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.

Sometimes it might be better if GW stated when things should happen in the sequence numerically rather than rely on words.

Much as FFG has been pissing me off lately i do wish GW would take a note from their books and just define everything.
Lot of key words that simply are not clarified in 40k. At all. And when rules actively call out that event its a major problem.

 flandarz wrote:
I *do* understand where it's supposed to be done. What I'm saying is that the wording is bad. Cuz until you fail that Save and assign that damage, your unit hasn't lost a Wound. Which makes it ambiguous as to whether it has been "wounded". And that's aside from the last part of the FAQ Grot Shield, which states a 2+ ends the "attack phase".

Again, I'm well aware of how Grot Shields is supposed to work. I'm just saying its wording is terrible and should be more clear.

Well luckily for us the grot strategem the faq entry gets around by that by not requiring unit losing a wound. Codex yes but as a result it also meant lascannon swept multiple grots while it was at it.

It's not ambigitious. You roll to wound on step 2 roll to wound. Each succesfull roll there is a wound. You get n wounds from there. You fulfill the grot screen requirement there.

If to wound stage is not enough for you and unsaved wound isn't needed what word would you use for this stage anyway? You need some term for succesfull rolls here. Wounds seems pretty logical to me for to wound stage but...

I'm getting the feeling you're digging in your heels on this one, so I'll just letcha have this, pal. You're absolutely right. There's no way that "wounds a unit" could possibly mean "when that unit loses a wound". New players would probably never get confused by the part of the attack phase and the measurement of "health" for their character sharing a name. GW has crafted a perfectly worded masterpiece that no one ever posts a message about in YMDC asking about clarification on.

This has been an issue since many editions though. GW quite clearly assumes "wounding" (verb) something means succeeding a to wound roll.

When GW talks about a model being damaged they refer to it as losing a wound (noun).

While I agree that the wound characteristic should be called hitpoints or something less ambiguous and Mortal Wounds making the whole thing even more confusing, the interpretation of the rule is quite clear.

 flandarz wrote:
I'm getting the feeling you're digging in your heels on this one, so I'll just letcha have this, pal. You're absolutely right. There's no way that "wounds a unit" could possibly mean "when that unit loses a wound". New players would probably never get confused by the part of the attack phase and the measurement of "health" for their character sharing a name. GW has crafted a perfectly worded masterpiece that no one ever posts a message about in YMDC asking about clarification on.

So what's the result if not wounding for rolling the to wound roll succesfully? Give answer to that one if you can. There's term for that one so if wound is not it then you must be able to provide better one.

But sure. Keep on TFG'ing yourself 5++ and 6+++. See how many opponents you have with that attitude.,

Considering you quoted my messages where I said "you guys are probably right" and "I'm well aware of how it works", I'm just gonna hafta assume you ignored those parts. You're arguing points that have already been resolved, pal. Currently, my stance is that GW should have worded the Stratagem more clearly. The fact that a portion of the attack rolls AND a characteristic on a unit's data sheet share the same name means that, even if everyone *knows* what its supposed to mean, there's a level of ambiguity in the wording that *should* have been clarified. Your argument appears to be that the wording is 100% clear. I disagree.

So, yes. When you roll "to Wound" you're "wounding" a target. However, when you remove Wounds from a unit, I'd say it'd be easy to assume you're also "wounding" it. That's the ambiguity. That's where the wording should have been more concise.

Hey man I have HEAPS of questions! Firstly, congrats on just killing it with Orks, inspirational mate.
I run a similar but different list to you, so my questions are basically gameplay tips, I do alright with this list, I have a positive win ratio but I'm not topping GTs yet.

