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.

 Sluggaloo wrote:
How aren't Orks a top tier codex when two pros commandeering them lost to hard counters by tiny point margins at the lvo. They performed really well. They smashed many other armies as a mono dex. These claims that Orks are gate keeper at best are laughable.

Show me string of orks in top-10 and winning tournaments.

People keep claiming orks are such an awesome yet fail to show the numbers. All I see winning tournaments steadily is same old imperial and eldar soups.

Soup>mono. Orks=mono.

 Sluggaloo wrote:
That Eldar flier list shuts down huge board space by just plonking big fat un-assaultable flier bases everywhere. The fact nick lost that game by a point or two is a testament to how good a player he is.

I mean, I get what you're saying, but the ork list should be able to endure and score more. It also has the capability to shoot down between 1-3 flyers a turn so I don't think the matchup is that bad. Kill the DE flyers and the scatterbikes and that list has no real anti-chaff left. I also wonder how much the ork players tried spreading out boyz/grots so the flyers couldn't fly anywhere on the board and thus get destroyed. That's a lot harder with space elf flyers since they can turn twice, but hardly impossible with a green tide. Consider the fact that the Ynnari player went back to reposition his supersonic on camera, in the finale when he had placed them down and moved other units thereafter. I'm just saying, people keep stating that it's so impressive they even got close and that's not my assessment. It's a winnable matchup (this is not me saying I'd win it, just stating there are several avenues to do it.)

But as a general game balance thing, I hope they implement a "rule of three" on supersonic units. Meaning you can't have more than 3 supersonics at 2k, even if they come from different datasheets.

 hollow one wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Spoiler:

I think we need to accept the reality that Orks just aren't that competitive. Its OK. We have been here before, in many previous editions.

The two lists that finished 16th and 17th are held as some paragons of competitive play. A mono Tau list finished higher. Much higher. As did a mono SM list of all things. The Ork lists that finished 16th and 17th were also piloted by some of the best players of the game bar none.

At the LVO this year our weaknesses were exposed and they are (currently) as follows;
1. An over reliance on stratagems to be effective.
2. No cost effective way to deal with heavy armour.
3. Too fragile without strats.
4. Obvious, simple tactics.
5. Most of our units are too expensive to be competitive therefore our unit choices are obvious and limited. Making counter play easy.

I think its pretty obvious given our results post codex that we are not a competitive army to be feared. Yes good players can take a variation of the same build and perform adequately. But if Nick and Steve can't break top 8, I don't see what else can be done without sweeping points reductions.

2 Ork players in top 50 of LVO.
5 Ork players in top 100 of LVO.

We made up over 10% of the meta.

These numbers don't lie. We need something. Hopefully GW decide to reprice our units in the big FAQ or something. Otherwise we sit as a gatekeeper army at best, a poor army at worst.

One of the best players in the world disagrees with you.
However, the stats look to show 46% overall winrate for Orks.

I expect this is because the army is very complicated to play, but when played well is top tier. I say this in so many words a lot on these forums, but this is a clear case of "git gud". The list has the chops, obviously, the list beats basically anything, its unanimous in the podcast/tourney-scene that the list is good and the "ork-meta" is a real thing. But if you watch Nick's re-enactment of the game vs Alex's flyers , it is seriously complicated. You need to make sure all grots are within a warboss, all lootas are safe and play appropriately around vect, stagger your loota presence, mob up/tide/jump all at the right times without throwing away units, tripoint with grots running across the whole table, be mindful enough to bring the badmoon flamer relic, position weirdboys to get max smite damage etc.

This list does not play itself. Any lesser player would just place the 22 lootas down, mob up, and get wiped by the flyers and vect. When you say "obvious, simple tactics" it just proves to me you don't play this list. And there are likely a lot of orks out there net-listing this list and just losing, not understanding why it is strong or how complicated it is to play.

Nothing in your link shows Nick Nanavati disagreeing with me. Hard to disagree really, since I’ve provided hard stats that can’t be disagreed with. My comments are largely facts.

“Git Gud” is not a good enough response, I’m afraid. As you’ve hinted - Nick Nanavati is one of the best players in the world and he finished 16th. He also said he has no idea how he would have beaten the flyer list. Furthermore 40k is not exactly the most complicated game to play, particularly now. Those tactics you’ve mentioned, the things you say are oh so complicated that Nick employs are simple and obvious. Keep Grots near warboss to mitigate morale?! Wow. Such advanced tactics. Mob up and Da Jump without throwing away units?! Damn I’d never thought of that! Tripoint!!! Lololol. Bring a relic?! I’d never thought of that!! Oh and ensure Weirdboy is suitably buffed to get max smite. Incredible. And ‘playing around Vect’ means you’re not maximising efficiencies means you don’t win games.

