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.

In this thread:

They changed stuff so my army list is no longer valid and I will have to change stuff, this means the codex sucks.

DaPino wrote:
In this thread:

They changed stuff so my army list is no longer valid and I will have to change stuff, this means the codex sucks.

In this post:

I have no concept of reading comprehension, hurr durr durr derp.

Seriously, several arguments beyond "muh armies" have been laid out. Try actually responding instead of drive by gak-talking.

And how many players that made said arguments have played more than 2 games with the new codex?

Agreed, sometimes you just don't need a lot of experience to realise it isn't good. But, given that the new edition has only been out for 1 month combined with the fact that the ork codex has yet to celebrate it's one-week-anniversary, I'd say people are complaining about things they have no experience with whatsoever.

DaPino wrote:
And how many players that made said arguments have played more than 2 games with the new codex?

Agreed, sometimes you just don't need a lot of experience to realise it isn't good. But, given that the new edition has only been out for 1 month combined with the fact that the ork codex has yet to celebrate it's one-week-anniversary, I'd say people are complaining about things they have no experience with whatsoever.

You mean besides actually comparing to how it worked before with visual representation and actual statistics?

Such as the KFF 5++ model vs cover save whole unit?

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

DaPino wrote:
And how many players that made said arguments have played more than 2 games with the new codex?

Agreed, sometimes you just don't need a lot of experience to realise it isn't good. But, given that the new edition has only been out for 1 month combined with the fact that the ork codex has yet to celebrate it's one-week-anniversary, I'd say people are complaining about things they have no experience with whatsoever.

You mean besides actually comparing to how it worked before with visual representation and actual statistics?

Such as the KFF 5++ model vs cover save whole unit?

So as my post sais, sometimes you don't need to play something to tell wether it's become better or worse. Yeah, KFF is such a case.
Then again, does that justify shunting the entire codex, saying it is a complete letdown? Not really because you have a lot of stuff you haven't actually tried out but that doesn't matter because they nerfed something you used before.

I've got people running around my FLGW, crying about how 7th edition was the final nail to the coffin of GK as a viable army. Why? Because the librarian got nerfed. Well feth your librarian got nerf and instead you got scoring purifiers that got a better ability and all your vehicles have a 6++ if you cast their power, you must feel so screwed over. I'll just sit in a corner, playing my totally OP CSM.

I've been playing Orks since Rogue Trader and my friend has been playing them since 5th. For both of us, this new codex lacks anything that grabs us by the 'urtie bits and screams BUY ME!

Our favorite thing about playing orks was that our opponents never knew what to expect. Some days we'd roll eight battlewagons, others dozens of boys. Some days it'd be nothing but Dreads and Kans as far as da eye could see. We liked that most of our most awesome unit's powers ended with "... or it explodes." We gloried in the battles where our own weapons killed more of our troops than the enemy did.

We made it a point to try and use every unit in our codex at least a few times just to see if they could be made useful, so we had a pretty good idea of where we needed some beefing up.

So we were hoping for a lot of awesome variability and randomness, but would have settled for a competently executed set of rule fixes.

Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.

We still lack any serious threat to AV14.
We still have vehicles that crumple if so much as glared at.
Flash gits still seem useless.
Zagstruk still seems useless.
Kommandos still lack the ability to leap out of the table edge and start stabbing.
Zogwort is gone.
Wazzdakka is gone.
Using (fill in unit) as troops is gone.
In their places are flyers which we technically already had and a $100 mecha and the option of maybe getting some of our missing characters back by spending more money on more books later.

Now, it does sound like tankbustas may actually be useful now, but that alone doesn't really make us want to run out and throw down a fistfull of cash. Especially since our group basically played 6th ed two times and sort of collectively went "Eh, f@#$ that" and hasn't played 40K in almost a year. My closest GW shop closed and my FLGs seems to mostly do WarmaHordes and MtG. I wanted a book that made me want to kick the doors down and go "DA ORKZ IS BACK!"

I agree 100% with Unistrut. No reason to spend more money.

DaPino wrote:
Not really because you have a lot of stuff you haven't actually tried out but that doesn't matter because they nerfed something you used before.

You don't see how people whose army has been nerfed might not be overjoyed at the suggestion that they have nothing to complain about because they can just buy different stuff?

 insaniak wrote:

DaPino wrote:
Not really because you have a lot of stuff you haven't actually tried out but that doesn't matter because they nerfed something you used before.

