come on a forum and start telling people how awesome it is.

The immediate implication in your doing this is that the people complaining are either too stupid to know how to use the unit, or that you are either some genious tactician who can turn lead into gold. Neither are likely, but both results of your argument are purely on your hearsay alone, and put the person you are arguing with in an impossible position of either being an idiot or arguing against a genious.

Here's the reality: kanz were hit pretty hard with the nerf-bat and they weren't all that great before. That's evidence anyone can see with their eyes. Now your argument to counter this fact is purely anecdotal and impossible to confirm, and is as I pointed out above, bound to cause an argument because of it's very nature.

I'm sure it was meant well, but in the end the, "I use it and kicked my friend's butt with it" argument is not really a valid one to go trolling around the internet with.

[Caitsidhe]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kffacxfA7G4

[Wolfshade]

A couple of things.

Firstly, people should play 40k however they like and include what units they want regardless of a unit being "sub optimal", "sub prime" or whatever.

Second, the argument that you used something in a game and it did what you wanted it to is a great argument. Afterall, we only have anecdotes. I am supremely confident that no one has played enough 7th edition games with the Ork codex to have a statistically significant results to "prove" otherwise.

Yes Kans are slow, but no more slow than any other walker. I very much like kans, though I have yet to use them in 7th. I probably will still use them in 7th if my rulebook ever turns up (thanks Totalwargamer...).

[Uberbeast]

Firstly, people should play 40k however they like and include what units they want regardless of a unit being "sub optimal", "sub prime" or whatever.

Second, the argument that you used something in a game and it did what you wanted it to is a great argument. Afterall, we only have anecdotes. I am supremely confident that no one has played enough 7th edition games with the Ork codex to have a statistically significant results to "prove" otherwise.

Yes Kans are slow, but no more slow than any other walker. I very much like kans, though I have yet to use them in 7th. I probably will still use them in 7th if my rulebook ever turns up (thanks Totalwargamer...).

No, anecdotal, personal evidence is not acceptable because here on the internet everyone just makes it up and can easily trump everything the last guy says to the point of it being incredible. The only thing it serves is to add color to someone's opinion.

And yes, feel free to take whatever sub-par units you like, I'm not saying don't take it because it sucks (I reguarly run mandrakes in my Dark Eldar). I am saying that taking it doesn't change the fact that it sucks a lot worse than it did before. And arguing that all walkers are the same speed is a little of a false argument here as well when you consider that of all the walkers out there, the ork ones rely most on getting into close combat to do any damage while other walkers can get their points back with superior balistic skills and weapons. With the whole ork army gaining speed, a gimped kan with it's many nerfs is just going to be lagging behind the real combat.

There is another issue I'd like to bring up about the Kanz, and that is internal balance. If you want to allow players to run all the units from the book you should make them all viable. Right now Kanz are possibly the worst heavy support option down there with the gorkanaught in a slot where most of the many other options are far and away better. Unless you just like losing a lot, you're going to want to try something else other than kanz out, and there are plenty of toys to take.

So ask yourself this- Where were all the cries for a nerf to Killa Kanz? Where was the community uproar, the banning of it from tournaments, the countless thread spam, the constant joking at every game night about OP Cheese? In a complete absense of complaint about KK's needing a nerf, they took a triple whammy of one of the hardest nerf combos I've seen in my many years of gaming combined with nerfs to how kff worked and two editions of indirect nerfing to walkers and CC in particular.

[Wolfshade]

No, anecdotal, personal evidence is not acceptable because here on the internet everyone just makes it up and can easily trump everything the last guy says to the point of it being incredible. The only thing it serves is to add color to someone's opinion.

So what evidence do you have?

[Mr Mystery]

I don't make things up. Real life is much more fun!

[lets_get_em_boyz]

Although on second readthrough i do like the idea of filling my elites with trukking burna boys and tankbustas. Convoy style.

[daboarder]

So what evidence do you have?

Probably things like, pts, stats, the special rule making them subject to moral tests.

Those changes are not really subject to opinion. specially that last one.

[Wolfshade]

Probably things like, pts, stats, the special rule making them subject to moral tests.

Those changes are not really subject to opinion. specially that last one.

Ah yes, but it is only how those changes interact with 7th edition and other 7th edition armies as a whole where the evidence lies.

From 2nd to 3rd a space marine went from 30pts to 15pts, did this make them massively under costed and game breaking?

[Charon]

Ah yes, but it is only how those changes interact with 7th edition and other 7th edition armies as a whole where the evidence lies.

From 2nd to 3rd a space marine went from 30pts to 15pts, did this make them massively under costed and game breaking?

To be fair the changes of 7th are few and i can only think of one change which benefits kanz and this one is purely cosmetic as you still get glanced a lot. Kanz could be good in an evironment where S6 or S7 multishot weapons do not exist. Sadly they exist in masses at low cost.

