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.

 oldzoggy wrote:

My issue with Shock attack guns ( as with most fun things in the codex) is its point cost. I don't really care for the risk of a bad result. Its paying 85+ points for a BS2 T4 2W 6+sv model that shoots a ~S8 Ap2 large blast heavy weapon that I mind. The mishap table is fun and all but a BS2 large blast on such a flimsy model should just not cost that much.

Is the SAG mek that expensive for what you get? A Leman Russ battle cannon is a comparable weapon and costs with its russ 150+ pts. The battlecannon is only ap3 rather than ap2. Okay it doesn't have a mishap table and it fires at BS3 rather than BS2. A SAG mek can be given BS3 with a gitfinda, and being a character he can get a goodish amount of resilience through LOS. Put him in with some grots in cover at the back of the table and he should last long enough to wipe a marine HQ or two from the table, no?

 SolarCross wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:

My issue with Shock attack guns ( as with most fun things in the codex) is its point cost. I don't really care for the risk of a bad result. Its paying 85+ points for a BS2 T4 2W 6+sv model that shoots a ~S8 Ap2 large blast heavy weapon that I mind. The mishap table is fun and all but a BS2 large blast on such a flimsy model should just not cost that much.

Is the SAG mek that expensive for what you get? A Leman Russ battle cannon is a comparable weapon and costs with its russ 150+ pts. The battlecannon is only ap3 rather than ap2. Okay it doesn't have a mishap table and it fires at BS3 rather than BS2. A SAG mek can be given BS3 with a gitfinda, and being a character he can get a goodish amount of resilience through LOS. Put him in with some grots in cover at the back of the table and he should last long enough to wipe a marine HQ or two from the table, no?

Well for one thing, go take a look at that table. The Strength of the gun is equal to 2D6, The random table has 1 good result on it, 1! that is it. On a double 6 your shot turns into a D weapon. The other 5-6 results on the table are nerfs to the gun and model, the two worst being on a double 1 you die, and on i think double 4s? (cant remember) your model is teleported into B2B contact with your target and is considered locked in combat. In other words, dead.

So for 85pts you get a crappy HQ choice that has a fairly decent chance to kill himself, no protection or buffs for his unit and if you want to make him as durable as a Leman Russ you have to pay another 4pts to give him eavy armor, (he isnt allowed Mega Armor)


The SAG sucks unfortunately, it is so cool to, but GW hates orks

 SolarCross wrote:

Is the SAG mek that expensive for what you get? A Leman Russ battle cannon is a comparable weapon and costs with its russ 150+ pts. The battlecannon is only ap3 rather than ap2. Okay it doesn't have a mishap table and it fires at BS3 rather than BS2. A SAG mek can be given BS3 with a gitfinda, and being a character he can get a goodish amount of resilience through LOS. Put him in with some grots in cover at the back of the table and he should last long enough to wipe a marine HQ or two from the table, no?

Lets see.

Big mek + Shock attack gun + Gitfinda + Grots = 125 points.
For this you will get a LD8 T2 12 model group that can't move and shoot.
I am still not very convinced of the use when I could just field 4 Kustom mega kannons for that price. Its not horrible bad and the mishap is fun, but its just too expensive.

 oldzoggy wrote:

 SolarCross wrote:

Is the SAG mek that expensive for what you get? A Leman Russ battle cannon is a comparable weapon and costs with its russ 150+ pts. The battlecannon is only ap3 rather than ap2. Okay it doesn't have a mishap table and it fires at BS3 rather than BS2. A SAG mek can be given BS3 with a gitfinda, and being a character he can get a goodish amount of resilience through LOS. Put him in with some grots in cover at the back of the table and he should last long enough to wipe a marine HQ or two from the table, no?

Lets see.

Big mek + Shock attack gun + Gitfinda + Grots = 125 points.
For this you will get a LD8 T2 12 model group that can't move and shoot.
I am still not very convinced of the use when I could just field 4 Kustom mega kannons for that price. Its not horrible bad and the mishap is fun, but its just too expensive.

