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.

For those saying the Oldcrons were too much like Tyranids...seriously? That has nothing to do with the army's play-style,which I feel is far more important metric. If you want to complain about factions being too similar I don't think I need to start a list for you.

The Oldcrons could have used a few things to give them some variety and over time it got stale when they started to imply the Necrons had their hand in every evil plot, but compared to their current bank of quirky personalities the Oldcrons were far more menacing and intriguing. I would have preferred the C'Tan to be more grudging allies with the Necrons trapped in a similar circumstance than having either lord over the other, but I guess I can make my own back story.

My friend has played them since 3rd and he hated the Newcron lore so much he continued to use his old codex until we started houseruling the game.

 amanita wrote:
For those saying the Oldcrons were too much like Tyranids...seriously? That has nothing to do with the army's play-style,which I feel is far more important metric. If you want to complain about factions being too similar I don't think I need to start a list for you.

The Oldcrons could have used a few things to give them some variety and over time it got stale when they started to imply the Necrons had their hand in every evil plot, but compared to their current bank of quirky personalities the Oldcrons were far more menacing and intriguing. I would have preferred the C'Tan to be more grudging allies with the Necrons trapped in a similar circumstance than having either lord over the other, but I guess I can make my own back story.

My friend has played them since 3rd and he hated the Newcron lore so much he continued to use his old codex until we started houseruling the game.

Wrong thread?

Yes. Very weird how that happened.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Honestly the Snakebites Strategem isn't too expensive once you realize it affects the whole army. And of course the defensive trait is better vs AP0.

Otherwise yeah it's definitely weaker than Deffskulls for sure, who get THREE frickin bonuses instead of just one (and that one doesn't even stack with vehicles!).

3 frickin bonues but also bad relic and trait. Those bonuses are also bland in an army that isn't MSU oriented. Take the re-rolls, it's one of each per unit which makes things like single dudes with rokkits or KMB way better than before, but it's quite irrelevant in any typical ork units that is supposed to do the heavy job. The wreckers stratagem sound great on paper but on average means that 1-3 hits that usually don't wound this time do, and then the opponent must roll the saves, not a huge difference. The real Deathskull bonus is the 6++, while the re-rolls are good but many units don't really benefit from that and the third bonus is highly situational and stacks better with units that don't gain that much being deathskulls, like meganobz, which you probably don't want at competitive levels.

Deathskulls are no joke, that's for sure, but their kultur is far from being the obvious choice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Can I get like a summary?

Just wondering what the general thought is whether it's a good codex or like a GK codex

It's a solid codex, but I'd rate with a 8 or 8,5 something like Drukhari not orks. Higher votes are soups only and probably AM and Knights. Orks should get a 7 or 7,5 IMHO. If you don't have access to the index options 7 is maybe even generous.

Snakebites relic isn't terrible. If you get close enough it can do a lot of damage to buffer lines. However, i wish it was 9" range.

Bitharne wrote:


Everyone is crying that Tankbustas pop out and die after killing something...I have 12-15 of them, and then some, that require removal of a whole unit to deal with. As people have said: you're unwilling to change your list and want tp keep to the “old ways”. People focus on the “cool” things. Fire twice stratagem; cool and all...too bad it’s counter to what makes the best Ork list.

Now, if you’re upset you can’t play you’re 20-years on bad moons you love cuz of them that’s one thing; but if we’re talking pure competitive lists then Orks, in my opinion, are likely top of the heap (as in the strongest list in the game, period) as Deffskullz. If you can’t see why you might need to pull away from the “we’ve always done it this way” mindset.

To satisfy my curiosity, what is this Deathskulls list?

 amanita wrote:
For those saying the Oldcrons were too much like Tyranids...seriously? That has nothing to do with the army's play-style,which I feel is far more important metric. If you want to complain about factions being too similar I don't think I need to start a list for you.

The Oldcrons could have used a few things to give them some variety and over time it got stale when they started to imply the Necrons had their hand in every evil plot, but compared to their current bank of quirky personalities the Oldcrons were far more menacing and intriguing. I would have preferred the C'Tan to be more grudging allies with the Necrons trapped in a similar circumstance than having either lord over the other, but I guess I can make my own back story.

My friend has played them since 3rd and he hated the Newcron lore so much he continued to use his old codex until we started houseruling the game.

Get out of ere yah Tin'ed Git befor we smash yah back inta yah million year sleep again!

 Blackie wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Honestly the Snakebites Strategem isn't too expensive once you realize it affects the whole army. And of course the defensive trait is better vs AP0.

