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.

SemperMortis wrote:

So how is 2 50% more? hell, how is 7 50% more? it adds 1/6th more hits on average, which is mediocre at best.

See here:

Sorry I worded that poorly - 50% of their hits will get you another shot. That's what I get for posting on the phone.

Lootas need a hefty increase in their Dmg output to be worth taking, I am fine with keeping them absurdly priced but I want D3+2 shots and at least 5+ armor. And an army wide special rule that lets us either always hit on 6s or completely ignore hit modifiers.

Yea D3+2 would be absurd. They're a few points off in shooting effectiveness of CSM AC Havocs. I'm onboard for ignoring modifiers.

 lolman1c wrote:
What I don't get is Lootas having a mek with them now. Lore wise and 7th edition it was fine but doesn't make too much sense in 8th and kinda feels like GW is making you buy 2 boxes to just get 5 Orks. XD

Honestly, don;t think I've even see a single mek by himself in 8th edition... everyone just gets another big mek.

I used meks and sag big meks together with a bunch of bombers in one game to abuse character rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

So how is 2 50% more? hell, how is 7 50% more? it adds 1/6th more hits on average, which is mediocre at best.

See here:

Sorry I worded that poorly - 50% of their hits will get you another shot. That's what I get for posting on the phone.

Lootas need a hefty increase in their Dmg output to be worth taking, I am fine with keeping them absurdly priced but I want D3+2 shots and at least 5+ armor. And an army wide special rule that lets us either always hit on 6s or completely ignore hit modifiers.

Yea D3+2 would be absurd. They're a few points off in shooting effectiveness of CSM AC Havocs. I'm onboard for ignoring modifiers.

if you also c

onsider that havok in cover is 4 times more durable than a loota, it's actually what lootas need to be equal to havoks when shooting at something without to-hit modifiers. They need even more than that if you face -1 to hit.

I actually have an unpainted mek with the Kustom Pistol and chain saw. It looks cool but haven't had the time or need to paint it.

Mek can be useful to fill a slot or to score an objective since it's the cheapest character we can get outside grot crews.

 koooaei wrote:
if you also consider that havok in cover is 4 times more durable than a loota, it's actually what lootas need to be equal to havoks when shooting at something without to-hit modifiers. They need even more than that if you face -1 to hit.

There is a fine line to how cheap you can make something before it becomes ridiculously spammable and broken especially when you factor in other advantages they can receive.

But if you put them alongside a Loota they kinda just sit there and do nothing. You could put them with Lootas in a trukk but then they would have to have the whole unti leave the trukk to repair the trukk by 1 wound and then have your units exposed... it's stupid!

 Daedalus81 wrote:


7 shots is 7 shots.

7 shots with orks means 2 hits that also have to wound and pass the saves. Lootas' targets are usually T7+ 4+ save models. Those +7 shots actually means +0-1 more hit that goes through the saves. So +2 wounds if you're lucky. 2-4 wounds if you target something with T6 or less.

And we're talking about the max squad with no casualties taken before and the luck roll on the D3 shots.

 lolman1c wrote:
But if you put them alongside a Loota they kinda just sit there and do nothing. You could put them with Lootas in a trukk but then they would have to have the whole unti leave the trukk to repair the trukk by 1 wound and then have your units exposed... it's stupid!

I'm talking about independent meks. They're not there to fix stuff usually. Just to be the cheapest possible unit to be left on an objective and that can't be targeted if something else is nearby. Can be quite useful in small and mid-sized games where you need all your boyz at the front and want to use mek gun crews for other purposes like bauble wrapping.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
if you also consider that havok in cover is 4 times more durable than a loota, it's actually what lootas need to be equal to havoks when shooting at something without to-hit modifiers. They need even more than that if you face -1 to hit.

There is a fine line to how cheap you can make something before it becomes ridiculously spammable and broken especially when you factor in other advantages they can receive.

Yeah but are havoks really that rediculous? We're just trying to make lootas AS effective as them and you're saying - no, you can't have that because reasons.

SemperMortis wrote:
Rismonite:

Lootas went from a 4+ cover save to a 5+ save in cover, they die very easily to a number of units in an enemy list and at the hefty price they are worth targetting. If you are bringing 30 Lootas then you are investing 1/4th of your list (2,000pt) into a unit that is considered utter crap across the board. They don't do much damage and die very easily due to low armor save. If you want to compare apples to apples then compare them (our number 1 48in ranged anti-vehicle weapon) to enemy units with a similar purpose. We lose every time.

