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.

SemperMortis wrote:
Ohh, and Trukkz don't perform their job anymore. They were designed as a CHEAP transport for Ork Boyz squads. GW even sold a unit called "Trukk Boyz" but now if you take "Trukk Boyz" you will lose any benefits you normally get for leadership because LD 7 (with nob) won't save you.

It will if you're near a mob of 30. :3

Orks as an army have been extremely Flanderized throughout the editions into being a "horde of Boyz" while losing a lot of tools/comedic "utility" that could potentially make such a horde work in the first place! Additionally, although Orks technically aren't "worse" due to hit mods being -1 to hit (instead of "snap shoot on 6s", there are *more* hit penalties floating around 8th in general. Are you facing Stormravens at night-time? Guess what, most of your army literally cannot do anything! Enjoy rolling 7s to hit, or trying to assault.

When you compare this to the assorted tricks Orks used to have throughout the editions, from Turbo-Boosta move-shenanigans, to Kult of Speed Orks being able to retreat towards a transport, to Weirdboyz having a power that let them push Remain-In-Play templates around ("Why yes, I'll shove that Vortex back into your lines"), Burnas being able to roll 2d6 to penetrate vehicles, Ammo Tunts being able to grant a reroll to-hit to any model in B2B (regaedless if it was the same unit), and there are a lot of potential options for making Orks characterful while giving them more depth of play besides "can I move forward and krump?"

One of the more notable issues with Orks in 7e, other than the disparity of options, a gimpy Mob Rule, junk troops, etc, was that while Orks are fun to convert up, they're actually kind of boring in-game. In a game where armies could get Orders, Doctrines, Canticles, whacky Psychic Powers, Riptide Reactors, Elemental Invocations, and all sorts of kooky "techpieces", the only oddity Orks got outside of "move and shoot" was "Do I pop the Waaagh this turn?" The only problem was this wasn't even a choice, since the answer to this question either became "Always" (you were running a Green Tide), or "Never" (you were running Zhadsnark).

SemperMortis wrote:
Ohh, and Trukkz don't perform their job anymore. They were designed as a CHEAP transport for Ork Boyz squads. GW even sold a unit called "Trukk Boyz" but now if you take "Trukk Boyz" you will lose any benefits you normally get for leadership because LD 7 (with nob) won't save you.

Compared to other transports, they are cheap. Something with 10 wounds or whatever shouldn't cost 30 pts.

SemperMortis wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You can dispute it, but I think you are very, very wrong. Trukks are more expensive, but actually can perform their jobs now. The Ork mobs are nothing short of terrifying, and a balanced list will always struggle to handle these hordes, I think. Ork mobs punch out T7 vehicles and less just fine. T8+ are an issue, but most of them are very pricey. And they're not being taken in the meta from what I've seen.

Also, Gorka/Morka nauts are legit now. One of them killed my entire DC squad in one round. But yeah, Orks have nothing, sure.

30 Ork boyz will put out 120 attacks (if they all got in range) They will hit 90 times, against T7 they will wound 30 times. Against a 3+ save that is 10 wounds. YAY! of course that is also saying like I said ALL of them got in range, all of them rolled average and the opponent only had a 3+ save and no extra stuff like the -1 to hit or the -1 to wound or the 2+ armor save.

Against T8 with a 2+ save though, those 90 hits turn into 15 wounds which equals 2.5 wounds going through after the 2+ save. all with the same stipulations mentioned above. Also if orkz don't have a warboss nearby they don't get to advance and assault, they also suffer severe problems from leadership and lack of ability to kill tough models with good saves.

Gorkanaut is considered to be OK by most of us and that is strictly because of its number of close combat attacks. Its actually hitting significantly harder then a stompa point for point in close combat. Its ranged weaponry though is a joke and all but ignored. So you are saying you are afraid of a 364pt model that moves 8 inches a turn and gets 4 hits with a S6 weapon and 2 hits with a S5 weapon at range a turn? (Rokkit will miss more often then not and the Skorcha is short ranged) It actually costs more then a land raider, is slower then a land raider, is less durable then a land raider (it has 2 more wounds but the LR has a 2+ save) and can only really do damage when it gets into CC. Where as the Land Raider can put out a hurting UNTIL it gets into CC.

You assaulted or allowed a slow walker to assault your assault unit that is designed solely to kill things in CC and were surprised you lost to a model that costs significantly more then your death company.

And the Morkanut? its worse then the GOrkanaut by far.

Thats 30 boys in a vacume. With other bonuses they are hitting drastically more than 90 times. Its possible to get about 6-7 attacks per boy. 8th is about synergy. Looking at the unit on its own is a fallacy.

SemperMortis wrote:
Ohh, and Trukkz don't perform their job anymore. They were designed as a CHEAP transport for Ork Boyz squads. GW even sold a unit called "Trukk Boyz" but now if you take "Trukk Boyz" you will lose any benefits you normally get for leadership because LD 7 (with nob) won't save you.

