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.

Well, Chaos Lords really are TBH But yea, Chaos is a perfect example.
"How do I play my Chaos? Im new to the game."
"Dual Lash princes (once in awhile I actually read sorcerer) obliterators and plague marines.


Good god that just gets under my skin. Granted the current CSM dex is just awful, it truly is a pile of garbage, but Im sure there are lists/builds in that codex that can kick just as much ass, but no one ever wants to discuss it or try it out

KingCracker wrote:Well, Chaos Lords really are TBH But yea, Chaos is a perfect example.
"How do I play my Chaos? Im new to the game."
"Dual Lash princes (once in awhile I actually read sorcerer) obliterators and plague marines.


Good god that just gets under my skin. Granted the current CSM dex is just awful, it truly is a pile of garbage, but Im sure there are lists/builds in that codex that can kick just as much ass, but no one ever wants to discuss it or try it out

Let's just say Khârn is a complete monster. He'd easily be one of the best HQ beatsticks in the game if he was an EW, now he's just "good". His vulnerability can be avoided by getting stuff in b2b with power fists though.

DE are another good example.

I've stopped trying to get critique on the lists I run. It always turns into venoms, ravagers, trueblasters. I used to think I was running my DE all wrong when I was new to the game, but then I started winning games. I got good at playing like a proper DE, and realized that netlists didn't fit with my playstyle. At all. I have had lots of fun and success with my 'LIQUIFIER GUNS ERRYWURR' lists.

Lokas wrote:I have had lots of fun and success with my 'LIQUIFIER GUNS ERRYWURR' lists.

Arent liquefiers the only way to run Haemoncolus lists?

Without them, wracks are a bit gimpy compared to wyches

I run my Warriors with Liquifier Gun toting Haemonculi.

9 Warriors, 1 blaster, Haemonculi with a liquifier gun. Downright nasty close range anti-infantry firepower. Especially if I gang up on an enemy unit, so I'm pouring 32 or more splinter rifle shots, and however many hits I can get with the templates.

They're also surprisingly survivable, with FnP.

Lokas wrote:DE are another good example.

I've stopped trying to get critique on the lists I run. It always turns into venoms, ravagers, trueblasters. I used to think I was running my DE all wrong when I was new to the game, but then I started winning games. I got good at playing like a proper DE, and realized that netlists didn't fit with my playstyle. At all. I have had lots of fun and success with my 'LIQUIFIER GUNS ERRYWURR' lists.

Actually, when someone asks for advice, you should always assume that the asker is not solid on his list building and/or new to the game - otherwise he wouldn't have asked. You should not tell those people to give flash gits or tripple tank bustas a try, those people need solid advice first. As far as I can tell, KC trying to get us veterans to think out of the box and find a challenge or even some viable tactics by doing so.

In my opinion telling someone eager to start a bike army "Add squads of five koptaz!" is just as bad as telling someone "Bikes suck, you must get 9x kanz", no matter what that person actually wants. Sadly, you see both happen way to often.
(Sorry for not coming up with DE examples, all I know about them is they break easily when hit with a choppa )

Jidmah wrote:Actually, when someone asks for advice, you should always assume that the asker is not solid on his list building and/or new to the game - otherwise he wouldn't have asked. You should not tell those people to give flash gits or tripple tank bustas a try, those people need solid advice first. As far as I can tell, KC trying to get us veterans to think out of the box and find a challenge or even some viable tactics by doing so.

In my opinion telling someone eager to start a bike army "Add squads of five koptaz!" is just as bad as telling someone "Bikes suck, you must get 9x kanz", no matter what that person actually wants. Sadly, you see both happen way to often.
(Sorry for not coming up with DE examples, all I know about them is they break easily when hit with a choppa )

Maybe I'm the only one who does this, but when I come up with a list I like to get someone else to look it over to make sure there aren't any glaring flaws in it that I've missed because I've gotten too wrapped up in how homgawdawesome the theme is. Thing is, whenever I go into the Army Lists forum, no matter how many times I said 'I don't want to do a netlist, I just want so critique on this' the only answers I ever seem to get these days is 'Why would you do that? Here, try this netlist instead.' It's aggravating. In DE terms, the current trend is venomspam lists. I personally don't care for venomspam lists. I won't go into why, as I don't wanna derail the thread with that discussion, but I don't like them. I wanted to try something different, and when I tried to get people to critique my lists, all I got was 'Do venomspam instead.'

