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.

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Tyran wrote:
The fact that you are comparing snapshots with -1 to hit shows you don't understand math.

...
If Orks fail to hit with every shot, who cares, they weren't really shooting much without the -1. If a Marines fail to hit because of the -1 it reduces their odds of victory in a much more significant way.

-

A large portion of the Ork Codex are just 'Dakka' units, disregarding them "Just because their orks" makes no sense? Its like saying "Space marines have good guns, they shouldn't be able to hit in melee ever!"
Orkz are shoe-horned into running a melee based build *because* their ranged options are really sub-par.

Additionally, the new Ork Strategem "Dakka Dakka Dakka" lets you get another hit on a 6+, with the -1 modifier that essentially makes the stratagem completely useless.

 Galef wrote:

Shooting is a bonus for Orks, not their main way of winning. Marines kinda rely on a few good rounds of shooting to win
-

Here's an example.
5x Lootas 85 points
BS 5+ | Wep Attacks 1d3 (Average at 2)

vs
6x Space Marines 91 points (Tactical)
BS 3+ | Wep Attacks rf 2 (Lets say an average of 1.5)

No mods
Lootas hit 30% of 10 attacks, resulting in 3 hits
Space Marines hit 66.66% of 9 attacks, resulting in 6 hits.

With -1 modifier
Lootas hit 16.66% of 10 attacks, resulting in 1.5 hits.
Space marines hit 50% of 9, resulting in 4.5 hits

So tell us more about how it effects Orks less, Lootas are Orks dedicated shooting option

And did you do the math on the Loota guns damage vs the Bolter damage there?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

And did you do the math on the Loota guns damage vs the Bolter damage there?

Sure thing - I'm assuming you want it against MEQ?

Lootas
1.5 hits at s7, 1(66%) wound at save -1, resulting in 0.5 penetrating(4+ save, 50%) for a total of 1 damage.

Marines
4.5 hits at s4, 2.25(50%) wounds, resulting in 1.5(3+ save, 33%) for a total of 1.5 damage.


Why do you think Orks shouldn't deserve a decent shooting phase?

 Eonfuzz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

And did you do the math on the Loota guns damage vs the Bolter damage there?

Sure thing - I'm assuming you want it against MEQ?

Lootas
1.5 hits at s7, 1(66%) wound at save -1, resulting in 0.5 penetrating(4+ save, 50%) for a total of 1 damage.

Marines
4.5 hits at s4, 2.25(50%) wounds, resulting in 1.5(3+ save, 33%) for a total of 1.5 damage.


Why do you think Orks shouldn't deserve a decent shooting phase?

I was thinking something the Loota would target.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I was thinking something the Loota would target.

2D screams "Use me against primaris or terminators"

Lootas
Against Primaris its a 50% chance to deal 2 damage.
Against Terminators its a 25% chance to deal 2 damage.
Otherwise you miss all shots.

MEQ
Against Primaris you deal 1 damage with a 50% for 1 more.
Against Terminators its a 50% to deal 1 damage.
Otherwise you miss all shots.

And besides, dont forget that SM also have the re-roll bubbles which let you reroll on 1's or 2's (If there's a - modifier) - this means that negative to hit impact SM's even less.

 Eonfuzz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I was thinking something the Loota would target.

2D screams "Use me against primaris or terminators"

Lootas
Against Primaris its a 50% chance to deal 2 damage.
Against Terminators its a 25% chance to deal 2 damage.
Otherwise you miss all shots.

MEQ
Against Primaris you deal 1 damage with a 50% for 1 more.
Against Terminators its a 50% to deal 1 damage.
Otherwise you miss all shots.

And besides, dont forget that SM also have the re-roll bubbles which let you reroll on 1's or 2's (If there's a - modifier) - this means that negative to hit impact SM's even less.

If you want to include rerolls like that, you need to buy an equivalent amount of Lootas for the buffing dude.

We were talking about how the -1 to hit effects Marines more than Orks, I was making a point that Orks are hit harder than SM in this case.

Rerolls are just an extra cherry on top, losing 50% of your shots compared to losing 16% is straight forward as can be.