It's funny cause you said were..past tense.
They just different now. Mine survive more than one enemy shooting phase now so I'll take it.
You said there was no anti tank. I'm going to guess you haven tried Smasha guns yet. But truthfully I have no idea what you expect from Ork antitank. Did you know Grots now have a 6+ save. Which is really good now that bolters cant auto kill them, or much of anything else.
If you can't figure out how to work with Orks new Mob rule or are simply too stubborn to make it work then that's on you. It's brilliant. If you figure it out you'll do very well.

 Xenomancers wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
MagicJuggler - If you won't use the tools available to your army in order to counter a threat, then I can't really say much else.

I play CSM. My closest thing to a "tool" for sniping out characters is either ninja-jumping a Heldrake and hoping my opponent didn't screen their character, or waiting for Noise Marines to die while they're conveniently in Line of Sight, or cheating with casino dice for Infernal Gaze. I suppose I could get cute and take Exalted Flamers instead of actual CSM HQs because they're cheaper, more expendable, and have actual AT guns, so I have the option to hang back and shoot while summoning. At that point though, I might as well be playing a Daemon army, rather than actual Chaos Space Marines. Or there's going "take Magnus, hurr" because the restriction on *attempting* to cast a power more than once per turn means you want the caster that gets bonuses to cast in the first place.

This was an actual issue in 7th edition incidentally, and Wrath of Magnus was the perfect example of this. Warp Charge scaled logarithmically for linear point investments, making it better to have one "big caster" and smaller "battery" casters rather than a bunch of medium casters. Rubric Marines and Sorcerers were already overcosted, and a unit of them was 150 points for *one* Warp Charge; meanwhile, WoM added Heralds Anarchic and Blue Horrors, so Daemons could spend 100 points for 4 Warp Charge. Point-for-point, this was a 6-fold increase in WC efficiency. Guess which army you saw Magnus in (protip: You never actually saw him with Thousand Son Marines).

Perhaps the most hilarious component though was the power Siphon Magic. Siphon Magic was a real mess of a power, because as a Blessing, when it was cast, it meant that whenever a power was successfully manifested nearby, that caster gained a token that could be spent as a Warp Charge point. Other than the funny RAW (Warp Charge was innately not tied to an individual Psyker, and there were no rules for "tokens." Could you store them from turn to turn?), this led to the hilarious issue that the power was awesome for hi-level casters like Magnus, but useless for Level 1 casters like Aspiring Sorcerers (since casting Siphon Magic would prevent casting any other powers, making the extra "Warp Charge" from Siphon Magic useless!).

Despite this, I almost prefer the 7e system to 8e, despite the idiocy that came from GW writing rules that make Bethesda look competent at launch. "May only attempt to cast a power once per turn" is not innately scalable, "spam smite" makes Psyker powers dull and a one-dimensional gun analogue, and it doesn't actually address internal balance between said powers ("Hmm, do I take Warptime or Infernal Gaze? Warptime is clearly superior, hurr.") Imagine if Guard could only issue each Order once per turn, and you had to take a Leadership check for it. Or imagine Sisters only got *one* Act of Faith per turn, period.

The problem lies in the Psychic Focus rule not being scalable at all. Many Tyranids units get penalized since they pay an extra for Psychic capabilities and these are often wasted on Smite-spam

Psychic focus is a really bad rule. How about - just don't make broken powers live invisibility and it doesn't matter if they cast it twice. As long as the psyker is properly costed.

But internal balance is so hard, man! Next you're going to suggest putting point values on all the powers like this is early 4th edition or something like that!

On another note, the biggest issue I found with the 7e system for psy powers (besides the "Battery" one) is that not only was it not scalable (though this was less of an issue than in 8e), but that Psychic Powers were all or nothing.

What I mean by this is, say you take a power like Summoning (a hated power, but this one demonstrates the example perfectly). Summoning gives you extra troops in-game, but you need at least 3 successes. This means if you throw 5 Warp Charge down, you have a 50-50 chance of the summon going off. If it fails, you just wasted 5 Warp Charge on nothing. If you get 5 successes though, your opponent needs to roll 5 sixes in order to deny it. Rolling 4 sixes is the same as rolling 0, and thus it's fairly pointless to actually attempt Denying (better save dice to negate Witchfires/Maledictions if you suspect your opponent will sling a Shriek).

One of the earlier 7e homebrews I did was to revise the Psychic system, so each Psyker got an extra WC, and could "push" for a free die, but they couldn't pool their WC to let one caster be a focal lens. Rather than each power having a Threshold ("must roll at least 3 successes", or "must roll a 5+, 7+, etc" on 2d6), this system instead made every Psychic power only require 1 success to go off, but made them really weak by comparison. However, additional successes (to a max of 4) would increase the effect of the power. Scouring Flame would be S5 AP 4 on 1 success, S8 AP 1 on 4 successes.

On the flipside, rather than being an all or nothing threshold, Deny the Witch would simply subtract successes from manifesting the power. Even if you couldn't completely stop a power from going off, you could blunt the worst of its effects!

