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.

Ugh, not only is a battlewagon no tougher than a rhino, but it's got a worse save to boot.

I feel like it should be T8 base, and its 'ard case ups its save from 4+ to 3+. Or as it is now, but has a 3+ save base.

That's another thing, it feels like basic troop transports are too expensive and too durable.

For example, a rhino is harder to kill than a dreadnought. Same toughness, same save, 2 more wounds. Why? That makes no sense.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
Ugh, not only is a battlewagon no tougher than a rhino, but it's got a worse save to boot.

I feel like it should be T8 base, and its 'ard case ups its save from 4+ to 3+. Or as it is now, but has a 3+ save base.

That's another thing, it feels like basic troop transports are too expensive and too durable.

For example, a rhino is harder to kill than a dreadnought. Same toughness, same save, 2 more wounds. Why? That makes no sense.

I'm not sure about gameplay wise, but I've got to admit thematically I like the extra wounds and 4+ armor save of the Battlewagon. Seems fitting. I think the 'Ard Case is a fair tradeoff as it is, but I could definitely see giving it some further benefit like 3+ armor save or maybe extra wounds for a price.

The Big Mek with KFF does work pretty well with the Battlewagon, but of course that's adding a decent number of points and taking up transport space.

One thing I'd really like to see is them putting Ramshackle on most every Ork vehicle. That would probably add a lascannon hit or two worth of durability to a Battlewagon, and while might never help out a buggy or kopta theoretically we'd be taking gobs of them anyway and it would still be a good rule. Plus, I think it's really thematic.

I think there are several things they could do to make the Battlewagon better. I kind of like the idea of doing the following:
Drop the base points (it's overcosted anyway) that way it's worth taking it as a taxi for big mobs on Boyz.
Make the 'Ard Case a substantial upgrade to durability at an appropriate points cost. Right now I'm kind of scared to put big, expensive units in it like MANz because it isn't that hard to blow it up and leave them sitting in my backfield.
Give it a version of Grinding Advance that works with all of it's Heavy weapon options. This makes Kannons and Killkannons worth taking at BS 5+, and helps turn the wagon into a mobile bunker.


I also think that Trukks need to be made less durable, and get a substantial points drop. I'll take a drop to 6 wounds even if it means a single lucky Lascannon might destroy the trukk, if the points drop makes it worth putting Boyz in the trukk and not caring when it blows up and leaves them in my deployment zone.

I understand why they wanted to make vehicles more durable in this new edition. It makes sense that people were upset that all of their expensive vehicles were so easy to destroy up. The thing with Orks is that we're supposed to have loads of cheap vehicles, and when one gets blown up we don't care because they have plenty more.

 Blackie wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
X helps unit y? It's a buff. Buffs aren"t new 8th ed invention.

Some buffs modify the units profiles. It's completely different than giving cover/invuln to units under the bubble. Basically buffs replaced the bonuses that characters gave to the units they joined, now they cannot join a unit but they give the buffs to units nearby. That's the difference with the previous editions.

It's still a buff! Buff's have existed since rogue trader in the game. Before there were buffs that affected all close enough and buffs that affected only unit buffer had joined. 8th ed invented nothing new there. If anything it removed stuff.

KFF was hard to balance before as buffs you can apply to arbitary unit, it still is. Nothing changed there.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
Sweet!!! Leaked images of chapter approved show Orkz getting massive price cuts across the board!!!! We are finally competitive!!!!!

Just kidding, GW screwed us again.

Well, apart from the kill tank, your first sentence is correct, many things did receive substantial points cuts. And in some fairness, kill tanks were pretty undercosted, though 150 extra was a bit hefty.

Many things = pks, killsaws, buggies and KMKs. Stop.

Big choppas got a price reduction but 7 or 9 points doesn't change anything, and the morkanaut is still overcosted. The pk points drop means that warbosses and nobz leading boyz units let you save some points and the painboy become more reliable. But meganobz are still quite expensive considering that they must take a ride. 80% of the codex currently needs a points reduction so CA just helped us a little bit. In fact with that release you basically save from your ork list an average of 20-40 points without modifying your style because of CA. Don't care about the kill tank, it's FW, and I agree about the fact that it wasy pretty undercosted.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
Ugh, not only is a battlewagon no tougher than a rhino, but it's got a worse save to boot.

