Switch Theme:

How much do you think Boyz will cost per model?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
How much will boyz cost with T5 and AP-1 Choppas?
7pts
8pts
9pts
10pts
11pts
12pts
13pts
14pts
15pts

View results
Author Message
Advert


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




Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Mr. Grey wrote:
 The Red Hobbit wrote:
GW tends to start high then adjust points lower. So I think Boyz will start 10-11 then shift down to 9-10 over time.

On the brightside if they start off at 10-11ppm GW may be comfortable enough to improve Shoota Boyz and make them worthwhile.


That strategy hasn't seemed to apply to the Stompa so far, which since the beginning of 8th, even with a number of Chapter Approveds, is probably still 300+ points too expensive for what you get out of it.


The Stompa has been horribly priced since...forever I believe. The only time they were considered playable was a brief period in 7th edition where the FW version got a typo and was basically half the price. Think about that for a second, it was half the price and it was still barely competitive. Imagine any other faction getting a Lord of War, Super Heavy Titan for HALF their current price. The game would be so ridiculously unfair as to be all but unplayable. For orkz, it was a flash in the pan of the Stompa being playable, no major events were won though.

GW has a tendency not to correctly price ork things, and usually when they guess, its always on the high end, and they RARELY correctly price it after that. Look at the Squigbuggy. Unarguably the worst of the new buggies, it was also priced the most heavily at 140pts when it was first released. And here we sit, years later and its gotten 30ppm cheaper, that is a 21% price cut, should be good now right? Nope, still hot garbage. And the playable buggies have only gotten worse as more rules/codexs and prices come out.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Look dude this is common sense.

Orks have bad BS right? So if we just double the number of shots they have they'll hit just as much on average and it will be fair right? No...because when they roll well - the impact is magnified by 2x.


"Its got what orkz crave, it's got electrolytes".

Clearly the answer isn't to make orks better at shooting because than they might be impactful. No, the answer is to let them be god awful so Xeno can beat them occasionally.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
honestly that is the issue of a lot of ork shooting its swingy, super effective or super not. Also a lot of thing they do to even things out don't really work.

as an example take the loota (RIP has not seen a table this edition) for 20 points its a normal boy with a deffgun so seemingly the deffgun is worth 12 points, on a T4 body with a 6+ save. that gun is D3 shots which ok might be great but rather than D3 per model in the unit to maybe even things out you roll on dice and if you have 15 lootas in the squad its the difference between 15, 30, or 45 shots. Orks used to be BS4 but for some reason it was decided they should be worse at shooting. i would prefer just for example 2 flat shots out of a loota gun and a bs4 than what they currently have (even if it meant losing ddd, cause consistency would beat swingy)


Lets look at lootas. They got beaten with the nerf bat because people like Xenomancer complained about how good they were. Lootas haven't been good since 7th and even then it was...meh. What was good about lootas was being able to use the stratagem Mob up for 1CP, to get 25 lootas into 1 unit, than you spend 2CP to give them Moar dakka and than 3 CP to give them shoot twice, also 1CP to reroll number of shots to try for at least 2 shots on the 1/3rd chance you rolled a 1-2. Also, you needed to spend another 1 CP and buy 30-60 grots to babysit the Lootas. So 25 Lootas, 30-60 grots, and 8CP a turn and 6 CP a turn after that. That made them competitive, not game breaking great, but definitely high end competitive. That all ended up averaging 50 shots x 2 a turn at BS 4 (reroll 1s and exploding 5s and 6s ends up with right around BS4). Total cost was around 630pts.

Now because those people complained the lootas went up in price 2ppm, they lost the ability to mob up and guess what that did? effectively killed the loota and in turn, the Bad Moonz kulture. Orkz don't really have a unit worth shooting twice with for 3CP. Hell, shooting again twice for 1 CP with most of our units would be a questionable call

How about the SAG? Players complained about that because the theoretical dmg for it was astronomical. 1D6 shots at 2D6 strength. Unit was good for a change but was it game breaking at 60ppm? No. At 1D6 shots you averaged 1.3 hits a turn. S2D6 averaged 7, dmg averaged 3.5 Apparently this was so amazing though that GW had to increase the price to 120ppm. How many SAG Big Mekz have you seen since that happened?

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






Voss wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
This unit is more than capable of destroying or crippling up to 5 units a turn. To deny this is utter insanity. Sorry I don't like the game to be decided by whether my opponent is spiking more 6's than average. The potential damage is too high.


See, this is why no one takes your opinion seriously.

Even if he rolls all sixes on all number of shots and all hit rolls and gets 36 shots out of both the deffkannon and both times the gatler shoots and then wounds all those dice and you fail all your saves... that's still just four dead units.

It also won't happening more than once during this planet's lifetime because it's so unlikely.

According to that logic, a full unit of assault helblasters should be 1000 points - after all, the have the potential to kill 10 ork buggies per turn.


Look dude this is common sense.

