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.

Luke_Prowler wrote:While Orks are an assault unit (In the sense that their units lean towards being better at assault than shooting), this does not mean that the shooting UNITS in the army should be bad. Shoota Boyz, Lootas, and Flash Gitz should still be worth taking, and weapons like big shootas be worth their points. Even in lore we have examples of orks being capable in the shooting department (the War of Dakka).

Saying that the Ork codex would be fixed by making CC better ignores that orks still have an uphill battle against other low tier armies. I don't mind if orks have to make up for a lack of range or penetration, but orks are in a bad place and need something other than a quick fix.

Then nerf the armies that are OP rather than buffing the armies that are not if the problem still isn't solved; the moment you start buffing things other low tier factions will want similar buffs, which will firstly be more work than just nerfing the top tier armies, and secondly will result in a constant power struggle as rules would be updated to try and overcome unfair play with more unfair play.

SemperMortis wrote:Orks do in fact lack ranged firepower and firepower in general. Our shoota boyz are supposed to take care of short range (They don't) Our Mek Gunz are supposed to take care of the mid range (They don't) and our Lootas are the only good long range firepower we have and they are substandard at best. What unit do we have that has a high volume of shots at long range that are worth shooting? Lootas...thats it. Our Kill Kannon is a joke, our Lobba is meh at best. No, we lack good firepower and the biggest problem is our handful of good long range guns have TONS of downsides. Zzap Gunz, Smasha Gunz hell even the Bubble Chukka.

When was the last time an enemy with even a decent T value and armor save was afraid of shootas or big shootas or even Supa Shootas?

I've found Big and Supa Shootas to be highly effective against MEQ's, although if I were to suggest a change to them, I'd make the Big Shoota cheaper - 10 points seems excessive for such a weapon in a Boyz Mob

Most Ork weaponry is close ranged - that's just an unfortunate truth you have to bear if you wish to play Orks. I think giving them extra ranged weapons will start to encroach on IG territory in the wrong way.

As for the random weapons, I again agree that those are too negative overall to justify spending on them; either make them cheaper or remove the randomness, preferably the former.

I think its ridiculous that your comparing how OP and undercosted the Tau are to giving Shoota style weapons 1 extra shot or possibly 2. Is S4-5 really that scary on a T4 model with a 6+ save and BS2?

It's not scary, but it's not been paid for. I think you still don't see how that statement is hypocritical after saying that the Tau are undercosted - by allowing an extra shot you've now undercosted the Shoota, no?

anyone who has played orks knows that in the current edition everything about our codex is underpowered. This was just a topic to get the feelings of the community about increasing the shot output of Shoota weapons or possibly some other orky weapons like Rokkitz and lootas. You seem hell bent on this not ever coming to pass and the argument was that you don't want them as good as Tau or your SM Tacticals.

I know that Orks are underpowered, in comparison to other armies; nerfing those top tier armies and changing the rules regarding assaults and leadership should mean that Orks are no longer underpowered.

And what does me owning a small collection of Blood Ravens and Tau have to do with anything? Even if that was to make me somehow biased, my Ork collection is about twice as large as both of those combined, and those two collections haven't seen a game yet.

Plus, I'd prefer the Shoota over at least the Boltgun - Shootas get to fire 2 shots 6 inches further than a Bolter can, for a start, and they're an Assault weapon. Unless I'm going against IG, the AP loss wouldn't bother me much. The Boltgun is only more effective because it's being wielded by a Space Marine, which the player pays a premium for.

I'm fine with a proposal to make Shootas fire more shots. Pay for that upgrade. If you don't, then it ultimately makes you no better than factions who get more leeway when they purchase upgrades.

Well making Shoota boyz 1pt cheaper won't help in any way. Shoota boyz if used (I never use them because they suck) are fielded in smaller units, so 30-45 total models. Reducing the price of ALL Of that investment by 30-45pts doesn't in any way help the underlying problem of damage output or damage mitigation. At most that is another 5-7 boyz you can buy with the savings, nothing worth noting in other words.

