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.

 hollow one wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Some of you must have missed the fact that the win rate for Orks has been steadily deceasing for some time and now sits at sub 50%.

We are no longer a top level faction. Tyranids perform better.

We're at 48% win rate, including all the jokers who bring trash lists, of which orks bring in abundance. We are 7% of the field and at 9% TWIP, meaning there are a higher percentage of players going undefeated than would be expected based on our field representation. What this means is that good players are outperforming expectations, probably because we have the tools to win but are a complex army to play. We are not a point and shoot list like knights (who perform exactly as expected), and thanks to every amateur that thinks you're supposed to run forward all game as orks, we get a lot of unfavorable data injected into our totals.

And if you look at the last two months of results, there has not been a single weekend where orks have not come top 4 in a GT/Major, with something around 5 events Orks coming first in that time frame. There are roughly 16 podium placements made by orks since 1st June, by contrast there have been 3 tyranids. Out of the recent ETC singles event Orks came 10th and 14th, nids best result was 50th.

Don't just throw out a percentage as if it means something. Data is more complicated than that. If you want to do well at an event, you would clearly play Orks over Nids. Orks are in a good spot right now, we may not be the best army in the game, but we are up there.

Nope. Not having you dispute the facts by claiming that there are a high proportion of 'jokers' that bring 'trash lists'. I would actually argue the opposite - given our faction has been so poor historically we actually have a higher proportion of stronger players.

48% is sub 50% which is exactly what I claimed. You don't need to cite 40k stats - where do you think I got my info from?

The reason we have a high TWIP is because our most competitive build is very hit or miss. It either dominates or is easily countered. The number of counters to the list is growing all the time with each release.

Random statistical analyses aside the reason we have such a proportion of podium finishes is because, again, we are a very swingy army. I also note that our most successful finishes seem to be in smaller events - which is almost certainly because those players didn't meet their counters.

A dropping, sub 50% win rate is not 'in a good spot' in my opinion. Other armies are literally getting buffed while we stagnate or receive nerfs. The 48% win rate you highlighted includes our wins from mob up Lootas, for example. I don't know why you're so anti the facts the data presents but it is abundantly obvious we are on a downward trend in terms of competitive viability (and have been for some time I might add). Our win rate is dropping. Other faction's win rates are increasing. We are dropping below factions generally considered to be middle to bottom tier. That does not describe a top tier army.

E - I feel like you're forgetting that Tyranids can and almost certainly will soup with GSC/AM which makes them far more viable?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
The reason we have a high TWIP is because our most competitive build is very hit or miss. It either dominates or is easily countered. The number of counters to the list is growing all the time with each release.

If it was hit or miss at even amounts, the TWIP would match the field representation. But that is not the case. You dont understand these numbers. And even when you listen to the people who create these data they tell you it is dubious to just interpret win %, it is not a meaningful individual statistic.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Random statistical analyses aside the reason we have such a proportion of podium finishes is because, again, we are a very swingy army. I also note that our most successful finishes seem to be in smaller events - which is almost certainly because those players didn't meet their counters.

So ignoring statistics and then minimizing our wins, ignoring our overperforming TWIP, and focusing on the random path to victory boiling to the top. Basically choose your own adventure in bias?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
A dropping, sub 50% win rate is not 'in a good spot' in my opinion. Other armies are literally getting buffed while we stagnate or receive nerfs. The 48% win rate you highlighted includes our wins from mob up Lootas, for example.

Half the field is below 50% win rate, and the highest win rate is 55%. The spread is very narrow, the meta is in a good place. And see my previous post as to why focusing on this one number is not meaningful, since nids have a 49% win rate and I clearly outlined that Orks are better in that post.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I don't know why you're so anti the facts the data presents but it is abundantly obvious we are on a downward trend in terms of competitive viability (and have been for some time I might add). Our win rate is dropping. Other faction's win rates are increasing. We are dropping below factions generally considered to be middle to bottom tier. That does not describe a top tier army.

I was never arguing with the fact that we were dropping, clearly the 25 Loota nerf hurt us. But we went from being one of, if not the best, army in the game, to something a little more reasonable. The sky isn't falling.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
E - I feel like you're forgetting that Tyranids can and almost certainly will soup with GSC/AM which makes them far more viable?

I was only focusing on Nids because you made a vapid comparison to orks in your post, and it was an easy target to explain why your focus on one number (win percentage) is not meaningful.

Our disagreement here is simple, you seem to think that 48% winrate means orks lose more than half of their games and that beacuse that number is dropping we are no longer top tier. I am merely shifting those goalposts. Yes the winrate is dropping, because we were THE best army in the game and now we are merely in the top 5-ish. Does that mean we need buffs? Probably not.