Orks have bad BS right? So if we just double the number of shots they have they'll hit just as much on average and it will be fair right? No...because when they roll well - the impact is magnified by 2x.


Definitely not 'common sense.' More just 'bad at statistics'

When you are being wrong...you should probably not insult people. This is brain dead common sense stuff.

and while the average to get at least 1 hit on 2 shots on 5's is 56% and a single shot htting on 3's is 66%. You get the idea. The chance of getting 2 hits on the single shot gun hitting on 3's is 0%.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Xenomancers wrote:

That is true. That is why I call it lightning damage. In diablo there were several kinds of damage - lightning damage was the most swingy with a damage range of like 1-49 where fire damage was a consistent 24 or so (just a general idea) - which is best? Well if you both sit back and take 100 shots there wont be much difference but the lightning damage is going to threshhold a mob sometimes in a single shot or 2 but the fire damage takes a minimum of 3 hits to kill a mob. So...the lightning is clearly superior as you rarely have time to sit still and shoot more than 2-3 shots anyways. 40k is similar in this sense. Since Alpha strike is really all that matters - large damage results is all that matters.


So your complaint with Orkz now is that they are swingy, and occasionally they get good swingy dmg and you feel this shouldn't happen. Cool. Give us reliable dmg like Marines or Cronz get. Whats that? You don't like the idea of Orkz being reliable. Ah, so you basically just want orkz to suck at shooting. roger.

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






SemperMortis wrote:
 Mr. Grey wrote:
 The Red Hobbit wrote:
GW tends to start high then adjust points lower. So I think Boyz will start 10-11 then shift down to 9-10 over time.

On the brightside if they start off at 10-11ppm GW may be comfortable enough to improve Shoota Boyz and make them worthwhile.


That strategy hasn't seemed to apply to the Stompa so far, which since the beginning of 8th, even with a number of Chapter Approveds, is probably still 300+ points too expensive for what you get out of it.


The Stompa has been horribly priced since...forever I believe. The only time they were considered playable was a brief period in 7th edition where the FW version got a typo and was basically half the price. Think about that for a second, it was half the price and it was still barely competitive. Imagine any other faction getting a Lord of War, Super Heavy Titan for HALF their current price. The game would be so ridiculously unfair as to be all but unplayable. For orkz, it was a flash in the pan of the Stompa being playable, no major events were won though.

GW has a tendency not to correctly price ork things, and usually when they guess, its always on the high end, and they RARELY correctly price it after that. Look at the Squigbuggy. Unarguably the worst of the new buggies, it was also priced the most heavily at 140pts when it was first released. And here we sit, years later and its gotten 30ppm cheaper, that is a 21% price cut, should be good now right? Nope, still hot garbage. And the playable buggies have only gotten worse as more rules/codexs and prices come out.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Look dude this is common sense.

Orks have bad BS right? So if we just double the number of shots they have they'll hit just as much on average and it will be fair right? No...because when they roll well - the impact is magnified by 2x.


"Its got what orkz crave, it's got electrolytes".

Clearly the answer isn't to make orks better at shooting because than they might be impactful. No, the answer is to let them be god awful so Xeno can beat them occasionally.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
honestly that is the issue of a lot of ork shooting its swingy, super effective or super not. Also a lot of thing they do to even things out don't really work.

as an example take the loota (RIP has not seen a table this edition) for 20 points its a normal boy with a deffgun so seemingly the deffgun is worth 12 points, on a T4 body with a 6+ save. that gun is D3 shots which ok might be great but rather than D3 per model in the unit to maybe even things out you roll on dice and if you have 15 lootas in the squad its the difference between 15, 30, or 45 shots. Orks used to be BS4 but for some reason it was decided they should be worse at shooting. i would prefer just for example 2 flat shots out of a loota gun and a bs4 than what they currently have (even if it meant losing ddd, cause consistency would beat swingy)


Lets look at lootas. They got beaten with the nerf bat because people like Xenomancer complained about how good they were. Lootas haven't been good since 7th and even then it was...meh. What was good about lootas was being able to use the stratagem Mob up for 1CP, to get 25 lootas into 1 unit, than you spend 2CP to give them Moar dakka and than 3 CP to give them shoot twice, also 1CP to reroll number of shots to try for at least 2 shots on the 1/3rd chance you rolled a 1-2. Also, you needed to spend another 1 CP and buy 30-60 grots to babysit the Lootas. So 25 Lootas, 30-60 grots, and 8CP a turn and 6 CP a turn after that. That made them competitive, not game breaking great, but definitely high end competitive. That all ended up averaging 50 shots x 2 a turn at BS 4 (reroll 1s and exploding 5s and 6s ends up with right around BS4). Total cost was around 630pts.

