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.

All i want is for the battlewagons to be dedicated options for boyz squads numbering 20 or less. I think that would make them a very good army again. (compared to being pretty good now)

Eldar Own wrote:

thunderingjove wrote:I think if you want both a higher BS than 2 and the desire to retain the mypotic fluff of the Ork race, Grots and more Grot variety are the answers.

Big Meks should have BS3, because 'dey is betta wiv gubbinz' that is the only BS change i feel is neccessary.

I just don't see the myopic Ork nature ever getting beyond a BS of 2, even the Big Mek. As far as seeing the big picture, the Big Mek would put his optics to the wielding in the garage over the shooting at the range. Once again, I think the answer to poor Ork BS is weapons with more shoots, more TLs, greater wackiness, and Grots with more weapon choices.

kadeton wrote:Instead of Furious Charge, all Orks should get the Counter-Attack USR and gain +1 S in the first round of combat, regardless of whether they charged. Currently Orks just don't feel like a reckless horde to me - there's too much fiddling about with careful movement to make sure you get the charge off. This change would make it so that the Ork player would be less concerned avoiding getting charged, and could play in a style more in keeping with the Ork fluff.

I wonder how overpowered it would be to give Orks (or some Ork units) both Furios Charge AND Counterassault?

Madmax1 wrote:I realized I never gave the stats for the Squiggoth. In the IA8 book, there are 2 types of Squiggoths. A Big Squiggoth is a Monstrous Creature. It can transport 10 orks and has S - 7, T - 6, W - 4. And it can carry 1 big gun, (kannon, lobba, or zzap gun).

The Gargantuan Squiggoth is a Gargantuan Creature that can carry 20 troops. It's S - 10, T - 8, and W - 8. That one has more weapons including some apocalypse type weapons.

So, I'd like to see at least the Big Squiggoth in the next codex.

Dude, the Big Squiggoth seems more than reasonable in a normal (non-Apocalypse) game of 40K. Where they ever included in previous codexes or incarnations of the game?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

loota boy wrote:I think orks are fine with furious charge, and as for the ork with bs 3 str 4 and toughness 5, No thanks. That would most likely cost something a bit more than 10 pts, because it's a plauge marine without power armour, fnp, and one less bs. And plauge marines are 23 pts. That ork would be like 15 pts. And if orks are 15 pts, then the horde aspect is out the window. Also, only one attack per boy?! We are orks, for feths sake! Imho, I think that +1 str and +1 int would be fine.

Amen, brother. We want to play Orks, right? I think we should remember the fluff, then make the codex competitive from the prespective of that fluff. We don't want to overpower them like SW or IG, the SOBs!

BRING BACK MADBOYZ

Madmax1 wrote:I realized I never gave the stats for the Squiggoth. In the IA8 book, there are 2 types of Squiggoths. A Big Squiggoth is a Monsterous Creature. It can transport 10 orks and has S - 7, T - 6, W - 4. And it can carry 1 big gun, (kannon, lobba, or zzap gun).

The Gargantuan Squiggoth is a Gargantuan Creature that can carry 20 troops. It's S - 10, T - 8, and W - 8. That one has more weapons including some apocalpyse type weapons.

So, I'd like to see at least the Big Squiggoth in the next codex.

Definetly A squiggoth would be awesome, cool, orky and awesome. And cool. We now know that GW like making really big models, as they've done with a lot of new fantasy releases and a squiggoth would fit into this nicely. Plus, it's cool, and everyone would buy one. It's a win for us and a win for GW, what's the problem?

loota boy wrote:I think orks are fine with furious charge, and as for the ork with bs 3 str 4 and toughness 5, No thanks. That would most likely cost something a bit more than 10 pts, because it's a plauge marine without power armour, fnp, and one less bs. And plauge marines are 23 pts. That ork would be like 15 pts. And if orks are 15 pts, then the horde aspect is out the window. Also, only one attack per boy?! We are orks, for feths sake! Imho, I think that +1 str and +1 int would be fine.

Totally in agreement here.

I'd keep the same statline of an ork, but add these special rules

Special rules: Furious Charge, Counter-Attack, Brutish Stregnth.

Brutish Stregnth: Orks a huge, hulking creatures, with arms as thick as most men and as a result they can cause grievous injuries to any foe. Ork re-roll rolls of to wound.