You don't see how people whose army has been nerfed might not be overjoyed at the suggestion that they have nothing to complain about because they can just buy different stuff?

I don't see that either, considering that the number of active posters on dakkadakka being able to play the codex right now is one. And I doubt anyone with a decent ork collection doesn't have at least one pain boy somewhere or the bits to build one within a couple of minutes. I just built a trio of meks with killsaws yesterday by taking a good look at my bits box.

Almost all my orks were purchased second hand, because after buying 6 other armies and starting with AoBR orks I wanted to be able to play. So my ork bits are extremely limited, despite having several thousand points of orks easy. Granted, about 600 points of that is WDW exclusive now... So lets try to avoid the "no true orksman" fallacy shall we?

Even without playing the book, we can look at things and understand that they are objectively worse.

The math has been run on Mob Rule, and aside from a few extremely specific situatoins (usually involving being in close combat), it is inarguably worse.

No invulnerable saves in Close Combat is completely, 100% indefensable.

KFF change is a wash to me. As a cover save it only applied to shooting, so the ++ save being only shooting isnt anything new. Being a ++ save is better than being a Cover save, IMO, thanks to the prevalance of Ignores Cover weapons and options. Being models instead of units was probably a necessary change given the switch to ++ instead of +c, but still feels like a huge nerf especially for Green Tide style lists.

Adding a chance to for Killa Kanz to be shaken? Why? Fluffy or not (I would argue not), was it really necessary? Were they that broken before? (Hint: the answer is no.) Its a nerf, plain as day. Oh but if I include an all but useless Deff Dread they're harder to shake! Whoopity do! Now I can waste another HS slot on a unit specifically to babysit my first unit so it can do its job! Its ludicrous.

Attack Squigs got nerfed. I mean, just think about that. Attack Squigs.

No FOC manipulation, for all those that ran Nobz or Deff Dreads as troops, is a nerf. "But you can use more FOCs or Unbound!" I honestly want to cross check the people suggesting using unbound against those that cried about it before 7th landed. I suspect there are a fair number of people who bitched about it before suddenly white knighting its use for Ork players.

Ramshackle nerfed. An AV10, open topped vehicle. How often do you think the new Ramshackle will matter? I can only speak from my experience, where no trukk Ive ever fielded has died to a single shot. Have they been exploded? Certainly, but theres usually so much overkill (since most basic weapons can glance the thing) that downgrading to a glance is basically meaningless. The trukk is still gone, my dudes are still boned.

Waagh plane nerfed. First off, let me say that Waagh Plane (or at least its concept) is the biggest missed opportunity in Ork history. GW had a golden opportunity and precedent for allowing different units to handle WAAAGH differently. Instead, they nerfed the one standout they had, making the Dakkajet hardly worth its points. Completely dropped the squig at the 1 yard line.

Shootas are a paid upgrade. Ork boyz were a good deal at 6ppm. One of the best troops values in the game, no doubt about that. As GW pushes a shooty game (because I think we can all agree that 7th still favors shooty armies), did they make our choppy boyz cheaper? Nope, instead they made it more expensive to go with the flow of the edition. Is it a MASSIVE nerf? No, it's 1 ppm. Is it another in a string of "WTF?" moments throughout the codex? You bet your squig it is.

Looted Wagons removed from the codex because even though GW might sell other model kits to Orks to loot, even a single dollar going to Chapterhouse (or any other company!) was just UNACCEPTABLE! Granted, I could just be bitter after Tyranids, but come on.

Exhaust Cloud nerfed. First we have some of the only bikes that DON'T grant a 3+ armor save, that's okay though because at least we get cover!

About that cover save...

Well we get Cybork bodies to save our nobz at least!

About that cybork body...

6+ FnP isnt quite 5++, but at least its a lot cheaper!

About the cost...

Honestly, the list of places where GW just stepped on their squig goes on and on. It's pathetic.

Did we get some buffs? Sure.

There are plenty of points drops, some great (rockets are almost entirely cheaper or free now) others not-so-great (lootas down 1ppm! *fingertwirl*).

Buggies can outflank and be in units of 5, which is neat, except they're still going to die to a stiff breeze. Or a light breeze. Look, no one pass gas near the AV10, open topped 2 HP models okay?

Orks certainly got the raw end of the deal. I'm at least fairly happy with the IG 'dex - despite the removal of some units which irritates me and missing a lot of blatantly obvious fixes. I feel for you with some of these changes. Even if you argued shaken kans was more realistic, at least buff them in other ways to counteract it.