It’s exactly because I know how the list plays that I can say it’s weak and it’s only gotten weaker. I’m not just looking at the LVO meta either, that’s a good benchmark but where I’m looking is future state. Get ready for 20 hand flamers dropping in an army that can Vect. Get ready for marine bikes shooting twice as many shots at those boys. Get ready for easy to include, pre game list tailoring Assassins destroying your Weirdboys (who now can’t max smite if you try to hide), SAG Meks and any other key buffing character.

I have actually spoken to the FLG guys and they maintain that our strongest combos have not yet been found. If there is a top level Ork list, the Loota star isn’t it. Evidently.

E - formatting.

E2 -

 Sluggaloo wrote:
How aren't Orks a top tier codex when two pros commandeering them lost to hard counters by tiny point margins at the lvo. They performed really well. They smashed many other armies as a mono dex. These claims that Orks are gate keeper at best are laughable.

Here’s some facts that directly counter your above statement:

Top Ork finish - 16th
Mono armies that placed higher - Tau, Space Marines.
Numbers of Ork players that went 5-1 - 2.
Numbers of Necron players that went 5-1 - 1.
Numbers of Ork players in top 100 - 5.

tneva82 wrote:

 Sluggaloo wrote:
How aren't Orks a top tier codex when two pros commandeering them lost to hard counters by tiny point margins at the lvo. They performed really well. They smashed many other armies as a mono dex. These claims that Orks are gate keeper at best are laughable.

Show me string of orks in top-10 and winning tournaments.

People keep claiming orks are such an awesome yet fail to show the numbers. All I see winning tournaments steadily is same old imperial and eldar soups.

Soup>mono. Orks=mono.

This. Orks feel on the same level as craftworld eldar or guard or admech (which is pretty impressive considering where we came from), but I can't see them beating soups simply because those other armies can add more power from other codices while we can't.

From what I see in my gaming group, GW did a pretty decent job balancing mono-codex armies, it's a shame that those soup rules gak all over that.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 hollow one wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Spoiler:

I think we need to accept the reality that Orks just aren't that competitive. Its OK. We have been here before, in many previous editions.

The two lists that finished 16th and 17th are held as some paragons of competitive play. A mono Tau list finished higher. Much higher. As did a mono SM list of all things. The Ork lists that finished 16th and 17th were also piloted by some of the best players of the game bar none.

At the LVO this year our weaknesses were exposed and they are (currently) as follows;
1. An over reliance on stratagems to be effective.
2. No cost effective way to deal with heavy armour.
3. Too fragile without strats.
4. Obvious, simple tactics.
5. Most of our units are too expensive to be competitive therefore our unit choices are obvious and limited. Making counter play easy.

I think its pretty obvious given our results post codex that we are not a competitive army to be feared. Yes good players can take a variation of the same build and perform adequately. But if Nick and Steve can't break top 8, I don't see what else can be done without sweeping points reductions.

2 Ork players in top 50 of LVO.
5 Ork players in top 100 of LVO.

We made up over 10% of the meta.

These numbers don't lie. We need something. Hopefully GW decide to reprice our units in the big FAQ or something. Otherwise we sit as a gatekeeper army at best, a poor army at worst.

One of the best players in the world disagrees with you.
However, the stats look to show 46% overall winrate for Orks.

I expect this is because the army is very complicated to play, but when played well is top tier. I say this in so many words a lot on these forums, but this is a clear case of "git gud". The list has the chops, obviously, the list beats basically anything, its unanimous in the podcast/tourney-scene that the list is good and the "ork-meta" is a real thing. But if you watch Nick's re-enactment of the game vs Alex's flyers , it is seriously complicated. You need to make sure all grots are within a warboss, all lootas are safe and play appropriately around vect, stagger your loota presence, mob up/tide/jump all at the right times without throwing away units, tripoint with grots running across the whole table, be mindful enough to bring the badmoon flamer relic, position weirdboys to get max smite damage etc.

