Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 15:07:35
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote: 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
T5 Ork Boy compared to T4 Ork Boy with Armor save.
12 S4 hits = 6 wounds against T4 and 4 against T5
the T4 would save 1 wound because 6+ armor so 5 Casualties, the T5 models would lose all 4 so 4 casualties. So if they don't increase the price of the Boy this would be fine. I would also prefer Ork boyz to get S4 instead of S3.
The only problem I see is that then Ork Nobz would have to be T5 (Which they should already have been) and Warbosses need to be T6 (Which they should already have been) and Ghaz would then need to be T7. This would also justify the stupidly high price for Warbikes on Ork Boyz, Nobz and Special Characters. Plus it would be a lot more fun for my Biker army to have T6 Warbiker and T7 Warbosses on bike.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 15:13:00
Subject: Re:Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Veteran Wolf Guard Squad Leader
|
A toughness increase would be fitting. 5+ armour is pretty questionable in the game, with anything more potent than a potato gun seemingly able to pierce it.
|
I let the dogs out |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 15:35:09
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Automated Rubric Marine of Tzeentch
|
SemperMortis wrote:
T5 Ork Boy compared to T4 Ork Boy with Armor save.
12 S4 hits = 6 wounds against T4 and 4 against T5
the T4 would save 1 wound because 6+ armor so 5 Casualties, the T5 models would lose all 4 so 4 casualties. So if they don't increase the price of the Boy this would be fine. I would also prefer Ork boyz to get S4 instead of S3.
The only problem I see is that then Ork Nobz would have to be T5 (Which they should already have been) and Warbosses need to be T6 (Which they should already have been) and Ghaz would then need to be T7. This would also justify the stupidly high price for Warbikes on Ork Boyz, Nobz and Special Characters. Plus it would be a lot more fun for my Biker army to have T6 Warbiker and T7 Warbosses on bike.
Totally fine with the T increases. That is what I meant across the board T increase. It would make playing against orks less like playing against tough guardsmen with axes and more like tough green skins that are kinda scary.
Not sure about the S increase though seems like that would be a bit much. I would say something like "cleave: to wound rolls of 6 have AP 4"
Helps them get through the horde armies but doesn't make them any better against more elite armies that would struggle with dealing with a very large number of T 5 mobs.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/01/03 15:45:28
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 16:04:15
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote:SemperMortis wrote:
T5 Ork Boy compared to T4 Ork Boy with Armor save.
12 S4 hits = 6 wounds against T4 and 4 against T5
the T4 would save 1 wound because 6+ armor so 5 Casualties, the T5 models would lose all 4 so 4 casualties. So if they don't increase the price of the Boy this would be fine. I would also prefer Ork boyz to get S4 instead of S3.
The only problem I see is that then Ork Nobz would have to be T5 (Which they should already have been) and Warbosses need to be T6 (Which they should already have been) and Ghaz would then need to be T7. This would also justify the stupidly high price for Warbikes on Ork Boyz, Nobz and Special Characters. Plus it would be a lot more fun for my Biker army to have T6 Warbiker and T7 Warbosses on bike.
Totally fine with the T increases. That is what I meant across the board T increase. It would make playing against orks less like playing against tough guardsmen with axes and more like tough green skins that are kinda scary.
Not sure about the S increase though seems like that would be a bit much. I would say something like "cleave: to wound rolls of 6 have AP 4"
Helps them get through the horde armies but doesn't make them any better against more elite armies that would struggle with dealing with a very large number of T 5 mobs.
How about Choppas Granting +1 strength, and Shootas getting +1 BS or +1 Shots something like that. Realistically S3 boyz are trash, Anything T5 and above just laughs at them. 10 Boyz with S3 have 30 attacks at WS4, so 20 hits. Against T5 that is 3 wounds......So if they have a 3+ save thats 1 wound...... Getting S4 means that those same 10 boyz with 30 attacks will be inflicting 6-7 wounds which means 2 casualties against T5 3+ saves. Automatically Appended Next Post: To put that another way, Ork charges should be SCARY not average. When orks charge they should have the ability to feth up things, but after that 1st turn they shouldn't be neutered to S3 where they have little to no chance to win in CC, especially since at Initiative 2 they almost never catch anyone in a sweeping advance.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/03 16:05:33
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 18:18:54
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
How about a basic boy reboot?