Tyran wrote:
Orks players are annoyed that their shooting is easily nullified in the current meta by modifiers, forcing them into pure assault lists.

I get this. But at least they have the option to do pure assault lists. Marines don't really have the option to do all melee lists (technically they do, but the list would have to be the same few units repeated and would have zero versatility and would drastically weaker than a pure assault Ork list).

Mathmatically, Orks suffer worse from -1 to hit, sure. But only for a small portion of their units, so just don't take those units or get within 12" with them.
-1 to hit is likely to affect EVERY unit in the majority of a Marine list, or force them to take very short ranged weapons and the methods in which to deploy them.
And in that fashion, Orks are not as affected by -1 to hit as they don't have to tailor their ENTIRE list to counter it, just a few units like Lootas.

I can go round and round on this, but I think we should just agree to disagree.
We can revisit the topic once Orks get a legit Codex and see where they stand then (hopefully better, regardless of where I stand on the -1 to hit issue)

-

" same few units repeated"

Hmmm...Ork boyz, more ork boyz, even more ork boyz, MAYBE stormboyz and/or kommandos just for fun. Yeah. What a wealth of different units!

tneva82 wrote:
" same few units repeated"

Hmmm...Ork boyz, more ork boyz, even more ork boyz, MAYBE stormboyz and/or kommandos just for fun. Yeah. What a wealth of different units!

Are you actually suggesting that the vast majority of Ork units are shooting units? An army with BS5+ almost across the board is a shooting army?
What kind of world do I live in?

Sure most units have shooting, but as I said before, the affects of said shooting are supposed to be a bonus as they make their way to melee.
So -1 to hit just stops you from seeing the preview trailers, but you're still in the seat to watch the movie (whether the movie is good is another issue altogether)

-

I think we''re talking past eachother. Galef is saying that Orkz do some shooting, but mostly they do CC. Marines do some CC, but mostly they do shooting.

So Orkz might lose 50% of their shooting ability, but that was only 10% of their power. Marines might lose 25% of their shooting, but it's 20% of their power. So while Ork shooting is more impacted, the Ork army itself is *less* impacted.

He is *not* arguing that Ork Shooting is less impacted than Marine shooting (I think he made that claim too, originally, but clearly backed off of it).

Everyone else is saying Orkz lose more *shooting* than Marines.

These two are not mutually exclusive. It's possible both are true.

Is 50% of Ork shooting less of their power than 25% of Marine shooting is of their power? That is a very good question, and the one Galef is trying to discuss.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Those "10%" and "20%" of their power comments were SWAGs - only intended to show what the argument was, not intended to be the actual numbers.)

Bharring wrote:
I think we''re talking past eachother. Galef is saying that Orkz do some shooting, but mostly they do CC. Marines do some CC, but mostly they do shooting.

So Orkz might lose 50% of their shooting ability, but that was only 10% of their power. Marines might lose 25% of their shooting, but it's 20% of their power. So while Ork shooting is more impacted, the Ork army itself is *less* impacted.

He is *not* arguing that Ork Shooting is less impacted than Marine shooting (I think he made that claim too, originally, but clearly backed off of it).

Everyone else is saying Orkz lose more *shooting* than Marines.

These two are not mutually exclusive. It's possible both are true.

Is 50% of Ork shooting less of their power than 25% of Marine shooting is of their power? That is a very good question, and the one Galef is trying to discuss.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Those "10%" and "20%" of their power comments were SWAGs - only intended to show what the argument was, not intended to be the actual numbers.)

Thanx Bharring. That is pretty much what I am trying to say
Ork shooting may go down 50%, but that affects <25% of their list. Marine shooting only goes down 25%, but that affects 50-75% of most Marine lists

-

Bharring wrote:
My post didn't refer to barebones VV. Kitted VV versus naked VV is kinda the same scenario.

The point is that, now that you need less of any given assault threat to do the same damage, if it's overkill now, either take more of smaller threats or take on more at once with the threats.

Except nobody ever cared about overkill because for the price you're taking Vanguard instead.

Do you or do you not know the price difference between Assault Marines and Vanguard?

