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.

In our little group we run our own version of the rules but many things are still reflected by the current 7th Ed rules, such as shooting being stronger than close combat. Would improving the armor save for orks help them without making them too strong (especially in close combat since a 5+ save does little against most ranged attacks anyway)? Would it unfairly give them an edge over other close combat oriented lists such as tyranids, etc.?

Any thoughts are welcome!

I would say no because they dont have armor on.

RIght now nids and orks are very meh, nids especially are weak since they still are working off a 6th ed codex.

besides even with a 5+ still wont get saves from bolter weapons I think honestly it would not effect it in much of a meaningful way.

Just my thoughts on it.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
I would say no because they dont have armor on.

RIght now nids and orks are very meh, nids especially are weak since they still are working off a 6th ed codex.

besides even with a 5+ still wont get saves from bolter weapons I think honestly it would not effect it in much of a meaningful way.

Just my thoughts on it.

Well, it matters vs scatterlaser, but not much else. Anything that nerfs the scatterlaser is a okay with me.

Martel732 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
I would say no because they dont have armor on.

RIght now nids and orks are very meh, nids especially are weak since they still are working off a 6th ed codex.

besides even with a 5+ still wont get saves from bolter weapons I think honestly it would not effect it in much of a meaningful way.

Just my thoughts on it.

Well, it matters vs scatterlaser, but not much else. Anything that nerfs the scatterlaser is a okay with me.

Ill second that my friend.

Orks honestly just need a base FNP save, period.

right now t-shirt armor is a joke, I can count on one hand the number of times I've gotten to roll a save, mostly involving trukks going boom and that dumbass mob rule.

Give boyz a 6+, Nobz a +5, and characters a 4+. It's fluffy and the orks still die to raw strength outright.

Some Orks should have a better save, like Lootas and Tank Bustaz and Flash Gitz etc.

The basic Ork? No.

As silly as it might sound, I've always been a fan of the idea of the size of the Mob of Boyz affecting their armor save.

Example:
A 10 Ork Mob is 6+.
20 Ork Mob is 5+.
30 Ork Mob is 4+.

And that's before adding in 'Eavy Armor or anything like that.

I like the idea of them getting tougher like that as their numbers get bigger. Orks are meant to be able to take a fair bit of damage aren't they? 5+ standard wouldn't be too much really.

As an ork player/collector I dont have a problem with them having a 6+ save. The boyz generally dont have much but scraps of metal to 'protect' them. FNP would be ok but I would rather see a change in the system as a whole (moving to D10/D12 for wound chart) so that theres more granularity. Points wise I think theyre ok atm but the mob rule and Ork Nobz could do with a change. I think the problem is the proliferation of heavy weapons and ott stuff (WK, Knight, massively undercosted stuff in comparison). Where games are played against mostly infantry in an almost 2nd ed like way then things even out a bit more

Thanks for the replies!

Although I like the idea that their save gets better the more that are in the squad, I don't think we'd want to deal with the extra bookkeeping. It would encourage larger squads which is pretty orky though!

A FNP roll makes some sense, but then it adds quite a bit more dice rolling that this game just doesn't need.

Fluffwise I don't have a serious issue with their armor being equal to a 5+; it's simply representative of their overall toughness without actually raising their Toughness stat. But perhaps 5+ is too much of a stretch?

As far as not being effective enough of a change, well that's an entirely different kettle of fish.

Let's just give them Necron reanimation protocols but call it "Yer not ded yet ya git"

Ork boyz cost 6 points each, a 6+ armor save is fair. They should run as an army composed by a lot of expendable units. The 6+ save is not really a weakness for the orks. As an ork player i'd suggest many improvements for our codex, but a better armor save is not one of them. Also a FNP without a Painboy attached doesn't make any sense, orks are just big naked guys, not machines, beasts or super soldiers. Being T4 and having 6+ armor is fair imho.

^ I'd say that's a fair point. Boyz are pretty inexpensive.

I think there should more be a bonus towards a FNP depending on the numbers.

10-20 is 6+++, 21-30 is 5+++, and 31+ is 4+++. Then Pain Boyz add +1 to an existing score, or 5+++ if nothing.

