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.

I don't often play 1500 points, that's a GW UK tournament thing and when playing new guys.

1750 - 1850 - 2000 are in my view better for the overall tournament as many dominant armies at lower points values can be more evenly matched.

I've never won a major tournament, and since you read my posts I'm guessing you know why, so we need not get into that again.

Winning isn't skill based at GTs at the moment , and I'm claiming my skill + this army list does well. I'm not sure why you think this army isn't competitive--have you played it and played against it? If so, how many times?

I've used this list against a list almost identical to the one posted at the start of this thread, on 6'4 and 8'4 boards with 25-50% terrain density.

I haven't lost yet.

Besides your theory, have you playtested and have good experience to share?

How many tournaments have you seen a 6 Dev marine army at? I've seen no army lists with 6 HB squads with tank hunters, except mine.

So, enlighten me as to where your very negative comments come from.

Experience?

for the sake of discussion here's an all comers necron list that i actually play. i'm not saying it would necessarily stomp orks, but i'd feel pretty confident about the matchup.

lord w/ veil and orb
2x 10 warriors
2x 8 immortals
3x 7 scarabs
monolith


include me in the skeptical of stormboyz group. they don't seem that scary on their own. stormboyz + trukks could provide enough targets to overwhelm shooting. but two stormboyz units? not even full strength? with the above list i'd shoot up one and swamp the other with scarabs.

they're good units. the problem is that they aren't any harder to deal with than any other orks; you just have to deal with them sooner. for that to work you need enough turn two threats that they can't be dealt with.

i'm gonna say i like the looks of your assault focused list, because no matter what i do to it something is getting into CC. for a shooty list i'd take shootas, shootas, some more shootas, then lootas and solo deffkoptas for support.

Stelek wrote:I don't often play 1500 points, that's a GW UK tournament thing and when playing new guys.

All European GTs are played at 1500 points. That's the standard points value.

I've never won a major tournament, and since you read my posts I'm guessing you know why, so we need not get into that again.

Yes, I do know why.

I'm not sure why you think this army isn't competitive--have you played it and played against it? If so, how many times? How many tournaments have you seen a 6 Dev marine army at?

Not against your army. I guess people simply don't see the point in taking 5man squads of Marines anymore, or equipping HB squads with the tank hunter veteran skill. I have seen a 6x Chaos Havoc army play at tournaments many times when it was still legal, and I have defeated it myself. The Chaos army had 6 Havoc squads armed with 4 missile launchers each, and all had the tank hunter veteran skill. I played Chaos too.

I haven't lost yet.

That's good to hear. I haven't lost a game of 40K since December 2002, when my Necrons phased out. Tournaments are great fun. I have only once played larger than 1500 point battles on a tournament level. 1500 points really is the norm here.

So, enlighten me as to where your very negative comments come from.

Bad things about your 6x heavy squad army?

-It's incredibly boring to play.
-Opponents don't like it and that may affect your sportmanship scores.
-It's one sided, and tables absolutely stacked with terrain may hurt you.
-5man squads are incredibly vulnerable to morale checks and leak a lot of VPs easily.
-Independent crutch heroes on bikes/flying can cause incredible damage in your side by charging in with the power weapon/fist turned off and finishing the squad off during your turn. Independent characters also completely neutralise Assault Squads that lack power fists.
-Massive lack of anti-tank ability.
-Winning a game requires you to completely annihilate the enemy since that's the only way you can ever capture enough mission objectives to win. If VP's aren't used at all, for example an alpha recon, you're usually in trouble.
-Your army isn't the strongest version of SAFH Marines. I think Mauleed can help you on that. He has had a fantastic track record with his Ultramarines.

for a shooty list i'd take shootas, shootas, some more shootas, then lootas and solo deffkoptas for support.

That may very well be the best way to go at it. I was trying to make lists here that focus on the various excellent support units available, but it seems that most of you feel that Orks are too vulnerable for such elitism and that unless the army has atleast 90 Shoota Boyz in 1500 points it is underpowered. I have more faith in the new Orks than that, but time will tell. All I know is that if 60 Storm Boyz are easy to annihilate for an enemy army, they won't have much trouble with 100 Shoota Boyz who make assault three turns later than the faster units would have.

How undefeated does one need to be with any list they bring before it's pointless?

