Ork nobz were always unique compared to a SM because they had 2 wounds to a SM's 1. Now with 9th edition handing old Marines another wound for 3ppm, what is going to happen to ork Nobz? I really do not want to see them to go up 1 wound because I will bet you dollars to donuts they don't price it at 3ppm like Marines got. I honestly don't see them as a competitive choice right now because at 17ppm they are more than twice the price of a boy while delivery less CC attacks and significantly less shooting than boyz. Add in the meta of SM's and primaris running around with 3+ Saves and 2+ wounds and that 2nd wound for Nobz isn't worth all that much because most competitive armies are gearing their list to deal with multi wound good save models.
Personally, I would really like to see nobz go to T5, this way we aren't over run by 3 wound models, plus with this treatment, it moves meganobz into a similar position to gravis models.
They'll stay at T4/2W. GW almost never changes the statline for anything; pretty much everything in 3e had an identical statline in 7e, even as the game grew killier around them.
The Ork Nob issue of no longer feeling like an elite choice is frankly something that is happening across all non-marine elite (besides Custodes) choices across the spectrum. When your basic intercessor can have as many or potentially more attacks than your elite choices, you know there's a problem. Look at how woefully outmatched Incubi, Aspect Warriors, Bullgryn and a bunch of other elites feel nowadays. SM have been taking so much design space that you need either a crazy amount of cost-efficiency or bespoke rules to compete.
Ideally, Nobz get either T5 or they gain WS2+ to reflect that they're the ones that fight the best and compensate for the -1 to hit from Power Klaws and Killsaws. Access to boomsticks that the Deffkilla Wartrike has would make them have a meaningful ranged weapon that isn't overpriced. Having basic choppas be AP-1 would also be a good start, as well as the PK being a flat 3 damage weapon.
Realistically, however, I think the most GW could do is make them troops choices. It fills in a gap where you could take them instead of boyz for mech lists and actually feel like they'll contribute rather than just having boyz hiding inside trukks.
Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if Ere we go gets expanded. Maybe an additional attack or a extra point of strength. A mate I play with thinks we'll lose the option to choose which dice we re-roll for it, i'm hoping he's wrong. But I gess we gotta wait till the codex comes out.
Based on the nob bikers though I doubt there will be a state change. The warboss is likely to be buffed up a bit if the biker boss is an indicator.
I would like to see them go to T5, and if they aren't already (I just know 'em from Kill Team) become Troop options.
I know using them in Kill Team most of my opponents were very surprised they weren't T5. Power-creep or no, I always want factions to have more Troop options and Nobz really do feel like a nice fit for Orks to allow a more elite infantry (ala Ironjawz from AoS) playstyle. At very least allow for playing Orks without having to take out a small loan to build an army.
Galas wrote: I would like for Nobz to be come 3W with 3 attacks base and become troops. And become ork equivalent of Tyranid Warriors.
Again though, I don't really like that idea because it just adds another model to the 3 wound list and more importantly, I DO NOT trust GW to correctly price them at 3wounds, specifically because they haven't been correctly priced since the 4th edition codex.
I don't think they need a third wound, but I do think nobz should be made troops. this would, IMHO give Orks an intreasting array of troop choices, you'd have "stupid cheap and mostly useless grots" you'd have cheap and functional Boyz, and then you could also take Nobz as your troops if you wanted a more "elite" ork army.
Call me crazy, but could it be possible to buff all their stats and make a cheap HQ choice? Narratively speaking, nobs are the next step up in the Ork hierarchy so I think it could work almost like a command squad.
Maybe as a bodyguard variant. Or be able to replace the boss at the cost of the remaining unit members as the new warboss kills the rest of the nobs to assert dominance.
While fun and fluffy it would be a little tricky to balance without someone somewhere complaining (now if we were imperials on the other hand!)
Mr Nobody wrote: Call me crazy, but could it be possible to buff all their stats and make a cheap HQ choice? Narratively speaking, nobs are the next step up in the Ork hierarchy so I think it could work almost like a command squad.
The problem with that idea is that HQ slots are now a premium slot for Ork lists and it doesn't address the core issue of Nobz when it comes to their effectiveness as a unit. They will be unable to take relics so they can't take the basically mandatory Killa Klaw that the Warboss can, doesn't provide the 5+ invuln aura a Big Mek does, nor the utility of Da Jump from a Weirdboy. So there would arguably be even less incentive to take them now in the HQ slot compared to what we currently have available that far outdo Nobz offensively or ability-wise. Troops are a slot that non-green tide Ork lists struggle to fill efficiently and Nobz, especially after being buffed, would be a great way of addressing that.
I would prefer a Big Boss "lieutenant" equivalent HQ rather than a Nob squad as an HQ choice.
They could just give them back all the things they have lost since 5th:
- Become troops
- 5++ cybork
- Waaagh! banner unit upgrade
- Painboy unit upgrade
- Dedicated battlewagon transport
- PKs that hit hard enough to threaten anything
Basically they lost everything that differentiated them from MANz, so it's no surprise that one of the two units remains unused.
More durability, either in the form of 5++ cybork, more wounds, higher toughness, or more wounds and cybork which reduces incoming damage by 1.
Troops - they are elite yes, but not really "elites". They should be available as troops, and should hold objectives.
2+ to hit - these guys are the best the orks have at hitting stuff, and shoud hit stuff well. Their main weapons are -1 to hit, so 2+ is generally 3+ anyway.
I'd also like to see some new flavour for them, rather than the same old nobs but with little stat tweaks. I'm thinking:
Mobs of aspiring big meks testing out new guns or weapons, like handheld zzapp guns, shokk-choppas, just some cool new weapons.
Stormboy nobs, for speed, fly, deepstrike, transportability, and another fast-nobs slot if you run out of space for biker nobs.
It would also be cool to have Nobs team up to get stuck in. For example; Nob Bikers can transport 1 nob each. If a biker is slain, then you can either lose the nob or emergency disembark the unit. Nobs 2-up on bikes, hopping off to krump things - super orky.
Am I the only person who thinks making Nobz Troops is a horrible idea? Completely contradicts like 30-odd years of lore. Boyz have always been the core of an Ork army.
Nazrak wrote: Am I the only person who thinks making Nobz Troops is a horrible idea? Completely contradicts like 30-odd years of lore. Boyz have always been the core of an Ork army.
Nazrak wrote: Am I the only person who thinks making Nobz Troops is a horrible idea? Completely contradicts like 30-odd years of lore. Boyz have always been the core of an Ork army.
They were already troops in 5th and it was probably the best edition ever for orks.
There also have been stories in the fluff where powerful warbosses, especially goff ones, had huge retinues of dozens of nobz around them. And we are most likely talking about 2-3 units of nobz used in an army, not about nobz hordes. Boyz still do that way better than them.
For orks who have no clear organisational structure beyond all going in roughly the same direction as the biggest guy, fluff is a rather weak reason to not change the role of such great and iconic models to improve their use on the tabletop.
Orks are in a pretty good place right now so nobs just need to be decent, rather than really powerful. I think something as simple as becoming troops would do that...
1: Being troops means objective secured, which is good.
2: Being troops means they can be the troop tax, which is good.
3: Being troops means they are exempt from the rule of 3, so you could take lots of little squads of nobs in trukks with special weapons, which sounds fun.
4: It separates them from meganobs slot, so you can take 3 nob units and 3 meganob units in a single detachment.
I do think cybork needs a fix though, one model getting a rubbish save is just terrible. 5++ for all, or reduce damage by 1, would be perfect.
The problem is, Ork boyz cant be useful in minimum squads because then the infinitely more force-multiplier-able max squads would be overpowered.
And ork players can't run a reasonable list unless they have 3 troops
and GW doesn't want Gretchins showing up in ork lists other than as a joke unit, so much so that they made them 30-40% overpriced to disincentivize them
So, orks need a more elite troop. Nobz are the obvious choice. (Well, bikers are an obvious choice for a speed freeks army, and Kanz/Dreads for a mekmob army, but GW is in an off edition for Army Construction Skew so das is verboten in 9th)
And yeah I'm in agreement that T5 feels like a good spot for nobz. Orks and Nids should display durability through Toughness and Wounds, necrons through Res Prots, Nurgle through wound ignore mechanics, Space marines, Tau and Sisters through armor, and Eldar and Daemons through hit mods and invulns.
Yep I totally agree with that, the_scotsman. I do believe they could also do with an additional attack, I really like big choppers but I feel like I need more attacks from them. But that may not make them troop choice worthy. T5 and 4 attacks base might be too much for a troop.
Tiberius501 wrote: Yep I totally agree with that, the_scotsman. I do believe they could also do with an additional attack, I really like big choppers but I feel like I need more attacks from them. But that may not make them troop choice worthy. T5 and 4 attacks base might be too much for a troop.
3A definitely feels fine to me. does once again highlight just how EMBARASSINGLY few attacks my eldar stuff gets for being "lightning fast" dedicated melee units, but both boyz and nobz get bonus attacks from their choppas.
.....
....seriously why are Eldar guardian/kabalite units not A2, aspect warriors/Incubi/Wyches A3, and dedicated infantry-shredding aspects like Scorpions A4 with the chainsword bonus?
Tiberius501 wrote: Yep I totally agree with that, the_scotsman. I do believe they could also do with an additional attack, I really like big choppers but I feel like I need more attacks from them. But that may not make them troop choice worthy. T5 and 4 attacks base might be too much for a troop.
3A definitely feels fine to me. does once again highlight just how EMBARASSINGLY few attacks my eldar stuff gets for being "lightning fast" dedicated melee units, but both boyz and nobz get bonus attacks from their choppas.
.....
....seriously why are Eldar guardian/kabalite units not A2, aspect warriors/Incubi/Wyches A3, and dedicated infantry-shredding aspects like Scorpions A4 with the chainsword bonus?
Because Eldar are horrifically stuck in the past atm. Howling banshees man... wtf is that unit?
I seriously hope Eldar get some help for a good bunch of their units in their next book. For Demi-gods, they’re hardly better than a guardsman.
Tiberius501 wrote: Yep I totally agree with that, the_scotsman. I do believe they could also do with an additional attack, I really like big choppers but I feel like I need more attacks from them. But that may not make them troop choice worthy. T5 and 4 attacks base might be too much for a troop.
3A definitely feels fine to me. does once again highlight just how EMBARASSINGLY few attacks my eldar stuff gets for being "lightning fast" dedicated melee units, but both boyz and nobz get bonus attacks from their choppas.
.....
....seriously why are Eldar guardian/kabalite units not A2, aspect warriors/Incubi/Wyches A3, and dedicated infantry-shredding aspects like Scorpions A4 with the chainsword bonus?
Because Eldar are horrifically stuck in the past atm. Howling banshees man... wtf is that unit?
I seriously hope Eldar get some help for a good bunch of their units in their next book. For Demi-gods, they’re hardly better than a guardsman.
It really does say something when a basic SM captain has more attacks and does more consistent damage than most of their Phoenix Lords, basically their equivalent of Chapter Masters.
Tiberius501 wrote: Yep I totally agree with that, the_scotsman. I do believe they could also do with an additional attack, I really like big choppers but I feel like I need more attacks from them. But that may not make them troop choice worthy. T5 and 4 attacks base might be too much for a troop.
3A definitely feels fine to me. does once again highlight just how EMBARASSINGLY few attacks my eldar stuff gets for being "lightning fast" dedicated melee units, but both boyz and nobz get bonus attacks from their choppas.
.....
....seriously why are Eldar guardian/kabalite units not A2, aspect warriors/Incubi/Wyches A3, and dedicated infantry-shredding aspects like Scorpions A4 with the chainsword bonus?
Because Eldar are horrifically stuck in the past atm. Howling banshees man... wtf is that unit?
I seriously hope Eldar get some help for a good bunch of their units in their next book. For Demi-gods, they’re hardly better than a guardsman.
It really does say something when a basic SM captain has more attacks and does more consistent damage than most of their Phoenix Lords, basically their equivalent of Chapter Masters.
As Deathwatch my Blackshield Veteran has better damage output than any pheonix lord, hands down.
Galas wrote: I would like for Nobz to be come 3W with 3 attacks base and become troops. And become ork equivalent of Tyranid Warriors.
Again though, I don't really like that idea because it just adds another model to the 3 wound list and more importantly, I DO NOT trust GW to correctly price them at 3wounds, specifically because they haven't been correctly priced since the 4th edition codex.
If you weren't to touch anything about their current profile, where would you say the current "correct" cost is, in your eyes?
Blackie wrote: Troop option with T4 3W 4+ for 20-22ppm assuming they have free slugga & choppa.
Or course also Flash gitz and Meganobz would get their +1W, they're actual Nobz with a big weapon or a big armor.
Meganobz could get T5.
Please god no! lol. With all the multi-wound weapons being taken to deal with Primaris/gravis/NuMarines, Nobz at 20-22pts and 3wounds would be easy kills.
It really does say something when a basic SM captain has more attacks and does more consistent damage than most of their Phoenix Lords, basically their equivalent of Chapter Masters.
Its the design space paradigm all over again. Anytime a faction is good at something, Marines somehow take over as being as good or better at it. Remember in 7th when orkz got the "Green Tide" formation. 10 units of boyz? Marines got Demi-Company so the more Marines they took the more free razorbacks they got. We had tournament lists with almost as many SM models as Orkz were bringing Boys. Tau firewarriors were good at gunline tactics, now Intercessors outperform them point for point, the list goes on and on.
At the moment, Ghaz is the biggest baddest ork in the entire galaxy. He starts with baseline 5 attacks. A SM Captain baseline has 4, a CM has 5 as well. So the leader of a faction is as good as a run of the mill Chapter Master. And I say Run of the mill because there are literally a THOUSAND Chapter Masters. There are SM characters with 5 attacks base and even more. I believe Dante has 6, Mephiston and the Sanguinor have 5 as well. The Raven Guard's CM has 6 attacks. The Space Wolves have a host of HQ selections with significantly more than 5 attacks base. The wolfkin dudes all have what amounts to 7 attacks, Logan Grimnar has basically 10 at lower strength or 5 at higher strength. Ragnar has 10 on the charge (Or being charged). Of course there is a difference in attacks because of what they hit on and what strength etc but the point being that a faction renowned for CC shouldn't have the same or FEWER attacks than run of the mill SM chapter masters and characters. The Blood angels one makes sense because they are themselves a CC oriented army but Ultrasmurfs? Come on now.
Galas wrote: I would like for Nobz to be come 3W with 3 attacks base and become troops. And become ork equivalent of Tyranid Warriors.
Again though, I don't really like that idea because it just adds another model to the 3 wound list and more importantly, I DO NOT trust GW to correctly price them at 3wounds, specifically because they haven't been correctly priced since the 4th edition codex.
If you weren't to touch anything about their current profile, where would you say the current "correct" cost is, in your eyes?
Depends honestly, are we factoring in SM's receiving a nerf or a cost increase soon? I say that because if we are using SM as a measuring stick than Nobz need to be around 13-15pts. If a SM has better armor, better BS, moves faster, basically immune to morale issues and is 18pts, I can't imagine a world where Nobz are anymore than 15ppm at the absolute most. nobz have a pistol compared to a Marine having again what amounts to a 2 shot range 24 bolter that sometimes has -1AP. The only real advantage nobz have over Marines is 3 attacks base compared to baseically 2 (most combats don't go past 1 full turn) and base strength 5 compared to Marines 4.
Remember that Ghaz attacks are S14 AP-4 D4 with WS 2+, that's pretty big, I doubt many named SM characters can top that. And on top of that his attacks go up with brackets (however with lower strangth) up to 7.
I don't think Nobz need to have super good stats with T5, 4+ or WS2+. My thought on it is that they should revamp the special weapons to make them better and deadlier (just like what they did with SM weapons) without increasing their point cost. That with some other quality of life changes and we'd have a cheap platform for deadly weapons with dedicated transport. The main problem I believe right now for nobz is that they're just ork boyz with one more wound and +1S (but at almost double the price).
A better emphasis on special weapons to kill marines and elites like power claws and big choppas would actually make them not fill the same role (but worse) than ork boyz.
In short, i'd rather they give them better rules than better stats.
Mr Raptor wrote: Remember that Ghaz attacks are S14 AP-4 D4 with WS 2+, that's pretty big, I doubt many named SM characters can top that. And on top of that his attacks go up with brackets (however with lower strangth) up to 7.
I don't think Nobz need to have super good stats with T5, 4+ or WS2+. My thought on it is that they should revamp the special weapons to make them better and deadlier (just like what they did with SM weapons) without increasing their point cost. That with some other quality of life changes and we'd have a cheap platform for deadly weapons with dedicated transport. The main problem I believe right now for nobz is that they're just ork boyz with one more wound and +1S (but at almost double the price).
A better emphasis on special weapons to kill marines and elites like power claws and big choppas would actually make them not fill the same role (but worse) than ork boyz.
In short, i'd rather they give them better rules than better stats.
Agree, and I think this might not only help nobz, but also boyz. Turning the PK into a TH equivalent (3 damage, AP-2) would go a long way to make nobz and squad leaders a threat again.
Jidmah wrote: That's just making nobz troops with extra steps
Well scarboyz have been an intermediate between Boyz and nobz forever, but they haven't really been represented much.
Marines get sliced into the most obscenely fine lines to get all these different units, it should be trivial for other armies to get even a 10th of that.
Frankly giving them W3 wouldn't solve their problem. They'd just be more resilient to small caliber but still just as weak against multi wound weapons.
But in the end it would just make them ork boyz but bigger. It's not really very enticing, and ork boyz would still be better because they'd have more board control and immunity to multi-damage weapons (and much more attacks per points).
Frankly Orks should be able to use Adjacent infantry from the "Tier below" to give them bonus saves, a bit like grot shields.
Warboss > Meganobz > Nobz > Boyz > Gretchin
Having a squad of kitted out nobz throwin boyz into the way of dakka would be pretty thematic, and also give them extra survivability without treading on the toes of other factions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: Scarboyz are currently trashing tournaments...
A single CP for a squad of half price 1W nobz? Count me in.
In any case, as we found out from the mehreeeeeen changes. 1W on a durable platform that has a plethora of rules buffing all phases and having the best troop weaponry in the game is worth only 3 points.
Nobz should only be +2 points from Boyz following that logic.
Eonfuzz wrote: Frankly Orks should be able to use Adjacent infantry from the "Tier below" to give them bonus saves, a bit like grot shields.
Warboss > Meganobz > Nobz > Boyz > Gretchin
Having a squad of kitted out nobz throwin boyz into the way of dakka would be pretty thematic, and also give them extra survivability without treading on the toes of other factions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: Scarboyz are currently trashing tournaments...
A single CP for a squad of half price 1W nobz? Count me in.