Now because those people complained the lootas went up in price 2ppm, they lost the ability to mob up and guess what that did? effectively killed the loota and in turn, the Bad Moonz kulture. Orkz don't really have a unit worth shooting twice with for 3CP. Hell, shooting again twice for 1 CP with most of our units would be a questionable call

How about the SAG? Players complained about that because the theoretical dmg for it was astronomical. 1D6 shots at 2D6 strength. Unit was good for a change but was it game breaking at 60ppm? No. At 1D6 shots you averaged 1.3 hits a turn. S2D6 averaged 7, dmg averaged 3.5 Apparently this was so amazing though that GW had to increase the price to 120ppm. How many SAG Big Mekz have you seen since that happened?

SAG was just about as bad of an idea for a weapon as t5 orks are for this game. Just FYI - T4 orks do just fine. Orks currently have a higher win rate than marines in competitive 40k.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




SemperMortis 798896 11151129 wrote:

So your complaint with Orkz now is that they are swingy, and occasionally they get good swingy dmg and you feel this shouldn't happen. Cool. Give us reliable dmg like Marines or Cronz get. Whats that? You don't like the idea of Orkz being reliable. Ah, so you basically just want orkz to suck at shooting. roger.


But that would make no sense. even with swingy damage orks have a higher win rate then most space marine armies throught out 9th ed.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Xenomancers wrote:
[
SAG was just about as bad of an idea for a weapon as t5 orks are for this game. Just FYI - T4 orks do just fine. Orks currently have a higher win rate than marines in competitive 40k.


Well, i'm super happy that the Marine/necron player who doesn't play orkz thinks a weapon that has been around longer than his Cronz army was a bad idea and that Orkz at T4 are doing just fine because of an irrelevant statistic like W/L in tournaments. Hey Xeno, did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the reason SM's aren't running away with tournaments more than they are is because literally EVERYONE at tournaments builds there list to kill Marines?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote:
SemperMortis 798896 11151129 wrote:

So your complaint with Orkz now is that they are swingy, and occasionally they get good swingy dmg and you feel this shouldn't happen. Cool. Give us reliable dmg like Marines or Cronz get. Whats that? You don't like the idea of Orkz being reliable. Ah, so you basically just want orkz to suck at shooting. roger.


But that would make no sense. even with swingy damage orks have a higher win rate then most space marine armies throught out 9th ed.


Same thing I said to Xeno. How well do you think orkz would do if everyone tailored their lists to kill orkz like they do Space Marines?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/16 19:26:31


 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Same thing I said to Xeno. How well do you think orkz would do if everyone tailored their lists to kill orkz like they do Space Marines?

I don't understand the reasoning behind the question. Orks are not popular enough for that to happen. And everyone was trying to meta against DE, all it achived was a slight drop in win rate, it is still the top army win rate wise out there. And that is with people having more then enough time to adjust to the army.

Hey Xeno, did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the reason SM's aren't running away with tournaments more than they are is because literally EVERYONE at tournaments builds there list to kill Marines?

But first it is not just tournaments, and second at tournaments if someone goes full anti marine meta, then they better be friends with the judges or the person who does the match ups, so they get those 2 DA games in match 3-5, because if they run in to SoB, DE or orks they are going to be very sad about their results.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/16 19:43:56


If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






Karol wrote:
Same thing I said to Xeno. How well do you think orkz would do if everyone tailored their lists to kill orkz like they do Space Marines?

I don't understand the reasoning behind the question. Orks are not popular enough for that to happen. And everyone was trying to meta against DE, all it achived was a slight drop in win rate, it is still the top army win rate wise out there. And that is with people having more then enough time to adjust to the army.

Hey Xeno, did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the reason SM's aren't running away with tournaments more than they are is because literally EVERYONE at tournaments builds there list to kill Marines?

But first it is not just tournaments, and second at tournaments if someone goes full anti marine meta, then they better be friends with the judges or the person who does the match ups, so they get those 2 DA games in match 3-5, because if they run in to SoB, DE or orks they are going to be very sad about their results.


honestly this is one of the things warmachine got very very right. you should produce your main army list but also ahve a sidebaord so that you can choose to adjust based on what you are facing. the core of the army mostly stays the same but you get a few things to play around with to adjust. ideally it'd just be "ok i am playing against space marines (not having seen the other's list), i'll sub in squad x with lower ap weapons" not huge amounts of points but a few squads for most armies to swap. if that same player is facing dark eldar maybe higher volume of shots less dependant on ap is the way to go.

10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 G00fySmiley wrote:
Karol wrote:
Same thing I said to Xeno. How well do you think orkz would do if everyone tailored their lists to kill orkz like they do Space Marines?

I don't understand the reasoning behind the question. Orks are not popular enough for that to happen. And everyone was trying to meta against DE, all it achived was a slight drop in win rate, it is still the top army win rate wise out there. And that is with people having more then enough time to adjust to the army.

Hey Xeno, did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the reason SM's aren't running away with tournaments more than they are is because literally EVERYONE at tournaments builds there list to kill Marines?