I've tried running gimp armies, flavor armies, fluff armies, theme armies....doesn't matter much.

Thankfully, I do well in spite of anything I bring.

Don't think I need much help from Mauleed on building smurfs, I don't think much of his Ultramarine list myself.

YMMV of course.

How undefeated does one need to be with any list they bring before it's pointless?

Well, usually once a player thinks he's a good player he starts to play on a GT scale. If he is as good as he thinks, eventually he wins one of them, and he never fails to finish outside of the top 5. Nobody really cares about the undefeated bully in the minor leagues.

Therion wrote:-Opponents don't like it and that may affect your sportmanship scores.

Yeah, my disdain for this kind of thinking at tournaments isn't directed at you, it's more directed at players who think comp=sportsmanship.

Comp is dead. Hopefully sportsmanship and escalation will die soon, and maybe then we'll have a decent tournament system.

I won't hold my breath.

Gee, so if you don't win a GT you're a bully.

Great talking to you.

Stelek wrote:Gee, so if you don't win a GT you're a bully.

...and quite possibly playing in the minor leagues.

Great talking to you.

Since you asked for it I explained in careful detail why your SM army is hopelessly ineffective. You ignored all of it, and instead started talking about you being undefeated with all your armies, although you have never won a major tournament. Let's just say that I'm really happy if this discussion is over, and you decide not to speak to me again since it's painfully obvious we're wasting eachother's time here.

@Selek: totally disagree with you’re about 1750, 1850, 2000, = more balance tourneys. Actually, all that leads to is bigger and more unwieldy armies/games that can't get past a two or three turns. Where talking about, 105+ model Ork armies and 50+ model SM armies and you want more stuff? This is why the best competitive 40k players are, unfortunately, turning to WM.

@Therion: Opponents being able to score on another’s sportsmanship is the other thing that makes competitive 40k a joke these days. Like Selek said, "Doesn’t come down to skill any more".

Good thing hover tanks and armies of guys with jump packs will always look way cooler than wizards with funky steam robots.

I don't think that any new Ork list will be a top tier list with Eldar Mech or Nidzilla, but they will be in the same league as SM AC list or DP. Compared to where they where at we can't really complain.

@Therion: Opponents being able to score on another’s sportsmanship is the other thing that makes competitive 40k a joke these days. Like Selek said, "Doesn’t come down to skill any more".

I don't know how it's in the US but composition has never existed in EU and sports points make about 5% of the total points you can gather from battles and painting. By the way, what do you mean 'any more'? Has something changed to the worse? As far as I know comp & theme was much more important in the US in the past than it is now.

on the subject of orks...

That may very well be the best way to go at it. I was trying to make lists here that focus on the various excellent support units available, but it seems that most of you feel that Orks are too vulnerable for such elitism and that unless the army has atleast 90 Shoota Boyz in 1500 points it is underpowered. I have more faith in the new Orks than that, but time will tell. All I know is that if 60 Storm Boyz are easy to annihilate for an enemy army, they won't have much trouble with 100 Shoota Boyz who make assault three turns later than the faster units would have.

60 stormboyz is talking a whole different ballgame. that's fully committing to the blitz approach and could be very effective. i guess it's not the viability of stormboyz that i'm skeptical of so much as their viability as a support unit.

maybe something like this:

KFF mek

3x 5 lootas

2x 20 shootas, nob w/ klaw

3x 20 stormboyz, nob w/ klaw and bosspole


lootas backing up stormboyz makes more sense to me than the other way around.

Dude, no one said please be a di** about it.

You can not respect me or my views, but being disrespectful is uncalled for.

lootas backing up stormboyz makes more sense to me than the other way around.

Okay Corinth, how about these two lists then? Both are built with a little focus in mind, like you suggested. They got almost identical model counts. One is more resilient and shooty, and the other is a lot faster.