In any case, as we found out from the mehreeeeeen changes. 1W on a durable platform that has a plethora of rules buffing all phases and having the best troop weaponry in the game is worth only 3 points.
Nobz should only be +2 points from Boyz following that logic.
I think there's proably a "minimally agreed upon base price for 2 wound infantry" that I don't think any 2 infantry should go below (simply because at the end of the day it eaither takes 2 shots or a dedicated anti-heavy weapon to kill the unit) but I agree Ork Noz are, at 17 PPM heavily over priced. IMHO if Ork boyz are 8 PPM, Ork Nobz would proably work at around 14 PPM (maybe as low as 12, or as high as 15) a Nob is not worth two boyz.
Jesus I'd not looked at the price until now. 17 PPM to Boyz 8 PPM? that's rediculas
Jidmah wrote: Scarboyz are currently trashing tournaments...
A single CP for a squad of half price 1W nobz? Count me in.
In any case, as we found out from the mehreeeeeen changes. 1W on a durable platform that has a plethora of rules buffing all phases and having the best troop weaponry in the game is worth only 3 points.
Nobz should only be +2 points from Boyz following that logic.
I think there's proably a "minimally agreed upon base price for 2 wound infantry" that I don't think any 2 infantry should go below (simply because at the end of the day it eaither takes 2 shots or a dedicated anti-heavy weapon to kill the unit) but I agree Ork Noz are, at 17 PPM heavily over priced. IMHO if Ork boyz are 8 PPM, Ork Nobz would proably work at around 14 PPM (maybe as low as 12, or as high as 15) a Nob is not worth two boyz.
Jesus I'd not looked at the price until now. 17 PPM to Boyz 8 PPM? that's rediculas
Yeah, it's one of the many reasons a lot of us are salty about the recent changes.
It's a shame too. I really, really like Nobz but if you compare them to equiv specialist units like Vets they're pretty below average.
Not to mention the 4+ save...
I'll be honest though, Nobz were very very good back when they could carry 5 ammo runts for the free wounds.
Edit:
I actually have a squad of converted texan nobs with revolvers and killsaws, had a whole backstory for them too. They haven't come off the shelf in a while though =/
I think it is pointless to compare an individual unit to another unit from another faction, especially when they don't have the same role. Yes a firstborn marine is clearly superior to a Nob for about the same points (an actual gun with good BS, better save, doctrines, better leadership, troop slot, ect...) but it doesn't really matter.
What's important is what purpose they have in the army and how they synergize with it. Currently, the answer for nobz is "pretty poorly", because they get outperformed in almost every aspect by boyz, and the gaps that boyz leave can be filled by other much more reliable/cost-efficient units.
As nobz are now, they'd be fine as troops. But if they are to stay elite, they clearly need some help with their weapons/options to make it worth it.
On the other hands, I'm all for giving the meganobz T5, now that is justifiable for their price and role.
Jidmah wrote: Scarboyz are currently trashing tournaments...
A single CP for a squad of half price 1W nobz? Count me in.
In any case, as we found out from the mehreeeeeen changes. 1W on a durable platform that has a plethora of rules buffing all phases and having the best troop weaponry in the game is worth only 3 points.
Nobz should only be +2 points from Boyz following that logic.
I think there's proably a "minimally agreed upon base price for 2 wound infantry" that I don't think any 2 infantry should go below (simply because at the end of the day it eaither takes 2 shots or a dedicated anti-heavy weapon to kill the unit) but I agree Ork Noz are, at 17 PPM heavily over priced. IMHO if Ork boyz are 8 PPM, Ork Nobz would proably work at around 14 PPM (maybe as low as 12, or as high as 15) a Nob is not worth two boyz.
Jesus I'd not looked at the price until now. 17 PPM to Boyz 8 PPM? that's rediculas
Yeah, it's one of the many reasons a lot of us are salty about the recent changes.
It's a shame too. I really, really like Nobz but if you compare them to equiv specialist units like Vets they're pretty below average.
Not to mention the 4+ save...
I'll be honest though, Nobz were very very good back when they could carry 5 ammo runts for the free wounds.
Edit:
I actually have a squad of converted texan nobs with revolvers and killsaws, had a whole backstory for them too. They haven't come off the shelf in a while though =/
I mean, in a hypothetical world where a unit has twice the wounds, twice the armor save and twice the firepower of another uni, I don't think it's worth twice the points even, sure logicly you'd think it might be, but 2 wounds has added vunerability to multi-wound weapons. etc. added wounds are thus, proably something with diminishing returns in terms of value
Mr Raptor wrote: Frankly giving them W3 wouldn't solve their problem. They'd just be more resilient to small caliber but still just as weak against multi wound weapons.
But in the end it would just make them ork boyz but bigger. It's not really very enticing, and ork boyz would still be better because they'd have more board control and immunity to multi-damage weapons (and much more attacks per points).
???? Going from 2w to 3w is a GREAT change agaisnt multiwound weapons. You can spam 2damage. You cannot spam 3 damage. Going from 2 to 3 wounds makes a unit double resilient agaisnt any 2 damage weapon in the game, and much better agaisnt damage 1d3 weapons.
Having nobz be Ork Boyz but bigger with more access to weapon options is ... what they are? You have your boyz for anti horde clearing and your nobz for anti elite/vehicle clearing both as troops, and allowing for elite ork armies. They are like space marine veterans.
Eonfuzz wrote: Frankly Orks should be able to use Adjacent infantry from the "Tier below" to give them bonus saves, a bit like grot shields.
Warboss > Meganobz > Nobz > Boyz > Gretchin
Having a squad of kitted out nobz throwin boyz into the way of dakka would be pretty thematic, and also give them extra survivability without treading on the toes of other factions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: Scarboyz are currently trashing tournaments...
A single CP for a squad of half price 1W nobz? Count me in.
In any case, as we found out from the mehreeeeeen changes. 1W on a durable platform that has a plethora of rules buffing all phases and having the best troop weaponry in the game is worth only 3 points.
Nobz should only be +2 points from Boyz following that logic.
I think there's proably a "minimally agreed upon base price for 2 wound infantry" that I don't think any 2 infantry should go below (simply because at the end of the day it eaither takes 2 shots or a dedicated anti-heavy weapon to kill the unit) but I agree Ork Noz are, at 17 PPM heavily over priced. IMHO if Ork boyz are 8 PPM, Ork Nobz would proably work at around 14 PPM (maybe as low as 12, or as high as 15) a Nob is not worth two boyz.
Jesus I'd not looked at the price until now. 17 PPM to Boyz 8 PPM? that's rediculas
If you think theres a need of a minimun price for 2 wound infantry wait until you see Adeptus Mechanicus horse riders or Krieg Death Riders. The only reason the first ones aren't trashing tournaments is because just how expensive they are. And you had adeptus mechanicum players having the balls to claim they were meh. 16 points for fething 3 wound models, and now the same for 3 wound T4 FNP5+ krieg models.
The value of wounds is actually a really weird thing.
Let's say the first wound has the value N
The second wound's value is less than N
The third wound is less valuable than N but more valuable than the second one, because 2D is now bad against you.
The fourth is slightly more valuable as the third one, because of the interaction with 3 damage attacks.
The fifth and sixth ones are less valuable than the second one, they really don't change anything about your model.
The seventh one is valuable again because it puts you out of d6 range
8th-9th is like 5th and 6th.
Wound number 10 is actually less valuable than all that come before them, because it takes away character protection and makes you degrade.
The least valuable one is actually the 18th wound because it takes away dense and obscuring terrain. Any model with 18 or 19 wounds would be better if they had 17 wounds.
Mr Raptor wrote: Frankly giving them W3 wouldn't solve their problem. They'd just be more resilient to small caliber but still just as weak against multi wound weapons.
But in the end it would just make them ork boyz but bigger. It's not really very enticing, and ork boyz would still be better because they'd have more board control and immunity to multi-damage weapons (and much more attacks per points).
???? Going from 2w to 3w is a GREAT change agaisnt multiwound weapons. You can spam 2damage. You cannot spam 3 damage. Going from 2 to 3 wounds makes a unit double resilient agaisnt any 2 damage weapon in the game, and much better agaisnt damage 1d3 weapons.
Yes, but as he said, that's not the problem with nobz, so it wouldn't change anything.
Jidmah wrote: The value of wounds is actually a really weird thing.
Let's say the first wound has the value N
The second wound's value is less than N
The third wound is less valuable than N but more valuable than the second one, because 2D is now bad against you.
The fourth is slightly more valuable as the third one, because of the interaction with 3 damage attacks.
The fifth and sixth ones are less valuable than the second one, they really don't change anything about your model.
The seventh one is valuable again because it puts you out of d6 range
8th-9th is like 5th and 6th.
Wound number 10 is actually less valuable than all that come before them, because it takes away character protection and makes you degrade.
The least valuable one is actually the 18th wound because it takes away dense and obscuring terrain. Any model with 18 or 19 wounds would be better if they had 17 wounds.
then there's also the fact that a second wound is more or less valuable depending on toughness armor and over all firepower of the unit etc. there's so many interlocking elements of the rules that honestly developing a formula for points costs would proably be tricky.
Mr Raptor wrote: Frankly giving them W3 wouldn't solve their problem. They'd just be more resilient to small caliber but still just as weak against multi wound weapons.
But in the end it would just make them ork boyz but bigger. It's not really very enticing, and ork boyz would still be better because they'd have more board control and immunity to multi-damage weapons (and much more attacks per points).
Excuse my naivety here but isn't any gain in durability an improvement? If your nobz are being offed by heavy weapons then surely those heavy weapons aren't firing at their intended targets.
Giving them more expensive/better options only makes shooting them with heavy weapons make more sense. 3 wounds is the sweet spot for the bulk of weapons hurting them without killing a model with each shot short of dedicated anti-vehicle.
Combine 3w with slightly improved weapon profiles and you have a winner. I personally prefer the idea of them as troops rather than a not-quite-glass-melee-cannon.
It's an improvement, but not one that makes them viable, a change would have to enable them to do something that can't be done by another unit. At best nobz would simply push one of those units out, and we'd be having the same discussion over MANz or kommandoz or gretchin.
Most changes that affect nobz would affect Meganobz as well. If they go to W3, so will they, if they go to T5, so will they. Meganobz are in a decent spot right now because they are deadly and tough. While nobz, who are in the same slot, aren't.
Then following your arguments either manz or nobz needs to get the cut, there isn't much more you can do to 1 without upsetting the other by definition.
Nazrak wrote: Am I the only person who thinks making Nobz Troops is a horrible idea? Completely contradicts like 30-odd years of lore. Boyz have always been the core of an Ork army.
They were already troops in 5th and it was probably the best edition ever for orks.
They were not Troops in 5th. A single squad per Warboss HQ took could be a Troop choice, so if you took a pair of Warbosses your compulsory Troop slots could be filled with Nobz of any variety. They were not Troops by default.
Dudeface wrote: Then following your arguments either manz or nobz needs to get the cut, there isn't much more you can do to 1 without upsetting the other by definition.
And yet Intercessors and Tacs exist in the same space The simple solution would be to make meganobz tankier than regular nobz. and a 2+ isn't making them tankier, especially in a meta where melta is the new weapon of choice. Kind of how Heavy intercessors are just tankier intercessors with better long range guns. And before anyone gets upset, I am not remotely talking about the utility/competitiveness of Heavy Intercessors, just pointing out that differences between similar units can exist.
Nobz in general have sucked since the end of the 4th edition codex, the only reason they were good in 4-6th was because of wound pool shenanigans. IE you had 10 nobz with a total of 20 wounds. The unit's firepower/melee power didn't diminish until you inflicted the 11th wound. Same thing for Nob bikers, the unit itself wasn't particularly good, but with wound pool shenanigans they were amazing. So, how do Nobz get back to that point? Well, you could give them ablative wounds in the form of ammo runts or a mechanic that lets them throw lesser models (boyz/grotz) into the Line of Fire to take a wound for them, or you could price them low enough to make them spammable to the point where losing a whole unit isn't game over. At their current price point they are utter garbage. And finally, they need to be able to actually inflict damage when they get into combat. 3 attacks base sounds great, especially at S5, but against a Marine defensive statline (T4 3+ save) a nob is averaging .59 wounds a turn, that is including the +1 attack for using a choppa. In return that Marine is averaging .5 wounds on the first turn and .33 every turn thereafter.
Maybe give Nobz a middle ground weapon between Choppa's and big choppas as a standard load out. Heavy Choppa +1 attack, -1AP 2dmg and upgrade the Big choppa to give +1 attack as well so you are paying 5pts for a BC to get the +2 strength.
Dudeface wrote: Then following your arguments either manz or nobz needs to get the cut, there isn't much more you can do to 1 without upsetting the other by definition.
And yet Intercessors and Tacs exist in the same space The simple solution would be to make meganobz tankier than regular nobz. and a 2+ isn't making them tankier, especially in a meta where melta is the new weapon of choice. Kind of how Heavy intercessors are just tankier intercessors with better long range guns. And before anyone gets upset, I am not remotely talking about the utility/competitiveness of Heavy Intercessors, just pointing out that differences between similar units can exist.
Nobz in general have sucked since the end of the 4th edition codex, the only reason they were good in 4-6th was because of wound pool shenanigans. IE you had 10 nobz with a total of 20 wounds. The unit's firepower/melee power didn't diminish until you inflicted the 11th wound. Same thing for Nob bikers, the unit itself wasn't particularly good, but with wound pool shenanigans they were amazing. So, how do Nobz get back to that point? Well, you could give them ablative wounds in the form of ammo runts or a mechanic that lets them throw lesser models (boyz/grotz) into the Line of Fire to take a wound for them, or you could price them low enough to make them spammable to the point where losing a whole unit isn't game over. At their current price point they are utter garbage. And finally, they need to be able to actually inflict damage when they get into combat. 3 attacks base sounds great, especially at S5, but against a Marine defensive statline (T4 3+ save) a nob is averaging .59 wounds a turn, that is including the +1 attack for using a choppa. In return that Marine is averaging .5 wounds on the first turn and .33 every turn thereafter.
Maybe give Nobz a middle ground weapon between Choppa's and big choppas as a standard load out. Heavy Choppa +1 attack, -1AP 2dmg and upgrade the Big choppa to give +1 attack as well so you are paying 5pts for a BC to get the +2 strength.
I'd argue tacs and intercessors shouldn't, happy to see a move to primaris only. Saying that tacs have broader load out options at least.
Would giving meganobz a 2+/5+++ (note not invuln) base with t5 and an extra wound with no increase to melee firepower give them the niche of durable while leaving space for nobz to be the killy unit?
I'd argue tacs and intercessors shouldn't, happy to see a move to primaris only. Saying that tacs have broader load out options at least.
Would giving meganobz a 2+/5+++ (note not invuln) base with t5 and an extra wound with no increase to melee firepower give them the niche of durable while leaving space for nobz to be the killy unit?
Not especially. The biggest threat to meganobz is anti-tank weaponry and the same things that target gravis marines. So going to 4W T5 with a 5+ FNP wouldn't really increase their durability by an appreciable amount, unless of course we are going to keep them roughly the same price, and I doubt that would happen. Against a multi-Melta weapon (likely the most common thing used against them in the future) its D6+2 most of the time. Currently its wounding on 2s, so 6 hits = 5 wounds. against a 6+ armor save that is 4.16 unsaved wounds for guaranteed 4 dead Meganobz. If you increase T to 5 and give them an extra wound its 6 hits = 4 wounds = 3.33 unsaved wounds each one does D6+2 which averages 5.5dmg. which against a 5+FNP = 3.66 unsaved dmg. so again likely 3-4 dead Meganobz. Basically, in order for Meganobz to be "durable" they need an invuln save of some sort, preferably a 4+.
Mr Raptor wrote: I think it is pointless to compare an individual unit to another unit from another faction, especially when they don't have the same role. Yes a firstborn marine is clearly superior to a Nob for about the same points (an actual gun with good BS, better save, doctrines, better leadership, troop slot, ect...) but it doesn't really matter.
40k does not have the sublime balance that would make that a sensical approach. Cross-faction point comparisons are usually valid.
I'd argue tacs and intercessors shouldn't, happy to see a move to primaris only. Saying that tacs have broader load out options at least.
Would giving meganobz a 2+/5+++ (note not invuln) base with t5 and an extra wound with no increase to melee firepower give them the niche of durable while leaving space for nobz to be the killy unit?
Not especially. The biggest threat to meganobz is anti-tank weaponry and the same things that target gravis marines. So going to 4W T5 with a 5+ FNP wouldn't really increase their durability by an appreciable amount, unless of course we are going to keep them roughly the same price, and I doubt that would happen. Against a multi-Melta weapon (likely the most common thing used against them in the future) its D6+2 most of the time. Currently its wounding on 2s, so 6 hits = 5 wounds. against a 6+ armor save that is 4.16 unsaved wounds for guaranteed 4 dead Meganobz. If you increase T to 5 and give them an extra wound its 6 hits = 4 wounds = 3.33 unsaved wounds each one does D6+2 which averages 5.5dmg. which against a 5+FNP = 3.66 unsaved dmg. so again likely 3-4 dead Meganobz. Basically, in order for Meganobz to be "durable" they need an invuln save of some sort, preferably a 4+.
With my suggestion they'd happily eat 50 s4 ap - d1 hits per meganob, my issue is you're viewing them and treating them like tanks. If you're buffing them to the point people are forced to fire anti tank weapons at infantry, then I'd argue they're working as intended, or you're simply preventing them from dieing in nearly any and every circumstance.
If you gave them a 4++ you've essentially made ork custodes, which seems wrong given meganobs have never has invulns or force fields iirc.
I want an honest suggestion of what a nob and mega nob should look like with a rationale at this point because it seems that altering one causes the other to need altering and it spirals into oblivion.
Mr Raptor wrote: I think it is pointless to compare an individual unit to another unit from another faction, especially when they don't have the same role. Yes a firstborn marine is clearly superior to a Nob for about the same points (an actual gun with good BS, better save, doctrines, better leadership, troop slot, ect...) but it doesn't really matter.
40k does not have the sublime balance that would make that a sensical approach. Cross-faction point comparisons are usually valid.
Well, that's kind of backwards. Cross-faction point comparisons are worthless precisely because you can't calculate point values for most of the things that make factions different. And even if you could, it wouldn't be precise enough.
The only thing you really can compare is whole armies.
Mr Raptor wrote: I think it is pointless to compare an individual unit to another unit from another faction, especially when they don't have the same role. Yes a firstborn marine is clearly superior to a Nob for about the same points (an actual gun with good BS, better save, doctrines, better leadership, troop slot, ect...) but it doesn't really matter.
40k does not have the sublime balance that would make that a sensical approach. Cross-faction point comparisons are usually valid.