Your 30 Lootas are getting 60 shots, 20 hits and against a SM Tac squad thats 13ish wounds at -1 AP so you can only kill 6-7. If they lose morale then yeah you get first blood, if not then you just used 500+ points to kill about 100pts of Space Marines.

I personally think we are just in need of a points update the model doesn't need a fundamental change. I think Lootas at 9 points would be OP, Lootas at 12 points would be 'a tiny bit expensive'. Even overpriced like they are now they seem like a tool with uses, their range helps pressure an opponent to close range with the mob who will make the points back for the Lootas hand over fist.

SO MUCH MATHSSSS! But no really... I laugh at the people who say Ork weapons are powerful enough even if they only hit on a 6. Because you still got to go through a stupid amount of chances....

Okay so Let's get the number for how possible it is to wound a rhino at max strength.

Okay because I like to be cheeky let's say Ork's didn't role well to get to go first. This means we have a 1/6 chance to go first.

Now let's have the D3 shots. we need 1/3 chance to get that max 45 shots. So we're at 1/18 chance.

Then now we got to hit. If yah lucky and your opponent doesn't have -1 to hit you got a 1/3 chance to hit! So now we're at a 1/54 to have optimal firing and hits.

Now the wounds! Because we're S7 we now got a 1/2 chance to wound! best chance we have had all day! woot woot! we now on 1/108 chance we actually get perfect hits and wounds.

But that Rhino has an armour save! Luckily he was out in the open so an easy armour save of 4+ boyz! (1/2 chance we will wound).

That's a 1/216 chance our unit will be 100% effective and actually blow every bodies mind! So if you do some backwards dumb not real math you get 15/72 or something... I don't know...

The point is! None of this means anything and I just want to look smart!

 koooaei wrote:


Yeah but are havoks really that rediculous? We're just trying to make lootas AS effective as them and you're saying - no, you can't have that because reasons.

I'm saying at 14 points they'd be pretty close..maybe 13. Beyond that is asking too much when you get two wounds per havok (yes with a crap save).

 koooaei wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
But if you put them alongside a Loota they kinda just sit there and do nothing. You could put them with Lootas in a trukk but then they would have to have the whole unti leave the trukk to repair the trukk by 1 wound and then have your units exposed... it's stupid!

I'm talking about independent meks. They're not there to fix stuff usually. Just to be the cheapest possible unit to be left on an objective and that can't be targeted if something else is nearby. Can be quite useful in small and mid-sized games where you need all your boyz at the front and want to use mek gun crews for other purposes like bauble wrapping.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
if you also consider that havok in cover is 4 times more durable than a loota, it's actually what lootas need to be equal to havoks when shooting at something without to-hit modifiers. They need even more than that if you face -1 to hit.

There is a fine line to how cheap you can make something before it becomes ridiculously spammable and broken especially when you factor in other advantages they can receive.

Yeah but are havoks really that rediculous? We're just trying to make lootas AS effective as them and you're saying - no, you can't have that because reasons.

But why would you ever take a mek with a group of Lootas and why does GW still sell them in the same box! I really Wish GW would just do boxes of 5 lootas with maybe the option to turn one into a mek... for Mork sake GW! Stop scamming people!

 lolman1c wrote:
SO MUCH MATHSSSS! But no really... I laugh at the people who say Ork weapons are powerful enough even if they only hit on a 6. Because you still got to go through a stupid amount of chances....

Who said that?

Okay so Let's get the number for how possible it is to wound a rhino at max strength.

Okay because I like to be cheeky let's say Ork's didn't role well to get to go first. This means we have a 1/6 chance to go first.

Now let's have the D3 shots. we need 1/3 chance to get that max 45 shots. So we're at 1/18 chance.

I'm not sure what any of that had to do with wounding a rhino, which...

The point is! None of this means anything and I just want to look smart!

....just makes you look disingenuous and ridiculous.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 koooaei wrote:


Yeah but are havoks really that rediculous? We're just trying to make lootas AS effective as them and you're saying - no, you can't have that because reasons.