If Shootas were assault 3 and Big Shootas at least Assault 4 possibly 5 you might see those weapons and models used as an alternative to Slugga Boyz and Rokkitz.

30-45 points could get you some expensive upgrades. Certainly nothing to sniff at; Boyz aren't the be and end all of what you can spend your points on.

The Big Shoota has always been good since it's range 30 (but as said before, I think that is genuinely overcosted).

Even so, if your problem is that Orks lack good damage output at range (which they do) then surely the correct diagnosis is their BS and their range, as they're ultimately the factors that are preventing you from being successful in the shooting phase, not how much actual firepower you have.

When was the last time an enemy with even a decent T value and armor save was afraid of shootas or big shootas or even Supa Shootas?

The last game I played! ha. 3 little bikers sitting in front of 30 shoota boys! The survivor was so worried he scooted off after failing his moral test!
Yep, there was a survivor. grumble grumble grumble. Oh well...

I would like the Waaagh! Rule to be amended to include granting Preferred Enemy (everything) so that shooty mobs can receive benefits from calling a Waaagh also. Could go a long way to improving the army as a whole IMHO.

v0iddrgn wrote:
I would like the Waaagh! Rule to be amended to include granting Preferred Enemy (everything) so that shooty mobs can receive benefits from calling a Waaagh also. Could go a long way to improving the army as a whole IMHO.

Hmm...I kinda LIKE that. May have to steal that idea for our home cooked rules. I don't even know what the 7th Ed Waaagh does.

there is a difference between under pricing a weapon and bringing it to where it should be. Assault 3 Shootas makes sense. Also Big Shootas are 5pt upgrades right now, and nobody takes them because a Rokkit is slightly better still.

Yes, most of ork weaponry is garbage range or damage output but that doesn't need to stay like that. Look at the SAG, its ridiculously over priced, but even at HALF that price it wouldn't be much better because of the risk/reward ratio.

Smasha Gunz, Zzap Gunz, Bubble CHuckas all need boosts to be worth taking. Big shootas don't have enough damage output to be worth taking, even for 5pts a model. Rokkitz are barely worth taking at the moment, Tankbustas real power used to lay in the fact that they had Melta Bombs as well as the decent damage output. With the new FAQ Tankbustas are going to become useless again.

So it becomes a question of reducing hte price dramatically OR increasing the number of shots/accuracy of the shots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warhead01 wrote:

When was the last time an enemy with even a decent T value and armor save was afraid of shootas or big shootas or even Supa Shootas?

The last game I played! ha. 3 little bikers sitting in front of 30 shoota boys! The survivor was so worried he scooted off after failing his moral test!
Yep, there was a survivor. grumble grumble grumble. Oh well...

30 shoota boyz = 60 shots (if all in range) 20 hits, and against T5 that would be 7ish wounds. Against a 3+ = 2 dead bikers. So in other words, 210pts of shootas couldn't take out a 80ish point unit of bikers in 1 turn of shooting, at 18in range or less.

SemperMortis wrote:
there is a difference between under pricing a weapon and bringing it to where it should be. Assault 3 Shootas makes sense. Also Big Shootas are 5pt upgrades right now, and nobody takes them because a Rokkit is slightly better still.

Yes, most of ork weaponry is garbage range or damage output but that doesn't need to stay like that. Look at the SAG, its ridiculously over priced, but even at HALF that price it wouldn't be much better because of the risk/reward ratio.

Smasha Gunz, Zzap Gunz, Bubble CHuckas all need boosts to be worth taking. Big shootas don't have enough damage output to be worth taking, even for 5pts a model. Rokkitz are barely worth taking at the moment, Tankbustas real power used to lay in the fact that they had Melta Bombs as well as the decent damage output. With the new FAQ Tankbustas are going to become useless again.