Spoiler:

++ Battalion Detachment - Bad Moons ++
Big Mek (Index) : Kustom Force Field
Big Mek on Warbike (Index): Kustom Force Field
Big Mek W/ Shokk Attack Gun: Shokk Attack Gun

Gretchin 10x
Gretchin 10x
Gretchin 10x

Tankbustas 15x
Lootas 15x

++ Battalion Detachment Evil Sunz ++

Warboss on Warbike (index): Power Klaw, Warlord
Weirdboy
Weirdboy

Boyz x30 Choppas: Boss Nob: Big Choppa, Choppa
Boyz x30 Choppas: Boss Nob: Big Choppa, Choppa
Boyz x30 Choppas: Boss Nob: Big Choppa, Choppa

Painboy

Stormboyz x22: Boss Nob: Power Klaw, Slugga

* I have trouble using my small amount of grots effectively, I feel like my lootas often remain in exactly my deployment location or I da jump them to commit suicide. However, when I move my grots forward to gain a better foothold they get shot off the board and I'm still trapped with my loota mobility. What am I doing wrong here? How do you consider your loota placement in deployment? And what do you do in game to get more movement, if at all.

* ITC wise: Is Recon a trap? Is your list just a castle that cripples the opponent and then moves out? Or are you advancing forward with the boys from turn 1. What secondaries do you take in the mirror?

* How often do you deep strike your lootas? And with boyz squads, what variables do you consider important enough to force you to deepstrike boyz?

* What is your opinion on the 15 loota 10+ smasha gun lists that are running around? Do mek guns give over too many kill points?

* I have trouble using my small amount of grots effectively, I feel like my lootas often remain in exactly my deployment location or I da jump them to commit suicide. However, when I move my grots forward to gain a better foothold they get shot off the board and I'm still trapped with my loota mobility. What am I doing wrong here? How do you consider your loota placement in deployment? And what do you do in game to get more movement, if at all.

I think your army likely plays A LOT different than mine. I have so much (long range) shooting that people need to come at me or I will table them. So it means my loota placement is much easier since they're defensive. You need to use your lootas offensively. When I was playing my renegade open style list I had a lot more grots which allowed me to be aggressive. I would have 30 grots around a defensive position where lootas could start then have 30 grots run up to a better vantage point to be ready to block when I da jumped lootas there.

my general advice is that lootas are so devastating, you often only need them to shoot the right stuff for one turn so suiciding them isn't that bad. Especially if you can put them in a place where you opponent gets super excited and over extends themselves to kill the lootas.

* ITC wise: Is Recon a trap? Is your list just a castle that cripples the opponent and then moves out? Or are you advancing forward with the boys from turn 1. What secondaries do you take in the mirror?

For me, yeah, I generally don't do Recon. If I do recon it's because I'm supremely confident. I don't move things outside of my kff unless I absolutely must or shooting isn't a concern. So that often means I'm castled for several turn.
usually I reserve a 30 man and hide a 30 man then put the 10 man forward in a place it can hopefully go forward, mob up, and countercharge something mid field. The only things that ever go forward are my 90 grots.

I haven't played with new secondaries so I'm not sure about those. However, I usually took reaper, BB, HH, or Kingslayer and rely on my SAG mek to go kill characters.

* How often do you deep strike your lootas? And with boyz squads, what variables do you consider important enough to force you to deepstrike boyz?

I don't remember the last time I deep struck lootas. Even against 6 wyverns I put them on the table. I'd rather have my opponent throw everything they had in killing lootas (and the grots protecting them). It also very depends on how much damage my lootas can do. Often times the armies that are best at picking up lootas are also armies that lootas are basically just expensive boys against, like pure knights. Sure, shoot everything at my lootas, my lootas aren't gonna do jack in this match up anyway. Oftentimes I'll judge if my opponent is competent before hand and try to bait them with "poorly" placed lootas. I did this at adepticon vs the all flier army. Lootas aren't (super) useful in that match up and I saw he was running his knight towards my army so I put the lootas where I wanted his knight to go and then he traded his knight for lootas that I didn't need anyway.

Deep striking boys is tough, basically I think where the game will be at the beginning of turn 1 and the beginning of turn 2 and where boys will help the most. So for instance, if I'm playing kraken stealers, obviously I'm gonna have stealers in my face turn 1, so I need boys to push back, same with tzangors. If I'm playing against say, cultist spam, what good are boys in deployment zone turn 1? they're out of range of shootas, much less assault. You can usually achieve a similar goal by just putting boys all the way in the back of deployment zone so I'll do that to avoid spending CP but sometimes it can't be helped.

also, side note, I don't use green tide very often, not once at adepticon. I think people just do it reflexively but often times double swinging some unit that's already there is better than getting a new unit in the wrong place.