I'm not saying that poor advice should be given to support a theme, oh no. That, I'll agree with you, is just as bad if not worse than 'Don't bother with that, have this copypasta instead.' I was just trying to say that DE are another good example where the 'You can only play this army one way' mentality comes in. I mean, take a quick look over the army lists section. I'd bet you money that most of them are attempts at venomspam or the advice given for the list is to swap to venomspam.

i have a question,

is it possable to use a CSM army focused on Chaos Spawn, or is it just the mad dream of a idiot like me?

@hand banana
Of course it's possible, can't say how effective it'll be thought. I'd say the best way to use spawn is via Gift of Chaos, and only vs non marine armies. Would be fun to field a unit of 3 sometime thought, can't imagine what your opponent will think.

I was thinking of fielding 23 of them....In a 1500 pt game. my oppoent will think im the biggest idiot in existence, with good reason...

I think that most people advocate these "popular" builds to newcomers because more often than not they are the most tactically forgiving. Alot of the lesser units that veterans are able to have success with require alot different thinking. These tactics just are not all that obvious to new players.

You can make almost any unit "work" if you write a list around them, and the skill of the player can go a long way when it comes to how the game actually goes.

That being said some units/lists are better than others, and good players don't always fall for for the "confuse them by bringing bad units" tactic.

Barksdale wrote:I think that most people advocate these "popular" builds to newcomers because more often than not they are the most tactically forgiving. Alot of the lesser units that veterans are able to have success with require alot different thinking. These tactics just are not all that obvious to new players.

Im going to dissagree with this a bit. I wouldnt call them more forgiving at all, if anything, some of the power builds are actually less forgiving and take alot of tactical knowledge to pull off. New players dont normally understand how to use units together, or when to "spring traps" and such, infact most new players basically move forwards and attack. I can use a perfect example from DashofPepper again, he runs 1 BW with burnas in it and has kicked ALOT of ass with that, and so people started taking the same unit build. Problem was, I remember seeing alot of threads pop up in here, asking how the hell to make this work? Because players would take it, think "well Dash did it so it HAS to be win" and used it wrong all the time. They would do the same thing that new players do, run it strait forward and POW, that unit would get blown up before really doing anything. Or they would just sit there and template, and wonder why they were blown up, not realizing you have to move first, thats key. What they didnt realize, was that Dash wouldnt run that BW up first thing and start the burny dance, he would hold it back, and use it to take out straglers mostly.

I disagree. Dual Lash is an extremely simple and powerful concept, and is not at all hard to "understand".

Mech Guard is another good example of a "cheesy" or "netlisty" style, which, again, doesn't take a genius to use effectively.

It's true that people recommend powerful lists, but I don't think they're any more forgiving than any other lists.

Oh, really? I actually think lash princes are a perfect example here.

When I told a friend that lash princes were a regular used chaos HQ, he looked it up in his codex and then asked me why anyone would ever want to field that thing. Even after I told him a few tricks, he struggled to make it work for him. Lash Princes are a total different level of skill than suicide terminators, khorne berzerkers in land raiders or obliterators. A new chaos player needs to know that he should stay away from his FA slot, chaos generals are usually under-performing and the advantages of lascannons on predators or havocs. He will find out about lash princes himself sooner or later.

Hmph. I can't recall ever having that thought process. I just saw Lash and thought, "blasts and assault, coolio".

I just don't understand why using a psychic power to clump a bunch of dudes together and dumping blasts or assaulty things on them is any harder to conceptualize or understand than anything else you listed. Both Berzerkers and Obliterators are entirely one dimensional, as is Lash.

Unless I'm not understanding the posts.

Nah, you understood it perfectly fine.

There is a big difference between someone starting the game without any wargaming experience and someone starting his second army/switching games. Getting stuff closer to assault it, or getting them away to keep them from assaulting are obvious uses for the lash, however clumping up stuff for blasts or templates isn't. Many new players don't even consider clumping up being a bad thing, one of my friends has been playing orks for almost 10 years, and he still loses 12 boyz from a single leman russ battle cannon. Granted, he doesn't care for that, but the point is, people don't start out with all the basics and then start applying them to their codex. If you did, maybe you're just a natural talent.

Khorne Berzerkers stand around when disembarking from a rhino and can't charge. A landraider allows them to charge when they disembark, so a landraider full of khorne berzerkers must be a good idea. Same for obliterators - the have all the weapons, so the are never useless. Simple 1+1=2 thinking, or one-dimensional as you said.