So it becomes a question of reducing hte price dramatically OR increasing the number of shots/accuracy of the shots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warhead01 wrote:

When was the last time an enemy with even a decent T value and armor save was afraid of shootas or big shootas or even Supa Shootas?

The last game I played! ha. 3 little bikers sitting in front of 30 shoota boys! The survivor was so worried he scooted off after failing his moral test!
Yep, there was a survivor. grumble grumble grumble. Oh well...

30 shoota boyz = 60 shots (if all in range) 20 hits, and against T5 that would be 7ish wounds. Against a 3+ = 2 dead bikers. So in other words, 210pts of shootas couldn't take out a 80ish point unit of bikers in 1 turn of shooting, at 18in range or less.

Yes, but they could then charge the bikers (if within 12") and crump them there. Because Orks are a CC army.

Math real quick: Biker gets 1 attack, hitting on a 4, wounding on a 4, with a 6+ save, means slightly over a 1/5 chance of killing a Boy. But let's say he does, leaving only 29 Boys.

They get 87 attacks, hitting on 4s (43.5), wounding on 5s (14.5), with a 3+ save (4.83 repeating). That's a thoroughly dead bike. Hell, the whole squad could be there and they'd still get wiped!

Yes, but they could then charge the bikers (if within 12") and crump them there. Because Orks are a CC army.

Math real quick: Biker gets 1 attack, hitting on a 4, wounding on a 4, with a 6+ save, means slightly over a 1/5 chance of killing a Boy. But let's say he does, leaving only 29 Boys.

They get 87 attacks, hitting on 4s (43.5), wounding on 5s (14.5), with a 3+ save (4.83 repeating). That's a thoroughly dead bike. Hell, the whole squad could be there and they'd still get wiped!

Yep, of the Orks had been able to charge, been in charge range at all after dice were rolled or not blocked in any way from charging. I totally would have done that too.
And then watch them all die in the SM's next turn...But I would have done it!

Yeah, the Spice Maroons running away kinda ruined your charge there. And stupid ATSKNF means they barely even get penalized for it!

 amanita wrote:

v0iddrgn wrote:
I would like the Waaagh! Rule to be amended to include granting Preferred Enemy (everything) so that shooty mobs can receive benefits from calling a Waaagh also. Could go a long way to improving the army as a whole IMHO.

Hmm...I kinda LIKE that. May have to steal that idea for our home cooked rules. I don't even know what the 7th Ed Waaagh does.

LOL It basically allows Orks to Run and launch assaults in the same turn. That's it. I feel Orks should get another benefit from Waaagh! seeing as it is supposed to whip them into a frenzy in the fluff.

Yeah, the Spice Maroons running away kinda ruined your charge there. And stupid ATSKNF means they barely even get penalized for it!

Very true. But there still fun to fight. I'll have the White Scars beat in under 10 games. Heck maybe under 5 games.

After that game I changed my list a little instead of 30 shoota boys I now field 2 mobs of 20 and a full 30 slugga boys. And set up in a refused flank. This lets me focus my shooting and draw them in, mostly due to Objectives. I send out small solo units of war trakks and Deff Koptas. I'm mostly focused on shooting with my current list with a total of 2 power klaws in the whole list. T5 is just a pain to slugg through. The War traks are an MVP unit twin bigshootas, highly mobile and only 30 point each. they've won me several games. Sadly I have to spill out my army over 2 or more CAD. just to "min/Max" those and my Deff Koptas. We'd be doing better but..My dice aren't very kind to me.

I'm still kinda amused by everyone saying that Orks are purely a CC army but they used to be BS3+, and they are based both around DAKKA and CHOPPY.

Maybe I'm just nostalgic for my Bad Moonz and their old BS4+ character based around shooting.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I'm still kinda amused by everyone saying that Orks are purely a CC army but they used to be BS3+, and they are based both around DAKKA and CHOPPY.

