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

This one.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Dakka_Dakka_Ork_Takktica

Still seems pretty solid to me, but stormboys have been getting the frownyface a lot it seems.
Do you guys think this the write up is still good? What would you change?

I've also been curious about the opinion of Stormboyz expressed here.

I've never agreed with it, but I've never been motivated enough to write my own, although I've written extensive tactics that would have made a good tactica. Let me see if I can find my "Dash post" and drop it in here.


*EDIT* Here it is.

I'm going to work off of a couple of assumptions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Playing Warhammer 40k is fun.
2. Playing Warhammer 40k and winning is more fun.
3. Playing Warhammer 40k and losing is less fun.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Human nature and natural selection demand that we continually seek to improve ourselves. Having an A type personality probably doesn't hurt this effort, but if you lose a game of 40k and don't reflect on the game with, "What did I do wrong? What could I have done better? How can I prevent this from happening again?" then I can't really talk to you.

If this thought process and those three assumptions *do* apply to you, then read on.

******
Orks are a unique codex. An ork boy is significantly cheaper than just about any other model in 40k, and is basically a platform from which many things spring (other kinds of ork variants - stormboyz, lootas, nobs...). If you read the fluff, every ork starts in the same place, and as they develop, they lean towards on klan/society, which is how they figure out what kind of ork they're going to be.

In other codexes (space marines and their variants being the most prolific), basic troops are well-rounded models. You ever play Final Fight? How about ANY kind of game with character selections? You've got the big, strong guy that's slow...the average Joe....and the weaker but very speedy character. This applies in 40k as well. Space marines are like your average, well-rounded Joe. Orks are NOT. You can't mix and match orks in any order you like to make a generalized list.

This is *not* called power building, its called understanding your codex, how your codex is designed, and using it as such. Every time someone calls "playing a theme" to be "powerbuilding" I want to stab them in the F***** eye. If you look in the Ork codex, do you see the codex writers putting in pictures for the sample armies of some Lootas backing up a squad of meganobs in a trukk, who are advancing next to some buggies and a deffkopta or two?

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They even TELL you how to make your army. They tell you what the Ork klans are - Bad Moons, Kult of Speed, Deffskullz, etc.

That kind of thematic army construction is the intent of the Ork codex. That is what makes orks powerful. The ork codex is written so that you can design an army list that is absolutely ridiculously powerful, but it is NOT made up of average Joe units; everything is specialized towards a specific goal. When you build an army list, you should follow the thematic advice given to you in the Codex. PICK a theme. There's a lot of them:

Green Tide. Mechanized Assault. Mechanized Shooting. Ork Gunline (Moar Dakka), Kan-Wall. Dreadz of Fury. Kult of Speed. Outflanking Goodness. Rebel Grotz. Nob Bikers. Super Units. Orky Burnas.

All of those things have something in common - the lists were designed with a theme in mind, and have the synergy to work together towards that goal. When you start combining those themes to make a list, you're being counterintuitive to the very style that the orks were created for.

Remember this: Orks can do anything that any other army can do, and they can do it better than that army. However, orks can only do it one at a time. You can outshoot a Tau Gunline. You can out-assault a khorne army or an army of genestealers. You can put down more templates than IG....whatever your goal in mind is....orks can do it better, but it has to stick to that theme. Orks are not meant to be universal, middle-of-the-line armies.

To give another analogy...if you've ever played an MMO, there are different classes. Fighter, Tank, barbarian, mage, cleric, wizard, hunter, ranger, red mage, death knight, rogue, whatever.....its all based on the game you play. The class you pick sets you on a path for the kind of game you play, the skills you get - they are pre-defined roles.

40k armies fit into that kind of typification. Except for Orks. Orks would be the generic class. You start with a neutral character, with skillpoints to assign, and you can make orks any kind of army you want them to be. People fail with orks because they want some of everything. Instead of making them a fighter, or an archer, or a guardian...and they would be better fighters, archers and guardians than every other type...they split points between all three to make a Figardian.

*edited out inappropriate joke about the acronym for Fighter Archer Guardian*




*EDIT* I'm adding information for the tactics article I'm working on.

If you're running a foot-slogging list, shoota boys are your friend. Slugga boys belong inside vehicles. In fact, I think you should convert your slugga boy mobs into shoota boys. In 5th edition, the shoota boy is the most efficient point purchase across all 40k.