I'm saying at 14 points they'd be pretty close..maybe 13. Beyond that is asking too much when you get two wounds per havok (yes with a crap save).

13pts puts them at still useless because as already pointed out, Havocs can function in smaller squads and enjoy easier access to cover. So getting them a 2+ save isn't that hard, so if you want to count wounds, I can get 2 wounds for your 1, BUT I have a 1/6 chance to survive a bolter wound, you have a 2/3rd chance to survive a bolter wound without cover. a 5/6th chance with cover. So yeah my guy is 1/2 the cost but he will statistically die 75% quicker. So now we get to the aspect of Glass Cannon. I am fine with them being glass cannons and for them to stay at the absurd price they are at, but they better be doing some serious damage when they do get to shoot before they are wiped out. D3+2 at most gives them 5 shots each, statistically 4. But lets go with 5. 15 of them will net you 75 shots, 25 hits and against a T7 3+ save target (rhino) you will do 12-13 wounds and 6-7 unsaved wounds for 12-14 damage. So a 250pt+ unit managed to kill a 75pt unit in 1 turn of shooting, that doesn't sound to bad to me. And if they have -1 to hit (smoke launchers) that gets cut in half. That sounds reasonable to me still.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
SO MUCH MATHSSSS! But no really... I laugh at the people who say Ork weapons are powerful enough even if they only hit on a 6. Because you still got to go through a stupid amount of chances....

Who said that?

Okay so Let's get the number for how possible it is to wound a rhino at max strength.

Okay because I like to be cheeky let's say Ork's didn't role well to get to go first. This means we have a 1/6 chance to go first.

Now let's have the D3 shots. we need 1/3 chance to get that max 45 shots. So we're at 1/18 chance.

I'm not sure what any of that had to do with wounding a rhino, which...

The point is! None of this means anything and I just want to look smart!

....just makes you look disingenuous and ridiculous.

Looks like someone here doesn't see a joke when he reads one! The whole thing was a lead up for that last line that made the whole thing funny. Can't have a good debate with good jokes! (and don't you dare do the joke "Well I'm still waiting for the good joke" because damn this joke is amazing!)

SemperMortis wrote:


13pts puts them at still useless because as already pointed out, Havocs can function in smaller squads and enjoy easier access to cover. So getting them a 2+ save isn't that hard, so if you want to count wounds, I can get 2 wounds for your 1, BUT I have a 1/6 chance to survive a bolter wound, you have a 2/3rd chance to survive a bolter wound without cover. a 5/6th chance with cover. So yeah my guy is 1/2 the cost but he will statistically die 75% quicker. So now we get to the aspect of Glass Cannon. I am fine with them being glass cannons and for them to stay at the absurd price they are at, but they better be doing some serious damage when they do get to shoot before they are wiped out. D3+2 at most gives them 5 shots each, statistically 4. But lets go with 5. 15 of them will net you 75 shots, 25 hits and against a T7 3+ save target (rhino) you will do 12-13 wounds and 6-7 unsaved wounds for 12-14 damage. So a 250pt+ unit managed to kill a 75pt unit in 1 turn of shooting, that doesn't sound to bad to me. And if they have -1 to hit (smoke launchers) that gets cut in half. That sounds reasonable to me still.

Except that also kills a predator so it's not good to say that it's fair that it killed a rhino. It takes 10 lascannons to do the same amount of damage.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lolman1c wrote:


Looks like someone here doesn't see a joke when he reads one! The whole thing was a lead up for that last line that made the whole thing funny. Can't have a good debate with good jokes! (and don't you dare do the joke "Well I'm still waiting for the good joke" because damn this joke is amazing!)

Well, it is the internet.

 koooaei wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 hippyjr wrote:
What is it about ignoring penalties that you don't agree with? I loved the idea as soon as I heard it. Fits the fluff, gives orks a buff to shooting (which they desperately need, but still keeps them from becoming op by keepig the current bs5), and provides a slight counter to the negative hit modifier problems that everyone seems to complain about on the forums.

Howabout rules that ignore something flat out are not good? That makes hard to balance things out. Suddenly -1 trait guys are paying too much for it. Such hard counters are bad for game.

Also it makes no sense. And there are other ways to deal with ork shooting. More shots for points and then universal rule that says 6 always hits(for all armies).

How many shots should lootas get to be effective and to deal with -1 to hit?