* What is your opinion on the 15 loota 10+ smasha gun lists that are running around? Do mek guns give over too many kill points?

Mek guns are pretty amazing. I could definitely see it working. I prefer having piles of CP to keep SAG mek and lootas double shooting though. Also the close combat of lootas isn't important in games your winning but it can be amazing in games your losing. Losing that could be rough.

kill points shmill points.
Life is too short to stress a few kill more points.

to quote my favorite fictional character Richard Sharpe "Just get in close and kill the bastards"

Hi guys, sorry for the OT, I´m about to start a small league between friends, 6/8 people, do you have any suggestion for an excel template or program to use?
Cheers

I only really got one question: do you think lists that *don't* feature the Loota Bomb are viable in the competitive scene? Could someone, say, make a competitive Speed Freekz list, or a Green Tide list? In other words, if the SSAG and Lootas were banned tomorrow, what options do you think we'd have to remain competitive?

 flandarz wrote:
I only really got one question: do you think lists that *don't* feature the Loota Bomb are viable in the competitive scene? Could someone, say, make a competitive Speed Freekz list, or a Green Tide list? In other words, if the SSAG and Lootas were banned tomorrow, what options do you think we'd have to remain competitive?

Currently, I think Orks are the strongest codex by far, broad alliances close the gap considerably but I still lean towards orks beating all of them, allies and all. Clock and fatigue of playing the army has lost me twice as many games as the enemy army.

If you take lootas out, then no, I don't think that's the case anymore. However, your questions was "viable" not "unbeatable". So yes, I think they are viable without lootas but I would likely start looking elsewhere to see if there is a chaos army that might be stronger but I'd likely stick with orks. As of now though, if you gave me a super fluffy 1500 point ork list and slapped lootas plus grots onto it I am likely going 4-2, maybe 5-1 (or 3-3 cause stupid northeast). That's bonkers.

You changed your question halfway through and included the SSAG. I think the SSAG is actually more important to orks remaining viable with different builds than people realize. For 80 points and a warlord trait he solves heavy army and tough characters which are basically the biggest problem with "not loota" builds. I think losing the SSAG would actually be much worse for ork viable competitive builds than losing lootas. He requires CP and that's it, however you want to build an army to give him CP you're free to do it. As opposed to Lootas which force you to write 500 points of your list the same way.

In summary, there definitely are "viable" non loota builds out there in that they can podium at GTs and midsize majors and maybe win with good matchups and some luck.

However, anyone building an ork list (currently) that doesn't start with loota battalion is not prioritizing winning. WHICH IS OKAY, but I don't think anyone who starts a description of their army list with "I don't like lootas so...." is someone you should listen to if your main goal is winning with the ork codex. Also, I think trying to win without them as a personal challenge is okay, like Ben Jurek did. However, (and I think he'd be first to admit) it is playing a bit on hard mode.

edited for misspelling and re-phrasing statement

Yeah, I forgot about him until halfway in. I just wanted to see what your thoughts were on the subject. I feel like we got a lot of good units, aside from the Loota and SSAG, so I wanted a professional opinion on it. I mean, I like both of those units and I use them, but I like having lots of threats on the field. Dakka Jets and Gorks seem to be pretty solid, and of course Mek Gunz. The eponymous Boy Blob still has a place in most lists too.

In any case, seems like I got my answer. Being: you'll still have a good army without them, but it won't be nearly as strong as it could be with them.

I think the Ork codex is up there in terms of playing mono codex.

Whether it is the strongest one I am not sure. It could be close.

We can still rely on Mek Gunz if we didn't have access to lootas. Morkanaut and gorkanaut can be reliable as well when buffed with strats. Plus killa klaw warboss and boys/weirdboys.

bonebreaka spam.

I personally don't think it's close. Orks have everything.

I think pure craftworld with a bunch of wave serpents is a strong single codex counter. However, it's weaker against pretty much everything else in comparison to orks even if the head to head is in eldars favor.