I feel like reducing the potential for extreme variance in game results is one of the keys to making for more balanced play overall. You want to win because you outplayed your opponent, not because your opponent got screwed over by mechanical idiosyncracies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You can dispute it, but I think you are very, very wrong. Trukks are more expensive, but actually can perform their jobs now. The Ork mobs are nothing short of terrifying, and a balanced list will always struggle to handle these hordes, I think. Ork mobs punch out T7 vehicles and less just fine. T8+ are an issue, but most of them are very pricey. And they're not being taken in the meta from what I've seen.

Also, Gorka/Morka nauts are legit now. One of them killed my entire DC squad in one round. But yeah, Orks have nothing, sure.

30 Ork boyz will put out 120 attacks (if they all got in range) They will hit 90 times, against T7 they will wound 30 times. Against a 3+ save that is 10 wounds. YAY! of course that is also saying like I said ALL of them got in range, all of them rolled average and the opponent only had a 3+ save and no extra stuff like the -1 to hit or the -1 to wound or the 2+ armor save.

Against T8 with a 2+ save though, those 90 hits turn into 15 wounds which equals 2.5 wounds going through after the 2+ save. all with the same stipulations mentioned above. Also if orkz don't have a warboss nearby they don't get to advance and assault, they also suffer severe problems from leadership and lack of ability to kill tough models with good saves.

Gorkanaut is considered to be OK by most of us and that is strictly because of its number of close combat attacks. Its actually hitting significantly harder then a stompa point for point in close combat. Its ranged weaponry though is a joke and all but ignored. So you are saying you are afraid of a 364pt model that moves 8 inches a turn and gets 4 hits with a S6 weapon and 2 hits with a S5 weapon at range a turn? (Rokkit will miss more often then not and the Skorcha is short ranged) It actually costs more then a land raider, is slower then a land raider, is less durable then a land raider (it has 2 more wounds but the LR has a 2+ save) and can only really do damage when it gets into CC. Where as the Land Raider can put out a hurting UNTIL it gets into CC.

You assaulted or allowed a slow walker to assault your assault unit that is designed solely to kill things in CC and were surprised you lost to a model that costs significantly more then your death company.

And the Morkanut? its worse then the GOrkanaut by far.

Thats 30 boys in a vacume. With other bonuses they are hitting drastically more than 90 times. Its possible to get about 6-7 attacks per boy. 8th is about synergy. Looking at the unit on its own is a fallacy.

Synergy is a loaded term, and one that always bothered me ever since 4th edition Eldar came out because that's when people really started spewing it out.

"Banshees have Synergy with Eldar Farseers, because they can cast Doom on an enemy unit of foot Marines and overcome the Strength issues that Banshees have!"

Synergy as defined by such players is not "two units that work in a vacuum, but can mutually support each other", so much as "one unit is dependent on the other to not completely suck". Khaine save you if you came up against a mechanized army (read: Most 5e armies), leaving your Banshees flailing away uselessly, because each unit of Banshees ate up an Elite slot that could have been used for Fire Dragons!

Real Synergy would have been something like Wave Serpents with Star Engines, and War Walkers or so. Or Karamazov and Interceptors. Or Kroot and a Crisis Commander, etc. These are all historical "standalone" examples of 2 units/characters that could very easily work standalone, did not depend on the other to not suck, and could become more than the sum of their parts.

There's more to synergy than "buff-stacking", and in fact hyper-focused buff-stacking of specific unit combos can result in certain combos that actually don't work as well in "practice" as the designers may have intended! Privateer Press learned this one in Mk2 as the community now has "Skornergy" as a word for when certain buff-combos ironically lead to a fairly non-workable army.

 Talamare wrote:
That detachments provided insane bonuses that were not balanced between armies and a ton of insane free stats, points, and abilities?

Well, I guess it wasn't exactly free since there were some arbitrarily easy unit requirement.

Anyone else feeling 8e is on the fast train to basically what broke 7e...

The hell you on bro? First of all, ha no. Second of all the formation thing was what people who sucked at the game were worried about. People who are good hated deathstars.

 MagicJuggler wrote:

There's more to synergy than "buff-stacking", and in fact hyper-focused buff-stacking of specific unit combos can result in certain combos that actually don't work as well in "practice" as the designers may have intended! Privateer Press learned this one in Mk2 as the community now has "Skornergy" as a word for when certain buff-combos ironically lead to a fairly non-workable army.

I could agree or disagree on how 8th is good or bad, if is an improvement or not, but this is what I used to say for AoS.
Modern design is compromised by this concept that synergy is something defined by small numbers pr-defined by the designer (and you are oh-so-smart to figure out) and not an effect of how the units move and play on the battlefield.

Thank you, MagicJuggler.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ERJAK wrote:

 Talamare wrote:
That detachments provided insane bonuses that were not balanced between armies and a ton of insane free stats, points, and abilities?

Well, I guess it wasn't exactly free since there were some arbitrarily easy unit requirement.

Anyone else feeling 8e is on the fast train to basically what broke 7e...