Think on that - for 6 points...SIX POINTS....you get an infantry model with an assault 2 STR4 gun, who is WS4, STR4, T4 on the charge. In terms of math hammer between shoota and slugga boys, it's pretty simple. Slugga boys have +1 attack in close combat, and shoota boys have +1 attack outside of close combat. Since your Orks on the assault are only I3, you're going to strike last meaning that 30 boyz are going to take some casualties before getting their attacks back.

On the flip side, shoota boys get 2 shots before assaulting, and the enemy doesn't get to shoot back first and cause casualties - putting in any kind of hurt before you assault is incredibly valuable. And since it has an 18" range, you can shoot into a unit even when you don't have range to assault this turn. My advice for green tide:

Take all your troops choices as shoota boys. Consider taking a squad of gretchin - you can spread them across your front lines to provide 4+ cover saves for your whole army. Alternatively, you can take a squad of ork boyz to do the same. If you make them 'Ard Boyz they gain considerably in staying power.

Want to get real freaky? Take a squad of 'Ard Boyz, stick Mad Dok Grotsnik with them for a 4+/4+. Spread that unit out 2+ coherence to minimize the damage that blast templates can do, and have the whole thing move+run in front of your army. Your screening unit has 4+ armor saves, 4+ feel no pain, and the rest of your army has 4+ cover saves now. If your points allow it, what really tops off the list is adding some fast attack Stormboyz. You can put them into close combat, or have them multi-assault to shake/stun some tanks/artillery, have them get in fast and tie up enemy units (hello Tau!), or if the situation doesn't call for it, you can leave them behind your screening unit and keep them in reserve to get in where you need supporting assault units at.

I'd love to see that "Dash post" polished up into an article. And imagine how much simpler it would be just to post a link.

As a specific answer to Stormboyz - they're not the most incredible fast attack unit, but they fill a role in certain army styles. Deffkoptas and twin-linked rokkit warbuggies also fill roles in different Ork army types (Mechanized Orks, Kan walls being most prevalent) but it really depends on the kind of army you want to play.

Thanks Dash.
Say, while you're looking this way, I was wondering if you might have a moment to comment on this other thread I posted? Seeing as you have the DE down to a science?
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/347456.page

Thanks Dash. I too would love to see a full takktica from you, or even just a full update of
http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Dakka_Dakka_Ork_Takktica which does appear a little elderly.

I read it and disagree with many points. However, I think any player could learn something from it.

He listed bikes as suck, also burnas. Tell that to the guy I just played on vassal, when I wiped out 2 squads with burnas alone, just putting templates off the battlewagon.

Stormboyz as good? I don't think so. Thy're about as good as boyz on the round you scream whagh. You might as well spring for Gzazgul and get a guaranteed 6 inches.

I think the Ork takktika has issues. For starters warbikers aren't poor, not by a longshot. I've had some really good success using them and that's just in small squads against a mix of enemies.
Stormboys I call iffy since they're just faster orks. Yay for 6+ armour save... Not a squad I would consider.
Warboss on bike, again not mandatory since you can have a very CC-ish boss in a wagon. Same applies to nobz - a wagon makes more sense for them than a trukk. Trukk is fast and breaks. Wagon is slower yet more durable. Might ruin target priority but I'd be willing to gamble.
Gretchin only seem to be an OBJ holder on your turf or a huge speedbump in a horde army. Not much else for them IMHO.
Buggies aren't as bad as the write makers them out. Granted, twin big shootas isn't what you'd normally put on a warbuggy, and normlly it's twin rokkits. Still speedy anti-tank. Need to try these out.
Koptas apparently need PKs according to people on this board, but I remain unsure about koptas as a whole. They die too fast for me when I tried them.
Deff dread I might consider semi-competitive, mainly in a Kan Wall list or a general horde army. All that snipping and sawing is delightful Again, I don't use them so, reserved judgement.

The takktika needs refining methinks.

Juvieus Kaine wrote:I think the Ork takktika has issues. For starters warbikers aren't poor, not by a longshot.

I couldn't get past that part of your post. =p

Yes, they *are* that poor.

I think it's too biased, every good tactica I've ever seen has broken down the good and the bad of every unit in that particular army without being biased by the writers personal opinion. They provided the best way to use each unit (as each unit does have it's uses) and leave it up to the reader to decide wether or not they'll use it instead of saying "I think these units suck so don't use them, I think these units are great so use them".