Attack Squig: The difference between a single reroll to hit and +1 attack is negligible and only comes into play when you manage to hit with every attack, which is quite rare. Otherwise, so ling as you miss one attack you will end up with the same result. It's also in line with the other Squigs. This really is not an actual nerf, especially if the points dropped. If they did, it's actually a buff.

Exhaust Trail: Bikes can Jink, it's not like Snap Shots are that huge of a loss for Orks. And Flatput still grants a 3+. And Warbikers got cheaper at least.

Cyborg Bodies: Actually, cheap 6+ FNP is actually a buff anytime you'd be allowed an Armor or Cover Save. Otherwise, if they ignore your Cover and armor, it is a nerf. If you are allowed an Armor or Cover Save or even Invulnerable(KFF) it's a 20% increase in Survivability.


Not everything is as bad as it first looks. I'm not saying there are legitimate gripes, just some aren't as bad.

 Zagman wrote:
Attack Squig: The difference between a single reroll to hit and +1 attack is negligible and only comes into play when you manage to hit with every attack, which is quite rare. Otherwise, so ling as you miss one attack you will end up with the same result. It's also in line with the other Squigs. This really is not an actual nerf, especially if the points dropped. If they did, it's actually a buff.

Exhaust Trail: Bikes can Jink, it's not like Snap Shots are that huge of a loss for Orks. And Flatput still grants a 3+. And Warbikers got cheaper at least.

Cyborg Bodies: Actually, cheap 6+ FNP is actually a buff anytime you'd be allowed an Armor or Cover Save. Otherwise, if they ignore your Cover and armor, it is a nerf. If you are allowed an Armor or Cover Save or even Invulnerable(KFF) it's a 20% increase in Survivability.


Not everything is as bad as it first looks. I'm not saying there are legitimate gripes, just some aren't as bad.

1. Hitting stationary vehicles with all attacks isnt all that rare. Given that melee is how orks are practically forced to destroy heavy vehicles (and some light vehicles), it is still a nerf. Noticable on a warboss as wel.

2. Losing half our hits isnt a big deal? I mean, we hit rarely enough as it is. Flatout at 3+c is nice an all, but if over a 6 turn game how often am I flat-outing vs not? Far more turns are spent NOT moving flat out.

3. With the KFF no longer granting cover saves, the frequency of getting a save + FNP has dropped sharply. You also have to consider the models that could take Cybork in the first place: Nobz (not MANZ) and characters. Few of those models were getting to take their 4+ armor save in the first place. Characters might have a 2+ from MegaArmor, but if they did they're looking to get Powerfisted in the face. Basically the instance of getting a save is rare enough that the drop from 5++ to 6+ FNP is a nerf big enough to drive a Megasquiggoth through. In CC, you are almost entirely worse off with 6+ FnP than a 5++. Weapons easily wounding T5 orks tend to be big things: power fists, t.hammers, etc. Those go through our 2+ MA just as easily, and where we'd have a 5++ before, we're now hoping for 6+f. Not to mention force weapons (which we'll probably see more of, given psykers increased presence) will go through that FnP completely. ID weapons like D weapons? GG FnP!

Surprisingly, the "They made my list illegal and I have to buy stuff, so this codex sucks" approach does not apply to me. By some weird happenstance my army is 100% valid now (including my superheavy), and the nerf bat has been quite soft on it. I'm starting to wonder if GW has planted a hidden camera on my games room or something.

But still, I'm dissatisfied with the new codex.

Forget DLC or missing characters. The biggest offender here is the ork morale table. Along with some other small but important changes, that rule alone kills the spirit of the army as we knew it.

Let me explain: The way I see it, orks were fun to play with not because of random tables, but because they allowed a crazy, reckless approach to the game. If Eldar could be compared to a rapier and IG to a broadsword, orks were a set of brass knuckles. Orks were an army that actively rewarded you for being brash, direct and brutal. You could pull some demented counter-intuitiive and tactically unsound maneouver with them and still achieve victory or, at least, have fun pretending to be a bellowing megalomaniac.

Now, with Ork Morale, that cheerful recklesness is gone. Ork morale chastises you for bold head-on charges and makes being careful an imperative. The only units immune to its punishing effects are vehicles and a fair few tough infantry units. Boyz, once the backbone of our army, are relegated to last-minute objective grabbers.

but its so random just like orks! It allows to be cinematic and forge your own narrative!

