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.

Airmaniac wrote: The Orks however, are unable to deal with AV13 or AV14 Vehicles, period. No, Power Klaws in close combat do not work. Hitting on sixes isn't going to cut it, and that is assuming those Power Klaws actually get into combat.

"Period"? Avoid categorical pronouncements like this and you have a chance of being taken seriously. For five points an ork player gets a handy device (the grabbin klaw) that immobilizes a vehicle for a turn on 4+. At my most recent four tournaments I dropped land raiders like I drop Bristol Scale 7 bowel movements.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Airmaniac wrote: (Land Raider spam being the spoiler for the Orks)

Luckily, an Ork player would never meet Land Raider spam at any of the top tables because such a list would be weeded out in the first three rounds by sundry Tau, Eldar, and whatnot. Very few, if any, Land Raider spam lists have won any major tournament. I can't name one, can you?

Backfire wrote:Lets take ToS 2009 Heat 1 results. Six matches, so it is statistically more signifant than 3-match tournaments. It appears there are no soft scores, with almost 150 participants it's a decent field.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m640087a_Throne_of_Skulls_40K_-_Heat_1.pdf

Top 50 has

-8 Space marines
-6 Imperial Guard
-7 Orks
-6 Eldar
-4 Daemons
-9 Chaos Marines
-2 Dark Angels
-3 Tyranids
-2 Tau
-1 Dark Eldar
-0 Black Templar, Necron or DH

-And apparently there were one Warriors of Chaos and one Dark Elves? One would think that bows and spears aren't a match for a bolt gun...

This means absolutely nothing at all. Not only have you taken absolute data instead of relative data (for example: there are only 3 Dark Angel armies in the field, so 66,67% of them finished top 50, while there are 18 Orks armies in the field, so 38,89% of them finished top 50). You are also forgetting, that not all those armies are playing the the most competitive (or even a competitive) build. Since certain armies have less 'horrible' units then others do, there is no way to compare the strength of the competitive builds of the armies like this.

Can we get off the subject of Orks not being competitive its kind of a moot point.


Im actually more interested in how Tyranids and Space Wolves are gong to start fairing.

olympia wrote:

Airmaniac wrote: The Orks however, are unable to deal with AV13 or AV14 Vehicles, period. No, Power Klaws in close combat do not work. Hitting on sixes isn't going to cut it, and that is assuming those Power Klaws actually get into combat.

"Period"? Avoid categorical pronouncements like this and you have a chance of being taken seriously. For five points an ork player gets a handy device (the grabbin klaw) that immobilizes a vehicle for a turn on 4+. At my most recent four tournaments I dropped land raiders like I drop Bristol Scale 7 bowel movements.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Airmaniac wrote: (Land Raider spam being the spoiler for the Orks)

Luckily, an Ork player would never meet Land Raider spam at any of the top tables because such a list would be weeded out in the first three rounds by sundry Tau, Eldar, and whatnot. Very few, if any, Land Raider spam lists have won any major tournament. I can't name one, can you?

In the first case, this would mean a Battlewagon army probably, meaning the Battlewagon is standing within 6" of the Land Raider to use the Grabbin' Klaw. Whatever is inside the Battlewagon is going to get shot to pieces before it even get's to assault the (50% chance) stationary Land Raider, because the up close and personal Battlewagon is now within Melta range of the Space Marine army.

The second part brings us back to what has been already explained about 10 times in this thread: the first (and very often the second round of the tournament) you can come up against anything. Just because you don't think you will meet Land Raiders on the top tables, doesn't mean you can't meet them in the first two rounds. Also, you will be meeting enough Land Raiders on the top tables as well, as they seem a popular choice for the Space Marines (since they can carry Assault Terminators, which are arguably a very good unit).

Eldar -
Bike Council, Monstrous Eldar, Iyanden build.

Orks -
Diversified nobs in battlewagons (not bikers)
Battlewagon spam
MASSIVE HORDE

Chaos -
Lash Princes, Abbaddon, Plague Marines, Oblits.