Otherwise yeah it's definitely weaker than Deffskulls for sure, who get THREE frickin bonuses instead of just one (and that one doesn't even stack with vehicles!).

3 frickin bonues but also bad relic and trait. Those bonuses are also bland in an army that isn't MSU oriented. Take the re-rolls, it's one of each per unit which makes things like single dudes with rokkits or KMB way better than before, but it's quite irrelevant in any typical ork units that is supposed to do the heavy job. The wreckers stratagem sound great on paper but on average means that 1-3 hits that usually don't wound this time do, and then the opponent must roll the saves, not a huge difference. The real Deathskull bonus is the 6++, while the re-rolls are good but many units don't really benefit from that and the third bonus is highly situational and stacks better with units that don't gain that much being deathskulls, like meganobz, which you probably don't want at competitive levels.

Deathskulls are no joke, that's for sure, but their kultur is far from being the obvious choice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Can I get like a summary?

Just wondering what the general thought is whether it's a good codex or like a GK codex

It's a solid codex, but I'd rate with a 8 or 8,5 something like Drukhari not orks. Higher votes are soups only and probably AM and Knights. Orks should get a 7 or 7,5 IMHO. If you don't have access to the index options 7 is maybe even generous.

The Warlord trait isn't that bad, but I'll grant you the relic not being good just like anything repair related.

However, to say the Kulture only works with MSU is silly to the point you likely didn't read it. 6++ is excellent for an army like Orks in the first place (and really helps those large blobs survive) and getting Objective Secured for all your Infantry is bonkers. That large unit of Kommandos now takes objectives better than other army's troop choices.

The reroll is almost an afterthought.

SemperMortis wrote:


Alright boyz, lets take another trip down bowling ball alley.

30 Boyz vs 30 Firewarriors. Turn 1 firewarriors get 30 shots, 15 hits, 10 wounds and about 9 dead Orkz. Orkz are fearless and move and advance 9 inches. they are out of charge range. Tau are now in double tap fun range and fire 60 shots, 30 hits, 20 wounds and yay hte ork boyz which are super awesome and just as good as before are now dead to the last boy.

But hey, that is ok because we can now add in buffing characters and all sorts of facets to prove that ork boyz are better.....so long as we don't add in corresponding Tau buffs that is.....

Lets just go with overwatch, 30 Firewarriors get 60 shots for 10 hits and 7ish wounds. that is 6 dead Orkz just to overwatch on a similar number of models. Add in all the buffs that give them better overwatch and linked overwatch and really quickly that more than doubles, but for the same of argument lets say that it only doubles. so orkz lose 12 Boyz to overwatch and get into CC with somehow all 30 firewarriors. They only have 18 left so now they get 3 attacks each instead of 4 so now its 54 attacks, 36 hits and 24 wounds (T3 right?) So against that 4+ save that is only 12 wounds. So by using Da Jump or even the strat to deep strike turn 2 we are still pulling even with Tau firewarriors. And on top of all of that you have to remember that Tau firewarriors aren't even seen as the best unit in the codex. So our boyz which were competitive at least against firewarriors if you could get them into CC are now dead to the last boy by turn 2 to a similar number of firewarriors unless we deep strike in which case we draw even....which isn't good news because they can fall back and blast you off the table still.

No, boyz at 7ppm are not ok in the current game. Unless every other factions troops go up in prices this is nonsense.

This is the absolute dumbest most disingenuous way to do analysis.

Let's do 30 fire warriors vs 6 Grotesques! So let's see, no T6 or 6+++ for the Grotesques...

Tau:
- 30 * .5 * .5 * .666 = 5 wounds

Grotestques:
- Advance 10 inches, distance is now 14"

Tau:
- Move back 6", distance is now 20"
- 30 * .5 * .5 * .666 = 5 wounds

Grotesques:
- Advance 11", distance is now 9"

Tau:
- Move back 6", distance is now 15"
- 60 * .5 * .5 * .666 = 10 wounds

Grotesques:
- Move 7", distance is now 8", charge
60 * .167 * .5 * .666 = 3.3 wounds

The Grotesques are now dead. OMG YOU GUYZ GROTESQUES R BAD!

Or, you know the Boyz could hop into a Trukk. Why that's even cheaper so 12 Boyz and a Trukk vs 21 FW.

