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.

Now most ork players realize that Ghazzy has no place in a competitive army. This is because the DLS MA Warboss is extremely good, and fills his role better than he does. However, I think I have figured out how GW priced him the way they did, and how he is pretty balanced for what he does. In a competitive setting, where you need to be slightly above the balance, he has no place. However, he is fairly average based on points for a normal special character.

Analysis:
Ghazghkull Thraka vs. Warboss
A Warboss with bosspole, MA, and cybork body is 110 points. Cybork Body is usually useless, but with Ghazzy's extra wounds, it has a good chance of giving him at least one save throughout the game. Ghazghkull's benefits could definitely be seen as equaling 115 points. Here are the bonuses and an estimated cost.
Big Shoota, estimated at +3 points
+1 WS, estimated at +5 points
+1 Wound, estimated at +15 points
+1 Attack, estimated at +15 points (given that an attack squig is that cost, BTW, I'd recommend giving him a squig)
Locked in Warlord Trait, could be seen as a + or - depending on what you run. However, it is a pretty good trait, and I'd estimate it at +5
Eternal Warrior, estimated at +40, in conjunction with his extra wound and cybork, it is really valuable
Prophet of Gork and Mork, 1 turn 2++ save? Very nice, especially now that none of the characters can get them (except Badrukk), if timed right, can swing the battle in his favor, also allowing MANZ in his squad to run can be nice (is more relevant for his council, as you won't often want all your 2+ saves in one spot, can really help mobility problems for one turn), estimated at +35 points

Total cost after extras- 223 so very close to his actual cost of 225. (please post a comment if you think I overvalued or undervalued something, or if I missed something. Also if you want more logic behind why I assigned something the points I did, I'd be happy to explain.

Complaints (miscellaneous things that I think GW might have done a bit better):
It is extremely disappointing that GW didn't see fit to give Ghazzy LD 10, extremely underwhelming.
No unique wargear? Really? Just a unique special rule...
No side benefits to help his troops?
IMHO the leader of the orks should benefit from all of the ork warlord traits, now THAT would be cool as he is the epitome ork. They'd definitely have to up his cost a little to make that happen, but it would be so cool!

Side note: for very large games, Ghazzy's "Council of the Waaagh" formation makes him actually viable. It makes sense that the most important green skin would only show for huge battles, so I guess GW is trying to put him in that roll.

Any feedback is appreciated!

I don't know if I have the latest codex for Orks, but in the one I have Thraka gets 7 strength 10 attacks ignoring armour when he assaults. Even alone he has the muscle to make a mess of practically anything on the battlefield. Toughness 5 and a 2+ save with 4 wounds AND instant death immunity makes him bloody hard to put down, as well. I once put my Salamander force against him and his Nobz that my mate brought round. I nearly had a heart attack when a unit of four Big Meks led by Thraka charged my beloved dreadnought. Most of my army was tied up with two obscenely large units of bog-standard Orks, while Thraka tore right through my centre line, annihilating my Command squad, Librarian, Terminator squad, a Predator and Landraider. My mate thought it was hilarious, watching me look on in horror as my carefully created army list crumbled catastrophically from his assault.

Yep, he's hard, very, VERY hard indeed.

GW do not appear to do any calculations, rather it seems they just slap on what feels right.

 Ashiraya wrote:
GW do not appear to do any calculations, rather it seems they just slap on what feels right.

Yep, they've (and by "they" I mean the different games designers) been directly quoted on multiple occasions that they do a rough ball-park to get a good "feel" for costs and basically leave it at that.

I've never been up against him, but I'd say he sounds like a relatively balanced guy. Tough to kill, sure, but he's 225 points. I have to say, that once a game 2++ is scary, when does he declare when it's activated? When he gets hit, or at the start of his turn? I'd honestly say it might be worth more than that depending on when he uses it, as that'd put my hopes of smite mode on my deathwing down the drain.

 Ashiraya wrote:
GW do not appear to do any calculations, rather it seems they just slap on what feels right.

This is me doing the math FOR GW... I think they priced him pretty well


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And they must have had some logic behind it at GW, even if they didn't do it formulaicly, their ballpark estimate was pretty close to my mathematical calculation

(And if someone sees an error in my calculations, please point it out)

 kingbobbito wrote:
I've never been up against him, but I'd say he sounds like a relatively balanced guy. Tough to kill, sure, but he's 225 points. I have to say, that once a game 2++ is scary, when does he declare when it's activated? When he gets hit, or at the start of his turn? I'd honestly say it might be worth more than that depending on when he uses it, as that'd put my hopes of smite mode on my deathwing down the drain.

