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.
It has become clear to me that many people in this thread have been reading too much imperial propaganda! It's hard to believe Orks are actually good because every single faction basically has their lore written where they are the best and everyone else sucks... but their is genuine lore where orks have out smarted with better tactics and out shot the "finest of the imperium". One time the freaking orks outsmarted the Tau of all races!
Orks are not the comic relief recent GW has tried to push. Anyone with good knowledge of the lore would know that Orks are genetically designed to be the greatest weapons in the universe (whether it be by the Old ones, brainboyz or snotlings depending on what edition). So not only are we unbalanced and underpowered but we are also unrepresented on the table top as we are in the lore! If Orks played like they did right now they would have gone extinct before humanity even reached the stars (even with their reproduction).
Galas wrote: A "Every 6 to hit roll is a hit" rule benefits Orks the most of every army agaisn't all kind of -1 hit bonuses. And is much more easy to balance than just "Always hit on a 5+".
Against a lot of armies currently Orks hit on a 5+, since not every army is taking -1 to hit. Yet I can say with complete confidence that if there's anyone out there who is getting blown off the table by Ork firepower, they're in a very, very small minority.
That's why it wouldn't be unbalanced for Orks to always hit on 5's. Ork shooting not working in 8th is not just a result of -1 modifiers; it's the result of base changes in 8th. Cover is much harder for Orks to get, since we tend to take big units to negate our poor Leadership, and it also provides the least benefit to us due to our poor armour saves. In previous recent editions, cover was how a lot of our shooting units gains survivability. They don't have that option anymore. Blast weapons used to be a way for Orks to negate poor ballistic skill, but now they hit just as poorly as all our other shooting. The twin-linked change handed Orks a very small increase in firepower but handed every other army a big increase, especially on armies that hit on a 3+. That meant that our shooting units were suddenly facing a much higher amount of firepower coming their way, whilst not being able to retaliate much better.
Much of this could be negated by appropriate points cost changes. But handing Orks a rule saying "Always hit on 5+" isn't going to create any balance problems because it's not causing balance problems now.
Making armies inmune to whole strategies and bonuses of other armies isn't good game design. Making orks inmune to all "to hit" modifiers, as an army, isn't good game design. Having some ork units with inmunity to "to hit" rolls could be balanced. Other units with those rules exist, and if they are costed appropiately theres no problem with some specialized units like those.
But, Imperial Guard army wide inmunity to morale wasn't good game design. The Eldar Craftworld trait that make them inmune to morale loses isn't good game design.
Having stackable maluses that make the enemy literally incapable of doing anything is bad game design. Thats why the "Always hit on a 6" for everyone should exist.
All the other reasons you have explained are much more on point on what needs to be modified in orks to make them viable as a shooty army. The "Them hitting on 5+ isn't a problem, so they should always hit on a 5+" doesn't goes anywhere we should want to reach, talking about the base-rules and design of the game.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/10/29 00:03:53
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Galas, you have said what I was saying more clear I couldn’t agree better. We should come to a concensus on balance, a give and take type deal not just no we need this no matter what.
Because theres armies wholle army bonuses are "to hit" modifiers agaisn't shooting, a "to hit" modifier is all the defense flyers got in 8th, and having army-wide rules that negate full basic mechanics of the game is bad game design.
As I said, with a "A 6 is always a hit", Ork-based shooting units lose 50% of their shooting with a -1 to hit. With a -2 they still lose 50%, but Imperial Guard an Tau lose 66% of their shooting, etc...
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Galas wrote: Because theres armies wholle army bonuses are "to hit" modifiers agaisn't shooting, a "to hit" modifier is all the defense flyers got in 8th, and having army-wide rules that negate full basic mechanics of the game is bad game design.
As I said, with a "A 6 is always a hit", Ork-based shooting units lose 50% of their shooting with a -1 to hit. With a -2 they still lose 50%, but Imperial Guard an Tau lose 66% of their shooting, etc...