But first it is not just tournaments, and second at tournaments if someone goes full anti marine meta, then they better be friends with the judges or the person who does the match ups, so they get those 2 DA games in match 3-5, because if they run in to SoB, DE or orks they are going to be very sad about their results.


honestly this is one of the things warmachine got very very right. you should produce your main army list but also ahve a sidebaord so that you can choose to adjust based on what you are facing. the core of the army mostly stays the same but you get a few things to play around with to adjust. ideally it'd just be "ok i am playing against space marines (not having seen the other's list), i'll sub in squad x with lower ap weapons" not huge amounts of points but a few squads for most armies to swap. if that same player is facing dark eldar maybe higher volume of shots less dependant on ap is the way to go.

Absolutely agree. Units with weapon options should be able to chose them at the very minimum pregame.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

Spoiler:
  Xenomancers wrote:
 G00fySmiley wrote:
Karol wrote:
Same thing I said to Xeno. How well do you think orkz would do if everyone tailored their lists to kill orkz like they do Space Marines?

I don't understand the reasoning behind the question. Orks are not popular enough for that to happen. And everyone was trying to meta against DE, all it achived was a slight drop in win rate, it is still the top army win rate wise out there. And that is with people having more then enough time to adjust to the army.

Hey Xeno, did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the reason SM's aren't running away with tournaments more than they are is because literally EVERYONE at tournaments builds there list to kill Marines?

But first it is not just tournaments, and second at tournaments if someone goes full anti marine meta, then they better be friends with the judges or the person who does the match ups, so they get those 2 DA games in match 3-5, because if they run in to SoB, DE or orks they are going to be very sad about their results.


honestly this is one of the things warmachine got very very right. you should produce your main army list but also ahve a sidebaord so that you can choose to adjust based on what you are facing. the core of the army mostly stays the same but you get a few things to play around with to adjust. ideally it'd just be "ok i am playing against space marines (not having seen the other's list), i'll sub in squad x with lower ap weapons" not huge amounts of points but a few squads for most armies to swap. if that same player is facing dark eldar maybe higher volume of shots less dependant on ap is the way to go.

Absolutely agree. Units with weapon options should be able to chose them at the very minimum pregame.
Hm, wonder which army that would advantage.

Could it be Marines, who have lots of options in almost every unit?
Or could it be something like Daemons, who have virtually none?

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
[
SAG was just about as bad of an idea for a weapon as t5 orks are for this game. Just FYI - T4 orks do just fine. Orks currently have a higher win rate than marines in competitive 40k.


Well, i'm super happy that the Marine/necron player who doesn't play orkz thinks a weapon that has been around longer than his Cronz army was a bad idea and that Orkz at T4 are doing just fine because of an irrelevant statistic like W/L in tournaments. Hey Xeno, did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the reason SM's aren't running away with tournaments more than they are is because literally EVERYONE at tournaments builds there list to kill Marines?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote:
SemperMortis 798896 11151129 wrote:

So your complaint with Orkz now is that they are swingy, and occasionally they get good swingy dmg and you feel this shouldn't happen. Cool. Give us reliable dmg like Marines or Cronz get. Whats that? You don't like the idea of Orkz being reliable. Ah, so you basically just want orkz to suck at shooting. roger.


But that would make no sense. even with swingy damage orks have a higher win rate then most space marine armies throught out 9th ed.


Same thing I said to Xeno. How well do you think orkz would do if everyone tailored their lists to kill orkz like they do Space Marines?

No one is tailoring to kill marines lol. People bring the most efficent weapon a platform has vs a huge list of possible targets.
Know what else is on that list? Custodians/ Harliquens/ Dark Eldar / Deathgaurd....Show me the weapon profile that beats all of those? It doesn't exist. What it comes down to is - more shots is almost always the better solution - therefore...orks are already being "tailored against".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Spoiler:
  Xenomancers wrote:
 G00fySmiley wrote:
Karol wrote:
Same thing I said to Xeno. How well do you think orkz would do if everyone tailored their lists to kill orkz like they do Space Marines?

I don't understand the reasoning behind the question. Orks are not popular enough for that to happen. And everyone was trying to meta against DE, all it achived was a slight drop in win rate, it is still the top army win rate wise out there. And that is with people having more then enough time to adjust to the army.

Hey Xeno, did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the reason SM's aren't running away with tournaments more than they are is because literally EVERYONE at tournaments builds there list to kill Marines?

But first it is not just tournaments, and second at tournaments if someone goes full anti marine meta, then they better be friends with the judges or the person who does the match ups, so they get those 2 DA games in match 3-5, because if they run in to SoB, DE or orks they are going to be very sad about their results.


honestly this is one of the things warmachine got very very right. you should produce your main army list but also ahve a sidebaord so that you can choose to adjust based on what you are facing. the core of the army mostly stays the same but you get a few things to play around with to adjust. ideally it'd just be "ok i am playing against space marines (not having seen the other's list), i'll sub in squad x with lower ap weapons" not huge amounts of points but a few squads for most armies to swap. if that same player is facing dark eldar maybe higher volume of shots less dependant on ap is the way to go.