 Galef wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
" same few units repeated"

Hmmm...Ork boyz, more ork boyz, even more ork boyz, MAYBE stormboyz and/or kommandos just for fun. Yeah. What a wealth of different units!

Are you actually suggesting that the vast majority of Ork units are shooting units? An army with BS5+ almost across the board is a shooting army?
What kind of world do I live in?

Sure most units have shooting, but as I said before, the affects of said shooting are supposed to be a bonus as they make their way to melee.
So -1 to hit just stops you from seeing the preview trailers, but you're still in the seat to watch the movie (whether the movie is good is another issue altogether)

-

Orks are actually about a 50/50 split and until this edition could definitely make a shooty army. We did it with massed firepower and blast weapons to make up for the low BS. I don't know where everyone is getting this 'orks should only want to assault' nonsense. A lot of our stuff doesn't want to be any closer than 24"-36". The minus to hit army traits really do kill many of our builds. It's getting to the point where I want to throw my lootas at the next person to tell me to 'just jump within 12 inches'.

Slayer,
What's your fascination with naked VV vs naked ASM? Does it really matter? Kitted VV are still a lot more expensive than ASM. Which is what I was referring to.

As for nobody ever cared about overkill, my post was soon after and in response to the complaint that a squad would be overkill, if it did 10 or 15 wounds to an 8-wound squad. A naked 5man VV squad is not doing 10 or 15 wounds on average to anything I can think of. So the complaint was heavier hitters than an unkitted VV squad.

They are 2 ppm more than ASM. And have far superior gear options.

I know - I have SM.

Tyel wrote:

Take the post above saying superfriends broke the game.

Well... they didn't. Or at least no more than various other factions.
They regularly lost in tournaments to Eldar, and Riptides, and double gladius lists etc.
What mattered was who went first. If the super friends player went first, allowing them to advance up the table and activate their psychic defences, they probably had the game in the bag.
If the shooty player went first, getting another turn to shoot, including one before invisibility was up, they had a good chance of killing enough that they had the game in the bag.

The thing is, that electro displacement deathstar was on a whole other level of stupid, to the point where it had past 75% win rate and was simply banned from ITC and other events, which never did anything that drastic before.

It's a level of no-play that hadn't been reached before and can only happen due to Assault, which in 7th used to simply prevent the opponent from playing at all, with the exception of an infantry only crappy overwatch.

Of course shooting was broken in this edition though, I'm just pointing out that when assault breaks the game, it's a lot more broken.

Bharring wrote:
Slayer,
What's your fascination with naked VV vs naked ASM? Does it really matter? Kitted VV are still a lot more expensive than ASM. Which is what I was referring to.

As for nobody ever cared about overkill, my post was soon after and in response to the complaint that a squad would be overkill, if it did 10 or 15 wounds to an 8-wound squad. A naked 5man VV squad is not doing 10 or 15 wounds on average to anything I can think of. So the complaint was heavier hitters than an unkitted VV squad.

You don't own Space Marines if you're saying kitted Vanguard are a lot more expensive.

I think you should run the numbers on that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
More specifically, VV that are averaging 10-15 wounds in one round of CC with their loadout are likely a bit more expensive than a naked 5man ASM squad.

I scanned through the thread and opinions are all over the place, heres my 2cents.

I've played my friends Eldar list 7 times with my Tau. its been a rout/tabling about each time. Being able to stack -2 to hit on Rangers/Wave Serpents/Fliers is great, or making it -3 with the strategem. My entire army outside of 12" is shooting on overwatch. That really sucks for marker lights, as I never ever will get the +1 to hit, so rereolling 1's is what I can shoot for.

I can't really rely on long range anti-tank so I have to spam commanders. Its not that great because deep striking them in results in getting blasted by forewarning. Does limit you tactically. Drones can soak it but it does leave them quite open unless you bring them down with other stuff.

Even then, I've seen wave serpents survive 12 fusion gun shots (9 hit, bad wound rolls/failed to wound) So sometimes I can't rely on commanders all the way, and they are my best anti-tank. Its frustrating how limiting it is sometimes.

I don't have dedicated assault troopers besides the fragile kroot hounds which limits options.