A full clip.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:


13pts puts them at still useless because as already pointed out, Havocs can function in smaller squads and enjoy easier access to cover. So getting them a 2+ save isn't that hard, so if you want to count wounds, I can get 2 wounds for your 1, BUT I have a 1/6 chance to survive a bolter wound, you have a 2/3rd chance to survive a bolter wound without cover. a 5/6th chance with cover. So yeah my guy is 1/2 the cost but he will statistically die 75% quicker. So now we get to the aspect of Glass Cannon. I am fine with them being glass cannons and for them to stay at the absurd price they are at, but they better be doing some serious damage when they do get to shoot before they are wiped out. D3+2 at most gives them 5 shots each, statistically 4. But lets go with 5. 15 of them will net you 75 shots, 25 hits and against a T7 3+ save target (rhino) you will do 12-13 wounds and 6-7 unsaved wounds for 12-14 damage. So a 250pt+ unit managed to kill a 75pt unit in 1 turn of shooting, that doesn't sound to bad to me. And if they have -1 to hit (smoke launchers) that gets cut in half. That sounds reasonable to me still.

Except that also kills a predator so it's not good to say that it's fair that it killed a rhino. It takes 10 lascannons to do the same amount of damage.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lolman1c wrote:


Looks like someone here doesn't see a joke when he reads one! The whole thing was a lead up for that last line that made the whole thing funny. Can't have a good debate with good jokes! (and don't you dare do the joke "Well I'm still waiting for the good joke" because damn this joke is amazing!)

Well, it is the internet.

I'm a comical none serious guy. Only 25% of the stuff i say here is serious.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JimOnMars wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 hippyjr wrote:
What is it about ignoring penalties that you don't agree with? I loved the idea as soon as I heard it. Fits the fluff, gives orks a buff to shooting (which they desperately need, but still keeps them from becoming op by keepig the current bs5), and provides a slight counter to the negative hit modifier problems that everyone seems to complain about on the forums.

Howabout rules that ignore something flat out are not good? That makes hard to balance things out. Suddenly -1 trait guys are paying too much for it. Such hard counters are bad for game.

Also it makes no sense. And there are other ways to deal with ork shooting. More shots for points and then universal rule that says 6 always hits(for all armies).

How many shots should lootas get to be effective and to deal with -1 to hit?

A full clip.

So a hundred or potentially a thousand depending on how many orks there are and how good the Lootas mek was.

Unlimited so long as the ork's believe they are fully loaded =P

Lootas should be 10 ppm. Maybe 12 if the codex provides some effective buffs by strategems or clan bonuses. Single wound orks with t-shirt save are overcosted if they cost more than 10-12 ppm. Unless maybe our transports become 40pts for a trukk and 80 for a BW.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 koooaei wrote:


Yeah but are havoks really that rediculous? We're just trying to make lootas AS effective as them and you're saying - no, you can't have that because reasons.

I'm saying at 14 points they'd be pretty close..maybe 13. Beyond that is asking too much when you get two wounds per havok (yes with a crap save).

Why? Calculate it. To make lootas as effective as havoks - counting in durability and not even touching to-hit modifiers and absolute lack of synergy:

1 havok in cover has 2+ armor save, gets an average of 1.33 hits and costs 28 pts. Durability coefficient is (5/6) / 28 = 0.0298, damage coefficient is 1.33 / 28 = 0.0457
1 loota in cover has 5+ armor save, gets an average of 0.67 hits and costs 17 pts. Durability coefficient is (2/6) / 17 = 0.0196, damage coefficient is 0.67 / 17 = 0.0394

To make lootas equal point-wise in both fields, they need to be 0.0298 / 0.0196 = 1.518 times cheaper for durability and 0.0457 / 0.0394 = 1.1599 times cheaper for damage output.

17 - 17/1.518 = 5.8 pts cheaper for durability
17 - 17/ 1.1599 = 2.34 pts cheaper for damage output.

8.14 pts cheaper total. Rounding up to 8 pts cheaper. Means lootas should cost 9 ppm to be equal to unbuffed havoks.

 Blackie wrote:
Lootas should be 10 ppm. Maybe 12 if the codex provides some effective buffs by strategems or clan bonuses. Single wound orks with t-shirt save are overcosted if they cost more than 10-12 ppm. Unless maybe our transports become 40pts for a trukk and 80 for a BW.