For Mork sake we would still be hitting on 6s! It's not exsactly the greatest thing in the world for things that have points that are threw the roof and more expensive than guard and marine weapons! It's bad game design to have a factions where a lot of their troop can't even use their main weapon because of another races special ability! How is it balanced to keep losing to the exsact same list and then suddenly your opponent randomly decides their guys are another faction to get -1 to hit and cripple your entire army (because yes, lots of us do love shooting ork armies because as we have said a million times we like klans who focus on shooting and up until this edition our armies were totally viable). Giving the entire army -1 to hit was the dumbest and most game breaking thing anyone at gw could have ever thought about... by doing so they negated an entire factions shooting. As seen in the ig codex strats are not a buff that is supposed to win you the game. They're a lore friendly little reward that has no effect on points so hitting on a 5+ for orks would not only level the playing field but would also balance the game for a faction that already has terrible shooting. "B-But what if you actually roll 20 5s?" I've heard this argument and it is also dumb and I won't go into it.
What if one of the Ork klans tactics that come out is literally -3 to hit to marine players? The marine players would be out in the streets in protest because they would be hitting on 6s! We could just tell them that their armies are obviously close combat oriented because the chainsword is one of the most iconic weapons in the game so forget about the other things in their codex. So what if their entire army they paid equal money for is actually useless to someone who happened to be more interested in cc.
pismakron wrote:That is a strange way of looking at it. A negative modifier in close combat would be absolutely harmless to Tau, mostly harmless to IG, but be very disadvantageous to Orks, and severely crippling to Tyranids.
The reverse is true for negative modifiers to shooting. -2 to hit in the shooting phase would absolutely cripple IG or Tau whereas Orks and Nids would probably do alright under such circumstances. Genestealers, Nobs, Sluggaboyz, Gorkanauts and Hormagaunts would be largely unaffected.
Funny how you try to hide a model with almost 100 points worth of ranged weapons between models unaffected by shooting.
But no, orks are not doing alright against -2 hit modifiers, not even against -1 to hit. We have close to no chance of killing vehicles or monsters with such modifiers because we simply cannot reach them in combat and when we do, anything but a warboss or Thrakka himself are not going to actually destroy that vehicle.
Close combat can be prevented by movement, bubble wrapping, counter-charges and whatnot. Stop acting as if it were created equal to shooting. There is a reason why Khorne Daemons and World Eaters are failing hard even at casual levels.
Galas wrote:A "Every 6 to hit roll is a hit" rule benefits Orks the most of every army agaisn't all kind of -1 hit bonuses. And is much more easy to balance than just "Always hit on a 5+".
Currently the only reason to believe that fixed 5+ is unbalanced is you saying so.
Orks lose much more from -1 to hit than any other army, while paying the same (or more!) for their ranged weapons than marines who keep lying to themselves that they payed for their BS 3+.
Newsflash: You didn't! Your shooting models are the same than those of orks despite having better armor, ballistic skill, range, strength and AP - and often even comparable or better CC. Try using flash gits for a game instead of hellblasters and tell me how upgradeing a flash git to a hellblaster is worth 2 points.
Balance only ever seems to be in danger when orks are asking for something that might even compare to what the Imperium is. Other armies being able to table all but the most competitive ork armies with ease never seems to be a problem.
Galas wrote: Because theres armies wholle army bonuses are "to hit" modifiers agaisn't shooting, a "to hit" modifier is all the defense flyers got in 8th, and having army-wide rules that negate full basic mechanics of the game is bad game design.
That's an arbitrary definition of good game design. There are plenty of armies that already have army-wide rules to ignore actual basic mechanics (as in mechanics that actually appear in the basic rules).
Negative to hit modifiers are neither a basic mechanic, nor essential to the survival of anything. Fliers are still vehicles with high toughness, armor saves and wounds. Even when always hitting them on 5+, orks will struggle to take them down. Context is important.
If the codex would change ork shooting and melee to handle vehicles with the same ease other armies do, sure, 6+ is enough. But currently it isn't.
As I said, with a "A 6 is always a hit", Ork-based shooting units lose 50% of their shooting with a -1 to hit. With a -2 they still lose 50%, but Imperial Guard an Tau lose 66% of their shooting, etc...