Absolutely agree. Units with weapon options should be able to chose them at the very minimum pregame.
Hm, wonder which army that would advantage.

Could it be Marines, who have lots of options in almost every unit?
Or could it be something like Daemons, who have virtually none?

Daemons can be summoned - it's the same thing except better than having weapon options.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/16 20:04:18


If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

Have you ever seen anyone use summoning well, Xeno?
I doubt it-because it’s not good. It’s not really versatile.

Whereas a Devastator squad swapping from Lascannons against tanks to Heavy Bolters against hordes doubles its power, more or less.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 JNAProductions wrote:
Have you ever seen anyone use summoning well, Xeno?
I doubt it-because it’s not good. It’s not really versatile.

Whereas a Devastator squad swapping from Lascannons against tanks to Heavy Bolters against hordes doubles its power, more or less.

Why does it suck so much? Because it can be denied?

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Have you ever seen anyone use summoning well, Xeno?
I doubt it-because it’s not good. It’s not really versatile.

Whereas a Devastator squad swapping from Lascannons against tanks to Heavy Bolters against hordes doubles its power, more or less.

Why does it suck so much? Because it can be denied?
No. it can’t be denied-but it can fail on its own.
It requires a character to not move at all.
It’s limited to what they’re marked as, so only Belakor and unmarked CSM can summon any faction of demons.
They have to appear near the (non-moving, remember) character, and away from enemy models.
They get no bonuses or strats.

And most daemon units are pretty similar to one another anyway.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 Xenomancers wrote:
Voss wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
Spoiler:
 Jidmah wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
This unit is more than capable of destroying or crippling up to 5 units a turn. To deny this is utter insanity. Sorry I don't like the game to be decided by whether my opponent is spiking more 6's than average. The potential damage is too high.


See, this is why no one takes your opinion seriously.

Even if he rolls all sixes on all number of shots and all hit rolls and gets 36 shots out of both the deffkannon and both times the gatler shoots and then wounds all those dice and you fail all your saves... that's still just four dead units.

It also won't happening more than once during this planet's lifetime because it's so unlikely.

According to that logic, a full unit of assault helblasters should be 1000 points - after all, the have the potential to kill 10 ork buggies per turn.


Look dude this is common sense.

Orks have bad BS right? So if we just double the number of shots they have they'll hit just as much on average and it will be fair right? No...because when they roll well - the impact is magnified by 2x.


Definitely not 'common sense.' More just 'bad at statistics'

When you are being wrong...you should probably not insult people. This is brain dead common sense stuff.

and while the average to get at least 1 hit on 2 shots on 5's is 56% and a single shot htting on 3's is 66%. You get the idea. The chance of getting 2 hits on the single shot gun hitting on 3's is 0%.


He is right though. The "common sense" behind dice rolls is called statistics and not a matter of opinion. It's also not "brain dead" stuff at all, especially since you clearly fail to understand how it works. Go read up what variance is before you keep making a fool out of yourself.

7 Ork facts people always get wrong:
Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other.
A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot.
Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests.
Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why.
Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor.
Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers.
Orks do not have the power of believe. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Xenomancers wrote:

No one is tailoring to kill marines lol. People bring the most efficent weapon a platform has vs a huge list of possible targets.
Know what else is on that list? Custodians/ Harliquens/ Dark Eldar / Deathgaurd....Show me the weapon profile that beats all of those? It doesn't exist. What it comes down to is - more shots is almost always the better solution - therefore...orks are already being "tailored against".

Karol wrote:
Same thing I said to Xeno. How well do you think orkz would do if everyone tailored their lists to kill orkz like they do Space Marines?

I don't understand the reasoning behind the question. Orks are not popular enough for that to happen. And everyone was trying to meta against DE, all it achived was a slight drop in win rate, it is still the top army win rate wise out there. And that is with people having more then enough time to adjust to the army.

But first it is not just tournaments, and second at tournaments if someone goes full anti marine meta, then they better be friends with the judges or the person who does the match ups, so they get those 2 DA games in match 3-5, because if they run in to SoB, DE or orks they are going to be very sad about their results.


Nobody is tailoring against Marines, and they are instead tailoring against Harlies, DE and Deathguard....k. Lets see

Last 40kstats tournament had double DE players winning 1st and 2nd (this is pre-nerf) I guess they just decided to bring 20pts of upgrades on a 40pt unit that has -2AP to kill those pesky 6+ save orkz and equally pesky fellow DE players with their 6+ save on their troops. Or...stay with me here...is it possibly a response to 3+ power armor spam? Meh, we will never know.

Maybe the other units they took were more general purpose, designed to kill lightly armored targets with 1 wound. Like say...those Incubi...with their -3AP 2dmg klaives...weird, that seems like the best weapon to target multi-wound power armored targets with...huh must be a coincidence...i'm sure the rest of the list isn't biased towards heavy armor and multi dmg....like these Raiders with their splinter...oh nope, those are Dark Lances with D3+3 dmg and -4AP. Not a great unit to target basically any faction except armor and elite infantry.


