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.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Can someone actually provide some evidence outside of anecdotes to show that hordes are too powerful and weapons that are designed to be strong against them need to be increased in potency?

Until the most basic premise of this question is proven the discussion around it is moot.

apparently the answer is that Hordes aren't OP but that anti-horde weapons tend to be as effective or MORE effective on elite infantry and people are upset that a Lascannon isn't as effective at slaying up to 5-6 bodies as it is killing 1 super elite terminator or other such model.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Can someone actually provide some evidence outside of anecdotes to show that hordes are too powerful and weapons that are designed to be strong against them need to be increased in potency?

Until the most basic premise of this question is proven the discussion around it is moot.

I think that elite models are too weak, rather than hordes being too strong. I can mathematically show you weapon efficacy, but I don't know if that's what you are looking for.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Can someone actually provide some evidence outside of anecdotes to show that hordes are too powerful and weapons that are designed to be strong against them need to be increased in potency?

Until the most basic premise of this question is proven the discussion around it is moot.

Any specific examples you want mathed out?

SemperMortis wrote:
apparently the answer is that Hordes aren't OP but that anti-horde weapons tend to be as effective or MORE effective on elite infantry and people are upset that a Lascannon isn't as effective at slaying up to 5-6 bodies as it is killing 1 super elite terminator or other such model.

I don't see how a flamer or heavy flamer is more effective against a squad of Terminators over a mob of Boyz, personally.

Martel732 wrote:
I think that elite models are too weak, rather than hordes being too strong. I can mathematically show you weapon efficacy, but I don't know if that's what you are looking for.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Any specific examples you want mathed out?

No, I don't want mathed examples. I want evidence on the proposition that "hordes are too strong" and hence anti-horde weapons needs to be better at taking them out.

If 'hordes are too powerful on a mechanical level', they must be dominating tournaments, right? Which ones? How well do relatively elite armies do in the same tournaments?

What exactly is the definition of a 'horde'?

Maths teaches us little except what happens on average/with perfect rolling/with worst possible rolling in a vacuum so I don't find it a reliable metric for balance when used in isolation.

'Terminators/TEQs are too weak' is not the same argument as 'hordes are too strong' and the balancing actions for one might/should be completely different to the other.

"I don't see how a flamer or heavy flamer is more effective against a squad of Terminators over a mob of Boyz, personally. "

That's because you refuse to consider mathematics in your analyses.

Tournaments have their own caveats, such as time limits. I don't play games with time limits, which enhances IG, but hurts Orks.

A Flamer kills, shot per shot, 2.5 points of Boyz.
It kills, shot per shot, 3.75 points of Terminators, assuming your Termis are 45 points apiece.

Heavy Flamers?
Boyz lose 4 points per shot.
Termis (again assuming 45 points per Termi) lose 10 points per shot.

It's less about hordes as it is any 1 would infantry that costs less than 10 points being too efficient at what it does. It might also depend on what your definition of hordes are, but to say that cultists or IG infantry squads aren't popular is just not the case, and x amount of points of cultists are more durable than the same amount of Marines vs most weapons in the game.

Most imperial lists have 32+ guardsmen in them at a minimum just for the CP as a standard, and many have more. The amount of fire power needed to shift that many guardsmen will kill more points worth of most other infantry in the game, making them less effective from a durability standpoint, which just doesn't make very much sense.

jcd386 wrote:
It's less about hordes as it is any 1 would infantry that costs less than 10 points being too efficient at what it does. It might also depend on what your definition of hordes are, but to say that cultists or IG infantry squads aren't popular is just not the case, and x amount of points of cultists are more durable than the same amount of Marines vs most weapons in the game.

Most imperial lists have 32+ guardsmen in them at a minimum just for the CP as a standard, and many have more. The amount of fire power needed to shift that many guardsmen will kill more points worth of most other infantry in the game, making them less effective from a durability standpoint, which just doesn't make very much sense.

Most basic infantry that I know of costs less than 10 pts. Are you suggesting that eldar guardians are too effective simply because they are less than 10 pts? Skitarri rangers? Battle sisters?
As far as I know the only faction whose basic infantry is more than 10 pts is marines.

Dandelion wrote:

jcd386 wrote:
It's less about hordes as it is any 1 would infantry that costs less than 10 points being too efficient at what it does. It might also depend on what your definition of hordes are, but to say that cultists or IG infantry squads aren't popular is just not the case, and x amount of points of cultists are more durable than the same amount of Marines vs most weapons in the game.