So orks would have counter-attack, because orks wouldn't stand there and 'let da squishies come ta us', above, and have the brutish stregnth. It solves the fluff question of 'If orks are so huge and strong why do they have the same stregnth as a guardsman?' but without making them overly powerful. As a new points cost, i'd say 8pts, though I've never been good at estimating points costs.

Here are my ideas. Some of these have been brought up before:



Add Klan-Specific options to the codex. There are many different ways this could be done.

Flash Gits: BS improved to 3. Snazzguns changed to Twin-Linked. Option to include Bosspole and Dedicated Transport.

Weird Boy: Completely re-do Ork psychic powers, especially the random effects. Players should be able to choose which power they want to use. Make the effects themselves random instead. Instead of a single HQ Weirdboy unit, allow 1-3 Weirdboys to be taken, and allow them to be assigned to individual Boyz Squads.

Pain Boys: Allow 1-3 Painboys to be bought as an HQ option as Independent Characters and split up and assigned to squads.

Looted Wagon: Use the "Big Trakk" option from Imperial Armour 8 instead, call this the Looted Wagon. Remove Apocalypse weapons such as the Supa-Skorcha as an option, but retain the Supa-Kannon instead of the Boom Gun. For those of you without Imperial Armour 8, the Big Trakk is an open-topped, 12/11/10 vehicle with a 12 transport capacity and many customizable options. The Big Trakk could be customized to fit many different roles and models that people have made for their Looted Wagons.

Zapp Guns: Change the S of Zapp Guns to 5 + D6

Storm Boyz: Change to 10 pts. Give Zagstrukk the ability to re-roll his Deep-Strike deviation.

Mega Nobz: Give 5+ Invulnerable Save, Option to buy a Painboy, Bosspole.

Stickbomms: If a unit does not have Stickbomms normally, make this upgrade a flat +5 pts per mob instead of 1 pt per model.

Boyz: Allow unit to take Burnas, Big Choppas as special weapons. Allow Battlewagon as Dedicated Transport.

Burnas: Allow to take Dedicated Transport.

Tankbustas: Remove "Glory Hogs". Add "Tank Hunters". Give option for Dedicated Transport.

Add the Junka tank from Imperial Armour 8. For those without Imperial Armour 8, this is a 11/11/10 that can be customized with a variety of gear including a KFF and Shokk Attack Gun, and can be taken either as an Elite or a Dedicated Transport for a Big Mek.

Waagh!!: The Waagh!! rule was written for 4th edition and was neutered in 5th. To make it powerful again, allow the Orks to Shoot and Run during the Shooting Phase, and give them Fleet. Yes, this makes the Waagh!! really powerful, but in my mind, it should be.

thunderingjove wrote:

Eldar Own wrote:

thunderingjove wrote:I think if you want both a higher BS than 2 and the desire to retain the mypotic fluff of the Ork race, Grots and more Grot variety are the answers.

Big Meks should have BS3, because 'dey is betta wiv gubbinz' that is the only BS change i feel is neccessary.

I just don't see the myopic Ork nature ever getting beyond a BS of 2, even the Big Mek. As far as seeing the big picture, the Big Mek would put his optics to the wielding in the garage over the shooting at the range. Once again, I think the answer to poor Ork BS is weapons with more shoots, more TLs, greater wackiness, and Grots with more weapon choices.

I see your point, but i still think that meks should be better shots in some way, maybe they must take a Ld check to fire at BS3 instead of 2, representing resisting the temptation of just pulling the trigger hard and making lots of noise.

Eldar Own wrote:I see your point, but i still think that meks should be better shots in some way, maybe they must take a Ld check to fire at BS3 instead of 2, representing resisting the temptation of just pulling the trigger hard and making lots of noise.

Hmm.... An interesting idea, but I'm afraid it would open up a whole new set of complex rules.

Let's think of this from a place of wackiness. What if the rules for the Shokk Attack Gun were modified such that whenever it fired without mishaps (no doubles), the effect was Raargh! on the current chart (double 6s); that is, "any model hit by the gun this turn is removed from play. Vehicles take an automatic penetrating hit"?

That would be very powerful, very wacky, very open to mishaps (due to the mishap chart), and very open to failure (due to the Big Mek's poor BS). I think such a scenario would benefit play because it wouldn't be overpowered (less overpowered than Jaws of the Wolf) due to the fair chance of failure, and very Orky due to its wackiness. You could change this suggestion around to make it fairer, but you see where I'm coming from.

