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.

 Infantryman wrote:
I don't have the current Xeno index (I should buy that?). Is Orky shootaz Rapid Fire or Assault?

M.

18" Str 4 AP - Assault 2.

They're assault. I don't think Rapid Fire is even a profile in the Ork index.

In fact, I can't think of a rapid fire weapon they've had in a long time...

Well, at least they're not THAT bad...

M.

While PKs are stupid expensive right now, is it reasonable to hope they get a boost to they're "killyness." I can't help but feel their damage output can be quite lackluster at times. Technically PKs are the Ork equivalent of lascannons I think, not powerfists; the high damage weapon meant to crack open hard targets.

Just a not clearly thought out thought. Maybe Orks should have an additional wound to represent how much damage they can soak. So 2 wound Boyz.

Tygre wrote:
Just a not clearly thought out thought. Maybe Orks should have an additional wound to represent how much damage they can soak. So 2 wound Boyz.

I believe that's supposed to be represented by being T4. I never really valued how much difference there is between T3 and T4 until I played a game against my friend's Tyranid army. He had a mix of Gaunts and Genestealers and the +1 T made the Stealers much harder to wound. So having T4 on our basic infantry is pretty decent. The only kicker is that the wounds that do go through will probably not get saved.

 GreatGranpapy wrote:

Tygre wrote:
Just a not clearly thought out thought. Maybe Orks should have an additional wound to represent how much damage they can soak. So 2 wound Boyz.

I believe that's supposed to be represented by being T4. I never really valued how much difference there is between T3 and T4 until I played a game against my friend's Tyranid army. He had a mix of Gaunts and Genestealers and the +1 T made the Stealers much harder to wound. So having T4 on our basic infantry is pretty decent. The only kicker is that the wounds that do go through will probably not get saved.

T4 6+ save is just about the same as T3 5+ save (Guardsmen) in regards to durability. 12 S4 hits against T4 6+ save = 5 wounds, 12 S4 hits against T3 5+ = 5 wounds. So the toughness nonsense is just that, nonsense. GW should either give orkz T5 or a 5+ save. 2 Wounds would be going overboard and require a pretty hefty price hike, at least 3pts, probably closer to 4, plus by doing that you require EVERY other Ork unit to do likewise, Nobz will need 3 wounds, meganobz 4 etc etc. I think a 5+ save for maybe 1pt wouldn't be terrible, maybe give us back our inch of movement they took away as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The biggest difference between T3 and T4 in regards to durability is when you start hitting S6+ weapons, and honestly at that point it doesn't matter because your opponent is using Anti armor weapons on infantry.

I'd love the 6'' movement. It also makes sense, just look at the boyz, they're some sort of little hulks.

Rather than T5 I'd like a 6+ FNP for all orks infantries and bikers that is cumulative with the painboy bubble, so it would become 5+ with the dok nearby.

Grot gunners for Gorks and Morks. Let em take up transport capacity but let the walkers actually do more than advance and die.

I made Stratagems and Klan Attributes (attributes sounds bad, but tactics is even worse IMO).

Link: https://1d4chan.org/wiki/The_Angrier_Initiative#ORKS

Not doing the math for S 3 seems like a bad idea. Maybe Boyz aren't tough enough, but do Orks really need to be much tougher than humans? Isn't it enough that Orks are a little bit tougher wearing nothing but a leather vest vs combat armour. Orks are suppose to be a horde army, they are already quite a bit tougher than the smaller Tyranids, I really don't see the problem. There already isn't far between an Ork and a Space Marine.

36 S 4 AP - hits kills 15 Orks or 16 Guardsmen 6.66% more.

36 S 3 AP - hits kills 10 Orks or 12 Guardsmen 20% more.

36 S 7 AP 1 hits kills 24 Orks or 25 Guardsmen 25% more.

36 S 7 AP 3 hits kills 24 Orks or 30 Guardsmen 4.17% more.

36 S 4 AP 1 hits kills 18 Orks or 20 Guardsmen 11.11% more.

36 S 5 AP 2 hits kills 24 Orks or 24 Guardsmen 0% more.

SemperMortis wrote:

 GreatGranpapy wrote:

Tygre wrote:
Just a not clearly thought out thought. Maybe Orks should have an additional wound to represent how much damage they can soak. So 2 wound Boyz.