Maybe I'm just nostalgic for my Bad Moonz and their old BS4+ character based around shooting.

people like to imagine that the Ork army is just as straight forward as they play it. Charge, maybe shoot something, die in droves, lose game.

Personally the fact that everyone calls shooting "dakka" and then having people argue that orks don't need shooting ....LMAO

SemperMortis wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I'm still kinda amused by everyone saying that Orks are purely a CC army but they used to be BS3+, and they are based both around DAKKA and CHOPPY.

Maybe I'm just nostalgic for my Bad Moonz and their old BS4+ character based around shooting.

people like to imagine that the Ork army is just as straight forward as they play it. Charge, maybe shoot something, die in droves, lose game.

Personally the fact that everyone calls shooting "dakka" and then having people argue that orks don't need shooting ....LMAO

GW hasn't exactly helped by flanderizing them as being straightforward and dumb about it, Orks have always been a mixture of both shooting and CC. It's just after 4th the return rate for one has been poorer then the other and as a result they get pushed into being more into CC because that's more effective.

4th/5th edition had the majority either being Shoota boyz with Nob/Warnob wound shenanigans, Trukk Choppa boyz, and mek field. The problem is when one considers that Ork's have had some stupidly overcosted Ranged Weapons (Flash gitz, Mega Blasta's) or that Assault Weapons don't carry as much weight as they used to since Rapid Fire could move and shoot, and Mech just seems overcosted thanks to HP and lower armor totals (And the nerf to Forcefield)

They remind me of Chaos in that they seem like their rules would be far more effective in an older version rather then moving into the newer ones, 6th edition and beyond has not been kind to them.

Dakka, to me, has always had the connotation of being "the quantity of projectiles fired" rather than "the chance of actually causing damage to the target" when it comes to Orks. I feel that's well-reflected by the low BS and the (relatively) high shot count of Orks on a per-point basis.

Massive amounts of Dakka is well within the Ork's theme, in my mind, to the point that calling Orks a solely CQC army is disingenuous - Orks that focus on shooting should be reasonably decent at shooting.

I don't think it's really disputed that Orks are a bottom-tier army, and that they could use help on just about all fronts (in both their Dakka and their Krumpin'). The real dispute is where the balance should lie - how much should Orks improve, and how much should higher-tier armies be brought down?

I do think the power creep and power gap (i.e. the difference between the lower and higher tier armies) should be lessened going forward, but where to find that balance is difficult.

Because of the above, I don't feel putting Orks at a level where they're equal-to or better-than the highest-tier codices is the most appropriate action: Orks are not the only low-tier army, and the other higher-tier armies still have too much of an advantage over the less fortunate armies. I also feel that armies at high-tier levels are power are more disruptive when it comes to "bad matchups" - that is, when your army has a disadvantage fighting against a high-tier army, that disadvantage is more likely to be insurmountable due to the more exaggerated nature of the advantage.

I also don't think its reasonable of feasible to bring EVERY other army down to the Ork's level - that's such a drastic drop for some codices (Necrons, Space Marines, Eldar, Tau) and requires so many other codices to change (basically every other codex besides Blood Angels and Sisters of Battle) that it becomes infeasible to imagine it actually happening any time soon.

I'd rather see lower tier codices, like Orks, SoB, and BA, modified slightly to be competitive at the mid-tier level, and higher-tier codices (Necrons, SM, Eldar, Tau) modified to be slightly less powerful to be competitive at the same. The top tier codex armies would still complain, but not at the level that they would if they were dropped all the way down to Ork tier, and people's investments in their army wouldn't need to be entirely negated (in the same way that some Ork models have been - Ork players, I'm sure you don't enjoy when that happens to you, so why would you presume it would be OK for it to happen to other players?) in the ways that people often call for when it comes to things like Riptides, Wraithknights, and the like.