What about the other DE list, he didn't build it to target elite infantry right? ohh he did?...well poop.

What about the 3rd place SOB list?

Wow....thats a lot of Repentia with -3 AP D2 weapons...like 350pts worth....not exactly great for slaying hordes but really good at killing.....Marines.
Some seraphim...those can have flamers and be devastating against hordes! And they have Melta pistols...weird.
Wow that is a lot of retributor squads as well 6 Multi-meltas and 3 Heavy Flamers not exactly ideal for killing orkz or nids or Guardsmen but really good at elite infantry and vehicles.

I could literally go on all night and show you how most if not all lists that finish in the top 4 are going to be bringing significantly more anti-elite and anti-vehicle weapons than anti-horde or light/medium infantry weapons. But I doubt that would matter since you have this wondrous ability to be blissfully unaware of any information that deviates from your opinion. I could also state how I've played against GT tournament winners and their teams in major tournaments and they've flat out told me that they absolutely build their lists to beat Marine and Marine type lists, but again, it wouldn't matter. The main point here is that you are 100% wrong. If you go to a tournament right now and you aren't built to deal with Marines as one of your top priorities...if not THE top priority, well, you won't be advancing to the finals.

BTW, side note, in that GT I mentioned, about 16.6% of attendees were guaranteed Space Marine with another 2 players playing Custodes and 6 other lists only listed as Imperium (Excluding #3). The Armed forces day GT in Illinois saw 40% of all lists being Marines, Utahs Gamer Alliance GT was 28% Marines and ALSO the recent 256 person event in Atlantic city saw just shy of 25% of all lists being Space Marine not counting grey knights, custodes or Chaos of any sort.

So why would you list build against Marines? Because you are likely to play them in at least 1 game at major events And, if you includes Custodes, Grey Knights, Chaos Marines and SoB or to put it another way, Power Armor armies, you will find that the majority of your games in a tournament will be against them.

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

 Xenomancers wrote:

SAG was just about as bad of an idea for a weapon as t5 orks are for this game. Just FYI - T4 orks do just fine. Orks currently have a higher win rate than marines in competitive 40k.


No, they are not fine. In competitive 40k they get the results using skewed lists with tons of infantries or tons of vehicles. SM get the results with average collections of models using a bit of everything. This is the real goal, to make armies optimized without skewing, not just getting a solid win rate. The drukhari codex is a perfect example of how a codex should be designed: you can put a limit of 0-1 choices per unit and still have a very optimized list. SM codex is also good but somehow ruined by having 3000 datasheets and the rules bloat.

 
   
Made in ch
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Have you ever seen anyone use summoning well, Xeno?
I doubt it-because it’s not good. It’s not really versatile.

Whereas a Devastator squad swapping from Lascannons against tanks to Heavy Bolters against hordes doubles its power, more or less.

Why does it suck so much? Because it can be denied?
No. it can’t be denied-but it can fail on its own.
It requires a character to not move at all.
It’s limited to what they’re marked as, so only Belakor and unmarked CSM can summon any faction of demons.
They have to appear near the (non-moving, remember) character, and away from enemy models.
They get no bonuses or strats.

And most daemon units are pretty similar to one another anyway.


This.
Also if you build your list to not detonate on summoning you will run WB, and at that point the components you use for that list will work better as a possessed list regardless.
So there's virtually no point to summoning.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page
A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units."
Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?"
Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?"
GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!"
Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.  
   
Made in us
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






 Xenomancers wrote:
 G00fySmiley wrote:
Karol wrote:
Same thing I said to Xeno. How well do you think orkz would do if everyone tailored their lists to kill orkz like they do Space Marines?

I don't understand the reasoning behind the question. Orks are not popular enough for that to happen. And everyone was trying to meta against DE, all it achived was a slight drop in win rate, it is still the top army win rate wise out there. And that is with people having more then enough time to adjust to the army.

Hey Xeno, did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the reason SM's aren't running away with tournaments more than they are is because literally EVERYONE at tournaments builds there list to kill Marines?

But first it is not just tournaments, and second at tournaments if someone goes full anti marine meta, then they better be friends with the judges or the person who does the match ups, so they get those 2 DA games in match 3-5, because if they run in to SoB, DE or orks they are going to be very sad about their results.


honestly this is one of the things warmachine got very very right. you should produce your main army list but also ahve a sidebaord so that you can choose to adjust based on what you are facing. the core of the army mostly stays the same but you get a few things to play around with to adjust. ideally it'd just be "ok i am playing against space marines (not having seen the other's list), i'll sub in squad x with lower ap weapons" not huge amounts of points but a few squads for most armies to swap. if that same player is facing dark eldar maybe higher volume of shots less dependant on ap is the way to go.