While the marine went down in points, so did everything else too and marines lost a lot of special rules and immunities from 2nd to 3rd.

[Wolfshade]

But only in specific metas.

[Charon]

The meta has to be extraordinarily specific to not include thingls like Scatter lasers, Autocannons, Tau or plasma.

[daboarder]

Ah yes, but it is only how those changes interact with 7th edition and other 7th edition armies as a whole where the evidence lies.

From 2nd to 3rd a space marine went from 30pts to 15pts, did this make them massively under costed and game breaking?

sure, but the statement he made was that these are variables which can be determined quantitatively, as opposed to anecdotal "they did awesome this one time at band camp" and he is correct in that statement, for good or ill those changes can be objectively assessed in the environment we all use ie: the 7th edition rules.

[Wolfshade]

No, not really. It is about them not existing on mass. Which if you play games at 1,000 pt level is not unheard of.

Then there are the matter of getting the kanz shot in the first place, which with scenary or other target priorities, or locking those weapons in CC while the kanz advance unmolested.

It is not hard nor difficult to imagine, but then these would be in-game situations which apparently doesn't count as evidence...

- - - Updated - - -


sure, but the statement he made was that these are variables which can be determined quantitatively, as opposed to anecdotal "they did awesome this one time at band camp" and he is correct in that statement, for good or ill those changes can be objectively assessed in the environment we all use ie: the 7th edition rules.

Ah yes quanititative evidence. How good is a meltagun? Better than a bolter and a flamer, it is more expenisve has higher S lower AP, but same range easy! Great ok, though shooting Orks in flakk armour a Bolter is better and the flamer is even better still, if only positioned right, which requies skill which is not so easy to quantify.

The hard fast evidence involves playing huge numbers of games, enough games with the same two armies just to start to over come random fluctuations in dice, let alone different army builds both the ork and the opponent, then again with all the different opponents. Then the different scenarios, different tactics etc. Then and only then will you have the emperical evidence.

Without that, all it is is bland anecdotal evidence.

Statsitcally, having played 20 games with orks is so close to having played 1 that it really doesn't make a difference. Get that up to the tens of thousands then you have statistically sound evidence

Even then after all that you still ahev random chance, tactics etc. So while the "average" result is known the chances of having an average result is low. (Consider the average roll of a dice, that is 3.5, the probability of it happening is 0).

[Charon]

No, not really. It is about them not existing on mass. Which if you play games at 1,000 pt level is not unheard of.

Then there are the matter of getting the kanz shot in the first place, which with scenary or other target priorities, or locking those weapons in CC while the kanz advance unmolested.

It is not hard nor difficult to imagine, but then these would be in-game situations which apparently doesn't count as evidence...

While this holds some truth, the level of downgrades is at both sides.
With 6 Kanz at 1000 Points there is not much else left to focus on, so you point your few heavies their way.
Sure scenery always makes a difference but it also slows down the Kanz and vehicle squardons are a pain to hide on any table.
So if you downgrade the points, you dont only downgrade the amount of cheap S6/7 multishot eapons (5 - 10 points a piece) but also the amount of kanz (so you dont need masses of these weapons anymore).
And for some armies these weapons come just naturally (DE, Eldar, Tau) with nearly every unit you would field.

[Wolfshade]

Oh certainly that is true, though I must admit I have only ever fielded 3 kanz at a time.

Back in 6th I was playing a BA game and my 3 kanz, well 2, 1 had been left behind, (immobilised vehicle squadron rules etc.) and ended up in combat with mephiston, cutting him down. Now I certainly wouldn't advocate that as a viable tactic, as amusing as it was.

I know the theory, it is just my experiance with them is different from the percieved wisdom. I know that in 7th melee armies aren't the way forwards, though I still fairly regularly table my opponents with melee weapons. I am not bold enough to say that I must be the greatest player ever! (Though the thought did cross my mind ;) ) or that I was lucky. I would say that I did out think my opponents and both of our armies would regularly be called "sub-par".
I know that vehicles are easier to glance to death, but in game situations I still find myself killing tanks through penetrations and glancing to be more rare.

[Path Walker]

Assesing things on points and stats is all well and good but it really doesn't reflect the effectiveness in a game where you have other units and other priorities, and your enemy does too, the game isn't a perfect environment where you can get all your Plasma guns to bear and destroy all the Kans before they can do anything and if you do that, you also sacrifice firing them at something else, the fact that people online dismiss Kans works to their favour as people don't see them as a threat, meaning they're often left to do their thing, most units in the game (with a few obvious exceptions) are useful when used for what they're good at.