Most imperial lists have 32+ guardsmen in them at a minimum just for the CP as a standard, and many have more. The amount of fire power needed to shift that many guardsmen will kill more points worth of most other infantry in the game, making them less effective from a durability standpoint, which just doesn't make very much sense.

Most basic infantry that I know of costs less than 10 pts. Are you suggesting that eldar guardians are too effective simply because they are less than 10 pts? Skitarri rangers? Battle sisters?
As far as I know the only faction whose basic infantry is more than 10 pts is marines.

Necron Warriors cost 12 points per, with zero options.

No, it's not all units below 10 pts. This is a very complicated mathematical problem, way past GW's pay grade.

The two biggest offenders to me are 4 pt guardsmen and 6 pt kabalites. Orks are effective at 6pts, but relying on melee for damage makes them inherently less effective than kabalites imo. Especially when you factor in kabalite weapons and transports.

Guardians pay more for a shorter range gun, and can't fire out of any Eldar transport to my knowledge.

One could argue that sisters of battle are too effective for 9 pts, but I like to think they are close to where marines should be priced currently. Especially after the drukhari dropped. If this were a computer game, the drukhari existing would knock 1 pt off marines right there.

jcd386 wrote:
It's less about hordes as it is any 1 would infantry that costs less than 10 points being too efficient at what it does. It might also depend on what your definition of hordes are, but to say that cultists or IG infantry squads aren't popular is just not the case, and x amount of points of cultists are more durable than the same amount of Marines vs most weapons in the game.

Most imperial lists have 32+ guardsmen in them at a minimum just for the CP as a standard, and many have more. The amount of fire power needed to shift that many guardsmen will kill more points worth of most other infantry in the game, making them less effective from a durability standpoint, which just doesn't make very much sense.

Roffle, Cultists are this popular because they are cheap, and therefore fill the troop tax easy. They also profited from the tide of traitors stratagem and additionally from the Slaaneshy double shooting. The problem isn't the cultists but rather that normal CSM suck compared to them simply by the shere dmg output and rof.
a 10 man CSM bolter squad costs 130 pts. they offer 10/20 shots 6.333 shots hit a guardsmen target and generate 4.... wounds over 12 inches

i get 32.5 cultists for that. they offer me 32.5 /65 shots. 16.25 hit and 8.125 wound on a guardsmen target.

Yes durabiltiy comes into play and favors the marines. However you can split the cultists of and form 3 troops slots. Have filled them and therefore payed min tax, allready for some detachment, getting access to CP which is the main problem.
It get's even worse with guardsmen and whilest they are not in the same codex as SM or Custodes they still generate dirt cheap CP for those armies and are even better in most ways than Cultists which need stratagems to really shine.
Orkz on the other hand have with mob up a rule that literally makes them immune to morale, and by extension that is what makes them a good horde army as in they don't need to pay extra for stopping the running from morale, on the contrary you have also a horde army done right in R&H which needs to buy enforcers (basically the same as old commisars but instead denying all morale checks via inflicting d3 autolosses on all infantery units that need to make a morale test) for 30 aswell as suffering from lackluster troop choices and or from the lack of Squadsize, (cultists are only allowed in 30 man blobs for R&H without access to stratagems)

And then we have Kabalites. Nothing shows the overpriced situation of any marine in the game better then these. 6 pts for a profile that is equal in everything but T and Armor. Their gun is better aggainst MC and they cost less then half the ammount of a marine.

 JNAProductions wrote:
A Flamer kills, shot per shot, 2.5 points of Boyz.
It kills, shot per shot, 3.75 points of Terminators, assuming your Termis are 45 points apiece.

Heavy Flamers?
Boyz lose 4 points per shot.
Termis (again assuming 45 points per Termi) lose 10 points per shot.

You have shown in this single post why I didn't want pointless mathematical arguments thrown at me. When calculating the 'points post per shot' are you also factoring in the reduced offensive power of said unit as it takes casualties? Are you taking into account possible morale losses? All of these things happen in a real game and while the flamer takes 3 shots to kill a Boy, or 5 to kill 2 it takes 12 to kill a TEQ. So until those 12 flamer shots have gone into the Terminators they have lost 0 points.