Absolutely agree. Units with weapon options should be able to chose them at the very minimum pregame.


not exactly how a side board works, though you could somewhat do this with a few squads. you would have 15% of your army to work with and a set amount of units to swap in. much easier in power level games than points games but as an example you might in a 2000 point game you now have 300 points to swap in and out. If you wanted to say bring 2 devistator squads where both have a sarg, 2 heavy bolters, and in one squad 2 las cannons and in another 2 plasma cannons. there is 140 of your 300 points to swap between on the sideboard before the game starts. or mayeb you decide you want a pure anti tank dev squad but on the side baord in case of orks or tyranids you have a thunderfire cannon to swap in at the 120 points. swapping weapon loadouts at the squad level, while it would be nice for marines, would actually not benefit most other armies whereas swapping whole squads makes things pretty even.

10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




250+ votes and the general consensus is Stay the same, go to 9ppm and the next biggest is 10ppm, everything else is extreme minority.

10ppm could be doable, so long as GW tacks on other benefits for ork boyz in general, I would prefer them to stay at 8 but we shall see

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






SemperMortis wrote:
250+ votes and the general consensus is Stay the same, go to 9ppm and the next biggest is 10ppm, everything else is extreme minority.

10ppm could be doable, so long as GW tacks on other benefits for ork boyz in general, I would prefer them to stay at 8 but we shall see

I'd prefer for the units in my favorite army to get +1T and -1 ap on their melee attacks for the cost of 0 - but then again. I understand that would require more than just a small point increase.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Xenomancers wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
250+ votes and the general consensus is Stay the same, go to 9ppm and the next biggest is 10ppm, everything else is extreme minority.

10ppm could be doable, so long as GW tacks on other benefits for ork boyz in general, I would prefer them to stay at 8 but we shall see

I'd prefer for the units in my favorite army to get +1T and -1 ap on their melee attacks for the cost of 0 - but then again. I understand that would require more than just a small point increase.


Didn't your preferred army get +1 wound, -1AP on every gun/CCW in the army (depending on turn, and some in general), double your shooting from range on your most common firearm, double your CC attacks turn 1 all for the cost of 3ppm? And didn't that "increase" in price basically just bump you to where you guys used to be several editions ago? And aren't you guys now more durable point for point and more deadly point for point against basically every basic troops choice than you were in previous editions?

Its almost like you constantly complain about any other faction that you don't play getting any kind of buff.


 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut



Bamberg / Erlangen

 Xenomancers wrote:
I'd prefer for the units in my favorite army to get +1T and -1 ap on their melee attacks for the cost of 0 - but then again. I understand that would require more than just a small point increase.

I don't, as it makes no sense balance and gamewise. And my favourite is the same as yours. Just because you would benefit from it, doesn't mean that it is good for the game.

   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

 Xenomancers wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
250+ votes and the general consensus is Stay the same, go to 9ppm and the next biggest is 10ppm, everything else is extreme minority.

10ppm could be doable, so long as GW tacks on other benefits for ork boyz in general, I would prefer them to stay at 8 but we shall see

I'd prefer for the units in my favorite army to get +1T and -1 ap on their melee attacks for the cost of 0 - but then again. I understand that would require more than just a small point increase.


Ap-1 is only for choppa models, which are boyz, snaggas, warbikes, stormboyz, kommandos and nobz with the latter that would probably prefer other options, but they are affected by the change so I consider them anyway. The majority of the ork units won't get any AP bonus in combat since only a few of them have choppas. And it's just AP-1 though, not AP-1 in turns 1 and 2 then buffed to AP-2 . We're not getting a stackable -1AP buff to our other close combat weapons from turn 3 either.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Blackie wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
250+ votes and the general consensus is Stay the same, go to 9ppm and the next biggest is 10ppm, everything else is extreme minority.

10ppm could be doable, so long as GW tacks on other benefits for ork boyz in general, I would prefer them to stay at 8 but we shall see

I'd prefer for the units in my favorite army to get +1T and -1 ap on their melee attacks for the cost of 0 - but then again. I understand that would require more than just a small point increase.


Ap-1 is only for choppa models, which are boyz, snaggas, warbikes, stormboyz, kommandos and nobz with the latter that would probably prefer other options, but they are affected by the change so I consider them anyway. The majority of the ork units won't get any AP bonus in combat since only a few of them have choppas. And it's just AP-1 though, not AP-1 in turns 1 and 2 then buffed to AP-2 . We're not getting a stackable -1AP buff to our other close combat weapons from turn 3 either.


No Army would have all those buffs for free Blackie, that would be ridiculous and OP and these players complaining about T5 orkz would be up in arms right? I mean....could you imagine if Marines got that buff?

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Annandale, VA

 Xenomancers wrote:
Voss wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
This unit is more than capable of destroying or crippling up to 5 units a turn. To deny this is utter insanity. Sorry I don't like the game to be decided by whether my opponent is spiking more 6's than average. The potential damage is too high.


See, this is why no one takes your opinion seriously.

