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.

So with the new edition right around the cornering thought I'd see if any of the rumors are favorable for the Greenskins?

So I guess that's either a no, or wait and see...

The ones I'm concerned about are casualty removal and changes to rapid fire and cover.

Today, the boyz can run across the field, with a 4+ cover often enough, and as they move, any that die get pulled from the back. Enemies need to choose, stand and fire at us as we come, or move back and not shoot.

Changes to rapid-fire mean they can keep falling back and firing, while we get less cover, and our casualties have to be taken from the front, that will steal inches from our advance.

Not good, but without seeing all the rules and playing through it, who knows.

I can't imagine that the rumored turn sequence will help the Orks whatsoever.

If it really is Move, Assault, Shoot it will negatively affect the orks being able to fire and assault into a unit like they are used to in 5E.

But before we get worried, the rulebooks are out in like 9 days, so just hold tight and hope for the best.

Bluetau wrote:I can't imagine that the rumored turn sequence will help the Orks whatsoever.

If it really is Move, Assault, Shoot it will negatively affect the orks being able to fire and assault into a unit like they are used to in 5E.

But before we get worried, the rulebooks are out in like 9 days, so just hold tight and hope for the best.

turn sequence has not changed

My standard answer for all of these "Will 6E hurt/help my ____ Codex?"

No one can answer that until we have the actual rules in our hands in 2 weeks! Sorry buddy, can't help you any more than that!

Although the only real 'cheese' in the ork codex (it still gets alot of flak though!) of wound allocation for nob squads it rumoured to get a nerf.
Plus if 'closest model' being removed is true then that can ruin assault and the supposed 'roll 2d6 to assault' thing sounds like a double-edged sword.

I keep hearing 'dreads are getting hull points,' can we hope / expect this to include deff dreads as well?

rabidaskal wrote:I keep hearing 'dreads are getting hull points,' can we hope / expect this to include deff dreads as well?

Hopefully deffdreads WILL become a little better. Of the 4 games I have played using mine, 3 times he got killed before doing ANY damage (twice being killed by a wraithlord) and the 4th, got tied up in CC for 3 turns by a 5 man long fangs squad....having 2 extra DCCWs then died straight after finally killing them.

All the rumors are looking to negatively effect the orks. Except for allies. Having some shooting units that arent BS2 should be a big help.

Phragonist wrote:All the rumors are looking to negatively effect the orks. Except for allies. Having some shooting units that arent BS2 should be a big help.

The Allies thing may only be for team games from the sound of some of the rumors, so I wouldn't count on that.

The 2d6 charge distance is definatly a double edged sword for the orks, it means a 3'-5' charge through open terrain that would have been guaranteed to be successful in 5th could fail in 6th, on the flip side a 5'+ assault that couldn't have happened in 5th(for infantry) can happen in 6th.

Jump infantry getting to strike once at initiative 10 on a 3d6 drop the lowest charge can definitely make storm boyz better(and the necron Triarch Praetorians).

Orks being at ballistic skill 2 is not nearly as detrimental as people make it sound, true your looking for 5+ to hit but you also generally fire a significantly larger volume of shots to make up for it, and if your dice go hot a significantly larger number of hits than most armies can dish out. Look at lootas, if they had a better ballistic skill their points would either skyrocket or they would get a significant nerf, but because they only have a 1/3 chance of hitting a squad of 10 has the potential to fire 30 shots so around 10 hits on average with a very strong gun that massacres troops, MCs, and light vehicles.

Not wanting to fuel any nerdrage, but maybe Orks will get something to help them overcome these?

I.E. Furious Charge getting reworked a little to improve the charging process for orks.

Or mob rule adds something that forces a leadership check before reactive fire (if that's what it's called) occurs?

Just like I said in the DE are getting screwed thread.

The FAQ will determine what really happens to the Orks. So much can change with an errata of special abilities.

TheAvengingKnee wrote:
Orks being at ballistic skill 2 is not nearly as detrimental as people make it sound, true your looking for 5+ to hit but you also generally fire a significantly larger volume of shots to make up for it, and if your dice go hot a significantly larger number of hits than most armies can dish out. Look at lootas, if they had a better ballistic skill their points would either skyrocket or they would get a significant nerf, but because they only have a 1/3 chance of hitting a squad of 10 has the potential to fire 30 shots so around 10 hits on average with a very strong gun that massacres troops, MCs, and light vehicles.