Replace the grots with a Mekgun or two and you have roughly the same thing but with T7 and a extra bit of firepower

hahaha, GW hates ork, think is a fact xD.
The new codex (full of nerfs) and the supplements (full of jokes) prove it.

The 4th codex is more competitive on the actual edition...and that is very sad when you realice the amount of new rules and meta. That is all you need to know that the actual codex is garbage.

And the SAG mek is not a competitive model. I tried use the shokk multiple times, and NEVER compensate the points cost.


I LOVE orks, but is true that GW ***** us with the actual codex....And the fact that when they release the supplement it looks like a bad joke doesnt helps

If GW hated orks every single ork rules thorough history would be garbage. Which is false.

tneva82 wrote:
If GW hated orks every single ork rules thorough history would be garbage. Which is false.

7th edition GW has released a New codex, a supplement, another supplement, a New improved version of the Supplement, a bunch of Flyer rules that makes Ork flyers the joke of the universe and..........Thats it.

We get a lot of support as far as new content, but we are never meant to be competitive. At the moment GW DOES hate orks in the sense they don't want Orks to succeed and win, they instead want Orks to play as the low lvl NPC army that the heroes of the imperium get to smash up every game.

And 7th edition is indeed whole history of orks. GW and no ork release existed before 7th ed!

Funny....I started 40k like 16 years ago and could swear that a) it was not 7th edition then b) I distinctly remember facing orks(they were even half of what drew me to 40k!). Guess ghost memory!

In deed, I took a look a the new Ork codex, and there are loads of negative rules !
Look at the Zzap gun for example: he can gets hot on 1,2 an even 3, and it costs 10 points on a battlewagon !
How on Earth one would wants to take a weapon that is so certain to kill his own tank...

 godardc wrote:
In deed, I took a look a the new Ork codex, and there are loads of negative rules !
Look at the Zzap gun for example: he can gets hot on 1,2 an even 3, and it costs 10 points on a battlewagon !
How on Earth one would wants to take a weapon that is so certain to kill his own tank...

I'm not sure that is right; he wording of the zzap rule is this:

"If a Zzap gun Gets Hot, the Wound is resolved against the crew." RAW that means the zzap rule may kill grot gunners of a mek zzap artillery piece but do nothing to a battlewagon. Note it says crew not passengers so the battlewagon's orky cargo is also safe from it.

tneva82 wrote:
If GW hated orks every single ork rules thorough history would be garbage. Which is false.

I don't believe GW hates Orks, but I don't believe they want to give them great rules either. I heard rumors that GW doesn't know what to do with Orks, that there's no one passionate enough about them at this time to do their rules. As they stand, they rank amongst the NPC armies of the game- along with Dark Eldar, Chaos Space Marines, Tyranids- existing to be slaughtered by Space Marine players in the forge of the narrative.

GW loves ork they really do just look at the amount of content they produce for it. It is just that they keep their power low for some reason. I suspect that this just might be because of a realistation that things might sell better if armies are tailored for different target groups. Eldar, TAU etc for the tournament minded players who like to stratigize and enjoy winning with the raw power of superior rules, orks for players who care about modelling, casual / narrative gaming and don't care as much about winning. So they gave orks a ne set of wonderful models ( they really are) and tons of attention in campaign books but kept their power low.
Lets hope I am wrong.

tneva82 wrote:
And 7th edition is indeed whole history of orks. GW and no ork release existed before 7th ed!

Funny....I started 40k like 16 years ago and could swear that a) it was not 7th edition then b) I distinctly remember facing orks(they were even half of what drew me to 40k!). Guess ghost memory!

Well lets see, 7th Edition Orks suck, 6th Edition Orks are barely playable, 5 Edition Orks are relatively middle Tier, 4th edition, again middle tier to low tier, 3rd edition, kind of garbage. No idea about 2nd and rogue.