Well, that's kind of backwards. Cross-faction point comparisons are worthless precisely because you can't calculate point values for most of the things that make factions different. And even if you could, it wouldn't be precise enough.
The only thing you really can compare is whole armies.
If you want to argue about whether thing A or thing B should be X points or X+1 points, sure. But surely you feel competent to eyeball the fact that a Space Marine gets more and better special rules/support ability interactions than an Ork?
With my suggestion they'd happily eat 50 s4 ap - d1 hits per meganob, my issue is you're viewing them and treating them like tanks. If you're buffing them to the point people are forced to fire anti tank weapons at infantry, then I'd argue they're working as intended, or you're simply preventing them from dieing in nearly any and every circumstance.
If you gave them a 4++ you've essentially made ork custodes, which seems wrong given meganobs have never has invulns or force fields iirc.
I want an honest suggestion of what a nob and mega nob should look like with a rationale at this point because it seems that altering one causes the other to need altering and it spirals into oblivion.
T5, 4W and a 5+ FNP takes about 110 S4 ap - D1 hits to kill. But again, meganobz are already durable enough vs S4 ap - d1 shots. It takes 36 S4 shots to kill a meganob atm or slightly tougher than a Gravis Marine, giving them a 4th wound or T5 would give them more than enough durability vs that type of weaponry. The problem is that people aren't shooting meganobz with T4 no AP weapons that often, they are shooting them with Plasma and now melta. Because why waste bolters on Meganobz when you can shoot boyz instead and than use your plasma/melta to delete a 38pt meganob. T5 does a lot, so does giving them a 4th wound, but i'll bet you dollars to donuts that GW than prices them closer to 50-60ppm instead of 38, and at that point why wouldn't you pop them with a melta gun?
As far as turning Meganobz into Custodes....didn't SM's have access to a 3++ not that long ago? I think its a 4++ now but still, its not unheard of, and Terminators (Meganob equivalents) have access as well.
With my suggestion they'd happily eat 50 s4 ap - d1 hits per meganob, my issue is you're viewing them and treating them like tanks. If you're buffing them to the point people are forced to fire anti tank weapons at infantry, then I'd argue they're working as intended, or you're simply preventing them from dieing in nearly any and every circumstance.
If you gave them a 4++ you've essentially made ork custodes, which seems wrong given meganobs have never has invulns or force fields iirc.
I want an honest suggestion of what a nob and mega nob should look like with a rationale at this point because it seems that altering one causes the other to need altering and it spirals into oblivion.
T5, 4W and a 5+ FNP takes about 110 S4 ap - D1 hits to kill. But again, meganobz are already durable enough vs S4 ap - d1 shots. It takes 36 S4 shots to kill a meganob atm or slightly tougher than a Gravis Marine, giving them a 4th wound or T5 would give them more than enough durability vs that type of weaponry. The problem is that people aren't shooting meganobz with T4 no AP weapons that often, they are shooting them with Plasma and now melta. Because why waste bolters on Meganobz when you can shoot boyz instead and than use your plasma/melta to delete a 38pt meganob. T5 does a lot, so does giving them a 4th wound, but i'll bet you dollars to donuts that GW than prices them closer to 50-60ppm instead of 38, and at that point why wouldn't you pop them with a melta gun?
As far as turning Meganobz into Custodes....didn't SM's have access to a 3++ not that long ago? I think its a 4++ now but still, its not unheard of, and Terminators (Meganob equivalents) have access as well.
But you want them resistant to small arms, resistant to anti armour fire, killy in close combat and no less points efficient than nobz. That seems an unreasonable request at that point, but more importantly again, leaves nobz even more pointless. Making a walking tank vulnerable to anti tank seems fair.
I'm sure you know as well as I do terminators have fluffwise always have had a refractor field build into their armour, where as a meganob is a collection of hydraulic and metal pieces cobbled together. Giving them an invuln would need a retcon of the fluff and make a kff big mek less relevant.
Again, how would you differentiate a role between nobz and mega nobz?
SemperMortis wrote: The problem is that people aren't shooting meganobz with T4 no AP weapons that often, they are shooting them with Plasma and now melta. Because why waste bolters on Meganobz when you can shoot boyz instead and than use your plasma/melta to delete a 38pt meganob. T5 does a lot, so does giving them a 4th wound, but i'll bet you dollars to donuts that GW than prices them closer to 50-60ppm instead of 38, and at that point why wouldn't you pop them with a melta gun?
You say "problem", I say "people correctly identifying which unit to shoot with which weapon".
Isn't that the sort of tactical decision-making people keep claiming they want to see in this game?
SemperMortis wrote: The problem is that people aren't shooting meganobz with T4 no AP weapons that often, they are shooting them with Plasma and now melta. Because why waste bolters on Meganobz when you can shoot boyz instead and than use your plasma/melta to delete a 38pt meganob. T5 does a lot, so does giving them a 4th wound, but i'll bet you dollars to donuts that GW than prices them closer to 50-60ppm instead of 38, and at that point why wouldn't you pop them with a melta gun?
You say "problem", I say "people correctly identifying which unit to shoot with which weapon".
Isn't that the sort of tactical decision-making people keep claiming they want to see in this game?
I'm with you, firing anti vehicle at infantry models is a decision someone has made to leave a vehicle alive instead. If they cover all their weaknesses, what is the point.
AnomanderRake wrote: If you want to argue about whether thing A or thing B should be X points or X+1 points, sure. But surely you feel competent to eyeball the fact that a Space Marine gets more and better special rules/support ability interactions than an Ork?
Comparing *a* Space Marine to *an* ork just as useless as comparing their points. Armies are more than the sum of their parts. There is a reason why half the armies would totally want to play 5 pts gretchin while orks don't touch them with a ten foot pole, and it's neither points nor rules interactions.
Orks have two rather variable archetypes which can clearly compete with what marines can bring - and the main reason why one of them is not topping tournaments anymore are the secondary kill objectives, which are part of neither codex.
Nobz could theoretically fit into either of them, but they are nowhere to be seen, while MANz and boyz constantly do appear in lists.
Bringing nobz in line with intercessors does nothing for orks, making them alternative to MANz and/or boyz without does.
Jidmah wrote: Bringing nobz in line with intercessors does nothing for orks, making them alternative to MANz and/or boyz without does.
This might be right in terms of "winning all the tournaments" - but alternate builds which produce different ways to play can still be interesting. (I mean this is what you are saying - but I'm saying making them comparable to intercessors would surely do that. I guess.)
I'm mixed on the debate. I agree you have to consider armies in the context of all the buff architecture available to them - so unit X in faction Y will perform differently to the same unit in faction Z.
But at the same time, you can look at "damage output+resillience+movement"/"points" and usually get a reasonable handle on what will perform and what won't across all factions.
I don't think they'll get significant buffs - but I don't think making basic Nobz a troops choice would break the game - any more than thinking Heavy Intercessors will make all the Marine troops choices obsolete.
Essentially, if you would just turn nobz into intercessors with the exact same statline, rules, points and bolt rifle shootas shooting twice as often to compensate for BS5+, they would remain unused because orks simply have no need for intercessors.
Jidmah wrote: I think you got what I was trying to say.
Essentially, if you would just turn nobz into intercessors with the exact same statline, rules, points and bolt rifle shootas shooting twice as often to compensate for BS5+, they would remain unused because orks simply have no need for intercessors.
You see I'm not sure about this. Leaving aside the issues in the base game rules - if you were running a speed freaks sort of list, don't you think a bunch of Orkcessors in a trukk would beat say 10 boyz?
My thought on that is that Nobz need the versatility and anti-elite/anti-tank power that boyz lack, but still remain easier to kill than meganobz.
They should be deadly in melee and not utter trash at range. Whether they're troops or not is irrelevant to their use imo and somehow I doubt GW will give orks a heavy infantry choice for troops. However, they should get these upgrades without sacrificing their point cost.
Dudeface wrote: Then following your arguments either manz or nobz needs to get the cut, there isn't much more you can do to 1 without upsetting the other by definition.
I actually forgot MANz were W3 now. It still stands for toughness though. If nobz got to T5 (which I doubt) then obviously MANz will too. The opposite isn't necessarily true though.
Mr Raptor wrote: My thought on that is that Nobz need the versatility and anti-elite/anti-tank power that boyz lack, but still remain easier to kill than meganobz.
They should be deadly in melee and not utter trash at range. Whether they're troops or not is irrelevant to their use imo and somehow I doubt GW will give orks a heavy infantry choice for troops. However, they should get these upgrades without sacrificing their point cost.
Dudeface wrote: Then following your arguments either manz or nobz needs to get the cut, there isn't much more you can do to 1 without upsetting the other by definition.
I actually forgot MANz were W3 now. It still stands for toughness though. If nobz got to T5 (which I doubt) then obviously MANz will too. The opposite isn't necessarily true though.
I feel this sums it up, nobz need to be semi fragile damage dealers, while the meganobz need to be nigh unstoppable but with lower damage output.
Tyel wrote: You see I'm not sure about this. Leaving aside the issues in the base game rules - if you were running a speed freaks sort of list, don't you think a bunch of Orkcessors in a trukk would beat say 10 boyz?
Maybe, but only if you make them troops. Trukkboyz plus a unit of kommandoz would still be cheaper and do the forward objective capping thing better. As a shooting unit they definitely won't be useful, as you could get three buggies or a buggy and a plane for the same costs.
Mr Raptor wrote: I think it is pointless to compare an individual unit to another unit from another faction, especially when they don't have the same role. Yes a firstborn marine is clearly superior to a Nob for about the same points (an actual gun with good BS, better save, doctrines, better leadership, troop slot, ect...) but it doesn't really matter.
40k does not have the sublime balance that would make that a sensical approach. Cross-faction point comparisons are usually valid.
Not only that. When Ork player A goes up against Marine player B and discovers the units he paid the same points for are inferior it feels bad. It is bad optics. Now the greater tactical synergy is also important; if there is a ready counter argument of "yes, but your Ork unit can do [useful thing]" that largely resolves the problem, ASSUMING that useful thing is an adequate counter-balance. But recognition of that dynamic is important because without the base stat comparison there isn't groundwork for how strong the 'extra' needs to be.
AnomanderRake wrote: If you want to argue about whether thing A or thing B should be X points or X+1 points, sure. But surely you feel competent to eyeball the fact that a Space Marine gets more and better special rules/support ability interactions than an Ork?
Comparing *a* Space Marine to *an* ork just as useless as comparing their points. Armies are more than the sum of their parts. There is a reason why half the armies would totally want to play 5 pts gretchin while orks don't touch them with a ten foot pole, and it's neither points nor rules interactions.
Orks have two rather variable archetypes which can clearly compete with what marines can bring - and the main reason why one of them is not topping tournaments anymore are the secondary kill objectives, which are part of neither codex.
Nobz could theoretically fit into either of them, but they are nowhere to be seen, while MANz and boyz constantly do appear in lists.
Bringing nobz in line with intercessors does nothing for orks, making them alternative to MANz and/or boyz without does.
Armies may be more than the sum of their parts, but if all the parts of army 1 are better than all the parts of army 2 that doesn't, I don't know, telegraph a little that maybe army 1 is better?
AnomanderRake wrote: Armies may be more than the sum of their parts, but if all the parts of army 1 are better than all the parts of army 2 that doesn't, I don't know, telegraph a little that maybe army 1 is better?
What makes you think that space marines are better than orks?
See, this demonstrates the problem perfectly. You assume that space marines are better because of their stats and rules, but yet orks have a winrate that is significantly higher than marines in general and slightly better than their best chapters.
If you are talking about marines being the end all be all of broken, I don't think this is relevant to the conversation. Sure they have insanely good cost efficient units, but i'd rather see nobz being balanced internally first rather than having them be the complete equals of intercessors point for points. At that point, why even bother having multiple armies if we want all units to have a similar statline throughout all codices.
Units are not only their statlines. They have special rules, army buffs, stratagems, ... some of these things being about impossible to value properly in term of points. So personally, i don't care if nobz are less efficient point for point than intercessors. I want them to be actually useful in an (or at least certain) ork army. Which is not the case right now because they are not good enough at what they're supposed to be good at, making them a poor choice to take.
Mr Raptor wrote: If you are talking about marines being the end all be all of broken, I don't think this is relevant to the conversation. Sure they have insanely good cost efficient units, but i'd rather see nobz being balanced internally first rather than having them be the complete equals of intercessors point for points. At that point, why even bother having multiple armies if we want all units to have a similar statline throughout all codices.
Units are not only their statlines. They have special rules, army buffs, stratagems, ... some of these things being about impossible to value properly in term of points. So personally, i don't care if nobz are less efficient point for point than intercessors. I want them to be actually useful in an (or at least certain) ork army. Which is not the case right now because they are not good enough at what they're supposed to be good at, making them a poor choice to take.
But you want them resistant to small arms, resistant to anti armour fire, killy in close combat and no less points efficient than nobz. That seems an unreasonable request at that point, but more importantly again, leaves nobz even more pointless. Making a walking tank vulnerable to anti tank seems fair.
I'm sure you know as well as I do terminators have fluffwise always have had a refractor field build into their armour, where as a meganob is a collection of hydraulic and metal pieces cobbled together. Giving them an invuln would need a retcon of the fluff and make a kff big mek less relevant.
Again, how would you differentiate a role between nobz and mega nobz?
nowhere did I make that claim though. I think nobz need more durability AND a huge increase to their Damage output, leaving them with T5 2w and 4+ armor does not make them as tanky as a Meganob. On the meganob, their dmg output is fine, but they need to be tankier, as far as never having an invuln save....may I introduce you to "Cybork" enhancements which used to give the Orkz a 5+ invuln save. and were primarily used on...nobz.
SemperMortis wrote: The problem is that people aren't shooting meganobz with T4 no AP weapons that often, they are shooting them with Plasma and now melta. Because why waste bolters on Meganobz when you can shoot boyz instead and than use your plasma/melta to delete a 38pt meganob. T5 does a lot, so does giving them a 4th wound, but i'll bet you dollars to donuts that GW than prices them closer to 50-60ppm instead of 38, and at that point why wouldn't you pop them with a melta gun?
You say "problem", I say "people correctly identifying which unit to shoot with which weapon".
Isn't that the sort of tactical decision-making people keep claiming they want to see in this game?
Yeah its a problem because at the moment, nobody is using S4 No AP 1 dmg weapons to take down tanky units. When was the last time you thought to yourself "you know what would be a good idea? Im going to shoot all my S4 weapons at those Gravis Marines". So making Meganobz more resistant to S4 weaponry doesn't fix their core issue which is them being vulnerable to anti-tank weaponry which is currently being spammed.
AnomanderRake wrote: Armies may be more than the sum of their parts, but if all the parts of army 1 are better than all the parts of army 2 that doesn't, I don't know, telegraph a little that maybe army 1 is better?
What makes you think that space marines are better than orks?
See, this demonstrates the problem perfectly. You assume that space marines are better because of their stats and rules, but yet orks have a winrate that is significantly higher than marines in general and slightly better than their best chapters.
We covered this in the Ork tactics thread, but basically, the reason Orkz are doing well with goff spam is because its counter meta. Most armies correctly assume they will be facing off against Primaris/Gravis type models and therefore bring weapons designed to kill that sort of target, so when you get swamped by 90-120 ork bodies that don't mind being incinerated by a S8 melta blast as much as they do getting hit with a plethora of Hurricane bolters, yeah we win. The beauty about the goff spam is that not only is it counter meta, but its currently great based on 9th edition scoring rules. In other words we bring more troops than the enemy can handle and therefore hold objectives better.
But you want them resistant to small arms, resistant to anti armour fire, killy in close combat and no less points efficient than nobz. That seems an unreasonable request at that point, but more importantly again, leaves nobz even more pointless. Making a walking tank vulnerable to anti tank seems fair.
I'm sure you know as well as I do terminators have fluffwise always have had a refractor field build into their armour, where as a meganob is a collection of hydraulic and metal pieces cobbled together. Giving them an invuln would need a retcon of the fluff and make a kff big mek less relevant.
Again, how would you differentiate a role between nobz and mega nobz?
nowhere did I make that claim though. I think nobz need more durability AND a huge increase to their Damage output, leaving them with T5 2w and 4+ armor does not make them as tanky as a Meganob. On the meganob, their dmg output is fine, but they need to be tankier, as far as never having an invuln save....may I introduce you to "Cybork" enhancements which used to give the Orkz a 5+ invuln save. and were primarily used on...nobz.
SemperMortis wrote: The problem is that people aren't shooting meganobz with T4 no AP weapons that often, they are shooting them with Plasma and now melta. Because why waste bolters on Meganobz when you can shoot boyz instead and than use your plasma/melta to delete a 38pt meganob. T5 does a lot, so does giving them a 4th wound, but i'll bet you dollars to donuts that GW than prices them closer to 50-60ppm instead of 38, and at that point why wouldn't you pop them with a melta gun?
You say "problem", I say "people correctly identifying which unit to shoot with which weapon".
Isn't that the sort of tactical decision-making people keep claiming they want to see in this game?
Yeah its a problem because at the moment, nobody is using S4 No AP 1 dmg weapons to take down tanky units. When was the last time you thought to yourself "you know what would be a good idea? Im going to shoot all my S4 weapons at those Gravis Marines". So making Meganobz more resistant to S4 weaponry doesn't fix their core issue which is them being vulnerable to anti-tank weaponry which is currently being spammed.
AnomanderRake wrote: Armies may be more than the sum of their parts, but if all the parts of army 1 are better than all the parts of army 2 that doesn't, I don't know, telegraph a little that maybe army 1 is better?
What makes you think that space marines are better than orks?
See, this demonstrates the problem perfectly. You assume that space marines are better because of their stats and rules, but yet orks have a winrate that is significantly higher than marines in general and slightly better than their best chapters.
We covered this in the Ork tactics thread, but basically, the reason Orkz are doing well with goff spam is because its counter meta. Most armies correctly assume they will be facing off against Primaris/Gravis type models and therefore bring weapons designed to kill that sort of target, so when you get swamped by 90-120 ork bodies that don't mind being incinerated by a S8 melta blast as much as they do getting hit with a plethora of Hurricane bolters, yeah we win. The beauty about the goff spam is that not only is it counter meta, but its currently great based on 9th edition scoring rules. In other words we bring more troops than the enemy can handle and therefore hold objectives better.
With my suggestion they'd happily eat 50 s4 ap - d1 hits per meganob, my issue is you're viewing them and treating them like tanks. If you're buffing them to the point people are forced to fire anti tank weapons at infantry, then I'd argue they're working as intended, or you're simply preventing them from dieing in nearly any and every circumstance.
If you gave them a 4++ you've essentially made ork custodes, which seems wrong given meganobs have never has invulns or force fields iirc.