A lash can be used to string units out, to hinder their shooting/assault capabilities, move ICs in unfavorable positions, clump units together to blast or flame them or whatever other options you have. Rather than 1+1 this is A or B if C, otherwise D or even E. This is hardly one-dimensional, it requires a lot of insight on how the game works(assaults, shooting, movement) and not just finding the right of all those options, but finding the options in the first place.

I understand. I started out playing Tau, then Space Marines, so when I found Chaos (my fave), I already had been playing 40k for a good 2 years; as a result, I already had the basics down.

I can see where the applications might not be initially obvious to a newer player, though.

KingCracker wrote:

Barksdale wrote:I think that most people advocate these "popular" builds to newcomers because more often than not they are the most tactically forgiving. Alot of the lesser units that veterans are able to have success with require alot different thinking. These tactics just are not all that obvious to new players.

Im going to dissagree with this a bit. I wouldnt call them more forgiving at all, if anything, some of the power builds are actually less forgiving and take alot of tactical knowledge to pull off. New players dont normally understand how to use units together, or when to "spring traps" and such, infact most new players basically move forwards and attack. I can use a perfect example from DashofPepper again, he runs 1 BW with burnas in it and has kicked ALOT of ass with that, and so people started taking the same unit build. Problem was, I remember seeing alot of threads pop up in here, asking how the hell to make this work? Because players would take it, think "well Dash did it so it HAS to be win" and used it wrong all the time. They would do the same thing that new players do, run it strait forward and POW, that unit would get blown up before really doing anything. Or they would just sit there and template, and wonder why they were blown up, not realizing you have to move first, thats key. What they didnt realize, was that Dash wouldnt run that BW up first thing and start the burny dance, he would hold it back, and use it to take out straglers mostly.

I guess I should have been more clear. This situation is exactly what I am talking about. Just as you say the first inclination is for them to run the bw forward and fast. The tactic of holding the burnas back to mop up just isn't that obvious to new players. All they see is hey burnas they need to get close and fast so they can be used. Most people would advocate brining multple bw's spam, or kan wall etc. etc. for the simple fact that it is more tactically forgiving.

Fair enough, and Ill point out I did say things like "disagree a bit" and "some of these builds" so I do agree, that some power builds are pretty strait forward "power blob guard" is pretty simple as far as its base use goes. And again, these things are one of those you either learn from doing, or are told, because no one, no matter how good they are, just dont think that way when they are starting out

I love this concept of list building - taking underused or underestimated units and building a list designed to make them shine can really throw your opponents, and a great many of them work surprisingly well. I've been running a Sisters of Battle list based around Penitent Engines and Repentia lately, and I have been doing far better than I hoped for with them - I'm starting to think it's downright competitive (been thinking about posting some tactics or battle reports). But the point wasn't to win, so much as to play the units I looked at and thought sounded fun... the whole "Oh, you like *them*? Then paint them pretty and put them on the shelf, because they don't belong on the table" attitude does no one any favors. If you are smart about it, you can make a good list with nearly any unit.

Helping someone play the unit they want to play, the best they can play it, is far better than telling them what they *should* want to play.

Well congrats on making a less used build work for you. I do have to mention, a couple things about playing the "less then stellar" units. I should of warned that in some players cases, you may want to hold off till you get the flow of your play style, because everyones is different. Just taking a FlashGits build, is going to fetch you some losses, they are pricey, infact to run my list of just x2 Gits units the way I load em up, it runs 2k points quick run down.
KFF Mek
KFF MEK
x20 shoota boyz
x20 shoota boyz
x20 shoota boyz
x5 lootas
x5 lootas
x5 lootas
rokkit buggy squadron
rokkit buggy squadron
rokkit buggy squadron
FlashGitz
FlashGitz

Thats not a whole lot of Ork bodies for 2k points, so I have to play to the best of my abilities and make sure I use this list the way its intended to be, saturation of units. There is alot of things going on in it sure, a wall build, decent amount of bodies, long range and alot of high STR shooting, but as you can plainly see, the only AT is the rokkits/PK in the list, and anything AV14 is going to be a real PITA. Id run this one as tight as I could, so I could counter drop podders/deep striking units hopefully. But as always, any build has its weaknesses, but this one would definitely take opponents by surprise, the wall is different then how youve EVER seen on a table, FlashGitz? How do you handle Gitz? Things like that, but again, if someone expected it, they could counter it rather easily. But still, alot of fun and alot of bullets

Interesting discussion for sure. I've used veteran sniper squads in IG and a tech priest. The tech priest was basically insurance for dual manticores so they could get off 4 shots each. He basically sat in the back and repaired stuff. I can see a use in a castle where he repairs wagons when you circle them up so you can keep the av circle alive and moving around so adapts don't hurt so bad.