Regarding your actual proposed rule changes, I'm not convinced that Shoota Boys are truly so weak that they'd need a baseline 50% increase in shooting efficacy - that's a big jump, and that carries over into other aspects of the game that makes far less sense - for instance, Ork Overwatch is already fairly powerful due to the combination of high shot counts per point and the already-low BS of Boys in general - In your proposed rule change, an Overwatch by Shoota Boys would be almost as dangerous as a normal shooting phase for boys without the change!

And Shoota boys are not pure shooting units that merit exceptional shooting capabilities - through their baseline stats and low point cost, they really aren't truly good OR bad at Krumpin', and they often come in enough numbers that they're scary to almost everyone that doesn't specialize in mowing down poor-save infantry.

Decreasing point costs for 'ard boys would help with durability, which is certainly a circumstantial factor that would benefit their usefulness as a shooting unit (by being able to survive long enough to shoot).

Changing Mob Rule to be less punishing would also help make Shoota Boys more viable.

But increasing raw firepower by 50% is a huge boost, and I'm wary of making changes that significant. Almost the entire army has deficits, so it seems far more productive to address the army-wide elements (particularly Mob Rule) before making such a broad, one-size-fits-all "+1 shot" change.

12 shoota boyz will put out 24 shots, 8 hits and 4 wounds against a T4 enemy.

In overwatch those same 12 will put out 24 shots, 4 hits and 2 wounds against a T4 enemy.

So overwatch IS 50% as good as regular shooting. Adding 1 more shot per weapon would change that number exactly the same, it would just give them a bit more hits/wounds.

36 shots = 12 normal hits 6 normal wounds
or
In overwatch 36 shots, 6 hits 3 wounds.

Is that really scary to the point where its unfair or OP or that im pushing orks to far in the direction of Eldar/Tau shenanigans? because I really have a hard time imagining my opponents being overly concerned with that kind of minor improvement. As far as a price increase? Nope, they are utter garbage at the moment. You could nerf most other codexs down a peg or two and Shoota boyz would still be a dumpster fire. At most I would accept keeping them at 7pts a model, anything more then that and all youve done is made them slightly better at shooting while making them more expensive, or in other words, you've accomplished nothing.

Changing Mob rule or making Eavy armor cheaper will fix durability but it won't fix the fact that Shoota boyz don't put out enough dakka to do much more then annoy other units.

Who mentioned a price point increase for Boys? I didn't, and wouldn't suggest it, since I already agree that Boys are underpowered. The only mention I see for that is coupled with a significant boost in baseline armor or the like, or with your significant boost in shooting potential.

It doesn't seem like much because you're looking at 12 boys, and you're talking about their firepower outside of the context of other units shooting from similar points.

Let's compare your 84 points of Shoota boys with 84 points of Tactical Marines, 84 points of Necron Warriors, 84 points of Imperial Guard, and 84 points of Tau Fire Warriors.

Shootas: 4 wounds normal, 2 wounds overwatch
SemperMortis Shootas: 6 wounds normal, 3 wounds overwatch
Tactical Marines (6 models): 2 or 4 wounds normal, 1 wound overwatch
Necrons (~6.5 models): 2.3 to 4.6 wounds normal, 1.08 wounds overwatch
Fire Warriors (9.3 models): 3.2 to 6.4 wounds normal, 2.1 wounds overwatch
Imperial Guard (17 models): 2.8 to 5.6 wounds normal, 1.9 wounds overwatch

So Shoota boys AS IS are already better than most infantry at shooting on a point-per-point basis, are only roughly equaled in rapid-fire range, with the only exception being Fire Warriors and Imperial Guard (who only significantly out-shoot Shootas in rapid-fire range, but still only approximately match Shootas on Overwatch wounds).

And those two? They're getting Krumped big-time by Shoota boys if they get into melee, so it stands to reason they'd be slightly better at some forms of shooting.

