Making Orks Competitive in 8th - Waaaagh! (Ork tactics)

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.

**rvd1ofakind**

Jidmah wrote:
rvd1ofakind wrote:
You just have to believe everything I say without a source :p

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2018/10/01/orktober-has-begun/#comments

Thanks!

I think Reece is quite clearly talking about aesthetics and not about tournament floor rules.

uhhhhh:

"Well, GW may not have a basing guide for Orks at this point in time but looking at AoS it seems like it may become a possibility that you should be open to."
"AoS’ base chart is a rule for Matched Play, IIRC. It’s not for open and narrative play."

**tneva82**

Soooo...You interpret "it MAY become..." as "it WILL..."...

Albeit I'm not native english speaker but I'm pretty sure may is not same as will. It's possibility. "I may die tomorrow" does not mean I will die tomorrow. Nor will "I may win lottery this week" mean next week I'm rolling over in cash.

**warhead01**

An Actual Englishman wrote:
warhead01 wrote:
He says nothing specific as to how his events plan to deal with this "issue".
I don't attend those large events so I doubt it's a problem I will have to deal with. Just reading that some people believe it's mandatory is irritating.

This is true, but Reece also says (bear in mind he has inside knowledge of GW's plans) -

Reecius wrote:Well, GW may not have a basing guide for Orks at this point in time but looking at AoS it seems like it may become a possibility that you should be open to.

Reecius wrote:AoS’ base chart is a rule for Matched Play, IIRC. It’s not for open and narrative play.

Which seems like a pretty big hint to me.

For whatever reason the site didn't allow me to comment so I haven't had the chance but the long and short of it is that I would find this in very bad taste if it happened.

GW aren't going to provide the new bases for my models (bikes and otherwise) to re-base them without cost to me.
It's going to take an inordinate amount of my time to re-base my models, which I simply don't have (and if I did, I wouldn't want to spend my limited hobby time revisiting completed models).
I won't be able to play casual matched play games as well as tournaments without house ruling unless I re-base all of my models. Some of my models are less than a year old. It's a slap in the face of loyal customers who have been purchasing for years.

I figured he wasn't addressing it as he already has guidelines in his rule pack or is planning to take a vote on it or something. They did rules voting in the past as I recall.
I would hope that the nope to bigger bases would be larger than the yep and reverberate across the internet and GW's radar. (Like a psychic slap in the face.

)
I know it's a dead horse now.

**rvd1ofakind**

tneva82 wrote:
Soooo...You interpret "it MAY become..." as "it WILL..."...

Albeit I'm not native english speaker but I'm pretty sure may is not same as will. It's possibility. "I may die tomorrow" does not mean I will die tomorrow. Nor will "I may win lottery this week" mean next week I'm rolling over in cash.

Like I said. You need to know how he writes things. It's based on previous experience. "You may not wanna buy too many brimstones" for example means "they are getting nerfed to hell".
Imagine yourself in his situation. You know GW is moving orks to 32mm and will release a chart but you can't straight up say that. If so, how else would you say that if not "AoS did it, so 40k could as well *wink wink nudge nudge*"

**An Actual Englishman**

rvd1ofakind wrote:
You have to know how Reece writes. He has to be very diplomatic and secretive to not break the NDA and to not be damaging to GW's sales. When he says "he could see an argument" he means "but this is how it's gonna be anyway".

Just FYI - I'm not happy about the change and I only have <150 of that to do and I've only based like 4 models so far as Orks are my 3rd army in a year. I cannot imagine having to do 500+

Yea I read this exactly the same way as you rvd and as you say I think it comes with experience of listening to the man talk and comment on different things.

Thanks for sharing the news (though I don't think there was a need for "the nerf they deserved") and your take on it. It's nice to know you're not pleased and you sympathise with those of us who have more Orks to do.

Based on how Reece normally communicates with us and the fact that the pics all show boyz on 32s, I'd take that part of the equation as a certainty. The basing table isn't a "for sure" thing for me at this stage, but if Reece's communication is anything to go by, it's a very, very likely thing too.

**Jidmah**

rvd1ofakind wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
rvd1ofakind wrote:
You just have to believe everything I say without a source :p

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2018/10/01/orktober-has-begun/#comments

Thanks!

I think Reece is quite clearly talking about aesthetics and not about tournament floor rules.

uhhhhh:

"Well, GW may not have a basing guide for Orks at this point in time but looking at AoS it seems like it may become a possibility that you should be open to."
"AoS’ base chart is a rule for Matched Play, IIRC. It’s not for open and narrative play."