I believe that's supposed to be represented by being T4. I never really valued how much difference there is between T3 and T4 until I played a game against my friend's Tyranid army. He had a mix of Gaunts and Genestealers and the +1 T made the Stealers much harder to wound. So having T4 on our basic infantry is pretty decent. The only kicker is that the wounds that do go through will probably not get saved.

T4 6+ save is just about the same as T3 5+ save (Guardsmen) in regards to durability. 12 S4 hits against T4 6+ save = 5 wounds, 12 S4 hits against T3 5+ = 5 wounds. So the toughness nonsense is just that, nonsense. GW should either give orkz T5 or a 5+ save. 2 Wounds would be going overboard and require a pretty hefty price hike, at least 3pts, probably closer to 4, plus by doing that you require EVERY other Ork unit to do likewise, Nobz will need 3 wounds, meganobz 4 etc etc. I think a 5+ save for maybe 1pt wouldn't be terrible, maybe give us back our inch of movement they took away as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The biggest difference between T3 and T4 in regards to durability is when you start hitting S6+ weapons, and honestly at that point it doesn't matter because your opponent is using Anti armor weapons on infantry.

T4 6+ is, mathematically, marginally more resilient than T3 5+ against anything up to S5. Although I'd personally like to see Ardboyz make a comeback, there is no problem at all with basic orks in this regard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The fact that models with fancy kit (e.g. Lootas) are just as squishy as Boyz is a bit of an issue, but rather than messing about with the core stats of Orks, I think that squishiness just needs to be factored in when establishing the costs of upgrades. If you want better, more resilient Orks, take Nobz. It's literally what they're there for.

 Nazrak wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

 GreatGranpapy wrote:

Tygre wrote:
Just a not clearly thought out thought. Maybe Orks should have an additional wound to represent how much damage they can soak. So 2 wound Boyz.

I believe that's supposed to be represented by being T4. I never really valued how much difference there is between T3 and T4 until I played a game against my friend's Tyranid army. He had a mix of Gaunts and Genestealers and the +1 T made the Stealers much harder to wound. So having T4 on our basic infantry is pretty decent. The only kicker is that the wounds that do go through will probably not get saved.

T4 6+ save is just about the same as T3 5+ save (Guardsmen) in regards to durability. 12 S4 hits against T4 6+ save = 5 wounds, 12 S4 hits against T3 5+ = 5 wounds. So the toughness nonsense is just that, nonsense. GW should either give orkz T5 or a 5+ save. 2 Wounds would be going overboard and require a pretty hefty price hike, at least 3pts, probably closer to 4, plus by doing that you require EVERY other Ork unit to do likewise, Nobz will need 3 wounds, meganobz 4 etc etc. I think a 5+ save for maybe 1pt wouldn't be terrible, maybe give us back our inch of movement they took away as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The biggest difference between T3 and T4 in regards to durability is when you start hitting S6+ weapons, and honestly at that point it doesn't matter because your opponent is using Anti armor weapons on infantry.

T4 6+ is, mathematically, marginally more resilient than T3 5+ against anything up to S5. Although I'd personally like to see Ardboyz make a comeback, there is no problem at all with basic orks in this regard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The fact that models with fancy kit (e.g. Lootas) are just as squishy as Boyz is a bit of an issue, but rather than messing about with the core stats of Orks, I think that squishiness just needs to be factored in when establishing the costs of upgrades. If you want better, more resilient Orks, take Nobz. It's literally what they're there for.

Except nobz are still over priced and crap unless you buy an ammo runt and even then they still aren't any more durable then a boy pt for pt. I do agree though that our specialists need either more armor or lower costs.

I'd love for trukks to either get cheaper, or have an ability to offset their high cost and low durability besides ramshackle.