I still use veterans with camo and sniper rifles plus missile launcher to sit on an objective and fire long range. they also have defensive grenades do can camp in cover quite well.

For all my love of under-appreciated units, flashgits are still subpar to another under-appreciated unit, the humble warbiker. For the same amount of points you get 2 extra shots, twin linked, built in mobility, fake toughness 5, and a cover save. The flashgits get better melee, and feel no pain. People dislike the warbikers, but they are fairly good shooting for their points. Then again maybe the two units synergize well together, they both provide highly mobile shooting, might even combine charges together for safety. But I don't really see flashgitz in anything but a very specialized list, like weirdboyz or deffwing.

Has anybody made the pysker primaris work? I've got an interesting conversion idea, what ways could he/she be justified?

Another hidden gem, the blood claw. Due to how good grey hunters are everyone has forgotten that these even exist. I'm considering trying an experimental idea of a massive marine horde. It might be tough for the enemy to kill 90 marines before they get across, especially when 30 wolf scouts keep them from deploying too close the the table edge.
(really this is just justification for my Zulu space marine conversion idea)

keep em coming, we need to keep list creativity alive in they dark and grey times.

*Dashofpepper enters the fray*

First, thanks for the kind words in your OP. There's a lot I'd like to say, some things I'd like to address that I know that I'll miss, but I'll do my best.

KingCracker wrote:
The best part about using rarely fielded units, is when you figure out how to use them properly, people arnt really sure how to counter it at first.

What sort of playing field are we talking about? I thought I saw tournament play mentioned, which concerns me - because I would heartily disagree. Evaluating the enemy army across the table should always follow the same thought process - when a unit that you aren't familiar with gets fielded, all that should change are the questions you ask. For Flashgits, it would be "What kind of guns do they have? What's the range? What's their armor save?" Finding out that they have a 24" reach, variable AP, and are otherwise expensive and weak nobs leads to the conclusion that the Flashgits can be ignored at range, or circumvented at closer range with vehicle positioning.

I won't lie, many of my wins with the old Dark Eldar came from opponents not knowing what my army could do....and more importantly, *NOT CARING ENOUGH TO FIND OUT.* I start every game asking my opponents if they have any questions about my army, it's capabilities, stats, etc - and was surprised by how many people not only didn't know, but didn't care enough to find out. Willfull ignorance by opponents can help oddball armies, but shouldn't be relied on as a strategy for success.

KingCracker wrote: Ive read and discussed tactics and such with DashofPepper, he really is a very clever player, and could probably turn any army into a winner. But I realized in reading his threads and such, that MOST of the players out there, play a cookie cutter list, and say the same things as the last 10 guys (I call this copeypastey) and it gets boring.

That's the nature of 40k. When DE were released, Hulksmash and I drew up a new wych cult and a new kabal. I played both and settled on the Kabal. I started advocating it's use based on the strategic advantages that I found, posting battle reports, strategy guides, even naming the army theme "Darklight Storm" hoping it would catch. Now lots of people run it. The "Trueborn/Venom/Ravager" spam. That's not to say that everyone copied me; with choices as they are, it's not difficult for many individuals to arrive at similar conclusions on their own. When Necrons pop out, I'll retool my Wraith-Wing; maybe even build a new Necron army that's isn't a wraith wing. I'll play with it, batrep it, write strategy guides about using it....and copying me or not, other people will start using it, and it will be callled "XYZ spam."

You and I just tackle looking for a challenge differently. I have an extremely hard time wrapping my head around the idea of doing less than my best, so I have trouble with the idea of using an army list that is...."lesser" than I could succeed with. My alternative is to pick a weaker codex (which is why I play Necrons) and do my best with them. I'm not disparaging you, just pointing out where my viewpoint is coming from.

KingCracker wrote: I can bet 99% of you, would have no real clue on how to face my FlashGits army...in a tournament style setting, local or otherwise, if I just showed up, shook your hand and pulled out my army, you would instantly scratch your head.

I sort of addressed this in my first point, but let me flesh it out. At a tournament, whether someone is familiar with your army or not is irrelevant - it's all about the questions you ask and the strategy you develop before putting any models on the table. I play Dark Eldar. I play the same DE at every tournament, everywhere. We walk up to the table, matched against each other, and I have no idea what Flashgits do.