Getting in close is an option, but even then sometimes you can still stack the modifiers with stratagems, and leaves you real open for smites, which any good Eldar is bringing tons of.

For an faction that has its identity in basically 2 1/2 phases of the game, its brutal. I don't know how to compete with just my index, I've given up against his Eldar.

Eldar psychic phase also does a number but thats something else.

 Galef wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
" same few units repeated"

Hmmm...Ork boyz, more ork boyz, even more ork boyz, MAYBE stormboyz and/or kommandos just for fun. Yeah. What a wealth of different units!

Are you actually suggesting that the vast majority of Ork units are shooting units? An army with BS5+ almost across the board is a shooting army?
What kind of world do I live in?

Sure most units have shooting, but as I said before, the affects of said shooting are supposed to be a bonus as they make their way to melee.
So -1 to hit just stops you from seeing the preview trailers, but you're still in the seat to watch the movie (whether the movie is good is another issue altogether)

-

There are 16-17 Ork units that I would class a primarily shooting units, and more that I would consider middle ground units (things like kans). Arguably there are more of these than assault primary units (unless we include individual characters)

Bharring wrote:
I think you should run the numbers on that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
More specifically, VV that are averaging 10-15 wounds in one round of CC with their loadout are likely a bit more expensive than a naked 5man ASM squad.

They're two or three points more expensive for the extra attack. 1 extra Power Weapon here and there is not adding to the cost like you think, as it's around 3 power weapons you're actually able to buy another Assault Marine.

 Xenomancers wrote:
-1 to hit army traits are pretty busted. I think they should just be mass removed from the game and replaced with something else. I'm not saying there are not other busted army traits...but -1 to hit for what ends up being most of your army completely overshadows other options. If not for 2 special characters (Cawl and Guilliman [these guys are even more busted than -1 army traits]) Every armies best faction would be -1 to hit that had access to it (obviosuly these heros need fixing too.)

-1 to hit is so obviously and statistically better than all the other defensive traits. 6+ stackable or non stackable FNP? always count in cover? Am I missing another? Not even remotely close in power level. Again - I'm not ignoring other OP army traits - the top 3 AM traits are a little too good. Kraken is a little OTT for nids. I just think they could be fixed differently. -1 to hit army traits should just be flat out replaced or at the very least (should not stack with other -1 to hits) really though - just remove them and replace with something else.

It's really just sad we have to go through all this nonsense to play the game we love. I could write a balanced rule set for this game in a day. Literally a day. It's just so obvious to me that they aren't trying.

Couldn't agree more. And I love my Raven Guard.

Slayer,
A 10 man VV squad vs Guardsmen:
30x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) is about the 10-15 wounds mentioned.

To average 10-15 wounds, kitted or not, you're looking at twice the cost of a 5man ASM squad. It really doesn't matter that VV and ASM are so close in PPM. That was never the point. You're just stuck on a tangent.

Point is, the unit that's getting those 10-15 wounds costs a noticeable amount more than a 5man ASM.

You're just too invested in proving me wrong to even understand what I said.

“Orks are 5+, they don’t deserve to be a shooty army”

Go fetch yourself - Orks have, and should be able to, go melee, shooty, or a mix just like any other army.

Ork shooting should be buckets of dice; quantity, not quality.

They should be the one with 20/40 shot guns, not imperials - every other army should be jealous of the amount of shots, and dice rolled in general - not the other way around.

Try having played an Ork army in any previous edition, or even opening up their codex for once - the vast majority of their options are shooting based.

Previously, their play styles used to be horde/vehicle heavy/shooty/melee; in any combination of those aspects - or at least, they should be able to do that.

If Orks aren’t allowed to shoot, then space Marines shouldn’t be allowed to melee - cut out blood angels, cut out black Templar, vanguard vets, assault Marines, Dreadnoughts, everything. ; if you do that for Ork shooting units, guess what you get left - boys, stormboyz, Manz/def dreads, and that’s it.

But let’s be real - Orks should be allowed to shoot, Marines should be allowed to melee, everything should have options.

Don’t pigeonhole an army you don’t play, asses.