I want an honest suggestion of what a nob and mega nob should look like with a rationale at this point because it seems that altering one causes the other to need altering and it spirals into oblivion.
T5, 4W and a 5+ FNP takes about 110 S4 ap - D1 hits to kill. But again, meganobz are already durable enough vs S4 ap - d1 shots. It takes 36 S4 shots to kill a meganob atm or slightly tougher than a Gravis Marine, giving them a 4th wound or T5 would give them more than enough durability vs that type of weaponry. The problem is that people aren't shooting meganobz with T4 no AP weapons that often, they are shooting them with Plasma and now melta. Because why waste bolters on Meganobz when you can shoot boyz instead and than use your plasma/melta to delete a 38pt meganob. T5 does a lot, so does giving them a 4th wound, but i'll bet you dollars to donuts that GW than prices them closer to 50-60ppm instead of 38, and at that point why wouldn't you pop them with a melta gun?
As far as turning Meganobz into Custodes....didn't SM's have access to a 3++ not that long ago? I think its a 4++ now but still, its not unheard of, and Terminators (Meganob equivalents) have access as well.
You said here you want meganobz to be resilient to anti infantry, anti armour and the whole thread is saying that they're more points efficient than nobz so nobz are pointless. You've confused yourself replying to (your) posts about meganobz and thinking it relates to regular nobz somehow.
The point is if meganobz have similar damage output per point at greater survivability nobz just become useless again. If nobz have greater damage output because they're notably cheaper, you'd stop bringing meganobz.
Their roles need splitting out or the gap between survivable and damage output needs widening notably.
SemperMortis wrote: We covered this in the Ork tactics thread, but basically, the reason Orkz are doing well with goff spam is because its counter meta. Most armies correctly assume they will be facing off against Primaris/Gravis type models and therefore bring weapons designed to kill that sort of target, so when you get swamped by 90-120 ork bodies that don't mind being incinerated by a S8 melta blast as much as they do getting hit with a plethora of Hurricane bolters, yeah we win. The beauty about the goff spam is that not only is it counter meta, but its currently great based on 9th edition scoring rules. In other words we bring more troops than the enemy can handle and therefore hold objectives better.
We didn't cover this, buggy spam also has part in those win rates and some of that is objectively wrong. And frankly I just didn't discuss this because with you I don't want to have another discussion where you math out how much more powerful intercessors are than nobz when it's completely irrelevant in the first place.
There are no facts that back up that marines as an army are more powerful than orks as an army.
Mr Raptor wrote: If you are talking about marines being the end all be all of broken, I don't think this is relevant to the conversation. Sure they have insanely good cost efficient units, but i'd rather see nobz being balanced internally first rather than having them be the complete equals of intercessors point for points. At that point, why even bother having multiple armies if we want all units to have a similar statline throughout all codices.
Units are not only their statlines. They have special rules, army buffs, stratagems, ... some of these things being about impossible to value properly in term of points. So personally, i don't care if nobz are less efficient point for point than intercessors. I want them to be actually useful in an (or at least certain) ork army. Which is not the case right now because they are not good enough at what they're supposed to be good at, making them a poor choice to take.
Nobz need to be balanced externally first, *then* internally. It's better if a given army has only one good build than none.
Mr Raptor wrote: If you are talking about marines being the end all be all of broken, I don't think this is relevant to the conversation. Sure they have insanely good cost efficient units, but i'd rather see nobz being balanced internally first rather than having them be the complete equals of intercessors point for points. At that point, why even bother having multiple armies if we want all units to have a similar statline throughout all codices.
Units are not only their statlines. They have special rules, army buffs, stratagems, ... some of these things being about impossible to value properly in term of points. So personally, i don't care if nobz are less efficient point for point than intercessors. I want them to be actually useful in an (or at least certain) ork army. Which is not the case right now because they are not good enough at what they're supposed to be good at, making them a poor choice to take.
Nobz need to be balanced externally first, *then* internally. It's better if a given army has only one good build than none.
Thats not how... you balance a game. I mean, ideally you would be the doing the two things at once. But orks aren't in so a bad shape that balancing nobz internally would let them to still be utter trash externally.
SemperMortis wrote: We covered this in the Ork tactics thread, but basically, the reason Orkz are doing well with goff spam is because its counter meta. Most armies correctly assume they will be facing off against Primaris/Gravis type models and therefore bring weapons designed to kill that sort of target, so when you get swamped by 90-120 ork bodies that don't mind being incinerated by a S8 melta blast as much as they do getting hit with a plethora of Hurricane bolters, yeah we win. The beauty about the goff spam is that not only is it counter meta, but its currently great based on 9th edition scoring rules. In other words we bring more troops than the enemy can handle and therefore hold objectives better.
We didn't cover this, buggy spam also has part in those win rates and some of that is objectively wrong. And frankly I just didn't discuss this because with you I don't want to have another discussion where you math out how much more powerful intercessors are than nobz when it's completely irrelevant in the first place.
There are no facts that back up that marines as an army are more powerful than orks as an army.
What does a "powerful army" mean anyway ?
Does it mean that it has exactly 1 army cheese comp that wins tournaments but the other 80% of the codex is garbage ?
Is it that the whole codex is better than most others in any role with only strong cost efficient units ?
Is it just because its winrate is above 50% ?
The SM problem right now is that they have a long list of strong options and a few decent options (in comparison, the necron codex has a long list of decent options and a few strong options). Whether or not SM crash tournaments isn't really bothering me (and they seem to get a fair amount of wins without crowding tops either).
It however becomes more problematic in casual/pick-up games, where people play what they have/like/could come up with. Right now THAT is the demographic SM are crushing. You can hardly go wrong and have so many ways to make a good army. Orks can't do that. Orks require a lot more thought and skill to equal the average SM list.
Galas wrote: Thats not how... you balance a game. I mean, ideally you would be the two things at once. But orks aren't in so a bad shape that balancing nobz internally would let them to still be utter trash extrenally.
It's better than balancing internally with no regard for external balance, but unfortunately that seems to be GW's tack lately.
The problem you've got is that Orks are placing *reasonably* regularly in tournaments. They don't do so all the time, but they are clearly not down with the bad factions.
So saying Nobz are bad, fix Nobz - okay. How you do this without stepping on toes is a bit unclear, but its fair enough.
But the view that boyz and Manz need to be buffed prompts a bit of a "???" response from me.
This increases even further if you take the view Harlequins and Custodes are doing so well because they didn't really get a 9th edition points hike, and are so just undercosted compared to everyone else by about 10%. As are certain Marine units.
The big difference is the SMs are weighted towards defense while the Orks are weighted toward offense. If they keep the points adjusted correctly, all should be well.
The big difference is the SMs are weighted towards defense while the Orks are weighted toward offense. If they keep the points adjusted correctly, all should be well.
Primaris existing gives the lie to that progression.
Nazrak wrote: Am I the only person who thinks making Nobz Troops is a horrible idea? Completely contradicts like 30-odd years of lore. Boyz have always been the core of an Ork army.
No, you are not. I hate, hate, hate the idea. I don't know what to do to better balance the game, and I know that GW seems to be hell-bent for leather on eliminating anything 'normal' in each army, but I sincerely hope they don't do this. I feel like nobs, thematically, need some boys to boss around. I think it would be fine to have certain missions/scenarios/whatever where 'the tough guys' all show up, but at the core of what makes an Ork army seem like an ork army is more boyz than nobs.
Now, admittedly, I am the doddering old fart who thinks the IG should be fielding infantry squads with command squads, etc, as well, and Tyranids should be fielding loads of Gaunts.
I get that people want the cool models, and the best performing models, and they want to use the models that they buy. But I also don't see the point of having a "force organization" of some sort if regular, basic troops aren't the Troops choices and elite, specialist squads aren't Elites. Yes, Marines do have better troops--but that's the POINT of marines, isn't it? I think so much of the problem is more from the points costs than the stats. If insanely elite, insanely well-equipped troops like Space Marines were actually expensive, rather than the baseline, it wouldn't be quite as annoying.
You said here you want meganobz to be resilient to anti infantry, anti armour and the whole thread is saying that they're more points efficient than nobz so nobz are pointless. You've confused yourself replying to (your) posts about meganobz and thinking it relates to regular nobz somehow.
The point is if meganobz have similar damage output per point at greater survivability nobz just become useless again. If nobz have greater damage output because they're notably cheaper, you'd stop bringing meganobz.
Their roles need splitting out or the gap between survivable and damage output needs widening notably.
No, I said they need to be tankier, nowhere did i say they need to be better vs small arms fire. My main problem with them is that they walk right into a meta that is currently filled to the brim with Primaris Marines, Old Marines and Gravis marines all who have 2+ wounds and 3+ armor and some have T5 along with everything else. So in a meta where armies are bringing a plethora of multi-dmg high AP weapons, simply giving a meganob 1 more wound isn't going to accomplish as much as people think.
And again, I want NOBZ to get a dmg increase, maybe better choppas or something, but not meganobz. this creates 2 units with different jobs. Meganobz to be tanky and hold objectives and Nobz to rush in and take them from others.
SemperMortis wrote: We covered this in the Ork tactics thread, but basically, the reason Orkz are doing well with goff spam is because its counter meta. Most armies correctly assume they will be facing off against Primaris/Gravis type models and therefore bring weapons designed to kill that sort of target, so when you get swamped by 90-120 ork bodies that don't mind being incinerated by a S8 melta blast as much as they do getting hit with a plethora of Hurricane bolters, yeah we win. The beauty about the goff spam is that not only is it counter meta, but its currently great based on 9th edition scoring rules. In other words we bring more troops than the enemy can handle and therefore hold objectives better.
We didn't cover this, buggy spam also has part in those win rates and some of that is objectively wrong. And frankly I just didn't discuss this because with you I don't want to have another discussion where you math out how much more powerful intercessors are than nobz when it's completely irrelevant in the first place.
There are no facts that back up that marines as an army are more powerful than orks as an army.
We covered it in that I broke down the event you listed literally by army that the ork faced and showed what that specific army had geared itself towards. If the multitudes in the tournament scene are flooding the table with multi dmg, good AP weapons, than buggy spam is dead while Ork hordes will do great simply because the enemy doesn't have enough dakka to take care of the hordes. In the event you listed the closest the ork player came to losing was against Nuns with Gunz, and that was because the player in question utilized heavy bolters to deal with Primaris Marines as their go to weapons system, after that there was literally nothign else capable of clearing ork boyz with the rest of their list being heavy weapons like Exorcists. 2 of the lists the ork player faced only had 5 Troop models total.
as to SM being a more powerful army than Orkz...yes, yes they are significantly more powerful. Point for point they can outperform orkz at range or in CC, the only ork lists that are currently winning rely on skewing heavily into infantry and even than, if orkz became a bigger threat to the tournament scene and people geared their armies towards beating ork horde as much as they do beating SM Primaris than ork horde would be dead relatively quickly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tyel wrote: The problem you've got is that Orks are placing *reasonably* regularly in tournaments. They don't do so all the time, but they are clearly not down with the bad factions.
So saying Nobz are bad, fix Nobz - okay. How you do this without stepping on toes is a bit unclear, but its fair enough.
But the view that boyz and Manz need to be buffed prompts a bit of a "???" response from me.
This increases even further if you take the view Harlequins and Custodes are doing so well because they didn't really get a 9th edition points hike, and are so just undercosted compared to everyone else by about 10%. As are certain Marine units.
Its more to do with the fact that the Ork faction is doing well in tournaments because a common playstyle is currently counter meta and incredibly effective based on 9th edition missions. Ork Horde, backed by Ghaz means orkz have a huge amount of relatively cheap models that few tournament lists are capable of eliminating in a timely fashion which means the ork player will win frequently by playing to the mission. Take a look at the recent tournament Jidmah and I discussed, Orkz won 1st place. The Ork players list consisted of Ghaz, warboss, weirdboy, kff big mek, 90 boyz, 2 units of Kommandos, 2 units of Meganobz, 3 Mek gunz and 10 grotz.
2nd place was a DA player who had 2 min units of infiltrators, 1 min unit of intercessors, 5 Knights with shields and maces, an invictor with auto cannons, 2 talons, 3 melta ATVs and 3 outriders
3rd place was a Space Wolf/Smurf player who brought girlyman, melta, grav and a bunch of SW Terminators with claws and shields. No anti-horde weaponry.
So read those 2 SM lists, compare it to the ork list, why did the ork player win?
Answering the OT, my preferred solution would be to differentiate the nobs and MANz in two points:
- killiness: MANZ would be heavy hitters. High strength and low volume, but with no penalty on the WS. They would be hitting on 3+ thanks to the support of the mega armour (or give them WS2+). Nobs would be hitting with medium volume and medium strength (aka big choppas). Increase #A when charing to 4 (or give them WS2+). Those changes would leave space for the boys for high volume low strength.
- resilience. Generally I would be careful suggesting inv saves. I think that the kff will change according to the published (and then errated) PAKFF. Therefore, I would go in the direction of flat -1 damage, FnP OR ignoring the first -1 fp. MANZ would definitely go to T5 and normal nobs would have access to cheap cybork bodies (all the unit).
Orkimedez_Atalaya wrote: Answering the OT, my preferred solution would be to differentiate the nobs and MANz in two points:
- killiness: MANZ would be heavy hitters. High strength and low volume, but with no penalty on the WS. They would be hitting on 3+ thanks to the support of the mega armour (or give them WS2+). Nobs would be hitting with medium volume and medium strength (aka big choppas). Increase #A when charing to 4 (or give them WS2+). Those changes would leave space for the boys for high volume low strength.
- resilience. Generally I would be careful suggesting inv saves. I think that the kff will change according to the published (and then errated) PAKFF. Therefore, I would go in the direction of flat -1 damage, FnP OR ignoring the first -1 fp. MANZ would definitely go to T5 and normal nobs would have access to cheap cybork bodies (all the unit).
Seems reasonable, I agree pretty universally. Only thing I'd add is maybe leave nobz with the ability to take klawz but give megankbz a different melee weapon that was d3+3 damage maybe so the fewer attacks really hurt big things, where as the nob klawz are then more for light vehicles and marine clearing.
You said here you want meganobz to be resilient to anti infantry, anti armour and the whole thread is saying that they're more points efficient than nobz so nobz are pointless. You've confused yourself replying to (your) posts about meganobz and thinking it relates to regular nobz somehow.
The point is if meganobz have similar damage output per point at greater survivability nobz just become useless again. If nobz have greater damage output because they're notably cheaper, you'd stop bringing meganobz.
Their roles need splitting out or the gap between survivable and damage output needs widening notably.
No, I said they need to be tankier, nowhere did i say they need to be better vs small arms fire. My main problem with them is that they walk right into a meta that is currently filled to the brim with Primaris Marines, Old Marines and Gravis marines all who have 2+ wounds and 3+ armor and some have T5 along with everything else. So in a meta where armies are bringing a plethora of multi-dmg high AP weapons, simply giving a meganob 1 more wound isn't going to accomplish as much as people think.
And again, I want NOBZ to get a dmg increase, maybe better choppas or something, but not meganobz. this creates 2 units with different jobs. Meganobz to be tanky and hold objectives and Nobz to rush in and take them from others.
Tankier = more resistant to damage, doesn't matter where it comes from. But agree that the nobz should be more of a shock assault clearing unit.
The big difference is the SMs are weighted towards defense while the Orks are weighted toward offense. If they keep the points adjusted correctly, all should be well.
The difference is that a marine can do multiple things that a terminator can't do, while a nob is just a meganob with worse armor.
There simply is no reason to every use both MANz and nobz - no matter what you do to their points, one will always be less efficient than the other.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SemperMortis wrote: We covered it in that I broke down the event you listed literally by army that the ork faced and showed what that specific army had geared itself towards. If the multitudes in the tournament scene are flooding the table with multi dmg, good AP weapons, than buggy spam is dead while Ork hordes will do great simply because the enemy doesn't have enough dakka to take care of the hordes. In the event you listed the closest the ork player came to losing was against Nuns with Gunz, and that was because the player in question utilized heavy bolters to deal with Primaris Marines as their go to weapons system, after that there was literally nothign else capable of clearing ork boyz with the rest of their list being heavy weapons like Exorcists. 2 of the lists the ork player faced only had 5 Troop models total.
You have analysed five wins out of 512 on record and your argumentation is heavily flawed by confirmation bias. There are one or two orks placing in the top ranks of some GT *every week*, and those 970 recorded games include people placing low and practice games. In addition, why should the whole meta warp to answer marines when the top dogs are dameons, harlequins, sisters and custodes. Even the highest placing marine chapter mostly does so by spamming tons of wolves, not primaris.
as to SM being a more powerful army than Orkz...yes, yes they are significantly more powerful. Point for point they can outperform orkz at range or in CC
Irrelevant, as outlined above. As the context of an army cannot be translated to points, a point for point comparison says absolutely nothing about the power of an army. You also seem to be ignoring that the ability to kill stuff is not the same as the ability to win games. Or would you argue that Tau are a powerful army right now?
the only ork lists that are currently winning rely on skewing heavily into infantry and even than
Not really? I mean, 90-120 boyz isn't a lot compared to previous editions, and if infantry skew was the goal they wouldn't be sinking as much points into MANz as they do. The primary strength of the Thrakka horde is being able to get lots of points from primaries, due to powerful melee units with objective secured and cheap deep strikers.
if orkz became a bigger threat to the tournament scene and people geared their armies towards beating ork horde as much as they do beating SM Primaris than ork horde would be dead relatively quickly.
Most armies aren't specifically geared towards killing marines, and even if they are, the big hits for marines currently seem to be fenris wolves, deathwing terminators and ATVs - none of which care about the primaris statline.
TL;DR: Data doesn't support your analysis. Thrakka horde is clearly a build powerful enough to win tournaments and beat marines. Using that as a target to make all ork units and archetypes just as good is way better than complaining about wanting the same toys as an army which is doing worse.
I wouldn't say that lots of ork boyz countering multi dmg weapons has nothing to do with ork builds winning tournaments (after all, SM are and will remain the most common faction). But it is not the only or even the main reason they do.
Ork boyz are pretty good on their own, they're T4 which is not terrible, they dish out quite a lot of dmg especially with their hidden PC . They are good at screening and board control and when paired with a KFF and painboy they're very resilient.
And that is all the more painful for nobz, who are clearly outclassed by them. They don't really do more dmg, and for their points they are much worse in resilience on top of being elite.
2 ork boyz cost less than 1 naked Nob, do more attacks and have the same number of wounds. Also while they loose half their power if they take 1 wound and have a worse save (which clearly makes them worse against small firearms) they laugh at multi wound weapons, which are becoming more and more common. I would say that is a small win for ork boyz, but when you add the fact that they can be taken by 30 vs 10 and are troops (and thus have more board control, more screen, benefit much more from Ghaz buffs, ect...) then why would you take Nobz ?