That's why I think a 50% boost in shooting is too much - at that point, you're not just outshooting the more jack-of-all-trades like Tactical Marines, you're outshooting (or at worst matching) truly dedicated shooting units like Fire Warriors and Imperial Guard, while ALSO remaining significantly more useful in combat (and, because Shootas are assault weapons, that's a very viable and widely available choice for Shoota Boys to make in game).

I get that you want Shoota boys to be better, but making them the BEST is not an appropriate method of balancing them out. They have durability and leadership issues out in the open (though they're more durable per point than almost any other troop choice when they have cover, which is fairly ubiquitous in the game), and that's why I agree they could use a boost, but the amount of boost another shot provides is TOO SIGNIFICANT a boost to be balanced against other troop choices.

Your shooting is not the issue - it is already mid-tier to high-tier on a per-point basis (which is the main balancing rubric here). Your durability and leadership (i.e. your ability to make use of your decent shooting) is the issue, and clearing up that issue will allow you to make use of your shooting to good effect.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Who mentioned a price point increase for Boys? I didn't, and wouldn't suggest it, since I already agree that Boys are underpowered. The only mention I see for that is coupled with a significant boost in baseline armor or the like, or with your significant boost in shooting potential.

It doesn't seem like much because you're looking at 12 boys, and you're talking about their firepower outside of the context of other units shooting from similar points.

Let's compare your 84 points of Shoota boys with 84 points of Tactical Marines, 84 points of Necron Warriors, 84 points of Imperial Guard, and 84 points of Tau Fire Warriors.

Shootas: 4 wounds normal, 2 wounds overwatch
SemperMortis Shootas: 6 wounds normal, 3 wounds overwatch
Tactical Marines (6 models): 2 or 4 wounds normal, 1 wound overwatch
Necrons (~6.5 models): 2.3 to 4.6 wounds normal, 1.08 wounds overwatch
Fire Warriors (9.3 models): 3.2 to 6.4 wounds normal, 2.1 wounds overwatch
Imperial Guard (17 models): 2.8 to 5.6 wounds normal, 1.9 wounds overwatch

So Shoota boys AS IS are already better than most infantry at shooting on a point-per-point basis, are only roughly equaled in rapid-fire range, with the only exception being Fire Warriors and Imperial Guard (who only significantly out-shoot Shootas in rapid-fire range, but still only approximately match Shootas on Overwatch wounds).

And those two? They're getting Krumped big-time by Shoota boys if they get into melee, so it stands to reason they'd be slightly better at some forms of shooting.

That's why I think a 50% boost in shooting is too much - at that point, you're not just outshooting the more jack-of-all-trades like Tactical Marines, you're outshooting (or at worst matching) truly dedicated shooting units like Fire Warriors and Imperial Guard, while ALSO remaining significantly more useful in combat (and, because Shootas are assault weapons, that's a very viable and widely available choice for Shoota Boys to make in game).

I get that you want Shoota boys to be better, but making them the BEST is not an appropriate method of balancing them out. They have durability and leadership issues out in the open (though they're more durable per point than almost any other troop choice when they have cover, which is fairly ubiquitous in the game), and that's why I agree they could use a boost, but the amount of boost another shot provides is TOO SIGNIFICANT a boost to be balanced against other troop choices.

Your shooting is not the issue - it is already mid-tier to high-tier on a per-point basis (which is the main balancing rubric here). Your durability and leadership (i.e. your ability to make use of your decent shooting) is the issue, and clearing up that issue will allow you to make use of your shooting to good effect.

Now the thing you have to remember is that your just looking at the base weapons. Space Marines and Guardsmen are all about their special weapons while the rest of the unit is basically bullet catchers and help contribute a little bit of extra damage when shooting. Necron Warriors are not known for their amazing shooting but their durability is unparalleled for their points as basic troops plus gauss has the benefit of being effective against all vehicles. Fire Warriors are the kings of unit synergy with Markerlights, Ethereal Aura, Coordinated Fire, etc making them into dakka spam kings. Guardsmen and Tacticals also have bonuses through Orders/Chapter Tactics which makes them more combat effective as well. Shootas in the Boyz unit are the main course for their shooting while their special weapons are a single S8 AP3 rokkit or assault 3 S5 big shoota (all at BS2 and only 1 special weapon per 10 boyz).