Personally I've always used Storm Boyz as a quick Tank Hunter unit or a tie up unit, while they are pretty much the same as normal Boyz they can ignore terrain which gives them an advantage over Boyz on the Waaagh. I just keep them to cover and use them to either take out a tank or other vehicle or assault them into a shooty unit (Long Fangs, Broadsides etc.) to keep them busy. If they die then they kept the enemy from shooting at the rest of my army, if they win then they killed an enemy and kept them from shooting at the rest of my army.

Now yes they may not be the best unit the Orks have, they may not be one of those die hard tournament winning units like Biker Nobs. But that dosen't mean they are useless, so I think it all depends on how you play and what type of army you want. And that goes with every unit for every army.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Juvieus Kaine wrote:I think the Ork takktika has issues. For starters warbikers aren't poor, not by a longshot.

I couldn't get past that part of your post. =p

Yes, they *are* that poor.

Then you're a bad person and very biased in your opinion Or you just don't like them, which is understandable. But they aren't that bad. The alternatives in the Fast Attack slot, mostly the koptas taht everybody on ehre loves lording up, are not as good. I for one don't like buzzkoptas because they don't work for me. They get shot before they hit home eveyr time so they don't make their points back.

So, with all this said, anyone have a link to a "good" Takktika?

I haven't been able to find one Ork tactics page that covered the entire army, there have been a few here and there that covered individual units or army types. I'll try and post links to them later

matphat wrote:So, with all this said, anyone have a link to a "good" Takktika?

Matphat, there isn't one - what I copy/pasted it as close as it gets to "here's how to use Orks."

I can do you one better though: Tell me what you're trying to do, how you want it to work, what you envision happening, and I will help you pick the units, the supplements, and the tactics to get there. I daresay that you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone on the face of the planet who has been more successful than me with Orks, and anything I can do to further the green kroosade and make OTHER Orks successful is time well spent in my book.

@Juvieus: Warbikers are extremely expensive for an ork model, less effective than nobs who can be just as mobile, undewhelming in shooting, overwhelmed in close combat, without even a serious advantage in mobility to their mechanized counterparts - who can't turbo-boost up to 24", but they can move 13", disembark 2", run 6" on a Waaaugh! and charge 6", and actually cover more ground than the warbikers. On top of all that, they are T4(5) instead of T5, so STR8 will still insta-gib them, which isn't as important as it is with nobs, since warbikers only have one wound, their 3-15 unit size means that they're going to be taking leadership tests long before regular boyz - and I'm not sure I've EVER even seen someone take these in units of 15, and on top of all that, this is for a STR3 model, who is STR4 on the charge, attacking at I3 at best.

Consider this a challenge to your belief in warbikers, but I'd be happy to play a game with you on Vassal; you with your warbiker army (or units) and me with my standard fare, and I show you their ineffectiveness.

@Warboss Imbad Ironskull: You said "....that doesn't mean they are useless, so I think it all depends on how you play and wha type of army you want. And that goes with every unit for every army."

Most codexes *definitely* have units that *are* completely worthless. Here, I believe worthless has the following meaning: Brutally ineffective for their point value at their appointed task compared to other options in the codex. Flashgits: Horribly expensive, underperforming, complete waste of space in an army. That isn't going to stop people from using them - however, I will say that you will probably never see a competitive ork list with Flashgits in them. That's the problem with warbikers - there's nothing that they can't do that something else in the codex can't do better and for less points.

Like I said, it depends on how you play and what type of army you want. As long as a unit can actually do something (i.e kill something ) it isn't worthless, it's just up to the player and their attitude on how they play. If they're out to win a tournament then yes there are always better options then Flashgits that are more cost effective. But the relevance of how cost effective they are is based on the player using them, where you may consider them worthless another player may win games left and right because of them. Every unit in every codex has a use andso isn't worthless, it just depends on if you're willing to use them for that role or use something else.