However, what you mentioned about Leadership got me thinking about an idea I had for Tankbustas. There is no reason to get rid of the Glory Hog rule IF that rule were modified such that a leadership roll would negate its effect. How is a general, even an Ork general, going to bring around a unit that disobeys orders EVERY time such-&-such a situation arises? They won't. An Ork general would accept a fifty-fifty percent likelihood (rolls on 7s), but not a one-hundred-percent likelihood, no no no.

thunderingjove wrote:

Eldar Own wrote:I see your point, but i still think that meks should be better shots in some way, maybe they must take a Ld check to fire at BS3 instead of 2, representing resisting the temptation of just pulling the trigger hard and making lots of noise.

Hmm.... An interesting idea, but I'm afraid it would open up a whole new set of complex rules.

Let's think of this from a place of wackiness. What if the rules for the Shokk Attack Gun were modified such that whenever it fired without mishaps (no doubles), the effect was Raargh! on the current chart (double 6s); that is, "any model hit by the gun this turn is removed from play. Vehicles take an automatic penetrating hit"?

That would be very powerful, very wacky, very open to mishaps (due to the mishap chart), and very open to failure (due to the Big Mek's poor BS). I think such a scenario would benefit play because it wouldn't be overpowered (less overpowered than Jaws of the Wolf) due to the fair chance of failure, and very Orky due to its wackiness. You could change this suggestion around to make it fairer, but you see where I'm coming from.

However, what you mentioned about Leadership got me thinking about an idea I had for Tankbustas. There is no reason to get rid of the Glory Hog rule IF that rule were modified such that a leadership roll would negate its effect. How is a general, even an Ork general, going to bring around a unit that disobeys orders EVERY time such-&-such a situation arises? They won't. An Ork general would accept a fifty-fifty percent likelihood (rolls on 7s), but not a one-hundred-percent likelihood, no no no.

Mishap on a double is equivalent to a 1-in-6 chance. Your change is basically the same as saying the Shokk Attack gun destroys whatever it hits on a 2+. I think that's a fair bit more overpowered than JotWW.

thunderingjove wrote:

Eldar Own wrote:I see your point, but i still think that meks should be better shots in some way, maybe they must take a Ld check to fire at BS3 instead of 2, representing resisting the temptation of just pulling the trigger hard and making lots of noise.

Hmm.... An interesting idea, but I'm afraid it would open up a whole new set of complex rules.

Let's think of this from a place of wackiness. What if the rules for the Shokk Attack Gun were modified such that whenever it fired without mishaps (no doubles), the effect was Raargh! on the current chart (double 6s); that is, "any model hit by the gun this turn is removed from play. Vehicles take an automatic penetrating hit"?

That would be very powerful, very wacky, very open to mishaps (due to the mishap chart), and very open to failure (due to the Big Mek's poor BS). I think such a scenario would benefit play because it wouldn't be overpowered (less overpowered than Jaws of the Wolf) due to the fair chance of failure, and very Orky due to its wackiness. You could change this suggestion around to make it fairer, but you see where I'm coming from.

However, what you mentioned about Leadership got me thinking about an idea I had for Tankbustas. There is no reason to get rid of the Glory Hog rule IF that rule were modified such that a leadership roll would negate its effect. How is a general, even an Ork general, going to bring around a unit that disobeys orders EVERY time such-&-such a situation arises? They won't. An Ork general would accept a fifty-fifty percent likelihood (rolls on 7s), but not a one-hundred-percent likelihood, no no no.

I'm not sure i agree with your proposed shokk attack gun change, i like it how it is. But i definetly agree with the tankbusta change. One reason i don't take thim is becasue of the glory hogs rule, sometimes tankbustas are more needed shooting/assaulting things other than tanks. A Ld test would be a perfect change, as it makes the rule better and also adds to the fluff because the tankbustas want to shoot the tank but the general wants otherwise. Do the tankbustas to what they're told? Or do they ignore him and go for glory? I always thought that tankbustas should have some rule to do with death and glory, like a re-roll to miss or something.

If I recall correctly Nazdreg was bs3 (or maybe 4). Maybe a wargear upgrade to give orks bs3 would be better.