==Footsloggers==

HQ:

Warboss
Bike, Power Klaw, Cybork Body

Big Mek
Kustom Force Field

Elites:

12 Lootas

12 Lootas

12 Kommandos
1 Snikrot, Burna

Troops:

20 Shoota Boyz
Nob, Power Klaw, 2 Rokkits

20 Shoota Boyz
Nob, Power Klaw, 2 Rokkits

20 Shoota Boyz
Nob, Power Klaw, 2 Rokkits

20 Shoota Boyz
Nob, Power Klaw, 2 Rokkits

Total Points: 1500p exactly
Total Models: 119

==Blitzkrieg==

HQ:

Warboss
Bike, Power Klaw, Cybork Body

Elites:

12 Lootas

Troops:

20 Shoota Boyz
Nob, Power Klaw, 2 Rokkits, Bosspole

20 Shoota Boyz
Nob, Power Klaw, 2 Rokkits, Bosspole

Fast Attack:

20 Stormboyz
Nob, Power Klaw

20 Stormboyz
Nob, Power Klaw

20 Stormboyz
Nob, Power Klaw

Total Points: 1500p exactly
Total Models: 113

Therion wrote: Nobody really cares about the undefeated bully in the minor leagues.

Awesome, Therion is my hero....pretty much sums the discussion with Selek up.

The Stormboy blitz with plenty of Loota support seems the logical Ork power army. Lost of shotty+ Backing up plenty of fast attack (very, 2nd ed actually).

Last US GT I played in was 05' and I was 3-2-0 (w-t-l) my buddy who came with me was 3-0-2 and he ranked in the top 10 and I was square in the middle of the pack. I got worse opponent from two guys. One played a TAU Mech list and with incredibly lucky dice rolling, I desimated three mech units on the same turn he deep struck them (he thought it was really cheap I could do that). Second guy didn't like it when I cursed at my dice for rolling a ridiculous amount of ones to wound on my NFW (st 6 pw against t4 orks). After that we discovered WM and the SR tournament system and pretty much shelved 40k for about a year and a half. Now I'm making a come back mostly cuz of the Ork codex and "City Fight" but my buddy and a huge part of my old 40k group are now only playing WM. We're talking about people who have played the game since 1st ED and I thought would play way after I put it down. Don't get me wrong there is still ton's of 40k players around but it's seems to be more and more becoming the game of young kids and people who don't care to read the rules.

Hope the US adopts EU comp rules and quick.

lol excellent trolling fellas.

Too bad I was out actually playing 40k today, eh?

You should try it, might get better. Even join the bush leagues!

rofl

I know you're set on modeling the warboss on a bike but I think two meks with sags or one sag/one kff might be the best buy here.

Or two warpheads. Admittedly the extra waagh is random but with two of them it'd be often enough with the reroll.

If we're talking purely most effective anyway.

This may be biased as I always had difficulty against the Space Wolf Scouts...

I believe the Kommandos w/ Snikrot are effective enough to be in a top tier Ork list. They are more flexible than SW Scouts in the regard they can come in from any table edge. To avoid them, your opponent really has to cram his army towards the center. That should be the easiest area that you can focus your Ork shooting at.

An Ork unit that can effectively avoid being shot at before launching an assault deserves some playtesting at the least, IMO.

Sarigar, isn't that the point of the unit?

Kommandos are I think the biggest bugaboo for Tau and IG. Most other armies can handle it, but those Kommandos can crush an entire flank by themselves.

lol @ comment from pot to kettle. hilarious!

those new lists look dead hard. i can't see much room for improvement, though i personally like bosspoles in stormboyz squads to increase the expected value of orcs in CC on turn two.

i like snikrot with the shooters since he gets to CC without taking fire, leaving only shoota boyz as targets for any guns that can't match the lootas range.

Therion, ignore the baiter for a minute please.

What is your critique of my footslogger ork build theory.

Orlanth wrote:
Big Mek with Shokk Attack Gun.
- I cant iterate this enhough, an Ap2 ordnance weapon that cannot be picked out is too damn good. More than worth his weight in lootas.

But not worth as much as a KFF in a walking army. He's a solid choice, but the KFF is superior.

Kommandos with burnas.
- Six of them, just six with one or two burnas. Get close, flame and die. Might take them might not. Might consider a suicide infiltrating klaw too.

Will 6 even be able to reliably flame? That's only about 14" of effective range, meaning you usually get shot at least one turn before you do anything. And it's not hard to kill 6 orks in one turn.

