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.

tneva82 wrote:
Because no unit in the game should end up in impossible to hit. Only total rookie game designer with zero idea on what good game consist would think that's good idea. No wonder thus GW has introduced such an idea.

You are so right, tneva! No unit should be impossible to hit!

Except units that are out of LOS.

Or units that are out of range.

Or units in combat.

Or characters behind a screen.

I presume these conditions were designed by "rookie game designers" also?

Do you also object to these 4 cases?

No. Naturally not those four.

If there are 4 cases where I can keep you from shooting at me, why can't there be five? Does the world end if there are five, tneva?

Dandelion wrote:

So GW giving Eldar -2 to hit flyers is totally cool and we shouldn't criticize it? You know, since it's their train set. I mean, if you take that line of thinking then there's no point in discussing anything rules wise at all.

I mean, all other armies can still hit an Eldar Flyer at -2. orks are the only army where they would not be able to with 90% of their army or more for the entire game

I'm waiting for a kitbashing article that goes something like:
Step 1: Pick up Mek Gun
Step 2: Place Mek Gun in the bed of the Truck/Battlewagon


I'm hoping they make the Killkannon more killy. Even if they fixed it through points its profile is just disappointing. Same goes for the Deth Kannon.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 davou wrote:

Dandelion wrote:


Now explain why grots get the rule.

You've seen the codex?

Warhammer Community wrote:Previously seen as a Stratagem in Chapter Approved 2017, we’ve added this as a special rule on EVERY Orks unit that works ALL the time. You’ll never, ever hit on worse than a 6 – and you’ll get an extra shooting attack for free when you do so. If you believe in yourself, you can hit anything…

Some things don't need the Codex to be seen.

fair enough, I retract my snark

 JimOnMars wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Because no unit in the game should end up in impossible to hit. Only total rookie game designer with zero idea on what good game consist would think that's good idea. No wonder thus GW has introduced such an idea.

You are so right, tneva! No unit should be impossible to hit!

Except units that are out of LOS.

Or units that are out of range.

Or units in combat.

Or characters behind a screen.

I presume these conditions were designed by "rookie game designers" also?

Do you also object to these 4 cases?

No. Naturally not those four.

If there are 4 cases where I can keep you from shooting at me, why can't there be five? Does the world end if there are five, tneva?

Depends, are we keeping the "always fail on a 1" in?

 Billagio wrote:

Dandelion wrote:

So GW giving Eldar -2 to hit flyers is totally cool and we shouldn't criticize it? You know, since it's their train set. I mean, if you take that line of thinking then there's no point in discussing anything rules wise at all.

I mean, all other armies can still hit an Eldar Flyer at -2. orks are the only army where they would not be able to with 90% of their army or more for the entire game

I'm not comparing anything to orks in that statement, just pointing out that "roll with it" undoes 90% of all rules discussions. the last 10% being YMDD.
So, to bring it back to orks, if the codex ends up sucking would I be reasonable to suggest that you not criticize the rules, since it's GW's train set?
I'd say it'd be rather unreasonable, just like that fellow's statement that I replied to.

I remember in old threads when discussing the problem of negative to hit modifiers and orks I would get irritated when people would write things along the lines of 'just charge them, orks are a melee army anyway'.

It's true that for pretty much every other army it's an edge case and not nearly as likely as with orks, but it seems like those edge cases are very easily solved by the addition of the small rule that 6s always hit. I don't think it's strictly necessary, but at the same time I see basically no cost to doing so.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:

I'm hoping they make the Killkannon more killy. Even if they fixed it through points its profile is just disappointing. Same goes for the Deth Kannon.

So you'll be disappointed when they just rename them the Slight Inkonvenience Kannon and the Paperkut Kannon?

I mean, at least those names would more accurately represent how they perform on the tabletop.

Dandelion wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

1) Almost all armies are built to hit on 4+ natively, they hit -2 to hit on sixes anyways.

1) Degrading profiles and heavy weapons exist.