I feel like it should be T8 base, and its 'ard case ups its save from 4+ to 3+. Or as it is now, but has a 3+ save base.

That's another thing, it feels like basic troop transports are too expensive and too durable.

For example, a rhino is harder to kill than a dreadnought. Same toughness, same save, 2 more wounds. Why? That makes no sense.

I'm not sure about gameplay wise, but I've got to admit thematically I like the extra wounds and 4+ armor save of the Battlewagon. Seems fitting. I think the 'Ard Case is a fair tradeoff as it is, but I could definitely see giving it some further benefit like 3+ armor save or maybe extra wounds for a price.

The Big Mek with KFF does work pretty well with the Battlewagon, but of course that's adding a decent number of points and taking up transport space.

One thing I'd really like to see is them putting Ramshackle on most every Ork vehicle. That would probably add a lascannon hit or two worth of durability to a Battlewagon, and while might never help out a buggy or kopta theoretically we'd be taking gobs of them anyway and it would still be a good rule. Plus, I think it's really thematic.

I think there are several things they could do to make the Battlewagon better. I kind of like the idea of doing the following:
Drop the base points (it's overcosted anyway) that way it's worth taking it as a taxi for big mobs on Boyz.
Make the 'Ard Case a substantial upgrade to durability at an appropriate points cost. Right now I'm kind of scared to put big, expensive units in it like MANz because it isn't that hard to blow it up and leave them sitting in my backfield.

As you can probably guess from my avatar, I play battlewagons a lot, even in 8th. They are plenty durable, it takes a ton of shooting to take down even one battlewagon protected by a KFF, 'ard case roughly adds 50% to its durability due to bolters, flamers, autocannons and missiles doing a lot less damage, which seem to be the most common weapon profiles.

The big issue is that battlewagons simply are too expensive, considering that any units you would want to transport are very expensive. In previous editions, you would field three BW at 1500 and four at 2000. If I could simply field those lists I used to play, I'm confident they would work just fine. All those lists are 200-400 points more expensive than before though, so I cannot.
For example a burna wagon is 390 points, a wagon with 10 nobz with runts is also 390 (before adding cc weapons), tank bustaz are 435 (485 with squigs), boyz are 312. You could remove the deff rolla for 19 points less but rarely makes a big difference.
Battlewagon boyz are very lackluster. You usually don't get +1 attack from having 20 models because you either needed one slot for a character or because you took one or more casualties from overwatch/explosion. I'd actually field burnaz instead of boyz despite their ridiculous price tag, but cannot afford to do so because I would be left with too few models on the table.
In addition, both trukk boyz and koptaz, who used to be my support elements both got immense price hikes without actually getting better at their role, so there's that.

Basically dropping points on battlewagons to 5th edition level (when they had 4++ KFF, AV12 and would simply ignore all damage results below 4) would solve most problems of BW armies. We're simply missing the points to field a fourth wagon and/or bring some elite passengers.

Give it a version of Grinding Advance that works with all of it's Heavy weapon options. This makes Kannons and Killkannons worth taking at BS 5+, and helps turn the wagon into a mobile bunker.

You meant "that works with all weapons". There has never been a single rokkit bit for the battle wagon, so that option is probably going away. A codex dakka wagon should be sporting kannon, killkannon and four big shootas. Did you know the quad gun from the ADL fits onto battlewagons?
Stickkbomb chuckas should also make a return as low range low damage weapon.

I also think that Trukks need to be made less durable, and get a substantial points drop. I'll take a drop to 6 wounds even if it means a single lucky Lascannon might destroy the trukk, if the points drop makes it worth putting Boyz in the trukk and not caring when it blows up and leaves them in my deployment zone.

Agree, currently a trukk is simply half a battlewagon. The more efficient one will always outperform the other, currently I see little reason to put something in an open topped battle wagon instead of in a trukk.