Optimists playing 40k? Are you gaking me? I thought we agreed to lynch all these people long ago.

 Billagio wrote:
but its so random just like orks! It allows to be cinematic and forge your own narrative!

One thing I will give GW, I expected a LOT more random tables. Instead we stayed the same. (Losing Ramshackle but gaining Mob Rule). Guess they wouldnt let Kelly stick around all that long.

 streamdragon wrote:
1. Hitting stationary vehicles with all attacks isnt all that rare. Given that melee is how orks are practically forced to destroy heavy vehicles (and some light vehicles), it is still a nerf. Noticable on a warboss as wel.

Stationary vehicles are hit on 3+, the chance of all your warbosses attacks hitting is 13.2% So about one out of six times when hitting a vehicle or a unit with less WS, it was nerfed, yes.

2. Losing half our hits isnt a big deal? I mean, we hit rarely enough as it is. Flatout at 3+c is nice an all, but if over a 6 turn game how often am I flat-outing vs not? Far more turns are spent NOT moving flat out.

Math says that three twin-linked BS2 shots hit 1.67 times, three twin-linked BS1 shots hit 0.92 times. So the old warbikers killed 0.0666 MEQ per point, the new ones kill 0.0657 per point (1.43% less), with the option for three more bikers per mob, the ability to kill 45% more unless something actually shoots them with AP4 or better and a better cover save when turbo-boosting. Tell us how that's a nerf.

3. With the KFF no longer granting cover saves, the frequency of getting a save + FNP has dropped sharply.

How so? At least according to the BRB 5++ and 6+ FNP is strictly better than 5+ cover and 5++. Or are you implying that you'd get to use the KFF less often than when it was cover?

You also have to consider the models that could take Cybork in the first place: Nobz (not MANZ) and characters. Few of those models were getting to take their 4+ armor save in the first place.

Mostly because they were on a bike and had 4+ cover anyway. In close combat the most common occurrence of armor-ignoring close combat weapons were characters and Grey Knights. Nobz were always a bad choice to fight close combat specialists, since your 5++/FNP would hardly protect your 50+ point investment from being killed.

Characters might have a 2+ from MegaArmor, but if they did they're looking to get Powerfisted in the face.

Why would you put your warboss in CC with something wielding a powerfist? Why would someone put somebody in CC with a Warboss wielding a powerklaw?

Basically the instance of getting a save is rare enough that the drop from 5++ to 6+ FNP is a nerf big enough to drive a Megasquiggoth through. In CC, you are almost entirely worse off with 6+ FnP than a 5++. Weapons easily wounding T5 orks tend to be big things: power fists, t.hammers, etc. Those go through our 2+ MA just as easily, and where we'd have a 5++ before, we're now hoping for 6+f.

You do take a couple of additional wounds against regular characters, simply because 6+ is less than 5+, but it's not like you could expect to fight any of those things you named and live before because of cybork.

Not to mention force weapons (which we'll probably see more of, given psykers increased presence) will go through that FnP completely.

Unless you just accidentally roll a six or two of your DTW roll and then proceed to laugh manically while your warboss kicks your opponent's psyker's head in. Or you don't and roll your 2+ LoS!, just like before, rather than hoping for your 5++ save to succeed.

ID weapons like D weapons? GG FnP!

Yeah, because a unit of nobz was totally going to survive that knight charging them/the turbo-laser shooting them if they had a 5++ save.

The cybork save was a weak save that simply was bought because it was better than no save and cheap enough. It was no storm shield, not even an iron halo. For almost all intents and purposes it dropped by 1 point, and in case you're fighting rank and file soldiers it might have even increased your chances of survival. Yes, I would have liked to keep the 5++ save as well, but it's by no means worth the fuss you're making about it. More often than not, it's not going to make a difference.

The basic issue that I would present to you is this:

The Ork codex was weak. It needed buffing, badly, to bring the army back up to competitive levels. I don't know of any Ork player who has had all that much fun in 6th edition. The new codex thus had to be a strong improvement over the last one, especially in terms of making our units better able to reach combat and then win combat, which is (broadly speaking) what Ork players tend to prefer to do.

This book appears not to be a buff; it seems to be about the same, and includes a mixed bag of new units (the 'naut isn't so good, the guns are amazing but totally overpriced money wise) along with some stinging nerfs to things that Ork players regarded as the core of the army (Ramshackle, Mob Rule, etc). So when you hear complaining over the book, remember that it needed to bring improvements, and seems not to have. Perhaps the book does make the army better, but I suspect that many army styles will become substantially worse, sadly including my own Trukkrush tactics. Only time will tell, of course, but I am far from hopeful.