Degraded models are supposed to be worse than non degraded models. That's the whole point.
If you need your heavy weapons to hit stuff, don't move them. That's how it's supposed to be.

2) Except it's the same reason why orks get it: not being able to hit is not fun.

You obviously have not understood why orks have gotten the rule in the first place. You have already voided all your arguments.

And no, the arguments against other factions getting it have been super weak which is why no one has changed their mind yet. You yourself gave the reason that a basilisk should not be able to hit a voidraven. But what about a hydra? Chip off some wounds and now it's a paperweight, unable to contribute. Take some wounds off a Riptide and boom... useless. You don't even need to kill them.

"Chip of some wounds a hydra" = blow 9 out of 11 wounds off a tank and it can't hit -2 fliers.
"Take some wounds off a riptide" = remove 8 wounds off a T7 model with a 2+/5++ that can be boosted to 2+/3++ and kill both it's drones and it's useless. Unless, of course, you just take a velocity tracker, then you don't give a damn about degrading.
Let's see how many wounds you have to take off a battlewagon in order to make it useless. Ah, right, zero.
Warbuggies and wartrakks? Zero.
Gorkanaut or Morkanaut? Zero.
Koptas? Zero!
Trukk? Zero!
Deff dread? Zero.
Stompa? Zero.
Tank bustas, lootas, shoota boyz, nobz, warbikers, big mek with SAG? Zero!

According to you these units are "paperweight, unable to contribute, useless, you don't even need to kill them." That's 75% of our datasheeets at deployment.
In no way does this compare to a hydra with 2 wounds left needing to hit allaitoc planes on sixes.

And you've claimed that "bad game design" is not an argument, so tell me why should Orks always hit on 6s? Because I can guarantee you that anything you say can be boiled down to "bad game design". The majority of orks not being able to hit... is bad game design. Why is it bad game design? Because it's no fun. It's frustrating.

Entire armies made up of -2 to hit models can be fielded and are fielded. A well rounded ork army made of nothing but shooting units cannot shoot its opponent with as much as a single unit. Every single unit fails to perform it's primary function, just because what your opponent fielded.
We don't have tau commanders or hive tyrants that can just hit those things on 4+ anyways.
We can't just shoot the other models that are not degraded in order to hit something.
We can't just not move our heavy weapon and have them shoot at something else.
We can't buy upgrades, use stratagems or buff our units with psychic powers to hit anyways.
We simply can't shoot.

A shooting army not being able to shoot is a very good argument.
Oh, and if you answer this with "orks are not a shooting army", I'll find a way to fill your intestines with snotlings.

mhalko1 wrote:


Because they do have the volume fluffwise. Think of the max size of grot units. It's still 30. In the fluff swarms of grots still do litter the battlefield.

So Guard should get the rule then?

We don't know if gretchin actually get the rule. They don't get 'ere we go or mob rule either.

Army wide rules often don't appear on all datasheets.

This thread is now tiresome.

problem is we are starved of rumors by now ... since release dates are expected to being in T-3Ws

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:
I remember in old threads when discussing the problem of negative to hit modifiers and orks I would get irritated when people would write things along the lines of 'just charge them, orks are a melee army anyway'.

It's true that for pretty much every other army it's an edge case and not nearly as likely as with orks, but it seems like those edge cases are very easily solved by the addition of the small rule that 6s always hit. I don't think it's strictly necessary, but at the same time I see basically no cost to doing so.

Thank you!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

We don't know if gretchin actually get the rule. They don't get 'ere we go or mob rule either.

Army wide rules often don't appear on all datasheets.

Except it specifically mentions the bubblechukka in the rule itself. So unless orks get some snazzy new ork-manned mekguns, then it applies to gretchin.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Because no unit in the game should end up in impossible to hit. Only total rookie game designer with zero idea on what good game consist would think that's good idea. No wonder thus GW has introduced such an idea.

You are so right, tneva! No unit should be impossible to hit!