A unique permission to disembark units after moving would be choice. Even if it cost an upgrade (boarding plank).

Want to see a few things come in, or back

1. allow elements of the fantasy range to be used - zero cost for GW to do this, e.g. allow "primitives" using fantasy orks with sticks, spears etc, perfect for Snakebites among other things - ditto the squig units

2. bring back "big uns", ideally a new kit with slightly larger models and various bling bits, these can be the T4 W2 or T5 W1 models with a better save and maybe stronger in combat but smaller mobs

3. at least one (weedy) Gretchen HQ and ideally at least one or two more Grot units - thinking a short ranged sniper and some other sneaky type unit that infiltrates but isn't amazingly good at it

4. realistic costs for the vehicles so they occasionally get used

5. The six main clans and Cult of Speed to get their own flavour, like the Tyranid Hive Fleets have

leopard wrote:
Want to see a few things come in, or back

1. allow elements of the fantasy range to be used - zero cost for GW to do this, e.g. allow "primitives" using fantasy orks with sticks, spears etc, perfect for Snakebites among other things - ditto the squig units

2. bring back "big uns", ideally a new kit with slightly larger models and various bling bits, these can be the T4 W2 or T5 W1 models with a better save and maybe stronger in combat but smaller mobs

3. at least one (weedy) Gretchen HQ and ideally at least one or two more Grot units - thinking a short ranged sniper and some other sneaky type unit that infiltrates but isn't amazingly good at it

4. realistic costs for the vehicles so they occasionally get used

5. The six main clans and Cult of Speed to get their own flavour, like the Tyranid Hive Fleets have

1. Snakebites ≠ feral Orks. More squigs would obv be great though.

2. Nobz already exist. You just described Nobz.

3. Grot HQs don't make any sense in 40K. No self-respecting Ork is going to let a weedy grot boss them about. Snipers aren't a bad shout though.

4. Yep, totally. At the moment the vehicles are too expensive for what they do, which has the added problem that if you take them, you're eating into your points too much to be able to buy sufficient boyz.

5. I can't see there's any chance we won't be getting Clan rules for the big six. Not sure KoS necessarily need specific rules; it's more about army composition. Although obviously the latter is dependent on vehicles being more viable.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
A few more thoughts on the Clan stuff:

So far, any traits/chapter tactics/etc. seem to be dependent on having all units within a detachment share the same <Chapter>, <Regiment> etc. keyword. Given Ork Warbands’ tendency to comprise Orks from a number of different Clans, it seems that imposing this restriction wouldn’t be particularly appropriate, from an in-universe perspective. As a long-time Warboss, originally attracted to the faction by the wide variety of units and colour schemes, I think it would be a crying shame if the Clan rules served to encourage “mono-Clan” army builds. It seems to me there are a few potential options here:
Allow mixed-Clan detachments. The most straightforward, but perhaps inadvisable as it could lead to a) complaints from non-Ork players who feel Orks are being given a benefit not afforded to other armies; b) players simply cherry-picking the most effective Clan trait for any given unit. <Clan> bonuses (e.g. from a Waaagh! Banner) would obviously still be restricted by keyword, but not sure if this is enough to offset the obvious advantages/potential for abuse of this approach.

Allow mixed-Clan detachments, but only allow players to allocate a specific <Clan> keyword to a unit within that detachment if there is a Boyz mob with that keyword in the same detachment. (E.g., you can add a unit of Deathskulls Lootas to your detachment provided you have a Deathskulls Boyz mob too.) This would hark back to the way Ork armies were composed in the ‘Ere We Go/Freebootas era (e.g. bring an Evil Sunz mob and you can bring a Mek too) without being as restrictive. It would probably make sense to allow players to ignore this restriction if all units within a detachment share the same <Clan> – i.e. exactly the same as with keywords in other armies. The only drawback I see to this is that it is perhaps slightly more complicated than most army composition rules this edition, although not entirely without precedent (cf Genestealer Cults/Brood Brothers).