Lootas
- I will start with two units of six (well hidden) then add every spare point back into them later. I would rather have two mobs of 6 rather than one mob of 12. Though 2x12 is better still. Sure they run easy, but as ssoon as they do they stop shooting. A mob of 12 taking casualties will quickly get to the point where it will run taking six or so lootas out of the game. Having a low 50% mark means that they can more likely rally. Let alone hide. I am concerned about getting a useful cover save for a large loota mob, and splitting them means they cannot so easily be tied up in assault.
So start with 2x6, then add extra orks (in pairs) later if points remain.

Completely disagree. Units of 12-15 don't care if you hit them with single shots. Units of 6, in an army that otherwise have no tanks, suddenly become everyone's target 1 with AT guns that otherwise would be wasted. Kill 2, and flip a coin and if you call it wrong you lose them.

Shoota boyz
- Take six mobzsand work out mob size afterwards. More mobs means more klaws. Assuming a healthy minimum of twenty orks each this eats a little over half your points. I honestly think that mobs of 30m can be vulnerable to assaults as it can be easy to keep the klaw out of combat if you attack the orks, and they can get in the way of the rest of your horde. A greater 'density' of klaw nob coverage from smaller mobz is better. Sure some might start losing fearless, but they will in return be smaller remnants and fewer orks fleeing overall.

I don't get that last comment. No way around it, smaller squads will be more likely to drop out of fearless and run. The will, invariably, die/run faster. Your other comments are valid however.

Koptas
- I am convinced by the arguements for single cheap koptas. Slam them into the first line of the enemy and block LOS for your boyz to march behind. If they die they die.

Except that if they die they don't block any LOS, and in fact give your opponent a free move (towards or away). Koptas will generally lose combat against anything built to fight, so I don't see a ton of utility in them doing suicide charges. Save these for juicy units and objective grabbing.

I have problems with KFF that I mentioned in another thread.

Ok, what is your minimum recommended loota size? I would prefer to get 8 or 12 lootas because of box sizes.

Do you insist on fewer size 30 mobs over taking 6 mobs of whatever size you can get for them (within reason)?

I was seeing koptas as LOS blockers against Tau armies. I fancy a kopta tieing up battlesuits for a worthy amount of time, or a line of fire warriors blocking whatever is behind them.
If facing something where your koptas wont be able to make a good account of themselves (i.e. anything except Guard ands Tau) they still act as mobile TL rokkits and objective grabbers.

Dethkoptas: LOS blocking against Tau would be marginal. Crisis Suits are going to be hiding behind LOS blocking terrain when you assault them, so there's no real gain in blocking LOS (NOTE: unless you play Tau players who leave their Crisis Suits in the open or very sparse terrain) The rest of a typical tourney style Tau army will be vehicles or possibly Broadsides, but Broadsides are targetting vehicles, thus the assault won't block LOS anyways.

The TL Rokkit seems ok, but that puts them within 24" of your opponent's army. Possibly with very, very careful movement.

I'm looking at 12-14 Lootas and 1-2 squads worth. This may give me the flexibility to put them in the most advantageous position instead of having to rely on a KFF. The potential for Orks to run away just seems too great a risk to take.

Orlanth wrote:Ok, what is your minimum recommended loota size? I would prefer to get 8 or 12 lootas because of box sizes.

12 is the minimum I would field. Less than that seems like they'll evaporate too quickly to be worth their points.

Do you insist on fewer size 30 mobs over taking 6 mobs of whatever size you can get for them (within reason)?

Yes. I understand that more klaws is a big plus, but I'd rather have less that I can depend on. I know if I see 6 20 boy mobz, I'm going to shoot each until it's down to ~10, so that even if it hits me, it's likely to lose, fail moral, and die. Mobz that hit me and stay over 10 after a round of combat tie me up and make me cry. Sure, it won't happen reliably, but every time 9 orks breaks, that's a whole unit and it's klaw never coming back.

I was seeing koptas as LOS blockers against Tau armies. I fancy a kopta tieing up battlesuits for a worthy amount of time, or a line of fire warriors blocking whatever is behind them.
If facing something where your koptas wont be able to make a good account of themselves (i.e. anything except Guard ands Tau) they still act as mobile TL rokkits and objective grabbers.

Sure, it'll work on static tau armies, but only if the guy really goofs up his deployment. But it isn't going to be that hard for just one kopta to lose combat. It's only 3 attacks on the charge, and if it takes one wound, it's probably testing on a very bad number, as it'll generally be outnumbered many to one.