I understand why they wanted to make vehicles more durable in this new edition. It makes sense that people were upset that all of their expensive vehicles were so easy to destroy up. The thing with Orks is that we're supposed to have loads of cheap vehicles, and when one gets blown up we don't care because they have plenty more.

The thing is, unlike a predator on the other side of the battlefield, a battlewagon is not that hard to kill. Weapons with AP -1 or -2 work pretty well to take a lot of wounds from them, and all of them will be in range since you're coming close instead of hiding in a corner. Plasma is also pretty dangerous, but luckily I've already reached my goal when someone with 12 pt guns is shooting at me from 12" away

 Blackie wrote:
The KFF has exactly the same mechanic that it had in previous edtions, I wouldn't call it a "buff".

FNP, ghaz aura, waaagh banner, etc... these are 8th edition's buffs, the KFF is always the same thing.

It does not have the exact same mechanic that it had in previous editions (close but not exact), and it has always been a buff and therefore always something that made balance more difficult.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blackie wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
X helps unit y? It's a buff. Buffs aren"t new 8th ed invention.

Some buffs modify the units profiles. It's completely different than giving cover/invuln to units under the bubble. Basically buffs replaced the bonuses that characters gave to the units they joined, now they cannot join a unit but they give the buffs to units nearby. That's the difference with the previous editions.

There is no inherent difference between modifying a unit profile and giving it a different or better save. Buffs given to a single unit are still tricky to balance for, but are much easier to do so than for one that applies to multiple units.

Darsath wrote:
There are many rules writers at Games Workshop who have a similar style, and are passionate about the same armies and factions. This crossover has left the studio lacking in diversity of concepts and army interest.

This is pretty much the problem. Most of the current crop of GW designers seem to just be Marine/Imperium fanboys so find it hard to write for anything else because they are buying into the narrative of "mankind's struggle against foes in the 41st millenium". Back in the day they had people who played Orks a lot, who played Chaos a lot, who played Eldar a lot, and it showed in the fact they would be passionate about their forces to make them thematic and good. But now, when all of them play various flavors of Marine or Guard, you end up with not much love being thrown to the other factions.

Wayniac wrote:

Darsath wrote:
There are many rules writers at Games Workshop who have a similar style, and are passionate about the same armies and factions. This crossover has left the studio lacking in diversity of concepts and army interest.

This is pretty much the problem. Most of the current crop of GW designers seem to just be Marine/Imperium fanboys so find it hard to write for anything else because they are buying into the narrative of "mankind's struggle against foes in the 41st millenium". Back in the day they had people who played Orks a lot, who played Chaos a lot, who played Eldar a lot, and it showed in the fact they would be passionate about their forces to make them thematic and good. But now, when all of them play various flavors of Marine or Guard, you end up with not much love being thrown to the other factions.

For fanboys they seemed to do the Marines a poor job.

M.

 Infantryman wrote:

Wayniac wrote:

Darsath wrote:
There are many rules writers at Games Workshop who have a similar style, and are passionate about the same armies and factions. This crossover has left the studio lacking in diversity of concepts and army interest.

This is pretty much the problem. Most of the current crop of GW designers seem to just be Marine/Imperium fanboys so find it hard to write for anything else because they are buying into the narrative of "mankind's struggle against foes in the 41st millenium". Back in the day they had people who played Orks a lot, who played Chaos a lot, who played Eldar a lot, and it showed in the fact they would be passionate about their forces to make them thematic and good. But now, when all of them play various flavors of Marine or Guard, you end up with not much love being thrown to the other factions.

For fanboys they seemed to do the Marines a poor job.

M.

Contrary to what some people may see on here, Marines aren't actually that bad. They're just mono-build, and the codex has very poor internal balance. But that's common of most 8th edition codexes, not specific to marines.

Btw - post from the Facebook page. "the same team is working on all the codexes so you can be assured that it is getting the same care and attention that all our books receive." In ref to the ork codex.

Let's hope at least one person on that team has actually played orks or at least has read their fluff.