Dashofpepper wrote:@Juvieus: Warbikers are extremely expensive for an ork model, less effective than nobs who can be just as mobile, undewhelming in shooting, overwhelmed in close combat, without even a serious advantage in mobility to their mechanized counterparts - who can't turbo-boost up to 24", but they can move 13", disembark 2", run 6" on a Waaaugh! and charge 6", and actually cover more ground than the warbikers. On top of all that, they are T4(5) instead of T5, so STR8 will still insta-gib them, which isn't as important as it is with nobs, since warbikers only have one wound, their 3-15 unit size means that they're going to be taking leadership tests long before regular boyz - and I'm not sure I've EVER even seen someone take these in units of 15, and on top of all that, this is for a STR3 model, who is STR4 on the charge, attacking at I3 at best.

Consider this a challenge to your belief in warbikers, but I'd be happy to play a game with you on Vassal; you with your warbiker army (or units) and me with my standard fare, and I show you their ineffectiveness.

I can accept they are rather expensive but it beats koptas. And they can go up to 12, not 15.

As far as experience goes I've had them reach enemy lines with few casualties on a long board, which says alot to me. They're underestimated and besides, it's another power klaw. They're guns aren't rubbish - plenty of dakka. I use nobz in a wagon and bikers and the bikers have always proven useful. Call me stupid for playingf different to you and most other people, but it's how I roll. And sadly I don't use Vassal so I'll have to decline the game.

I like bikers, you don't. We can leave it at that surely?

Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote: the relevance of how cost effective they are is based on the player using them, where you may consider them worthless another player may win games left and right because of them .

Show me a player who wins games left and right because of Flash Gitz, and I'll show you a player who has never played against a decent army. =D


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Juvieus Kaine wrote:
I like bikers, you don't. We can leave it at that surely?

You're welcome to like bikers and use them - I don't take issue with that - personal quirk of yours and you're welcome to it. What I *do* take issue with is you recommending them to someone looking for advice on ork tactics, which goes beyond personally liking them and into the realm of negatively affecting someone elses' competitive ability if they take that advice.

The reason I suggested Vassal is because to be honest, there is no better way to open someone's mind to new ideas than to absolutely crush them into the ground. I do this a couple times a year when someone is particularly ardent about a particularly bad idea. If I table them while only losing a unit or two at most, it breaks through and makes them consider that maybe their idea that they refused to budge on isn't so hot. Even better if I table them with Necrons.

Dashofpepper wrote:What I *do* take issue with is you recommending them to someone looking for advice on ork tactics, which goes beyond personally liking them and into the realm of negatively affecting someone elses' competitive ability if they take that advice.

Well again this is matter of opinion. But I won't argue it anymore.

Dashofpepper wrote:The reason I suggested Vassal is because to be honest, there is no better way to open someone's mind to new ideas than to absolutely crush them into the ground. I do this a couple times a year when someone is particularly ardent about a particularly bad idea. If I table them while only losing a unit or two at most, it breaks through and makes them consider that maybe their idea that they refused to budge on isn't so hot. Even better if I table them with Necrons.

That's just evil

Dashofpepper wrote:

Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote: the relevance of how cost effective they are is based on the player using them, where you may consider them worthless another player may win games left and right because of them .

Show me a player who wins games left and right because of Flash Gitz, and I'll show you a player who has never played against a decent army. =D

If I still lived in Washington I could in fact show you a player (I'd actually take his picture ) who wins quiet regularly thanks to his Flash Gits in a group of veteran players who've been in the game since the begining.

I take it that you play the game to win every single time? (and believe it or not there are players to whome winning isn't everything) If I'm correct this would lead you to only take the units that are the most effective for the task and there is absolutly nothing wrong with that.

But a player who plays the game just because they enjoy it and is of the mindset that even though they like to win they don't absolutly have to every time they play isn't absolutly going to have to take the unit that doe a particular job best.

And even though they don't take the best unit for the job that dosen't mean that they can't win or don't do it regularly with the less "effective" unit and it dosen't make that unit worthless, and in the same breath it dosen't mean their opponent is unexperienced or has a bad army.

So do you get what I'm saying? you're saying that a unit like Flash Gits is worthless because there are units that do the same thing better and for less points and so give you better chances of winning. But the fact is that there are players who do;ot play the game just to win and so don't need to take the top units because they do;ot have to try and insure their win every time. But that dosen't mean they don't win

There's a good analysis on Kirby's site here. I wouldn't call it a tactics site just like I wouldn't call Dakka article tactics. They are more of a over view and opinions are like ...well lets just say everyones got one.


http://kirbysblog-ic.blogspot.com/p/armies-in-5th-edition-articles.html

As always, there is a difference between:

"Unit A is generally poor and should be avoided by most players"

and

"Unit A will accomplish nothing and prevent you from winning games."