I'm aware of all of that, and that's why I agree that Ork Boys (including Shoota Boys) are underpowered and could use boosts - my contention is that their boosts should come in other areas, and need not be as significant as a raw 50% increase in firepower.

I think it should be in Orky synergies where boosts should come, including leadership (making Mob Rule a benefit like it used to be, rather than the penalty it currently is), WAAAAAGH!-related benefits (I really like the concept of giving Preferred Enemies (all) when Waaaagh!ing, but I wouldn't even mind if all weapons got +1 shot with a Waaaagh!, since it would limit the boosts and thus limit their effectiveness to only be the best at the height of Orkiness), and durability increases.

Changing the frequency of special weapons and/or decreasing their point costs might also be a good way to go about it.

Ultimately, I'd rather make the Orks special in some way and reflective of their horde nature, and I don't think giving Orks 3 shot Shootas does that.

I could go for that.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
I'm aware of all of that, and that's why I agree that Ork Boys (including Shoota Boys) are underpowered and could use boosts - my contention is that their boosts should come in other areas, and need not be as significant as a raw 50% increase in firepower.

I think it should be in Orky synergies where boosts should come, including leadership (making Mob Rule a benefit like it used to be, rather than the penalty it currently is), WAAAAAGH!-related benefits (I really like the concept of giving Preferred Enemies (all) when Waaaagh!ing, but I wouldn't even mind if all weapons got +1 shot with a Waaaagh!, since it would limit the boosts and thus limit their effectiveness to only be the best at the height of Orkiness), and durability increases.

Changing the frequency of special weapons and/or decreasing their point costs might also be a good way to go about it.

Ultimately, I'd rather make the Orks special in some way and reflective of their horde nature, and I don't think giving Orks 3 shot Shootas does that.

Well as you mentioned earlier the biggest problem is durability and leadership, but since everytime that gets addressed everyone screams about how they need to remain cheap and garbage as far as those two core concepts the next step is to increase dakka so they have a chance of killing stuff before dying spectacularly.

And in your raw data you missed a few things, key among them is range. Shoota is 18, everyone else is 24+ with Firewarriors being 30. So before the orks can even fire a volley they are going to be fethed rather spectacularly by the enemy. Another key element you addressed but not really is the durability issue. a SM has 3+ armor to the Orks 6+, so on average the Bolter will be firing a lot more often then the shoota because range and you know...being alive.

As it stands Ork Shoota boyz are NEVER TAKEN because why waste the point on upgrading a slugga boy when they are going to get blasted apart before they get in range, or if they do get in range you don't want them to fire because it will ruin your charge range and leave you exposed to return fire for another turn. So the added bonus of being good in assault is wasted most of the time. So the answer is either make them more durable (something everyone complains about apparently) or increase the dakka to make them a legitimate dakka threat. Also the special weapons aren't going to be useful because your choices are still a couple S5 Big Shootas or 2-3 BS2 rokkitz.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
I'm aware of all of that, and that's why I agree that Ork Boys (including Shoota Boys) are underpowered and could use boosts - my contention is that their boosts should come in other areas, and need not be as significant as a raw 50% increase in firepower.

I think it should be in Orky synergies where boosts should come, including leadership (making Mob Rule a benefit like it used to be, rather than the penalty it currently is), WAAAAAGH!-related benefits (I really like the concept of giving Preferred Enemies (all) when Waaaagh!ing, but I wouldn't even mind if all weapons got +1 shot with a Waaaagh!, since it would limit the boosts and thus limit their effectiveness to only be the best at the height of Orkiness), and durability increases.

Changing the frequency of special weapons and/or decreasing their point costs might also be a good way to go about it.