 Galef wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
" same few units repeated"

Hmmm...Ork boyz, more ork boyz, even more ork boyz, MAYBE stormboyz and/or kommandos just for fun. Yeah. What a wealth of different units!

Are you actually suggesting that the vast majority of Ork units are shooting units? An army with BS5+ almost across the board is a shooting army?
What kind of world do I live in?

Sure most units have shooting, but as I said before, the affects of said shooting are supposed to be a bonus as they make their way to melee.
So -1 to hit just stops you from seeing the preview trailers, but you're still in the seat to watch the movie (whether the movie is good is another issue altogether)

-

Actually in the ork index more than 50% of the units are shooty ones, not to mention those ones that can have both setups, shooty or choppy. The BS5+ should be balanced by the insane amount of shots orks could fire, in a fluffy perspective. But unfortunately it's not the reality. Lots of 100% background based orks lists are shooting oriented, basically all those armies that are themed around big meks. But also spead freaks lists which don't have the insane amount of S4 hits that green tides can have and strongly rely on the shooting phase with embarked flash gitz or tankbustas, bikes, buggies and planes, other than assault units which can't have the math to do the entire job alone.

The -1 to hit is not affecting marines that badly, their shooting would be pretty strong anyway.

And orks close combat abilities are not that good, basically because the edition doesn't particularly reward melee. Now if they can actually wreck something in close combat I may even accept the nullification of their shooting lists. Unfortunately it's not the case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:


The rock-paper-scissors logic will apply only to skewed lists, which will not be competitive.
Gunline wins against slow assault and loses against fast assault which in turn loses against slow assault.
Truly competitive lists will mix parts of these 3 archetypes. You don't bring a list to a tournament that is match up dependent.

IMHO it's the opposite. Many tournament lists are based on the rock-paper-scissor complex because mixed styles usually don't work at competitive levels. Tournaments players bring lists with one of these archetypes and pray that they'll avoid their hard counter. The majority of the factions can win a tournament only with this approach.

Orks only bring green tides and they hopre they'll avoid lists with massive anti infantry weapons. Drukhari only bring tons of lances/blasters and they hope to face lots of armors and avoid hordes.

Bharring wrote:
Slayer,
A 10 man VV squad vs Guardsmen:
30x(2/3)(2/3)(2/3) is about the 10-15 wounds mentioned.

To average 10-15 wounds, kitted or not, you're looking at twice the cost of a 5man ASM squad. It really doesn't matter that VV and ASM are so close in PPM. That was never the point. You're just stuck on a tangent.

Point is, the unit that's getting those 10-15 wounds costs a noticeable amount more than a 5man ASM.

You're just too invested in proving me wrong to even understand what I said.

No, I understand the original point. What I'm seeing is a bad defense of Assault Marines.

 ChargerIIC wrote:
I think it's more a weakness of the D6 system than something specific to toHit rolls. I understand why the original WH40k went with D6s, they the one dice type gamers have sacks of, but it creates this very narrow band in which you can boost stats before they become broken.

Take -1 toHit on a guardsman (BS 4+). Give him a single bonus and he's still fine. Stack another -1 to hit and he's nearly incapable of missing.

Reverse it. Give him +1 to hit and he still gets work done (effect 5+). Stack 2 of them (like an armywide -1 to hit rolls stacked on a flyer's native -1 to hit rolls) and suddenly he can't be relied on to hit anything (effective 6+ )

It gets just as bad on wound rolls. Add +1 or -1 and you are still within a decent band of effectivenss. Do +2 or -2 and a lot of units become either capable of only wounding on 6 or capable of effectively wounding anything they want.

It won't happen in this edition, but either bonuses need to not stack (causing a riot) or they need to move to different dice (causing a riot). This is assuming they haven't just resigned themselves to having the problem, which given how many times they've advertised 2+ BS and 2+ Wound rolls in community articles, might be the case. It's the politically least painful move for them.

I agree, a d10 system would allow a lot more granularity and balance.

On the other hand, it would be a pain to roll 180 D10.
I mean, it is already a pain to roll 180 D6.

You're making your own straw man, then, Slayer.