I've not examined his rules (as I dont currently plan to use any lords of war) but I thought I heard somewhere that there was a way for him to get his 2++ on every turn? Isn't it something to do with when he calls waaaghs?

I may be (and probably am) mistaken, might be thinking of something else entirely.

Niiru wrote:

 kingbobbito wrote:
I've never been up against him, but I'd say he sounds like a relatively balanced guy. Tough to kill, sure, but he's 225 points. I have to say, that once a game 2++ is scary, when does he declare when it's activated? When he gets hit, or at the start of his turn? I'd honestly say it might be worth more than that depending on when he uses it, as that'd put my hopes of smite mode on my deathwing down the drain.

I've not examined his rules (as I dont currently plan to use any lords of war) but I thought I heard somewhere that there was a way for him to get his 2++ on every turn? Isn't it something to do with when he calls waaaghs?

I may be (and probably am) mistaken, might be thinking of something else entirely.

People thought it might be a loophole, using the formation that allows you to Waaagh every turn to get Ghazzy's 2++ save every turn. However, for that to happen, the Warboss in the formation has to be your warlord, so that means Ghazzy won't get his save, because it only works if he calls his special Waaagh.

He gets the 2++ save starting when he calls the waaagh!, and it lasts until the start of his next turn, so 2 full combats. None of the multiple-waaagh formations allow Ghazzy in...so no multi-turn 2++ for him. It seems like GW did their due diligence on that one.

Still, the 2++ rerollable for 1 turn (1/6 of the game) isn't bad.

 Accolade wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
GW do not appear to do any calculations, rather it seems they just slap on what feels right.

Yep, they've (and by "they" I mean the different games designers) been directly quoted on multiple occasions that they do a rough ball-park to get a good "feel" for costs and basically leave it at that.

They have also said that feeling comes from play testing things to see if they feel like they're too expensive or too cheap.

Yes i know someone is going to mock that, but it's a detail we're ignoring if we claim they just slap some points on things and call it good. It's a bit more involved than just that.

 JimOnMars wrote:
He gets the 2++ save starting when he calls the waaagh!, and it lasts until the start of his next turn, so 2 full combats. None of the multiple-waaagh formations allow Ghazzy in...so no multi-turn 2++ for him. It seems like GW did their due diligence on that one.

Still, the 2++ rerollable for 1 turn (1/6 of the game) isn't bad.

He never gets a rerollable save

It's like calculating warp talon's cost based on:
raptors (18 pt) + daemon (+5 pt) + dual lightning claws (30 pt) + blind on ds (2-3 pt) - nades (1 pt) - bolt pistol (1 pt) = 53-54 pt, down it two times and wonder why they're STILL doing mediocre at best.

Ghazzy is weak cause of combination of factors:
225 pt for a snp model with only one way of getting delivered. And this way has huge av 12 sides and is opentopped. It's 95 pt over a DLS warboss. And you can go a long way for 95 pt with orkses.
He pays for invul and eternal warrior but they're getting useful only in larger games as orkses can avoid challenges pretty easilly. While in larger games he's getting nowhere due to the ammount of ranged firepower that's gona down the wagon in no time.
DLS warboss does killing and surviving way better than ghazzy for almost half the cost.

This drawbacks often outweigh the benefits of his special Waaagh!

Being a LOW is mostly good, i think. Cause it allows you to free up a valuable slot.

All in all,Ghazzy is usable but not great. While DLS warboss is amazing for his price.

 koooaei wrote:
It's like calculating warp talon's cost based on:
raptors (18 pt) + daemon (+5 pt) + dual lightning claws (30 pt) + blind on ds (2-3 pt) - nades (1 pt) - bolt pistol (1 pt) = 53-54 pt, down it two times and wonder why they're STILL doing mediocre at best.

Ghazzy is weak cause of combination of factors:
225 pt for a snp model with only one way of getting delivered. And this way has huge av 12 sides and is opentopped. It's 95 pt over a DLS warboss. And you can go a long way for 95 pt with orkses.
He pays for invul and eternal warrior but they're getting useful only in larger games as orkses can avoid challenges pretty easilly. While in larger games he's getting nowhere due to the ammount of ranged firepower that's gona down the wagon in no time.
DLS warboss does killing and surviving way better than ghazzy for almost half the cost.

This drawbacks often outweigh the benefits of his special Waaagh!