Keep the restrictions as per other armies, but give Orks a low-end HQ, to mitigate the dual problem of multiple-Clan armies ending up with too many Points/PL tied up in HQ choices, and it not being particularly appropriate for an Ork tribe to have multiple Warbosses (for example); or for Goffs to have loads of Weirdboyz hanging around. Something roughly analogous to a Space Marine Lieutenant (statline somewhere between a Nob and Warboss; maybe bring back the “Clanboss” nomenclature – another callback to 1st Edition?) could easily be represented using a model from the Nobz kit, and afford ample opportunities for some fun conversions/kitbashing, which we all know Ork players love.
(To be honest, I’d like to see this regardless of Clan rules, as I think it would be a fun and useful addition to the Orky repertoire.)

Thoughts?

1. Snakebites ≠ feral Orks. More squigs would obv be great though.

2. Nobz already exist. You just described Nobz.

3. Grot HQs don't make any sense in 40K. No self-respecting Ork is going to let a weedy grot boss them about. Snipers aren't a bad shout though.

4. Yep, totally. At the moment the vehicles are too expensive for what they do, which has the added problem that if you take them, you're eating into your points too much to be able to buy sufficient boyz.

5. I can't see there's any chance we won't be getting Clan rules for the big six. Not sure KoS necessarily need specific rules; it's more about army composition. Although obviously the latter is dependent on vehicles being more viable.

1. Aware snakebites != feral, they are however a natural fit for less well armed orcs or less well armoured models generally, not suggesting such are limited to them but it provides a nice theme - throw in boar riders etc, the kits are generally compatible with the 40k ones so up arming is easy enough.

2. Except the orcs have had "bigger orcs" for some time, the index removed them - the idea is something partway between boyz and nobz, better equipped and bigger, but not that high in the social ranking. thinking its a way to provide another infantry kit with different options.

3. who said anything about grits leading orks? thinking allowing a grot detachment, a cheap, not very good HQ model allowing a "grot rebellion" list - would be fully supportive of rules to reflect this so any aura etc only apply to grots, its more a way to expand the little guys roles and provide some character

4. thats the point , not just aiming for cheaper vehicles, just want them to fit in nicely and be given a cost to make it hard to decide to take them or not

5. I do hope so, thinking KoS could be given various bonuses, just needs to be different to Evil Sunz


Would also love to see looted vehicles, ideally as a section on how to convert a few other vehicles to ork control not something limited to "open play" or just a looted rhino

leopard wrote:



1. Aware snakebites != feral, they are however a natural fit for less well armed orcs or less well armoured models generally, not suggesting such are limited to them but it provides a nice theme - throw in boar riders etc, the kits are generally compatible with the 40k ones so up arming is easy enough.

2. Except the orcs have had "bigger orcs" for some time, the index removed them - the idea is something partway between boyz and nobz, better equipped and bigger, but not that high in the social ranking. thinking its a way to provide another infantry kit with different options.

3. who said anything about grits leading orks? thinking allowing a grot detachment, a cheap, not very good HQ model allowing a "grot rebellion" list - would be fully supportive of rules to reflect this so any aura etc only apply to grots, its more a way to expand the little guys roles and provide some character

4. thats the point , not just aiming for cheaper vehicles, just want them to fit in nicely and be given a cost to make it hard to decide to take them or not

5. I do hope so, thinking KoS could be given various bonuses, just needs to be different to Evil Sunz


Would also love to see looted vehicles, ideally as a section on how to convert a few other vehicles to ork control not something limited to "open play" or just a looted rhino

1. Not sure this requires any specific rules though; you can just mix in bits from the fantasy kits to give things a Snakebity vibe. I'd personally like to see Boars back, but I can't really see it happening.

2. I'm fairly sure Skarboyz haven't been a thing since the 3rd edition codex. And now Boyz are S4, I'm not sure there's really much of a space for them to occupy. I think you could make an argument for bringing back 'Ardboyz, although I do wonder if Boyz with a 4+ save might be a bit *too* good this edition. I guess it'd be fine if you costed them accordingly.