Increase strength to 4 and toughness to 5, but reduce weapon skill to 3, number of attacks to 1 basic and skip the armor saves.
Too different? Too weak? I've just always thought it was odd that orks had the same skill and more attacks than a space marine.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 18:36:20
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
amanita wrote:How about a basic boy reboot?
Increase strength to 4 and toughness to 5, but reduce weapon skill to 3, number of attacks to 1 basic and skip the armor saves.
Too different? Too weak? I've just always thought it was odd that orks had the same skill and more attacks than a space marine.
And what you just did there was make a boy slightly more tough and significantly weaker in every other way. In other words RUINED ork boyz.
I would actually be fine with your proposal if you make the new point cost 3ppm. Otherwise all you've done is made boyz just as weak, just in a different way.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 18:49:19
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Nasty Nob
Crescent City Fl..
|
Why not just add a wound to ever Ork type? They'll still die to double toughness like everything else but maybe survive falling out of an exploding trukk?
|
The rewards of tolerance are treachery and betrayal.
Remember kids, Games Workshop needs you more than you need them. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 18:52:22
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
T5 would make the Ork boy too expensive.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 19:00:22
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Nasty Nob
Crescent City Fl..
|
I don't think the costs should go up. Apparently core units should be over powered and undercosted.
|
The rewards of tolerance are treachery and betrayal.
Remember kids, Games Workshop needs you more than you need them. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 19:13:56
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
warhead01 wrote:Why not just add a wound to ever Ork type? They'll still die to double toughness like everything else but maybe survive falling out of an exploding trukk?
Do you really want to deal with that lvl of book keeping though? Granted the rules state you have to remove as many models as possible instead of wound spreading but still
BTW on a side note Does that rule apply in CC as well? I have a guy at my game shop who says if several models are in base to base he can allocate one wound to each one before removing some as casualties.
Also the problem with adding 1 wound to every ork is Nobz would then be 3 wounds each, That would almost make Nobz appropriately priced
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 19:36:33
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Nasty Nob
Crescent City Fl..
|
Ya, it's not that bad and yes it's the same in close combat.
I think you guy is playing it incorrectly. after a model is wounded they'd have to take the next and the next until they die. ( I have to look that up to be sure though)
Which is why I don't think it's that big of a deal. a power fist would still kill a whole nob. or several. Biker nobs get a boost but they cost a tone of points. ( I remember you mentioning that a lot lol)
Maybe it's not the right answer for "fixing orks".
But it would be interesting. 30 boys becomes "60". and should have enough bodies left to slap fight it out once they get stuck in. While still being properly squished by double toughness wounds. Maybe they go up to 7 points pre model. But not much above the 6 points they are now. If points were less fixed on modls and equipment over all in 40K, like how they are in AoS then you could get shootas or sluggas and choppas for the same cost. And a 4+ save would be a better thing...or maybe more noticibly good) if orks( boys) had 2 wounds. But I'm not sure if Evy' Armour should stay the same points or go up. Ideally just keeping the troops cheap is what I'd want.
|
The rewards of tolerance are treachery and betrayal.
Remember kids, Games Workshop needs you more than you need them. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 20:16:07
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
SemperMortis wrote: amanita wrote:How about a basic boy reboot?
Increase strength to 4 and toughness to 5, but reduce weapon skill to 3, number of attacks to 1 basic and skip the armor saves.
Too different? Too weak? I've just always thought it was odd that orks had the same skill and more attacks than a space marine.
And what you just did there was make a boy slightly more tough and significantly weaker in every other way. In other words RUINED ork boyz.
I would actually be fine with your proposal if you make the new point cost 3ppm. Otherwise all you've done is made boyz just as weak, just in a different way.
What? Bumping the strength to 4 is weaker? They still hit the same with a lower WS, they just get hit back more often. I was hoping for more serious debate, not hyperbole.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 20:30:40
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Nasty Nob
Crescent City Fl..
|
What? Bumping the strength to 4 is weaker? They still hit the same with a lower WS, they just get hit back more often. I was hoping for more serious debate, not hyperbole.