This list does not play itself. Any lesser player would just place the 22 lootas down, mob up, and get wiped by the flyers and vect. When you say "obvious, simple tactics" it just proves to me you don't play this list. And there are likely a lot of orks out there net-listing this list and just losing, not understanding why it is strong or how complicated it is to play.

Nothing in your link shows Nick Nanavati disagreeing with me. Hard to disagree really, since I’ve provided hard stats that can’t be disagreed with. My comments are largely facts.

“Git Gud” is not a good enough response, I’m afraid. As you’ve hinted - Nick Nanavati is one of the best players in the world and he finished 16th. He also said he has no idea how he would have beaten the flyer list. Furthermore 40k is not exactly the most complicated game to play, particularly now. Those tactics you’ve mentioned, the things you say are oh so complicated that Nick employs are simple and obvious. Keep Grots near warboss to mitigate morale?! Wow. Such advanced tactics. Mob up and Da Jump without throwing away units?! Damn I’d never thought of that! Tripoint!!! Lololol. Bring a relic?! I’d never thought of that!! Oh and ensure Weirdboy is suitably buffed to get max smite. Incredible. And ‘playing around Vect’ means you’re not maximising efficiencies means you don’t win games.

It’s exactly because I know how the list plays that I can say it’s weak and it’s only gotten weaker. I’m not just looking at the LVO meta either, that’s a good benchmark but where I’m looking is future state. Get ready for 20 hand flamers dropping in an army that can Vect. Get ready for marine bikes shooting twice as many shots at those boys. Get ready for easy to include, pre game list tailoring Assassins destroying your Weirdboys (who now can’t max smite if you try to hide), SAG Meks and any other key buffing character.

I have actually spoken to the FLG guys and they maintain that our strongest combos have not yet been found. If there is a top level Ork list, the Loota star isn’t it. Evidently.

E - formatting.

E2 -

 Sluggaloo wrote:
How aren't Orks a top tier codex when two pros commandeering them lost to hard counters by tiny point margins at the lvo. They performed really well. They smashed many other armies as a mono dex. These claims that Orks are gate keeper at best are laughable.

Here’s some facts that directly counter your above statement:

Top Ork finish - 16th
Mono armies that placed higher - Tau, Space Marines.
Numbers of Ork players that went 5-1 - 2.
Numbers of Necron players that went 5-1 - 1.
Numbers of Ork players in top 100 - 5.

You think the player who is in the argument of best player in the world, was 1st in ITC coming into LVO, and the only currently sponsored 40k player, chooses to play orks because they are not the best chance he has to win? Like maybe he picks it because Eldar are better but he's tired of winning. At the end of his recap video as well he says he will play orks again, and considers the flyer list the only list in the tournament that might have given him a challenge, and he lost to that list by 1 point.

You watch that video of his re-enactment. Pause the game before he starts explaining each turn and tell me if you get his movement and psychic phase correct. Games are way more complicated than you are giving it credit, even for a point and shoot army like imperial knights there are real decisions being made. This army is complicated thanks to the freedom of choice. You can have any unit on basically any part of the board at will every psychic phase. That is a lot of decision making that people feth up.

And look, I might have hit a nerve when saying git gud, but I'm just gonna double down okay? Deep striking hand flamers are not relevant vs a loota star if you use your grots properly, and your support characters can hide and cast da jump very comfortably PLUS you can grot sheild snipers. Any yeah, anti-horde weapons are a thing, but bike also are outranged by lootas and die really easily to two damage weapons. You don't know what you're doing with this list, period. I'd expect this degree of complaints from semper, I mean seriously... we literally have one of the best lists in the game.

How do we know it's one of the best lists in the game? The LVO placements are 16&17 and those are good/great but again, before beta bolters and GSC. You can argue how much either of those will affect Orks but any impact will skew negative.

Look Nick Nanavati is a great player, no doubt, but he's also really confident in his own abilities (as he should be) that does not mean that we should automatically treat his opinion as fact. People make mistakes at the highest level all the time, look at any professional sport and you'd find that out quickly. Those guys are also professionals (and obviously with much better training and resources) so his explanations, while sound in logic, might not be the only move to make let alone the correct one. I personally think an Ork horde with lootas are countered by several armies quite well and I don't think this list will shake up the meta. Could I be wrong? Ab-so-lute-ly! But to state as a fact that it's one of the best lists in the game when the evidence isn't there yet is also wrong (at least depending on your definitions of "one of the best")

I also doubt the loota strategy will last. GSC brings a few wyverns, they target your lootas. You grot shield said lootas and then they "vect" that. Lootas die in droves. And that list probably won't be rare, seeing as how non-LoS weapons are great in ITC and Tyranid soup in general is looking strong.