The hell you on bro? First of all, ha no. Second of all the formation thing was what people who sucked at the game were worried about. People who are good hated deathstars.

You don't ned to "suck" to despise the gladius. Free point on a point game = wrong.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Orks as an army have been extremely Flanderized throughout the editions into being a "horde of Boyz" while losing a lot of tools/comedic "utility" that could potentially make such a horde work in the first place!

As a non-Orkz player, I see that GW has very appropriately honed the Ork army focus to serve as "comedic relief" against the Grimmest Darkest Grimdark that ever Grimdarked.

To properly match the Fluff, Orks should NEVER be anywhere close to "competitive" as an army - otherwise, they'd already have taken over the galaxy! That's why their army is correctly designed to randomly self-destruct or flop at critical junctures.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Orks as an army have been extremely Flanderized throughout the editions into being a "horde of Boyz" while losing a lot of tools/comedic "utility" that could potentially make such a horde work in the first place!

As a non-Orkz player, I see that GW has very appropriately honed the Ork army focus to serve as "comedic relief" against the Grimmest Darkest Grimdark that ever Grimdarked.

To properly match the Fluff, Orks should NEVER be anywhere close to "competitive" as an army - otherwise, they'd already have taken over the galaxy! That's why their army is correctly designed to randomly self-destruct or flop at critical junctures.

No. I don't agree at all. Comedic relief, sure if you find starvation, beatings, genocide and slavery funny then they're hilarious.

 warhead01 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Orks as an army have been extremely Flanderized throughout the editions into being a "horde of Boyz" while losing a lot of tools/comedic "utility" that could potentially make such a horde work in the first place!

As a non-Orkz player, I see that GW has very appropriately honed the Ork army focus to serve as "comedic relief" against the Grimmest Darkest Grimdark that ever Grimdarked.

To properly match the Fluff, Orks should NEVER be anywhere close to "competitive" as an army - otherwise, they'd already have taken over the galaxy! That's why their army is correctly designed to randomly self-destruct or flop at critical junctures.

No. I don't agree at all. Comedic relief, sure if you find starvation, beatings, genocide and slavery funny then they're hilarious.

I'm more taken aback by the idea that entire factions should be non-competitive. That same mindset is what led to Orcs&Goblins being borderline unplayable in 7th WHFB while Daemons ("the ultimate bad guy") were able to steamroll most other armies. The game should be more about generalship and less about "matchup", and both players should have a variety of options beyond the scope of list-building.

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Orks as an army have been extremely Flanderized throughout the editions into being a "horde of Boyz" while losing a lot of tools/comedic "utility" that could potentially make such a horde work in the first place!

As a non-Orkz player, I see that GW has very appropriately honed the Ork army focus to serve as "comedic relief" against the Grimmest Darkest Grimdark that ever Grimdarked.

To properly match the Fluff, Orks should NEVER be anywhere close to "competitive" as an army - otherwise, they'd already have taken over the galaxy! That's why their army is correctly designed to randomly self-destruct or flop at critical junctures.

No. I don't agree at all. Comedic relief, sure if you find starvation, beatings, genocide and slavery funny then they're hilarious.

I'm more taken aback by the idea that entire factions should be non-competitive. That same mindset is what led to Orcs&Goblins being borderline unplayable in 7th WHFB while Daemons ("the ultimate bad guy") were able to steamroll most other armies. The game should be more about generalship and less about "matchup", and both players should have a variety of options beyond the scope of list-building.

Exactly that. I for one have been playing orks for 20 years now. I didn't look at them and say Hey these look like Comedic Relief I'll play those. I get that they way they've been treated or kinda represented is a bit in like with comedy But GW's kinda bone headed. I'm hopeful they want every faction they make models for to be able to play well against the other factions they produce. Looks like they're finally headed in that direction. Time will tell. I really wish that had been the case for 7th edition.
We're going to conqueror the universe with flip flops and machetes, it ain't going to be easy but were going to do it.

WAAC players, my biggest complaint - people who make it their hobby to twist bend and break stuff and call it competitive. Otherwise, the vehicle damage table and some OP undercosted nearly unavoidable units, but then again for this see the first complaint, above, as this was the real problem.

 jeff white wrote:
WAAC players, my biggest complaint.

That's not really a complaint about 7e

That's a complaint about 40k

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Orks as an army have been extremely Flanderized throughout the editions into being a "horde of Boyz" while losing a lot of tools/comedic "utility" that could potentially make such a horde work in the first place!

As a non-Orkz player, I see that GW has very appropriately honed the Ork army focus to serve as "comedic relief" against the Grimmest Darkest Grimdark that ever Grimdarked.

To properly match the Fluff, Orks should NEVER be anywhere close to "competitive" as an army - otherwise, they'd already have taken over the galaxy! That's why their army is correctly designed to randomly self-destruct or flop at critical junctures.

No. I don't agree at all. Comedic relief, sure if you find starvation, beatings, genocide and slavery funny then they're hilarious.