Except those armies have easy access to shooting buffs through characters, army-wide rules, stratagems, orders and more. Of course, getting -1 to hit is a lot easier than -2, you just need to paint your army in the right color scheme.
Meanwhile, orks payed the same points for their shooting than tau and guard, while already shooting with less strength, ap and range. But that's ok, because orks are supposed to be bad at shooting, shouldn't be able to shoot on the level or gunline army, and it's all balanced because lootaz can assault a unit of MEQ and actually kill two of them. You gotta pay for those close combat stats, eh?
Getting screwed over three to four times is awesome.
Orks have both shooting and melee units. The have always been an army that does both equally. Orks are bad shots, not bad at shooting.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/29 10:33:33
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
^^^^^^ Couldn't have said it better myself. As I said a few posts ago... any argument against orks getting this slight buff, that would still mean we are hitting on 5s, just sounds like another faction scared they might actually lose for once against ork players who have spent years perfecting their tactics because they have had to play extremely smartly just to have a chance. (I watched one game where it was dark angels vs Orks. The Dark Angels army was in no way competitive yet they still won by standing still and just rolling shots against a very smart and well thought out ork player)
Strg Alt wrote: The majority of people on this board never witnessed 2nd Orks which were quite shooty. But from 3rd onwards GW retconned the Orks into green Tyranids
You never played 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th edition did you?
Hell, even in 7th shooty orks were at least exactly as unviable as choppy orks were.
In fact, Orks being only good at melee is a mutation that happened pretty much exclusively in 8th edition. Orks never really had a high to-hit roll. What they had was lots and lots of dice. However, at the moment, Orks put out a pitiful amount of dice compared to almost any Imperial or Chaos army, while hitting less often and hitting less hard than either.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/10/29 10:58:53
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
I think what you are missing here, is taht the claim isn't that orks are totally fine and needs no upgrade, but instead that your suggested upgrade is absurd and would throw large portions of the game out of whack.
As the eldar codex shown, GM are aware that the xeno indcies are subpar, and unlike SM/CSM/GK and even AM to a degree where there were few changes to units and costs and the traits and such are everything, eldar got massive changes to points, unit stats and such across the board, in addition to their new traits and such.
So when the codex actually comes, THEN you can make claims about orks being not good enough, or having trouble.
Because by the looks of eldar-you can expect massive changes.
Being unable to shoot a few things under specific conditions is not an issue, if you got the toolbox to get around it.
Or flatout ignore it, as mentioned by some here, stormboys are some of the good things in 8th orks at the moment. they also happen to put a stop to the "can't be shot at" shenanigans by being fast, fly, and hitting well in CC.
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now.
BoomWolf wrote: I think what you are missing here, is taht the claim isn't that orks are totally fine and needs no upgrade, but instead that your suggested upgrade is absurd and would throw large portions of the game out of whack.
Then you should make a good argument for why it's absurd and would throw "large portions of the game out of whack".
You aren't doing so.
Orks always hitting on a natural 6 no matter what wouldn't throw ANY part of the game out of whack. In fact, it's no good argument for why even the idea Orks always hitting on a 5+ would throw "large portions of the game" in to disarray has been presented-- though I'm not really partial to the latter.
At 180 points, a Shoota Boy squad that has taken no casualties (why haven't you been shooting at them, again?) can put out 60 S4 AP- D1 shots, meaning 20 hits at 5+, or 10 at 6+. Equivalent points of tactical marines, notoriously decried by a few very loud posters as being garbage, do equivalent or better, and that's just with boltguns.
So this breaks what, then? This sure as hell wouldn't scare Alaitoc or Raven Guard.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/29 13:41:02
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
This is an urban legend. Orks are hitting well in CC only against infantries. They just have tons of S4 with no ap attacks. Stop. The big choppa has a crappy AP-1 which means armored stuff is not threatened, pks/killsaws cost a lot and you'll get only a few wounds with them. High T models and melee superstars are still quite hard for orks, even if the greenskins charge.
Orks CC is average/mediocre in 8th edition. Of course compared to shooting you have the illusion that orks hit hard in combat, but that's not because of their melee abilities but thanks to the 0 damage they do by shooting.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/29 13:09:00
BoomWolf wrote: I think what you are missing here, is taht the claim isn't that orks are totally fine and needs no upgrade, but instead that your suggested upgrade is absurd and would throw large portions of the game out of whack.