3. I see what you're driving at, but it seems GW have done away with any restrictions on what you can take, and I think this would just be opening the door to people abusing the option of a super-cheap HQ choice.

Not gonna disagree with you on the others though! No reason they couldn't give looted vehicles their own profile, and why not do a conversion sprue to add them to whatever kit you like, a la GsC/Deathwatch?

oh mixing the bits is easy enough, was thinking a more feral option though, pure close combat with no ranged weapons.

Perhaps done as "young 'uns" out to prove themselves.

Up armoured is the role I was thinking of, just forgot the name, a 4+ save would be fine with the right cost - especially limited to say one unit per formation, or in the elite slot.

I think a grot HQ would be fine - stick a rule in that the formation they are in cannot include any <ork> units.


A conversion sprue for vehicles would be wonderful, or a box with a couple of spures of bitz aimed at converting a couple of vehicles, include grot oilers etc, crew figures and other stuff that would be good in plastic but doesn't really justify its own set - the sort of thing every ork player is likely to want one or two of at least.

In general I'd like to see a few things changed with Orks when our codex is released.

1. More AP on our shooting weapons aside from Mek Gunz.
2. A reason to take PKs.
3. Properly costed vehicles.
4. More ways to dish out mortal wounds, without relying on Weirdboyz.
5. A reason to take bikes.
6. More focus from our elite units, Boyz should be the "general unit", they shouldn't be better than a specialist at performing the specialists' intended role.
7. A reason to take varied and themed lists, outside of Boyz.

I'm not sure how GW are going to go about this without nerfing Boyz or making our other units much, much cheaper. I'd prefer if they added new abilities for our existing units, rather than making them cheaper. We lack variation and we are boring to play against and with.

1-3 very much so
4.. with caution yes
5. gods yes, they look wonderful, please give them a role
6. either this or have units defined by their profile, not equipment, and have a much greater versatility in equipment
7. if they go the way Tyranids have then the different clans should get something that will provide six or so working "themes"

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I'm not sure how GW are going to go about this without nerfing Boyz or making our other units much, much cheaper. I'd prefer if they added new abilities for our existing units, rather than making them cheaper. We lack variation and we are boring to play against and with.

I would also like new abilities for existing units, both to make them better and add more flavor. They can help out a lot of things with Stratagems, but I'm hoping to see a bunch of units get more fun rules right in their unit entries as there are only so many stratagems to go around*. Some units could probably use additional special rules and stratagems and still need a points drop in addition to that.

Before Jink existed Ork Warbikes had a special invulnerable save that extended to units behind them to represent the clouds of dust and oily smoke. I'd like to see Ork Warbikes become the Ork's version of Venomthropes, where enemies have a -1 to hit them in the shooting phase plus if they have X+ models then the -1 to hit bubble extends to other Ork units wholly within X". This rule would apply to Nob Bikers as well, and Ork characters on warbikes would benefit from the -1 to hit but they wouldn't be able to generate the bubble.

I don't like the Burna Boyz' Pyromaniaks ability. I'm glad that they got some flavor, but I just think it's a bad rule. I'd rather see them get to shoot again if they destroy a unit in the shooting phase, which would make them good at cleaning up small units. They used to have a bonus against vehicles in close combat way back when, so it would be cool if they got a rule kind of like Genestealers where on wound rolls of 6+ in close combat they are AP -4.

I wouldn't even mind seeing some negative flavorful special rules if they adjust the points accordingly. As has been mentioned before, there is a problem with Ork specialists in that we pay a lot of points for a model with one wound and a 6+ armor save. There are a lot of ways that coudl be helped, such as making transports cheaper, giving specialists the option of taking better armor and giving them sources of ablative wounds (ammo runts, spanners that cost the same as a regular boy, making the special weapon an optional upgrade so cheap Boyz can be mixed in, allowing wounds to be reassigned to nearby units of Grots, etc.).