With what Jidmah said about nobz and meganobz I arguee the only way to make nobz worth it and feel different agaisnt meganobz is to make them troops.
You can have both a place for boyz and nobz in the same troop slot: Boyz will always be beeter agaisnt horde and about covering ground, and nobz should be the anti-medium/elite troops.
I don't understand people that dont want nobz to be troops. I mean, if you want to play heavy boyz lists you can still do it? But it would open a ton of space design for more ork elite lists. Just because Tyranids have tyranid warriors as an option doesnt mean they dont have a ton of builds centered around gants.
And they have two troop options that are two versions of the same thing; hormagaunts and genestealers, but one is a more expensive version, more offensive, and the other is more based in movility.
Galas wrote: With what Jidmah said about nobz and meganobz I arguee the only way to make nobz worth it and feel different agaisnt meganobz is to make them troops.
You can have both a place for boyz and nobz in the same troop slot: Boyz will always be beeter agaisnt horde and about covering ground, and nobz should be the anti-medium/elite troops.
I don't understand people that dont want nobz to be troops. I mean, if you want to play heavy boyz lists you can still do it? But it would open a ton of space design for more ork elite lists. Just because Tyranids have tyranid warriors as an option doesnt mean they dont have a ton of builds centered around gants.
And they have two troop options that are two versions of the same thing; hormagaunts and genestealers, but one is a more expensive version, more offensive, and the other is more based in movility.
It's fluff reasons mostly, nobz are meant to be the equivalent to upper-middle class society and far less common than boyz, so an army running them as troops would be like fielding an army of sargeants.
While true, I don't see why that would make them unavailable as troops (although I prefered it when you could take 1 pack as troop per Warboss, I think that was great game design).
In a world with gravis armors in troop choice I feel that is a bit hypocritical. Also, it would kinda fix the problem of orks having only 2 troop choices, one of which is pretty terrible. Ork boyz being pretty good on their own and synergizing well with the rest of the codex is the only reason why they don't feel too much of a tax.
Fluffy army comp is a pretty loose concept. Why couldn't a battle be initiated by a very elite ork army with a warboss that prefers to bring all the Nobz into the heart of battle instead of boyz swarming ?
I'm not specifically advocating for troop Nobz, but I don't feel there are that many reasons they would be such a bad idea.
When I see the core implementation in SM and Necrons, I feel like GW easily just wipes their butts with the lore anyway when designing armies (seriously ? dread core but not scarabs ?)
Mr Raptor wrote: While true, I don't see why that would make them unavailable as troops (although I prefered it when you could take 1 pack as troop per Warboss, I think that was great game design).
In a world with gravis armors in troop choice I feel that is a bit hypocritical. Also, it would kinda fix the problem of orks having only 2 troop choices, one of which is pretty terrible. Ork boyz being pretty good on their own and synergizing well with the rest of the codex is the only reason why they don't feel too much of a tax.
Fluffy army comp is a pretty loose concept. Why couldn't a battle be initiated by a very elite ork army with a warboss that prefers to bring all the Nobz into the heart of battle instead of boyz swarming ?
I'm not specifically advocating for troop Nobz, but I don't feel there are that many reasons they would be such a bad idea.
When I see the core implementation in SM and Necrons, I feel like GW easily just wipes their butts with the lore anyway when designing armies (seriously ? dread core but not scarabs ?)
You can put any primaris in a suit of gravis, from a rookie to a captain, its not a sign of seniority.
You can take an elite army built around nobz using a vanguard detachment now, moving them to troops only enables obsec and arguably saves some cp.
Thats exactly one of the problems of nobz, the lack of Obsec to fight for objetives.
Nobz are the black orcs of 40k, and you had full black orcs armies in fantasy in special lists. Now in AoS we have a full black orc and black orc ++ armies.
Adding more troop variety and lists variety for xenos armies is never a bad thing. With the exception of Tyranids, all xenos armies are severly lacking from a troop perspective.
Galas wrote: Thats exactly one of the problems of nobz, the lack of Obsec to fight for objetives.
Nobz are the black orcs of 40k, and you had full black orcs armies in fantasy in special lists. Now in AoS we have a full black orc and black orc ++ armies.
Adding more troop variety and lists variety for xenos armies is never a bad thing. With the exception of Tyranids, all xenos armies are severly lacking from a troop perspective.
Armies with 2 or fewer base troops off top of my head:
Chaos marines
Custodes
Sisters
Orks
Crons
Stealer cults
Grey knights
Custodes have two troop options, that offer different stuff, a meele one that can be both offensive , defensive, or a mix of both, and a shooting one.
Chaos Marine have an "elite" troop option and a chaff option.
Sisters have a single one, but thats because they are extremely new, even if they have existed for 20 years. The same for Harlequins.
Grey Knights are a small army with two troop options, and those two are clearly different, an elite one and a more "basic" infantry one.
Crons suffer similarly like Orks but even of both their troop options are basically middle range shooting ones, they play quite differently in the kind of lists they are used with, unlike orks.
Orks on the other hand have two options: An unusable one thats ultra cheap (or was) chaff, and a cheap chaff one.
Galas wrote: Custodes have two troop options, that offer different stuff, a meele one that can be both offensive , defensive, or a mix of both, and a shooting one.
Chaos Marine have an "elite" troop option and a chaff option.
Sisters have a single one, but thats because they are extremely new, even if they have existed for 20 years. The same for Harlequins.
Grey Knights are a small army with two troop options, and those two are clearly different, an elite one and a more "basic" infantry one.
Crons suffer similarly like Orks but even of both their troop options are basically middle range shooting ones, they play quite differently in the kind of lists they are used with, unlike orks.
Orks on the other hand have two options: An unusable one thats ultra cheap (or was) chaff, and a cheap chaff one.
Well I'm pretty sure owners of the other factions on the list have complaints of their own, owning a chaos army my cultists are barely more use than your grots for the points and chaos marines themselves are so lacklustre you wonder why you bother.
Making nobz troops seems an ok idea, don't paint as a "poor pity me and my 2 options" moment.
Dudeface wrote: It's fluff reasons mostly, nobz are meant to be the equivalent to upper-middle class society and far less common than boyz, so an army running them as troops would be like fielding an army of sargeants.
We had this on one of the first pages and that is simply not true. There are quite some examples in the lore of warbands consisting of nothing but Nobz, for example Thrakka's Bully Boyz.
It also would be like fielding an army of veterans, which marines actually can do.
Dudeface wrote: It's fluff reasons mostly, nobz are meant to be the equivalent to upper-middle class society and far less common than boyz, so an army running them as troops would be like fielding an army of sargeants.
We had this on one of the first pages and that is simply not true. There are quite some examples in the lore of warbands consisting of nothing but Nobz, for example Thrakka's Bully Boyz.
It also would be like fielding an army of veterans, which marines actually can do.
Orks can do that now if they don't care about obsec. There are no veteran options in the marine troops slot, they need a vanguard detachment the same as orks do.
Dudeface wrote: It's fluff reasons mostly, nobz are meant to be the equivalent to upper-middle class society and far less common than boyz, so an army running them as troops would be like fielding an army of sargeants.
We had this on one of the first pages and that is simply not true. There are quite some examples in the lore of warbands consisting of nothing but Nobz, for example Thrakka's Bully Boyz.
It also would be like fielding an army of veterans, which marines actually can do.
Orks can do that now if they don't care about obsec. There are no veteran options in the marine troops slot, they need a vanguard detachment the same as orks do.
Note that both Orks and Marines can gain ObSec on non-Troops.
Jidmah wrote: Marines can also promote troops to veterans, gaining 100% legit veteran troops.
I might be missing something here, Jidmah, but how?
Having skimmed the rest of the thread, it seems like y'all agree that Ork Nobz need a bit of spit and polish, but you don't agree on how best to handle that?
Veteran intercessors are no longer a strategem. They're a separate datasheet from basic intercessors and are elites, kind of like Chosen for csm. Loyalists can still promote lots of their characters though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You have analysed five wins out of 512 on record and your argumentation is heavily flawed by confirmation bias. There are one or two orks placing in the top ranks of some GT *every week*, and those 970 recorded games include people placing low and practice games. In addition, why should the whole meta warp to answer marines when the top dogs are dameons, harlequins, sisters and custodes. Even the highest placing marine chapter mostly does so by spamming tons of wolves, not primaris.
Yes, I analyzed the most recent Ork victory. I can further analyze other recent GT's but the results will be the same. As far as Daemons, Harlies, sisters and Custodes being Top dog they share it with SM but only if they bring a list that counters SM's and only if they don't run into a skew Ork list. Its almost like space Marines are a victim of their own success. Its almost like people are list building against their current playstyle of multi-wound models....like the renegade open winner whose units almost to a man (demon) had 2+dmg weapons. or 2nd place who brought 900pts of Blight Haulers. Multi-dmg high AP weaponry. The meta has shifted to target the likely opponents, in this case its Multi-wound good save models (Tacs, primaris and Gravis) and the best part is that by gearing towards this you can usually handle high-durability units fairly well. The Top list as mentioned had no answer to horde besides his 30 troops. Had he faced an ork player bringing goff horde he would have lost. Ironically, the 2 ork players in that GT finished 23rd and 24th. One brought Buggies the other brought 60 boyz and a host of Meganobz and Smasha gunz. But there were 3 Space Marine lists in the top 8 and 5 in the top 12., none were space wolves. Fully 1/3rd of the entire tournament were Space Marines of one flavor or another, and if you count Custodes and SOBs it is probably closer to half or more.
Irrelevant, as outlined above. As the context of an army cannot be translated to points, a point for point comparison says absolutely nothing about the power of an army.
You also seem to be ignoring that the ability to kill stuff is not the same as the ability to win games. Or would you argue that Tau are a powerful army right now?
Actually...pretty much the opposite. Ability to kill is all but useless unless your opponent happens to bring what you geared towards. If I bring a bunch of intercessors and fight against a IG Tank list...im going to lose, likewise, in the current meta you have Tournament lists bringing Melta guns and 2-3dmg melee weapons against....boyz. Go figure the ork list wins. On the reverse of that, as I mentioned, if orkz became a meta shifting force, their horde style would die relatively quickly since T4 boyz with a T-shirt aren't exactly hard to kill if you actually take horde clearing weapons. Summary: I'm not ignoring it at all, I am pointing out that most lists are geared towards killing multi-wound models which is why Ork boyz are doing so well. But if a SM player list tailored against an Ork horde list the way most tournament players list tailor to fight SMs....well we wouldn't last long.
Not really? I mean, 90-120 boyz isn't a lot compared to previous editions, and if infantry skew was the goal they wouldn't be sinking as much points into MANz as they do. The primary strength of the Thrakka horde is being able to get lots of points from primaries, due to powerful melee units with objective secured and cheap deep strikers.
7th edition 120 boyz was the norm, 90 was acceptable but 120 was preferable. 120 boyz in 7th was....720pts. 90 boyz in 9th is = 720pts. So point for point its a pretty hefty investment, especially when you factor in goffs using 1CP per mob to give them S5. As far as MANz, they fall into hte skew but not as well as Boyz. Honestly, if we ever have a fething tournament out here I plan on bringing as many boyz as I can muster, backed by Painboyz, KFF big mekz and Weirdboyz. Because I 100% agree with your other comment, the primary strength of Ghaz horde is taking primaries.
Most armies aren't specifically geared towards killing marines, and even if they are, the big hits for marines currently seem to be fenris wolves, deathwing terminators and ATVs - none of which care about the primaris statline.
This is patently false. Go look at any GT from the last 2 weeks or so. Most top placing armies are heavily invested in multi-dmg weapons than anything else. The GT I mentioned above as proof and the one I mentioned in the Ork thread as another proof.
TL;DR: Data doesn't support your analysis. Thrakka horde is clearly a build powerful enough to win tournaments and beat marines. Using that as a target to make all ork units and archetypes just as good is way better than complaining about wanting the same toys as an army which is doing worse.
Again, Thrakka Horde is NOT a powerful build. Its a Counter Meta build that wins by bringing a plethora of cheap throwaway infantry units that the enemy can't deal with fast enough to earn enough primaries to win.
Also, I am not wanting "the same toys as an army which is doing worse" I am talking about whats going to happen with nobz to make them useful.
Ork boyz are pretty good on their own, they're T4 which is not terrible, they dish out quite a lot of dmg especially with their hidden PC . They are good at screening and board control and when paired with a KFF and painboy they're very resilient.
And that is all the more painful for nobz, who are clearly outclassed by them. They don't really do more dmg, and for their points they are much worse in resilience on top of being elite.
2 ork boyz cost less than 1 naked Nob, do more attacks and have the same number of wounds. Also while they loose half their power if they take 1 wound and have a worse save (which clearly makes them worse against small firearms) they laugh at multi wound weapons, which are becoming more and more common. I would say that is a small win for ork boyz, but when you add the fact that they can be taken by 30 vs 10 and are troops (and thus have more board control, more screen, benefit much more from Ghaz buffs, ect...) then why would you take Nobz ?
==> the special weapons
Are they good ?
No.
T4 isn't bad I'll give you that, but they no longer really dish out much in the way of damage in regards to their most likely target, SMs. In 8th an ork boy was 7ppm and has basically the same statline as he does now, Against 13pt marines he was doing 3 attacks, 2 hits, 1 wound and .33 dmg. So 3 boyz killed 1 Marine, 21pts killed 13 in CC, that is a very good trade off. Now? not so much, those same 3 boyz do 9 attacks, 6 hits, 3 wounds and 1dmg which is ZERO dead Marines. It now takes 6 Boyz to do what 3 used to accomplish. As far as the "Hidden" PK goes, nowhere near what it used to be. On the hidden nob it gets 3 attacks, 1.5 hits 1.25 wounds for D3 dmg each. likely 1 dead Marine. Prior editions that same PK nob was slaying Leman Russ's and Terminators, now it struggles to kill 1 Tac Marine.
And when you compare them to nobz...yeah that is the point, nobz are kind of useless right now.
Remember it's 4 attacks per boyz if the unit has at least 20 of them. Which isn't unlikely with good use of KFF and painboy.
And my point is definitely not that they're the end all be all. Far from that. They are a cheap troop choice that require support, it would be ridiculous if they were one of the top damage dealer of the faction.
But honestly for their price, they deal decent damage and have good survivability.
And sure they are not as good to kill marines as they used to be per point, but I don't think that's an issue. First, because it's not really their job in the first place. Second, because even if Marines are the most played faction, they are about 30% (including subfactions), which, while disproportionate for a single faction, means that you have less than 1/3 chance to fight against a marines army per battle if you go to a tournament. And ork boyz are pretty good at killing gants, SoB, eldars, Taus, cultists, demons, ect...
Mr Raptor wrote: Remember it's 4 attacks per boyz if the unit has at least 20 of them. Which isn't unlikely with good use of KFF and painboy.
And my point is definitely not that they're the end all be all. Far from that. They are a cheap troop choice that require support, it would be ridiculous if they were one of the top damage dealer of the faction.
But honestly for their price, they deal decent damage and have good survivability.
And sure they are not as good to kill marines as they used to be per point, but I don't think that's an issue. First, because it's not really their job in the first place. Second, because even if Marines are the most played faction, they are about 30% (including subfactions), which, while disproportionate for a single faction, means that you have less than 1/3 chance to fight against a marines army per battle if you go to a tournament. And ork boyz are pretty good at killing gants, SoB, eldars, Taus, cultists, demons, ect...
In the aforementioned Grand Tournament, Space Marines made up 33% of the tournament, now add in Chaos Space Marines, Grey Knights, Custodes and suddenly far above 50%. So the likelihood of running into T4 3+ is relatively high.
As far as killing Marines not being their job, well that is the problem, it is in fact their job, and prior to this edition, a job that they accomplished just fine once they finally got into CC.
Now to get into the nitty gritty of math. You are correct boyz have 4 attacks if they are choppa boyz and have 20+ models. As far as durability, lets assume 30 Boyz(Nob/PK) backed by a KFF and a Painboy. To kill the 30 boyz would require 37 failed KFF saves which means you would need 55-56 wounds. TO get 55-56 wounds with bolters would require 110-112 hits, and for a SM player to get 110-112 hits would require about 165-168 shots. That does seem fairly tough honestly. The problem is though that it isn't a 250pt boyz unit. Its a 250pt boyz unit with 140pts of babysitting characters, one of whom is an HQ and is in high demand. So you are talking about 390pts for 1 unit of boyz to have the durability to require 165-168 bolter shots. Out of curiosity, How many bolter shots does it take to kill 10 Tac Marines? 180.
390pts worth of buffed boyz take 165 shots to kill. 10 Tac Marines coming in at 180pts require 180 shots. Or to put it nicely, point for point they are more than TWICE as durable as those boyz. And more importantly, once the Boyz lose 11 models they reach critical loss and lose 1/4th to 1/3rd of their attacks.
This just further reinforces my point though, the reason Ork boyz are winning events is because nobody is bringing those Bolters to the games. Because it takes 180 to kill 10 Tac Marines. On the reverse of that, if you took a plethora of Meltas/plasma etc, your return on investment is much better vs Space Marines and SIGNIFICANTLY worse vs those Orkz. In other words, one of the main points I made when the edition was brand new. I'll gladly take a Melta shot on my ork boyz, because they fear that about as much as they fear a bolter.
SemperMortis wrote: In the aforementioned Grand Tournament, Space Marines made up 33% of the tournament, now add in Chaos Space Marines, Grey Knights, Custodes and suddenly far above 50%. So the likelihood of running into T4 3+ is relatively high.
As far as killing Marines not being their job, well that is the problem, it is in fact their job, and prior to this edition, a job that they accomplished just fine once they finally got into CC.
Now to get into the nitty gritty of math. You are correct boyz have 4 attacks if they are choppa boyz and have 20+ models. As far as durability, lets assume 30 Boyz(Nob/PK) backed by a KFF and a Painboy. To kill the 30 boyz would require 37 failed KFF saves which means you would need 55-56 wounds. TO get 55-56 wounds with bolters would require 110-112 hits, and for a SM player to get 110-112 hits would require about 165-168 shots. That does seem fairly tough honestly. The problem is though that it isn't a 250pt boyz unit. Its a 250pt boyz unit with 140pts of babysitting characters, one of whom is an HQ and is in high demand. So you are talking about 390pts for 1 unit of boyz to have the durability to require 165-168 bolter shots. Out of curiosity, How many bolter shots does it take to kill 10 Tac Marines? 180.
390pts worth of buffed boyz take 165 shots to kill. 10 Tac Marines coming in at 180pts require 180 shots. Or to put it nicely, point for point they are more than TWICE as durable as those boyz. And more importantly, once the Boyz lose 11 models they reach critical loss and lose 1/4th to 1/3rd of their attacks.