As the eldar codex shown, GM are aware that the xeno indcies are subpar, and unlike SM/CSM/GK and even AM to a degree where there were few changes to units and costs and the traits and such are everything, eldar got massive changes to points, unit stats and such across the board, in addition to their new traits and such.
So when the codex actually comes, THEN you can make claims about orks being not good enough, or having trouble.
Because by the looks of eldar-you can expect massive changes.
Being unable to shoot a few things under specific conditions is not an issue, if you got the toolbox to get around it.
Or flatout ignore it, as mentioned by some here, stormboys are some of the good things in 8th orks at the moment. they also happen to put a stop to the "can't be shot at" shenanigans by being fast, fly, and hit,ting well in CC.
Well I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m really glad this has been cleared up ‘Being unable to shoot a few things under specific conditions is not an issue, if you got the toolbox to get around it.‘ what a revelation! I would like a list of this toolbox please?
How have your stormboys faired against fliers out of interest, are you popping them left right and centre? Because in my experience they struggle to scratch them, get left for dust the following turn then get blasted in the ass.
Also could I have a list of the toolbox for ignoring the neigh on invulnerable (well least to my weak lists) unit wiping, vehicle popping, back line *terminator pooper that is the imperial flier? *insert unit of choice.
I and I’m sure many others will eagearly await your reply.....
2017/10/29 13:25:00
Subject: Re:Ork shooting getting worse by the day.
I think what you are missing here, is taht the claim isn't that orks are totally fine and needs no upgrade, but instead that your suggested upgrade is absurd and would throw large portions of the game out of whack.
I've yet to see anyone actually make an actual claim as to why such a thing is absurd.
pismakron wrote:That is a strange way of looking at it. A negative modifier in close combat would be absolutely harmless to Tau, mostly harmless to IG, but be very disadvantageous to Orks, and severely crippling to Tyranids.
The reverse is true for negative modifiers to shooting. -2 to hit in the shooting phase would absolutely cripple IG or Tau whereas Orks and Nids would probably do alright under such circumstances. Genestealers, Nobs, Sluggaboyz, Gorkanauts and Hormagaunts would be largely unaffected.
Funny how you try to hide a model with almost 100 points worth of ranged weapons between models unaffected by shooting.
But no, orks are not doing alright against -2 hit modifiers, not even against -1 to hit. We have close to no chance of killing vehicles or monsters with such modifiers because we simply cannot reach them in combat and when we do, anything but a warboss or Thrakka himself are not going to actually destroy that vehicle.
Close combat can be prevented by movement, bubble wrapping, counter-charges and whatnot. Stop acting as if it were created equal to shooting. There is a reason why Khorne Daemons and World Eaters are failing hard even at casual levels.
Galas wrote:A "Every 6 to hit roll is a hit" rule benefits Orks the most of every army agaisn't all kind of -1 hit bonuses. And is much more easy to balance than just "Always hit on a 5+".
Currently the only reason to believe that fixed 5+ is unbalanced is you saying so.
Orks lose much more from -1 to hit than any other army, while paying the same (or more!) for their ranged weapons than marines who keep lying to themselves that they payed for their BS 3+.
Newsflash: You didn't! Your shooting models are the same than those of orks despite having better armor, ballistic skill, range, strength and AP - and often even comparable or better CC. Try using flash gits for a game instead of hellblasters and tell me how upgradeing a flash git to a hellblaster is worth 2 points.
Balance only ever seems to be in danger when orks are asking for something that might even compare to what the Imperium is. Other armies being able to table all but the most competitive ork armies with ease never seems to be a problem.
Galas wrote: Because theres armies wholle army bonuses are "to hit" modifiers agaisn't shooting, a "to hit" modifier is all the defense flyers got in 8th, and having army-wide rules that negate full basic mechanics of the game is bad game design.
That's an arbitrary definition of good game design. There are plenty of armies that already have army-wide rules to ignore actual basic mechanics (as in mechanics that actually appear in the basic rules).