On an unrelated note, I was combing through the Ork codex one day and realized that if anything with a bs that is not awful got one of the several ork weapons, then the game would be broken beyond belief!!

OT now, the new rules aren't what holds the destiny of the 40k metagame. It is the FAQ's.

Which on yet another tangent: for BT, they better get change AAC to only preferred enemy in melee or else they'd get rerolls for all shooting as well. It'd be so broken that it's a quite obvious errata.

Great news, cover saves are nerfed, which !@#$s Lootas, FNP is nerfed, which !@#$s Nobs, and our T-shirt saves that everything wears from Burna Boys to Warbosses is also ignored by anything with a CCW.

Whoopdie doowhee.

Oh, and we don't get access to any of the new Psychic powers and still get stuck with one of the worst Psykers in the entire game. Wheeeeee

Something in there better be good, I swear to god.

From the look of the rumors standard boyz will be a little less effective, but with the bonus' that jump infantry seem to be getting stormboyz will be coming back with a fury

CrashCanuck wrote:but with the bonus' that jump infantry seem to be getting stormboyz will be coming back with a fury

Wait a minute. That just occurred to me. Stormboyz largely rely on either their hidden PK or their I4 PK via Zagstruk, yeah? So wait a minute, how does Zagstruk's rule work? His PK strikes at normal initiative, so does that mean modified by jump infantry charge bonus? What about regular PKs, do they strike at I1 even on the charge? Should be some interesting questions when the rulebook hits and I doubt a quarter of them will be answered in the post-release FAQs.

It's going to be impossible to tell exactly what will happen with Orks, but from what we know:

Positives:
- Hull Points make destroying vehicles easier. This was one of the Orks' biggest weaknesses.
- Snap Fire makes shoota boyz a very scary target for assault.
- All units get a 6+ "save" (of sorts?) against psychic powers, so now Orks have at least some kind of psychic defence.
- Allies might be able to fill in gaps where needed, such as with psykers or more reliable shooting.

Negatives:
- AP values in close combat might negate what little armour saves Orks typically have.
- Cover saves worsened, except for ruins.
- Obscuring vehicles might only give a 5+ cover save, so KFFs will be less useful.
- No (direct) access to new psychic powers.

Neutral (i.e. both good and bad):
- Random charge distances make assaults risky, but the average charge range is higher.
- FNP dropping to 5+ is bad, but it seems to only be negated by Instant Death.

This list isn't comprehensive, of course, and anything is subject to change via FAQs. Overall, to me the Orks aren't looking too bad - IMHO one of the biggest problems for them in 5th was getting everyone else out of their tin cans so the boyz could shoot/chop up the infantry, so the hull points rule might actually be very helpful. But that is then balanced by nerfed cover saves, especially from KFFs to vehicles.

In the end, we'll just have to wait and see.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xxBlazinGhostxx wrote:Which on yet another tangent: for BT, they better get change AAC to only preferred enemy in melee or else they'd get rerolls for all shooting as well. It'd be so broken that it's a quite obvious errata.

It's already limited to close combat in the codex itself. No need for an erratum

Cheexsta wrote:
Neutral (i.e. both good and bad):
- Random charge distances make assaults risky, but the average charge range is higher.

Though I hear Fleet gets to reroll, so at least we have that the turn we Waaaugh.

Great news, cover saves are nerfed, which !@#$s Lootas, FNP is nerfed, which !@#$s Nobs, and our T-shirt saves that everything wears from Burna Boys to Warbosses is also ignored by anything with a CCW.

4+ saves are now more useful, since if you put the armored nobz up in front, they'll still allocate the wounds to those, with a 4+/5+ save, they'll still be pretty resistant.

It also means 'Ard boyz will be a bit more useful.

Cheexsta wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

xxBlazinGhostxx wrote:Which on yet another tangent: for BT, they better get change AAC to only preferred enemy in melee or else they'd get rerolls for all shooting as well. It'd be so broken that it's a quite obvious errata.

It's already limited to close combat in the codex itself. No need for an erratum

I cannot believe I missed that...

Then again I have only read the vows thrice.