Kans and grot tanks can't tellyport can they? Curse you GW for gimping the non-infantry grots! (Really wish they'd made an 'unkultured' modifier rather than blanketing ALL gretchin with the nerfhammer)

 hollow one wrote:

You think the player who is in the argument of best player in the world, was 1st in ITC coming into LVO, and the only currently sponsored 40k player, chooses to play orks because they are not the best chance he has to win? Like maybe he picks it because Eldar are better but he's tired of winning. At the end of his recap video as well he says he will play orks again, and considers the flyer list the only list in the tournament that might have given him a challenge, and he lost to that list by 1 point.

I think the facts speak for themselves and as much as a good player as Nick is he is not the be all, end all of competitive 40k knowledge. He was #1 ITC until he decided to run Orks at LVO and he dropped to 3rd. Interesting how his stance has changed or you’re tweaking it to suit your argument because at the LVO he didn’t just say the flyer list would ‘give him a challenge’ he said he had no idea how he could have beaten it. I don’t know or care why he picked Orks. I’m sure, if he wants to be the best competitive 40k player, he will quickly realise they aren’t the faction for him.

You watch that video of his re-enactment. Pause the game before he starts explaining each turn and tell me if you get his movement and psychic phase correct. Games are way more complicated than you are giving it credit, even for a point and shoot army like imperial knights there are real decisions being made. This army is complicated thanks to the freedom of choice. You can have any unit on basically any part of the board at will every psychic phase. That is a lot of decision making that people feth up.

It’s not just a decision to feth up. Chess clocks now exist so some of these plays because a problem because they are massive time sinks.

And look, I might have hit a nerve when saying git gud, but I'm just gonna double down okay? Deep striking hand flamers are not relevant vs a loota star if you use your grots properly, and your support characters can hide and cast da jump very comfortably PLUS you can grot sheild snipers. Any yeah, anti-horde weapons are a thing, but bike also are outranged by lootas and die really easily to two damage weapons. You don't know what you're doing with this list, period. I'd expect this degree of complaints from semper, I mean seriously... we literally have one of the best lists in the game.

You haven’t hit a nerve by saying ‘git gud’, you’ve hit a nerve by repeatedly stating obviously incorrect things and throwing personal attacks around. We literally have a list that finishes 16th when piloted by one of the best 40k players of recent history. Not what I’d call ‘best in the game’, take your hyperbole elsewhere. Hand flamers kill your Boyz mate? They make those 40 teleporting Boyz hit a wall of flame and die. Lol it’s obvious you have no idea what changes are coming to the meta. The Vindicare (sniper) can target 2 characters in one phase. Good luck Grot Shielding both. Oh please tell me how you use these Weirdboys to ‘maximum smite effect’ like Mr Nanavati tells you to while simultaneously keeping them hidden from snipers? Magic? The same magic you use to do Grot Shields twice in the same phase? And finally, most obviously, you can’t Grot Shield anything if it is Vect’d. Which it will be. Every damn game against GSC/Nids and Aeldari. Until Imperium and Chaos get their equivalent of course. This is all forgetting those double damage bolsters at max range that every Astartes just got for free.

It seems to me that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Waaaghbert wrote:

CaptainO wrote:

Waaaghbert wrote:

Spoiler:

CaptainO wrote:

Waaaghbert wrote:

 The Shrike wrote:

CaptainO wrote:
Anyone tried a quad kustom mega blaster deff dread as part of a dredd waagh.

8 x kustom blasta shots for 91pts.... Bad moonz make sense with the reroll 1s.

Not a math guy by any means but wouldn’t Deathskulls make more sense? It’s a single model unit; so if you take say 3 solos to fill out a Brigade; each one gets to reroll a hit, wound and damage and gets a 6++ on top...

I think your right at least for the regular 4 shots. I did some quick maths and DS is better even if you consider only hitting, so is actually far superior if you factor in the one reroll for wounding and damage, not even considering the 6++.

simplified, 4 dice give you ~0,66 ones, so only 0,66 rerolls whereas DS give you one reroll flat.

I only calculated this for 4 shots because I don't think it is worth it useing the Strat on one Deffdread and I don't think it is possible to use it on a squadron since they act indepentently after deployment as far as I know.