I'm still waiting for someone, anyone, to show us that hordes are too powerful mechanically and hence are winning lots of tournaments....

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
A Flamer kills, shot per shot, 2.5 points of Boyz.
It kills, shot per shot, 3.75 points of Terminators, assuming your Termis are 45 points apiece.

Heavy Flamers?
Boyz lose 4 points per shot.
Termis (again assuming 45 points per Termi) lose 10 points per shot.

You have shown in this single post why I didn't want pointless mathematical arguments thrown at me. When calculating the 'points post per shot' are you also factoring in the reduced offensive power of said unit as it takes casualties? Are you taking into account possible morale losses? All of these things happen in a real game and while the flamer takes 3 shots to kill a Boy, or 5 to kill 2 it takes 12 to kill a TEQ. So until those 12 flamer shots have gone into the Terminators they have lost 0 points.

I'm still waiting for someone, anyone, to show us that hordes are too powerful mechanically and hence are winning lots of tournaments....

Hordes aren't the problem, the problem is that certain troop choices just are to cost effective.
Granted normal marines are not top tier, but the banana regain CP combo with IG is.

This is a different suggestion to the OP.

So we're talking about only specific units being too strong, namely (from the looks of the thread) - Kabalite Warriors, Guardsmen and Boyz?


FYI Not Online - Mob rule doesn't make Orks immune to morale. It makes their LD the value of the number of models in the unit or they can take the value of a unit within 6" (or 3", can't remember off hand). You start to see that Orks are quite vulnerable to morale once an isolated squad of 30 Boyz takes 15+ casualties.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
This is a different suggestion to the OP.

So we're talking about only specific units being too strong, namely (from the looks of the thread) - Kabalite Warriors, Guardsmen and Boyz?


FYI Not Online - Mob rule doesn't make Orks immune to morale. It makes their LD the value of the number of models in the unit or they can take the value of a unit within 6" (or 3", can't remember off hand). You start to see that Orks are quite vulnerable to morale once an isolated squad of 30 Boyz takes 15+ casualties.

I said basically, and since you any way will take boyz you have no additional costs, that beeing said i agree that Orkz hordes are not the worst offenders.
On a side note there is quite alot wrong with the Orkz in general and they are in dire need of getting a proper Codex.
Also Ld 10 on a cheap t 4 model is still extremely good.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
This is a different suggestion to the OP.

So we're talking about only specific units being too strong, namely (from the looks of the thread) - Kabalite Warriors, Guardsmen and Boyz?


FYI Not Online - Mob rule doesn't make Orks immune to morale. It makes their LD the value of the number of models in the unit or they can take the value of a unit within 6" (or 3", can't remember off hand). You start to see that Orks are quite vulnerable to morale once an isolated squad of 30 Boyz takes 15+ casualties.

I said basically, and since you any way will take boyz you have no additional costs, that beeing said i agree that Orkz hordes are not the worst offenders.
On a side note there is quite alot wrong with the Orkz in general and they are in dire need of getting a proper Codex.
Also Ld 10 on a cheap t 4 model is still extremely good.

I think you mean Leadership 30, because of the boyz next to them that didn't get shot.

The problem is that many hordes have access to units that don' t minimize morale losses but rather make them completely immune.
Synapses, Early Commisars, Cold and BItter for Iron Warriors, etc.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
This is a different suggestion to the OP.

So we're talking about only specific units being too strong, namely (from the looks of the thread) - Kabalite Warriors, Guardsmen and Boyz?


FYI Not Online - Mob rule doesn't make Orks immune to morale. It makes their LD the value of the number of models in the unit or they can take the value of a unit within 6" (or 3", can't remember off hand). You start to see that Orks are quite vulnerable to morale once an isolated squad of 30 Boyz takes 15+ casualties.

I said basically, and since you any way will take boyz you have no additional costs, that beeing said i agree that Orkz hordes are not the worst offenders.
On a side note there is quite alot wrong with the Orkz in general and they are in dire need of getting a proper Codex.
Also Ld 10 on a cheap t 4 model is still extremely good.

I think you mean Leadership 30, because of the boyz next to them that didn't get shot.

Isn't it limited to LD 10?
Because if you can get LD 30 how the feth do you break such a squad without a punisher Gattling?