So I apologize just the last 2 editions they have been trash and the three before that they have been middling at best.

Well, of course say that GW hates the orks is a (HALF) joke.

But the evidence is the evidence, and the current codex is one of the worst of the existent codex. Even the previous codex will desenvolve better vs actual armies....and that is really sad

And then they gave us new supplements..... but were terrible xD.

Then they did the re-release, and far from do a decent thing, is even worst. It is specially offensive when at same time did a supplement for marines full of OP and cool stuff (yeah, the supplemet of a bad codex is bad and the supplement to one of the best codex is amazing.....hail the balance! xD)

And then they release the flyers supplement, with a new ship for marines (a very very very nice one) and one ofr orks!!!!, shame that the ork one is rubbish.



So yeah, as an ork player (and my second army is csm so i am not much better hahaha) I feel GW mocks us a "bit" haha

 oldzoggy wrote:
GW loves ork they really do just look at the amount of content they produce for it. It is just that they keep their power low for some reason. I suspect that this just might be because of a realistation that things might sell better if armies are tailored for different target groups. Eldar, TAU etc for the tournament minded players who like to stratigize and enjoy winning with the raw power of superior rules, orks for players who care about modelling, casual / narrative gaming and don't care as much about winning. So they gave orks a ne set of wonderful models ( they really are) and tons of attention in campaign books but kept their power low.
Lets hope I am wrong.

GW's model team adores orks. And if you were on that team, wouldn't you? "Well, team, here's our projects for the next six months: Space Marine thing, another space marine thing, space marine hero with some swooshy cape and a sword, another iteration of the tactical box, two special event space marines, and some ork units you can be totally free and creative with and do whatever you want as long as it's silly and crazy." Their rules team just does not know what to do with all the models that get produced.

Is true that more than one will be really tired or make so many loyal marines hahaha

At least with chaos could be a bit crazy and add some mutation here and there or evil touchs, but loyal? pff, only saves the wolfs xDD


and with orks happent a strange thing, most of the new miniatures sucks. A good example are the nauts....they look AMAZING, but are terrible bad and overcosted.
Also there are miniatures that are soo cool (like kans, tellyporta mega-armor mek, etc)) but are also terrible bad.

And i have a gorka and a morkanaut (housemade xD), 6 kans, at least 3 dreads, several meks, a looted tank, a mekjunka with shook (housemade too haha). etc.... so I know the feeling of have wonderful models with terrible bad rules, is a pain haha.

The best units of orks are bikes, grot tanks and ork big trakk with supa kannon. Thanks to Mork and Gork, grot tanks and ork big trakk are easily housemade created muhohoho

I know some people don't like the 6+++ compared to the old 5++ of the Cybork body, but it does statistically make you more durable to anything not AP2.

Plus Biker HQ's are always superior anyway and you're likely to take them, so it really isn't like you lost anything in that regard.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I know some people don't like the 6+++ compared to the old 5++ of the Cybork body, but it does statistically make you more durable to anything not AP2.

Plus Biker HQ's are always superior anyway and you're likely to take them, so it really isn't like you lost anything in that regard.

It...what?

Are you saying that base 6+ armor with current cybork is statistically more durable than previous cybork? Because that's...just wrong.

If you're saying that current cybork PLUS 'eavy armor is more durable... well...yes. You've invested 5 points more.

What makes it truly mind-bogglingly stupid is the fact that on any unit where spending the 5 points (for what marine armies get army-wide for free just cus), it makes far, far more sense to just get the 50 point painboy.

the_scotsman wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I know some people don't like the 6+++ compared to the old 5++ of the Cybork body, but it does statistically make you more durable to anything not AP2.

Plus Biker HQ's are always superior anyway and you're likely to take them, so it really isn't like you lost anything in that regard.

It...what?

Are you saying that base 6+ armor with current cybork is statistically more durable than previous cybork? Because that's...just wrong.

