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.

Hey guys. I took a break from the hobby around 2005-ish, & Ive just come back this year. Ive got a small ork army on the go, but I havent managed to get any games in yet. (on account of my nearest club being an hours journey away & being snowed under with work)

Now, back in the day, I always liked to play smaller games with a core of troops & a few non troops choices to back them up, as per.

Having perused these forums fairly thoroughly in the last couple of days, Ive noticed that with 5th ed, cheese seems to be the order of the day. Im starting to get a bit nervous with all this talk of only-dreadnought SM armies, & all 'fex armies for 'nids, & CSM armies with 9 obliterators (last time I was up on codices, oblits were a 0-1 choice).

anyway, the whole point of this thread is: Am I going to have to basically re-learn tactics from scratch, & re-tailor my beloved 'balanced' force into something built to take on cheese-heavy armies? The last time I played it wasnt possible to take more than 3 dreads, & I didnt often see more than 2.

any thoughts?

It probably depends on who you play and where you play. I have never played in a tournament, and generally just play with friends, so 'power gaming' isn't a real issue. I think the ork list is competitive as a balanced force.

My 1000 pt list probably includes a warboss in a truck with either a group of nobs or a squad of boys. A big mob of slugga boys walking. A dread or two (or even better, a few kans), grots (just cause they are fun) and something fun- maybe a squad of tankbustas or something.

The list is competitive and fun. I guess there are always power gamers, but I tend to avoid playing people who do that.

Welcome back to the hobby and I hope you find some good gamers to play with.

thanks Washecon.

Yeah, powergaming was a bit rife at my old club, & browsing peoples list & list suggestions was making me panic a bit

Now Ive finished uni for xmas though, Ive got time to travel to clubs & get games in.

The good news for you, is that Orks, of all the current lists, offer the best combination of fluff and power available.

A bunch of Boyz with whatever support you want, are actually a very strong list. Start with a handfull of big Boyz squads and a Nob and you're in good shape. Adding in some Bikers, a Kan or Dread, as a real Warboss might, can still work very well.

Basically you can build a list that won't make you feel like a jerk, but will still handle itself well enough to give you a good chance against powergamed lists.

If you quit in 2005, there HAS been quite a change.

With the advent of 5e and the codexes that have come with it, it seems that the state of 40k has changed significantly

40k is starting to be dominated by what used to be classified as "Special" characters. These are basically just units now, much of the time they determine what sort of army you will take as they frequently have an effect on units and what slots they fill in the force organisation chart. Even if they dont feature THAT sort of effect within your army selections, they may present a certain "synergy" with a particular sort of troops/units/whatever within their codex. This is of course considering those armies that have current codexes that have been written with the current ruleset in mind. (seemingly starting with codex eldar, GW might claim that these plans go back to TAU EMPIRE or possibly even BLACK TEMPLARS) Other codexes have to simply make due with what they've used over the past several years. (dark eldar...*cough cough*)

40k in my opinion, and other players will likely disagree, is evolving sort of along the lines of other competitors. It borrows heavily in deployment and "Big Bad Characters" from Warmachine/Hordes and what it borrows seems to be some of the things that cause those games to be rather successful.

There are particular personalities in those games that drive players to play a certain way according to fluff and pride in the chosen "leader" of an army. This seems to be what GW is trying to institute in the 40k games currently with the "BIG BAD CHARACTERS" that are so prevalent in many of the armies that you'll see out on the table nowadays. It's not really a bad thing. The game is changing, thats all, at least that's how I see it. It's still 40k, and its still fun.

Any similarities between 40k and Warmachine/Hordes are of course my own simple opinion and in no way FACT. Its simply something I've observed and rather agree with.

Cheesy combo's? They've always been around. If you were playing back in '05 then you're no doubt familiar with the 4 heavy support choice Iron Warriors. I'm willing to bet that you've experienced Starcannon Spam....there are simply new powerbuilds now that seem to take advantage of the current ruleset and their own new codexes. Nothing has really changed in this respect. The good news is that if you're playing with Codex: Orks you're still spoilt for choice in how you want to do battle. Hordes have won tournements in the past year, as have elite ork armies such as the Nob Biker list that seems to be the flavor of the week/month/year for now until something better comes along. Lots of battlewagons seems like a good idea sometimes made all the more sweet with a new model coming out for that selection....long overdue. Nob units seem especially powerful, mounted OR on bikes, and lootaz are golden. I even hear rumours of a nameless fear some vets may call dread-bash (9 Killer Kanz with a couple of dreads?)