Not Online!!! wrote:

I said basically, and since you any way will take boyz you have no additional costs, that beeing said i agree that Orkz hordes are not the worst offenders.
On a side note there is quite alot wrong with the Orkz in general and they are in dire need of getting a proper Codex.
Also Ld 10 on a cheap t 4 model is still extremely good.

I thought you believed them to be literally fearless, apologies.

It's funny people think Orks are immune to morale when we have quite a lot of units that can/will be devestated by losses - Killa Kans and Koptas are prime examples.

I'm struggling to understand the logic of this thread. People seem to think hordes are too strong, while others believe elite units are too weak and others still believe that anti horde weapons aren't good enough against their intended target for their points. These are 3 vastly different premises with completely different fixes for each.

E - to answer your question on breaking Boyz you either kill them to the Boy or ensure they aren't next to another Mob through positioning and target priority.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

I said basically, and since you any way will take boyz you have no additional costs, that beeing said i agree that Orkz hordes are not the worst offenders.
On a side note there is quite alot wrong with the Orkz in general and they are in dire need of getting a proper Codex.
Also Ld 10 on a cheap t 4 model is still extremely good.

I thought you believed them to be literally fearless, apologies.

It's funny people think Orks are immune to morale when we have quite a lot of units that can/will be devestated by losses - Killa Kans and Koptas are prime examples.

I'm struggling to understand the logic of this thread. People seem to think hordes are too strong, while others believe elite units are too weak and others still believe that anti horde weapons aren't good enough against their intended target for their points. These are 3 vastly different premises with completely different fixes for each.

Personally it is mainly a guard problem. Nobody complains about a R&H CSM mix even if i put down 2 50 man mutant blobs with enforcers.
Mainly because they don't get boosted via auras and stratagems and Cp is just as easily makable with normal CSM cultists.
Contrary to that you have the Guard which gains access to some really good relics that allow you to regain cp and perfectly cover the weakness of custodes aswell as profiting from their auras to some degree.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

I said basically, and since you any way will take boyz you have no additional costs, that beeing said i agree that Orkz hordes are not the worst offenders.
On a side note there is quite alot wrong with the Orkz in general and they are in dire need of getting a proper Codex.
Also Ld 10 on a cheap t 4 model is still extremely good.

I thought you believed them to be literally fearless, apologies.

It's funny people think Orks are immune to morale when we have quite a lot of units that can/will be devestated by losses - Killa Kans and Koptas are prime examples.

I'm struggling to understand the logic of this thread. People seem to think hordes are too strong, while others believe elite units are too weak and others still believe that anti horde weapons aren't good enough against their intended target for their points. These are 3 vastly different premises with completely different fixes for each.

E - to answer your question on breaking Boyz you either kill them to the Boy or ensure they aren't next to another Mob through positioning and target priority.

That is easier said then done, especially when there is literally a wall of 30 man blobs, which isn't that expensive to field.
Firstly you need massive Rof just for one 30 man blob, considering these are t4 units regular small arms will allready have problems dealing with that (S3 ones) Secondly even if you kill 15 Orkboys and they have a another squad near them they still get more morale than other units which should be comparable to them, minimizing morale losses even if you manage to do decent damage.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Isn't it limited to LD 10?
Because if you can get LD 30 how the feth do you break such a squad without a punisher Gattling?

Why would you think it's limited to 10?

Not Online!!! wrote:
That is easier said then done, especially when there is literally a wall of 30 man blobs, which isn't that expensive to field.
Firstly you need massive Rof just for one 30 man blob, considering these are t4 units regular small arms will allready have problems dealing with that (S3 ones) Secondly even if you kill 15 Orkboys and they have a another squad near them they still get more morale than other units which should be comparable to them, minimizing morale losses even if you manage to do decent damage.

It's not that hard, particularly if you play R&H.

I think the post below summarises an easy way to destroy Orks;

SemperMortis wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Is a boy better than a guardsmen? I guess.

Ironically, in a vacuum, no they aren't. At 120pts an Ork can field 19 ork boyz and a free nob, IG can field 27 guardsmen and 3 sergeants armed with lasguns and chainswords. As soon as the IG get in range the orkz start dying in droves, 30 shots, 15 hits, 5 wounds, 4 dead orkz. Orkz move and advance (8.5inches on average). IG move into Rapid fire range 60 shots, 30 hits 10 wounds 8 dead Orkz. Orkz take a leadership check at LD8 with 8 losses so they lose D6 more orkz so 3 more, they are now down to 5 models including a nob. Orkz move, shoot 5 shots 1.66 hits, 1.33 wounds 1 dead Guardsmen. Orkz charge, IG Overwatch 58 shots, 10ish hits on average 3 wounds and 2-3 more dead orkz. 3 orkz get in for 6 attacks at S4 and 4 attacks at S5 6 hits, 4 wounds and 3 dead Guardsmen. The absolute horde of remaining guardsmen then bum rush in and wipe out the remaining orkz.