The last we need is more of this "orks can't shot" idiocy.

I'm onboard with low BS, high dice.

Gimme that Assault 4 Shoota...

M.

 Jidmah wrote:
As you can probably guess from my avatar, I play battlewagons a lot, even in 8th. They are plenty durable, it takes a ton of shooting to take down even one battlewagon protected by a KFF, 'ard case roughly adds 50% to its durability due to bolters, flamers, autocannons and missiles doing a lot less damage, which seem to be the most common weapon profiles.

The big issue is that battlewagons simply are too expensive, considering that any units you would want to transport are very expensive. In previous editions, you would field three BW at 1500 and four at 2000. If I could simply field those lists I used to play, I'm confident they would work just fine. All those lists are 200-400 points more expensive than before though, so I cannot.

I think I pretty much agree with you. The Battlewagon is fairly durable, just not for the price. If I did the math right it takes 1-2 more Lascannon hits to take down a Battlewagon than a Rhino. Granted, if it's Missile Launchers then the Battlewagon can be made more durable with the 'Ard Case sidegrade, and Battlewagons gain a lot of benefit from a Big Mek with KFF, but one of those costs more than a Rhino by itself.

A Battlewagon is certainly a lot better than a Rhino and shout cost more, I just don't think it should cost more than twice as much.

 Jidmah wrote:

Give it a version of Grinding Advance that works with all of it's Heavy weapon options. This makes Kannons and Killkannons worth taking at BS 5+, and helps turn the wagon into a mobile bunker.

You meant "that works with all weapons". There has never been a single rokkit bit for the battle wagon, so that option is probably going away. A codex dakka wagon should be sporting kannon, killkannon and four big shootas. Did you know the quad gun from the ADL fits onto battlewagons?
Stickkbomb chuckas should also make a return as low range low damage weapon.

Shooting everything twice would definitely be better, and I don't think it would be overpowered on a BS 5+ model. If they did make that the rule I hope they don't get rid of Rokkits on the Battlewagon.

I had the idea of shooting Heavy Weapons twice because I was planning to write to GW and suggest that they include the Grinding Advance-type rule as part of the wording for Mobile Fortress, as then it easy to FAQ it to apply to all the Forge World units that have it. I was thinking it would make Battlewagons with Supa Kannons and Lifta-Droppas a lot better, as well as the Heavy Weapon options on the Big Trakk without allowing the Supa Skorcha to be fired twice which seems a little overkill. However, when I looked up the Big Trakk in the Index I discovered that the Supa Skorcha was actually a heavy weapon, and Kill Tanks also have Mobile Fortress, so just letting everything with Mobile Fortress shoot their heavy weapons twice probably isn't a good idea. Your suggestion of all weapons and just limiting it to Battlewagons for now is probably a better way of doing it.

I wonder if something they might do is give one price for Rokkits on Killa Kans and Tankbustas, and a different price for everything else. Similarly maybe they'll give Spanner Boyz really cheap versions of Killsawz and Kustom Mega weapons, to acknowledge that the Killsaw isn't worth it on a regular Boy and that they're giving up expensive weapons to start with.

Does anyone else also feel our strats in CA feel like cheap knock off bootlegs of other more powerful chapters strats... being able to combined squads but only if one is less than 10 and the other is more than 10 is very situational and laim (would have much rather had any number can combine with any number like the ig one) and the 6s only giving you 1 extra shot... come on! Shooting armies get to re fire their entire weapon! We needed a buff and got less than they got! How are ork players even still playing this game? It baffles me!

Orks really should get a 1CP you get to shoot twice Strategem. Tyranids get it for 2CP and they are more effective at range. It would be entirely fluffy for Orks to just empty their clips while shooting at something.

 Blackie wrote:

 Kap'n Krump wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
Sweet!!! Leaked images of chapter approved show Orkz getting massive price cuts across the board!!!! We are finally competitive!!!!!

Just kidding, GW screwed us again.

Well, apart from the kill tank, your first sentence is correct, many things did receive substantial points cuts. And in some fairness, kill tanks were pretty undercosted, though 150 extra was a bit hefty.