Another way is to make them cheaper. I think that Lootas should just be cheaper in general, but I wouldn't mind seeing them get "worse" in certain ways to make them even cheaper. That big Deffgun rig is heavy, so make them have a move of 4" and get -1 Attack in close combat, and drop their points accordingly. They shouldn't be running around or getting into melee anyway, but we have to pay the points for that extra attack in the Boy profile. Maybe it could also provide a 5+ armor save? That would be good for small units of Lootas in cover, but not as much for Lootas in vehicles or protected by a KFF.

leopard wrote:
1-3 very much so
4.. with caution yes
5. gods yes, they look wonderful, please give them a role
6. either this or have units defined by their profile, not equipment, and have a much greater versatility in equipment
7. if they go the way Tyranids have then the different clans should get something that will provide six or so working "themes"

Yes I think if we get a similar deal to the Nids we'll be golden. Here's hoping.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:

I would also like new abilities for existing units, both to make them better and add more flavor. They can help out a lot of things with Stratagems, but I'm hoping to see a bunch of units get more fun rules right in their unit entries as there are only so many stratagems to go around*. Some units could probably use additional special rules and stratagems and still need a points drop in addition to that.

Before Jink existed Ork Warbikes had a special invulnerable save that extended to units behind them to represent the clouds of dust and oily smoke. I'd like to see Ork Warbikes become the Ork's version of Venomthropes, where enemies have a -1 to hit them in the shooting phase plus if they have X+ models then the -1 to hit bubble extends to other Ork units wholly within X". This rule would apply to Nob Bikers as well, and Ork characters on warbikes would benefit from the -1 to hit but they wouldn't be able to generate the bubble.

I don't like the Burna Boyz' Pyromaniaks ability. I'm glad that they got some flavor, but I just think it's a bad rule. I'd rather see them get to shoot again if they destroy a unit in the shooting phase, which would make them good at cleaning up small units. They used to have a bonus against vehicles in close combat way back when, so it would be cool if they got a rule kind of like Genestealers where on wound rolls of 6+ in close combat they are AP -4.

I wouldn't even mind seeing some negative flavorful special rules if they adjust the points accordingly. As has been mentioned before, there is a problem with Ork specialists in that we pay a lot of points for a model with one wound and a 6+ armor save. There are a lot of ways that coudl be helped, such as making transports cheaper, giving specialists the option of taking better armor and giving them sources of ablative wounds (ammo runts, spanners that cost the same as a regular boy, making the special weapon an optional upgrade so cheap Boyz can be mixed in, allowing wounds to be reassigned to nearby units of Grots, etc.).

Another way is to make them cheaper. I think that Lootas should just be cheaper in general, but I wouldn't mind seeing them get "worse" in certain ways to make them even cheaper. That big Deffgun rig is heavy, so make them have a move of 4" and get -1 Attack in close combat, and drop their points accordingly. They shouldn't be running around or getting into melee anyway, but we have to pay the points for that extra attack in the Boy profile. Maybe it could also provide a 5+ armor save? That would be good for small units of Lootas in cover, but not as much for Lootas in vehicles or protected by a KFF.

I would love warbikes to deal mortal wounds on the charge. This seems like it makes most fluff sense to me to represent them charging in to combat like maniacs. Evil sunz should be able to leave combat and charge to make them even more potent.

Perhaps the Nob bikers could generate the invulnerable cloud to give them a unique purpose? Although this would overlap with kff biker mek quite a bit.

Totally with you on burna Boyz and lootas. They need either a buff or a points decrease. Grots also need a unique flavourful ability to give them a role outside of screen or objective grabber.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I would love warbikes to deal mortal wounds on the charge. This seems like it makes most fluff sense to me to represent them charging in to combat like maniacs. Evil sunz should be able to leave combat and charge to make them even more potent.

Warbikes used to get to shoot their guns a second time rather than making regular close combat attacks when they charged. It was a pretty powerful ability back in 3rd and 4th.

Bikes simply need to be more durable. They should have some rules that replace Jink and Exhaust Cloud: a flat 5+ invuln or a +1 or even +2 to their cover save if they moved in the previous turn. Otherwise they would always evaporate against anything with an AP-2 or better.