So yep, guardsmen are better point for point. And yet again, I haven't heard of anyone calling for 4ppm Ork boyz, Hell I am an ork player and I don't want 5ppm orkz. What I really want is the ability to take FEWER MODELS and still be competitive. My current tournament list has 165 Boyz models, 25 grotz and 5ish character models. Even if I could take HALF that and be successful I would be happy.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Isn't it limited to LD 10?
Because if you can get LD 30 how the feth do you break such a squad without a punisher Gattling?

Why would you think it's limited to 10?

Mainly because it was limited in previous editions and i since then stopped playing my Ork army, especially after how dakkajets and burna bombaz perform,
So my Flymek army got worse and worse which for me was the point that i jumped ship. I just assumed that it would be like the old rule limited to 10, which was the maximum LD in all previous editions.
I don't quite understand however what the idea behind this is: from a fluff position aswell as from a rules perspective.
One would imagine that if a Boy mob which functions as a unit within the Ork society and generally includes their closest "friends" they would not just aqquire morale from the presence of other orks. Secondly there is something inherently wrong with the rule as it allows to go over the limit, which other units pay quite alot of pts for additional moral. As a way one could see their Mob Morale as massively underpriced in such a case.
As for LD 30+ one would need to make atleast 25 losses to an ork squad to get ONE ork running and that is on a 6 in the morale test. That seems frankly quite stupid. there should be no way in hell an ork unit would stick around after 5/6 of the unit got wiped out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
That is easier said then done, especially when there is literally a wall of 30 man blobs, which isn't that expensive to field.
Firstly you need massive Rof just for one 30 man blob, considering these are t4 units regular small arms will allready have problems dealing with that (S3 ones) Secondly even if you kill 15 Orkboys and they have a another squad near them they still get more morale than other units which should be comparable to them, minimizing morale losses even if you manage to do decent damage.

It's not that hard, particularly if you play R&H.

I think the post below summarises an easy way to destroy Orks;

SemperMortis wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Is a boy better than a guardsmen? I guess.

Ironically, in a vacuum, no they aren't. At 120pts an Ork can field 19 ork boyz and a free nob, IG can field 27 guardsmen and 3 sergeants armed with lasguns and chainswords. As soon as the IG get in range the orkz start dying in droves, 30 shots, 15 hits, 5 wounds, 4 dead orkz. Orkz move and advance (8.5inches on average). IG move into Rapid fire range 60 shots, 30 hits 10 wounds 8 dead Orkz. Orkz take a leadership check at LD8 with 8 losses so they lose D6 more orkz so 3 more, they are now down to 5 models including a nob. Orkz move, shoot 5 shots 1.66 hits, 1.33 wounds 1 dead Guardsmen. Orkz charge, IG Overwatch 58 shots, 10ish hits on average 3 wounds and 2-3 more dead orkz. 3 orkz get in for 6 attacks at S4 and 4 attacks at S5 6 hits, 4 wounds and 3 dead Guardsmen. The absolute horde of remaining guardsmen then bum rush in and wipe out the remaining orkz.

So yep, guardsmen are better point for point. And yet again, I haven't heard of anyone calling for 4ppm Ork boyz, Hell I am an ork player and I don't want 5ppm orkz. What I really want is the ability to take FEWER MODELS and still be competitive. My current tournament list has 165 Boyz models, 25 grotz and 5ish character models. Even if I could take HALF that and be successful I would be happy.

Yes and also shows another problem. To get enough small arms fire, and Heavy Weapons for that matter, i need to play another horde army.
And again no it is not that easy, even for R&H because surprise surprise bs5 for most infantery too.(guard would be better, if it weren't for the max size of IG squads.)
Yeah sure you can argue about mortars and nade launchers, but what are you doing if you run a "elite" army, as in a pure marine list?
Because you won't get enough Bolters on an army like this. I doubt even CSM emperors children with sonic weaponry and double shoot strategem could successfully stop such an assult.
Quite frankly Boyz shouldn't be the only thing keeping you in the game. However atm they are, therefore i am hesitant to call for a nerf, but seriously limiting Orks back again to just horde a playstyle isn't fun, neitehr for them nor for players that play against them, that i can agree with..