A boy with a big shoota is 12. Now, surely the big shoota should be like...2 or 3. Still why would I ever want to do that when I can pay 2 points for +2S, +1AP, +1D and +12"?

I guarantee if they went to 10 points you'd see armies like this - 30 boyz to peg down morale. A painboy for FNP. Enough KFFs for decent coverage. Enough points for a grot screen, too.

Spearhead
Mek, KFF
Painboy
30 Boyz
15 Lootas
15 Lootas
15 Lootas

Spearhead
Mek, KFF
Weirdboy
15 Lootas
15 Lootas
15 Lootas

Spearhead
Mek, KFF
15 Lootas
15 Lootas
15 Lootas




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 koooaei wrote:

Why? Calculate it. To make lootas as effective as havoks - counting in durability and not even touching to-hit modifiers and absolute lack of synergy:

1 havok in cover has 2+ armor save, gets an average of 1.33 hits and costs 28 pts. Durability coefficient is (5/6) / 28 = 0.0298, damage coefficient is 1.33 / 28 = 0.0457
1 loota in cover has 5+ armor save, gets an average of 0.67 hits and costs 17 pts. Durability coefficient is (2/6) / 17 = 0.0196, damage coefficient is 0.67 / 17 = 0.0394

To make lootas equal point-wise in both fields, they need to be 0.0298 / 0.0196 = 1.518 times cheaper for durability and 0.0457 / 0.0394 = 1.1599 times cheaper for damage output.

17 - 17/1.518 = 5.8 pts cheaper for durability
17 - 17/ 1.1599 = 2.34 pts cheaper for damage output.

8.14 pts cheaper total. Rounding up to 8 pts cheaper. Means lootas should cost 9 ppm to be equal to unbuffed havoks.

What you're essentially saying is the a boy would cost 0 to 1 points. And the Deffgun instead of being 11 points would be 9 or so. While the math is sound it in no way makes a properly costed unit.

The number of bullets one can shoot in a game is finite. Other armies are not suddenly getting more shots to deal with the cheaper bodies.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

What you're essentially saying is the a boy would cost 0 to 1 points. And the Deffgun instead of being 11 points would be 9 or so. While the math is sound it in no way makes a properly costed unit.

The number of bullets one can shoot in a game is finite. Other armies are not suddenly getting more shots to deal with the cheaper bodies.

I'm not saying how much a boy should cost. I've calculated how much a loota should cost to be equal to an autocannon havok in damage output and durability combined. And please take note i haven't even included ld issues a loota would have over a havok.

If you want to prove my math wrong, you're welcome to try.

Btw, do you have any experience with ork units in question on tabletop (lootas, deff dreads)? I can't understand why you so fiercely protect this garbage?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
Lootas should be 10 ppm. Maybe 12 if the codex provides some effective buffs by strategems or clan bonuses. Single wound orks with t-shirt save are overcosted if they cost more than 10-12 ppm. Unless maybe our transports become 40pts for a trukk and 80 for a BW.

A boy with a big shoota is 12. Now, surely the big shoota should be like...2 or 3. Still why would I ever want to do that when I can pay 2 points for +2S, +1AP, +1D and +12"?

I guarantee if they went to 10 points you'd see armies like this - 30 boyz to peg down morale. A painboy for FNP. Enough KFFs for decent coverage. Enough points for a grot screen, too.

Spearhead
Mek, KFF
Painboy
30 Boyz
15 Lootas
15 Lootas
15 Lootas

Spearhead
Mek, KFF
Weirdboy
15 Lootas
15 Lootas
15 Lootas

Spearhead
Mek, KFF
15 Lootas
15 Lootas
15 Lootas

Except a Big Shoota boy is way overcosted too so maybe don't make that comparison please.

At 9 points per Loota our damage per point is right there with a Heavy Weapons Squad armed with Autocannons and per what Kooaei said it's on par with Havocs if you include durability as a factor . At 10 or 11 points I believe you see maybe what a Loota should cost considering our small increase in S and T vs the HWT.

 koooaei wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

What you're essentially saying is the a boy would cost 0 to 1 points. And the Deffgun instead of being 11 points would be 9 or so. While the math is sound it in no way makes a properly costed unit.