So I ask, and you explain. My thought process is then this: Lootas hurt me at 48" and can hurt my tanks, rokkit buggies are fast and have rokkits, Boyz and flash gits are 24". I can ignore them. So turn one I wipe out all three Loota units with long-ranged venom fire, and turn all ranged anti-tank into your rokkit buggies; you're running nine; I might kill a couple, damage a couple more.

On your turn...you have some midrange threats, and I'm not in mid-range, unless I moved up trueborn to snipe at your rokkit buggies. Depending on your deployment, I may just sit back a turn and save it - make those buggies come to me and out of coverage of your army, or stay in coverage, and out of range of me (generalizations here of course).

That's the biggest weakness of flashgits....and most "oddball" units, and in my opinion, the conceptual flaw behind this kind of army building. Your army shouldn't have "empty threats" or units that can be ignored - ESPECIALLY expensive ones. Flashgits are 24" infantry killers - so your opponents just need to not let them fill their niche.

KingCracker wrote:you have to build your army around what your wanting to take

This is a cornerstone of your argument - but I disagree. I do NOT think you should build your army around what you want to take. I think you should build your army around what you want to accomplish. If your intended accomplishment is to confuse opponents....Flashgits all the way. If your intended accomplishment is a fast, brutal force...that's a different answer. If you want a ponderous dreadnought that can't be taken off the field, another answer. If you want a vicious army that tables opponents....yet another answer.

But I would contend this: Having an army that is a mishmash of inefficient units represents one of three scenarios (keep in mind that we're talking about tournament play here):
1. You're a noob and don't know better.
2. You're hoping that your opponents are noobs, and will panick.
3. You're a 40k pro, and short of bringing half points to the table, it's the only way to get a challenge.

I believe tournament play comes down to list efficiency....which is why you see "spam" used - it's often most efficient. And in terms of efficiency, are Flashgits the most efficient 24" range infantry killer?

Absolutely not.

Limbo wrote: Personally, I like to use the Mawloc , who often gets overshadowed by the much better trygon, and the trygon is better. But the mawloc is far from useless.

Lots of posts like this here. You recognize that one unit is inferior to another unit, and they compete for the same spot and the same points. In terms of efficiency, why bring them?

Debating about the efficiency of one unit over another is one thing....that's what drives differences in "competitive" lists. Player X thinks that a Kan-Wall is more effective, Player Y thinks that Ghazghkull's Battlewagons are more effective. Debating the pros and cons of those is educational, and sometimes entertaining too. But having to build an entire army around an intentionally built in weakness...then talking about the art of maximizing "bad units"....

Maximizing is in itself talking about efficiency. Inserting a mathematically bad unit into an army is the opposite of maximization....whichi makes maximizing the utility of "bad units" oxymoronic. ><

If the thread title was "How to use bad units and possibly not lose," and if the OP wasn't advocating using those units and tactics in a tournament environment, holding out hope of running into people willfully ignorant about your army and being caught by surprise, then I wouldn't disagree with any of those; nor would I likely have posted at all.

But, it is what it is. Truly, this is not meant to be disparaging; just remember that I'm always forthcoming and honest - sometimes quite bluntly.

I honestly like the bluntness of your posts Dash, its refreshing, because its not insulting (to me anyways) and its to the point. And you proved my point about my Gitz army, if someone knows what they are doing, they have a good chance of busting it pretty good, and Ill be the first to admit that FlashGits are far from the best Heavy support Orks have, and really do rank at the bottom (another reason I keep saying putting them in a HS slot instead of elite is just weird) I like to try and take subpar builds and see just how good I am with them, like I mentioned a few times, normal tourny builds are just boring to me. I personally have no illusions that I could take this list to a tourny and just win all over the place. Its main focus was to use subpar units to good effect, and after all that, have fun with it.

But I must say, you, know that if you dont know something about your opposing army, you will ask about it until you know where to go from there, which I do the same thing, Ive asked to be shown the codex and the whole 9 yards so I know where to throw my boyz and so on, but youve also got to admit, not that many people do that (at least out here) they will go on thinking "Ive PWNED X amount of armies, Ill be fine" and jump blindly in. Maybe not the top ranks of tourny players, as they have to know what they are doing to get there. The worst part is, I can defend the Gits as much as possible, but the only way to actually prove they arnt worthless, would be to goto a few tournies and place well enough to prove my point. Im not a tourny player at all, the attitude that is in most of them, and the way its all about spamming the best units, in the best codices just doesnt appeal to me, its too boring. Id rather have some crazy, un seen force, and enjoy myself, then spam BW or melta Vets or whatever.