Not Online!!! wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Isn't it limited to LD 10?
Because if you can get LD 30 how the feth do you break such a squad without a punisher Gattling?

Why would you think it's limited to 10?

Mainly because it was limited in previous editions and i since then stopped playing my Ork army, especially after how dakkajets and burna bombaz perform,
So my Flymek army got worse and worse which for me was the point that i jumped ship. I just assumed that it would be like the old rule limited to 10, which was the maximum LD in all previous editions.
I don't quite understand however what the idea behind this is: from a fluff position aswell as from a rules perspective.
One would imagine that if a Boy mob which functions as a unit within the Ork society and generally includes their closest "friends" they would not just aqquire morale from the presence of other orks. Secondly there is something inherently wrong with the rule as it allows to go over the limit, which other units pay quite alot of pts for additional moral. As a way one could see their Mob Morale as massively underpriced in such a case.
As for LD 30+ one would need to make atleast 25 losses to an ork squad to get ONE ork running and that is on a 6 in the morale test. That seems frankly quite stupid. there should be no way in hell an ork unit would stick around after 5/6 of the unit got wiped out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
That is easier said then done, especially when there is literally a wall of 30 man blobs, which isn't that expensive to field.
Firstly you need massive Rof just for one 30 man blob, considering these are t4 units regular small arms will allready have problems dealing with that (S3 ones) Secondly even if you kill 15 Orkboys and they have a another squad near them they still get more morale than other units which should be comparable to them, minimizing morale losses even if you manage to do decent damage.

It's not that hard, particularly if you play R&H.

I think the post below summarises an easy way to destroy Orks;

SemperMortis wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Is a boy better than a guardsmen? I guess.

Ironically, in a vacuum, no they aren't. At 120pts an Ork can field 19 ork boyz and a free nob, IG can field 27 guardsmen and 3 sergeants armed with lasguns and chainswords. As soon as the IG get in range the orkz start dying in droves, 30 shots, 15 hits, 5 wounds, 4 dead orkz. Orkz move and advance (8.5inches on average). IG move into Rapid fire range 60 shots, 30 hits 10 wounds 8 dead Orkz. Orkz take a leadership check at LD8 with 8 losses so they lose D6 more orkz so 3 more, they are now down to 5 models including a nob. Orkz move, shoot 5 shots 1.66 hits, 1.33 wounds 1 dead Guardsmen. Orkz charge, IG Overwatch 58 shots, 10ish hits on average 3 wounds and 2-3 more dead orkz. 3 orkz get in for 6 attacks at S4 and 4 attacks at S5 6 hits, 4 wounds and 3 dead Guardsmen. The absolute horde of remaining guardsmen then bum rush in and wipe out the remaining orkz.

So yep, guardsmen are better point for point. And yet again, I haven't heard of anyone calling for 4ppm Ork boyz, Hell I am an ork player and I don't want 5ppm orkz. What I really want is the ability to take FEWER MODELS and still be competitive. My current tournament list has 165 Boyz models, 25 grotz and 5ish character models. Even if I could take HALF that and be successful I would be happy.

Yes and also shows another problem. To get enough small arms fire, and Heavy Weapons for that matter, i need to play another horde army.
And again no it is not that easy, even for R&H because surprise surprise bs5 for most infantery too.(guard would be better, if it weren't for the max size of IG squads.)
Yeah sure you can argue about mortars and nade launchers, but what are you doing if you run a "elite" army, as in a pure marine list?
Because you won't get enough Bolters on an army like this. I doubt even CSM emperors children with sonic weaponry and double shoot strategem could successfully stop such an assult.
Quite frankly Boyz shouldn't be the only thing keeping you in the game. However atm they are, therefore i am hesitant to call for a nerf, but seriously limiting Orks back again to just horde a playstyle isn't fun, neitehr for them nor for players that play against them, that i can agree with..

I gotta be honest, I don't think you understand enough about the game in it's current guise to make any calls regarding nerfs or buffs. Capped stats are no longer a thing. Have you missed that vehicles have 10+ W now?