Tau :
- 21 * .5 * .333 * .5 = 1.7 wounds

Orks:
- Advance 15", distance is now 9"
- Shooting kills 1

Tau:
- Move back 6", distance is now 15"
- 40 * .5 * .333 * .5 = 3.3 wounds

Orks:
- Hop out 8", distance is 7"
- Trukk moves 12", distance is 3"
- Shooting kills 2
- Trukk charges and loses 1 wound

The Fire Warriors are now stuck and unable to shoot after falling back. The Boyz have a very high chance of a 7" charge. Game over.

The joke with that argument is you can do the same for Tau... But I don't think units should be priced on what else is in your codex... not everyone wants a trukk and not everyone owns a trukk. This would be like saying "Well you see with marines, all you have to do is take a Knight and a Baneblade and they're golden!".

 lolman1c wrote:
The joke with that argument is you can do the same for Tau... But I don't think units should be priced on what else is in your codex... not everyone wants a trukk and not everyone owns a trukk. This would be like saying "Well you see with marines, all you have to do is take a Knight and a Baneblade and they're golden!".

You can do the same for about any unit.

Slow walking Boyz against 30" anti-infantry guns is always going to wind up making them look bad and has no rational basis for determining whether or not they're worth 7 points.

 lolman1c wrote:
Yeah, I've always said that cp were supposed to be one off game changers, not crutches for your entire army. Gone are the fun days where your missile would do more damage because you painted it yellow.

I hated, with a passion, 7th edition formations but at least they brought fluffy armies to the table. At the start of 8th the most common list you'd see was robo toilet seat man leading an army of conscripts. XD lore wise half those soliders would gave heart attacks from seeing the Emperor's son!

Yup, this is what my biggest complaint about this codex boils down to. Almost every unit that is considered "Good" requires CP and strats to be listed there. I don't see people taking lootas because they are good on their own, they require CP to even be competitive. Same thing for the Nautz, I doubt we will see someone play a competitive game with 1 or more Nautz slowly walking up the field, no they will arrive Via teleporta and be in charge range Turn 2 with a 3D6 charge.

I was hoping for a good codex with lots of good units that only got better with strats, not a ok codex with rather bad units that are better than average when you spend 2-5CP on them a turn.

 Daedalus81 wrote:


You can do the same for about any unit.

Slow walking Boyz against 30" anti-infantry guns is always going to wind up making them look bad and has no rational basis for determining whether or not they're worth 7 points.

Yes thank you daedalus for pointing out that my ridiculous BOWLING BALL ALLEY COMPARISON was ridiculous, thank god you came along to point out that one off comparisons are borderline useless...almost like I didn't call it BOWLING BALL ALLEY.

I am merely highlighting that a troop choice in a RANGED focus army stayed the same cost even after it got numerous buffs and strats that make it significantly better at its primary mission, shooting. Where as our close combat oriented troops got more expensive because they gained 16% more hits with S4 weapons, either 12 inch or 24inch ranged. Ork boyz require HORDES to function because trukk boyz are still useless. (11 boyz and free nob = 33 S4 attacks and 4 S5 attacks if they all have choppas), that sounds like a lot but even against bog standard Marines that works out to less than 5 dead Marines a turn, and that is being generous, assuming none die in overwatch. My basic rule of combat is Rule of 3, so 12 boyz plus at rukk cost 84+64 = 148pts, assuming no upgrades they should be killing 1/3rd of their points a turn to be considered good. Turn 1 they aren't doing anything because they are in a transport, so round 2 they need to be dishing out the pain and the fact is that they aren't. The biggest drawback is obviously the 64pts on a transport that is basically useless except as an overwatch eater after it drops its passengers off, bringing that down even lower would help but than you would have to lower its durability because even as pathetic as it currently is, its still 10 T6 wounds with a 4+ save.

Again though, if Ork boyz are still so damned good why are we no longer seeing 180+ boyz a game? keeping in mind I am fine with that, I honestly am not a fan of Horde playstyle, but if ork boyz get nerfed, going 180+ a game to about 60 on average (personal observations from games, local store and lists I've seen here on dakka) than our other units should have gotten a lot better; They didn't. We only got better because we got a ton of strats that require us to invest 60-120pts in grotz so we can gain more CP and spam strats every turn.

I'd love to bring 120 boyz to a game but it's taking so long to paint them all. XD I have 55 painted so far... it's a slow process as I only paint for leisure but good thing is I tend to not buy to many new things if I have old things to paint.

SemperMortis wrote:

Again though, if Ork boyz are still so damned good why are we no longer seeing 180+ boyz a game?