Many things = pks, killsaws, buggies and KMKs. Stop.

Big choppas got a price reduction but 7 or 9 points doesn't change anything, and the morkanaut is still overcosted. The pk points drop means that warbosses and nobz leading boyz units let you save some points and the painboy become more reliable. But meganobz are still quite expensive considering that they must take a ride. 80% of the codex currently needs a points reduction so CA just helped us a little bit. In fact with that release you basically save from your ork list an average of 20-40 points without modifying your style because of CA. Don't care about the kill tank, it's FW, and I agree about the fact that it wasy pretty undercosted.

nailed it. PKs aren't even worth taking in my opinion. The -1 to hit and the huge reduction in damage vs vehicles they suffered pretty much rendered them null and void to me. Killsaws i will have to start looking at, KMKs as well. Buggies (all 3 versions) are still crap. They are marginally better then a regular Warbike, and with the price reduction, cost slightly more. Ive said it before and I will say it again, Buggies will be getting a new model with the codex release (or around that time) but they are still terrible....which is itself a travesty because if the new model is good I would love to buy 3-9 of them for a huge speed freak army (I already have 30+ Warbikes).

Our 2 Strats are utter garbage, and the Marines one with reroll 1s is significantly better because......they hit on 3s. So those handful of sixes have a 2/3rds chance to become new hits where as our handful of 6s have a 1/3rd chance. Finally, +1 strength for our Warlord? Does anybody on the design team play Orkz? or understand game mechanics?

100% agree! We needed toughness not strength!

 adamsouza wrote:
Orks really should get a 1CP you get to shoot twice Strategem. Tyranids get it for 2CP and they are more effective at range. It would be entirely fluffy for Orks to just empty their clips while shooting at something.

Tbh, there's a huge balance problem in the game right now with Stratagems. Some increase your damage by 100% for 1CP with no condition (Daemon Forge), some by 100% with conditions (Fire Frenzy) and some by 16%... (Dakka dakka dakka).

IMO, firing twice (+100% damage) should cost 3CP without condition (Endless Cacophony, Tyranids, etc...) and 2CP with conditions (staying immobile, closest ennemy, no shooting next turn, etc...). 1CP should be the territory of 16.67%-33.33% stratagems at most.

Does anyone else also feel our strats in CA feel like cheap knock off bootlegs of other more powerful chapters strats... being able to combined squads but only if one is less than 10 and the other is more than 10 is very situational and laim

Is that an Ork stratagem now? That is very cool, harking back to the mob up rule of 3rd edition. I can see it being very useful as our squads are not vulnerable to morale until their numbers dwindle, and then you just mob them up!

Both stratagems are not completely useless, but I find that I'd rather spend my CP on rolling single charge dice or using counter-attack. The also compare in no way to any of the good stratagems other armies get.

I guess it can't hurt to drop a CP on DakkaDakkaDakka for a unit of tank bustaz or lootaz during first turn - anything you kill that turn will not be shooting back for the entire game.

 lolman1c wrote:
Does anyone else also feel our strats in CA feel like cheap knock off bootlegs of other more powerful chapters strats... being able to combined squads but only if one is less than 10 and the other is more than 10 is very situational and laim (would have much rather had any number can combine with any number like the ig one) and the 6s only giving you 1 extra shot... come on! Shooting armies get to re fire their entire weapon! We needed a buff and got less than they got! How are ork players even still playing this game? It baffles me!

Important note it is 10 or less, and 10 or more. So it is not super situational in that you can plan to do it Take a squad of 10 boyz to fill out a troop slot, turn 1 merge them with a squad of 30 boyz, then Da-jump the unit of 40 into the enemy. Or disembark a unit from a transport and join it with another to get up to having bonus attacks. Also allows for 2 Nobz in a squad, or multiple special weapons. The IG strategy is flat out worse than what we got, as it only works on a single unit (the Infantry Squad)that is max size 10 models.