This just further reinforces my point though, the reason Ork boyz are winning events is because nobody is bringing those Bolters to the games. Because it takes 180 to kill 10 Tac Marines. On the reverse of that, if you took a plethora of Meltas/plasma etc, your return on investment is much better vs Space Marines and SIGNIFICANTLY worse vs those Orkz. In other words, one of the main points I made when the edition was brand new. I'll gladly take a Melta shot on my ork boyz, because they fear that about as much as they fear a bolter.
Why is the measure of toughness how many S4 AP0 shots it takes to kill a unit? The measure of toughness is surviving for long enough to accomplish your battlefield role which is something that Ork Boyz are certainly doing right now.
As for them only being good in this specific meta, that's every good list. How good a unit/army/strategy is will always be 100% dependant on the meta they find themselves used in. If Ork hordes get countered orks will switch to buggy focused lists and keep on rolling.
Mr Raptor wrote: Remember it's 4 attacks per boyz if the unit has at least 20 of them. Which isn't unlikely with good use of KFF and painboy.
And my point is definitely not that they're the end all be all. Far from that. They are a cheap troop choice that require support, it would be ridiculous if they were one of the top damage dealer of the faction.
But honestly for their price, they deal decent damage and have good survivability.
And sure they are not as good to kill marines as they used to be per point, but I don't think that's an issue. First, because it's not really their job in the first place. Second, because even if Marines are the most played faction, they are about 30% (including subfactions), which, while disproportionate for a single faction, means that you have less than 1/3 chance to fight against a marines army per battle if you go to a tournament. And ork boyz are pretty good at killing gants, SoB, eldars, Taus, cultists, demons, ect...
In the aforementioned Grand Tournament, Space Marines made up 33% of the tournament, now add in Chaos Space Marines, Grey Knights, Custodes and suddenly far above 50%. So the likelihood of running into T4 3+ is relatively high.
As far as killing Marines not being their job, well that is the problem, it is in fact their job, and prior to this edition, a job that they accomplished just fine once they finally got into CC.
Now to get into the nitty gritty of math. You are correct boyz have 4 attacks if they are choppa boyz and have 20+ models. As far as durability, lets assume 30 Boyz(Nob/PK) backed by a KFF and a Painboy. To kill the 30 boyz would require 37 failed KFF saves which means you would need 55-56 wounds. TO get 55-56 wounds with bolters would require 110-112 hits, and for a SM player to get 110-112 hits would require about 165-168 shots. That does seem fairly tough honestly. The problem is though that it isn't a 250pt boyz unit. Its a 250pt boyz unit with 140pts of babysitting characters, one of whom is an HQ and is in high demand. So you are talking about 390pts for 1 unit of boyz to have the durability to require 165-168 bolter shots. Out of curiosity, How many bolter shots does it take to kill 10 Tac Marines? 180.
390pts worth of buffed boyz take 165 shots to kill. 10 Tac Marines coming in at 180pts require 180 shots. Or to put it nicely, point for point they are more than TWICE as durable as those boyz. And more importantly, once the Boyz lose 11 models they reach critical loss and lose 1/4th to 1/3rd of their attacks.
This just further reinforces my point though, the reason Ork boyz are winning events is because nobody is bringing those Bolters to the games. Because it takes 180 to kill 10 Tac Marines. On the reverse of that, if you took a plethora of Meltas/plasma etc, your return on investment is much better vs Space Marines and SIGNIFICANTLY worse vs those Orkz. In other words, one of the main points I made when the edition was brand new. I'll gladly take a Melta shot on my ork boyz, because they fear that about as much as they fear a bolter.
This is such a weird vacuum laden example I'm not even sure what the point is. You're claiming needing 1620 points of tac marines to kill a 250 point unit of boys under buffs in a turn is... bad?
Why is the measure of toughness how many S4 AP0 shots it takes to kill a unit? The measure of toughness is surviving for long enough to accomplish your battlefield role which is something that Ork Boyz are certainly doing right now.
As for them only being good in this specific meta, that's every good list. How good a unit/army/strategy is will always be 100% dependant on the meta they find themselves used in. If Ork hordes get countered orks will switch to buggy focused lists and keep on rolling.
The argument that Orkz are durable isn't really true though is it? I brought up the bolter comparison because Mr. Raptor made the statement that a unit of 30 boyz with a KFF and a painboy were durable. For the same points you could almost take 20 Intercessors, who have better weapons, armor and buffs. Even in the current meta, its a lot harder to shift 20 Intercessors off an objective than it is 30 boyz backed by a KFF and a painboy. So 20 intercessors can accomplish the same job while also inflicting significantly more damage at range.
This is such a weird vacuum laden example I'm not even sure what the point is. You're claiming needing 1620 points of tac marines to kill a 250 point unit of boys under buffs in a turn is... bad?
Read above.
Also, last time I checked, Marines had access to a plethora of anti-horde units/weapons. The problem is they never take them because they'd rather take more anti-elite weapons.
Why is the measure of toughness how many S4 AP0 shots it takes to kill a unit? The measure of toughness is surviving for long enough to accomplish your battlefield role which is something that Ork Boyz are certainly doing right now.
As for them only being good in this specific meta, that's every good list. How good a unit/army/strategy is will always be 100% dependant on the meta they find themselves used in. If Ork hordes get countered orks will switch to buggy focused lists and keep on rolling.
The argument that Orkz are durable isn't really true though is it? I brought up the bolter comparison because Mr. Raptor made the statement that a unit of 30 boyz with a KFF and a painboy were durable. For the same points you could almost take 20 Intercessors, who have better weapons, armor and buffs. Even in the current meta, its a lot harder to shift 20 Intercessors off an objective than it is 30 boyz backed by a KFF and a painboy. So 20 intercessors can accomplish the same job while also inflicting significantly more damage at range.
This is such a weird vacuum laden example I'm not even sure what the point is. You're claiming needing 1620 points of tac marines to kill a 250 point unit of boys under buffs in a turn is... bad?
Read above.
Also, last time I checked, Marines had access to a plethora of anti-horde units/weapons. The problem is they never take them because they'd rather take more anti-elite weapons.
You also neglected to consider that a tac unit will nearly always be more than 180 points, that the auras affect more than 1 ork unit, those 20 intercessors still take 5 turns to kill the 1 boyz unit, never mind the two buff characters.
I know it wasn't the intent but you're reinforcing (for me) the durability of boyz.
SemperMortis wrote: The argument that Orkz are durable isn't really true though is it? I brought up the bolter comparison because Mr. Raptor made the statement that a unit of 30 boyz with a KFF and a painboy were durable. For the same points you could almost take 20 Intercessors, who have better weapons, armor and buffs. Even in the current meta, its a lot harder to shift 20 Intercessors off an objective than it is 30 boyz backed by a KFF and a painboy. So 20 intercessors can accomplish the same job while also inflicting significantly more damage at range.
Only if by accomplish more you mean kill more and lose fewer models to incoming fire. The Boyz do more by denying you the chance to get within scoring range of an objective and by pinning you into your own deployment zone as they leap forward up the field, then they rip you up with S5 attacks while dying too slowly for you to win. That's durable and useful in my books.
Why is the only comparison you're making Bolters? Why not look at the durability against overcharged plasma, melta, or other weapons that are seeing more use on the battlefield? Durability doesn't exist in a vacuum and what is actually durable on the table, as opposed to being durable against a hypothetical scenario that isn't actually happening, will always change based on the meta.
Also, why are you including the points for buffs when talking Orks but not when talking about your 20 intercessors? Shouldn't we be looking at a Chapter Master and like a handful of Intercessors if we're comparing apples to apples?
SemperMortis wrote: The argument that Orkz are durable isn't really true though is it? I brought up the bolter comparison because Mr. Raptor made the statement that a unit of 30 boyz with a KFF and a painboy were durable. For the same points you could almost take 20 Intercessors, who have better weapons, armor and buffs. Even in the current meta, its a lot harder to shift 20 Intercessors off an objective than it is 30 boyz backed by a KFF and a painboy. So 20 intercessors can accomplish the same job while also inflicting significantly more damage at range.
Only if by accomplish more you mean kill more and lose fewer models to incoming fire. The Boyz do more by denying you the chance to get within scoring range of an objective and by pinning you into your own deployment zone as they leap forward up the field, then they rip you up with S5 attacks while dying too slowly for you to win. That's durable and useful in my books.
Why is the only comparison you're making Bolters? Why not look at the durability against overcharged plasma, melta, or other weapons that are seeing more use on the battlefield? Durability doesn't exist in a vacuum and what is actually durable on the table, as opposed to being durable against a hypothetical scenario that isn't actually happening, will always change based on the meta.
Also, why are you including the points for buffs when talking Orks but not when talking about your 20 intercessors? Shouldn't we be looking at a Chapter Master and like a handful of Intercessors if we're comparing apples to apples?
...Are you just not picking up what I am pointing out? I literally pointed out that armies ARE NOT TAKING bolters or anti-horde weapons which is why Orkz are doing good in the tournament scene. I even mentioned that boyz are significantly more durable point for point to Plasma/melta than Marines because a bolter is almost as dangerous to an ork as a melta gun is.
As to why I am not using buff characters for the SM? Because I am no the one who mentioned the buff characters and I showed the bolter shots to show that a standard Tac Marine unit is significantly cheaper and MORE durable vs small arms fire than those Ork boyz with durability buffing characters (KFF/Painboy).
The latest Ork top finish won out over a Space Marine and Sisters list that had plenty of horde mulching. Intercessors, infiltrators, invader atvs (they had meltas but they can just split fire), outriders, dark talons, and land speeder storms all have plenty of anti-infantry shooting.
The Sisters list had like twelve fething Mortifiers with flails which are built to mulch hordes and had plenty of anti-infantry shooting elsewhere. Even the Exorcists can at least do okay against Boys since they get some efficiency from blast.
But you want to know what makes Boys stand out from most other horde units?
They're T4. Suddenly most of that anti-infantry shooting that wounds hordes on 3s is now wounding them on 4s, and Mortifiers, which would be wounding gaunts on 2s are wounding them on 3s.
That this unit also has access to fairly trivial to use durability-buffing via KFF or a Painboy makes for one of the hardest to shift horde units in the game.
And it's not like the Ork list had nothing heavier shooting could find use on. Meganobz made up almost a fifth of that list's points, and it also had three Mek Gunz and Ghazghkuul as well that anti-tank shooting could target. So over eight hundred points of that army consisted of high saving throw multi-wound models. By comparison, Boys consisted of 742 points. Add Gretchen and you get 792. Add the Kommandos and you get 852 points consisting of one wound infantry. Is that really "skewing heavily into infantry"?
I don't even disagree with the assertion that Marines are better than Orks, I think they are, but there is nothing lamer than someone playing a strong army complaining about that army's strength.
tulun wrote: Do people honestly think Orks are better than SM?
That seems to be the hottest of takes and completely against any sort of expert opinion I've seen.
I think Orks tide lists have an edge in the meta -- the meta shifts at all to removing hordes, you'll see how fundamentally weak that list is.
Space marines are being tailored against and *still winning*.
When the meta skews anti-horde I expect to see Ork buggies and fliers show up.
This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Also when was the last time a unit's durability was accurately defined by how many shots of unbuffed bolter it can take ? Bolters are one of the biggest threats in the range of weapons Ork boyz fear, (very high volume that wounds on 4s and doesn't overkill) the biggest probably being the necron tesla. Marines just laugh at them, how is this new ?
Orks are not a top dog army at the moment but they are at least decent on their own. Right now they do well in tournaments because some of the strengths of their army are good in the current meta, along with some opportunist skewing.
Regarding SM themselves. I don't think they are that oppressive in tournaments. They're still placing really well and they probably have a lot of mirror matchups. But despite certain extremely strong abilities and units, they don't seem to be the biggest threat 40k has ever faced on its table.
Their biggest issues to me are that they have by far the largest player base. Which makes their strength much more omnipresent than when eldars, necrons or Taus were dominating.
And also their army has many strength but doesn't have a lot of weaknesses. You can field most units in the codex and still do fine, and lots of their units are multitask (without the appropriate costing). While this is not so much of a problem in high end play, I feel this is much more of a problem in casual/pick up games. Outside of the many many many mirror match ups i've seen, the SM players with their freshly opened half indomitus box along with a few more units to complete their army are completely crushing most other armies.
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Simply put this community has a self-sustaining culture where marine bashing is acceptable and often encouraged.
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Simply put this community has a self-sustaining culture where marine bashing is acceptable and often encouraged.
And why is that ? Is there a specific reason or is it just human's madness at play ? Maybe if you guys tried to think about the core of the problem, idk...
I just arrived and I already identified several posters who are either marine-haters who think people who play them should be burnt on a cross, or hardcore marine-fanboys who will die before admitting they are even above average. What it leads to is very poor discussion.
Why is it that people hate/love this faction so much while harlequins, SoB, Daemons and Custodes who also score very well and have some extremely good units and synergies don't get this treatment ?
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Simply put this community has a self-sustaining culture where marine bashing is acceptable and often encouraged.
And why is that ? Is there a specific reason or is it just human's madness at play ? Maybe if you guys tried to think about the core of the problem, idk...
I just arrived and I already identified several posters who are either marine-haters who think people who play them should be burnt on a cross, or hardcore marine-fanboys who will die before admitting they are even above average. What it leads to is very poor discussion.
Why is it that people hate/love this faction so much while harlequins, SoB, Daemons and Custodes who also score very well and have some extremely good units and synergies don't get this treatment ?
Because people overly identify with their faction, if their faction is then represented losing to marines or getting less attention to marines, they then lose rational comprehension as to why this might be and becomes a personal slight. Given marines get a lot of attention whilst being simultaneously only 1 faction, there are more people to be upset about them than the other way round.
As I said it's then self sustaining, xenos A player complains marines get something, marine player then is just excited about it, xenos B player then gets annoyed at not having anything to be excited about for the 2nd year running, same marine player simply tried to explain they're excited, chaos player A wades in and starts throwing sympathiser/shill/white knight comments in, then we end up where we are today.
But marines aren't one faction. Saying that someone who plays ultramarines is the same as a SW player is like saying that an eldar and dark eldar play the same faction.
When was the last time a DeathWing player got something from GW? Maybe the librarian a few months ago, but that one was limited to GW stores. Before that it was probably years since they got a new model. My dudes last model came out before 8th ed, making my faction the only one besides tyranids that got no new models in 8th ed. I doubt a tyranid player would be happy to hear that GSC are somehow counted among stuff he supposably got.
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Simply put this community has a self-sustaining culture where marine bashing is acceptable and often encouraged.
And why is that ? Is there a specific reason or is it just human's madness at play ? Maybe if you guys tried to think about the core of the problem, idk...
I just arrived and I already identified several posters who are either marine-haters who think people who play them should be burnt on a cross, or hardcore marine-fanboys who will die before admitting they are even above average. What it leads to is very poor discussion.
Why is it that people hate/love this faction so much while harlequins, SoB, Daemons and Custodes who also score very well and have some extremely good units and synergies don't get this treatment ?
Don't ask for reasons on this board, you will not get them, because there aren't.
Don't even try with hard numbers on here, because they will be ignored.
I mean, right now marines have a lower than 50% win rate and we still have these discussions. Sure, many lists tailor against them because they are EVERYWHERE,and this brings down their W/L ratio, but the same happened during IH era and they still had an embarassingly high win rate. This board cristallized its opinions an year ago and still refuses to admit that something may have changed in the mean time.
I wonder what would happen regarding Nobs if they made them cheaper, restricted their special weapons, and allowed them in squads up to 20 models?
They would be elites still, but elite at what orks do well - big mobs of things that want to hit you hard. I'd certainly try a unit of 20 ork nobs with 50% of them wielding klaws & saws. Technically you can do it already, with mob up, but now you could feasibly use mob up to get 30 nobs hitting the enemy.
They could also have the same rule as boys, but for over 10 models they gain an attack. There is zero reason, fluffwise, why nobs wouldn't form big mobs.
tulun wrote: That seems to be the hottest of takes and completely against any sort of expert opinion I've seen.
When it comes to self-proclaimed experts in this game, I draw your attention to the definition of "expert".
To whit - an ex- is a has-been, and a spurt is a drip under pressure.
If you look at what people like the Art of War people (Several winners of LVO), Titans, Tabletop Tactics (and so on) -- most place Orks as a C tier army.
If you think your opinion is worth more than their's, you're wrong. Or start placing at majors with Orks.
I will say this -- Orks in this Gravis / SM heavy meta are punching above their weight class. I don't think fundamentally as a codex we are anywhere near the strength of some of the top dogs -- Harlequins, Sisters, Ad mech, SM (and the various flavours). That's why a gaunt carpet can take second at an Aussie major, because 200 gaunts can be a real headache to deal with if you take nothing but plasma guns / lascannons.
Jidmah wrote:
This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
Right, but in the current state of the game, SM *do* dodge good kill secondaries. Hopefully they do address this as it is one of the reasons (obviously) they get extra efficiency, as they often start well ahead in points simply because your opponent has to take a bad or difficult secondary. But this is the current state of the game.
I think you'd need to quantify "as powerful as everyone says" with hard data. Like, what's the cutoff here? Because like I said, if the assertion is Orks are better than SM, this is crazy. SM just have way stronger builds, way more efficient units, and can probably come up (between the various supplements) possibly half a dozen or more top table lists. Orks have maybe two, and the green tide seems to be the only one really doing well right now.
If you think they are closer in power, well that's interesting. But I think SM can hold up to having people tailoring against them and hanging -- Green tide or buggy lists will fall apart on these situation because:
a) Our units are often good, but not hyper efficient in output or points cost.
b) We don't have strong defensive stratagems (ex: Gravis +1 save strat, trans human). Orks strength is redundancy, but our units are not cheap enough (compare a Megatrakk to an ATV in point cost) to really overwhelm an army leaning into killing us.
c) We often give up secondaries like candy.
I think both lists are glaringly weak, because they really can't take a punch -- but if the opponent can't really deal that punch in the first place (IE: I don't have enough bolters to kill 120 boys), a skilled player can do well because it's either a boatload of obsec bodies or a fast paced army that has a good amount of shooting / CC (8 mega trakks slaps hard).
I will say I look forward to our codex update. I think Orks, with a few power boosts here and there, might easily ascend the ranks to an A tier army.
Void__Dragon wrote: The latest Ork top finish won out over a Space Marine and Sisters list that had plenty of horde mulching. Intercessors, infiltrators, invader atvs (they had meltas but they can just split fire), outriders, dark talons, and land speeder storms all have plenty of anti-infantry shooting.
The Sisters list had like twelve fething Mortifiers with flails which are built to mulch hordes and had plenty of anti-infantry shooting elsewhere. Even the Exorcists can at least do okay against Boys since they get some efficiency from blast.