1) That was the only really viable list prior to the codex
2) It's boring
3) It's incredibly difficult to come in under time at a tournament
4) There are tools that make getting stuff up front a lot easier so redundant blobs are not necessary
5) Shiny new toys

 Daedalus81 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

Again though, if Ork boyz are still so damned good why are we no longer seeing 180+ boyz a game?

1) That was the only really viable list prior to the codex
2) It's boring
3) It's incredibly difficult to come in under time at a tournament
4) There are tools that make getting stuff up front a lot easier so redundant blobs are not necessary
5) Shiny new toys

1) Irrelevant to competitive gaming
2) Irrelevant to competitive gaming
3) Irrelevant to competitive gaming
4) Irrelevant to competitive gaming (Because why wouldn't I spend the CP to just deep strike 120+boyz turn 2 and deep strike another 60 turn 1 and turn 2 using "Da Jump".
5) Irrelevant to competitive gaming

So your argument is....Irrelevant to competitive gaming.

Now if you want to make all of your arguments from this point forward from a FLGS, open/narrative play mindset that is up to you. But if you want to talk about a unit being competitive or not you will need better arguments.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

Again though, if Ork boyz are still so damned good why are we no longer seeing 180+ boyz a game?

1) That was the only really viable list prior to the codex
2) It's boring
3) It's incredibly difficult to come in under time at a tournament
4) There are tools that make getting stuff up front a lot easier so redundant blobs are not necessary
5) Shiny new toys

1) Irrelevant to competitive gaming
2) Irrelevant to competitive gaming
3) Irrelevant to competitive gaming
4) Irrelevant to competitive gaming (Because why wouldn't I spend the CP to just deep strike 120+boyz turn 2 and deep strike another 60 turn 1 and turn 2 using "Da Jump".
5) Irrelevant to competitive gaming

So your argument is....Irrelevant to competitive gaming.

Now if you want to make all of your arguments from this point forward from a FLGS, open/narrative play mindset that is up to you. But if you want to talk about a unit being competitive or not you will need better arguments.

LOL, ok. I think we're done here.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

LOL, ok. I think we're done here.

Sounds good to me, if you want to present a valid argument let me know, in the meantime i hope you have a great weekend.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

Again though, if Ork boyz are still so damned good why are we no longer seeing 180+ boyz a game?

1) That was the only really viable list prior to the codex
2) It's boring
3) It's incredibly difficult to come in under time at a tournament
4) There are tools that make getting stuff up front a lot easier so redundant blobs are not necessary
5) Shiny new toys

1) Irrelevant to competitive gaming
2) Irrelevant to competitive gaming
3) Irrelevant to competitive gaming
4) Irrelevant to competitive gaming (Because why wouldn't I spend the CP to just deep strike 120+boyz turn 2 and deep strike another 60 turn 1 and turn 2 using "Da Jump".
5) Irrelevant to competitive gaming

So your argument is....Irrelevant to competitive gaming.

Now if you want to make all of your arguments from this point forward from a FLGS, open/narrative play mindset that is up to you. But if you want to talk about a unit being competitive or not you will need better arguments.

1. If you only ever run one type of list, that list is going to be countered
2. The aim of most games is to have fun and also to win
3. I think that means you can now move all your models faster, so you don't get penalised for slow play
4. There are just better ways now like you said yourself with deepstriking the boys
5. It's a new codex, people are going to try out everything until the top tier combinations have cemented

 kastelen wrote:

1. If you only ever run one type of list, that list is going to be countered
2. The aim of most games is to have fun and also to win
3. I think that means you can now move all your models faster, so you don't get penalised for slow play
4. There are just better ways now
5. It's a new codex, people are going to try out everything until the top tier combinations have cemented

1) So how good are those Imperial Soup lists with Guard CP batteries, imperial knights and sprinkled with Slamguinius's doing these days? If the list is good than you either build a tournament list to counter that 1 list and lose the event or you try to build a better list that can take all comers (tournament all comers that is)

2) Yes it is, but I am talking about competitive gaming, IE Tournaments. Trust me, not to many ork players for the last 18 months or so were going to events or hell even remotely competitive games going "Yippie, I get to bring 210+ models" You play with what you can compete with. I for one am happy boyz are no longer being spammed like that, but I was rather hoping they would stay the same as far as competitive level and other things would be brought up to be better so I would have to actually choose between them. As it stands, my competitive lists feature 60 boyz and even than I think its too much and am thinking of just saving 360pts and just take another 20 grotz.