In modern 40k, most units aren't good or bad, they are simply useful more or less of the time, and more or less efficient with regards to points.

Bikes and flash gitz have poor utility and poor efficiency. There are times when the really do come through, but less so than many other units.

Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:
I take it that you play the game to win every single time? (and believe it or not there are players to whome winning isn't everything) If I'm correct this would lead you to only take the units that are the most effective for the task and there is absolutly nothing wrong with that.

if I played the game to win every single time, I wouldn't have a Necron army. And I wouldn't play a Necron army that most Necron players feel is terrible. In order to acquire wraiths, I actually traded out my destroyers. =D

And no, I don't play the game to win. I play 40k for the tactical challenge, to pit my abilities against other people, and ultimately, I play to lose - I play against as varied opponents as I can find in the continual search for my betters so that I can improve myself - which is why I enjoy Grand Tournaments so much; players from around the country gather in one place, and I have a better chance of testing my mettle against the best out there.

Please don't confuse experience with skill. I've played plenty of white haired 40k players who have been around since the days of Rogue Traders, and krumped their armies off the table with little challenge. I've also played (and lost) against a high school student at his first Grand Tournament. There is limited correlation between experience and skill. Rather, experience supplements skill, but you need intelligence and cunning in the first place.

Since I'm the one who wrote the vast majority of that Takktica, I'll chime in.

The Takktica was written right when the Ork dex came out, which means it was written with a 4th Edition mindset and the 4th Edition meta, specifically area terrain being the most common terrain that was completely LOS blocking.

In that context stuff like Storm Boyz were pretty damn good, since you could hide them very easily and advance hopping between different pieces of terrain and hit a target unmolested.

This is also why things like Battlewagons and Deffrollas aren't trumpeted in the Takktica, armor other than skimmers weren't used much at all in 4th, and traditional armor wasn't very survivalble at all.

So since I barely read about current 40k, let alone play it anymore, the Takktica should be freely modified/edited by others who do currently play 40k and Orks.

Polonius wrote:As always, there is a difference between:

"Unit A is generally poor and should be avoided by most players"

and

"Unit A will accomplish nothing and prevent you from winning games."

In modern 40k, most units aren't good or bad, they are simply useful more or less of the time, and more or less efficient with regards to points.

Bikes and flash gitz have poor utility and poor efficiency. There are times when the really do come through, but less so than many other units.

Exactly


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dashofpepper wrote:

Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:
I take it that you play the game to win every single time? (and believe it or not there are players to whome winning isn't everything) If I'm correct this would lead you to only take the units that are the most effective for the task and there is absolutly nothing wrong with that.

if I played the game to win every single time, I wouldn't have a Necron army. And I wouldn't play a Necron army that most Necron players feel is terrible. In order to acquire wraiths, I actually traded out my destroyers. =D

See that's a perfect example of what I'm talking about, somethings worth is dependant on the person using it. So to some while a Necron army (at least untill their update comes) is worthless to you it has worth. To some while wraiths may be worthless compared to destroyers for you they have some kind of worth which is why you take them you see?

And no, I don't play the game to win. I play 40k for the tactical challenge, to pit my abilities against other people, and ultimately, I play to lose - I play against as varied opponents as I can find in the continual search for my betters so that I can improve myself - which is why I enjoy Grand Tournaments so much; players from around the country gather in one place, and I have a better chance of testing my mettle against the best out there.

Fair enough, but it's still pretty close because in the end you want units that will give you a tactical advantage over your opponents and so you want units that will do a specific job best and for less. To someone who dosen't have that drive Flash Gits probably aren't as useless.

Please don't confuse experience with skill. I've played plenty of white haired 40k players who have been around since the days of Rogue Traders, and krumped their armies off the table with little challenge. I've also played (and lost) against a high school student at his first Grand Tournament. There is limited correlation between experience and skill. Rather, experience supplements skill, but you need intelligence and cunning in the first place.