The number of bullets one can shoot in a game is finite. Other armies are not suddenly getting more shots to deal with the cheaper bodies.

I'm not saying how much a boy should cost. I've calculated how much a loota should cost to be equal to an autocannon havok in damage output and durability combined. And please take note i haven't even included ld issues a loota would have over a havok.

If you want to prove my math wrong, you're welcome to try.

Btw, do you have any experience with ork units in question on tabletop (lootas, deff dreads)? I can't understand why you so fiercely protect this garbage?

I'm not refuting the math. I'm saying it's bad logic.

You're not saying how much a boy should cost, but you're trying to point them on that durability comparison.

My most common opponent is an Ork player and we go back and forth often.

Let's face it. You guys would be bored if I didn't defend it.

OP: Does anyone hate this unit?
Poster#1: I hate it!
Poster#2: Me too!
OP: Well, looks like we're done here. Good job guys!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rismonite wrote:


Except a Big Shoota boy is way overcosted too so maybe don't make that comparison please.

At 9 points per Loota our damage per point is right there with a Heavy Weapons Squad armed with Autocannons and per what Kooaei said it's on par with Havocs if you include durability as a factor . At 10 or 11 points I believe you see maybe what a Loota should cost considering our small increase in S and T vs the HWT.

Slow down.

It absolutely needs to be made, because a big shoota needs to be able to occupy a valuable space or else the book will have no internal balance.

If a Loota is 9 that makes the Deffgun 3 points. Are you going to make Boyz with Big Shootas 6 points?

I like that we keep creeping down across these posts...13..12..11...10...9. There is no floor!

 Daedalus81 wrote:

It absolutely needs to be made, because a big shoota needs to be able to occupy a valuable space or else the book will have no internal balance.

If a Loota is 9 that makes the Deffgun 3 points. Are you going to make Boyz with Big Shootas 6 points?

It should be implied that the big shoota boy, who is also grossly overcosted, would receive a points reduction of his own and that his proposed changes are not what is being discussed here. At least to me, the last few pages of this thread have had nothing to do with internal balance of proposed changes in an ork codex that isn't out yet. However, it does seem to be about external balance of wishlist changes involving Lootas specifically to things already current in print. I don't know why you are hammering home a point that is much more irrelevant when there are units in current codices that we should be comparing our wishlisted proposed values with.

But, lets dilute and derail the point and bring up Big Shoota boy changes in the Loota thread;
-I think one Boy per ten should upgrade to a big shoota for free because otherwise few even build that model and he is otherwise cool to see
-I think the Big Shoota upgrade should cost +2 points in the rest of the codex

Wait, I think someone a while ago said Orks bring the most models to the table? Have you not played 8th edition?

 Rismonite wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

It absolutely needs to be made, because a big shoota needs to be able to occupy a valuable space or else the book will have no internal balance.

If a Loota is 9 that makes the Deffgun 3 points. Are you going to make Boyz with Big Shootas 6 points?

It should be implied that the big shoota boy, who is also grossly overcosted, would receive a points reduction of his own and that his proposed changes are not what is being discussed here. At least to me, the last few pages of this thread have had nothing to do with internal balance of proposed changes in an ork codex that isn't out yet.

Sure, but we've reached a point where the proposed changes severely alter that outlook.

If the logic is that the durability of an Loota should be directly reflective to that of a marine then what should the cost of a Primaris be? It has two wounds and so is doubly durable, right?

I had a good laugh when Daedalus compared lootas being to cheap to Big Shoota Boyz

I did a thread a while back where the majority agreed a big shoota should cost 2-3pts at most, and honestly in a boyz squad they should be a free upgrade because it sucks in general. A big shoota is a side upgrade for a slugga squad and a minor upgrade to a shoota squad. Its equivalent to a Stormbolter at most.

SemperMortis wrote:
I had a good laugh when Daedalus compared lootas being to cheap to Big Shoota Boyz

I did a thread a while back where the majority agreed a big shoota should cost 2-3pts at most, and honestly in a boyz squad they should be a free upgrade because it sucks in general. A big shoota is a side upgrade for a slugga squad and a minor upgrade to a shoota squad. Its equivalent to a Stormbolter at most.

You should probably go read my posts more closely.

Answer this question -

If a Loota is 9 or 10 points why would I NOT pick a Loota over a basic Shoota Boy?