I was talking about this part:

Well, GW may not have a basing guide for Orks at this point in time but looking at AoS it seems like it may become a possibility that you should be open to.

The 32s are obviously worse for game play but man, da Boyz look much better on 32s, especially units like Lootas and Stormboyz.

Hey, to each their own. For normal Boyz I could see that argument but Lootas especially look good on 32s and Stormboyz at least stand up on them, lol!

Yeah, they do look much better on 32s. It is good for taking up space but sucks for actual combat where you get less models in range to krump, and the Boyz need maximum weight of attacks IME.

Eh, we’ll see what happens.

**Weazel**

If they do a base size chart, it has to include vehicles as well I suppose. I'm not too keen on basing my Trukks and KMKs.

But I'm not buying it. In AoS a chart is justfied because stuff used to be on square bases that don't really work for obvious reasons so people needed reference how to base their models. But forced base size in 40k? Maybe, but unlikely to be enforced at least not right away.

Boyz and Nobz supplied on 32mm in the future though? Most probably.

**Galas**

Base Chart for AoS is a guideline and a suggestion not a rule.

**rvd1ofakind**

Er... no vehicles won't be included in the chart, lol. They don't have bases.

Also the deserved nerf was a bit tongue-in-cheek.

And 3 detachments max/3 of the same unit max is also a recommendation. Try bringing 5 detachments of galants to a tournament and say it was only a recommendation

GW doesn't want to alienate people so everything is a recommendation

**Jidmah**

I don't think a single person in this thread cares more about the nerf than about the work and money associated with re-basing hundreds of models.

At this point, no one owns less than 120 boyz plus maybe another 50-100 ork models across the different other infantry and bike units. Even for me, who has all his bases just black, this is a lot of work and money.

**tneva82**

Jidmah wrote:
I don't think a single person in this thread cares more about the nerf than about the work and money associated with re-basing hundreds of models.

At this point, no one owns less than 120 boyz plus maybe another 50-100 ork models across the different other infantry and bike units. Even for me, who has all his bases just black, this is a lot of work and money.

120+50-100? Noobs! I have like 400+

And then doesn't account the HUNDREDS of models worth of movement trays that are for 25mm bases

Oh and redoing my bases pretty much requires doing it from scratch. Base extenders don't work out that well for making appearance to match.

Good luck getting me to switch. Basically somebody wants me to do it he needs to pay and do it. And price will be hundreds of euros...

**koooaei**

And once again i'm happy i don't decorate and paint bases.

**Weazel**

rvd1ofakind wrote:
Er... no vehicles won't be included in the chart, lol. They don't have bases.

Also the deserved nerf was a bit tongue-in-cheek.

And 3 detachments max/3 of the same unit max is also a recommendation. Try bringing 5 detachments of galants to a tournament and say it was only a recommendation
GW doesn't want to alienate people so everything is a recommendation

The buggy models I've seen all have bases. All the walkers have bases etc. Just because Trukks have been supplied without bases thus far doesn't mean they will never have bases.

**tneva82**

That would be more nerfs. Fun fun fun

**Jidmah**

I'm fairly sure that battlewagons won't ever have bases

**Weazel**

I believe no four+-wheelers have had bases before the buggies. So we will see if they're setting a trend.

**Nuck Fewton**

anyone have links to any cheap base extenders out there? I can see my xacto wounds now trying to rebase ~300 figs.......

**DoomMouse**

What's the best way of getting them to clarify that we don't need to rebase models for tournaments? Email customer services? Obviously I'll only do this if they say Boyz need 32mm bases, but want to be ready if they try to pull that. I enjoy playing in tournaments and don't enjoy having to rip apart 200 models that are on perfectly adequate, fully painted bases!

I guess I'd go the base extender route if I had to - just found an eBay set via Google that does 250 25-32mm extenders for 8 pounds. But the WORK to make them all look nice again would be horrific...

**Billagio**

I would guess that if the tournament says you need to have 32mm bases then you do, otherwise you dont.

**Mellon**

In the facebook thread under the news there was a question about bases asked and the official account answered that there was no need to change.

Don't know what kind of oumph they have over tournament organisers or rules writers though, but it is hopeful.

"So hyped! Is it just me or are those boyz bases bigger than 25mm??"

Warhammer 40,000: "They may well be, but this doesn't mean you need to change yours at all - unless you want to!"