I understand that it sucks not getting free wins through list building, and that it is difficult to play strategically, and not blame dice, luck, or opposing armies countering us. But if people merely focused on how to win with the tools they are given, rather than focus on a win percentage as an excuse for why they are losing, the those people might get better! There is literally no reason why steve pampreen, rich kilton, or liam hacket are all consistently winning tournaments with orks and we are not. There is NO REASON other than they are better players.

 hollow one wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Some of you must have missed the fact that the win rate for Orks has been steadily deceasing for some time and now sits at sub 50%.

We are no longer a top level faction. Tyranids perform better.

We're at 48% win rate, including all the jokers who bring trash lists, of which orks bring in abundance. We are 7% of the field and at 9% TWIP, meaning there are a higher percentage of players going undefeated than would be expected based on our field representation. What this means is that good players are outperforming expectations, probably because we have the tools to win but are a complex army to play. We are not a point and shoot list like knights (who perform exactly as expected), and thanks to every amateur that thinks you're supposed to run forward all game as orks, we get a lot of unfavorable data injected into our totals.

And if you look at the last two months of results, there has not been a single weekend where orks have not come top 4 in a GT/Major, with something around 5 events Orks coming first in that time frame. There are roughly 16 podium placements made by orks since 1st June, by contrast there have been 3 tyranids. Out of the recent ETC singles event Orks came 10th and 14th, nids best result was 50th.

Don't just throw out a percentage as if it means something. Data is more complicated than that. If you want to do well at an event, you would clearly play Orks over Nids. Orks are in a good spot right now, we may not be the best army in the game, but we are up there.

Amen to this. I played Nids when the codex just went out and I got my A.s.s. whopped anyway.
I started with Orks before codex and spent 6 months training and finding a good list that I like and guess what? In 3 tournaments i got top 500 in ITC. There are SO MANY orks players out there and even more vanilla players that just copy and paste somebody else list and hopes to win with it without even understanding the mechanics. I´m winning like never, good orks players are winning everywhere and honestly, those poor SM needed a bump.
I Own a BA army that i LOVE but that is impossible to field because vs any decent opponent, marines dies like flies.
Play your army, focus on making less mistakes, don´t change list and try to be a better player. You might have 1 bad game in 20 where dices are just insane, but focus on the mission and try to reflect at home what could YOU had done differently. If you cannot understand why you lost, you WILL lose again.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
So the new White Scars stuff scares the bejebus out of me.
One of the main people i play is a white scars and he basically just got army-wide anti-multiwound T3 onward gaining both +1 AP on melee weapons and +1 damage.
The hell? At the rate of attacks im expecting with Shock Assault with poweraxe stormshield bikers he's going to butcher everything that isnt flying in melee after his ridiculous rate of fire on my boyz
Unless their points skyrocketed, i dont see how i could possibly face 19 white cars (4 characters following them) once that dex drops.

3 Poweraxes (S5 AP-3 2D) on T3 onward hitting stupid reliably each....

Howabout ultramarine aggressors? 12d6 s4 -1 autohit that will get to range t1. That is 21 dead orks. Pretty much only defence is be in tellyport. And not even sure that's worst you will face...

Gw takes offensive power to extreme with new codex.

tneva82 wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
So the new White Scars stuff scares the bejebus out of me.
One of the main people i play is a white scars and he basically just got army-wide anti-multiwound T3 onward gaining both +1 AP on melee weapons and +1 damage.
The hell? At the rate of attacks im expecting with Shock Assault with poweraxe stormshield bikers he's going to butcher everything that isnt flying in melee after his ridiculous rate of fire on my boyz
Unless their points skyrocketed, i dont see how i could possibly face 19 white cars (4 characters following them) once that dex drops.

3 Poweraxes (S5 AP-3 2D) on T3 onward hitting stupid reliably each....

Howabout ultramarine aggressors? 12d6 s4 -1 autohit that will get to range t1. That is 21 dead orks. Pretty much only defence is be in tellyport. And not even sure that's worst you will face...

Gw takes offensive power to extreme with new codex.

How do you get them into range T1?

 Jidmah wrote:
Yeah, I remember how GSC handflamers were supposed to be the end of the world, then slanesh chain guns and now whatever combo that is supposed to be.

A squad of IF agressors will pulverize a unit of boyz under the current rules, a few additional dead are nothing to write home about.

Ability to move and shoot twice for aggressors is new. As is ability to have transport that can move and then have guys come out

 JNAProductions wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
So the new White Scars stuff scares the bejebus out of me.
One of the main people i play is a white scars and he basically just got army-wide anti-multiwound T3 onward gaining both +1 AP on melee weapons and +1 damage.
The hell? At the rate of attacks im expecting with Shock Assault with poweraxe stormshield bikers he's going to butcher everything that isnt flying in melee after his ridiculous rate of fire on my boyz
Unless their points skyrocketed, i dont see how i could possibly face 19 white cars (4 characters following them) once that dex drops.