But you want to know what makes Boys stand out from most other horde units?
They're T4. Suddenly most of that anti-infantry shooting that wounds hordes on 3s is now wounding them on 4s, and Mortifiers, which would be wounding gaunts on 2s are wounding them on 3s.
That this unit also has access to fairly trivial to use durability-buffing via KFF or a Painboy makes for one of the hardest to shift horde units in the game.
And it's not like the Ork list had nothing heavier shooting could find use on. Meganobz made up almost a fifth of that list's points, and it also had three Mek Gunz and Ghazghkuul as well that anti-tank shooting could target. So over eight hundred points of that army consisted of high saving throw multi-wound models. By comparison, Boys consisted of 742 points. Add Gretchen and you get 792. Add the Kommandos and you get 852 points consisting of one wound infantry. Is that really "skewing heavily into infantry"?
I don't even disagree with the assertion that Marines are better than Orks, I think they are, but there is nothing lamer than someone playing a strong army complaining about that army's strength.
Couple of things. First, here is the breakdown of the Ork winner's opponents I did in the ork tactics thread. Ironically I pointed out what you just did, specifically that the Nuns with Gunz list was the closest the ork came to losing, and that is almost exclusively thanks to the mortifiers. But those Mortifiers were basically the only anti-infantry he brought. Exorcists get 6 shots for 4 hits and likely closer to 3 wounds. That isn't horde clearing. and while we are on the subject, LS Storms while fairly points efficient ,aren't anti-horde. 6 bolter shots (Cerberus launcher) and a Heavy bolter doesn't accomplish much. And the list that those were brought in had more anti-elite than anything, including 500pts of plasma inceptors and a bunch of Blade Guard. The ATV's also aren't good at Horde clearing when you give them Multi-meltas, 6 bolt shots, 4 hits, 2 wounds. Not exactly anything to write home about, especially not on an 85pt model.
Next, I am not "complaining about that army's strength". The point of this thread was what treatment GW was going to give nobz, and it got derailed by talking about boyz. As far as I am concerned orkz are in a good place right now, but that isn't because the army is inherently stronger than others in 9th but because the meta has shifted which brings out one of the favorite playstyles. As far as the ork player goes, he had 742pts of boyz, 110pts of Kommandos and 50pts of grotz. so just over 900pts of single wound infantry, he also had 3 HQ and 1 elite that were character protected (Weirdboy, Warboss, Big Mek, and painboy. 298pts). Based on the Weirdboy I would guess he either started the meganobz in reserve, teleporta striked, or hidden from view so he could da jump them. Nobody would foot slog meganobz. He also brough 3 Mek gunz in separate units for 120pts total. He brought 2 units of Meganobz for 380pts and finally he brought Ghaz for 300pts.
So the most the ork player had on the table at the start of the game of targetable multi-wound models was 3 mek gunz (120pts) and Ghaz (300pts) and since ghaz can only take 4dmg a phase he isn't a great target. I'm assuming the meganobz were either out of LOS or were most likely held in reserve to teleporta strike somewhere. But, even if they were on the table and in LOS (highly doubtful) thats only 780pts out of the list, and 300pts of that list can only lose 1/3rd of its wounds to shooting a turn.
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Simply put this community has a self-sustaining culture where marine bashing is acceptable and often encouraged.
Literally nobody in this thread has bashed or attacked Marine units, players, playstyles etc. Jidmah is pointing out that list tailoring is going on based on fighting the most common competitive list in the game right now, which is SM's featuring mutli-wound infantry.
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Simply put this community has a self-sustaining culture where marine bashing is acceptable and often encouraged.
And why is that ? Is there a specific reason or is it just human's madness at play ? Maybe if you guys tried to think about the core of the problem, idk...
I just arrived and I already identified several posters who are either marine-haters who think people who play them should be burnt on a cross, or hardcore marine-fanboys who will die before admitting they are even above average. What it leads to is very poor discussion.
Why is it that people hate/love this faction so much while harlequins, SoB, Daemons and Custodes who also score very well and have some extremely good units and synergies don't get this treatment ?
Marines get this treatment even when they are losing - always been this way. As you can see now with Custodes and Harliquens. People don't really care so much about imbalance specifically - because there is and always will be imbalance. You can't even rationalize with most of these people. They just hate marines. Like an older child that hates their younger sibling for getting all the attention except without any unconditional love at all.
In the case of orks. The army has generally always been good. Nobs have a much better history than terminators do for example. Right now the basic nob doesn't really have a place - though the mega nob does. Probably because their roll would be exactly the same as boys anyways. Should nobs just become troops and become the "primaris type ork" IDK...
Void__Dragon wrote: The latest Ork top finish won out over a Space Marine and Sisters list that had plenty of horde mulching. Intercessors, infiltrators, invader atvs (they had meltas but they can just split fire), outriders, dark talons, and land speeder storms all have plenty of anti-infantry shooting.
The Sisters list had like twelve fething Mortifiers with flails which are built to mulch hordes and had plenty of anti-infantry shooting elsewhere. Even the Exorcists can at least do okay against Boys since they get some efficiency from blast.
But you want to know what makes Boys stand out from most other horde units?
They're T4. Suddenly most of that anti-infantry shooting that wounds hordes on 3s is now wounding them on 4s, and Mortifiers, which would be wounding gaunts on 2s are wounding them on 3s.
That this unit also has access to fairly trivial to use durability-buffing via KFF or a Painboy makes for one of the hardest to shift horde units in the game.
And it's not like the Ork list had nothing heavier shooting could find use on. Meganobz made up almost a fifth of that list's points, and it also had three Mek Gunz and Ghazghkuul as well that anti-tank shooting could target. So over eight hundred points of that army consisted of high saving throw multi-wound models. By comparison, Boys consisted of 742 points. Add Gretchen and you get 792. Add the Kommandos and you get 852 points consisting of one wound infantry. Is that really "skewing heavily into infantry"?
I don't even disagree with the assertion that Marines are better than Orks, I think they are, but there is nothing lamer than someone playing a strong army complaining about that army's strength.
Couple of things. First, here is the breakdown of the Ork winner's opponents I did in the ork tactics thread. Ironically I pointed out what you just did, specifically that the Nuns with Gunz list was the closest the ork came to losing, and that is almost exclusively thanks to the mortifiers. But those Mortifiers were basically the only anti-infantry he brought. Exorcists get 6 shots for 4 hits and likely closer to 3 wounds. That isn't horde clearing. and while we are on the subject, LS Storms while fairly points efficient ,aren't anti-horde. 6 bolter shots (Cerberus launcher) and a Heavy bolter doesn't accomplish much. And the list that those were brought in had more anti-elite than anything, including 500pts of plasma inceptors and a bunch of Blade Guard. The ATV's also aren't good at Horde clearing when you give them Multi-meltas, 6 bolt shots, 4 hits, 2 wounds. Not exactly anything to write home about, especially not on an 85pt model.
Next, I am not "complaining about that army's strength". The point of this thread was what treatment GW was going to give nobz, and it got derailed by talking about boyz. As far as I am concerned orkz are in a good place right now, but that isn't because the army is inherently stronger than others in 9th but because the meta has shifted which brings out one of the favorite playstyles. As far as the ork player goes, he had 742pts of boyz, 110pts of Kommandos and 50pts of grotz. so just over 900pts of single wound infantry, he also had 3 HQ and 1 elite that were character protected (Weirdboy, Warboss, Big Mek, and painboy. 298pts). Based on the Weirdboy I would guess he either started the meganobz in reserve, teleporta striked, or hidden from view so he could da jump them. Nobody would foot slog meganobz. He also brough 3 Mek gunz in separate units for 120pts total. He brought 2 units of Meganobz for 380pts and finally he brought Ghaz for 300pts.
So the most the ork player had on the table at the start of the game of targetable multi-wound models was 3 mek gunz (120pts) and Ghaz (300pts) and since ghaz can only take 4dmg a phase he isn't a great target. I'm assuming the meganobz were either out of LOS or were most likely held in reserve to teleporta strike somewhere. But, even if they were on the table and in LOS (highly doubtful) thats only 780pts out of the list, and 300pts of that list can only lose 1/3rd of its wounds to shooting a turn.
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Simply put this community has a self-sustaining culture where marine bashing is acceptable and often encouraged.
Literally nobody in this thread has bashed or attacked Marine units, players, playstyles etc. Jidmah is pointing out that list tailoring is going on based on fighting the most common competitive list in the game right now, which is SM's featuring mutli-wound infantry.
I wasn't responding directly to Jidmah, I was answering Tyel why the community; not this thread admittedly, has a lot of marine complaint posts.
Void__Dragon wrote: The latest Ork top finish won out over a Space Marine and Sisters list that had plenty of horde mulching. Intercessors, infiltrators, invader atvs (they had meltas but they can just split fire), outriders, dark talons, and land speeder storms all have plenty of anti-infantry shooting.
The Sisters list had like twelve fething Mortifiers with flails which are built to mulch hordes and had plenty of anti-infantry shooting elsewhere. Even the Exorcists can at least do okay against Boys since they get some efficiency from blast.
But you want to know what makes Boys stand out from most other horde units?
They're T4. Suddenly most of that anti-infantry shooting that wounds hordes on 3s is now wounding them on 4s, and Mortifiers, which would be wounding gaunts on 2s are wounding them on 3s.
That this unit also has access to fairly trivial to use durability-buffing via KFF or a Painboy makes for one of the hardest to shift horde units in the game.
And it's not like the Ork list had nothing heavier shooting could find use on. Meganobz made up almost a fifth of that list's points, and it also had three Mek Gunz and Ghazghkuul as well that anti-tank shooting could target. So over eight hundred points of that army consisted of high saving throw multi-wound models. By comparison, Boys consisted of 742 points. Add Gretchen and you get 792. Add the Kommandos and you get 852 points consisting of one wound infantry. Is that really "skewing heavily into infantry"?
I don't even disagree with the assertion that Marines are better than Orks, I think they are, but there is nothing lamer than someone playing a strong army complaining about that army's strength.
Couple of things. First, here is the breakdown of the Ork winner's opponents I did in the ork tactics thread. Ironically I pointed out what you just did, specifically that the Nuns with Gunz list was the closest the ork came to losing, and that is almost exclusively thanks to the mortifiers. But those Mortifiers were basically the only anti-infantry he brought. Exorcists get 6 shots for 4 hits and likely closer to 3 wounds. That isn't horde clearing. and while we are on the subject, LS Storms while fairly points efficient ,aren't anti-horde. 6 bolter shots (Cerberus launcher) and a Heavy bolter doesn't accomplish much. And the list that those were brought in had more anti-elite than anything, including 500pts of plasma inceptors and a bunch of Blade Guard. The ATV's also aren't good at Horde clearing when you give them Multi-meltas, 6 bolt shots, 4 hits, 2 wounds. Not exactly anything to write home about, especially not on an 85pt model.
Next, I am not "complaining about that army's strength". The point of this thread was what treatment GW was going to give nobz, and it got derailed by talking about boyz. As far as I am concerned orkz are in a good place right now, but that isn't because the army is inherently stronger than others in 9th but because the meta has shifted which brings out one of the favorite playstyles. As far as the ork player goes, he had 742pts of boyz, 110pts of Kommandos and 50pts of grotz. so just over 900pts of single wound infantry, he also had 3 HQ and 1 elite that were character protected (Weirdboy, Warboss, Big Mek, and painboy. 298pts). Based on the Weirdboy I would guess he either started the meganobz in reserve, teleporta striked, or hidden from view so he could da jump them. Nobody would foot slog meganobz. He also brough 3 Mek gunz in separate units for 120pts total. He brought 2 units of Meganobz for 380pts and finally he brought Ghaz for 300pts.
So the most the ork player had on the table at the start of the game of targetable multi-wound models was 3 mek gunz (120pts) and Ghaz (300pts) and since ghaz can only take 4dmg a phase he isn't a great target. I'm assuming the meganobz were either out of LOS or were most likely held in reserve to teleporta strike somewhere. But, even if they were on the table and in LOS (highly doubtful) thats only 780pts out of the list, and 300pts of that list can only lose 1/3rd of its wounds to shooting a turn.
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Simply put this community has a self-sustaining culture where marine bashing is acceptable and often encouraged.
Literally nobody in this thread has bashed or attacked Marine units, players, playstyles etc. Jidmah is pointing out that list tailoring is going on based on fighting the most common competitive list in the game right now, which is SM's featuring mutli-wound infantry.
I wasn't responding directly to Jidmah, I was answering Tyel why the community; not this thread admittedly, has a lot of marine complaint posts.
Why is it that people hate/love this faction so much while harlequins, SoB, Daemons and Custodes who also score very well and have some extremely good units and synergies don't get this treatment ?
Marines get this treatment even when they are losing - always been this way. As you can see now with Custodes and Harliquens. People don't really care so much about imbalance specifically - because there is and always will be imbalance. You can't even rationalize with most of these people. They just hate marines. Like an older child that hates their younger sibling for getting all the attention except without any unconditional love at all.
Nope! You're wrong, you just aren't satisfied unless you have an unfair advantage with your marines over your opponent. This seems to be true of a lot of the most strident Astartes supporters both here and irl - they bought Astartes because they wanted to have an unfair advantage, since they're portrayed as the "best" army in fluff, and aren't satisfied if they don't get it.
Why is it that people hate/love this faction so much while harlequins, SoB, Daemons and Custodes who also score very well and have some extremely good units and synergies don't get this treatment ?
Marines get this treatment even when they are losing - always been this way. As you can see now with Custodes and Harliquens. People don't really care so much about imbalance specifically - because there is and always will be imbalance. You can't even rationalize with most of these people. They just hate marines. Like an older child that hates their younger sibling for getting all the attention except without any unconditional love at all.
Nope! You're wrong, you just aren't satisfied unless you have an unfair advantage with your marines over your opponent. This seems to be true of a lot of the most strident Astartes supporters both here and irl - they bought Astartes because they wanted to have an unfair advantage, since they're portrayed as the "best" army in fluff, and aren't satisfied if they don't get it.
I play about half of the armies. I am seeking no advantage in army choice. Marines are often on the lower end of power out of my army choices. Sure some power gamers went out and bought 3 repuslors executioners to spam in Ironhands supplement in the 8th eddition and flew them on top of 16 inch spires so they literally cant lose the game. Those players exists in every edition regardless of army. The same as all the Eldar armies a year earlier were just spamming as many eldar flyers as they could alitoc with protect fortune shinning spears wiping your army. The game could really use rules writters that understand they need to write rules with those players in mind.
I'm old enough to remember though when the same thing was being done with ork nobs to make an nearly indestructible kill unit of nobs.
Jidmah wrote: This. I also expect GW to address the lack of an anti-elite secondary soon, otherwise gak will totally hit the fan when DG and CSM go to two wound infantry as well.
There are a few extremely powerful things in Codex: Space Marines (eradicators, ATV, master apothecaries) which need to be addressed, but if the codex in general would be as powerful as everyone says, their winrate would be much higher, and we would be seeing more top marines placing on top. It's also worth noting that many top placements are bringing units specific to the new indices/supplements, like fenris wolves or deathwing, so they aren't winning despite tailoring against them, but because they simply dodge the primaris/gravis hate at the list building stage.
If the secondaries change a lot could change - but I'm not really sure on this Marine analysis.
As I see it there has been the odd event where there isn't a Marine player in the top 4 - but not many.
There is perhaps a sense of "why do people complain about Marines and not Harlequins/Custodes/Slaanesh" - but I think its because its harder to put the finger on the problem. (I think their stuff is just generally too cheap compared with other factions, but if you nerf it too much they could quickly go back to being rubbish.)
Simply put this community has a self-sustaining culture where marine bashing is acceptable and often encouraged.
And why is that ? Is there a specific reason or is it just human's madness at play ? Maybe if you guys tried to think about the core of the problem, idk...
I just arrived and I already identified several posters who are either marine-haters who think people who play them should be burnt on a cross, or hardcore marine-fanboys who will die before admitting they are even above average. What it leads to is very poor discussion.
Why is it that people hate/love this faction so much while harlequins, SoB, Daemons and Custodes who also score very well and have some extremely good units and synergies don't get this treatment ?
Marines get this treatment even when they are losing - always been this way. As you can see now with Custodes and Harliquens. People don't really care so much about imbalance specifically - because there is and always will be imbalance. You can't even rationalize with most of these people. They just hate marines. Like an older child that hates their younger sibling for getting all the attention except without any unconditional love at all.
In the case of orks. The army has generally always been good. Nobs have a much better history than terminators do for example. Right now the basic nob doesn't really have a place - though the mega nob does. Probably because their roll would be exactly the same as boys anyways. Should nobs just become troops and become the "primaris type ork" IDK...
Okay settle down Soulburst! Nobz are always going to be weak while powerful units like the stompa and squigbuggy ( it shoots exploding squigs! ) Are around. Also people hate marines because they will outgun, outlive and out reroll to victory every second match and other factions are probably only winning due to how the objective system works
Marines get this treatment even when they are losing - always been this way. As you can see now with Custodes and Harliquens. People don't really care so much about imbalance specifically - because there is and always will be imbalance. You can't even rationalize with most of these people. They just hate marines. Like an older child that hates their younger sibling for getting all the attention except without any unconditional love at all.
In the case of orks. The army has generally always been good. Nobs have a much better history than terminators do for example. Right now the basic nob doesn't really have a place - though the mega nob does. Probably because their roll would be exactly the same as boys anyways. Should nobs just become troops and become the "primaris type ork" IDK...
...wow.
Marines are currently getting this treatment because they went from being top 3 best armies in 7th, to being top 3 best in 8th (Sorry you don't agree, but they were, and tournament results prove this) and now are easily top 3 in 9th. So when you say they "are losing" you are referring to the 6ish months of Knights with loyal 32 dominating everyone else. And guess what? Nobody defended that lol, we were all upset about SOUP breaking the game.
As to why nobody is really upset with Harlequins/custodes. I mean, I haven't seen people screaming about them as much. But do they have unbelievably broken units like Eradicators or have a troop choice that out shoots firewarriors while also out fighting genestealers point for point? But really you probably don't see as much hate for them because they are combined still only a FRACTION of the size the SM player base. How many Harly/Custards do you see running around on a regular basis? I haven't fought either one since before COVID, and Ive been playing fairly regularly.
Now, into your next comment. Orkz have always been good..... Cool, you complain about the small part of 8th where your army wasn't top tier (Still wont tournaments and had top placing in major events) but orkz have always been good. Lets just gloss over all of 7th where they were arguably the absolute worst army in the entire game. And lets also forget the only reason they were competitive in 5th-6th was because they benefited from the editions new rules and hadn't had a new codex to fix these issues since 4th.