So obviously this is showing 2 different mind sets, you, being of the tournament mindset, and me, being competitive but mostly just having fun all around. Id enjoy my games more, losing with my FlashGits, knowing that I did something different and gave it a go, then winning with a spam list that you see everywhere on the net.

Dashofpepper wrote:
Lots of posts like this here. You recognize that one unit is inferior to another unit, and they compete for the same spot and the same points. In terms of efficiency, why bring them?

Debating about the efficiency of one unit over another is one thing....that's what drives differences in "competitive" lists. Player X thinks that a Kan-Wall is more effective, Player Y thinks that Ghazghkull's Battlewagons are more effective. Debating the pros and cons of those is educational, and sometimes entertaining too. But having to build an entire army around an intentionally built in weakness...then talking about the art of maximizing "bad units"....

Maximizing is in itself talking about efficiency. Inserting a mathematically bad unit into an army is the opposite of maximization....whichi makes maximizing the utility of "bad units" oxymoronic. ><

If you are building a list around a weakness, then you are not doing what I perceive this thread to be advocating... the point is not to throw a weak unit into a list, but to build a list that makes a unit weak in some circumstances shine. It's not as if you are generally choosing between a good shooting unit and a bad shooting unit in the same FoC - more likely you are choosing between, say, a great shooter everyone takes or a good assault unit that is a beast when properly supported, but is often overlooked. A genuinely bad unit is just a bad unit, but a unit that just suffers in comparison to an OP unit in the same slot, or is designed to work with a specific but rarely seen build, can be made quite competitive, and opens up styles of play that opponents won't necessarily have an easy answer to or experience with.

You need a clear idea of what you want to use said unit for, and HOW you are going to accomplish that - as you pointed out above, you can't have a useless unit in your list or it will be ignored and add nothing to your force. That is where the work of making a "bad" unit into a good one on the table is done. Sometimes you can't make it work, but often you can.

If Flash Gitz can be ignored due to short range and variable AP, maybe two mid-sized units in a Battle Wagon with -1 to AP roll upgrade can overcome those limitations - take down 2 5 man squads a round, or wipe most of a scary deathstar in power armor. Maybe offloading three units of Boyz in the backfield and zooming up three units of Gitz would make for scary dedicated anti-MEQ hunters. I honestly don't know enough about the unit and support units to know if that is viable - you'd need something for popping transports too. Point is, a lot of the time playing to a weak units strengths and minimizing their weaknesses in that way can make a weak unit on paper into a strong unit on the board. That's what you would be looking for if you want to design a list around them. After that, it's proxying or vassal to see if it will work, and either back to the drawing board or on to the table.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Limbo wrote: Personally, I like to use the Mawloc , who often gets overshadowed by the much better trygon, and the trygon is better. But the mawloc is far from useless.

Lots of posts like this here. You recognize that one unit is inferior to another unit, and they compete for the same spot and the same points. In terms of efficiency, why bring them?

Because they are just as strong as Trygons when attacking vehicles (bar hitting a couple of times less), more relible when deep striking and serves as a cheaper distraction than a Trygon

Again fellas, Dash is an obvious tourny player, and I dont think would ever try to take a "less then stellar" unit and fit it into his builds. Hes to much trying to use the best/strongest units in his codices. Which leads to why I think tourny lists(netlists) are boring. If dash writes back, Id like to know if he HONESTLY has played with every unit in the Ork dex more then once (And Im willing to bet there are a few units he has never touched) The reason I ask more then once, is, because you simply CANNOT play a unit once and judge on that performance, if its good or not.

FlashGitz are not auto win, but like Ive said for over a year now, when they DO work, they pulverize MEQ and less. Infact, because of this line of thinking, Ive been messing around with using Blastas/more DAKKA again. Shootier is nice being STR6, but blastas have an even better chance of smoking MEQs. Im thinking I might end up using Blasta/MoreDAKKA against MEQs, to put them down easier, and anything non MEQ, go with with Shootier/MoreDAKKA.

Mawlocs don't have the dual scything talons for re-rolls to hit, and they only have 3 attacks, so they're essentially useless against anything that moved at Cruising Speed. With a Trygon, you can count on about two hits on a fast skimmer.