Well, that's a drastically different Ork.
If your saying it's attack stat should become 1 then shoota boys becomes my ork of choice. 2 attacks on the charge vs 3 is huge and 3 vs 4 is to me still a problem. In my experience just having the capability of all of those attacks from a mob is a deterrent. My usual opponent doesn't want anything to do with that if it can be avoided. ws 3 means orks get hit more than they do now. so I don't like that at all. (to me if the WS goes down their BS needs to go up.
|
The rewards of tolerance are treachery and betrayal.
Remember kids, Games Workshop needs you more than you need them. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 21:01:46
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Resentful Grot With a Plan
|
Army Special Rule: Oi lads, this is a well good scrap: Once per game when a Waaagh is declared the Ork player may roll a D6 for each fully destroyed unit of Ork Boyz and Ork Nobz, on a 4+ the unit returns as outflanking reserves where a flanking roll of 5 or 6 is treated as arriving from the Ork player's board edge. (Units that started the game with transports or attached independent characters do not return with them). This rule represents nearby Orks being attracted by a particularly nasty part of a battle, or a strong enemy.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 21:04:26
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
amanita wrote:SemperMortis wrote: amanita wrote:How about a basic boy reboot?
Increase strength to 4 and toughness to 5, but reduce weapon skill to 3, number of attacks to 1 basic and skip the armor saves.
Too different? Too weak? I've just always thought it was odd that orks had the same skill and more attacks than a space marine.
And what you just did there was make a boy slightly more tough and significantly weaker in every other way. In other words RUINED ork boyz.
I would actually be fine with your proposal if you make the new point cost 3ppm. Otherwise all you've done is made boyz just as weak, just in a different way.
What? Bumping the strength to 4 is weaker? They still hit the same with a lower WS, they just get hit back more often. I was hoping for more serious debate, not hyperbole.
Going from WS4 and 2 attacks base with S3 to WS3, 1 attack base and S4 s a problem.
ON the charge the old ork would be Hitting on 4s against SM players, he would have 4 attacks (2 base, 1 charge 1 CCWs) so 2 hits and S4 vs T4 = 1 wound. In return the SM player would hit back with 1 attack, at WS4, S4 and would result in .25 wound with a 6+ save = .21 wounds inflicted. NOW the Ork player on the charge (Factoring in Furious charge still) will be hitting on 4s, wounding on 3s but with only 3 attacks, so 1.5 hits 5/6 chance to wound. In return that SM is now hitting on 3s and wounding on 5s so 2/3rd and 1/3rd chance to wound = .22 wounds inflicted.
So orks are easier to kill and hurt less in CC for the benefit of being slightly harder to kill in ranged combat against any weapon with a AP value.
So what you've done is made orks Tougher to kill overall (slightly) but weaker in CC (the only place they can do damage).
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/03 23:38:34
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Flashy Flashgitz
Armageddon
|
I don't think they need a gimmicky rule. I don't think most core troop units should. It would just cause clutter and be another thing that a lot of people would forget exists in game.
As for stats, the s3 is a huge problem. Coupled with the I3 it makes small squads of slugga boyz entirely useless. You can charge 5 space marines and not even kill one. At least shoota boyz have 20 shots in a squad of 10. Its a weird design aspect of orks if you think about it. On the charge they slice through marines with sheer number of dice like they're made of paper, but after a turn goes by they might as well be braindead grots in terms of combat prowess? What...? With the fact that they attack after Marines and Eldar you could honestly bump the strength to 4, KEEP furious charge, and you'd still be weaker.
|
"People say on their first meeting a Man and an Ork exchanged a long, hard look, didn't care much for what they saw, and shot each other dead." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/04 00:33:45
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Not as Good as a Minion
|
I3? They wish they had I3, they're I2!
|
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/04 01:08:00
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Ha! Right?