Negative to hit modifiers are neither a basic mechanic, nor essential to the survival of anything. Fliers are still vehicles with high toughness, armor saves and wounds. Even when always hitting them on 5+, orks will struggle to take them down. Context is important.
If the codex would change ork shooting and melee to handle vehicles with the same ease other armies do, sure, 6+ is enough. But currently it isn't.
As I said, with a "A 6 is always a hit", Ork-based shooting units lose 50% of their shooting with a -1 to hit. With a -2 they still lose 50%, but Imperial Guard an Tau lose 66% of their shooting, etc...
Except those armies have easy access to shooting buffs through characters, army-wide rules, stratagems, orders and more. Of course, getting -1 to hit is a lot easier than -2, you just need to paint your army in the right color scheme.
Meanwhile, orks payed the same points for their shooting than tau and guard, while already shooting with less strength, ap and range. But that's ok, because orks are supposed to be bad at shooting, shouldn't be able to shoot on the level or gunline army, and it's all balanced because lootaz can assault a unit of MEQ and actually kill two of them. You gotta pay for those close combat stats, eh?
Getting screwed over three to four times is awesome.
Orks have both shooting and melee units. The have always been an army that does both equally. Orks are bad shots, not bad at shooting.
As I said to Glane, the other reasons you have listed: Paying the same for just worse weapons, having basically everything in the army with a 6+ save, and in general, overpriced and unreliable stuff are the PROBLEMS of the orks. Hitting on 5+ or 6+, witth those other problems fixed, would make a tactical approach to a new enemy.
But I'll give you that the "-1 to hit at 12"" is a bad rule. Yeah.
And to be honest I don't understand the reasong behind "Ork shooting sucks because our weapons are bad and overpriced compared with armies with better BS and weapons. So the way to fix it is making we always hit on a 5+ instead of making our weapons cheaper and better"
And the bit about Game Design... it isn't arbitrary. I have listed many armies that have rules that GW has given them that are bad game design and are actually generating problems, yeah.
And to be honest I have never said that Ork shooting should sucks, but whatever. Keep making strawmans that I have never said. I'm just saying that the way to fix ork shooting isn't making them always hit on 5+ (But making a basic rule that a 6 is always a hit, thats something that should be made)
But I get it guys, your codex sucks, and you just want anything to be competitive. As a Tau that doesn't spam Commanders and Drones, I can understand you. But one needs to be reasonable and fix the real problems of the army, not random ones.
I could say that Tau should always hit on 4+ because, they already hit on 4+ most of the time and Tau aren't shooting out people off the table with their Broadsides, Firewarriors and Hammerheads? No? That could fix and balance them... or not. It will not, because their problems are about rules and costs, not about hitting on 4+, or 5+ agaisn't some armies.
lolman1c wrote: ^^^^^^ Couldn't have said it better myself. As I said a few posts ago... any argument against orks getting this slight buff, that would still mean we are hitting on 5s, just sounds like another faction scared they might actually lose for once against ork players who have spent years perfecting their tactics because they have had to play extremely smartly just to have a chance. (I watched one game where it was dark angels vs Orks. The Dark Angels army was in no way competitive yet they still won by standing still and just rolling shots against a very smart and well thought out ork player)
I'm sorry but this absurd victimization needs to stop if we want to have a honest discussion. Is worse than calling everybody that complained about Conscripts a Space Marines fanboy when many people wheren't. Theres reasons to arguee about a fixed +5 to hit roll being a bad solution. I don't have seen nobody saying "Oh yeah no, Orks shouldn't hit on a 5+, and they shouldn't receive other buffs and fixes, they just need to suck"
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/10/29 15:18:52
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Making sure we always hit on a 6+ or 5+ would make ork weapons better. IT'd be just one aspect of making Ork weapons better (the other aspects would be "give Ork weapons more shots", tbh).
Ork ranged weapons always having a chance to hit means that there's no situation where they're completely and utterly useless. Which is the point of 8th edition shooting-- if even a lasgun can occsionally damage a titan, why shouldn't a much bigger and heavier shoota not be able to occasionally damage an alaitoc ranger?