You could also make use of both, by joining 25 lootas into a single squad, possible 75 shots could make decent use of the extra shot on a 6 stratagem. Or join 2 10 man tank bust squads, or a 10 and 15, then jump them and use the extra shot strat firing 20-25 Rokkits + squigs.

Dakka Dakka Dakka-is flat out better than the marine equivalent

I'm not going to pretend these are the best stratagems that exist, but they are not flat worse than most stratagems that exist. There are really a very few high end abilities in each codex (space marines have maybe 1 great ability, with a few other decent ones).

What these aren't are the : Unit gets to shoot twice, or fight twice, or infiltrate style stratagems that other books have been getting.

They are decent strategies that I can see using if I have a bunch of CP in my list.

Breng77 wrote:

You could also make use of both, by joining 25 lootas into a single squad, possible 75 shots could make decent use of the extra shot on a 6 stratagem. Or join 2 10 man tank bust squads, or a 10 and 15, then jump them and use the extra shot strat firing 20-25 Rokkits + squigs.

Have we seen the exact wording yet? I have seen idea of combining different types of squads but haven't heard it actually works like that for sure and not say only with ork boyz.

tneva82 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

You could also make use of both, by joining 25 lootas into a single squad, possible 75 shots could make decent use of the extra shot on a 6 stratagem. Or join 2 10 man tank bust squads, or a 10 and 15, then jump them and use the extra shot strat firing 20-25 Rokkits + squigs.

Have we seen the exact wording yet? I have seen idea of combining different types of squads but haven't heard it actually works like that for sure and not say only with ork boyz.

listened to a guy read verbatim it on you tube, same data sheet is the wording. So it works on more than boyz.

tneva82 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

You could also make use of both, by joining 25 lootas into a single squad, possible 75 shots could make decent use of the extra shot on a 6 stratagem. Or join 2 10 man tank bust squads, or a 10 and 15, then jump them and use the extra shot strat firing 20-25 Rokkits + squigs.

Have we seen the exact wording yet? I have seen idea of combining different types of squads but haven't heard it actually works like that for sure and not say only with ork boyz.

As I said and was told I was lying bpin another thread... I have seen CA. The strat is that the two units have to share the same data sheet. That was the wording.

Breng77 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

You could also make use of both, by joining 25 lootas into a single squad, possible 75 shots could make decent use of the extra shot on a 6 stratagem. Or join 2 10 man tank bust squads, or a 10 and 15, then jump them and use the extra shot strat firing 20-25 Rokkits + squigs.

Have we seen the exact wording yet? I have seen idea of combining different types of squads but haven't heard it actually works like that for sure and not say only with ork boyz.

listened to a guy read verbatim it on you tube, same data sheet is the wording. So it works on more than boyz.

Okay so that's good. And at least dispels wildest hopes of merging meganobz/tank bustas with ork boyz!

Though still bit situational. Most of the time you want to be on small units if you don't have special bonus for being big. Strategem and jump being prime uses for this.

tneva82 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

You could also make use of both, by joining 25 lootas into a single squad, possible 75 shots could make decent use of the extra shot on a 6 stratagem. Or join 2 10 man tank bust squads, or a 10 and 15, then jump them and use the extra shot strat firing 20-25 Rokkits + squigs.

Have we seen the exact wording yet? I have seen idea of combining different types of squads but haven't heard it actually works like that for sure and not say only with ork boyz.

listened to a guy read verbatim it on you tube, same data sheet is the wording. So it works on more than boyz.

Okay so that's good. And at least dispels wildest hopes of merging meganobz/tank bustas with ork boyz!

Though still bit situational. Most of the time you want to be on small units if you don't have special bonus for being big. Strategem and jump being prime uses for this.

I mean all ork units benefit to an extent from being big do to mob rule, Da-jump, Warpath, Use of other stratagems. To me it will often be something you plan to do and not super situational. You might also use it occasionally do it for some on the fly advantage. Same with Dakka Dakka Dakka, it is not really situational, you will either plan to use it, or you will likely never use a CP for it.

