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.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
I voted YES simply because I want to see ALL armies at the Eldar/SM/Tau/Necron power level. That would bring balance without nerfing units, it would make for quicker games because casualty rates would be much higher for everybody, and everybody would be happier because there would be no "have-nots" because all armies would have those gross power builds.

40K is ultimately a power trip fantasy, why not give EVERYBODY a taste of game changing POWAH? I say crank it up to 11!

Something something "D weapons" something something "Gladius". Really, you really want them to crank out the power and give everyone OP crap?

Here's the thing, D weapons, formations with free rules, Super Heavies.....they aren't going anywhere. As much as everybody complains about these things, they are being used regularly by the vast majority of the player base and are here to stay. Wishing for a total rewrite that will eliminate those things is a waste of time, because any rewrite will make sure to include even more.

So that being said, what would be the point of nerfing an upper-tier army into uselessness so it matches other useless armies? Has that EVER helped the game in any significant way? Are Chaos Marine players happier now than in the 3.5 days? Simple truth, nobody likes to have their army nerfed, because it inevitably leads to units being made bad, which leads to units never seeing the field. If I was an Ork player again, I'd much prefer to have an army that is powerful with loads of different options and builds than the mono-build mediocrity it currently is. Having every army equally mediocre leads to an overall boring game and a bored community.

Just make everything to the level of tau/eldar/SM/necrons and let the dice gods decide who wins.

Playing mismatched games just feels terrible sometimes. However, playing my SM against necrons i never feel like my army was screwed from the start, same with my tau.

Neither option is good. Orks need buffing but this stupid MAKE EVERYTHING MOAR OP stuff needs to stop.

As has been stated a few times, bringing everyone down to the level of the ork codex doesn't change the fact that the Ork codex is hot garbage. We have rules that literally make no sense, pieces of wargear which are redundant and we have units that are so subpar compared to other units in our codex that they never see the light of day, except in fluffy for fun games.

One more army at the same tier of potency would only be a good thing.

SemperMortis wrote:
As has been stated a few times, bringing everyone down to the level of the ork codex doesn't change the fact that the Ork codex is hot garbage. We have rules that literally make no sense, pieces of wargear which are redundant and we have units that are so subpar compared to other units in our codex that they never see the light of day, except in fluffy for fun games.

Something something CSM and IG. Trust me, there are a handful of codices that are hot garbage right now.

 jreilly89 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
As has been stated a few times, bringing everyone down to the level of the ork codex doesn't change the fact that the Ork codex is hot garbage. We have rules that literally make no sense, pieces of wargear which are redundant and we have units that are so subpar compared to other units in our codex that they never see the light of day, except in fluffy for fun games.

Something something CSM and IG. Trust me, there are a handful of codices that are hot garbage right now.

Yup, but since I don't own those armies I wont comment on them. But overall I would like to see every army balanced out with each other and each one has lots of internal balance.

 jreilly89 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
As has been stated a few times, bringing everyone down to the level of the ork codex doesn't change the fact that the Ork codex is hot garbage. We have rules that literally make no sense, pieces of wargear which are redundant and we have units that are so subpar compared to other units in our codex that they never see the light of day, except in fluffy for fun games.

Something something CSM and IG. Trust me, there are a handful of codices that are hot garbage right now.

Yep. And Orks aren't at the bottom of the bottom, imho. IG is tough because of all the pie plates, and DE likewise can give us trouble, but any of the bottom 7 are a good game for us.

I voted No for a few reasons, several stated above.

1. You have to stop the power creep. Once Orks get bumped the next thread will be Bring DE, BA, Tyranid to top tier power. The game loses appeal when it just depends who gets first turn to unload their bag of tricks on the other player.

2. The complaints about top tier armies usually focus around particular formations or units. Are there tons of threads about how the Eldar guardian formations are ridiculous, or are the problems wraithknights/warp spiders/jetbikes? Adding a single unit or rule to a competitive formation is really all Orks would need. Example: a green tide-esque formation that didn't require 200 boys that had outflank and/or could charge from reserve. Or just lowering the points on the Ork walker units.

and 3. get ready to explode DakkaDakka. Orks are fairly competitive at low points. From 500-1000 points, most Ork armies and more specifically green tide lists can cause a lot of problems with the number of models on the table.

In short, there are terrible mismatches that can table an Ork player in 2 turns, however, the question is would you like to see Orks become one of the armies doing the tabling?