Because it doesn't matter if you make the weapons shoot more shots when those shots have 0% chance of hitting. After all: 3*0=0 30*0=0 300*0=0 3000*0=0
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/10/29 15:20:08
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Melissia wrote: Making sure we always hit on a 6+ or 5+ would make ork weapons better. IT'd be just one aspect of making Ork weapons better (the other aspects would be "give Ork weapons more shots", tbh).
Ork ranged weapons always having a chance to hit means that there's no situation where they're completely and utterly useless. Which is the point of 8th edition shooting-- if even a lasgun can occsionally damage a titan, why shouldn't a much bigger and heavier shoota not be able to occasionally damage an alaitoc ranger?
Yeah, I have said earlier, making every 6 a hit, is the same phylosophy as making every 6 a wound. It should be a core rule of the game. I assume that at first they didn't tought about as many to hit modifiers as we have now.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Strg Alt wrote: The majority of people on this board never witnessed 2nd Orks which were quite shooty. But from 3rd onwards GW retconned the Orks into green Tyranids
You never played 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th edition did you?
Hell, even in 7th shooty orks were at least exactly as unviable as choppy orks were.
In fact, Orks being only good at melee is a mutation that happened pretty much exclusively in 8th edition. Orks never really had a high to-hit roll. What they had was lots and lots of dice. However, at the moment, Orks put out a pitiful amount of dice compared to almost any Imperial or Chaos army, while hitting less often and hitting less hard than either.
I remember in 7th edition my 30 boyz mob lost against some Necron Snipers in CC. XD That's how bad it was!
Strg Alt wrote: The majority of people on this board never witnessed 2nd Orks which were quite shooty. But from 3rd onwards GW retconned the Orks into green Tyranids
You never played 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th edition did you?
Hell, even in 7th shooty orks were at least exactly as unviable as choppy orks were.
In fact, Orks being only good at melee is a mutation that happened pretty much exclusively in 8th edition. Orks never really had a high to-hit roll. What they had was lots and lots of dice. However, at the moment, Orks put out a pitiful amount of dice compared to almost any Imperial or Chaos army, while hitting less often and hitting less hard than either.
I have played 40K from 2nd to 5th. I remember the Choppa USR rule (reducing armour saves to a 4+) as being very effective vs. power armour and even more so against terminator armour. So stop portraying the Orks as wimps in close combat. It is simply not true. According to some posters they suck in this edition because their shooting is neutered with the application of modifiers and even in their chosen profession, the grand bar room brawl, they just don´t pack a punch. In addition, their vehicles are also overcosted. So the only prudent solution is to hope the upcoming Ork Codex will correct the design flaws and if this will not be the case just don´t play them for this edition.
Strg Alt wrote: stop portraying the Orks as wimps in close combat.
I didn't. Stop lying about what I said.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
So the only prudent solution is to hope the upcoming Ork Codex will correct the design flaws and if this will not be the case just don´t play them for this edition.
There is so much stupidity in this thread but this must be the worst so far...
2017/10/29 16:38:05
Subject: Re:Ork shooting getting worse by the day.
I think what you are missing here, is taht the claim isn't that orks are totally fine and needs no upgrade, but instead that your suggested upgrade is absurd and would throw large portions of the game out of whack.
I've yet to see anyone actually make an actual claim as to why such a thing is absurd.
Because you want an entire army to ignore the gimmick of a few select armies because you think it's unfair. Not everybody is playing Raven Guard, Alpha Legion, and...the one Craftworld, and you wish to punish those with this rule. Not to mention they're not even aiming in the first place. Based off that part of the fluff, they should actually be hitting on a 6 anyway.
Now is a -2 to hit ridiculous so that half your codex can't even hit the unit? Yeah absolutely. However, you can suffer the -1 penalty like everyone else and deal with it.
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.
You can write them multiple times, each with a different reason why -1 to hit is bad.
So far, we have not heard a peep from GW about this issue, which is surprising because they are supposedly communicating these days. We spend enough on this hobby (just look at GW's stock price for proof) and we deserve at least acknowledgement that there is a problem here. It won't happen, though, if they think it's just 1 or 2 guys complaining.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
You can write them multiple times, each with a different reason why -1 to hit is bad.