The imperium have a new battleplan with the Marine codex. Doctrines are going away and now Special Characters (as indicated above) offer up the only real switch-ups within the list if you dont want to play typical ultramarine marine/type armies. Rumour has it that the Imperial Guard codex (due up very soon) is getting ride of ALL of the doctrine rules and going with a standard army list too. I find it likely that you'll be able to pick and trade selections again though thanks to special characters again. I doubt that anyone would disagree with me on that point.

BOTTOM LINE?

Its still really the same game. You have power builds that seem to be unbeatable. Nob bikers=Speed Freaks of olde, Lash spame=Iron Warriors, Tyranid MC armies=Tyranid MC armies

The big difference is the games move faster, fast deployment, HtH is more brutal and decisive....of course this is tempered if you go up agaisnt an army of orks that takes full advantage of their new cheap boyz!

Shooting tends to gravitate more toward MASS firepower than low AP. MEQ are beginning to give up ground as the main threat out there as orks gain ground threatening to take more and more tournements home to place on their mantle. Mass firepower seems to kill MEQ the same as it ever has....marines are rather hurting.

Marines hurt (due to noone figuring them out yet?)
Chaos is awesome (with lash)
Orks are the new "brokenness"
Tau have fallen from grace
Dark Angels are still GW "kicking boyz"
Eldar are not to be underestimated, but have been reigned in
'hunters, are still 'hunters with new advantages and new problems
Dark Eldar...still scarce

Missions require a different approach to winning altogether. With a basic 3 types of games your tactics can change dramatically from game to game. A particular style build (such as say, an MSU build) might have GREAT advantages in a "take and hold" type of mission, but find itself totally hamstrung in a kill points mission. Now, army building is more important than ever requiring a sort of "balance" if you dont plan on tabling every opponent you come across. Basically, you need to roll your missions out in the book to get a feel of the way games are going now. While boring, the mission setup included in the basic rulebook is the most easily adopted scenario system yet. There really isnt any reason NOT to go with rolling mission and setup, especially if you're planning on tournement as currently the tournement battle borrow DIRECTLY from the main rulebook for their missions. Slight adjustments are madein the scenarios for tiebreakers and a large range of point spread for players, but as of now, you can safely figure that if you have a handle on the scenarios in the book, you wont get thrown for a loop during tournement play....essentially no lava tables and no deepstriking units every turn...weird scenarios are basically out...at least this year they were.

You could go on and on with little differences, but these little tidbits are what I find to be different. Again, its just my opinion here and likely people will disagree with me. Take from my post what you will.

It's still 40k though, its still fun, the emperor is STILL the light, and Orks are still crude filthy creatures that stink and smell like burnt bacon when covered in burning promethium.

and whatever happens....you will not be missed.

cheers for the update, Deadshane.

I had noticed the characters in the new Ork codex had been beefed up a bit. & I can see exactly what youre saying about each one harmonising with a different specialist unit. I hadnt realised that all the codexes would be going that way.

The biggest changes you will notice are the different, and in some cases much more agressive deployments, and being able to run in the shooting phase.

Running is part of what makes Orks viable. If you favor troop-heavy armies, even at very low points costs you will have 60+ Boyz burying armies with 1/3 of your number on turn 3.

I also took a couple years off and have gotten back into things in the last couple months.

Despite the obligatory "GW sucks, I want 2nd ed" crowd, 5th is a nice improvement. Not perfect by any means, but I am enjoying it a lot.

Yes Orks are nasty and my beloved IG is struggling, it is still a lot of fun once you get on the table and start rolling dice. Just gravitate to the good/fun/relaxed crowd of players and things should go great

Deadshane1 wrote:If you quit in 2005, there HAS been quite a change.

With the advent of 5e and the codexes that have come with it, it seems that the state of 40k has changed significantly

40k is starting to be dominated by what used to be classified as "Special" characters. These are basically just units now, much of the time they determine what sort of army you will take as they frequently have an effect on units and what slots they fill in the force organisation chart. Even if they dont feature THAT sort of effect within your army selections, they may present a certain "synergy" with a particular sort of troops/units/whatever within their codex. This is of course considering those armies that have current codexes that have been written with the current ruleset in mind. (seemingly starting with codex eldar, GW might claim that these plans go back to TAU EMPIRE or possibly even BLACK TEMPLARS) Other codexes have to simply make due with what they've used over the past several years. (dark eldar...*cough cough*)

40k in my opinion, and other players will likely disagree, is evolving sort of along the lines of other competitors. It borrows heavily in deployment and "Big Bad Characters" from Warmachine/Hordes and what it borrows seems to be some of the things that cause those games to be rather successful.