Dakkajets and Burna Bommas are one of the best Ork units we have, currently. If that was your reason for ceasing play with them I'd suggest you look again.

I'd also suggest that if you're afraid of 5 Orks that remain after you have killed 25 there is something wrong with your list. Generally it isn't difficult, in fact it's extremely common, for me to lose 45 - 60 Boyz per turn. The mob rule only works if there's another massive unit nearby and if all the Boyz are clustering together they aren't picking up objectives, or moving around terrain presumably. Custodes tear through Boyz like a knife through butter, they are the elite of the elite. Eldar, another traditionally elite army, don't seem to struggle either. It's about taking the right tools for the job.

As has been said time and time again, any game that goes the distance is pretty much an auto-loss for Orks now, despite your fears we just don't have the durability. Effectively the only competitive games we win are those where there is an enforced time limit and the games end on turn 2 or 3 with no punishment.

If this thread is an excuse to beat on Boyz, Kabalite Warriors, Guardsmen or whatever else is the flavour of the month villainous horde unit I'd suggest the title is changed to reflect such.

I do know that the stats are uncapped. I also do know that morale should've never been uncapped for a reason, mainly because (mostly) infantery has to deal with that and the new moral mechanic is there for a reason.
Again i stopped with the 6th ed Ork codex with the WD add on for the ork flyers, so forgive me for not nailing all the Ork rules atm.
I do however know enough that i can point out that the Rule in this case is flawed, I also agree that Ork boyz shouldn't be so god damn mandatory as they are now, because of their mob rule. Frankly i belive that alot of the overcosted Ork stuff like Mega armor etc. should get a well deserved cost reduction.

That beeing said the 5 orks left, should run as intended with the new morale system and not stick around because when they do we might aswell go back to the old system in which moral did not particullary matter.
Again, the Orks especially seriously need a Codex, from overpriced wargear to the problems that they have with survivability against anything that can field enough small dakka to the simple fact that after t3-4 they suck compared to other armies.

That still dosen't make the argument flawed that "hordes" are overperforming. Mind you i don't support the blanket statement that hordes overperform, in many cases they do not. However many choices like Guardsmen, Cultists, Kabalites are just frankly undercosted and that is the problem, especially now since we need for some detachment troop choices to generate cp. Those armies that got Codex Stratagems profit massively and in case of the Bananas they profit doubly from IG soup.
Basically in many cases it isn't a horde of units but rather dirt cheap troops that get picked for inherent advantages that either come with the army they are attached to or because they literally are a necessity and you just want to take cheap screening as to avoid getting bubblewrapped.

So the problem is mainly in 3 categories:

1: Costeffectivness: Some troop choices massively outperform others for ppm value, aka Kabalites and Guardsmen to a degree, aswell as Cultists.

2. Soup: Mainly a IG problem, they are getting used and abused for their cheap CP generation and for their Relic to regain spent CP

3. min taxes for detachment cp gains: This is again a problem as in there are units that are massively cheaper and can do the same thing the other alternatives within a codex can do. Cultists are the main offender here, why should i "waste" pts for a backfield unit that grabs some objectives and i mainly take for CP and cheap dakka, like CSM, when i can just field tripple the ammount of them in Cultists which have access to certain strategems that massively outperform most stratagems normal CSM get and aswell fill out my tax in the same pts budget?

To those saying Orkz with LD 30 is absurd or hard to impossible to remove...here is the simplest tactic to beat them...ready, this will be hard to wrap your head around....Shoot 2 mobz instead of 1

Most tournament lists i've faced can remove 30-45 boyz a turn without too much difficulty. The ones that can't can surely do so in 2 game turns (about the average time required to get mobz into CC). So instead of dumping all your shots into 1 mob and deleting it...SPLIT IT UP! If you can statistically kill 30 boyz a turn then kill 15 in one mob and 15 in the other, for 2 reasons. 1: the ork player might screw up and remove casualties so that the two units aren't within the required 6' to use each others leadership and 2: because now even if they are in range they are LD15 with 15 losses which means D6 auto losses for 1 squad at a minimum. I played against a rather smart admech player who did this little trick to 3 of my mobz over 2 game turns and by the end of turn 2 I was suffering 3-5+D6 casualties in each mob. I very clearly lose that game to his tactics.