Nobz need damage upgrades and a point decrease. That alone would make them worth taking. A strong melee unit that can dish out a ton of dmg in CC but isn't anywhere near as tough to remove as meganobz. Likewise I think Meganobz need a hefty increase in durability but they don't need a dmg increase. I would like to see Nobz being the dmg unit and meganobz being the tough/durable unit. Both fulfill different roles and both can do either job ok, but excel at their 1 speciality.
The thread's topic is "What is going to happen to Ork Nobz", I would appreciate if talk about any marines that are not in the process of getting punched by nobz would be taken elsewhere.
I think if we keep their statline, Nobz should get:
- Base Nob cost 15pts
- Free: Choppa (that we will name "Nob choppa") go S "user" AP1 D1 + the wielder can make 1 additional attack
- +5pts: Big choppa go to S+2 AP2 D2
- +10pts: PK should go Sx2 AP3 D3 with -1 to hit
At that I would add a rule for them to get +1S when charged, they charge or heroic intervention. That way Nobz would get S6 base, big choppa S8 and PK S12
- Make the FnP from cyborg body go to 5+ and make it available to all models in the unit
I would also make the special equipment worthwile:
For every 5 Nob in the unit, 1 nob can take either:
+10pts: Buzzsaw Sx2 AP5 dd3 with -1 to hit, against vehicles dmg goes to d3+3
+10pts: Spike S "user" AP2 D1 if you successfully damage a unit with this weapon, reduce that unit's fall back movement by 2" until next turn
For range, i would just make the kustom weapons assault 4 instead of 2, bring the flamer to 10" and give the rockit +1 to hit against vehicles.
Mr Raptor wrote: I think if we keep their statline, Nobz should get:
- Base Nob cost 15pts
- Free: Choppa (that we will name "Nob choppa") go S "user" AP1 D1 + the wielder can make 1 additional attack
- +5pts: Big choppa go to S+2 AP2 D2
- +10pts: PK should go Sx2 AP3 D3 with -1 to hit
At that I would add a rule for them to get +1S when charged, they charge or heroic intervention. That way Nobz would get S6 base, big choppa S8 and PK S12
- Make the FnP from cyborg body go to 5+ and make it available to all models in the unit
I would also make the special equipment worthwile:
For every 5 Nob in the unit, 1 nob can take either:
+10pts: Buzzsaw Sx2 AP5 dd3 with -1 to hit, against vehicles dmg goes to d3+3
+10pts: Spike S "user" AP2 D1 if you successfully damage a unit with this weapon, reduce that unit's fall back movement by 2" until next turn
For range, i would just make the kustom weapons assault 4 instead of 2, bring the flamer to 10" and give the rockit +1 to hit against vehicles.
It's been a while but isn't cybork body a 5+ invuln anyway? It seems reasonable apart from the +1 strength. a 20 point model landing 3 s8 ap-2 d2 attacks seems a bit much.
These various buffs are fine and are also necessary.
Nobs becoming troops is the real answer, though. That would differentiate them from Mega Nobs in a significant way, and it would also allow me to go for a more elite army without burning my CP.
Hopefully if Deathskulls also retain their "Zog off" on all infantry, troops also count as double for holding an objective.
Dudeface wrote: It's been a while but isn't cybork body a 5+ invuln anyway? It seems reasonable apart from the +1 strength. a 20 point model landing 3 s8 ap-2 d2 attacks seems a bit much.
Cybork was nerfed to 6+ FNP and doubled in points in 7th. It was never changed back.
Mr Raptor wrote: The thing is, GW seems to have more and more prices be multiples of 5 recently, so I doubt they'll part from that much.
Also, without that +1S that means regular nobz are still not really threatening at all, so why even take them ?
They are already Base S5. So their strength isn't the issue. The issue I have with them is that when you give them the decent weapons (Big Choppa, Saw, PK) you lose the +1 attack and you suffer -1 to hit on the PK and Saw. Conversely, if you gave them +1 attack and/or WS2+ they would be a lot better at dealing damage. I can't tell you the number of times I have had my PK nob fail miserably in CC.
Why is it that people hate/love this faction so much while harlequins, SoB, Daemons and Custodes who also score very well and have some extremely good units and synergies don't get this treatment ?
Marines get this treatment even when they are losing - always been this way. As you can see now with Custodes and Harliquens. People don't really care so much about imbalance specifically - because there is and always will be imbalance. You can't even rationalize with most of these people. They just hate marines. Like an older child that hates their younger sibling for getting all the attention except without any unconditional love at all.
Nope! You're wrong, you just aren't satisfied unless you have an unfair advantage with your marines over your opponent. This seems to be true of a lot of the most strident Astartes supporters both here and irl - they bought Astartes because they wanted to have an unfair advantage, since they're portrayed as the "best" army in fluff, and aren't satisfied if they don't get it.
I play about half of the armies. I am seeking no advantage in army choice. Marines are often on the lower end of power out of my army choices. Sure some power gamers went out and bought 3 repuslors executioners to spam in Ironhands supplement in the 8th eddition and flew them on top of 16 inch spires so they literally cant lose the game. Those players exists in every edition regardless of army. The same as all the Eldar armies a year earlier were just spamming as many eldar flyers as they could alitoc with protect fortune shinning spears wiping your army. The game could really use rules writters that understand they need to write rules with those players in mind.
I'm old enough to remember though when the same thing was being done with ork nobs to make an nearly indestructible kill unit of nobs.
You're factually wrong, but I'll respect the mod team and not drag it out.
Dudeface wrote: It's been a while but isn't cybork body a 5+ invuln anyway? It seems reasonable apart from the +1 strength. a 20 point model landing 3 s8 ap-2 d2 attacks seems a bit much.
Cybork was nerfed to 6+ FNP and doubled in points in 7th. It was never changed back.
That seems like a fractal representation of how GW treats orks. They don't seem to want the army to be good.
Some of their best/good units have been slapped with insane price hike (SAG, killa kanz, gretchins...) and a lot of the units they have don't work well.
But with the 9th meta certains builds manage to be decent, or even competitive. And I feel like the orks can compete with what they have against even the best armies in the current meta. But the internal balance is awful.
Some of their best/good units have been slapped with insane price hike (SAG, killa kanz, gretchins...) and a lot of the units they have don't work well.
But with the 9th meta certains builds manage to be decent, or even competitive. And I feel like the orks can compete with what they have against even the best armies in the current meta. But the internal balance is awful.
Orks are a spoiler army that make some powerful skew lists. Always have been. When Orks do a thing, it's always in full tilt, and trying to go half way makes a list that's worse than the sum of it's parts. This is particularly good when going horde, because most people build towards dealing with marines (9th in particular, but also in general) and getting people to take actual anti-horde weapons and not just their basic infantry weapons is like asking someone to remove their own knee caps.
Meh just give orks a growing WAAAAGH mechanic. You know each faction is going to get their flavour of Doctrines so lets not pretend otherwise. Probably going to be some gak like
Little Waaaaaaaagh!
Choose one effect that is always active - When Charging you can reroll any die result less than or equal to the turn number
- The turn when a unit you control charges, each model gains +1 A
- Any bonus weapon hits from Dakka Dakka Dakka gain 1 AP
Da Big WAAAAGH
Before the game secretly write down a turn number and your WAAAAGH. Once per game on that turn you can activate your chosen BIG WAAAAGH. This cannot be used if your warboss is dead - For this fight phase, all Ork units must resolve their fights before activating any opponent unit
- For this shooting phase, Dakka Dakka Dakka can now generate additional Dakka Dakka Dakka shots
- All your embarked units can fight this turn as if they had the < BOARDIN PARTY > stratagem active
Eonfuzz wrote: Meh just give orks a growing WAAAAGH mechanic. You know each faction is going to get their flavour of Doctrines so lets not pretend otherwise. Probably going to be some gak like
Little Waaaaaaaagh!
Choose one effect that is always active - When Charging you can reroll any die result less than or equal to the turn number
- The turn when a unit you control charges, each model gains +1 A
- Any bonus weapon hits from Dakka Dakka Dakka gain 1 AP
Da Big WAAAAGH
Before the game secretly write down a turn number and your WAAAAGH. Once per game on that turn you can activate your chosen BIG WAAAAGH. This cannot be used if your warboss is dead - For this fight phase, all Ork units must resolve their fights before activating any opponent unit
- For this shooting phase, Dakka Dakka Dakka can now generate additional Dakka Dakka Dakka shots
- All your embarked units can fight this turn as if they had the < BOARDIN PARTY > stratagem active
Orkz already have rerolling dice on the charge for most units (Ere We Go). The +1 attack would be nice, especially if it stacks with Ghaz buff. The DDD buff might as well just disappear. Orkz have a 1/6 chance to get DDD, they then have a 1/3rd chance to get a hit with that DDD shot, and either a 1/2 or a 2/3rd chance to wound usually. DDD is so miniscule as to be mostly irrelevant, its a nice fluffy rule that helps occasionally but nobody would take that proposal (Please keep in mind I am offering constructive criticism).
All the "Big Waaagh" abilities are basically useless with the exception of the 1st one which has a least some merit, but its an incredibly small buff and very hard to use correctly based on the conditions you set.
The DDD one, lets say you have 30 shoota boyz miraculously all in range. Thats 60 shots and 20 hits. 10 DDD shots which result in 3.33 more hits. Those 3.33 are roughly 1.67 extra DDD shots which therefore generate another 0.56 hits.
60 shots with that big Waaagh ability generate 0.56 extra hits. Does that seem worth much to you? Now, if they changed the DDD rule to be similar to the Marine ones which is hit rolls of 6 generate an extra HIT than I would be onboard, but as it stands this ability is just about useless.
The final Big waaagh ability suffers the exact same way as the 1st one. Its incredibly random and almost never going to be used because you have to get your embarked units into CC on the exact turn you set your Waaagh to go off on, not exactly a sure fire thing.
I do hope you are correct and everyone else starts to get similar buffs to that of the SM codex, but the ones you've listed would be almost no buff at all.
some bloke wrote: I wonder what would happen regarding Nobs if they made them cheaper, restricted their special weapons, and allowed them in squads up to 20 models?
They would be elites still, but elite at what orks do well - big mobs of things that want to hit you hard. I'd certainly try a unit of 20 ork nobs with 50% of them wielding klaws & saws. Technically you can do it already, with mob up, but now you could feasibly use mob up to get 30 nobs hitting the enemy.
They could also have the same rule as boys, but for over 10 models they gain an attack. There is zero reason, fluffwise, why nobs wouldn't form big mobs.
There is a (fluff) reason for this: Nobz don't like eachother.
They see one another as competition and each think they're the best. So when thrown together they're liable to fight amongst themselves for dominance. A basically perpetual cycle until there's only one of them left. The way around this is to give them a larger and clearly defined leader to keep them in line. A warboss, basically.
The 3ed codex actually only let you take units of Nobz as a retinue for a warboss for that reason. Otherwise you'd only ever find one nob per squad, as they'd MUCH rather be bullying a bunch of boyz that do as they're told / can be easily krumped if they talk back. This was still semi-present in the 4th edition codex where taking a Warboss allowed you t otake a unit of Nobz as troops, to represent his personal retinue.
I'm also, personally, not a fan of Nobz just being "Boyz+1." I don't have an issue with them being troops, but I do believe that their ability to be fully customized (bikes, special guns, special melee weapons, mega armor (as a different unit) is critical to their identity.
I mean, if they cannot stand each others, then why does the Nob unit even exist ? They even have a "boss nob" acting as a sergeant.
I'm not disagreeing, just being rhetorical btw.
A good whaaag bonus could that on the turn of the Whaaag, roll d6+6 for all charges instead of 2d6. Mobility is always great.
Nuns with guns have a similar ability after all.
Eonfuzz wrote: Meh just give orks a growing WAAAAGH mechanic. You know each faction is going to get their flavour of Doctrines so lets not pretend otherwise. Probably going to be some gak like
Little Waaaaaaaagh!
Choose one effect that is always active - When Charging you can reroll any die result less than or equal to the turn number
- The turn when a unit you control charges, each model gains +1 A
- Any bonus weapon hits from Dakka Dakka Dakka gain 1 AP
Da Big WAAAAGH
Before the game secretly write down a turn number and your WAAAAGH. Once per game on that turn you can activate your chosen BIG WAAAAGH. This cannot be used if your warboss is dead - For this fight phase, all Ork units must resolve their fights before activating any opponent unit
- For this shooting phase, Dakka Dakka Dakka can now generate additional Dakka Dakka Dakka shots
- All your embarked units can fight this turn as if they had the < BOARDIN PARTY > stratagem active
Orkz already have rerolling dice on the charge for most units (Ere We Go). The +1 attack would be nice, especially if it stacks with Ghaz buff. The DDD buff might as well just disappear. Orkz have a 1/6 chance to get DDD, they then have a 1/3rd chance to get a hit with that DDD shot, and either a 1/2 or a 2/3rd chance to wound usually. DDD is so miniscule as to be mostly irrelevant, its a nice fluffy rule that helps occasionally but nobody would take that proposal (Please keep in mind I am offering constructive criticism).
All the "Big Waaagh" abilities are basically useless with the exception of the 1st one which has a least some merit, but its an incredibly small buff and very hard to use correctly based on the conditions you set.
The DDD one, lets say you have 30 shoota boyz miraculously all in range. Thats 60 shots and 20 hits. 10 DDD shots which result in 3.33 more hits. Those 3.33 are roughly 1.67 extra DDD shots which therefore generate another 0.56 hits.
60 shots with that big Waaagh ability generate 0.56 extra hits. Does that seem worth much to you? Now, if they changed the DDD rule to be similar to the Marine ones which is hit rolls of 6 generate an extra HIT than I would be onboard, but as it stands this ability is just about useless.
The final Big waaagh ability suffers the exact same way as the 1st one. Its incredibly random and almost never going to be used because you have to get your embarked units into CC on the exact turn you set your Waaagh to go off on, not exactly a sure fire thing.
I do hope you are correct and everyone else starts to get similar buffs to that of the SM codex, but the ones you've listed would be almost no buff at all.
Those buffs I wrote all doing basically nothing at all? Semper, it's almost like I wrote it like a GamesWorkshop designer would have.
some bloke wrote: I wonder what would happen regarding Nobs if they made them cheaper, restricted their special weapons, and allowed them in squads up to 20 models?
They would be elites still, but elite at what orks do well - big mobs of things that want to hit you hard. I'd certainly try a unit of 20 ork nobs with 50% of them wielding klaws & saws. Technically you can do it already, with mob up, but now you could feasibly use mob up to get 30 nobs hitting the enemy.
They could also have the same rule as boys, but for over 10 models they gain an attack. There is zero reason, fluffwise, why nobs wouldn't form big mobs.
There is a (fluff) reason for this: Nobz don't like eachother.
They see one another as competition and each think they're the best. So when thrown together they're liable to fight amongst themselves for dominance. A basically perpetual cycle until there's only one of them left. The way around this is to give them a larger and clearly defined leader to keep them in line. A warboss, basically.
The 3ed codex actually only let you take units of Nobz as a retinue for a warboss for that reason. Otherwise you'd only ever find one nob per squad, as they'd MUCH rather be bullying a bunch of boyz that do as they're told / can be easily krumped if they talk back. This was still semi-present in the 4th edition codex where taking a Warboss allowed you t otake a unit of Nobz as troops, to represent his personal retinue.
I'm also, personally, not a fan of Nobz just being "Boyz+1." I don't have an issue with them being troops, but I do believe that their ability to be fully customized (bikes, special guns, special melee weapons, mega armor (as a different unit) is critical to their identity.
Honestly I've always thought the typical army structure doesn't befit an Orky waaagh. I think we *should* have to take copious amounts of boys or gretchin or bikers to "unlock" access to our more specialist units.
Making Nobz Boyz+++11 but use up one of the "unlocked" slots could be a really, really interesting trade off.
Eonfuzz wrote: Meh just give orks a growing WAAAAGH mechanic. You know each faction is going to get their flavour of Doctrines so lets not pretend otherwise. Probably going to be some gak like
Little Waaaaaaaagh!
Choose one effect that is always active - When Charging you can reroll any die result less than or equal to the turn number
- The turn when a unit you control charges, each model gains +1 A
- Any bonus weapon hits from Dakka Dakka Dakka gain 1 AP
Da Big WAAAAGH
Before the game secretly write down a turn number and your WAAAAGH. Once per game on that turn you can activate your chosen BIG WAAAAGH. This cannot be used if your warboss is dead - For this fight phase, all Ork units must resolve their fights before activating any opponent unit
- For this shooting phase, Dakka Dakka Dakka can now generate additional Dakka Dakka Dakka shots
- All your embarked units can fight this turn as if they had the < BOARDIN PARTY > stratagem active
Orkz already have rerolling dice on the charge for most units (Ere We Go). The +1 attack would be nice, especially if it stacks with Ghaz buff. The DDD buff might as well just disappear. Orkz have a 1/6 chance to get DDD, they then have a 1/3rd chance to get a hit with that DDD shot, and either a 1/2 or a 2/3rd chance to wound usually. DDD is so miniscule as to be mostly irrelevant, its a nice fluffy rule that helps occasionally but nobody would take that proposal (Please keep in mind I am offering constructive criticism).
All the "Big Waaagh" abilities are basically useless with the exception of the 1st one which has a least some merit, but its an incredibly small buff and very hard to use correctly based on the conditions you set.
The DDD one, lets say you have 30 shoota boyz miraculously all in range. Thats 60 shots and 20 hits. 10 DDD shots which result in 3.33 more hits. Those 3.33 are roughly 1.67 extra DDD shots which therefore generate another 0.56 hits.
60 shots with that big Waaagh ability generate 0.56 extra hits. Does that seem worth much to you? Now, if they changed the DDD rule to be similar to the Marine ones which is hit rolls of 6 generate an extra HIT than I would be onboard, but as it stands this ability is just about useless.
The final Big waaagh ability suffers the exact same way as the 1st one. Its incredibly random and almost never going to be used because you have to get your embarked units into CC on the exact turn you set your Waaagh to go off on, not exactly a sure fire thing.
I do hope you are correct and everyone else starts to get similar buffs to that of the SM codex, but the ones you've listed would be almost no buff at all.
Those buffs I wrote all doing basically nothing at all? Semper, it's almost like I wrote it like a GamesWorkshop designer would have.
Ok, I honestly laughed out loud when I read this! Sadly you are correct.
The simple solution would be to make meganobz tankier than regular nobz. and a 2+ isn't making them tankier, especially in a meta where melta is the new weapon of choice. Kind of how Heavy intercessors are just tankier intercessors with better long range guns. And before anyone gets upset, I am not remotely talking about the utility/competitiveness of Heavy Intercessors, just pointing out that differences between similar units can exist.
and were primarily used on...nobz.