Just a quick comparison of Like to Like. Eldar (top tier #1 army) Orks (Bottom Tier, possibly dead last)

Anti-Tank Elites:

Eldar Fire Dragons. 22ppm
Ork TankBustas. 13ppm

They have the exact save WS, S, W,
Eldar have better BS, I, LD, and SV
Orks have better T, A.

Orks are equipped with a 24in Rokkit, S8 AP3.
Eldar are equipped with a 12in Melta, S8 AP1.

Orks have a 6+ armor to the Eldars 3+ armor
Orks have BS2 to Eldars 4
Orks have Initiative 2 to Eldars 5
Orks have LD 7 to Eldars 9
Orks have T4 to Eldars 3
Orks have 2A to Eldars 1A.

If you were given the opportunity to add a unit to your codex which would you prefer?

This vocalises my opinion on it.

That's basically what I've been arguing for, OldZoggy:

Incomparables.

The issue in the game right now is that armies with GOOD stats, get special rules (run-shoot-run, ATSKNF, etc) with good shooting get twin linked and access to rerolls for everything. They hit 2/3 the time, and reroll those misses. Wow.

Orks have ****. We hit 1/3 the time. And in cc hit half the time. That's it.

Don't make that roll? That's all you get. Have fun beating yourself up.

SemperMortis wrote:
Just a quick comparison of Like to Like. Eldar (top tier #1 army) Orks (Bottom Tier, possibly dead last)

Anti-Tank Elites:

Eldar Fire Dragons. 22ppm
Ork TankBustas. 13ppm

They have the exact save WS, S, W,
Eldar have better BS, I, LD, and SV
Orks have better T, A.

Orks are equipped with a 24in Rokkit, S8 AP3.
Eldar are equipped with a 12in Melta, S8 AP1.

Orks have a 6+ armor to the Eldars 3+ armor
Orks have BS2 to Eldars 4
Orks have Initiative 2 to Eldars 5
Orks have LD 7 to Eldars 9
Orks have T4 to Eldars 3
Orks have 2A to Eldars 1A.

If you were given the opportunity to add a unit to your codex which would you prefer?

Not a very good comparison, given that FD are outright bonkers at AT job and nothing SHOULD be that good, that cheap, even though you are right about TB not being great.

But yes, many ork units need to be buffed in order to be viable. the general ork special rules needs to be patched up as well. the codex as a whole needs a facelift.

I want Orks to be stronger and for them to function properly with multiple build options. I don't want them to be so overwhelmingly powerful that they can mindlessly auto win against weaker codexes and require massive cheese to take down. Orks have usually been the fun army to play as and against so while I want it to be more fun to play Orks (and not feel like the NPC faction) I also want it to be fun for my opponent to play against Orks.

Fix Ork points cost, fix their durability, make it so melee Orks (Nobz) can actually win fights against other melee focused units, and fix mob rule so it doesn't feel like a punishment and becomes more like a benefit.

I think they are powerful enough. You need to play their strength. Mass infantry, firepower, speed. Stick to the mission objectives. Nothing else.

 wuestenfux wrote:
I think they are powerful enough. You need to play their strength. Mass infantry, firepower, speed. Stick to the mission objectives. Nothing else.

Agreed but Orks really do fail in eternal war against most armies

One thing that comes to minds is are players building 7th edition Ork armies? Or just Ork armies.

I for one am not fully employing the 7th edition army building mechanics. I don't use allies or fortifications at all, which includes the ADL. I hardly even use a Super heavy.
I do enjoy aircraft and have loads of that but I'm guilty of being stuck in my ways and my win loss record, if I had ever kept one, would reflect that. Most losses are close games till the end when I loose or I smash up an army played by a player who doesn't really know their army very well or simply wasn't sure what I would do with against them.
In a way I fell I know strictly play for fun, meaning I don't even consider winning before a game but try me best to during the game. I equate it more to pro wrestling than playing a game now. I go in I cut my promo we have our ups and downs till the rides over and boom it's done one, two, three. a nearly scripted match. All that said I'm a little tired of being the jobber because of my codex. I could have done that by choice with any of the earlier codex.

But it is what it is.
Orks are the embodiment of war not the embodiment of victory.