Being a LOW is mostly good, i think. Cause it allows you to free up a valuable slot.

All in all,Ghazzy is usable but not great. While DLS warboss is amazing for his price.

That was not contested (read first post, I did not say he was competitive. I just said he wasn't insanely overcosted like people seem to think he is). I agree that the DLS Warboss is far superior, and I would take him over Ghazzy in every optimized list. My original post was showing how Ghazzy is fair for his cost, not amazing. Side note: The calculation I used only really works on HQs, because prices for equipment and statlines differ for troops.

In summary, I completely agree with you. It is clear that Ghazzy has no place in a competitive list (except maybe in a giant list with his council, who knows?) the DLS MA Warboss is far superior. However, Ghazzy IS useable, he's at a delicate balance. If someone wants to use him, they aren't at an extreme disadvantage. I'm just happy to have a character that is semi-usable, especially since the dark Eldar lost their leader completely!

Sure, he's fine from that perspective.

I think GW are actually admirably good at estimating how many points most things are worth.

kodi wrote:
I think GW are actually admirably good at estimating how many points most things are worth.

I can agree with this, in particular the "most" part. Off the top of my head I can only think of a handful of things that should be more expensive, and even less that should be cheaper.

 kingbobbito wrote:

kodi wrote:
I think GW are actually admirably good at estimating how many points most things are worth.

I can agree with this, in particular the "most" part. Off the top of my head I can only think of a handful of things that should be more expensive, and even less that should be cheaper.

For the Cheaper categories all that immediately spring to mind:

Sisters in general are a bit overcost (and actually got more expensive the last time they got updated) as well as have all their wargear costs copy/pasted from the Marine codex despite not having all the advantages the Marines do that would justify those same costs. Also Penitent Engines.

Power Weapons/Fists for Guard. They don't need to be Marine prices on those squishy models.

I agree that GW can be good at "getting it right" in terms of cost; I just don't think they playtest anywhere near enough given they're charging $50 for a codex and another $50 for some fluff and a couple of formations.

LIke you said Clockwork, stuff like the pricing on melee weapons for IG are confusingly off (and have been for multiple editions). There are a number of units that suffer from bad point pricing: wyches, harlequins, etc. etc. To me, it would do GW a world of good to make sure these things are straight before books were put out.

 kingbobbito wrote:

kodi wrote:
I think GW are actually admirably good at estimating how many points most things are worth.

I can agree with this, in particular the "most" part. Off the top of my head I can only think of a handful of things that should be more expensive, and even less that should be cheaper.

I think with special characters in particular, they are more careful to err on the weaker side. I don't think they want uber special characters running around. I think Ghazzy is spot on for a special character!

 Accolade wrote:
I agree that GW can be good at "getting it right" in terms of cost; I just don't think they playtest anywhere near enough given they're charging $50 for a codex and another $50 for some fluff and a couple of formations.

LIke you said Clockwork, stuff like the pricing on melee weapons for IG are confusingly off (and have been for multiple editions). There are a number of units that suffer from bad point pricing: wyches, harlequins, etc. etc. To me, it would do GW a world of good to make sure these things are straight before books were put out.

Not to be snarky, but the IG melee weapon pricing weirdness comes from the kind of logic in this thread and others, where individual elements have a definite cost and you can price a model by adding up all the bits that make it up. There are far too many interactions between different rules on a single model, let alone the number of ways they can interact with other units in your army and enemy units on the board, to be able to say +1S or a 2+ save is worth even a remotely consistent amount of points between different models. Situations like an IG sergeant paying the same points for a powerfist as a SM Chapter Master should be proof enough that the a la carte method of figuring out points makes no sense.

For once I'm going to defend GW and say "price it as you feel it should be, playtest to tweak" is probably the best way to determine point values. Whether they do enough playtesting to tweak things correctly is up for debate, but you have to evaluate a model or unit as a whole, and in a variety of contexts, to get a feel for its value. Even pricing out individual components afterward is difficult because often they complement or conflict with one another. In other words, the value of upgrades is not even constant for a single model, they change depending on what other options you've taken on the model, in the unit, in the rest of the army, even what you're facing across the board. There is no magic formula that GW could apply that would make their unit pricing "better".