Well, after crunching some numbers, assuming the boys' target is a squad of marines and some orks boys received a few shots on the way in, their damage output with a lower weapon skill and one less attack is nearly the same as before (furious charge to both versions). What really separates them are subsequent rounds of combat where their higher toughness and strength make them better even with fewer attacks. No point in posting my findings here; everyone has their own criteria for what constitutes a typical encounter so they can do their own math. Not sure if changing so many stats is the best solution, but I believe Toughness 5 is more feasible than a 5+ save. Probably more in line with the fluff too.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/05 02:41:06
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
I want to try the below out with a friend (all subject to tweaking, of course)...
Orks up S by one.
Remove Furious Charge
Give boyz FNP6+
Nobs and up get FNP5+
Painboy increases FNP by 1 for the unit instead of a flat FNP.
Change Mob Rule to - unit can use squad number of wounds for leadership. If it's more than 10 then the unit is fearless.
Make WAAAGH also grant Rage for the turn, perhaps.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/05 03:26:15
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Ultramarine Master with Gauntlets of Macragge
What's left of Cadia
|
I think boyz should get a 6+ FNP on top of their armor. These are aliens who can laugh off having a limb blown off, then beat you to death with said limb. Since Boyz don't get their T-shirt save 9 times out of 10 anyway it wouldn't add that much more rolling
|
TheEyeOfNight- I swear, this thread is 70% smack talk, 20% RP organization, and 10% butt jokes
TheEyeOfNight- "Ordo Xenos reports that the Necrons have attained democracy, kamikaze tendencies, and nuclear fission. It's all tits up, sir."
Space Marine flyers are shaped for the greatest possible air resistance so that the air may never defeat the SPACE MARINES!
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/05 03:57:20
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
Honestly, I don't get why FNP 6+ is such a popular notion, especially for orks. If I lose 12 boyz to a boatload of incoming fire, now I have to re-roll 12 dice in the hopes of saving 2 of them on average??? How is this not more pointless dice rolling?
Just alter another stat and be done with it.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/05 13:26:40
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Nasty Nob
Crescent City Fl..
|
Honestly, I don't get why FNP 6+ is such a popular notion, especially for orks. If I lose 12 boyz to a boatload of incoming fire, now I have to re-roll 12 dice in the hopes of saving 2 of them on average??? How is this not more pointless dice rolling?
I think it actually encourages mobs to buy evy armour.
Unless you'd rather "speed up your play" buy just picking up your models.
I'd don't see it being very much help but getting to roll is better than not getting to roll.
Just alter another stat and be done with it.
What do you mean? Just get rid of saves all together?
|
The rewards of tolerance are treachery and betrayal.
Remember kids, Games Workshop needs you more than you need them. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/05 17:17:21
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
warhead01 wrote:Honestly, I don't get why FNP 6+ is such a popular notion, especially for orks. If I lose 12 boyz to a boatload of incoming fire, now I have to re-roll 12 dice in the hopes of saving 2 of them on average??? How is this not more pointless dice rolling?
I think it actually encourages mobs to buy evy armour.
Unless you'd rather "speed up your play" buy just picking up your models.
I'd don't see it being very much help but getting to roll is better than not getting to roll.
Just alter another stat and be done with it.
What do you mean? Just get rid of saves all together?