I think if I lost lootas I would definitely include a few more mek guns but probably would lean more on SSAG mek for big stuff and bad moon boys for little stuff.

I haven't tried the nauts, I don't have the models and given the option between infantry and vehicles I always pick infantry because they fit in my case.

The Gork and Mork Nauts are basically better Super Heavies than the Stompa. That's kind of the role they fill in your army.

I think a lot of stuff like naughts will be allowed to come out from hiding after reapers get their 5th nerf and castellan gets hit.

I have the model, just haven't bothered doing anything with it.

I think most folks are including it because it's another target for Kustom Ammo, which gives it a stupid amount of chaff clearing potential. I like it because your opponent can't ignore it to focus on your Lootas/Mek Gunz/SSAG. Drop it in a Tellyporta with some TBs and a KFF Mek inside and throw it in your opponent's face T2. It's tough enough and has enough Wounds that it will take your opponent focusing on it to take it down, then the TBs come out to play.

Stompa is just so bad you cant even compare anything to it.
3 Nauts or a stompa? Why...would you even attempt to ask such a question to yourself lol.

yeah, I get why you want one. But I am a firm believer in making the entire army similar defensive stats so if I got a naught it would require an entire army shift.

Which is hard to justify with how incredibly strong the army I'm currently running is.

Yup, random big thing in an army of small things is just asking for it to go poof immediately.
Everyone brings anti-tank stuff, theyre a fool to try a list that literally has no meltas/lascannons/battlecannon level weapons or something so disgustingly deadly in melee that it works too. Bring nothing those guns want to fight and you can basically ignore a lot of a force, bring 1-2 things and welp you had a big toy for a moment atleast.

Pretty much the only way i run the nauts are if i already got like 6+ other vehicles anyway. It tends to draw all the fire but often hangs on by a shred of life somehow the first turn it gets shot at, while the other vehicles are unharmed

yeah, unless all vehicles are SIGNIFICANTLY better, it's just not worth the trouble of transporting them.

I did have a blast playing 8 serpents and want to do something similar for trukks.

However, that's a local RTT fun army.

With my logic of

The best army includes lootas >
Lootas need lots of grots >
well if I'm getting lots of grots I mine as well get characters to fill out battalions >
If I already have this much infantry I mine as well go full infantry

I only bring a Gork when I'm gonna toss it in a TP for a T2 Ramming Speed Charge, after some solid anti-chaff fire on the screening units. If you can get it into CC, it'll last a lot longer.

I do feel that Gorks and Morks are rather wonderful units. I've had them do a rather delightful amount of damage with or without the dreadmob formation. The only thing holding them back is how geared most armies are to taking out knights, it's closest analog. Perhaps a buff to it's klaw damage would put it in that perfect zone. 5 or 4 damage flat feels about right.

Dreadmob formation doesnt really help a naut's output. Sure the fire twice stratagem is a thing, but i find it hard to field a naut and more than 2 battalions so i got the CP to burn on that on top of the other crap burning 3-6CP a turn lol.

Or by that did you mean a walker wall not the special detachment?

Given that we're talking about nauts now, how does the meka dred hold up to the Morkanaut and Gorkanaut when you're running a Dred Mob list? He has additional resilience with the degrading FNP save and he notably has a better chance actually hitting with most of his weapons thanks to BS4+. However, not being T8 is a big downside and he doesn't hit as hard in melee. The main reason why I ask is because I have 2 of them and I'm wondering if they're worth the bother. I guess at least they can benefit from Kulturs unlike Killa Kanz.

As you said the fact meka dread has kulturs gives it an edge.
(Killa kans are useless) but it depends on its role.
But deffskulls are nice, badmoons ok and evil suns is useful if you want the meka to have a kff and keep in range of those dajumped boys.

 vercingatorix wrote:

Spoiler:

* I have trouble using my small amount of grots effectively, I feel like my lootas often remain in exactly my deployment location or I da jump them to commit suicide. However, when I move my grots forward to gain a better foothold they get shot off the board and I'm still trapped with my loota mobility. What am I doing wrong here? How do you consider your loota placement in deployment? And what do you do in game to get more movement, if at all.