So getting back to the main point of this topic I think we can safely say that NOBODY thinks hordes are too powerful and what they really mean are 2-3 units in 2-3 separate armies are too cheap and annoy you heavily. They don't win the game for your opponent but they seriously help them with there strats and that bothers people here. Cool, so lets change the name of this topic to "Hordes annoy me, lets fix that".

SemperMortis wrote:
To those saying Orkz with LD 30 is absurd or hard to impossible to remove...here is the simplest tactic to beat them...ready, this will be hard to wrap your head around....Shoot 2 mobz instead of 1

Hold on, you're going to have to slow down.

First I shoot one unit, then what? Shoot another unit you say?!

This all seems a bit too much like tactical thinking, I thought this was supposed to be a wargame!

Which can be avoided via decent positioning and LOS blocking cover, which will exist on all tables, regardless of tournament or not, so you can surely hide one or two mobs somewhere. ..

Not Online!!! wrote:
Which can be avoided via decent positioning and LOS blocking cover, which will exist on all tables, regardless of tournament or not, so you can surely hide one or two mobs somewhere. ..

Where the feth on a normal table am I going to hide a mob of 30 Boyz, within 6" of a mob of another 30 Boyz? I don't think my Boyz have yet to benefit from cover, in any game I've played.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Which can be avoided via decent positioning and LOS blocking cover, which will exist on all tables, regardless of tournament or not, so you can surely hide one or two mobs somewhere. ..

Where the feth on a normal table am I going to hide a mob of 30 Boyz, within 6" of a mob of another 30 Boyz? I don't think my Boyz have yet to benefit from cover, in any game I've played.

When i manage to hide a 50 man blob out of LOS, then how the heck are you not managing 30 boys? Also aren't there rules like the first floor of ruins is blocking los and you can't shoot through them?
One squad hides behind the walls of a building, the other Squad stands in the open. Problem of the moral solved, aslong as you take the proper orks away from the unit that stands in the open, and yes i realize that Orks should get into CQC as fast as possible and that hiding might be a hinderance for that but sometimes you need to make a tradeoff no?
And yes i realize that Orks need to be within 6" of another Squad, that complicates these things i agree on that and that is also why i don't count Orks as a problem.
Because again hordes are not the problem, the problem is Soup, Min Tax Troops cost effectivness on certain troop choices and the fact that some choices are only made because some Stratagems are broken and therefore armies need CP and take such min tax troops.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Which can be avoided via decent positioning and LOS blocking cover, which will exist on all tables, regardless of tournament or not, so you can surely hide one or two mobs somewhere. ..

Where the feth on a normal table am I going to hide a mob of 30 Boyz, within 6" of a mob of another 30 Boyz? I don't think my Boyz have yet to benefit from cover, in any game I've played.

When i manage to hide a 50 man blob out of LOS, then how the heck are you not managing 30 boys? Also aren't there rules like the first floor of ruins is blocking los and you can't shoot through them?
One squad hides behind the walls of a building, the other Squad stands in the open. Problem of the moral solved, aslong as you take the proper orks away from the unit that stands in the open, and yes i realize that Orks should get into CQC as fast as possible and that hiding might be a hinderance for that but sometimes you need to make a tradeoff no?
And yes i realize that Orks need to be within 6" of another Squad, that complicates these things i agree on that and that is also why i don't count Orks as a problem.
Because again hordes are not the problem, the problem is Soup, Min Tax Troops cost effectivness on certain troop choices and the fact that some choices are only made because some Stratagems are broken and therefore armies need CP and take such min tax troops.

I won't hit on this too much since you already admitted most of the problems with your thinking.

1: Boyz need to be in CC in order to be worth a damn, unless they are camping an objective...which you would be better off using a min squad of Grotz and hiding them out of LOS.
2: You can hide 1 mob out of LOS and use their leadership for 1 turn...or you could daisy chain back to them but then you run the risk of not having enough bodies where the Rubber meets the road so to speak.
3: There is no trade off since you are now using 180pts as a morale battery, so almost 1/10th of your army is useless. And its actually more then that because of the daisy chains.
4: Ive played tournaments at numerous different events and venues and I have yet to come across a board with this mythical amount of terrain that blocks LOS all over the place. This isn't a hit on you but to the masses in general who scream "Just use more LOS terrain". I mean yeah, if we are playing a friendly game at the FLGS then yeah we can pile all sorts of terrain on the board, but if its 8-12+ tables all going at the same time terrain becomes few and far between.