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.

I agree in that boyz are good for what you get, but the problem is that they're our only really solid unit. I don't mind fielding 90 boyz, but the fact that 90 is considered on the low end is the problem. If our other units could actually pull their weight you would only need 90 boyz, you wouldn't need to bring 120-180 of them to be decent.

This conversation really shouldn't center around boyz, anyway. Even if they were the absolute best troop choice in the game hands-down with zero debate, it does not change the fact that the rest of our codex is extremely weak and lacks synergy or any real threat.

 Blackie wrote:
No please, boyz are not fantastic. To make them good or decent at least you need 120+ of them, and in competitive games even 180+. Genestealers are a solid option even in lower numbers, like 40-60.

40-60 Genestealers are worth 80-120 boyz, and that amount of boyz would work very well in pretty much any Tyranid list. In fact, any amount of boyz would improve most Tyranid lists. That is because boyz are very, very good, they just have almost no synergy with the rest of the Ork index. You can't use boyz with transports or alongside tankbustas or lootas for example. The Tyranid codex does not have these abnormalities. You can bring Genestealers along with Termagents, Hormagaunts, Warriors, Gargoyles, and even Carnifexes (with the codex). And if you could bring 30-60 boyz along, they probably work very well.

What troop choice in 8th edition would you put higher than Ork Boyz? I don't see many candidates to be honest.

I laugh when i see Ork players complaining about fielding 90+ infantry.

I play Tyranids. In casual games under 1k points i field over 90 infantry, for perspective. It's worse at 2000.

So you have a competitive list that requires a high model count. Oh no. The world's smallest violin plays here. Orks have always been a horde army, it's in their fluff, if you went into Orks thinking you'd win with something like 30-40 models on the table, I really don't know what to tell you.

 Marmatag wrote:
I laugh when i see Ork players complaining about fielding 90+ infantry.

I play Tyranids. In casual games under 1k points i field over 90 infantry, for perspective. It's worse at 2000.

So you have a competitive list that requires a high model count. Oh no. The world's smallest violin plays here. Orks have always been a horde army, it's in their fluff, if you went into Orks thinking you'd win with something like 30-40 models on the table, I really don't know what to tell you.

Well, imagine if you HAD to spend half of your points on Hormagaunts in order to be viable?

Tyranids has 50 different viable builds, Orks has 1. But yes, boyz are really good.

pismakron wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
I laugh when i see Ork players complaining about fielding 90+ infantry.

I play Tyranids. In casual games under 1k points i field over 90 infantry, for perspective. It's worse at 2000.

So you have a competitive list that requires a high model count. Oh no. The world's smallest violin plays here. Orks have always been a horde army, it's in their fluff, if you went into Orks thinking you'd win with something like 30-40 models on the table, I really don't know what to tell you.

Well, imagine if you HAD to spend half of your points on Hormagaunts in order to be viable?

Tyranids has 50 different viable builds, Orks has 1. But yes, boyz are really good.

To date tyranids are one of the worst factions with 0 viable builds. That may change with the codex but come on. 50 builds? Ork players if you want to be taken seriously be realistic.

 Marmatag wrote:

pismakron wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
I laugh when i see Ork players complaining about fielding 90+ infantry.

I play Tyranids. In casual games under 1k points i field over 90 infantry, for perspective. It's worse at 2000.

So you have a competitive list that requires a high model count. Oh no. The world's smallest violin plays here. Orks have always been a horde army, it's in their fluff, if you went into Orks thinking you'd win with something like 30-40 models on the table, I really don't know what to tell you.

Well, imagine if you HAD to spend half of your points on Hormagaunts in order to be viable?

Tyranids has 50 different viable builds, Orks has 1. But yes, boyz are really good.

To date tyranids are one of the worst factions with 0 viable builds. That may change with the codex but come on. 50 builds? Ork players if you want to be taken seriously be realistic.

Oh, but how can Tyranids be the worst when space marines are the worst? get your stories straight, man

 Marmatag wrote:
I laugh when i see Ork players complaining about fielding 90+ infantry.

I play Tyranids. In casual games under 1k points i field over 90 infantry, for perspective. It's worse at 2000.

So you have a competitive list that requires a high model count. Oh no. The world's smallest violin plays here. Orks have always been a horde army, it's in their fluff, if you went into Orks thinking you'd win with something like 30-40 models on the table, I really don't know what to tell you.

I love horde armies, I just don't want an horde with the spam of the same unit. I'd like to spam the specialists as well, not only the cheap troops.

In the infamous 7th edition I could bring 15 meganobz, 15+ lootas, 30 tankbustas, 20+ bikes, 8+ trukks, 5 BWs, 50-60+ boyz etc and enjoy different decent lists. Now it's just boyz, a couple of units that are also boyz, plus characters that usually do nothing than buffing boyz. I complain about that, not the fact that orks should bring lots of models. That's positive IMHO, but they should have some variety and the possibility to mix the lists with different stuff.

Tyranids and SM are both very good and they have tons of viable different options.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pismakron wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
No please, boyz are not fantastic. To make them good or decent at least you need 120+ of them, and in competitive games even 180+. Genestealers are a solid option even in lower numbers, like 40-60.

40-60 Genestealers are worth 80-120 boyz, and that amount of boyz would work very well in pretty much any Tyranid list. In fact, any amount of boyz would improve most Tyranid lists. That is because boyz are very, very good, they just have almost no synergy with the rest of the Ork index. You can't use boyz with transports or alongside tankbustas or lootas for example. The Tyranid codex does not have these abnormalities. You can bring Genestealers along with Termagents, Hormagaunts, Warriors, Gargoyles, and even Carnifexes (with the codex). And if you could bring 30-60 boyz along, they probably work very well.

That's exactly my point. You can make decent lists with hormagaunts, genestealer etc in which they are just part of the list, not THE list. Ork boyz are good/very good only if they are the entire list. That's why I can't consider them particularly good. 90 boyz at 2000 points are not solid at all, they can be all dead by turn 2 against some competitive lists.

 Marmatag wrote:
I laugh when i see Ork players complaining about fielding 90+ infantry.

I play Tyranids. In casual games under 1k points i field over 90 infantry, for perspective. It's worse at 2000.

So you have a competitive list that requires a high model count. Oh no. The world's smallest violin plays here. Orks have always been a horde army, it's in their fluff, if you went into Orks thinking you'd win with something like 30-40 models on the table, I really don't know what to tell you.

90 infantry models? How conveniently vague.

You're misrepresenting the problem on purpose.

No one has a problem with fielding 90+ infantry. No one has a problem with high model counts. A 5th edition battle wagon bash is probably the ork army with the lowest model count among all competitive lists we have ever had, and it still had (slightly) more than 90 infantry models, in addition to buggies, koptaz trukks and battlewagons. Outside of dread mobs, I cannot think of a single archetype that could go below 90 models at 2000.

Everyone has a problem with the only viable units being regular orks with basic wargear. Try fielding nothing but gaunts and characters for ten games in a row (no genestealers, all fast units blow), while not being allowed to cast more than a single psychic power and smite in those games.
Then come back and tell us how privileged we are to have a competitive list.

The problem is when gw delete templates they didn't compensante the nerf on army with poor bs, i mean 3,4, or 5 bs before with a template wasn't much a difference, but now it is, like sag really suck now, it's not even fun.