So GW very likely didn't try to figure out Ghazzy's pricing by adding up the bits on him, nor should they. All the point values in the OP are completely subjective, and also completely dependent on the various other options and special rules that the model has. For example, is +1W worth 15 points if he doesn't have Eternal Warrior, a high toughness, and a good armor save? Is Eternal Warrior still worth 40 points if he has one less wound, or a lower toughness? These values are totally dependent on one another, if you change one stat or rule you'd have to revalue everything else anyway. So the whole idea of starting from a warboss and adding bit by bit till you get to Ghazzy is flawed from the start.

Didn't mean to go on a rant, it's an interesting thread, but the idea that you can figure out a unit's value by adding points incrementally for various bits and pieces pops up now and then and it always annoys me.

.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
I agree that GW can be good at "getting it right" in terms of cost; I just don't think they playtest anywhere near enough given they're charging $50 for a codex and another $50 for some fluff and a couple of formations.

LIke you said Clockwork, stuff like the pricing on melee weapons for IG are confusingly off (and have been for multiple editions). There are a number of units that suffer from bad point pricing: wyches, harlequins, etc. etc. To me, it would do GW a world of good to make sure these things are straight before books were put out.

Not to be snarky, but the IG melee weapon pricing weirdness comes from the kind of logic in this thread and others, where individual elements have a definite cost and you can price a model by adding up all the bits that make it up. There are far too many interactions between different rules on a single model, let alone the number of ways they can interact with other units in your army and enemy units on the board, to be able to say +1S or a 2+ save is worth even a remotely consistent amount of points between different models. Situations like an IG sergeant paying the same points for a powerfist as a SM Chapter Master should be proof enough that the a la carte method of figuring out points makes no sense.

For once I'm going to defend GW and say "price it as you feel it should be, playtest to tweak" is probably the best way to determine point values. Whether they do enough playtesting to tweak things correctly is up for debate, but you have to evaluate a model or unit as a whole, and in a variety of contexts, to get a feel for its value. Even pricing out individual components afterward is difficult because often they complement or conflict with one another. In other words, the value of upgrades is not even constant for a single model, they change depending on what other options you've taken on the model, in the unit, in the rest of the army, even what you're facing across the board. There is no magic formula that GW could apply that would make their unit pricing "better".

So GW very likely didn't try to figure out Ghazzy's pricing by adding up the bits on him, nor should they. All the point values in the OP are completely subjective, and also completely dependent on the various other options and special rules that the model has. For example, is +1W worth 15 points if he doesn't have Eternal Warrior, a high toughness, and a good armor save? Is Eternal Warrior still worth 40 points if he has one less wound, or a lower toughness? These values are totally dependent on one another, if you change one stat or rule you'd have to revalue everything else anyway. So the whole idea of starting from a warboss and adding bit by bit till you get to Ghazzy is flawed from the start.

Didn't mean to go on a rant, it's an interesting thread, but the idea that you can figure out a unit's value by adding points incrementally for various bits and pieces pops up now and then and it always annoys me.

Edit: I must have not been clear: I'm making the same argument that weapons shouldn't have a set price. The fact that they're priced identically on units with completely different capabilities (aka IG sergeants and SM commanders) is silly.

If we're discussing cost, should we also discuss DLS? It seems very undercosted for what it brings, and is arguably the main reason Ghazghkull seems lacklustre.

He's paying a huge cost towards extra survivability, whilst Mega Armour Warboss can get virtual immunity to small-arms fire (plus potential rerolls elsewhere) for a mere 25pts. Not only that, but it also counts as a Waaagh Banner - giving him and his unit +1WS.

 Accolade wrote:


So GW very likely didn't try to figure out Ghazzy's pricing by adding up the bits on him, nor should they. All the point values in the OP are completely subjective, and also completely dependent on the various other options and special rules that the model has. For example, is +1W worth 15 points if he doesn't have Eternal Warrior, a high toughness, and a good armor save? Is Eternal Warrior still worth 40 points if he has one less wound, or a lower toughness? These values are totally dependent on one another, if you change one stat or rule you'd have to revalue everything else anyway. So the whole idea of starting from a warboss and adding bit by bit till you get to Ghazzy is flawed from the start.

Didn't mean to go on a rant, it's an interesting thread, but the idea that you can figure out a unit's value by adding points incrementally for various bits and pieces pops up now and then and it always annoys me.

They are most definitely subjective interpretations. In regards to a unique character, I factored everything into my points determining as there are MINIMAL options that Ghazghkull has. I WAS NOT trying to say that GW determines point values in this way (sorry if it came across like that), I was more trying to justify the price tag he has. I definitely kept all factors in mind when determining how many points each thing was worth. As his stats and rules are set, I don't have to reevaluate based on a variety of options.