There are particular personalities in those games that drive players to play a certain way according to fluff and pride in the chosen "leader" of an army. This seems to be what GW is trying to institute in the 40k games currently with the "BIG BAD CHARACTERS" that are so prevalent in many of the armies that you'll see out on the table nowadays. It's not really a bad thing. The game is changing, thats all, at least that's how I see it. It's still 40k, and its still fun.

Any similarities between 40k and Warmachine/Hordes are of course my own simple opinion and in no way FACT. Its simply something I've observed and rather agree with.

Cheesy combo's? They've always been around. If you were playing back in '05 then you're no doubt familiar with the 4 heavy support choice Iron Warriors. I'm willing to bet that you've experienced Starcannon Spam....there are simply new powerbuilds now that seem to take advantage of the current ruleset and their own new codexes. Nothing has really changed in this respect. The good news is that if you're playing with Codex: Orks you're still spoilt for choice in how you want to do battle. Hordes have won tournements in the past year, as have elite ork armies such as the Nob Biker list that seems to be the flavor of the week/month/year for now until something better comes along. Lots of battlewagons seems like a good idea sometimes made all the more sweet with a new model coming out for that selection....long overdue. Nob units seem especially powerful, mounted OR on bikes, and lootaz are golden. I even hear rumours of a nameless fear some vets may call dread-bash (9 Killer Kanz with a couple of dreads?)

The imperium have a new battleplan with the Marine codex. Doctrines are going away and now Special Characters (as indicated above) offer up the only real switch-ups within the list if you dont want to play typical ultramarine marine/type armies. Rumour has it that the Imperial Guard codex (due up very soon) is getting ride of ALL of the doctrine rules and going with a standard army list too. I find it likely that you'll be able to pick and trade selections again though thanks to special characters again. I doubt that anyone would disagree with me on that point.

BOTTOM LINE?

Its still really the same game. You have power builds that seem to be unbeatable. Nob bikers=Speed Freaks of olde, Lash spame=Iron Warriors, Tyranid MC armies=Tyranid MC armies

The big difference is the games move faster, fast deployment, HtH is more brutal and decisive....of course this is tempered if you go up agaisnt an army of orks that takes full advantage of their new cheap boyz!

Shooting tends to gravitate more toward MASS firepower than low AP. MEQ are beginning to give up ground as the main threat out there as orks gain ground threatening to take more and more tournements home to place on their mantle. Mass firepower seems to kill MEQ the same as it ever has....marines are rather hurting.

Marines hurt (due to noone figuring them out yet?)
Chaos is awesome (with lash)
Orks are the new "brokenness"
Tau have fallen from grace
Dark Angels are still GW "kicking boyz"
Eldar are not to be underestimated, but have been reigned in
'hunters, are still 'hunters with new advantages and new problems
Dark Eldar...still scarce

Missions require a different approach to winning altogether. With a basic 3 types of games your tactics can change dramatically from game to game. A particular style build (such as say, an MSU build) might have GREAT advantages in a "take and hold" type of mission, but find itself totally hamstrung in a kill points mission. Now, army building is more important than ever requiring a sort of "balance" if you dont plan on tabling every opponent you come across. Basically, you need to roll your missions out in the book to get a feel of the way games are going now. While boring, the mission setup included in the basic rulebook is the most easily adopted scenario system yet. There really isnt any reason NOT to go with rolling mission and setup, especially if you're planning on tournement as currently the tournement battle borrow DIRECTLY from the main rulebook for their missions. Slight adjustments are madein the scenarios for tiebreakers and a large range of point spread for players, but as of now, you can safely figure that if you have a handle on the scenarios in the book, you wont get thrown for a loop during tournement play....essentially no lava tables and no deepstriking units every turn...weird scenarios are basically out...at least this year they were.

You could go on and on with little differences, but these little tidbits are what I find to be different. Again, its just my opinion here and likely people will disagree with me. Take from my post what you will.

It's still 40k though, its still fun, the emperor is STILL the light, and Orks are still crude filthy creatures that stink and smell like burnt bacon when covered in burning promethium.

and whatever happens....you will not be missed.