I'd bring 21-22 points bikes with one of those rules.

Well ideally they'd be more durable and more killy. There needs to be a reason to take them instead of Boyz + weirdboy and I think mortal wounds might be a good reason.

D6 damage on Power Klaws would be a good change. Orks rely on getting up close to kill most things since our shooting is too poor, but PKs just can't get the job done, even when you take a lot of them. A Warboss ending up next to a tank used to be bad news for that tank; now, he statistically doesn't even kill a Rhino. In fact a Warboss needs to swing and hit and wound with all 4 of his attacks at 3+ to hit and 3+ to wound and roll above average on his damage in order to kill a Rhino.

To be fair very few things outside of Lords of War will kill a Rhino without substantial buffs. Rhinos are tough in 8th.

I wouldn't mind seeing Ork characters getting access to a better power klaw that does d6 or a flat 3 damage.

Along similar lines I think it would be good if they had Kustom Choppas and Kustom Sluggas that are somewhat better than regular sluggas and choppas and cost 0 or 1 point. That might make them worth taking on Nobz, and Nobz already come with much bigger sluggas and choppas than regular Boyz.

I'm in the same camp of having more durable bikes for roughly around the same points and maybe slightly more damaging firepower. Currently, big shootas are underwhelming on basically any platform you take them on and I think their points cost would be more justified if they were at least AP -1. Variants of them, like the dakkagun, should also be AP-1 so that when it does hit, it at least does something. As far as survivability goes, I wouldn't be surprised if they ended up getting a -1 to hit from shooting attacks buff when they advance to reflect the exhaust clouds, since that way it doesn't step on the toes of KFF's as much.

 Grimskul wrote:
I'm in the same camp of having more durable bikes for roughly around the same points and maybe slightly more damaging firepower. Currently, big shootas are underwhelming on basically any platform you take them on and I think their points cost would be more justified if they were at least AP -1. Variants of them, like the dakkagun, should also be AP-1 so that when it does hit, it at least does something. As far as survivability goes, I wouldn't be surprised if they ended up getting a -1 to hit from shooting attacks buff when they advance to reflect the exhaust clouds, since that way it doesn't step on the toes of KFF's as much.

I'd be interested in a big shoota squad similar to how tankbustas work except for hunting down infantry; I realize that this kinda steps on the feet of lootas, but it would give me somewhere to put the boatload of big shoota boys I've got

5-15 dudes, each with a big shoota, each re-rolling misses against infantry.

 davou wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
I'm in the same camp of having more durable bikes for roughly around the same points and maybe slightly more damaging firepower. Currently, big shootas are underwhelming on basically any platform you take them on and I think their points cost would be more justified if they were at least AP -1. Variants of them, like the dakkagun, should also be AP-1 so that when it does hit, it at least does something. As far as survivability goes, I wouldn't be surprised if they ended up getting a -1 to hit from shooting attacks buff when they advance to reflect the exhaust clouds, since that way it doesn't step on the toes of KFF's as much.

I'd be interested in a big shoota squad similar to how tankbustas work except for hunting down infantry; I realize that this kinda steps on the feet of lootas, but it would give me somewhere to put the boatload of big shoota boys I've got

5-15 dudes, each with a big shoota, each re-rolling misses against infantry.

I feel that, if anything, that it would step less on Loota's toes (who with D2 are more interested in attacking bikes and elite infantry) and more on Flash Gitz. Big Shoota Boyz would pretty much be strictly better than Flash Gitz if we implemented the ideas we proposed since they can fit more bodies together in a trukk/battlewagon on the move without losing accuracy and having longer range. I think it this is indicative of how certain units in our codex that should fill those roles, i.e. Flash Gitz, are either so subpar or require too many other elements in your army to make it work that they don't register as options for us. Flash Gitz gun profile should have stayed as Assault 3 and they should at least have a 4+ save on top of having options to boost their BS like gitfindas. Maybe even reflect their exorbitant wealth by allowing you to purchase a transport exclusively for them at a discount, like 30 points less.