Another thing I've begun to consider is that Orks are purely designed to play Maelstrom missions. Or any mission with objectives, period. The army doesn't seem designed to be capable of flat out tabling other races. Which isn't always a bad thing in the end. My only gripe isn't so much with Orks as it is with my local store. A lot of asshats there won't play mission objectives when I go down to play because they know they can't play as much cheese and table me. They would much rather play an uninteresting game of 'oh! lets kill that next!' instead of 'Ok, I really need to get that objective or it could cost me the game...but how to go about it?'

With 7th bringing the tactical objectives segment to the game, I KNOW I'll be forcing more of it in the local area. Kill Points is fine and all, but most times, Ork players will lose those unless we play strictly counter cheese...which we don't have a whole lot of. (I'm looking at you Imperial Knights...biggest bs if I ever did see it...) I don't mind losing games. Though I do mind losing games that weren't fun from the time I put my models on the table, until the end. You KNOW just by looking at your opponent's force if your going to even remotely have a good time.

When GW want to balance a codex internally. Can they learn to buff the weak units up, not the good units down.

Melevolence wrote:
Another thing I've begun to consider is that Orks are purely designed to play Maelstrom missions. Or any mission with objectives, period. The army doesn't seem designed to be capable of flat out tabling other races. Which isn't always a bad thing in the end. My only gripe isn't so much with Orks as it is with my local store. A lot of asshats there won't play mission objectives when I go down to play because they know they can't play as much cheese and table me. They would much rather play an uninteresting game of 'oh! lets kill that next!' instead of 'Ok, I really need to get that objective or it could cost me the game...but how to go about it?'

With 7th bringing the tactical objectives segment to the game, I KNOW I'll be forcing more of it in the local area. Kill Points is fine and all, but most times, Ork players will lose those unless we play strictly counter cheese...which we don't have a whole lot of. (I'm looking at you Imperial Knights...biggest bs if I ever did see it...) I don't mind losing games. Though I do mind losing games that weren't fun from the time I put my models on the table, until the end. You KNOW just by looking at your opponent's force if your going to even remotely have a good time.

While I agree with your sentiment, even Maelstrom of War missions result in a loss if you get tabled.

 streamdragon wrote:

Melevolence wrote:
Another thing I've begun to consider is that Orks are purely designed to play Maelstrom missions. Or any mission with objectives, period. The army doesn't seem designed to be capable of flat out tabling other races. Which isn't always a bad thing in the end. My only gripe isn't so much with Orks as it is with my local store. A lot of asshats there won't play mission objectives when I go down to play because they know they can't play as much cheese and table me. They would much rather play an uninteresting game of 'oh! lets kill that next!' instead of 'Ok, I really need to get that objective or it could cost me the game...but how to go about it?'

With 7th bringing the tactical objectives segment to the game, I KNOW I'll be forcing more of it in the local area. Kill Points is fine and all, but most times, Ork players will lose those unless we play strictly counter cheese...which we don't have a whole lot of. (I'm looking at you Imperial Knights...biggest bs if I ever did see it...) I don't mind losing games. Though I do mind losing games that weren't fun from the time I put my models on the table, until the end. You KNOW just by looking at your opponent's force if your going to even remotely have a good time.

While I agree with your sentiment, even Maelstrom of War missions result in a loss if you get tabled.

That's true. But it forces both sides to be even more strategic. Instead of throwing my Boyz out into the open to make a mad dash for cover as they inch across the board in an attempt to get within firing range or charge range. With these missions, it will often force your opponent out of their comfort zone. Force them to come to you if they want to capture that objective and win points. They will be harder pressed to table me when I'm hunkering down on objectives.

Edit: It also forces people to play different lists. Instead of a 'shooting fish in a barrel' list, they need to actually bring things to allow them to contest. They won't be outnumbering my troop numbers thats for sure.

But... it doesn't. If my force is built around tabling you, I don't care what the mission is or what objectives I draw. I'm ignoring them all in favor of trying to table you.

Edit: don't get me wrong, I'm really looking forward to trying out Maelstrom of War missions, even have the Objective deck ready to go. I'm just not sure how mission type changes your aforementioned issue with your club's members just playing to table people.

 streamdragon wrote:
But... it doesn't. If my force is built around tabling you, I don't care what the mission is or what objectives I draw. I'm ignoring them all in favor of trying to table you.