Eldar Own wrote: I'm not sure i agree with your proposed shokk attack gun change, i like it how it is. But i definetly agree with the tankbusta change. One reason i don't take thim is becasue of the glory hogs rule, sometimes tankbustas are more needed shooting/assaulting things other than tanks. A Ld test would be a perfect change, as it makes the rule better and also adds to the fluff because the tankbustas want to shoot the tank but the general wants otherwise. Do the tankbustas to what they're told? Or do they ignore him and go for glory? I always thought that tankbustas should have some rule to do with death and glory, like a re-roll to miss or something.

Yeah, the SAG idea I had up there isn't fully thought out, I'll grant you (although, whether the suggestion is more overpowered than Jaws of the Wolf, I'll not quite concede). Perhaps more balanced an approach would be thusly: SAG S equals 4 + 1D6; but roll 2D6, and choice the highest; if doubles are rolls, consult mishap table; the weapon continues as ordinance. Once again, edit and critique. But you see where I'm going: take the fluff; balance the flow for fair & fun gameplay.

Thanks for your kind words regarding my suggestions for the Tankbustas. Tankbusta ought absolutely to have the Tankhunter special rule; that is, +1 to the vehicle damage table, and immunity to tankshocks. And like I said, I think that Glory Hogs can work IF a leadership test negated it.

thunderingjove wrote:

Eldar Own wrote: I'm not sure i agree with your proposed shokk attack gun change, i like it how it is. But i definetly agree with the tankbusta change. One reason i don't take thim is becasue of the glory hogs rule, sometimes tankbustas are more needed shooting/assaulting things other than tanks. A Ld test would be a perfect change, as it makes the rule better and also adds to the fluff because the tankbustas want to shoot the tank but the general wants otherwise. Do the tankbustas to what they're told? Or do they ignore him and go for glory? I always thought that tankbustas should have some rule to do with death and glory, like a re-roll to miss or something.

Yeah, the SAG idea I had up there isn't fully thought out, I'll grant you (although, whether the suggestion is more overpowered than Jaws of the Wolf, I'll not quite concede). Perhaps more balanced an approach would be thusly: SAG S equals 4 + 1D6; but roll 2D6, and choice the highest; if doubles are rolls, consult mishap table; the weapon continues as ordinance. Once again, edit and critique. But you see where I'm going: take the fluff; balance the flow for fair & fun gameplay.

That still results in an average of 10 str. every shot.

loota boy wrote:

thunderingjove wrote:

Eldar Own wrote: I'm not sure i agree with your proposed shokk attack gun change, i like it how it is. But i definetly agree with the tankbusta change. One reason i don't take thim is becasue of the glory hogs rule, sometimes tankbustas are more needed shooting/assaulting things other than tanks. A Ld test would be a perfect change, as it makes the rule better and also adds to the fluff because the tankbustas want to shoot the tank but the general wants otherwise. Do the tankbustas to what they're told? Or do they ignore him and go for glory? I always thought that tankbustas should have some rule to do with death and glory, like a re-roll to miss or something.

Yeah, the SAG idea I had up there isn't fully thought out, I'll grant you (although, whether the suggestion is more overpowered than Jaws of the Wolf, I'll not quite concede). Perhaps more balanced an approach would be thusly: SAG S equals 4 + 1D6; but roll 2D6, and choice the highest; if doubles are rolls, consult mishap table; the weapon continues as ordinance. Once again, edit and critique. But you see where I'm going: take the fluff; balance the flow for fair & fun gameplay.

That still results in an average of 10 str. every shot.

Sure. With mishaps. And BS 2.

Wait, isn't it closer to 8 or 9? I don't know how to do the probability with to dice choosing the heighest.

4+ average 3 plus average 4 i'm guessing for the re-roll is averaging str 11, but 10 because you can't have eleven. I think a base str of 5 + re-rollable d6 str would be appropriate.

What about mishaps? How would you incorporate them?

You know what would be funny? If in the scenario I suggest above, you have to select the lower number!

Ok, well, instead of a re-rollable d6 you could just roll 2 and choose. And if it rolls double, than it's a mishap.

loota boy wrote:Ok, well, instead of a re-rollable d6 you could just roll 2 and choose. And if it rolls double, than it's a mishap.

Exactly. See above. The mishaps could be more destructive too, including Gets Hot! Special rule.