Marines -
Vulkan List
Termie heavy List

DE -
Parking lot of doom

IG -
Alpha Strike
mechvets

Nids -
Nidzilla

Necrons -
Dual/Triple monolith, Destroyer heavy.

Daemons -
Throw darts at the codex, get a winning build.

Tau -
Rail line
Battlesuit Army
Krootbash

Has no one had he experience of havng a 15 man Tankbusta squad shooting at their landraider? Or charging it with ST10 and 12 Meltabombs basically?

Seriously, Stop saying orks do not have anti av14. They dont have Melta weapons.. thats it.


I've field 2 to 3 landraiders the just sit there when you have 30 ST8 shots plough into it.

Airmaniac wrote:
This means absolutely nothing at all. Not only have you taken absolute data instead of relative data (for example: there are only 3 Dark Angel armies in the field, so 66,67% of them finished top 50, while there are 18 Orks armies in the field, so 38,89% of them finished top 50). You are also forgetting, that not all those armies are playing the the most competitive (or even a competitive) build. Since certain armies have less 'horrible' units then others do, there is no way to compare the strength of the competitive builds of the armies like this.

I'm not forgetting anything, thank you. I'm just showing that the real world seems to disagree with the theoryhammering of some posters. I mean, you can yap about non-optimal lists and lucky matchups until your keyboard breaks down, but in the end, proof of the pudding is in the eating. A competive army (or list), by definition, is an army which fares well in a competition. That's the bottom line.

Airmaniac wrote:

olympia wrote:

Airmaniac wrote: The Orks however, are unable to deal with AV13 or AV14 Vehicles, period. No, Power Klaws in close combat do not work. Hitting on sixes isn't going to cut it, and that is assuming those Power Klaws actually get into combat.

"Period"? Avoid categorical pronouncements like this and you have a chance of being taken seriously. For five points an ork player gets a handy device (the grabbin klaw) that immobilizes a vehicle for a turn on 4+. At my most recent four tournaments I dropped land raiders like I drop Bristol Scale 7 bowel movements.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Airmaniac wrote: (Land Raider spam being the spoiler for the Orks)

Luckily, an Ork player would never meet Land Raider spam at any of the top tables because such a list would be weeded out in the first three rounds by sundry Tau, Eldar, and whatnot. Very few, if any, Land Raider spam lists have won any major tournament. I can't name one, can you?

In the first case, this would mean a Battlewagon army probably, meaning the Battlewagon is standing within 6" of the Land Raider to use the Grabbin' Klaw. Whatever is inside the Battlewagon is going to get shot to pieces before it even get's to assault the (50% chance) stationary Land Raider, because the up close and personal Battlewagon is now within Melta range of the Space Marine army.

The second part brings us back to what has been already explained about 10 times in this thread: the first (and very often the second round of the tournament) you can come up against anything. Just because you don't think you will meet Land Raiders on the top tables, doesn't mean you can't meet them in the first two rounds. Also, you will be meeting enough Land Raiders on the top tables as well, as they seem a popular choice for the Space Marines (since they can carry Assault Terminators, which are arguably a very good unit).

You cand babble your rhetoric until you are blue in the face, that does not make you right. You are mistaking your interpretation of competitive with truely competetive. What you write on paper and mathhammer out and what is actually doing well in tournaments don't match, so it must be the tournament lists that are lacking, as you cannot possibly be wrong.

Orks are a solid army. They don't have meltas, so the theoryhammer lot conclude that they naturally can't be effective against av14 since meltas are the best tool for that. Wrong. Orks, when played properly by a good general are solid agains any build. You don't have to like it, but don't preach your ignorance of truth as fact; you are wrong.

Im sorry, but this topic is so full of BS that it would take hours getting through it all.