3 Poweraxes (S5 AP-3 2D) on T3 onward hitting stupid reliably each....

Howabout ultramarine aggressors? 12d6 s4 -1 autohit that will get to range t1. That is 21 dead orks. Pretty much only defence is be in tellyport. And not even sure that's worst you will face...

Gw takes offensive power to extreme with new codex.

How do you get them into range T1?

By the power of whining without thinking about rules. Duh

Ignore him.

 JNAProductions wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
So the new White Scars stuff scares the bejebus out of me.
One of the main people i play is a white scars and he basically just got army-wide anti-multiwound T3 onward gaining both +1 AP on melee weapons and +1 damage.
The hell? At the rate of attacks im expecting with Shock Assault with poweraxe stormshield bikers he's going to butcher everything that isnt flying in melee after his ridiculous rate of fire on my boyz
Unless their points skyrocketed, i dont see how i could possibly face 19 white cars (4 characters following them) once that dex drops.

3 Poweraxes (S5 AP-3 2D) on T3 onward hitting stupid reliably each....

Howabout ultramarine aggressors? 12d6 s4 -1 autohit that will get to range t1. That is 21 dead orks. Pretty much only defence is be in tellyport. And not even sure that's worst you will face...

Gw takes offensive power to extreme with new codex.

How do you get them into range T1?

Impulsor. Doubtful it moves less than 12" so that, 8" from disembark and flame away


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Emicrania wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
So the new White Scars stuff scares the bejebus out of me.
One of the main people i play is a white scars and he basically just got army-wide anti-multiwound T3 onward gaining both +1 AP on melee weapons and +1 damage.
The hell? At the rate of attacks im expecting with Shock Assault with poweraxe stormshield bikers he's going to butcher everything that isnt flying in melee after his ridiculous rate of fire on my boyz
Unless their points skyrocketed, i dont see how i could possibly face 19 white cars (4 characters following them) once that dex drops.

3 Poweraxes (S5 AP-3 2D) on T3 onward hitting stupid reliably each....

Howabout ultramarine aggressors? 12d6 s4 -1 autohit that will get to range t1. That is 21 dead orks. Pretty much only defence is be in tellyport. And not even sure that's worst you will face...

Gw takes offensive power to extreme with new codex.

How do you get them into range T1?

By the power of whining without thinking about rules. Duh

Ignore him.

Just because you can't be bothered to check what marines get doesn't mean nobody does

Impulsor can’t carry Gravis.

Yeah that transport is kinda dead weight. Its just an example of marines getting a technically very strong rule they dont really want, since the unit they'd want in it cant use it.
Really wish my duneriders got that rule for admech.

I dont think they do have a way to reach you T1, or if they do the entire unit doesnt have reach. It is however one hell of a deterrence to keep you away until you shot them with something.

 Jidmah wrote:


With the details dripping through (there is video which contains the whole SM codex if you feel like watching that for 2 hours), most of the supposedly uber stuff has some sort of drawback.

The doctrines require a pure SM army so no knights, custodes or loyal 32 if they want doctrines. They also need to take marines to generate CP, which isn't cheap.

With how many buffs the Codex's get I don't see this as a problem, keep in mind that they can still Soup between SM factions since they all have the required datasheet entry. Also, as far as CP is concerned, SM Scouts are still a thing AND if tacs are getting a price drop I can't see how scouts wouldn't as well. But, best case scenario, they don't get a price drop so to field multiple battalions they will have to take 165pts worth of troops per battalion. Not great as say Orkz with our grots, but by the same token, at least their troops choices can actually accomplish something.

 Jidmah wrote:
You also must switch doctrines in proper order (A->B->C), with a stratagem you can move backwards, only Utramarines can switch at will.

This is just a reason for the designers to tack in a stratagem that allows switching doctrines. This will only be a downside in the fact that it will cost CP to switch out of turn.

 Jidmah wrote:
Doctrines' armor penetration does not stack with other sources of additional AP, so those "AP-3 bolters" are not possible at all.

This is very true, but -1AP bolters which now gain double shots and a bunch of other buffs means that this is still going to be fething terrifying.

 Jidmah wrote:
Most vehicles have a mix of rapid, assault and heavy weapons, meaning not everything will benefit a doctrine.

True, but this just means that only SOME of their weapons gain a buff they previously didn't have access to. This is still a buff just not as good as it could have been, and keep in mind, the SM's have plenty of purpose built vehicles. Predator Annihilator comes to mind.

 Jidmah wrote:
Almost every marine player agreed that the pre-defined traits are superior to self-built ones.

I disagree, simple as that. Most of the complaints regarding this are about the OP ones that were ridiculous, looking at you Ravenguard.