I'm more taken aback by the idea that entire factions should be non-competitive. That same mindset is what led to Orcs&Goblins being borderline unplayable in 7th WHFB while Daemons ("the ultimate bad guy" were able to steamroll most other armies.

The game should be more about generalship and less about "matchup", and both players should have a variety of options beyond the scope of list-building.

Too bad, because GW clearly sees Orks as a joke army.

Warmahordes is over there. >>>

Going into games knowing I was going to lose as a guard player.

It was pretty depressing sometimes. I got good at losing while attempting to have a good spirit.

Now it's often times the opposite.

Using manticores vs riptide wing. AP4? WHO CARES!!! 2+ saves!!!

Had absolutely no problems with 7th other than marines getting everything the xenos should have had again. Loved every game I had, loved the fact my orks felt like orks unlike in 8th.

I just love the fact that a lot of what people were complaining about in 7th was turned up to 11 in 8th and suddenly everyone loves it. Random dice rolls anyone? Also people complain the rules where bloated and yet they have been playing the same core rules for 5 editions, also no one thought there was a "rules" bloat (that no one can agree what it actually is, rules/book/formation) until all the major tournament organisers (that had just jumped on the sigmar wagon after the gh that added points to a game everyone hated the rules for) started posting blogs about the "bloat".

I hate sigmars rules plain and simple but I understand why it had to happen, and yet I would rather play aos than un fun no depth rng tournament hammer that doesn't even stick to its well astablisbed lore, I mean seriously the space marines have a relic called teeth of terra (dorns chainsword) and it's not even unique to the imperial fists, that alone is enough reason for me to despise 8th and any self respecting IF player should at least be annoyed by that weather they like the game or not.

Random dice rolls anyone?

The Issue was not dice rolls as such but that things that should not have been random were: ie Warlord traits, Psychic Abilities etc - which are no longer in 8th ed - so major change for the better.

The "bloat" was that fact that in order to play a given army you have to look in codexes, supplements, downloadable limited edition boxes etc etc etc

Indexes sorted this out for 8th Ed but sadly they are moving back towards it with the new Marine Codex as some units are in one or the other but not both.

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:

I just love the fact that a lot of what people were complaining about in 7th was turned up to 11 in 8th and suddenly everyone loves it. Random dice rolls anyone?

'Everyone' is overstating it somewhat.

The news that 2D6 charge ranges were staying in 8th was one of the big turn-offs for me.

Also people complain the rules where bloated and yet they have been playing the same core rules for 5 editions, also no one thought there was a "rules" bloat (that no one can agree what it actually is, rules/book/formation) until all the major tournament organisers (that had just jumped on the sigmar wagon after the gh that added points to a game everyone hated the rules for) started posting blogs about the "bloat".

People were complaining about rules bloat for at least a decade before AoS came along. It had nothing to do with tournament organisers.

6th and 7th ed just amped it up with a constant stream of rules releases making it almost impossible for players to keep up. Which is what may have made it seem like it was just a tournament thing to you... Not being able to keep up with rules releases is less of an issue for most casual players.

For me:

1) Hot garbage rules with added bloat;

2) Dark Eldar / Flesh Tearer taxi service;

3) Brother Captain Smashfether;

4) Deathstars - case in point, bark bark star or something built around bullet 3;

5) Invisibilty, for extra cheddar add bullets 3 and 4 to it in order to guarantee tears flowing.

'Bout it I think for biggest peeves.

Worst things about 7th?

Excuse me while I set the correct mood - take it away Boyz.


Spill-overs from 6th like Apoc units in normal play.
GMCs, Superheavies and Flyers were terrible. D-weapons were just as bad.
The best MCs in the game weren't from MC armies, or even melee armies, or even monsters for that matter.
The gap between vehicle rules and MC rules.
The gap between shooting and melee in the core rules was huge - in a match between a shootie army and a melee army it was a question of the melee army's ability to cross "no-man's land" on the first turn, if they made it they won, otherwise their overpriced weaponry accounted for exactly squat, or worse, meant less targets for the enemy to kill to prevent them making the trip.
I guess the Alpha Strike should follow on from here but it just swung from shootie armies blowing any melee armies off the field before they managed to cross no-man's land to more melee armies making the trip.
Codex gap - I've got no issue with games being won at the list building level but games were won before lists were even written, some people lost when they chose their army and that's just horrible.
The random patch - most psychic powers were garbage but some psychic powers are so powerful they're game breaking, how do we fix it? Make them random. Supposedly this stops people relying on them...yeah...
The Decurion patch - A result of the codex gap, rather than re-pricing the broken stuff somebody got the bright idea of making unused units "free" to sell more mode - I mean even the game. Some decurions boosted unused units, others just added more hated units to the list alongside Riptides, Stormsurges and Wraithknights.
TFG - yeah, we all know one, some of us know more than one, some of us are one. Most people blame the WAAC guy, the Fluffy At All Cost guy can be just as venomous.

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:
Had absolutely no problems with 7th other than marines getting everything the xenos should have had again. Loved every game I had, loved the fact my orks felt like orks unlike in 8th.