QFT

Except the part of no one figuring out new marines. A lot of people have it's just that there's no public proof of it since they disgraced themselves in Baltimore so badly the stereotyped themselves as all bark and no bite. But i'm willing to bet next to no one playtested the drop pod lists everyone had and everyone running them just ASSUMED they would win.

Sorry about driving the thread off topic I had no intention about it I just felt like saying that and I hope this thread continues to stay on topic.



Edited by yakface to remove off-the-cuff remarks about someone who can't defend themselves.

I think you're going to find that the environment has changed substantially. Myself, I started at the end of 3e, and I can see it clearly.

If you have a group of friends who wants to get together, build "fun" lists, and not worry about making them "tough," you can have a LOT of really great games like that.

If, however, you want to build a "fun" army and be competetive at a tourney or the local FLGS... forget it. The "tough" builds will eat you alive.

For the record, by "fun," I mean: non-optimized lists that are built to fit the "fluff" of the army and not the strengths of the codex.

Eric

MagickalMemories wrote:I think you're going to find that the environment has changed substantially. Myself, I started at the end of 3e, and I can see it clearly.

If you have a group of friends who wants to get together, build "fun" lists, and not worry about making them "tough," you can have a LOT of really great games like that.

If, however, you want to build a "fun" army and be competetive at a tourney or the local FLGS... forget it. The "tough" builds will eat you alive.

For the record, by "fun," I mean: non-optimized lists that are built to fit the "fluff" of the army and not the strengths of the codex.

Eric

I agree, but you can still have fun with competetive players as long as they're not socially inept. Hell you can even ask them if they have any "softer" lists, a lot of the people around here have hard and soft lists. I know I run with multiple IG lists, one has a lot of "extras" that I wouldn't use against the Local Nob Biker


However, I really hope that when (long when...) the Battle Scenario book comes out, it will bring a lot of fun/fluffy/engaging games with it! Move away from the standard game and start pushing the story/fluff aspect of 40k. Could be very cool.

yeah, I generally tailored my armies to fit the fluff. Ah well. Im sure Ill get used to it.

MagickalMemories wrote:I think you're going to find that the environment has changed substantially. Myself, I started at the end of 3e, and I can see it clearly.

If you have a group of friends who wants to get together, build "fun" lists, and not worry about making them "tough," you can have a LOT of really great games like that.

If, however, you want to build a "fun" army and be competetive at a tourney or the local FLGS... forget it. The "tough" builds will eat you alive.

For the record, by "fun," I mean: non-optimized lists that are built to fit the "fluff" of the army and not the strengths of the codex.

Eric

I've been playing since 3e was all out of the new rulebook and I don't think thats at all a new thing. Fun and fluffy armies always got tooled on by powerbuilds.




Anyway, 40k is still 40k, you managed to skip fourth ed which means you haven't been made bitter by the tiny armies of supersoliders flying around in their hovertanks, and you've come in with a good ork codex that is very friendly to new players. Make an army, play some casual games at your local (or non local as it seems) games store and have fun with it. You may lose your first few battles, but keep in mind thats true of any new player. Just adjust your tactics, get an army that "feels" right and go with it.

It's still as fun as it ever was, and you're a lot less likely to have to check back to the rulebook all the time with bizarre conflictions like you would have in third.

I personally think you have one of the most friendly casual player armies around. There are some differences that you will have to find and adjust to, however playing orks its still as much fun to watch your warbuggie get blown up or watching your trukk go kareening accross the battlefield after it gets wacked.

Anyway orks are always really fun.

yeah, to be honest, that was one of the reasons I started an Ork army, Casper. I thought, even if I lost, itd be fun to see stormboyz corkscrewing off into the distance & kustom mega-blasters blowing up all over the place

shummy wrote:I've been playing since 3e was all out of the new rulebook and I don't think thats at all a new thing. Fun and fluffy armies always got tooled on by powerbuilds.

Me, too... and I agree... it's not NEW.
I think it's far more common, now.

Back in the day, tourneys weren't as prevalent as they are now. So, the majority of the people only played for fun and, thus, build a lot of fluffbunny armies.
As more tourneys became well known, and the internet became more common, the larger exposure to powerbuilds increased the # of people building powerlists.

Personally, I like that. I like building the hardest list I can and fighting someone whose done the same. I prefer it.

Then again, *I* am the guy in my group who takes cr@p because, sometimes... just sometimes... I WANT to play those crappy units that are fun to play.

So, I definitely like doing the "fun" thing now and again, too.


Eric