If you're saying that current cybork PLUS 'eavy armor is more durable... well...yes. You've invested 5 points more.

What makes it truly mind-bogglingly stupid is the fact that on any unit where spending the 5 points (for what marine armies get army-wide for free just cus), it makes far, far more sense to just get the 50 point painboy.

That's what I meant, yes.
Also don't forget Iron Hands get IWND on everything too.

I can't tell if you're serious or trolling. I'm leaning towards trolling.

The current Ork codex is so good everyone in my local meta gives the Ork player an extra 25% to the points limit.

[quote ]Well lets see, 7th Edition Orks suck, 6th Edition Orks are barely playable, 5 Edition Orks are relatively middle Tier, 4th edition, again middle tier to low tier, 3rd edition, kind of garbage. No idea about 2nd and rogue.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I know some people don't like the 6+++ compared to the old 5++ of the Cybork body, but it does statistically make you more durable to anything not AP2.

Plus Biker HQ's are always superior anyway and you're likely to take them, so it really isn't like you lost anything in that regard.

That is just completely wrong in every which way possible. In exactly ZERO situations is a 6+++ worth more then a 5++. More weapons then not can defeat 6+ armor so that 5++ is amazing, having a FNP on top of that is better then relying on a 6+++.

TO change that for space marines then lets change the 5++ that terminators get into a 6+++, but keep the price exactly the same, is that better? would you prefer that on terminators?

Man, only a non ork player that loves clean the floor with greenskins could say that the new cybork is better than old.

If it add a +1 to the feel no pain giving 6 if the miniature doesnt have one.......whel, could be more or less acceptable. But the 6+FNP sucks.

The ork HQ are, more or less, the worst characters focus on melee of the game, with very few decent weapon options and very low ways to save, since think are the only with no inv saves.
There are no chances: klaw and surely mega-armor.

Other melee HQ from other armies could choose several kinds of range weapons if they want (a plasma gun, for example, could be useful), interesting equip, several melee weapons, invulnerables....

SemperMortis wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I know some people don't like the 6+++ compared to the old 5++ of the Cybork body, but it does statistically make you more durable to anything not AP2.

Plus Biker HQ's are always superior anyway and you're likely to take them, so it really isn't like you lost anything in that regard.

That is just completely wrong in every which way possible. In exactly ZERO situations is a 6+++ worth more then a 5++. More weapons then not can defeat 6+ armor so that 5++ is amazing, having a FNP on top of that is better then relying on a 6+++.

TO change that for space marines then lets change the 5++ that terminators get into a 6+++, but keep the price exactly the same, is that better? would you prefer that on terminators?

In zero? Just for fun I'll prove you wrong.

Boy, heavy armour, FNP. Charging up against tactical space marine. Space marine shoots.

2 shots, 3+ to hit, 4+ to wound, 4+ save, 6+ FNP. Average result 0.277 wounds.

Same except this time rather than FNP you have 5++.

2 shots, 3+ to hit, 4+ to wound, 4+ save. 0.33 wounds.

So there. Proven. There can be situations where FNP trumps inv save.

Albeit odds are damned good you are going to be happier to have 5++ than 6+++

Ah well. Cybork body was most fun anyway when it literally made you a vehicle. That's more awesome than any kind of save

tneva82 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I know some people don't like the 6+++ compared to the old 5++ of the Cybork body, but it does statistically make you more durable to anything not AP2.

Plus Biker HQ's are always superior anyway and you're likely to take them, so it really isn't like you lost anything in that regard.

That is just completely wrong in every which way possible. In exactly ZERO situations is a 6+++ worth more then a 5++. More weapons then not can defeat 6+ armor so that 5++ is amazing, having a FNP on top of that is better then relying on a 6+++.

TO change that for space marines then lets change the 5++ that terminators get into a 6+++, but keep the price exactly the same, is that better? would you prefer that on terminators?

In zero? Just for fun I'll prove you wrong.