Even if he rolls all sixes on all number of shots and all hit rolls and gets 36 shots out of both the deffkannon and both times the gatler shoots and then wounds all those dice and you fail all your saves... that's still just four dead units.

It also won't happening more than once during this planet's lifetime because it's so unlikely.

According to that logic, a full unit of assault helblasters should be 1000 points - after all, the have the potential to kill 10 ork buggies per turn.


Look dude this is common sense.

Orks have bad BS right? So if we just double the number of shots they have they'll hit just as much on average and it will be fair right? No...because when they roll well - the impact is magnified by 2x.


Definitely not 'common sense.' More just 'bad at statistics'

When you are being wrong...you should probably not insult people. This is brain dead common sense stuff.

and while the average to get at least 1 hit on 2 shots on 5's is 56% and a single shot htting on 3's is 66%. You get the idea. The chance of getting 2 hits on the single shot gun hitting on 3's is 0%.


The more dice are rolled, the more the result trends towards the average, and the less likely extreme results are. You are more likely to get 6 or more hits on 8 dice at 3+ than you are to get 6 or more hits on 16 dice at 5+. That's how bell curves work.

You are overwhelmingly more likely to have issues with units 'rolling well' or 'rolling poorly' when they only get a few trials, like single-shot weapons, psychic tests, or abilities that are contingent on a once-per-turn die roll.

This fixation with 'potential damage' is bad understanding of statistics.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 catbarf wrote:


The more dice are rolled, the more the result trends towards the average, and the less likely extreme results are. You are more likely to get 6 or more hits on 8 dice at 3+ than you are to get 6 or more hits on 16 dice at 5+. That's how bell curves work.

You are overwhelmingly more likely to have issues with units 'rolling well' or 'rolling poorly' when they only get a few trials, like single-shot weapons, psychic tests, or abilities that are contingent on a once-per-turn die roll.

This fixation with 'potential damage' is bad understanding of statistics.


I've been trying to explain that to him for a bit. I'm guessing he got hit with one of those rare 3 Smasha gun shots turned into 6 and therefore the game is broken.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/27 11:46:57


 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 Blackie wrote:

Ap-1 is only for choppa models, which are boyz, snaggas, warbikes, stormboyz, kommandos and nobz with the latter that would probably prefer other options, but they are affected by the change so I consider them anyway. The majority of the ork units won't get any AP bonus in combat since only a few of them have choppas. And it's just AP-1 though, not AP-1 in turns 1 and 2 then buffed to AP-2 . We're not getting a stackable -1AP buff to our other close combat weapons from turn 3 either.


Why would someone want choppas on flyers or grot gun crews, or units that are using killsaws? Plus how would that even work. Plus orks don't have to get stackable -1AP to be efficient, they have more dice to roll and more unit. The impact of a few tens of boys will always be bigger then the impact 5 intercessor in 3-4 squads can do. Blade guard have the same problem, as they are very good at killing other marines and 2W stuff, but not very efficent vs hordes of units that drop their save.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




To be sort of devils advocate, there is an argument that maximum damage should be capped, because if a thousand Ork players roll a thousand dice, someone somewhere is going to get the maximum amount of damage. This isn't really an Ork thing, so much as a game thing.

Its why D6 shot D6 damage weapons are awful. The swing is far beyond what I think should be in the game - even if its going to be funny or frustrating when it does nothing/wipes out a Knight.

There's a sort of out of game mechanic in Orks being the faction that rolls lots of dice and just hopes to get lucky though. But would people really want to have to throw 120 dice from shooting say 30 shoota boyz?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/27 14:49:07


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Tyel wrote:
To be sort of devils advocate, there is an argument that maximum damage should be capped, because if a thousand Ork players roll a thousand dice, someone somewhere is going to get the maximum amount of damage. This isn't really an Ork thing, so much as a game thing.

Its why D6 shot D6 damage weapons are awful. The swing is far beyond what I think should be in the game - even if its going to be funny or frustrating when it does nothing/wipes out a Knight.

There's a sort of out of game mechanic in Orks being the faction that rolls lots of dice and just hopes to get lucky though. But would people really want to have to throw 120 dice from shooting say 30 shoota boyz?


Most things swing both ways, so as long as there isn't a minimum damage mechanic, there shouldn't be a maximum. Orks fight those swings by having multiples of cheap guns, so you get into the territory of the law of large numbers.

And outside of people mathhammering stuff, rolling 120 dice doesn't happen a lot. Assuming all are in range, which isn't a given 30 shoota boyz shoot 60 times which is in the ballpark of what some elite units can do as well. In combat, there is a soft cap due to the 1/2" rule, in practice you rarely have more than 10-12 boyz in combat, which also is in line with other armies' elite units.

7 Ork facts people always get wrong:
Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other.
A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot.
Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests.
Orks do not think that purple makes them harder to see. They do think that camouflage does however, without knowing why.
Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor.
Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers.
Orks do not have the power of believe. 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: