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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think high risk/high reward is what Orks should be. Not "random", or as Jid put it, "Randumb".

I see where you are coming from, but I also have to disagree here. High risk/high reward is rarely fun and regularly tends to blow up in GW's face when the risk can be mitigated (see bad moons tripple SAG/SSAG debacle).

The current SAG is the perfect example of high risk/high reward and it's just a horribly unfun unit to both play and play against. I really love my old metal SAG, so I play him frequently, but he never really contributes to a game in an interesting way. Four out of five times, the SAG roll too few shots, too low strength, doesn't hit, doesn't wound or causes minimal damage. In many games it does absolutely nothing or kill one or two models, horribly boring unit. Math says that a SAG has a 50% chance to cause 0 damage.

But that one time when you roll well, it just obliterates something like a stormraven, terminator squad or even a primarch. Yay, I win. It's not hilarious or awesome or anything really. I just announce that caused thirty something damage and the opponent picks up their expensive model and I feel like I somehow cheated them out of it.

I'd much rather have a SAG that is a lot less powerful, but does something more often. Less risk, less reward.

This is where I feel the SJD and bubble chukka did it right. Even if you don't roll the perfect result, the models still do something. And when you do roll the thing you wanted, it's not going to single-handedly win the game.

Nothing quite like a poor sport.

But this I think may go beyond it.

See, whilst we of course lack context, and this is not apologetics (because it’s still a criticism of that player. Bear with, I’ll get there in the end). But it could be an instance of someone who figures Netlist = Easy And Guaranteed victory.

As noted by OP, his opponent’s list was Meta heavy. Whether it was or wasn’t I dunno as I don’t know the modern game, but I’ve no reason to believe OP is fibbing about that.

If so, I understand Orks are generally seen as an Under Dog Codex.

To the untrained eye and uncritical mind, that can equate to “Orks can never beat X”, when in fact it’s all pretty relative - as has been demonstrated in this tale of woe. The difference between You Cannot Make A Good Army From This Codex, and “if you want to win you’ll need every dirty trick and ounce of tactical nous you possess”, and indeed “it’s not that bad. There are just Armies which have a much easier time of it”. And someone who simply fields a list wot won a tournament, with no understanding or consideration of how to actually use it? Could be prone to confusion and embarrassment when they get thrashed

Again I am singularly unqualified to say what’s what in that regard.

It is still exceptionally poor sportsmanship whichever way you butter it.

And I dare say we’ve all seen it. When I had my “filthy, but only if you know what you’re doing with it” Dark Elf army, full of things Everyone Knows Sucks”, I used to regularly thrash people, because I knew my list inside out, and now to get the best of it. Granted the clever tricks weren’t that clever, but definitely lesser seen.

Most took it in good graces and gave me more of a run for my money in further games. But some still insisted I could only have “diced” my victory. That’s bloody rude, as it makes no acknowledgement of my relative skill as a player. And they learn nothing from their thrashing, which meant they fell for the same tricks time and time again, never beating me.

Voss wrote:
If you think its bad now, you've no idea how much people whined about losing terminators to lasguns back in 2nd when they rolled armor saves on 2d6. Silly times.

One of my first 40K memories was a grot taking out a terminator with its pistol.

Hopefully it was your grot & thier termie.

ccs wrote:
Hopefully it was your grot & thier termie.

Eh, when you're playing with friends, it's funny even when it's happening to you.

You gotta take the bad rolls with the good.

 JNAProductions wrote:

ccs wrote:
Hopefully it was your grot & thier termie.

Eh, when you're playing with friends, it's funny even when it's happening to you.

You gotta take the bad rolls with the good.

Well yeah to both. But it's still better when it's your model getting the unlikely kill + bragging rights.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Voss wrote:
If you think its bad now, you've no idea how much people whined about losing terminators to lasguns back in 2nd when they rolled armor saves on 2d6. Silly times.

One of my first 40K memories was a grot taking out a terminator with its pistol.

Ever seen a stand of Gretchin (as they were) pop an Imperator Titan’s reactor because the Imperial Player forgot to channel plasma to their VSG?

Mad Doc Grotsnik has.

Surely that, and the resultant catastrophic meltdown and collateral has to be the biggest point for point kill ever?

Props to the Imperial player for taking it like a champ though.

Need to play Epic A - Orks are excellent! (Well Feral Orks tend to be a force that finds it easy to get draws rather than wins, but otherwise the Horde and Speedfreeks are winning forces...)

 JNAProductions wrote:

ccs wrote:
Hopefully it was your grot & thier termie.

Eh, when you're playing with friends, it's funny even when it's happening to you.

You gotta take the bad rolls with the good.

Funnily enough it was my grot, but my friend ( teenagers being what they are ) rolled one dice to a 1 and then tried to use the second dice to knock the first result into something else. Karma's a bitch though.

Damn. Very different to me were I tend to just believe my opponent 90% of the time if I am unfamiliar with the army rules.

TBF, you shouldn't do that either but a balance of the two is best. There's nothing wrong with asking to see your opponent's rules if you don't know them.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Voss wrote:
If you think its bad now, you've no idea how much people whined about losing terminators to lasguns back in 2nd when they rolled armor saves on 2d6. Silly times.

One of my first 40K memories was a grot taking out a terminator with its pistol.

Ever seen a stand of Gretchin (as they were) pop an Imperator Titan’s reactor because the Imperial Player forgot to channel plasma to their VSG?

Mad Doc Grotsnik has.

Surely that, and the resultant catastrophic meltdown and collateral has to be the biggest point for point kill ever?

Props to the Imperial player for taking it like a champ though.

I can come close.
Many ages ago (2e days) I was playing a game involving Armorcast Titans etc at GenCon.
I missed something in the event description & showed up with a normal Guard army.
Things did not go well for me as I was a might undergunned....
Late in the game though I had a Stormtrooper squad down a Reaver Titan with krak grenades & melta-bombs.
Titan came strolling down the street, stopped right next to the building my troopers were holed up in, paid them no attention & concentrated on some other Titan across board.
Boy was he surprised on my turn.

Story gets better though.
The next day (sunday) that titans owner walks into the 40k area, holds up two Titans & offers them for sale. He needed $ to get home.
My response: "I'll take the brown one!" (The one I'd killed the day before)
That Reaver has been serving me ever since.

Talk about battlefield salvage.

ccs wrote:

I can come close.
Many ages ago (2e days) I was playing a game involving Armorcast Titans etc at GenCon.
I missed something in the event description & showed up with a normal Guard army.
Things did not go well for me as I was a might undergunned....
Late in the game though I had a Stormtrooper squad down a Reaver Titan with krak grenades & melta-bombs.
Titan came strolling down the street, stopped right next to the building my troopers were holed up in, paid them no attention & concentrated on some other Titan across board.
Boy was he surprised on my turn.

Story gets better though.
The next day (sunday) that titans owner walks into the 40k area, holds up two Titans & offers them for sale. He needed $ to get home.
My response: "I'll take the brown one!" (The one I'd killed the day before)
That Reaver has been serving me ever since.

Talk about battlefield salvage.

I remember watching the Armorcast guys playtesting their stuff, and the designer getting incredibly salty when one of the bio-titan things got killed by a Vortex Grenade and houseruling it on the spot so it didn't die so he could win the game. "I'm not supposed to lose, I have bigger units!" basically.

^Ooh, I got one. Some guys rolled up on our gaming club with an armorcast Reaver Titan sometime in 1995-6ish. they wanted to demonstrate how awesome it was, and how it would blow through our army.

Well. . . part of out army was an Exarch on a Jetbike, holofield and all the fixings. A minus 6 to hit that thing once it was going. Not only that, but he had the Exarch Power "Disarm". He flew straight at that Reaver Titan and into CC, handily won the round of combat and, according to the rules, got to disarm the Reaver Titan, popping it's Turbo Laser Destructor right off.

They were none too pleased.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Ooh, I got one. Some guys rolled up on our gaming club with an armorcast Reaver Titan sometime in 1995-6ish. they wanted to demonstrate how awesome it was, and how it would blow through our army.

Well. . . part of out army was an Exarch on a Jetbike, holofield and all the fixings. A minus 6 to hit that thing once it was going. Not only that, but he had the Exarch Power "Disarm". He flew straight at that Reaver Titan and into CC, handily won the round of combat and, according to the rules, got to disarm the Reaver Titan, popping it's Turbo Laser Destructor right off.

They were none too pleased.

Lol!

It's always wacky for me when someone unironically thinks that the meme perception of a faction's capability is what it should be on the tabletop, particularly if it's piloted by someone who actually knows how to build and play a proper list. This makes me think of my cousin where they only play games where they can course through things with cheat codes or other ways of cheesing through a game and pretty much don't expect an actual "game" in the sense where there's a real possibility of losing. It's bizarre to me to have people who engage in a social game for only an ego stroke.

 Grimskul wrote:
It's always wacky for me when someone unironically thinks that the meme perception of a faction's capability is what it should be on the tabletop, particularly if it's piloted by someone who actually knows how to build and play a proper list. This makes me think of my cousin where they only play games where they can course through things with cheat codes or other ways of cheesing through a game and pretty much don't expect an actual "game" in the sense where there's a real possibility of losing. It's bizarre to me to have people who engage in a social game for only an ego stroke.

There's a lot of people with fragile egos, and no sense of fair play, but it seems to come out more in games than many other behaviors. I know a guy who only does big business deals with people he's played a round of golf with, and he watches for sportsmanship more than anything else, because he wants to deal with ethical people.

Hecaton wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
It's always wacky for me when someone unironically thinks that the meme perception of a faction's capability is what it should be on the tabletop, particularly if it's piloted by someone who actually knows how to build and play a proper list. This makes me think of my cousin where they only play games where they can course through things with cheat codes or other ways of cheesing through a game and pretty much don't expect an actual "game" in the sense where there's a real possibility of losing. It's bizarre to me to have people who engage in a social game for only an ego stroke.

There's a lot of people with fragile egos, and no sense of fair play, but it seems to come out more in games than many other behaviors. I know a guy who only does big business deals with people he's played a round of golf with, and he watches for sportsmanship more than anything else, because he wants to deal with ethical people.

Yeah, I guess it's because various types of games have become more mainstream and it's got easy potential bragging rights tied to it with a real "big fish in a small pond" type of deal that can happen easily so people who are insecure can easily try and lord over their "skills/wins".

Hecaton wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
It's always wacky for me when someone unironically thinks that the meme perception of a faction's capability is what it should be on the tabletop, particularly if it's piloted by someone who actually knows how to build and play a proper list. This makes me think of my cousin where they only play games where they can course through things with cheat codes or other ways of cheesing through a game and pretty much don't expect an actual "game" in the sense where there's a real possibility of losing. It's bizarre to me to have people who engage in a social game for only an ego stroke.

There's a lot of people with fragile egos, and no sense of fair play, but it seems to come out more in games than many other behaviors. I know a guy who only does big business deals with people he's played a round of golf with, and he watches for sportsmanship more than anything else, because he wants to deal with ethical people.

wonder how common this is? as a lot of execs play a lot of golf..

So let me get this straight.

This kid knew how to put together a netlist, but didn't know that Orks are more competitive than marines and actually have a positive matchup into them?

Spoletta wrote:
So let me get this straight.

This kid knew how to put together a netlist, but didn't know that Orks are more competitive than marines and actually have a positive matchup into them?

Potentially? Yes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimskul wrote:
It's always wacky for me when someone unironically thinks that the meme perception of a faction's capability is what it should be on the tabletop, particularly if it's piloted by someone who actually knows how to build and play a proper list. This makes me think of my cousin where they only play games where they can course through things with cheat codes or other ways of cheesing through a game and pretty much don't expect an actual "game" in the sense where there's a real possibility of losing. It's bizarre to me to have people who engage in a social game for only an ego stroke.

On computer games, guess it depends on what you’re after.

I play most games on easy mode, as I’m there for fun rather than a challenge. Some I’ll go back through on medium, but no higher. I’m looking to unwind after work, where I can deal with unreasonable people, so I don’t want frustration in my downtime.

Now….vs games? I don’t do those on computer for the above reason, and that I simply don’t have the time to get decent enough to be a challenging opponent online. Tabletop? Just need to pick your game and opponent. I’ve no beef playing and losing, but those super keen on the competitive side and I just aren’t likely to have a satisfying game. I don’t take the game seriously enough, and won’t be any kind of challenge. I mean I’ll still play them because why be snobby.

Spoletta wrote:
So let me get this straight.

This kid knew how to put together a netlist, but didn't know that Orks are more competitive than marines and actually have a positive matchup into them?

Did he actually know or.... did he just copy-paste a netlist from the internet?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
So let me get this straight.

This kid knew how to put together a netlist, but didn't know that Orks are more competitive than marines and actually have a positive matchup into them?

Potentially? Yes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimskul wrote:
It's always wacky for me when someone unironically thinks that the meme perception of a faction's capability is what it should be on the tabletop, particularly if it's piloted by someone who actually knows how to build and play a proper list. This makes me think of my cousin where they only play games where they can course through things with cheat codes or other ways of cheesing through a game and pretty much don't expect an actual "game" in the sense where there's a real possibility of losing. It's bizarre to me to have people who engage in a social game for only an ego stroke.

On computer games, guess it depends on what you’re after.

I play most games on easy mode, as I’m there for fun rather than a challenge. Some I’ll go back through on medium, but no higher. I’m looking to unwind after work, where I can deal with unreasonable people, so I don’t want frustration in my downtime.

Now….vs games? I don’t do those on computer for the above reason, and that I simply don’t have the time to get decent enough to be a challenging opponent online. Tabletop? Just need to pick your game and opponent. I’ve no beef playing and losing, but those super keen on the competitive side and I just aren’t likely to have a satisfying game. I don’t take the game seriously enough, and won’t be any kind of challenge. I mean I’ll still play them because why be snobby.

Oh, I don't really care about how people play single player or multiplayer games in their downtime, since like you said it's all up to what you want to do with said game for fun and there's no elitism on my end on what constitutes a "real game". However, my cousin is a bit of a try-hard and tries to brag about "speed-runs" or how easy a game was for him, despite, you know, him not even playing it normally most of the time.

He's by no means a bad gamer in terms of skill, but he definitely likes to overstate his ability.

I find the WAAC types, particularly in more in-person social games like 40k, where they attempt blatant cheating or poor sportmanship, really dumb since unlike online multiplayer video games, where you can be more detached from your ill-gotten gains from hacking or cheating beyond getting banned or have salty swearing since you can usually auto-queue with people, that acting this way just serves to alienate as TFG that people avoid playing and it usually won't even let you win an actual tournament should they deign to go there, so I don't really see the upside of being this obtuse of a person. Especially since the buy-in for 40k is pretty damn expensive and it's a fast way of making you $2000 hobby investment borderline unusable without anyone to play against.

 Blackie wrote:


Did he actually know or.... did he just copy-paste a netlist from the internet?

Does he have have to copy past anything? You got through marine units and while there are a lot, not many are actualy useful and worth taking. And that is especialy true as far as vehicles goes. Dreadnoughts with their -1D are just better, even with AoC being in effect for tanks.

 Grimskul wrote:
It's always wacky for me when someone unironically thinks that the meme perception of a faction's capability is what it should be on the tabletop, particularly if it's piloted by someone who actually knows how to build and play a proper list. This makes me think of my cousin where they only play games where they can course through things with cheat codes or other ways of cheesing through a game and pretty much don't expect an actual "game" in the sense where there's a real possibility of losing. It's bizarre to me to have people who engage in a social game for only an ego stroke.

i still try to play my orks the most. given my scene its good players who have large tournament lists but are playing fun list to have a few beers and laughs, and the "hardcore netlist statsheet warriors" they have decided they have learned best through the internet and crunching numbers, they make super powerful lists that should destroy my casualish squigrider and biker and buggy fun list and then... they suck at playing the mission, make a bunch of mistakes and then bitch the whole time when i win with a blowout in points with like 6 models left on the table and they have half their army doing dickymcgeezack nothing. I enjoy about 3/4 of those games because i like teaching and if they will listen after the game or post turn i can couch them on what the units should be doing. the other 1/4 is like the OP where i muct have cheated they had a bad game and they should have won because i was basically tabled despite a 96 to 12 scoreboard

also of note sometimes a netlister will come in knowing what they are doing, have watched the battle reports, probably got games in with friends at home or a garage, and know how to move and what secondaries to pick and i get my ass absolutely handed to me as an ork because potential for potential its a garbage codex. .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
So let me get this straight.

This kid knew how to put together a netlist, but didn't know that Orks are more competitive than marines and actually have a positive matchup into them?

ork codex was built with ap-1 on a lot of stuff as their way of whittling down with weight of dice at -1AP. space marines basically ignore most of the ap in ork weapons now and if you look at the stats in tournaments of orks vs other codexes they have a slightly positive matchup to some chapters and mostly neutral or negative matchups. its pretty safe to say against generic marines the ork codex is about even with neither player being at a signifigant codex advantage. (vs aeldari who just wreck the orks as they cannot catch the pointy ears, or tyranids playing the everything you can do I can do better factions)

https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/cliff.thomas3637/viz/40kFightClubTheMetaDataDashboard/40kFightClub-MetaDashboard?publish=yes

 Blackie wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
So let me get this straight.

This kid knew how to put together a netlist, but didn't know that Orks are more competitive than marines and actually have a positive matchup into them?

Did he actually know or.... did he just copy-paste a netlist from the internet?

Makes me think of this:

If that was true, then it would be very grim for all people whose armies have to play meta lists to be able to play the game at the casual level.

Karol wrote:
If that was true, then it would be very grim for all people whose armies have to play meta lists to be able to play the game at the casual level.

Karol, most people suck at the game. For every ultra competitive skilled player, theres a thousand bad casual ones that just want to push models on a table.

Strong profiles can only carry you so far if you lack experience and knowledge how to steer your army.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Karol wrote:
If that was true, then it would be very grim for all people whose armies have to play meta lists to be able to play the game at the casual level.

Karol, most people suck at the game. For every ultra competitive skilled player, theres a thousand bad casual ones that just want to push models on a table.

that is true. But then we get something like the thread from a few weeks ago. Three noobs start the game. One buys magnus, and it doesn't even matter if he likes the models or is some crypto WAAC, and the problems start. This maybe controversial to say, but I think that within the rules and setting events exist, w40k is more balanced then it is outside of the game. Now that doesn't mean that all armies are worth taking to tournaments, but the lists that are actualy played at events are. Outside of event games it is a total free for all. Specialy when one considers that some armies are designed to work in a specific way.
Harlis or DE were designed to work with open topped transports. Tyranids are designed to use monsters. GK, to use my dudes too, are designed to take NDKs . Those units are in patrol boxs. If a new player start playing with 3 patrol boxs. And his army for GK is 3 NDK, 3 units of interceptors, and some paladins is he doing the WAAC thing, or did he take the units offered on sale by GW, took the units which make sense and ended up with an army which is 80% of what a tournament list is?

And the same GK player can run in to an ork player who started his army with 3 boxs of beast snaggas. And then the problems start for real.

Strong profiles can only carry you so far if you lack experience and knowledge how to steer your army.

That depends. A plasma gun and a lascanon vs a termintor army probably isn't. But something like tyranids army is litteraly carried by undercosted multi wound models. DE were the same. GK were carried by stats of 2 GM NDKs and 3 NDKs. etc