3) I never ran into time problems when I ran horde armies. You have to move quickly but that was it, its mostly WAAC/TFG players who were ending games top of turn 2 and maybe into turn 3 because they slow played.

4) No, no there aren't lol. If you want to get 120 boyz up the field as quickly, effeciently and safely as possible, than deepstriking 120 boyz turn 2, da jumping boyz turns 1 and 2 are the best ways, it guarantees charge range (8' now with evil sunz) and it guarantees you will be getting there either at full strength or damn close to it, which is really important since Boyz gain 25% more attacks when above 20 models in a unit. If anything, this codex's strats and klanz make boyz even faster and more likely to get a solid turn 2 charge off, but they aren't taken in blobs like they were.

5) It took us about a week to realize Boyz were going to be the #1 thing for our Index, it took us about 6 hours or so to realize that this codex is "CODEX: DEEP STRIKE" From a competitive standpoint. The only real difference I am seeing in top tier list is what is jumped/teleported.

Meh, competitive tournaments are such a small minority of games I say screw thinking about them half the time... if it was up to me all tournament players would be forced to be analysed with a fun o-meter and if any of them were not having fun, regardless of winning or losing, then they get banned from 40k forever and arrested on sight if they're within a mile of a 40k store.

I'm very bitter about competitive players since they killed many of my games in the past. And I'm talking about outright killed them... developers focused on them too much, rest of the old player base left because the game was jo longer about having fun, only people left now had a pure competitive game (or in one case a game retrofitted poorly to be more competitive ) moaned about for a week before moving onto the next big thing. Nothing wrong with wanting to win and being competitive but pure competitive players can all become chess players for all I care.

 lolman1c wrote:
Meh, competitive tournaments are such a small minority of games I say screw thinking about them half the time... if it was up to me all tournament players would be forced to be analysed with a fun o-meter and if any of them were not having fun, regardless of winning or losing, then they get banned from 40k forever and arrested on sight if they're within a mile of a 40k store.

I'm very bitter about competitive players since they killed many of my games in the past. And I'm talking about outright killed them... developers focused on them too much, rest of the old player base left because the game was jo longer about having fun, only people left now had a pure competitive game (or in one case a game retrofitted poorly to be more competitive ) moaned about for a week before moving onto the next big thing. Nothing wrong with wanting to win and being competitive but pure competitive players can all become chess players for all I care.

It is my opinion that competitive players make a game better/more balanced. Without competitive players trying to maximize unit potential and army potential the broken combos would never get fixed. Plus, a big profit motive for this game is created by the competitive players.

I feel like there's a balance to be struck. Competitive players are needed to make sure that some things are reigned in and to find exploits or issues that the rules designers can't or don't find in their play-testing and thus tweak accordingly. On the other hand, you also want to consider flavour and fluff with regards to how the faction should actually function. I find a lot of WAAC players get tunnel vision regarding what's acceptable and what's trash, and it can often lead to binary and often arbitrary unit design where a unit has to overexceed in one or even several areas to worthy of being included in an army. This often leads to the cookie cutter netlists we see and while that's not necessarily a bad thing in of itself, it is indicative that their expertise doesn't necessarily always lay with thinking outside of the box.

Have you seen the ork Dakka jet?
16 str 6 ap-1 shots hitting on 3's? Kiss fire warriors goodbye. Competitive ork lists are going to have 3 of these. No question about it.

Then you can DA jump a 30 man boy with an 8" reroll charge.
Advance and charge turn 1 with 30 storm boys with a biker warboss. All the while you got 10 nobs in a truck coming up the middle for auto charge turn 2. While 9 or so smash guns are ripping your army apart with d3 d6 damage shots for like 45 points. The army is so good it's not even funny.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Have you seen the ork Dakka jet?
16 str 6 ap-1 shots hitting on 3's? Kiss fire warriors goodbye. Competitive ork lists are going to have 3 of these. No question about it.

Then you can DA jump a 30 man boy with an 8" reroll charge.
Advance and charge turn 1 with 30 storm boys with a biker warboss. All the while you got 10 nobs in a truck coming up the middle for auto charge turn 2. While 9 or so smash guns are ripping your army apart with d3 d6 damage shots for like 45 points. The army is so good it's not even funny.

Don't get me wrong, dakkajets ain't bad, but they definitely do not hit on 3's against fire warriors, I'm assuming you're including the stratagem that gives them +1 to hit? That only applies to units with fly. Otherwise, dakkajets only hit on a 4+ at best, and that's assuming they target only one unit. You might be able to get 3+ if you make them freebootas and you manage to kill something within 24" of it, but most people will run it as Bad Moonz. They're also fairly fragile as far as flyers go.