Except units that are out of LOS.

Or units that are out of range.

Or units in combat.

Or characters behind a screen.

I presume these conditions were designed by "rookie game designers" also?

Do you also object to these 4 cases?

No. Naturally not those four.

If there are 4 cases where I can keep you from shooting at me, why can't there be five? Does the world end if there are five, tneva?

Depends, are we keeping the "always fail on a 1" in?

Yep.
Always fail on a one does not help you hit a unit out of LOS.
Always fail on a one does not help you hit a unit beyond your weapon range.
Always fail on a one does not help you hit a unit that is in combat.
Always fail on a one does not help you hit a character behind a screen.

Not being able to hit A FEW units by A FEW of your units is not the end of the game.

IT IS THE GAME.

Get over it.

Units out of LoS, beyond range, in combat, or characters being screened are all game conditions that are a result of positioning on the table that can be interacted with and countered.
-2+ to hit is usually a case of list building and/or strategem use which cannot be countered or responded to.

 JimOnMars wrote:

Not being able to hit A FEW units by A FEW of your units is not the end of the game.

When did anyone say it was the end of the game? I've mostly been arguing out of principle.

In any case, this issue should not have been as contentious as it is considering how minute the change would be. I would have thought that "everyone hits on 6s" to be fairly neutral but... I guess not.
But your reasons are your own, and mine are mine so there's really no point in dragging this on.

On a more positive note, I am actually glad that orks did get the rule in the first place, and I hope it points to a better codex with shooting and melee both being viable and useful. I've got some Orks laying around that I could probably paint as Bad Moonz or Freebootaz (my faves) now that their shooting seems substantial. (here's hoping flash gits and lootas get a nice boost of some kind)

Oh, and I really hope they release a new deffkopta. I love the idea of it... the model not so much. It'd tie in really nicely with the buggies (which are also hella dope).

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

Spoiler:

 JimOnMars wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Because no unit in the game should end up in impossible to hit. Only total rookie game designer with zero idea on what good game consist would think that's good idea. No wonder thus GW has introduced such an idea.

You are so right, tneva! No unit should be impossible to hit!

Except units that are out of LOS.

Or units that are out of range.

Or units in combat.

Or characters behind a screen.

I presume these conditions were designed by "rookie game designers" also?

Do you also object to these 4 cases?

No. Naturally not those four.

If there are 4 cases where I can keep you from shooting at me, why can't there be five? Does the world end if there are five, tneva?

Depends, are we keeping the "always fail on a 1" in?

Yep.
Always fail on a one does not help you hit a unit out of LOS.
Always fail on a one does not help you hit a unit beyond your weapon range.
Always fail on a one does not help you hit a unit that is in combat.
Always fail on a one does not help you hit a character behind a screen.

Not being able to hit A FEW units by A FEW of your units is not the end of the game.

IT IS THE GAME.

Get over it.

Units out of LoS, beyond range, in combat, or characters being screened are all game conditions that are a result of positioning on the table that can be interacted with and countered.
-2+ to hit is usually a case of list building and/or strategem use which cannot be countered or responded to.

Yes and no. A baneblade parked at the end of the board invites suicide units to run up and try to shoot it...but that isn't really countering it, is it?

Characters being screened are not hittable if your army has no snipers. Killing the entire opponent's army just to get the character is a little silly, isn't it?

Most things with -3 or worse to hit are only immune in the shooting phase, so you can always assault them. This is way easier than killing Girlyman behind a baneblade screened by guardsmen by an army with no snipers...no?

There's no point discussing the always hit on 6s rule anymore.

GW will do what GW do and that will be that. Compared to other balances they need to make introducing this rule game-wide is fairly insubstantial. They have far greater balance concerns imo.

Anyway this thread is about Orktober and our new releases, not a rules debate.

We believe we've got 2 buggies/vehicles left to see;
Scrap jet
Ruck a truck squig buggy

Which do we think we're going to see previewed first? When do we think we'll see them? Keen to see what these squig buggies are.