I'd be taking the quad kustom shoota deff dread, a Super SAG Mek and 2 x smasha gunz for a 237 point spearhead bad moon dreed waagh specialist detachment. My logic is that both the dread and Mek could double shoot and I have redundancy in the event I get Veckt'd or whatever the GSC equivalent is.

If you double shoot with the quad blasta dread you're likely to get 1.33 1s a go. You could argue that the dredds shooting doesn't degrade so its less of an issue if he loses wounds to overheating. I don't know if I'd take the dredd if I couldn't double shoot him and if I take that spearhead as Deathskulls then either the Mek or the dredd could shoot twice...

Hm, the shoot twice strat on the deff dread nets you 0,7 more wounds against a T8 target, so I'm not sure it is worth spending 2 CPs for that. And I dont think any opponent is gonna Vect this.

The shoot twice strat will surely double the number of wounds it causes to whatever target it shoots at.

Dark eldar or GSC probably wouldn't bother vecting the deff dread but they might Vect the Super SAG Killa Mek firing twice (particularly good against Talos) SInce you can only vect once per phase the ability to use either kustom ammo or showing off gives redundancy. If they don't vect you have the option to use it on the dread.

Hm, maybe I'm not getting this right. But you basically have two arguments:
1) using them as Bad moons gives you the shoot twice start twice, thus creating redundancy. This I agree on, IF you'll use it on the Souped up SAG, wich leads me to ...
2) you think using Shoot twice on the dread is a good idea. This I disagree with. Of course you'll double the wounds, but one wound doubled is only one wound more and I dont think 1 wound is worth 2 CPs.

If I got this wrong and misunderstood you, I'm sorry, but there would be close to no situation where shoot twice on that Dread would be a good idea.

You got me. Against a T8 opponent you're right that it wouldn't do well but against T4-7 it would be pretty good. TEQ or Talos for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

I expect this is because the army is very complicated to play, but when played well is top tier. I say this in so many words a lot on these forums, but this is a clear case of "git gud". The list has the chops, obviously, the list beats basically anything, its unanimous in the podcast/tourney-scene that the list is good and the "ork-meta" is a real thing. But if you watch Nick's re-enactment of the game vs Alex's flyers , it is seriously complicated. You need to make sure all grots are within a warboss, all lootas are safe and play appropriately around vect, stagger your loota presence, mob up/tide/jump all at the right times without throwing away units, tripoint with grots running across the whole table, be mindful enough to bring the badmoon flamer relic, position weirdboys to get max smite damage etc.

This list does not play itself. Any lesser player would just place the 22 lootas down, mob up, and get wiped by the flyers and vect. When you say "obvious, simple tactics" it just proves to me you don't play this list. And there are likely a lot of orks out there net-listing this list and just losing, not understanding why it is strong or how complicated it is to play.

I agree with you 100%. Are people not winning with orks?!?!?! If I lose a game its been because I messed up or my opponent out played me. I've never felt it was because the orks were under powered. So maybe the loota star isn't the unstoppable force it was hoped to be. We've only had the codex just over 3 months! If the only good thing from that book was discovered within a month with minimal experimentation it would be a bad book.There are definitely hidden gems within, that over time will pop up. There's a certain amount of victim mentality. Git Gud

Also thanks for that link. Really interesting and useful. Some would say exactly what should be on a tactics thread about orks....

I agree with what Jidmah and the others have been saying. In a world where soup didn't exist, Orkz would have finished LVO in top spots. It's hard to compete against lists that can cherry-pick the cheapest and best units amongst multiple codices.

Orks have multiple lists that can beat the Meta soup list that is Castellan and Guard. Equally the pointy eared soup can and has been beaten by ork lists.

What I'm saying is that there is no list, soup or otherwise that a well piloted ork list can't beat. It could be argued that the imperial knight soup is easier to play but the orks definitely have the tools available to deal with it. They just have to play a bit more kunning.

The main take away from the LVO shouldn't be that the orks didn't finish top ten but that there are a number of lists that cause the current Meta ork list issues and therefore said lists require tweaking and new tactics explored.

I’m not sure what the competitive Ork list is going to be post LVO but as pina said I think it’s pretty obvious the upcoming releases hurt us more than most. And it’s not like we’re currently sat at the top tables.

