hollow one wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

Spoiler:

 hollow one wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
What's that in the backfield that you need protecting that grots are better at than grot gunners?

Well you are obviously protecting against deepstrikes, so you are protecting the board. And when compared to 3ppm gretchin, grot gunners come with expensive mek gunz and are at a huge area denial disadvantage. Don't get me wrong, I take KMKs instead of gretchin, but I also take other heavy armoured units so my KMKs are not the only good target for lascannons. But I think you might be intentionally ignoring the obvious answers here.

Indeed, i am. I think that grots can have a place but it in no way justifies their horrible profile. Grots would have been amazing in a necron army. Or in a SM army if they had no access to guards. But the "grots are the best unit in an ork army" is a gross overstatement. I know that none of you actually advocate that grots are THE best unit. All you're trying to do, at least as i understand it, is say that grots have an implementation and they can be good at some exact role. At which i say: Yeah, but this role is extremely niche for our army and can better be filled with boyz because, while taking less space and being a bit less durable vs s5-7 fire, they ARE better at everything else.

My logics is simple. To use grots, you take points away from the list and dump them to fill this exact niche which is fine and all but if you take the exact same amount of points and dump thim in boyz, they not only fill that niche, albeit a bit less effective in some situations, but also provide other quite important opportunities. Like being able to merge into other units when they get thinned out, being able to wreck face to small units - and i've done it countless times cause i often play vs hardcore players that like, for example, spamming scion comsquads. if they drop in and target something important, they got to make bloody sure they also deal with 10 shootaboyz that stand nearby cause otherwise, they'll loose the squad. 20 grots? Yeah, they'll kill a couple scions but than there are still a couple left. And shootaboyz will just wreck them in mellee before taking a coupe out.

I think in a competitive setting, the only advantage orks have is durability through wounds. Let's be honest here, you're not tabling your opponent if they brought a good list. You know what? You're not tabling them even if they brought a medium list. I would argue that board control through durability is the single most important variable orks can use to win games. Gretchin are easily the best role players to maximise that variable, quite literally twice as effective as boys. It may not be fun to play, or even realistic, but I think 600 gretchin would be the best list orks could field and win the most tournament games by far.

 gmaleron wrote:
Hey guys I'm an aspiring Ork player and I'm curious about one thing, I'm planning on building a list around the Chinork Warkopta and I'm curious based on your experiences what you have found that works well, tactics builds ect?

Shrapnelbait wrote:
Does anyone else find that their Warboss rarely gets into melee? I might be playing it wrong, but in order to protect him, I have to keep him buried in packs of boyz, then he never quite seems to get there before the fight is over.

Should I be looking to make the Warboss as cheap as possible? Is there any models, third party or otherwise that do a good Warboss with big choppa?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Kdash wrote:
So, i was at an event last weekend, and there was a lot of talk between some people about the Ork codex.

Essentially, from what we can gather from the hints coming from known play testers, is that the Ork codex has gone back for a re-write. I'm not sure how long ago it happened or how much the release date has changed but it sounds like they messed up MASSIVELY with it.

Essentially, it's been said that the codex was perfect for open play and narrative.

However, it was a diabolically broken rule set for matched play. And i mean EXTREMELY broken.
The main point issue (though apparently there were several) was that they were allowed to infiltrate their entire army in deployment or turn 1 (don't know which).

Which, as you can image..... .... ....... .....

I don't have any names or sources to give you, only what was being discussed in hushed voices by certain groups of players.

Sounds like bs to me.

A few things to consider -

1. I don't think GW have ever made Orks broken good.
2. I can't see the playtesters having such an impact on release schedules.
3. Many other codexes have released with totally broken things that were not fixed prior to release.
4. I could not imagine any circumstance where GW allowed an entire Ork army to infiltrate/deep strike/forward deploy turn one. It would render certain units completely useless and redundant.
5. Its not really an Orkish thing, much more GSC.

This feels to me like some hard trolling. 'Orks were strong but are preemptively nerfed lol', doesn't sound legit at all.

tneva82 wrote:
Well we don't know what other changes like costs gorkanaut gets. Though with the typical GW style of up prices for index, drop for codex to get people buy expect hefty point drops. This pattern is particularly obvious for vehicles which gorkanaut is...