Ultimately, I'd rather make the Orks special in some way and reflective of their horde nature, and I don't think giving Orks 3 shot Shootas does that.

Well as you mentioned earlier the biggest problem is durability and leadership, but since everytime that gets addressed everyone screams about how they need to remain cheap and garbage as far as those two core concepts the next step is to increase dakka so they have a chance of killing stuff before dying spectacularly.

I'm not screaming about them needing to remain garbage, so don't argue those points against me, please. And the changes I'm suggesting (which by the way includes the potential for +1 shot, but in more limited, balanced quantities) are about making sure the Orks get close enough and survive long enough to make their mid- to high-tier shooting count.

And in your raw data you missed a few things, key among them is range. Shoota is 18, everyone else is 24+ with Firewarriors being 30. So before the orks can even fire a volley they are going to be fethed rather spectacularly by the enemy. Another key element you addressed but not really is the durability issue. a SM has 3+ armor to the Orks 6+, so on average the Bolter will be firing a lot more often then the shoota because range and you know...being alive.

I did not discuss range explicitly, but I did account for it somewhat - the higher range also includes worse shooting (the first of the two "normal" wound numbers).

Ork Shootas are not Lootas - they shouldn't be hanging out in the back field trading shots. In most cases, your Boys will be within 18" shooting range of at least one enemy unit, and I'd be surprised if it didn't happen by turn 2 (so long as they aren't wiped out - something that can happen to any infantry). When your Boys are over 18" but under 24" away, enemy shooting is better. Between 12" and 18", your Boys shooting is significantly better (except against Fire Warriors, who are closer to Lootas and have their own issues), and between 0" and 12", your Boys shooting is still slightly better.

But while every other infantry mentioned has their Rapid Fire weapon and can't assault after they shoot, Shoota Boys can, and they are really quite adept at Krumpin' on a point-for-point basis (with 2 attacks base, and lots of bodies, resulting in lots of attacks and lots more attacks on the charge).

And while durability is definitely an issue for Boys (something I've agreed with repeatedly), you're not painting the whole picture either by referencing only the armor value - cover saves are ubiquitous in 7th edition, and your boys have twice the wounds to get through (which translates to a roughly equal durability if they have even 5+ cover, or better durability if they have 4+).

As it stands Ork Shoota boyz are NEVER TAKEN because why waste the point on upgrading a slugga boy when they are going to get blasted apart before they get in range, or if they do get in range you don't want them to fire because it will ruin your charge range and leave you exposed to return fire for another turn. So the added bonus of being good in assault is wasted most of the time. So the answer is either make them more durable (something everyone complains about apparently) or increase the dakka to make them a legitimate dakka threat. Also the special weapons aren't going to be useful because your choices are still a couple S5 Big Shootas or 2-3 BS2 rokkitz.

With very few exceptions (screw you, Eldar), MOST basic troops are rarely taken, if ever, because they often just aren't as exciting, potent, impressive, interesting, or specialized as other choices in the army. We all agree in this thread that Ork Boys generally could use a boost, but that doesn't entail your proposed boost is balanced. Look to fix the foundations before you repair the crack in the wall.

When I reference "everyone screaming" I don't mean you. I made a thread about making eavy armor significantly cheaper so that boyz would actually be enticed to using it. Apparently 2pts is ridiculous and 3pts is borderline to cheap. Regardless of pointing out that the drop from 4+ to 3+ is HUGE in regards to durability or that at 4pts a model your almost buying an extra boy (for every 3 Eavy armor boyz you can field 5 regular boyz).

Regardless In terms of dakka, orks are supposed to throw dice at problems as I mentioned above. If we left orks durability at where it is now and increased damage output from shooting I think it would be a decent fix.

Ork boyz die to a stiff breeze and increasing their ranged damage output would be a good way to make them worth taking compared to the ubiquitous biker armies we see now.

Needless to say, alot of things that are in the ork codex are overpriced.