I think its a very strong codex will yield results.

They are also flyers. So no objective taking, doesn't count on being on the table for the purpose of determining sudden death, is forced to move 20" a turn and can only turn 90 degrees, and if it fails to do this it will die.

The best way to use it is to fly around in circles in your back field, and that's dependent on terrain and model placement.
I mean, its a good unit, but I'd rather have something that will go exactly where I tell it to go without worrying about it getting blown up next turn because it can't complete its 20" move without landing on a ratling or something.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
They are also flyers. So no objective taking, doesn't count on being on the table for the purpose of determining sudden death, is forced to move 20" a turn and can only turn 90 degrees, and if it fails to do this it will die.

The best way to use it is to fly around in circles in your back field, and that's dependent on terrain and model placement.
I mean, its a good unit, but I'd rather have something that will go exactly where I tell it to go without worrying about it getting blown up next turn because it can't complete its 20" move without landing on a ratling or something.

Yeah, certainly not an be-all, end-all, type of unit. Just a solid flyer unit.

 lolman1c wrote:
Meh, competitive tournaments are such a small minority of games I say screw thinking about them half the time... if it was up to me all tournament players would be forced to be analysed with a fun o-meter and if any of them were not having fun, regardless of winning or losing, then they get banned from 40k forever and arrested on sight if they're within a mile of a 40k store.

I'm very bitter about competitive players since they killed many of my games in the past. And I'm talking about outright killed them... developers focused on them too much, rest of the old player base left because the game was jo longer about having fun, only people left now had a pure competitive game (or in one case a game retrofitted poorly to be more competitive ) moaned about for a week before moving onto the next big thing. Nothing wrong with wanting to win and being competitive but pure competitive players can all become chess players for all I care.

And so your answer to that has been to spit acid, attempt to chase away players, put people down, and otherwise be the shining definition of "Casual at all cost". Color me unsympathetic.

What I'm unhappy about is that it looks like mek guns are still the top choice for shooting and grots will be spammed for CP batteries. I was hoping ork armies going forward would look more like ork armies.

 Grimskul wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Have you seen the ork Dakka jet?
16 str 6 ap-1 shots hitting on 3's? Kiss fire warriors goodbye. Competitive ork lists are going to have 3 of these. No question about it.

Then you can DA jump a 30 man boy with an 8" reroll charge.
Advance and charge turn 1 with 30 storm boys with a biker warboss. All the while you got 10 nobs in a truck coming up the middle for auto charge turn 2. While 9 or so smash guns are ripping your army apart with d3 d6 damage shots for like 45 points. The army is so good it's not even funny.

Don't get me wrong, dakkajets ain't bad, but they definitely do not hit on 3's against fire warriors, I'm assuming you're including the stratagem that gives them +1 to hit? That only applies to units with fly. Otherwise, dakkajets only hit on a 4+ at best, and that's assuming they target only one unit. You might be able to get 3+ if you make them freebootas and you manage to kill something within 24" of it, but most people will run it as Bad Moonz. They're also fairly fragile as far as flyers go.

They got a 4+ save - which is weak - but that's not really an issue. You are going to get a save vs a lot of guns - and most anti tank guns that shoot you don't give something like a storm raven or a storm talon a save ether - or they will get a 6+. IDK about what trait is best - freebootas does seem like the best one for them though.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:

 lolman1c wrote:
Meh, competitive tournaments are such a small minority of games I say screw thinking about them half the time... if it was up to me all tournament players would be forced to be analysed with a fun o-meter and if any of them were not having fun, regardless of winning or losing, then they get banned from 40k forever and arrested on sight if they're within a mile of a 40k store.

I'm very bitter about competitive players since they killed many of my games in the past. And I'm talking about outright killed them... developers focused on them too much, rest of the old player base left because the game was jo longer about having fun, only people left now had a pure competitive game (or in one case a game retrofitted poorly to be more competitive ) moaned about for a week before moving onto the next big thing. Nothing wrong with wanting to win and being competitive but pure competitive players can all become chess players for all I care.

And so your answer to that has been to spit acid, attempt to chase away players, put people down, and otherwise be the shining definition of "Casual at all cost". Color me unsympathetic.

What I'm unhappy about is that it looks like mek guns are still the top choice for shooting and grots will be spammed for CP batteries. I was hoping ork armies going forward would look more like ork armies.

Yep, and I couldn't care less.