I just love the fact that a lot of what people were complaining about in 7th was turned up to 11 in 8th and suddenly everyone loves it. Random dice rolls anyone? Also people complain the rules where bloated and yet they have been playing the same core rules for 5 editions, also no one thought there was a "rules" bloat (that no one can agree what it actually is, rules/book/formation) until all the major tournament organisers (that had just jumped on the sigmar wagon after the gh that added points to a game everyone hated the rules for) started posting blogs about the "bloat".

No, people had complained about it some time, a simple forum search will show you that. 7E took it to a whole new level though when obtaining the complete game rules went from a ~$700-900 thing to get the core rulebook and every codex and FW book in say, 5E, to many thousands of dollars to collect every codex, supplement, dataslate, campaign book, a triple book core rule set, etc all spread over 4 or 5 different sales channels and the average came time kept creeping up towards 3 hours to deal with all the random charts, card drawing, etc that editions like 3E-5E had significantly less of.

On a more positive note, the thing I think 8th edition did the best in this transition that many past editions lacked was adding chess-like decision making during the battle.

In 7th edition, give me an army and it basically plays itself. This unit is the only thing that can hurt that tank over there so it's probably going to be doing that. This unit is great at quickly assaulting and those guys are awful at assault phase. The list played itself because there were few actual decisions to be made and everything was merely dice rolling on autopilot.

Then 8th edition drops. Command rerolls, strategems, anything can potentially be a threat, buffing auras that alter target priority, the threat of immediate deep strike charges, the removal of the reserves roll allowing a general to plan his assault, modular reinforcement-based daemon summoning, selectable firing modes that actually represent a choice with pros and cons instead of the automatic "this kills more".

I'm hoping as the rules get fleshed out they'll continue focusing on rules and rulebreakers that create a sense of real time leadership of your troops and where a crafty general can defeat an army that is his bane through clever use of unorthodox tactics -- exactly like real life. This is starting to resemble an actual game instead of merely a model-painting Reenactment Platform.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

It will if you're near a mob of 30. :3

So you are spending 85pts for a Trukk to go AS SLOW as a unit of 30 boyz foot sloggin. Why take the trukk in the first place? To get that LD boost from a huge mob you have to be right next to it and the entire point of a Trukk is to deliver its cargo as fast as possible. So your comment doesn't make any sense.

Martel732 wrote:

Compared to other transports, they are cheap. Something with 10 wounds or whatever shouldn't cost 30 pts.

Compared to other Transports they are cheap? They cost 85pts equipped with a big shoota and a Wreckin Ball, Naked they are 76pts which is more then what a Rhino costs. Ironically the reason people took Trukkz at all last edition was for the Assault vehicle rule, this no longer exists and everyone gets it, except you can't move and then unload troops. Rhinos are both more durable and CHEAPER then Trukkz.

 Lance845 wrote:


Thats 30 boys in a vacume. With other bonuses they are hitting drastically more than 90 times. Its possible to get about 6-7 attacks per boy. 8th is about synergy. Looking at the unit on its own is a fallacy.

30 Boyz have 2 attacks base, +1 for choppas, +1 for 20+ models, if Ghaz is nearby they get +1 on the charge, if you have a weirdboy he can cast Warpath for +1 attacks. Grand total? 6, and only on the charge and only if you are within 6in of Ghaz AFTER the charge. 7 attacks is impossible at the moment.

Yes you can buff those attacks, yes you can hit with more attacks, that in no way changes what I said. And with all those buffs, and realistically being the only good buffs we have in our codex we are pretty much required to take Ghaz and Weirdboyz and a Banner Nob in every game and to maximize that points investment we are further obligated to take 90-120boyz and cram them all in the same area so that Ghaz is within 6in of all units.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

It will if you're near a mob of 30. :3

So you are spending 85pts for a Trukk to go AS SLOW as a unit of 30 boyz foot sloggin. Why take the trukk in the first place? To get that LD boost from a huge mob you have to be right next to it and the entire point of a Trukk is to deliver its cargo as fast as possible. So your comment doesn't make any sense.

For protection? If you just wanted speed, it doesn't make sense to pay 85 pts for ~3" extra movement. (Trukks are 12" right? If they're 10" you're getting literally half an inch on average.)

 warhead01 wrote:

It's funny cause you said were..past tense.
They just different now. Mine survive more than one enemy shooting phase now so I'll take it.
You said there was no anti tank. I'm going to guess you haven tried Smasha guns yet. But truthfully I have no idea what you expect from Ork antitank. Did you know Grots now have a 6+ save. Which is really good now that bolters cant auto kill them, or much of anything else.
If you can't figure out how to work with Orks new Mob rule or are simply too stubborn to make it work then that's on you. It's brilliant. If you figure it out you'll do very well.

Yes, Trukkz have the ability to survive longer, and god are they paying for it. 150% increase in price.

Smasha Gunz? 50/50 to hit and then have to roll 2D6 to see if it does anything. That is what you call anti-tank? really?