 Blackie wrote:
Ork boyz cost 6 points each, a 6+ armor save is fair. They should run as an army composed by a lot of expendable units. The 6+ save is not really a weakness for the orks. As an ork player i'd suggest many improvements for our codex, but a better armor save is not one of them. Also a FNP without a Painboy attached doesn't make any sense, orks are just big naked guys, not machines, beasts or super soldiers. Being T4 and having 6+ armor is fair imho.

Nope they aren't fairly costed at all. They are currently quite overcosted instead of slightly undercosted as they should be. Just look at all the ork lists no ork player is currently running a large number of them they they are supposed to instead we are running all sorts of strange things. This is all the proof you need that they are wrongly balanced as the core of an ork army. If you don't agree with me just listen to Andy Cambers explaining his logic. https://youtu.be/tdM9AUEGBGM?t=12m14s
Now on the role Ork boys should take. They are not meant to be armored hulks they are meant to be a horde of nasty brutes and be the obvious take for ork players.

I would say cutt their point cost in half making them 3 point each and add +1 to their str. I hear you cry but but this is not fair at al unit x has stats y and cost now more than an ork boy.
Yes this might be the case, but ork boys are used differently and are in a different list or are also priced before the new valuation of points in the second half of 7th.
You should not compare Ork boyz with guardsmen. You should compare them with genestealer hybrid acolytes. They are the obvious core take for a genestealer cult, have a similar role ( -> assault the enemy in hordes although the hybrids can also be used in MSU), and are priced using the current point cost system.
Hybrids vs Boyz.

Point cost hybrid 7 boy 6
Close combat attacks. Hybrid base 3, S4 rending Ws 4 Boy base 3 S3 furious charge Ws4
Survivability Hybrid T3, 5+ sv Ld8 fearless return to the shadows ( this heals their entire squad back + adds special weapons), ork boy T4, ld7, mob rule
unit size. Hybrid 5-20 Boy 10-30
sarg point cost. hybrid 10 boyz 10
Close combat weapon upgrades available to the squad. Hybrids: hand flamer for any model, 1 in 5 a special close combat weapon good non I1 weapon available for sarg. Boyz: only a power klaw for the nob.
Delivery system: Cult ambush, and open topped transport. Boyz: foot slogging, ere we go waag and open topped transports

or even better just skip the comparing with other models and try to come up with a point cost for them by trying to fix the following situations.
- Multiple blobs have to be able to walk towards an equal amount of points of Tau gun line with the result of them both being nearly decimated at the end of the game.
- Multiple blobs will walk into an equal point sized Wulfen squad and also result in mutually assured destruction.

I never understand this forum too much. But I would want a unique idea to increase survivability, not just reanimation protocols on orkz, or an armor save increase, because I need less reasons to take heavy armor.

Here is a thought, how about giving most orkz "all 6's rolled on the 'to-wound' phase of shooting have to be rerolled". They are tough, rumored to take wounds that would kill a man and keep on going, this represents this bit of fluff well, and isn't just blanket FnP.

FnP should be for the important orkz, you know, the one's who would be too strong woth the special rule I mentioned above.

I think we should tell GW to add this nao! (Idgi)

I'd rather the Boyz became stronger offensively (since that would mean you would need less to survive while still being effective) than either a better save or FNP and make 'Eavy Armour cost less so that those who do want tougher boyz can do so without shooting the cost of the unit into the atmosphere

I really like universal feel no pain for Orks. They take a substantial amount of damage i the fluff, and seem to somehow fight through it. This helps represent how tough they are, while still making an armor value a useful thing.

This would make painboys useless, but giving painboys the ability to resurrect killed models could fix that as well.

But ultimately, they need a new codex and some new models.

I like the idea of them having NO armour save, but a 6+ FNP due to being so tough. Actually captures the idea of them sometimes surviving things they have no right business living through. Would also make their 6+ the same effectiveness in close combat, but give them some extra survivability at range too.

That said, my personal favourite is to make it so Ork Mobs don't have to obey standard casualty selection, but can instead remove whatever models from a squad they want.