Edit: don't get me wrong, I'm really looking forward to trying out Maelstrom of War missions, even have the Objective deck ready to go. I'm just not sure how mission type changes your aforementioned issue with your club's members just playing to table people.

This is what i feel kills the mood of any game. Playing merely to eliminate everything. It's boring as gak. Step out of your comfort zone and play something interesting instead of 'kill everything' lists.

Edit: In the end, I can still win. I'll probably win actually, because I'm playing differently than I would be before. While they play their same'copy & paste' list, I'll be playing far more defensivly than before. My odds of not getting tabled increase much more than me just throwing Boyz into fans because that is literally all that the game is. Kill Point games I refuse to play at my venue.

Melevolence wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:
But... it doesn't. If my force is built around tabling you, I don't care what the mission is or what objectives I draw. I'm ignoring them all in favor of trying to table you.

Edit: don't get me wrong, I'm really looking forward to trying out Maelstrom of War missions, even have the Objective deck ready to go. I'm just not sure how mission type changes your aforementioned issue with your club's members just playing to table people.

This is what i feel kills the mood of any game. Playing merely to eliminate everything. It's boring as gak. Step out of your comfort zone and play something interesting instead of 'kill everything' lists.

Agree 100%. I honestly wish 7th hadn't included the "Wipe the board and win" condition, especially for Maelstrom of War.

Then again, I'm a sucker for "heroic sacrifice" narratives, so the idea of an army seizing those objectives no matter the cost to themselves is appealing to me. That's a narrative I can't really forge when "LOL turn 6 I wiped you from the table even though you're up 10VP I win!" is still a thing.

DANGIT GW! HOW WILL I FORGE MY NARRATIVES?!

 streamdragon wrote:

Melevolence wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:
But... it doesn't. If my force is built around tabling you, I don't care what the mission is or what objectives I draw. I'm ignoring them all in favor of trying to table you.

Edit: don't get me wrong, I'm really looking forward to trying out Maelstrom of War missions, even have the Objective deck ready to go. I'm just not sure how mission type changes your aforementioned issue with your club's members just playing to table people.

This is what i feel kills the mood of any game. Playing merely to eliminate everything. It's boring as gak. Step out of your comfort zone and play something interesting instead of 'kill everything' lists.

Agree 100%. I honestly wish 7th hadn't included the "Wipe the board and win" condition, especially for Maelstrom of War.

Then again, I'm a sucker for "heroic sacrifice" narratives, so the idea of an army seizing those objectives no matter the cost to themselves is appealing to me. That's a narrative I can't really forge when "LOL turn 6 I wiped you from the table even though you're up 10VP I win!" is still a thing.

DANGIT GW! HOW WILL I FORGE MY NARRATIVES?!

*shrug* It's pretty stupid that's for damn sure. Aw well. Depending on how 7th changes up the game play of the locals, I may end up giving up on Warhammer for a long time. I only have the one venue, and the guys themselves aren't overall bad guys. They just play a game in the most obnoxious manner ever.

I find it ironic that many of the people who constantly post negative threads attacking GW for lack of balance, are the same who then attack GW for not giving them an auto-win codex. You need to realise you can't have it both ways.

I've read through a lot of the posts about the codex and it appears to me that the majority of those who are all about fluff are happy with the codex, but the "I'm not having fun unless I'm winning" crowd seem negative.

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
I find it ironic that many of the people who constantly post negative threads attacking GW for lack of balance, are the same who then attack GW for not giving them an auto-win codex. You need to realise you can't have it both ways.

I've read through a lot of the posts about the codex and it appears to me that the majority of those who are all about fluff are happy with the codex, but the "I'm not having fun unless I'm winning" crowd seem negative.

Please find me one post that demands winning, instead of being balanced. Please, I'll wait.

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
I find it ironic that many of the people who constantly post negative threads attacking GW for lack of balance, are the same who then attack GW for not giving them an auto-win codex. You need to realise you can't have it both ways.

I've read through a lot of the posts about the codex and it appears to me that the majority of those who are all about fluff are happy with the codex, but the "I'm not having fun unless I'm winning" crowd seem negative.

Were not asking for an auto win, but with some of these changes it can turn out to an auto lose vs eldar/tau and the like very fast. This codex from what we can tell so far is not balanced at all.