Land raider spam auto loses to many take all comers eldar/dark eldar/tau builds and is very much the definition of "tooling up to beat orks." Since raider spam is not a balanced army, a "balanced ork" do not need to beat it.

Unless you want to say that mech eldar is not a balanced army since a hydra spamming IG can beat that, tau is an unbalanced army since gunline IG can beat that, sisters is an unbalanced army since mech eldar can beat that.....

So the only good army is 2xlash + 9xoblit + plague spam. There, that is the very definition of a competitive army since it doesn't have any points in "countering the other guy's army"!

I cant believe I read this entire thread. Once again orks do struggle against raiders. However this scenario of some marine player having 3+ raiders in anything under 2500 is slowed.

Power klaws can and will do damage, as will tank bustas. In addition the idea of a raider just shooting up battlewagons is bunk, as they have that KFF.

Finally we reach the idea of tau being a very competitive army. Which they are not, for a number of reasons.
1-massacre system, shooting armies are generally not as good at it.

2-same problem that eldar armies face. Tooling up to deal with something. Lots and lots of kroots and fish o fury+submunition railheads could put a hurt on ork horde. But nob bikers or battle wagon bikes would roll all over you. You could take 3 pathfinder teams and 9 broadsides and leave that 3 raider list dead turn 1. But you will get swamped by horde. And when faced with anything and everything in all comers you find you dont have enough to deal with everything.

Finally I will state much of an armies effectiveness is its ease of play. A very experienced eldar player will stomp all over most people, look at blackmoor at the wild west shootout. However most players could no do well with what he ran. Most players could do well with ease armies. Armies which offer lots of bang for their buck, and are forgiving. Other easy armies can be things like black templar and blood angels, which while not the best hand to hand armies still rely on a point HUUURRRRRR charge tactic. Easy armies are armies that require minimal tactical thought to get gains, they handicap the game. So that your really good tau player might pull a draw against your average player running an ork horde. If for no other reason then the ork player got in hand to hand with at least 2 of his boyz.

Orkish, so you honestly believe that a hoarde or mixed ork list has the advantage over a vulkan marine list... lol

You talk bull gak about talking theory, well why are you in the tactics and not in battle reports. THIS IS THEORY.

Hollisman ummm 15 Tankbustas firing at a LR... please tell me you are joking. Assuming you havent already taken casualties getting into rang you cause less than 1 glance, and then the LR can probs take a cover save. Has anyone ever been dumb enough to let there LR be charged by tankbustas?? Seriously seriously hope not.

Hollismason wrote:Has no one had he experience of havng a 15 man Tankbusta squad shooting at their landraider? Or charging it with ST10 and 12 Meltabombs basically?

Seriously, Stop saying orks do not have anti av14. They dont have Melta weapons.. thats it.

I agree with this. Tankbustas coming out of a Trukk or Wagon can shoot all those rockits and then assault with str 10 tank hammers. A LR doesn't have a chance. The effective assault range of the tankbustas is 13" + 2" + 6" = 21 inches. That's nothing to sneeze at. I'm not sure it is viable for any LR spam list to try and sit back further than 21" from the Ork Army. LR spam just can't win vs. Orks that way. And let's remember it is the str 10 tankhammer assault that really does the damage from tankbustas.

Another trick for Orks is to have boarding planks on the wagons. The Wagon moves within 2" of the LR and the str 9 nob or str 10 warboss proceeds to whack on the LR for free. Heck even wrecking balls on Trucks will deliver a str 9 hit on a 4+ to the LR. The units and wargear are there for Orks to be successful vs Land Raiders. And those units will not take away to much from the core of the Ork army so it should be effective against many other type of builds.

IG: Hybrid lists with a strong mech/cav component + an infantry + tank/artillery firebase are also competitive...

It is the all or majority footslog IG list that would be the most challenging to play especially in light of the importance of capturing objectives missions...

97252783 wrote:Orkish, so you honestly believe that a hoarde or mixed ork list has the advantage over a vulkan marine list... lol

You talk bull gak about talking theory, well why are you in the tactics and not in battle reports. THIS IS THEORY.