Boy, heavy armour, FNP. Charging up against tactical space marine. Space marine shoots.

2 shots, 3+ to hit, 4+ to wound, 4+ save, 6+ FNP. Average result 0.277 wounds.

Same except this time rather than FNP you have 5++.

2 shots, 3+ to hit, 4+ to wound, 4+ save. 0.33 wounds.

So there. Proven. There can be situations where FNP trumps inv save.

Albeit odds are damned good you are going to be happier to have 5++ than 6+++

Ah well. Cybork body was most fun anyway when it literally made you a vehicle. That's more awesome than any kind of save

Little known fact, boyz can't take Cybork body. Beyond that, yes in a very specific situation a 6 FNP is good, but in everyone of those situations its better to have a 5++ with a Painboy in the unit to give you a 5+++. So anyway, no, it was a nerf no matter how you spin it.

SemperMortis wrote:
Little known fact, boyz can't take Cybork body. Beyond that, yes in a very specific situation a 6 FNP is good, but in everyone of those situations its better to have a 5++ with a Painboy in the unit to give you a 5+++. So anyway, no, it was a nerf no matter how you spin it.

FNP can though and anyway same can be applied to warboss as well.

And I didn't say it wasn't nerf. I just refuted claim that, let me quote it for you,

In exactly ZERO situations

.

Let's not spread lies now don't we? Helps a lot of your cause if you don't make up lies to support your claim.

SemperMortis wrote:


Little known fact, boyz can't take Cybork body. Beyond that, yes in a very specific situation a 6 FNP is good, but in everyone of those situations its better to have a 5++ with a Painboy in the unit to give you a 5+++. So anyway, no, it was a nerf no matter how you spin it.

Sadly Nobz also can't take Cybork anymore which is both puzzling and dumb (whoever wrote the Ork dex had it out for Ork 5th edtion tactics like Nob Bikers, Kan Wall with KFF, and Deffrolla Wagons). 6+ FNP is a joke and while it sometimes helps make a Lukky Stick Megaboss more tanky against non AP2 shooting, its generally better to have some defense against armor ignoring attacks than just being completely SOL.

 NorseSig wrote:
The current Ork codex is so good everyone in my local meta gives the Ork player an extra 25% to the points limit.

Well, that's how balance can work in worst situaions. Notice it's fluff accurate.

tneva82 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
Little known fact, boyz can't take Cybork body. Beyond that, yes in a very specific situation a 6 FNP is good, but in everyone of those situations its better to have a 5++ with a Painboy in the unit to give you a 5+++. So anyway, no, it was a nerf no matter how you spin it.

FNP can though and anyway same can be applied to warboss as well.

And I didn't say it wasn't nerf. I just refuted claim that, let me quote it for you,

In exactly ZERO situations

.

Let's not spread lies now don't we? Helps a lot of your cause if you don't make up lies to support your claim.

You are right, I was SLIGHTLY exaggerating for effect.

the point remains that it was HUGE nerf to ork armies and more so then one would at first think. Why? Well simply put, at the moment there is no way to get a invul save in CC for ork characters. The only invuls in our codex are the 5++ KFF which is only against shooting, and Badruk who gets his Invul save.

One of the most CC oriented armies in the game, that has IC who focus ENTIRELY on CC, does not have an invul save in CC, Since most Challenges these days focus around unwieldly power fists and Power Klaws and such, your characters tend to die unless they have that invul save. The only thing an ork has going for it is if he is a Warboss on a bike, because then he is T6 and can't be doubled out. But even then he is forced to rely on a 4+ save with (if he is lucky) a 5+ FNP if he has a painboy in the area, against AP1-4 weapons he has to rely solely on that 5+ FNP.

Most armies can give their warlords and special ICs a 4++ without trying overly hard, some (Like Space Marines) have entire units that have 5++ standard in their stats (terminators) Why is it that orks aren't even allowed to have a 5++?