Grots get a 6+ save now.....who cares? no I mean really who cares? Grots are useless still. You can't even deep strike them onto an objective and hope they stay on it with that cool 6+ save because as soon as a leadership test comes they are going to die in droves.

I am well aware of how to use the new Mob rule and i do my best to maximize its benefits, but the negatives far out weigh our benefits right now. Granted I Play a lot of competitive players who are rather smart and they understand how to strip my units of morale relatively quickly.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

It will if you're near a mob of 30. :3

So you are spending 85pts for a Trukk to go AS SLOW as a unit of 30 boyz foot sloggin. Why take the trukk in the first place? To get that LD boost from a huge mob you have to be right next to it and the entire point of a Trukk is to deliver its cargo as fast as possible. So your comment doesn't make any sense.

For protection? If you just wanted speed, it doesn't make sense to pay 85 pts for ~3" extra movement. (Trukks are 12" right? If they're 10" you're getting literally half an inch on average.)

Trukkz go 12 and they can advance, boyz go 5 and the advance cancels each other out. So at the end of turn 1 my Trukk will be at least 7inches away from a foot sloggin horde. And protection? really? You can just take 14 more boyz for about the same price as the Trukk.

SemperMortis wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:

It's funny cause you said were..past tense.
They just different now. Mine survive more than one enemy shooting phase now so I'll take it.
You said there was no anti tank. I'm going to guess you haven tried Smasha guns yet. But truthfully I have no idea what you expect from Ork antitank. Did you know Grots now have a 6+ save. Which is really good now that bolters cant auto kill them, or much of anything else.
If you can't figure out how to work with Orks new Mob rule or are simply too stubborn to make it work then that's on you. It's brilliant. If you figure it out you'll do very well.

Yes, Trukkz have the ability to survive longer, and god are they paying for it. 150% increase in price.

Smasha Gunz? 50/50 to hit and then have to roll 2D6 to see if it does anything. That is what you call anti-tank? really?

Grots get a 6+ save now.....who cares? no I mean really who cares? Grots are useless still. You can't even deep strike them onto an objective and hope they stay on it with that cool 6+ save because as soon as a leadership test comes they are going to die in droves.

I am well aware of how to use the new Mob rule and i do my best to maximize its benefits, but the negatives far out weigh our benefits right now. Granted I Play a lot of competitive players who are rather smart and they understand how to strip my units of morale relatively quickly.

Would you say this is better or worse than 7th edition trukks?
I know I like them better now.
Smasha Guns are yet another much improved unit from 7th edition. Yes it's random but it's amazing. Hit's on a 4+ which means it can hit flyers on a 5+ Any of them that get past the targets toughness will bleed it out. AP-4 is huge. D6 Damage is fantastic. Heck you could easily kill just about what ever. I tried it I'm hooked I have 6 of them now. I'm tempted to turn all my Mek gunz into Samsha guunz. (That'd give me 12 and I'd feel like a power gamer so I can't do it.) Try Kannons for less points they're quite Killy as well. (Are you playing points or Power Levels? I've done both and I really like the Mek guns better in Power Levels.)
The Grot save hasn't been this goon in 5? editions? Why is that important who cares? Well the poor little grots care. the Space Marines failing to kill them care. Aside from having their shooting weapons changed again they've never seemed more useful. I put them in front, I cover them with my KFF as I move my army forward and now will have them in range of a Pain boy. Not for them they just get the buff while he's there. No one wants to waste their time with fighting Grots. Yes their LD sucks but so far that's not even been an issue. They were charged by a rhino which failed to kill any of them for several turns in my last game. The screen enemy shooting. I can use a Command Point to auto pass their LD test if it's needed bad enough.
I've been on the bad end of the LD test for a few Mobs I know can be bad. I've mostly found that when the other player is put into a big combat and focuses on the wrong small units they're worried about, if they don't kill them all then my lot aren't worried about a LD test. I'll take this LD system over 7th edition's Mob Rule this feels proppa to me.

 warhead01 wrote:


Would you say this is better or worse than 7th edition trukks?

Worse, by far. 7th edition Trukkz were actually better, significantly less durable but more useful for an assault army, especially when Trukk Boyz were still usable.

 warhead01 wrote:

I know I like them better now.
Smasha Guns are yet another much improved unit from 7th edition. Yes it's random but it's amazing. Hit's on a 4+ which means it can hit flyers on a 5+ Any of them that get past the targets toughness will bleed it out. AP-4 is huge. D6 Damage is fantastic. Heck you could easily kill just about what ever. I tried it I'm hooked I have 6 of them now. I'm tempted to turn all my Mek gunz into Samsha guunz. (That'd give me 12 and I'd feel like a power gamer so I can't do it.) Try Kannons for less points they're quite Killy as well. (Are you playing points or Power Levels? I've done both and I really like the Mek guns better in Power Levels.)