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=2146373775683250&id=1575682476085719&comment_id=2146377515682876&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D

**rvd1ofakind**

That is the social media guy giving the technically correct PR answer. Yes, you don't have to. If you play in RTTs, you probably don't have to. Once you hit GT+ - there's a good chance you will be rejected.

**tneva82**

Thank god tournaments here are more sensible than that.

**Billagio**

Yeah my guess is if youre an avid tournament player and the ones you go to make you change your bases it shouldnt be a big deal for you. You already have to play WYSIWYG and magnetize the gak out of everything and paint according to your clan so swapping base sizes is the least of your worries imo. Chances are most tournament going ork players are going to have to repaint most of their armies anyway

**tneva82**

Well clan painting is actually least of worry. Avid tournament players paint in neutral colour scheme anyway so it can be used in whatever so you can have marine models be space wolves one game, blood angels next, grey knights third(well this isn't anymore case as GK sucks but when they didn't in 5th ed this was popular enough)

**SemperMortis**

rvd1ofakind wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Soooo...You interpret "it MAY become..." as "it WILL..."...

Albeit I'm not native english speaker but I'm pretty sure may is not same as will. It's possibility. "I may die tomorrow" does not mean I will die tomorrow. Nor will "I may win lottery this week" mean next week I'm rolling over in cash.

Like I said. You need to know how he writes things. It's based on previous experience. "You may not wanna buy too many brimstones" for example means "they are getting nerfed to hell".
Imagine yourself in his situation. You know GW is moving orks to 32mm and will release a chart but you can't straight up say that. If so, how else would you say that if not "AoS did it, so 40k could as well *wink wink nudge nudge*"

exactly this, you need to know how he writes. Mostly he talks out his backside with little idea of what he is talking about and generally can be relied on to be wrong in most cases. I am still waiting for Stompa's and Killa Kanz to dominate the meta.

**Anvildude**

Man,they need to add a new Klan to the Orks.

We got Goffs already, but with the way everyone's "Waaah"ing in this thread, they need to add in the EMOS as well!

Nyuk nyuk nyuk!

**rvd1ofakind**

SemperMortis wrote:
rvd1ofakind wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Soooo...You interpret "it MAY become..." as "it WILL..."...

Albeit I'm not native english speaker but I'm pretty sure may is not same as will. It's possibility. "I may die tomorrow" does not mean I will die tomorrow. Nor will "I may win lottery this week" mean next week I'm rolling over in cash.

Like I said. You need to know how he writes things. It's based on previous experience. "You may not wanna buy too many brimstones" for example means "they are getting nerfed to hell".
Imagine yourself in his situation. You know GW is moving orks to 32mm and will release a chart but you can't straight up say that. If so, how else would you say that if not "AoS did it, so 40k could as well *wink wink nudge nudge*"

exactly this, you need to know how he writes. Mostly he talks out his backside with little idea of what he is talking about and generally can be relied on to be wrong in most cases. I am still waiting for Stompa's and Killa Kanz to dominate the meta.

Oh, I wouldn't trust him about the viability of stuff ever. But having insider info like this is different.

**tneva82**

SemperMortis wrote:
I am still waiting for Stompa's and Killa Kanz to dominate the meta.

Ah yes the infamous stompa domination!

Oh wait they do dominate it! On the list of lousiest models in the game they are definitely fighting for the top spot.

**warhead01**

After my last game I started thinking about adding big shootas and kustom shootas to my shoota mobs riding in trukks. I'm also tempted to move the squad size up to 12 models.
24 shoota shots and 3 Big shootas shots from 3 or 4 mobs in trukks. Any one do this? How has it worked out for you?

**PiñaColada**

warhead01 wrote:
After my last game I started thinking about adding big shootas and kustom shootas to my shoota mobs riding in trukks. I'm also tempted to move the squad size up to 12 models.
24 shoota shots and 3 Big shootas shots from 3 or 4 mobs in trukks. Any one do this? How has it worked out for you?

Yes, I have. It's worked out terrible so far haha. But mind you this is before dakkadakkadakka and eventual points drops on the trukks. The damage simply isn't there if we're being honest. It's still fun though. I really hope that the codex brings some viability to speed freeks and vehicle heavy ork lists in general now that this release seems focused on just that. I really don't know how they'd make trukkboyz viable though. They'd have to make the trukk flimsier and chop its points in half for it to even be a thing I think.