I think your army likely plays A LOT different than mine. I have so much (long range) shooting that people need to come at me or I will table them. So it means my loota placement is much easier since they're defensive. You need to use your lootas offensively. When I was playing my renegade open style list I had a lot more grots which allowed me to be aggressive. I would have 30 grots around a defensive position where lootas could start then have 30 grots run up to a better vantage point to be ready to block when I da jumped lootas there.

my general advice is that lootas are so devastating, you often only need them to shoot the right stuff for one turn so suiciding them isn't that bad. Especially if you can put them in a place where you opponent gets super excited and over extends themselves to kill the lootas.

* ITC wise: Is Recon a trap? Is your list just a castle that cripples the opponent and then moves out? Or are you advancing forward with the boys from turn 1. What secondaries do you take in the mirror?

For me, yeah, I generally don't do Recon. If I do recon it's because I'm supremely confident. I don't move things outside of my kff unless I absolutely must or shooting isn't a concern. So that often means I'm castled for several turn.
usually I reserve a 30 man and hide a 30 man then put the 10 man forward in a place it can hopefully go forward, mob up, and countercharge something mid field. The only things that ever go forward are my 90 grots.

I haven't played with new secondaries so I'm not sure about those. However, I usually took reaper, BB, HH, or Kingslayer and rely on my SAG mek to go kill characters.

* How often do you deep strike your lootas? And with boyz squads, what variables do you consider important enough to force you to deepstrike boyz?

I don't remember the last time I deep struck lootas. Even against 6 wyverns I put them on the table. I'd rather have my opponent throw everything they had in killing lootas (and the grots protecting them). It also very depends on how much damage my lootas can do. Often times the armies that are best at picking up lootas are also armies that lootas are basically just expensive boys against, like pure knights. Sure, shoot everything at my lootas, my lootas aren't gonna do jack in this match up anyway. Oftentimes I'll judge if my opponent is competent before hand and try to bait them with "poorly" placed lootas. I did this at adepticon vs the all flier army. Lootas aren't (super) useful in that match up and I saw he was running his knight towards my army so I put the lootas where I wanted his knight to go and then he traded his knight for lootas that I didn't need anyway.

Deep striking boys is tough, basically I think where the game will be at the beginning of turn 1 and the beginning of turn 2 and where boys will help the most. So for instance, if I'm playing kraken stealers, obviously I'm gonna have stealers in my face turn 1, so I need boys to push back, same with tzangors. If I'm playing against say, cultist spam, what good are boys in deployment zone turn 1? they're out of range of shootas, much less assault. You can usually achieve a similar goal by just putting boys all the way in the back of deployment zone so I'll do that to avoid spending CP but sometimes it can't be helped.

also, side note, I don't use green tide very often, not once at adepticon. I think people just do it reflexively but often times double swinging some unit that's already there is better than getting a new unit in the wrong place.


* What is your opinion on the 15 loota 10+ smasha gun lists that are running around? Do mek guns give over too many kill points?

Mek guns are pretty amazing. I could definitely see it working. I prefer having piles of CP to keep SAG mek and lootas double shooting though. Also the close combat of lootas isn't important in games your winning but it can be amazing in games your losing. Losing that could be rough.

kill points shmill points.
Life is too short to stress a few kill more points.

to quote my favorite fictional character Richard Sharpe "Just get in close and kill the bastards"

 vercingatorix wrote:

Spoiler:

* I have trouble using my small amount of grots effectively, I feel like my lootas often remain in exactly my deployment location or I da jump them to commit suicide. However, when I move my grots forward to gain a better foothold they get shot off the board and I'm still trapped with my loota mobility. What am I doing wrong here? How do you consider your loota placement in deployment? And what do you do in game to get more movement, if at all.

I think your army likely plays A LOT different than mine. I have so much (long range) shooting that people need to come at me or I will table them. So it means my loota placement is much easier since they're defensive. You need to use your lootas offensively. When I was playing my renegade open style list I had a lot more grots which allowed me to be aggressive. I would have 30 grots around a defensive position where lootas could start then have 30 grots run up to a better vantage point to be ready to block when I da jumped lootas there.

my general advice is that lootas are so devastating, you often only need them to shoot the right stuff for one turn so suiciding them isn't that bad. Especially if you can put them in a place where you opponent gets super excited and over extends themselves to kill the lootas.