I don't think, I know. My theory? At least what I stand by with have been proven on board.

Maybe I think - I think you are just a newbie in 40k trying to start BS around the forum.

Well, if anyone desperately needs to prove his point about orks (or any other race) being weak or bottom tier, prove it to me on the table or in tournaments. If you can't, then your theories are just fairy tales. Instead of blaming the system, why not blame it on your own incompetence?

And like what SWPIGWANG has pointed out, competitive is about competitions. Quit trying to prove THEORETICALLY (even though in this case your theoretical reasoning is unsound) that Tyson Gay can sprint faster than Usain Bolt, because I believe what I see in competitions, especially when SAME RESULT REPEATS itself over and over again countless times.

Eidolon wrote:I cant believe I read this entire thread. Once again orks do struggle against raiders. However this scenario of some marine player having 3+ raiders in anything under 2500 is slowed.

QFT. I'm a dedicated CSM raider rusher-so I can fill my Raiders with some of the best assault troops in the game (berzerkers) that also score, and I would never, ever take 3 raiders under 2500.
Now, GK, OTOH...can run 3 raiders...but don't have the tools to deal with Orks at all.

Orkish wrote:

97252783 wrote:Orkish, so you honestly believe that a hoarde or mixed ork list has the advantage over a vulkan marine list... lol

You talk bull gak about talking theory, well why are you in the tactics and not in battle reports. THIS IS THEORY.

I don't think, I know. My theory? At least what I stand by with have been proven on board.

Maybe I think - I think you are just a newbie in 40k trying to start BS around the forum.

Well, if anyone desperately needs to prove his point about orks (or any other race) being weak or bottom tier, prove it to me on the table or in tournaments. If you can't, then your theories are just fairy tales. Instead of blaming the system, why not blame it on your own incompetence?

And like what SWPIGWANG has pointed out, competitive is about competitions. Quit trying to prove THEORETICALLY (even though in this case your theoretical reasoning is unsound) that Tyson Gay can sprint faster than Usain Bolt, because I believe what I see in competitions, especially when SAME RESULT REPEATS itself over and over again countless times.

Show me a battle report where a descent vulkan list has lost to an ork list. I wanna see this proof. Not that the 30 ork players managed to get a couple rank higher than the two vulk lists.

Gotta love it when people judge you on how many posts uv made :-). But to actually say it, wow thats silly.

Lolz at the comment about Usain Bolt (hav no idea who Tyson Gay is). That is proven because they actually compete against each other. Not lil 1 on 1 races where the overall differences in times decided the winner. Cmon you should kno better than that.

Tau are situationally competitive - i would say high tier 2. The things that keep them out of tier one are the fact that their base troop sucks and contributes nothing to the army - therefore necessitating an expensive transport (85 points minimum). They have no psychic defense, and really can't "hold" an objective. Sure they can claim/contest on turn 5, but 66% of the time, the enemy has a chance to kick them off of it next turn. the lack of hth doesn't really bother me. Units that really suck though are unit that can shrug off firepower (Nobs don't qualify). i'm talking seer councils and TH/SS termies. At least TH/SS termies are slow once you pop their raider.

Definitely not tier 1 though - and extremely unforgiving of mistakes.

Hollismason wrote:I hate the Tier statement and in fact am now replacing it with the following statement.


All armies in their own right can be competitive different armies have different levels of skill reuirment and experience in order to play correctly. There are levels of skill required to excell t making a ary competitive. However some armies are naturally easier to play than others.


Easy
Space Marine
etc...

Medium
Templars
etc..

Difficult
Tyranid

etc...

This was lost on page #2, but I would like to say that I agree 100%.


What most people think are "Top" lists are actually just the easiest builds to win with, so people who are bad or mediocure do better with them.