No. Increase either the Toughness or improve the Save.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/05 18:05:32
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Start by letting orks take models off the back of units. Then make shooty units in other codices PAY for their damn shootiness. Then see if there's still a problem.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/05 19:06:59
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta
|
I am all for 6+ fnp and either no armor or 6+ followed by a 6+ fnp . painboy then decrease fnp to 4+ , keep ard boys a purchasable upgrade for a 4+ armor then whatever fnp they have. current math I played with has a boy as it is worth about 4 points (slightly less) comparing to other book's troops the 6+ fnp would bring em alone to almost worth 5 points which would be an improvement. still get outclassed by most armies but less useless
|
10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/05 20:47:01
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Waaagh! Ork Warboss
Italy
|
oldzoggy wrote: 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 understand your points but i disagree. I hate hordes of boyz, orks are not beasts or tyranides, they're savages that have a resemblance with mad max characters. So lots of vehicles to carry the boyz and specialists, bikes and buggies. I only see orks like this, the concepts of blobs of 30 on foot or even the greentide are not interesting at all in my opinion and i don't want to play orks like that. Also they're a troop choice and many troops in 40k are weak. It's absolutely acceptable to me that orks are massacred if they get shot. The only think i found a bit unbalanced about them is the S3, i mean the same as guardsmen and eldar. And orks have arms and muscles that are twice the normal humans or eldars. But with furious charge this issue is almost balanced too. Also you can't compare them to wulfen as they're an elite choice and probably the best unit in close combat in the entire game. Throw a blob of boyz in close combat against the same amount of points of blood claws, those wolves don't stand a chance. 30 boyz have a very different role than 5 wulfen. Even if you talk about points, a standard ork boy costs 6 points, seems balanced to me if compared to other troops.The stompa, the kans, the 'naughts and the flyers and the burnaboyz cost too many points, not ork boyz.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/06 02:31:26
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard
|
amanita wrote: warhead01 wrote:Honestly, I don't get why FNP 6+ is such a popular notion, especially for orks. If I lose 12 boyz to a boatload of incoming fire, now I have to re-roll 12 dice in the hopes of saving 2 of them on average??? How is this not more pointless dice rolling?
I think it actually encourages mobs to buy evy armour.
Unless you'd rather "speed up your play" buy just picking up your models.
I'd don't see it being very much help but getting to roll is better than not getting to roll.
Just alter another stat and be done with it.
What do you mean? Just get rid of saves all together?
No. Increase either the Toughness or improve the Save.
They aren't getting their Toughness increased. A points decrease (5pts, the same as a Guardsman) is astronomically more likely then T5 or better than a 6+ save baseline.
The FNP is the most fluffy option by far. Perhaps that with the drop to 5pts.
|
warboss wrote:Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/06 04:58:31
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
They already can get FNP via a Pain Boy if you're that concerned about it.
Instead they should be getting bonuses depending on how many models are in the unit, kinda like how I feel Tyranids should get different bonuses depending on the Synapse creature near them.
|
CaptainStabby wrote:If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote:BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote:Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote:ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/06 08:52:12
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Automated Rubric Marine of Tzeentch
|
War Kitten wrote:I think boyz should get a 6+ FNP on top of their armor. These are aliens who can laugh off having a limb blown off, then beat you to death with said limb. Since Boyz don't get their T-shirt save 9 times out of 10 anyway it wouldn't add that much more rolling
Okay here is the problem with that anything that has no AP now has to deal with a LOT more Orks then before, 33% more on average. So while it would make them more viable against every army with AP armies without AP would be on the receiving end of a BGC. Automatically Appended Next Post:
No it wouldn't if they simply take away the armor save that they never get anyways. They could leave the points alone. Automatically Appended Next Post: Crazyterran wrote:They aren't getting their Toughness increased. A points decrease (5pts, the same as a Guardsman) is astronomically more likely then T5 or better than a 6+ save baseline.
The FNP is the most fluffy option by far. Perhaps that with the drop to 5pts.
Yes because when I think Orks I think what they need is more unreliable dice rolls. FnP would simply make a game longer and increase their points by a lot.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/01/06 09:02:28
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2017/01/06 09:19:59
Subject: Should the ork basic save be improved from 6+ to 5+?
|
 |
Auspicious Daemonic Herald
|
Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote: War Kitten wrote:I think boyz should get a 6+ FNP on top of their armor. These are aliens who can laugh off having a limb blown off, then beat you to death with said limb. Since Boyz don't get their T-shirt save 9 times out of 10 anyway it wouldn't add that much more rolling
Okay here is the problem with that anything that has no AP now has to deal with a LOT more Orks then before, 33% more on average. So while it would make them more viable against every army with AP armies without AP would be on the receiving end of a BGC.
You math is wrong. It's a 6+ FNP so its only 16.6% normally. But you take that out of the 5/6 chance of failing a 6+ armor save so adding 6+ FNP to 6+ armor only makes them 13.8% more survivable then before, not 33%. Very underwhelming
Also it doesn't matter if its against AP- or not because either way they are getting 1 additional 6+ save regardless of AP. It is equal in both regards
|
|
 |
 |
|