* ITC wise: Is Recon a trap? Is your list just a castle that cripples the opponent and then moves out? Or are you advancing forward with the boys from turn 1. What secondaries do you take in the mirror?

For me, yeah, I generally don't do Recon. If I do recon it's because I'm supremely confident. I don't move things outside of my kff unless I absolutely must or shooting isn't a concern. So that often means I'm castled for several turn.
usually I reserve a 30 man and hide a 30 man then put the 10 man forward in a place it can hopefully go forward, mob up, and countercharge something mid field. The only things that ever go forward are my 90 grots.

I haven't played with new secondaries so I'm not sure about those. However, I usually took reaper, BB, HH, or Kingslayer and rely on my SAG mek to go kill characters.

* How often do you deep strike your lootas? And with boyz squads, what variables do you consider important enough to force you to deepstrike boyz?

I don't remember the last time I deep struck lootas. Even against 6 wyverns I put them on the table. I'd rather have my opponent throw everything they had in killing lootas (and the grots protecting them). It also very depends on how much damage my lootas can do. Often times the armies that are best at picking up lootas are also armies that lootas are basically just expensive boys against, like pure knights. Sure, shoot everything at my lootas, my lootas aren't gonna do jack in this match up anyway. Oftentimes I'll judge if my opponent is competent before hand and try to bait them with "poorly" placed lootas. I did this at adepticon vs the all flier army. Lootas aren't (super) useful in that match up and I saw he was running his knight towards my army so I put the lootas where I wanted his knight to go and then he traded his knight for lootas that I didn't need anyway.

Deep striking boys is tough, basically I think where the game will be at the beginning of turn 1 and the beginning of turn 2 and where boys will help the most. So for instance, if I'm playing kraken stealers, obviously I'm gonna have stealers in my face turn 1, so I need boys to push back, same with tzangors. If I'm playing against say, cultist spam, what good are boys in deployment zone turn 1? they're out of range of shootas, much less assault. You can usually achieve a similar goal by just putting boys all the way in the back of deployment zone so I'll do that to avoid spending CP but sometimes it can't be helped.

also, side note, I don't use green tide very often, not once at adepticon. I think people just do it reflexively but often times double swinging some unit that's already there is better than getting a new unit in the wrong place.


* What is your opinion on the 15 loota 10+ smasha gun lists that are running around? Do mek guns give over too many kill points?

Mek guns are pretty amazing. I could definitely see it working. I prefer having piles of CP to keep SAG mek and lootas double shooting though. Also the close combat of lootas isn't important in games your winning but it can be amazing in games your losing. Losing that could be rough.

kill points shmill points.
Life is too short to stress a few kill more points.

to quote my favorite fictional character Richard Sharpe "Just get in close and kill the bastards"

Aw gak you done with orks Jid? I took a foray into deathguard/daemons myself but the codex brought me right back.

No, I still love 'dem boyz. But I hate moving loads of infantry, which I have found mandatory for this edition's orks. In previous editions I have always run boyz in transports, but as neither trukk boyz nor battlewagon boyz are viable anymore, that's out of option. In perspective, even my 5th edition kan wall was only running 80 boyz - considered more than you could possibly kill in a game at that time.

So I'm currently aiming for a buggy/walker based army which I will take for a spin whenever possible, but I'm aware that I will not be able to beat an opponent who gets serious with it. So when it comes to details of ITC missions and beating castellan lists, I simply keep my mouth shut - I simply have no experience with that and I'm not huge fan of backseat advice.

In general, Death Guard are much more relaxed to play in large games and competitive matches, as you have no issues with running out of time and I feel that you need to pay a lot less attention to details like movement, piling etc in order to win games. A 2000 points game of Death Guard feels like a walk in the park, while the same game as orks makes you feel like you were run over by a bonekrusha.
So kudos to anyone playing four or five games in a row, but it's simply not for me.

In the end, both Death Guard and Orks are green, and green is da best!