Also Kans aren't subject to morale, they have the Cowardly Grot rule which is very different, if you actually played games, you'd know that.

[Charon]

the fact that people online dismiss Kans works to their favour as people don't see them as a threat, meaning they're often left to do their thing, most units in the game (with a few obvious exceptions) are useful when used for what they're good at.


I guess you are missunderstanding the "issue".
Kans ARE a threat. There is nobody denying that. They are the same threat as a unit of 6 Terminators. And because of that they will draw fire (like Terminators) which they hardly survive (again... like Terminators) because the amount of shooting need to pop these kans in not very high and if the amount of kans that finally reach melee is low, they dont even do high amounts of damage (having just a few attacks).

So they are surely a threat but lack survivability to weather the fire directed at them. And while that was also an "issue" last codex, cowardly grot does them no good either.

[Path Walker]

I guess you are missunderstanding the "issue".
Kans ARE a threat. There is nobody denying that. They are the same threat as a unit of 6 Terminators. And because of that they will draw fire (like Terminators) which they hardly survive (again... like Terminators) because the amount of shooting need to pop these kans in not very high and if the amount of kans that finally reach melee is low, they dont even do high amounts of damage (having just a few attacks).

So they are surely a threat but lack survivability to weather the fire directed at them. And while that was also an "issue" last codex, cowardly grot does them no good either.

And again, your condesending attitude is noted, but you miss the fact that its not always a matter of your opponent being able to deal with Kans when they need to, sometimes and in the right situations, they're the tool you need to do the job you want them for, 7th edition, with the addition of Scoring and making it harder to "one shot" vehicles boosted up Kans, they can take more fire than before and can now come in bigger units, Cowardly Gots, which can make them Crew shaken (but if you have a dredd or more than 3 Kans, you're really reducing that risk), but if you want them to sit on an objective and weather bolter fire that would kill Boyz or Grots, thats not a problem.

The game doesn't fit with the "math hammer" assesments, because units have their uses that math doesn't take into account, thats what I am saying, dismissing any unit because you think 3 autocannons would destroy them in 2 turns of shooting isn't taking the flow of the game into account.

If you want to judge a unit, you have to try it out and see what its good at, and try lots of different things, playing games is what informs you about the game and what works for you, not sitting with a calculator and moaning on the internet.

Play more games and complain less and you'll find yourself enjoying your hobby more.

[Charon]

Maybe you should refrain to tell people how they should play the game?

We play the game at different levels. That it no problem in itself. So we need a more "geralized" approach to things.
If I come here running and telling you that grotz are the best unit evar because in the right situation and with the right dice they totally killed 10 Chaos terminators, the chaoslord and 6 Obliterators, you would still not be convinced that grotz are the "to go" anti-terminator unit.

You can only talk in averages here. And in average there are units that do a way better job than kanz even if the situation is not optimal. Ork heavy support is crowed and there are very good units in this section.

Again: nobody is saying "they dont work at all, never ever!". They are just harder to make work than other units and most of the time less rewarding. thats why they are perceived a "burden" you can always go out and use them, you can always compensate with skill or luck or a less skilled opponent. But that will still not change the fact that there are subpar units in the game and the Kanz are among them. Not on a Mandrake level of things mid you but still "below medicore".

[DarkLink]

Unless you consider disagreement to be condescending, I don't see anything condescending about his comment. You, on the other hand, reply to his argument with stuff like:


Also Kans aren't subject to morale, they have the Cowardly Grot rule which is very different, if you actually played games, you'd know that.

This both misses his point and insults his competence. So, dude, go read the forum rules and then chill out.


And, yeah, Kans are pretty terrible if you're facing a competent opponent. They were bad last edition, and they only got worse. They have bad stats, and there really aren't any mitigating factors beyond praying your opponent doesn't shoot them before they manage to get into assault. Maybe, maybe the rest of your list is so brutally good that your opponent is too busy dealing with it than with the Kans, or maybe your opponent sucks at target priority, but either way, it's not really the Kans that are the "good" part of that list.

[InterrogatorBlythicus]

Ok guys here's the problem with this thread. It's called informed discussion but there isn't a lot of it. There are three people who have decided the book is worthless. And no matter what ideas some people come up with, or valid points they make (like pathwalkers thing about survivability and so on), these three automatically say "nope, won't work, it's ****". So why waste your time arguing with people like this who have already made up there mind. I suggest ignoring them and stick to new ideas for formations.

Just a thought. Coz at this point it's clear that some people are more interested in *****ing than actual discussion.

[Mr Mystery]

Sod it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhNneU5shTs

And with that, I declare this thread dead as a Dodo. Nothing productive is now coming from it.

I shall summon a Mod to get it closed off.

[The Girl]

It's done nothing but give me grief for the last 3 days, so I'll answer that call.