Smasha Gunz are not good, they got better but they still aren't where they need to be. Bragging about hitting on a 5+ against flyers really highlights my problem with a lot of our community. We are so used to being crapped on by GW that we actually BRAG about hitting 1/3rd of the time. I agree with you that Kannons are as good. I don't think anyone in the game would think of you as a power gamer if you brought 12 Smasha Gunz. 492pts for 12 S2D6 -4AP D6 damage shots is ridiculously over priced. Right off the bat, against vehicles/flyers you will hit with 6/4 on average, Most vehicles are T7 so you have a 58.3% chance to wound a T7 vehicle (41.7% chance vs T8) So lets round that up to 60% chance and you will wound 3.6 and 2.4 times on average Vs T7. Again lets round UP to 4 and 3. At D6 damage that is 14wounds Vs vehicles and 10ish vs Flyers. That sounds pretty good, except you are seriously over paying for those shots. you are spending more then what it costs to field 3 predator annihilators for the ability to kill one of them a turn. Ohh and Ranged 36 LD4 with a 6+ save...yeah you are going to be running away pretty much the entire game whenever your opponent shoots you.

 warhead01 wrote:

The Grot save hasn't been this goon in 5? editions? Why is that important who cares? Well the poor little grots care. the Space Marines failing to kill them care. Aside from having their shooting weapons changed again they've never seemed more useful. I put them in front, I cover them with my KFF as I move my army forward and now will have them in range of a Pain boy. Not for them they just get the buff while he's there. No one wants to waste their time with fighting Grots. Yes their LD sucks but so far that's not even been an issue. They were charged by a rhino which failed to kill any of them for several turns in my last game. The screen enemy shooting. I can use a Command Point to auto pass their LD test if it's needed bad enough.
I've been on the bad end of the LD test for a few Mobs I know can be bad. I've mostly found that when the other player is put into a big combat and focuses on the wrong small units they're worried about, if they don't kill them all then my lot aren't worried about a LD test. I'll take this LD system over 7th edition's Mob Rule this feels proppa to me.

They are a screening force that no longer gives a mobile cover save. They no longer get a 4+ cover save for being in ruins on an objective. They suck horribly at CC, They are actually WORSE at shooting then they are at CC because they have pistols. Let that sink in, the one unit in our codex we want armed with shootas or good ranged weapons is armed with pistols. You are right that people would rather shoot boyz then Grots but by the same token if they are in range they still can. And if your opponent uses an empty Rhino to block grots for the whole game its a fair trade for him because he doesn't care about that empty rhino either.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Orks as an army have been extremely Flanderized throughout the editions into being a "horde of Boyz" while losing a lot of tools/comedic "utility" that could potentially make such a horde work in the first place!

As a non-Orkz player, I see that GW has very appropriately honed the Ork army focus to serve as "comedic relief" against the Grimmest Darkest Grimdark that ever Grimdarked.

To properly match the Fluff, Orks should NEVER be anywhere close to "competitive" as an army - otherwise, they'd already have taken over the galaxy! That's why their army is correctly designed to randomly self-destruct or flop at critical junctures.

I wouldn't say that's quite right. I'm no background guru, but the reason I see for the Orks having never taken over the galaxy is because they never work together and there's lots of in-fighting. I'm pretty sure that's been referenced in the background several times. And so that shouldn't mean Orks are a stupid/incompetent/competitive army. They're just as savvy in battle as Space Marines, the only difference being separate factions of Space Marines work together.

Mr Morden wrote:

Random dice rolls anyone?

The Issue was not dice rolls as such but that things that should not have been random were: ie Warlord traits, Psychic Abilities etc - which are no longer in 8th ed - so major change for the better.

The "bloat" was that fact that in order to play a given army you have to look in codexes, supplements, downloadable limited edition boxes etc etc etc

Indexes sorted this out for 8th Ed but sadly they are moving back towards it with the new Marine Codex as some units are in one or the other but not both.

I don't really think this was all that bad. Warlord Traits maybe didn't make sense to be fair, but I think the psychic system worked. Similar to old WHFB magic which was good (it had flaws but nothing to do with spell generation). The issue with 8th now is that you'll get psychic powers that never get used, because they're inferior to others in their discipline and/or because they're not worth casting over Smite. It was annoying, but 7th meant you had to sometimes make things work you wouldn't choose otherwise, which was a nice tactical challenge. Don't get me wrong, I prefer the certainty of always having a certain power, but of all the random things in 7th, psychic powers were far from the worst of it.

SemperMortis wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:


Would you say this is better or worse than 7th edition trukks?

Worse, by far. 7th edition Trukkz were actually better, significantly less durable but more useful for an assault army, especially when Trukk Boyz were still usable.

The issue isn't the Trukks themselves. They're more durable now, and can't be one-shotted as they could quite easily be previously. The issue is, as you say, the fact that you'll be relying on bad Ld with such a small boyz unit. While that sadly does mean that boyz in a trukk isn't a competitive choice, there's still plenty of mileage you can get out of trukks - units of 5/6 Nobz with a runt each, MANz, Tankbustas etc

Needing a PhD in xenos and imperial relations both inside and out.