Ah but without actually knowing the people I'm talking about you can't assume that they aren't both skillfull and experienced. I have no doubt that experience and skill aren't one and the same, I once got beat at a tournament by an 11 year old using his dads IG army who had only been playing a week versus my 10 years

But even at that the point is that even with Flash Gits (which we all know isn't one of the best units in the Ork army) in his army versus having the better units he still wins against players who are just as skilled as anyone when it comes to playing the game and often it is because of the Flash Gits. So somethings worth isn't determined by if there are better alternatives or not, somethings worth is determined by what the user would rather take. To you Flash Gits are worthless, to him (as well as other players I'm sure) they aren't

Voodoo Boyz wrote:Since I'm the one who wrote the vast majority of that Takktica, I'll chime in.

The Takktica was written right when the Ork dex came out, which means it was written with a 4th Edition mindset and the 4th Edition meta, specifically area terrain being the most common terrain that was completely LOS blocking.

In that context stuff like Storm Boyz were pretty damn good, since you could hide them very easily and advance hopping between different pieces of terrain and hit a target unmolested.

This is also why things like Battlewagons and Deffrollas aren't trumpeted in the Takktica, armor other than skimmers weren't used much at all in 4th, and traditional armor wasn't very survivalble at all.

So since I barely read about current 40k, let alone play it anymore, the Takktica should be freely modified/edited by others who do currently play 40k and Orks.

Well when it was written Deffrolla's didn't work on vehicles which made them an over-costed vehicle upgrade as opposed to probably the most feared weapon in the ork codex. Looking over the tactica it gets most things right and misses a few things completely. It's underselling big gunz, buggies, koptaz and burnas but most of the rest of the analysis is correct (aside from the aforementioned stormboyz).

Dashofpepper wrote:
@Juvieus: Warbikers are extremely expensive for an ork model, less effective than nobs who can be just as mobile, undewhelming in shooting, overwhelmed in close combat, without even a serious advantage in mobility to their mechanized counterparts - who can't turbo-boost up to 24", but they can move 13", disembark 2", run 6" on a Waaaugh! and charge 6", and actually cover more ground than the warbikers. On top of all that, they are T4(5) instead of T5, so STR8 will still insta-gib them, which isn't as important as it is with nobs, since warbikers only have one wound, their 3-15 unit size means that they're going to be taking leadership tests long before regular boyz - and I'm not sure I've EVER even seen someone take these in units of 15, and on top of all that, this is for a STR3 model, who is STR4 on the charge, attacking at I3 at best.

Consider this a challenge to your belief in warbikers, but I'd be happy to play a game with you on Vassal; you with your warbiker army (or units) and me with my standard fare, and I show you their ineffectiveness.

In general, I fear Warbikers more than Deffkoptas. Biggest factor is the automatic cover save, it makes Bikes very frustrating to shoot. Whilst Deffkoptas are also scary, they are more like one-shot deal - they come down, assault or shoot something, then are blown out of the sky. Another is that Bikerz have a Nob, which makes the unit more killy in assaults and harder to drive off the board. Even with Buzzsaw, Koptas aren't guaranteed to destroy vehicles or insta-kill IC's in assault, Bikernob (or even better, BikerBoss) is. Also, Warbikerz are somewhat cheaper so for their points value, they pack more dakka than the Koptas, making them scarier for my troops. Of course, I play Tau, maybe it's different for other armies.

I think the whole "Warbikers suck" thing is just in comparison with Nob Bikers, which are of course far more scary and can be taken as troops, without any special character. So if people are looking for most competive choice, Warbikers are usually ignored.

The thing about flash gitz is, they don't suck in the strictest sense. They're just overcosted and unreliable. When you decide to pay their expensive cost, and they happen to come through for you, they are capable of dealing an incredible amount of damage to the right targets - wiping monstrous creatures and terminators off the board. The reason they're uncompetitive is that sometimes you'll roll all 5's and 6's for their AP roll and you've paid through the teeth for some nobs with big shootas.

If you're a good enough player with a good enough army to carry the game for you when you find you've spent 400 points on some big shoota nobs, you can still win games with flash gitz on your list. And some of the time, they'll deal far more than their points' cost in damage and win the game for you.

Y'dig what I'm saying? It's like weirdboys. They obviously aren't that great, but a weirdboy that rolls zap every turn is a stupendous bargain. Overall there are better deals but they've both got devestating potential.

Plus I think that's part of the apeal of an Ork army is that things don't always work as planned.

I think the biggest problem with Flash Gitz is that they take a Heavy Support slot. Orks have so stupidly good choices there, why would anyone waste a HS slot on an unit whichs capabilities are generally matched or exceeded by another Codex entry (Nobz).