So far, we have not heard a peep from GW about this issue, which is surprising because they are supposedly communicating these days. We spend enough on this hobby (just look at GW's stock price for proof) and we deserve at least acknowledgement that there is a problem here. It won't happen, though, if they think it's just 1 or 2 guys complaining.
I have sent an e-mail, it wont do any good though. For every ork player there are scores of space marine players that are happy with orks being nothing but target practice.
You can write them multiple times, each with a different reason why -1 to hit is bad.
So far, we have not heard a peep from GW about this issue, which is surprising because they are supposedly communicating these days. We spend enough on this hobby (just look at GW's stock price for proof) and we deserve at least acknowledgement that there is a problem here. It won't happen, though, if they think it's just 1 or 2 guys complaining.
I have sent an e-mail, it wont do any good though. For every ork player there are scores of space marine players that are happy with orks being nothing but target practice.
Okay fine. As an AdMech and Necron player I'm telling you the unmodified 5+ to hit is not a good idea.
Go ahead and use the argument again it's privileged Space Marine players again. Please, I insist. Go ahead.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: Thanks for the direcion JimOnMars. I have wrote them about making a 6 always hit in the core rules. Now the ball is on their roof
I personally plan to write them about Calvary benefiting from Chapter Tactics rules. Yeah that's only Chaos Steeds and Rough Riders but I don't think it's fair to not include them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/29 17:24:55
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.
I love how the "Space marine players just want everyone else to suck" has become the go-to argument whenever someone disagree with the way of fixing a unit or faction that is bad. Not even with the fact that they need to be fixed, just the way to do it.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
I have trouble getting my head around the objections in this thread. NOBODY seems to be complaining that cc always hits on 5+. Why the uproar about shooting working the same way?
JimOnMars wrote: I have trouble getting my head around the objections in this thread. NOBODY seems to be complaining that cc always hits on 5+. Why the uproar about shooting working the same way?
Because have wholle armies that ignore mechanics without counter play is bad game design. As I said before, there could be specific Ork units that ignore "to hit" modifiers like Dark Reapers. If they are costed appropiately, then thats all good.
But a "Oh I'm sorry you are playing Alpha Legion/Raven Guard /Alaitoc, I play orks so you Trait just become useless. Yeah theres nothing you can do about that".
Is as bad as a Night Lord army going agaisn't imperial guard pre-FAQ "Oh yeah I know all your strategy is based on morale, but I just ignore morale all together. Yeah, sorry about that"
And theres "To hit" modifiers in CC. Some units have them.
Plus: Shooting has a TON of advantages over CC. Making shooting have some disadvantages agains't CC isn't a bad thing.
I'll repeat for the fifth time. The problem with Ork shooting is how they units are all crap. That isn't fixed making their BS inmune to modifiers. Fix Orks making them stronger, more reliable and cheaper, and make everything it on a 6. And then Orks are competitive without making all the -1 in 12" Traits just useless agaisn't orks.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/29 17:34:52
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
JimOnMars wrote: I have trouble getting my head around the objections in this thread. NOBODY seems to be complaining that cc always hits on 5+. Why the uproar about shooting working the same way?
Because have wholle armies that ignore mechanics without counter play is bad game design. As I said before, there could be specific Ork units that ignore "to hit" modifiers like Dark Reapers. If they are costed appropiately, then thats all good.
But a "Oh I'm sorry you are playing Alpha Legion/Raven Guard /Alaitoc, I play orks so you Trait just become useless. Yeah theres nothing you can do about that".
Is as bad as a Night Lord army going agaisn't imperial guard pre-FAQ "Oh yeah I know all your strategy is based on morale, but I just ignore morale all together. Yeah, sorry about that "
This is true. I am suggesting (or wishlisting to be more accurate) that the vast majority of these traits be replaced with some other trait, like +2 save in cover. That, plus the 6+ guarantee, would fix the problem and apply to all armies equally. A few very special units could keep the -1, as long as the cap is in place.
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now. 