We do have plenty of options for beating those lists. The issue comes up when you gotta fit those options into a list that can still handle the other options you'll find in a tournament. Making an anti-Castellan list is easy. Making a list that can reliably deal with Castellans, while also handling the variety of other lists out there is what is difficult.

CaptainO wrote:
Orks have multiple lists that can beat the Meta soup list that is Castellan and Guard. Equally the pointy eared soup can and has been beaten by ork lists.

What I'm saying is that there is no list, soup or otherwise that a well piloted ork list can't beat. It could be argued that the imperial knight soup is easier to play but the orks definitely have the tools available to deal with it. They just have to play a bit more kunning.

The main take away from the LVO shouldn't be that the orks didn't finish top ten but that there are a number of lists that cause the current Meta ork list issues and therefore said lists require tweaking and new tactics explored.

The problem is not that Orks lack the tools to deal with any one list in the top tiers of play... the problem is they cannot effectively build a list that can reliably deal with all of the lists at the top level of play.

I venture to agree with what a few others have said. We got a great dex, probably one of the stronger single dexes and it can stand toe to toe with any mono faction army... its when you put in force multipliers within soup that things get thrown out the window. When you have custodes and imperial knight armies with strong strategies but only able to generate a few command points it gets balances out... but when the loyal 32 is bringing all the cp they need... well that is another story.

Let’s not forget that, leading up to the LVO, orks were perhaps The biggest boogeyman for anyone looking to build a list themed against the meta. Saying orks are bid simply because of the LVO results is a bit too early of an assessment in my opinion. What’s more, isn’t assessing their place in the meta kind of irrelevant to a tactics thread (unless it’s another codex’s thread trying to convince that orks are no big deal), at least without offering solutions to what weaknesses are being cited? Unless the goal is to just shut down the thread?
Sorry, no intention to flame or point fingers at anybody, just an amateur player looking to keep the tactics conversation going

I started taking a warboss with killa klaw on foot rather than on a bike. Partly due to point limitation and partly to remove the temptation to just fire him up the board t1. His cracking skullz means if you conga line da jumped boyz back to him theyll stay around even if they get shot to hell. Also His ability to fight again (all be it for 3cp) means the enemy has to take him out.

CaptainO wrote:
I started taking a warboss with killa klaw on foot rather than on a bike. Partly due to point limitation and partly to remove the temptation to just fire him up the board t1. His cracking skullz means if you conga line da jumped boyz back to him theyll stay around even if they get shot to hell. Also His ability to fight again (all be it for 3cp) means the enemy has to take him out.

Having access to Get Stuck In Ladz is definitely the best reason to run a Warboss on foot. Sometimes the Bikeboss can fight once and not kill what he charged, then just have the enemy attack the other unit you have in combat with it instead of the Bikeboss (to avoid Orks is Neva Beaten) and Fall Back and shoot the Bikeboss instead of staying in melee for the next fight phase. Mostly an issue with Knights/Super-Heavys really, not much else is likely to survive that first round of attacks if you're using Killa Klaw and Brutal But Kunnin' + Fists of Gork, which you probably are.

Avoiding that eventuality by charging in the Bikeboss alone can make him vulnerable to dying to powerful Overwatch, particularly if he's taken some damage already from a previous fight phase or Snipers.

Generally though I think the Bikebosses are far superior because they only cost slightly more and the extra Movement they have let you leverage their buffs much better as well as pick your combats much more effectively.

Does anybody still play the warboss in mega armour?
I was checking out the freebooterz army we posted earlier but I can't find a reason to justify the 23 points difference with the biker boss for simply 2+ instead of a 4+.
Am I missing something here ?

MABoss felt overpriced in the index to me and since hes not in the codex he didnt get any help.
I dont see any reason to run one. If he had a baked in invul, maybe, but 2+ armor alone isnt that amazing since the only things that can actually hit him before he kills them first would rip that armor apart anyway.

A MA warboss is nice for eating overwatch and tying down shooting units. After all, a 2+ is at least as good as a 5++ against most weapons. The killa klaw always goes on a biker boss though.

He is too slow and too expensive though. Without natural ability to deep strike like terminator characters, I'd rather get a relic wartrike to do the same job.

Didn't Orks also have over a dozen lists finishing 4-2 at the lvo? Another thing you all are ignoring are the fact that Orks were one of the lists to beat. Literally every competitive player looking to perform at the lvo had to have an answer to them and the castellan. I.e. people were specifically tailoring their lists to deal with hordes. The top ITC players were running Orks too. I am an Ork player myself, sorry but you guys just come across as biased. We have a strong codex as, with the right lists, it poses a massive headache to even the most competitive of soups.