We don't need even more armies to be brought up to the "table opponents by turn 3"/"flood the board with obsec units and grav", we need those higher up armies to be brought down and the lower down armies to be buffed up to an acceptable mid point where everyone has an internally and externally balanced codex so that every army is on a level playing field even with their respective strengths and weaknesses. Also so that tabling happens with skill (or extremely good/poor rolling of dice at worst) rather than just who brought the most guns and rolled first turn.

Also the assault phase and shooting phase need to be balanced out. And certain unit types (vehicles mainly) need to get an overhaul to not have rules that make them worse for little gain.

All armies should roughly be equivalent.

Unless people like winning just because they are flavour of the month or 7.5 edition.

We don't need even more armies to be brought up to the "table opponents by turn 3"/"flood the board with obsec units and grav", we need those higher up armies to be brought down and the lower down

Making the othere armies more restrictive would help with that but would it create other problems?
If marines tac and assault squads had a starting size of 10 and one Tac squad was compulsory on all of their chapter foc's.
Or a points increase but I don't even know what the current Smace marine points costs are, they had been 150 roughly for a full tac squad before other options.
I keep thinking about Space Marines and Orks from second edition. 300 point tactical squads and orks were roughly 18 points each starting.
I keep going back to buffing the ork mobs by doubling their big shootas. where in 3rd the mob could simply buy three big shootas even at just 10 boys in the mob and the Nob could buy one as well. I think this makes up in a small way for the lack of killing power boys mobs actually have in close combat. I don't know if 3 rokkits should be a thing or not for boys mobs. but 6 big shootas will make a difference.
With Orks I lover my three to one advantage in bodies when mobs get stuk in. this was key (previously) to winning most combats while not having to literally rely on the Nobs. It's disheartening that a boys mob is just a pile of wounds to protect a nob. I'd like the boys to be a lot more meaningful.
While I don't expect or really think the old choppa rule needs to come back I do think there are other ways. Remove the 30 boys cap or just move it up to 40 or 50 models. Improve LD for Nobs even the old Mob up mechanic could help a tone. We'd give up a kill point but keep the warm bodies. Even some slight advantages give to choosing to use a grot mob above 10+1 models. Why not let the boys charge across them. and have the grots squished under foot in some way. Maybe they remove the -2 for assaulting through cover/terrain or can be removed/moved out of the way of a boys mob for assaulting. What ever the buff Orks get should be...Orky?

Rather than buff Orks, I'd prefer to debuff the most powerful codex's.

Bring everything down to the same level rather than buffing and contributing to the power creep. That would also have the advantage of helping out CSM and IG alongside the Orks, and make standard infantry far more relevant again (assuming the debuffs were done right of course.)

There is an other option.

Making armies like tyranids and orks etc truly the opponents out of the fluff and giving all NPC races the "without numbers" special rule for everything they have.

Honest questions to ANYONE voting no:
1. Do you actually think the current Ork codex has good internal balance?
2. Would the 7th edition codex even have a chance against 6th edition codices, before the supposed power creep?
Chances are these answers are "no".

YES! YES! YES!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Honest questions to ANYONE voting no:
1. Do you actually think the current Ork codex has good internal balance?
2. Would the 7th edition codex even have a chance against 6th edition codices, before the supposed power creep?
Chances are these answers are "no".

I think the issue is the pole has basically either "leave as is" or "buff to 7.5 broken as gak level" options. If there was an option for fixing the codex's core issues but not to 7.5 power levels then that would probably get most of the no's and probably some of the yes votes.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Honest questions to ANYONE voting no:
1. Do you actually think the current Ork codex has good internal balance?
2. Would the 7th edition codex even have a chance against 6th edition codices, before the supposed power creep?
Chances are these answers are "no".

1. No.
2. Yes. Varies a bit depending on the codex though.

Question for you: Do you think codexes like Eldar being miles above everyone else with their cheese builds is a good thing?

I voted no. CSM and DE need opponents for their games of Shelfhammer 40,000.

I just started playing the game in January, so I can t say anything about 6th ed. But I must say my Orks are fun - in building and painting. But playing them frustrates me more and more. Even when the guys I play against slow down to make me feel a bit more comfortable, Orks need some love. So I say yes, they need a push! I mean they are Orks! They should be fearless and feel no paint whatsoever. And maybe the ppm should be a bit more balaced.

Orks don't need buffed...they need to be Un-Nerfed.

Make the Mork/Gorkanaut superheavy and fix their moral issues...totally acceptable codex.