I think the sag gun rules are fine the way they are, they are random but can still be effective. I am more worried they will change the kff rules

moonshine wrote:I think the sag gun rules are fine the way they are, they are random but can still be effective. I am more worried they will change the kff rules

Wait, you think the rules for the SAG are fine now, or that the mishap table is fine? I ran two SAG all of last year. Let me tell you, they are very uncompetitive, even in double.

I don't believe anybody has mentioned the KFF yet, probably indicating our general like of it. I bet you all that the next codex will see it increased in price, but otherwise unchanged, like the Carnifex in the Tyranid book, forcing us to consider other builds.

thunderingjove wrote:

moonshine wrote:I think the sag gun rules are fine the way they are, they are random but can still be effective. I am more worried they will change the kff rules

Wait, you think the rules for the SAG are fine now, or that the mishap table is fine? I ran two SAG all of last year. Let me tell you, they are very uncompetitive, even in double.

I don't believe anybody has mentioned the KFF yet, probably indicating our general like of it. I bet you all that the next codex will see it increased in price, but otherwise unchanged, like the Carnifex in the Tyranid book, forcing us to consider other builds.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Luke_Prowler wrote:

thunderingjove wrote:

moonshine wrote:I think the sag gun rules are fine the way they are, they are random but can still be effective. I am more worried they will change the kff rules

Wait, you think the rules for the SAG are fine now, or that the mishap table is fine? I ran two SAG all of last year. Let me tell you, they are very uncompetitive, even in double.

I don't believe anybody has mentioned the KFF yet, probably indicating our general like of it. I bet you all that the next codex will see it increased in price, but otherwise unchanged, like the Carnifex in the Tyranid book, forcing us to consider other builds.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Hahaha.

Well the sag is not intended to be competative it's intended to be fun and random. Hopefully the kff will stay the same. I think the warboss should be able to take a burna, Orks need a power weapon for the warboss.

moonshine wrote:Well the sag is not intended to be competative it's intended to be fun and random. Hopefully the kff will stay the same. I think the warboss should be able to take a burna, Orks need a power weapon for the warboss.

Wait wait wait. Shouldn't every choice in every codex be "competitive" for some situation fulfilling some need? "Competitive" doesn't mean an overpowered, obvious choice, but a smart choice to an appropriate rationale.

Like Pyrovores and Etherials? Nah.

thunderingjove wrote:

loota boy wrote:Ok, well, instead of a re-rollable d6 you could just roll 2 and choose. And if it rolls double, than it's a mishap.

Exactly. See above. The mishaps could be more destructive too, including Gets Hot! Special rule.

Ohhh... I see. I'm sorry, I thought you ment str 4 + 1d6 str + an additional 2d6 str choose the highest, not str 4 + 2d6 str choose the highest. In that case, yeah, good.

loota boy wrote:

Ah, good. I was thinking there was some confusion, but I didn't what to get all pedantic. Do you think under the rule change we've agreed upon that the SAG should stay Ordinance?

loota boy wrote:

thunderingjove wrote:

loota boy wrote:Ok, well, instead of a re-rollable d6 you could just roll 2 and choose. And if it rolls double, than it's a mishap.

Exactly. See above. The mishaps could be more destructive too, including Gets Hot! Special rule.

Ohhh... I see. I'm sorry, I thought you ment str 4 + 1d6 str + an additional 2d6 str choose the highest, not str 4 + 2d6 str choose the highest. In that case, yeah, good.

That is over complicated, remembering somthing like that is way too complex. You take away the idea of the sag with somthing like that. The idea of the sag is that it can destroy an entire unit in one turn and do absoloutly nothing the next turn. It would also limit the mishaps.

Chosen Praetorian wrote:All i want is for the battlewagons to be dedicated options for boyz squads numbering 20 or less. I think that would make them a very good army again. (compared to being pretty good now)

Really? Really? i don't mean to sound offenisive, but then you might as well move it to the dedicated transport section. It's already dedicated for nobs, what more do you want? Battlewagon Brigade Is already very effective. This would make it just stupid. You could have a possible 12 battlewagons! (6 for troops dedicated, 3 for elites nobs dedicated, anouther 3 in heavy support.)

Battlewagons should not become available to all units as dedicated transports, but trukks should...

Stromboy rokkit pack upgrades for Big Meks/Warbosses