Orks should also have a special rule where casualties come from the rear. Call it enthusiasm.

 Rismonite wrote:
I never understand this forum too much. But I would want a unique idea to increase survivability, not just reanimation protocols on orkz...

I need to make it more obvious when I'm being sarcastic.

Martel732 wrote:
Orks should also have a special rule where casualties come from the rear. Call it enthusiasm.

Oh my god I need this in my life

All this stuff about orks being tough is already represented in game, by their toughness. IIRC they have the same survival traits as marines. IE stabilizing blood loss and organ failure when they aren't immediately killed. They are far tougher than normal humans, but then again so are marines. Keeping them in parity makes sense.

Orks need more FNP across the entire army considering they really don't feel much pain in the fluff and can survive some fairly extreme wounds.

5+ is just useless, really. That wouldn't make them any better, especially if it came with a slight points increase. Plus, it doesn't really fit in with the fluff.

S4 on profile though, now we're talking.

I like the idea of army-wide 6+ FNP though. It's a good change game-wise (and not too powerful) while fitting in with the background of the army quite well. A (reduced-cost) Painboy could then increase the FNP to 5+, and you could add a couple of other things into the codex that increased it further, such as Cybork Bodies and an artefact that effects the whole unit. Or say it increases by 1 during a Waaagh. But then never allow it to be taken beyond a 4+. I think that's a fair set of rules for an update... new codex anyone?

5+ saves are also worthless, due to the proliferation of AP5 weapons. In the past you could use cover, but ignores cover takes care of that.

Orks should be cheaper, mob rule should go back to how it was in 4th ed, and army wide FNP does sound interesting. Maybe it should be an effect of the mob rule; the more boys you have in a squad, the better the FNP.

Honestly I'd rather the boyz have no armour save and be a point cheaper than have a 5+ and potentially get a points increase.

It's not like 6+ armour ever does anything (IMO)

A 6+ armor save in close combat against most things (anything without AP, which is most things) increases survivability by 17%, almost one-fifth, which is very statistically significant and very much can be the difference between winning and losing a combat.

Alcibiades wrote:
A 6+ armor save in close combat against most things (anything without AP, which is most things) increases survivability by 17%, almost one-fifth, which is very statistically significant and very much can be the difference between winning and losing a combat.

Except that after the 1st round of combat Ork boyz at the moment are useless, so having those 1-2 extra boyz live isn't going to make a difference at all. Boyz should be 4ppm with Eavy Armor being a 3pt upgrade.

Every competitive Ork list these days is mostly bikes and specialty units, the only time I see Ork Boyz in any kind of numbers at tournies is from newbies or from people fielding Green Tide, and the green tide guys always lose horribly because most players have figured out easy strategies to neutralizing the Tide.

I recently fought an Ork Vs Ork game where my opponent took Boyz in the super formation that gives them Waaagh Every turn. I took a Kan Wall army because I wanted to play friendly. Turn 1 the game was basically over because it was easy for me to explode 3 Trukkz which resulted in about 45% casualties for those inside and then my Grotzookaz went to work and polished off another two trukkz (didn't explode) and killing a ton of boyz who spilled out of the other trukkz.

I played another game where my opponent took a Green Tide and I took a Zhadsnark biker army. Turn 1 18 bikes did work on his tide inflicting 28 Casualties, turn 2 I shot them again doing another 22 casualties and then assaulted him with my T5 S4 4+ Save models and guess what? I won horribly.

At the moment Boyz are to expensive, lack Dakka and have minimal CC ability because S3, Low initiative and no staying power (durability)

 amanita wrote:
In our little group we run our own version of the rules but many things are still reflected by the current 7th Ed rules, such as shooting being stronger than close combat. Would improving the armor save for orks help them without making them too strong (especially in close combat since a 5+ save does little against most ranged attacks anyway)? Would it unfairly give them an edge over other close combat oriented lists such as tyranids, etc.?

Any thoughts are welcome!

No, definitely not. In fact they should have thier armor save removed...and have thier T improved by one, yes Boyz should be T 5 with no armor save