As far as I can see Orks had 13 people go 4-2, which is a really respectable score but hardly something that should easily be quantified as one of the best lists out there.

There were also 131 people who went 4-2 in general and if I remember Ork players were a smidge above 10% of all players represented making that score average.

I'm not, nor do I think anyone here is, saying that Orks are bad. It's just a few of us disputing whether they deserve being lumped in with the absolute top dogs seeing as the evidence for that isn't there.

PiñaColada wrote:
As far as I can see Orks had 13 people go 4-2, which is a really respectable score but hardly something that should easily be quantified as one of the best lists out there.

There were also 131 people who went 4-2 in general and if I remember Ork players were a smidge above 10% of all players represented making that score average.

I'm not, nor do I think anyone here is, saying that Orks are bad. It's just a few of us disputing whether they deserve being lumped in with the absolute top dogs seeing as the evidence for that isn't there.

Orks had about 8% of the overall players actually, apologies I have since had corrected stats.

10% of our lists going 4-2 certainly isn't bad but it smacks to me of 'gatekeeper' army. We do well to a point which is 4 wins then the losses start rolling in. That's where the real top dogs in the competitive meta lie and unfortunately there are factions that can soup but chose not to and still outperformed Orks in the top 5-1 category.

No one is saying we're a bad faction, but I think its obvious too that we aren't top tier and we never will be as we won't have the option to sure up our weaknesses with other factions' units. If we were a mono faction with very few/no weaknesses, like, for example, Guard, then we'd be OK. Unfortunately our weaknesses are too vast for us to be a true top tier army.

It's also worth noting that not all 4-2 scores are equal. If you lose the first game then you're already out of the running to face the true killers in that tournament. Winning the first 4 games and then losing your last 2 means you've done really well until you faced the true top tier lists. It's still impressive seeing as you've beaten at least one or two really strong lists.

Losing your first 2 and then winning your last four means that you won against other fluffy lists. At least in simplistic terms..

on the mega armor warboss. I actually on my foot ork list run a mega armored big mek with kff and then a normal warboss on foot , though even in that "foot list" i run another warboss on a bike along with 2 painboys on bikes to spread feel no pain and waaaaghhs

I know this would create room for abuse but what is the result of xenos armies gaining the xenos keyword. I know people would spam the best units from multiple codices but isn't that kind of how imperium works now. it allows the current soup abuse. I'd be curious to see the result of a tournament that implement this small change.

Now I can't see GW doing this as it would prevent the collection of a brand new army and filling out the various choices.

mhalko1 wrote:
I know this would create room for abuse but what is the result of xenos armies gaining the xenos keyword. I know people would spam the best units from multiple codices but isn't that kind of how imperium works now. it allows the current soup abuse. I'd be curious to see the result of a tournament that implement this small change.

Now I can't see GW doing this as it would prevent the collection of a brand new army and filling out the various choices.

the biggest issue would be fluff reasons, but ulimatly that is why age of sigmar threw the lore for a loop for thier alliances.

honestly if tau, necrons and orks could ally they would compliment each other quite well.

fluff wise newcrons are coming back to the civilised galaxy and could ally tau, and ghaz could work out something with the tau

I don’t see orks submitting themselves to tau rule whatsoever.
And that’s exactly what tau requires.

Tau should ally in guard just like genecults.

Necrons should ally with admech... as they seem to like to work together

Orks should ally with chaos demons as they have some lore that suggests this happens. Specifically khorne and nurgle.

It would take substantially more work but allies should be limited like the genecult limits guards as allies. That would solve a lot of the current soup issues but still allow allies to be meaningful.

Orks should ally with chaos demons as they have some lore that suggests this happens. Specifically khorne and nurgle.

Hilariously it would fit the fluff. Back in second edition there was indeed Khorne worshiping Orks and even a story listing the universes least lucky genestealer cult that just so happened to infect some orks.

If there was a faction that could work as universal allies it would be Orks. I'm honestly surprised Blood Axes didn't get that as a trait or rule, being the ultimate mercenary group.

It would be sweet if they made a Grot codex, and really fleshed out the grot range like goblins in AoS but for 40k.

Would give ally options for orks.