GW have said that the new Ork releases aren't just vehicles and I think they said Ghazzy might get a new model. What else do people think we'll see?

imho i believe both unrevealed buggies will get ... revealed during the first set of WD leaks by the end of sept ... early oct

I don't think there are any large events where they could preview stuff between now and end of Orktober so realistically we have to wait until September 29 before getting any Ork news IMO.

And even then I'd wager that's the preorder date for Speed Freeks so the previews will be for that. By Orktober 6th I think we'll be drowning in Ork previews though

can't forget the white dwarf and possible leaks

I sometimes lose sleep at night when I consider all the heroic guardsmen who can't hit on 6's.

Any educated guesses for the cost of Speed Freeks?

It includes 6 bikes so that’s £48 (2 warbiker mob boxes x £24)
And
2 new war buggies which I’m guessing will retail for something like £22.50 each? (the same as other vehicles like Ork Truck, Rhino, Chimera) or maybe £29 like the Taurox? Or even £35 like the Goliath Truck?
And
Terrain £?
And Boards/counters/dice etc £?

130-150 is my guess

 aracersss wrote:
130-150 is my guess

Pounds? Dollars? Pigeons?

£100 seems likely I reckon. £80 if we're extremely lucky.

Honestly I think £80 is on the higher end of likely prices, since that's how much the Kill Team starter set is. I wouldn't be surprised if it's slightly less than that to be honest.

If it's £90 I'd be very surprised

If it's 90 quid I'll get it, as my flgs will sell it for 67.50 and that's a sweet deal in my eyes.

PiñaColada wrote:
Honestly I think £80 is on the higher end of likely prices, since that's how much the Kill Team starter set is. I wouldn't be surprised if it's slightly less than that to be honest.

If it's £90 I'd be very surprised

£80 is definitely not the higher end.
Could you imagine it being £60 or £70!? That’s insane. Though I’d love it for the amount of free stuff we’d get.


You have to remember it’s a GW boxed game, with rules and everything you need to play, not a start collecting Speed Orks.

I’d say £80-£90, depending on the price of the new vehicles, more likely £80 if I was throwing a guess in, but that’s the lower end I’d say.

Vehicles are probably £30 each unfortunately, which would make it one buggy and all the terrain/rules free

Danny76 wrote:

PiñaColada wrote:
Honestly I think £80 is on the higher end of likely prices, since that's how much the Kill Team starter set is. I wouldn't be surprised if it's slightly less than that to be honest.

If it's £90 I'd be very surprised

£80 is definitely not the higher end.
Could you imagine it being £60 or £70!? That’s insane. Though I’d love it for the amount of free stuff we’d get.


You have to remember it’s a GW boxed game, with rules and everything you need to play, not a start collecting Speed Orks.

I’d say £80-£90, depending on the price of the new vehicles, more likely £80 if I was throwing a guess in, but that’s the lower end I’d say.

Vehicles are probably £30 each unfortunately, which would make it one buggy and all the terrain/rules free

So is kill team and I'd argue that you get more stuff in that than this. A (most likely) way more fleshed out rulebook and a lot of terrain. If I had to guess a price I'd say it's £80 but I don't really see why it'd be higher than that. And considering you get 2 armigers for £45 I think the buggies will end up being the same or slightly less.

I'm just saying that I can't imagine any scenario where you don't at least get everything in the box sans the actual models for "free". So essentially it could be £90 I guess but I highly doubt it. If it's £100 then I imagine a lot of people will simply wait until they standalone release the buggies since a lot of us already have quite a few bikes.

Danny76 wrote:
Vehicles are probably £30 each unfortunately, which would make it one buggy and all the terrain/rules free

I hope not. Orks really don't need another unit where you have to pay £0.50 per point or more. Two buggies for £30 would be acceptable to me. Making them more expensive than trukks just means I will be kit-bashing them out of trukks.