Upset we didn't get any cool psychic powers this CA

Breng77 wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
Does anyone else also feel our strats in CA feel like cheap knock off bootlegs of other more powerful chapters strats... being able to combined squads but only if one is less than 10 and the other is more than 10 is very situational and laim (would have much rather had any number can combine with any number like the ig one) and the 6s only giving you 1 extra shot... come on! Shooting armies get to re fire their entire weapon! We needed a buff and got less than they got! How are ork players even still playing this game? It baffles me!

Important note it is 10 or less, and 10 or more. So it is not super situational in that you can plan to do it Take a squad of 10 boyz to fill out a troop slot, turn 1 merge them with a squad of 30 boyz, then Da-jump the unit of 40 into the enemy. Or disembark a unit from a transport and join it with another to get up to having bonus attacks. Also allows for 2 Nobz in a squad, or multiple special weapons. The IG strategy is flat out worse than what we got, as it only works on a single unit (the Infantry Squad)that is max size 10 models.

You could also make use of both, by joining 25 lootas into a single squad, possible 75 shots could make decent use of the extra shot on a 6 stratagem. Or join 2 10 man tank bust squads, or a 10 and 15, then jump them and use the extra shot strat firing 20-25 Rokkits + squigs.

Dakka Dakka Dakka-is flat out better than the marine equivalent

I'm not going to pretend these are the best stratagems that exist, but they are not flat worse than most stratagems that exist. There are really a very few high end abilities in each codex (space marines have maybe 1 great ability, with a few other decent ones).

What these aren't are the : Unit gets to shoot twice, or fight twice, or infiltrate style stratagems that other books have been getting.

They are decent strategies that I can see using if I have a bunch of CP in my list.

I like and appreciate your optimism and enthusiasm for the new chapter approved stuff but I just can’t really see where you are coming from. What does a squad of 40 boyz do that 30 can’t do? Not a lot in my opinion, definitely not more Cc attacks with that model count. As for two nobs in a squad Is that really that good? With the heavy supports mobbing up 1. Does anyone have 25 lootas or tankbusta? 2. How many points is that, about 500 for each type? 3. How are these units surviving the big target that’s just been put on them? (Because they don’t fit in any transports?). Off the top of my head I thing you would end up with about 5 extra hits from 75 loota shots with those two combined strategems.

All in all I just can’t see any real value to either of them, especially the mob up one.

Marklarr you aren't forging the narrative hard enough, and you clearly aren't dakka dakka or waaaghing enough! Duhh.

Sarcasm aside, great points. I agree across the board on your post, Mobbing up for that kind of strategy is useless, in fact the only use I have found for mobbing up as a sneaky kind of maneuver is to have a bunch of trukk boyz get close to the enemy on turn 1, turn 2 they get out to assault and that is when you Da Jump 30 boyz 9inches away from the enemy, but 3 inches from 10 trukk boyz, because then you can theoretically close the charge range from 9 to basically 1in if you wanted. The only problem with this strategy is that its easy to defeat and A Trukk is so prohibitively expensive that there isn't a real benefit because you've used to many points to even get the trukk.

As for the Dakka Strategem. the only use, and I mean the ONLY use for it is to help guarantee a kill on a game critical unit. and even then it isn't much of a benefit and won't guarantee that kill for you. If you do that little Mobbing up trick to get 25 Lootas, then use a CP reroll and magically get 3 shots each you will statistically roll 12 6s which nets you 4 more Hits on average.

So you spent all those CP and got a grand total of.....4 extra Hits with a S7 weapon. Ohh and you guaranteed that units destruction next turn because you made it such an appealing target.

Dakka Dakka strategy should cost 1 CP and let that unit shoot a 2nd time, or up to 3CP to let 3 units shoot twice. Otherwise with our BS it isn't worth doing at all.

 Vallhund wrote:
I agree. It seems as though the people who knew what they where doing with the orks left GW, and now we're left with the same guys who write up the other armies. It's as if they've just decided that orks aren't worth putting time and thought into. Maybe they'll figure themselves out with the codex.

problem is Orks have always been highly random and wacky, but all GW's heard the past.... age is "WE HATEZ RANDOM!"