A good player can win with any codex, and with a lot of builds that people don't think about.

agreed with Hollismason and Blackmoor - it's hard to break the tier habit though when talking about it.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:agreed with Hollismason and Blackmoor - it's hard to break the tier habit though when talking about it.

Yeah, I was the same way for the longest time. Then I realized that I could build a list that could win with both the Necron and the Demonhunters codexes, and I became a believer in any codex can win.




Oh, and by the way, here are the 10 ten armies from the UK GTs Heat #2 last week:

1) Orks
2) CSM
3) Eldar
4) CSM
5) Orks
6) Blood Angels
7) Imperial Guard
8) Necrons
9) Daemons
10) Imperial Guard

No soft scores, 6 games at 1500 points, 150 people.


Sorry, go ahead and continue with theorizing with what armies you guys think are good and bad.

LOl then you will see noobs like 97252783 saying "no vulkan list, not counted !".

Davicus wrote:LOl then you will see noobs like 97252783 saying "no vulkan list, not counted !".

Calling him a noob is like the pot calling the kettle black.

There is so much variation in a Vulkan and an Ork list that there is no way that anyone can say for certain which one will win facing each other in a tournament. Personally, I think it would be a close game no matter what the builds are if they players are of equal caliber.

So you are the pot and he is the kettle?

"LOl then you will see noobs like 97252783 saying "no vulkan list, not counted !"."

@Davicus: Did you even read the whole argument? Lolz it was comparing orks and marines, i never said anything about vulkan lists being the best? Ur calling me a noob?

In fact that post was so stupid i cant even see the point you were making. By saying that im a noob if i object to the tournament results being real evidence of the top lists, you obviously believe they are a perfect example.

Yup deamonhunters, blood angels and necrons really are THAT good.

I would have to agree with blackmoor here.

At the end of the day, its down to how the general plays his army.
That is something that no amount of mathhammering can show results for.

Sure, being a better general is a greater advantage than having a more effective list.

But when there is a game between two very good generals, where the difference is often a simple range mistake or the like, having a better list is a massive advantage.

97252783 wrote:Sure, being a better general is a greater advantage than having a more effective list.

But when there is a game between two very good generals, where the difference is often a simple range mistake or the like, having a better list is a massive advantage.

I agree with Blackmoor and Hollismason. 3 Tiers should be replaced with easy to play, medium to play and hard to play. I also disagree with the above statement. Of course one player can have complete gack in their army and will most likely lose to a better list, but if two top Generals are playing each other, then the lists they bring are going to be good no matter what codex they come from. There will be no massive advantage given to anyone. No more massive than the terrain or scenario might give to one or the other.

Not to harp on Blacmooor a bit but I think his footslogging eldar is a perfect example of player skill along with well built army. Most people look at the list and think how the hell does he win with that list. I did as well I just personally did not see it. However I dont discount it because I have read the battle reports of it being played.


As for Tau being competitive.
They're a very dificult army to make competitive now sure theycan mechanize very well but they have to bring a tool for each job to the table.

Personally , the best Tau lists I have played and played against have always taken advantage of fact that they can have dirt cheap troops and the ability to keep them off board with positional or bring them on when needed.


People discount Tau because its a weird army but it just requires some weird list make up. The rmy suffers heavily from a lack of mobility and the new vehicle rules. Everyone keeps discounting orks because they have no melt , um Necrons do not have melta and have 2 units for AV14 ST9 from monolith and heavy gauss and monstrous

Sure they glance which orks can do as well so tht is not the same.

I still think Pirahna / Kroot/ Battlesuit Horde is a great list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The only army I feel that fits in a easy to play / difficult to win category is Necrons.

97252783 wrote:By saying that im a noob if i object to the tournament results being real evidence of the top lists, you obviously believe they are a perfect example.

Honestly, no one here cares about what you think of the tournament results. You can be the weird one out all you care, and blame the system if you want.
Your theories are nothing more than trash to us if we don't see them at work and if the majority of us finds it dumb.