 Jidmah wrote:
Neither part of the IF and CF tactics are available for build-your-own-chapter.

True, thank god for small mercies?

 Jidmah wrote:
The chants are at the beginning of turn, so no super-charges from deep strike.

Also true, now they get yet another free buff on a decent HQ choice that prior to now hadn't been taken. So massive buff, just not as massive as it could have been.

 Jidmah wrote:
Gulliman was nerfed, no full re-rolls to wound in the codex anymore.

The fact that this was even a thing to begin with is ridiculous. Ghaz was almost as expensive at points during 8th and his big buff? +1 attack on the charge, big fething deal.

 Jidmah wrote:
Drop pods are still worse than weird boys.

True as well, but put that in perspective. Complaining that Drop Pods aren't as great as arguably one of the BEST units in the ork army, and also requires a certain amount of uncertainty to use. Have to pass the psychic test and risk blowing your head off because you will undoubtedly be within range of the 30 boyz you are jumping, meaning +3 to tests.

 Jidmah wrote:
Flamers and meltas won't become great with +3" range at the cost of a decent chapter tactic. They also won't benefit from a doctrine when dropping T1 because they are assault weapons.

But Plasma spam gets better? Thankfully the SM army isn't riddled with Plasma, Sarcasm aside, this is true but not a big concern since a Plasma gun is better in this edition due to saturation rather then 1 shot and hope for the best.

 Jidmah wrote:
Gravis cannot ride the new transport nor drop pods, so no agressors jumping in your face.

Correct me if I am wrong, I don't play SMs, but can't Aggressors still ride in the primaris transport and under certain conditions gain scout or something that allows them to appear up field?

 Jidmah wrote:
Gravis units tend to be 3 models strong, so you need to deal 9 damage - pretty doable in my book. They are also limited to 18" range, so just don't run at them.

9 damage is totally doable for most factions, orkz.....well we have a problem with this. The best way would have been with Lootas in the past but since those got nerfed we can still make a big unit of them capable of doing this but we in turn throw away that unit on our opponents turn unless we really want to spend the CP to shield them.

 Jidmah wrote:
In general, nothing has changed in regards to Space Marine's range. Against pure marines all their long-range weaponry is vehicle based which are easily destroyed with SAGs, mek guns, planes and lootas.
Green tide might have a hard time now, but dakka orks just need to play a little more defensively. Running at a primaris horde was suicide before and has become even more suicide with the new codex.

I will give you the SSAG and maybe the SAG, Mek gunz in my experience, unless spammed, tend to die turn 1-2. Planes have been an absolute failure and I can't see how they could reliably take out a T7 vehicle with a 2+ or 3+ save. Lootas struggle to take out a T7 vehicle as well but is doable if you spend CP.

Overall I think the SM codex is going to be on the wrong side of over powered.

 hollow one wrote:
If it was hit or miss at even amounts, the TWIP would match the field representation. But that is not the case. You dont understand these numbers. And even when you listen to the people who create these data they tell you it is dubious to just interpret win %, it is not a meaningful individual statistic.

I understand the numbers fine, thanks. I'm really struggling to see how you can possibly be arguing that win % is not a meaningful statistic for a faction that cannot soup?

 hollow one wrote:
So ignoring statistics and then minimizing our wins, ignoring our overperforming TWIP, and focusing on the random path to victory boiling to the top. Basically choose your own adventure in bias?

I find this massively pot-kettle given your statement about our playerbase and "jokers bringing trash lists". Nor am I ignoring any statistics, however as far as I'm concerned a 2% differential in TWIP is neither here nor there, while a rapidly decreasing win % speaks volumes.

 hollow one wrote:
Half the field is below 50% win rate,

Naturally.

 hollow one wrote:
the meta is in a good place.

I agree with this to an extent but it is obviously subjective and in my opinion the Ork meta is stagnant, boring and is becoming less and less viable.

 hollow one wrote:
And see my previous post as to why focusing on this one number is not meaningful, since nids have a 49% win rate and I clearly outlined that Orks are better in that post.

Yea, you didn't do that though? What you did do is focus on a very odd subset of data that I'm assuming matched the argument you wanted to present?

 hollow one wrote:
I was never arguing with the fact that we were dropping, clearly the 25 Loota nerf hurt us. But we went from being one of, if not the best, army in the game, to something a little more reasonable. The sky isn't falling.

I didn't say the sky was falling and I'm kinda getting tired of the subjective opinions thrown in as facts. I dispute that we're a top tier faction because our win percentage (among other things) shows this to be the case. It depends on your definition of "faction" but I don't think we've ever been top. Not this edition anyway. It was noted very early on that we're likely a 'gatekeeper' faction and lo and behold that's exactly what the data shows. The numbers of "podium but not quite top" finishes shows this. The win percentage shows this. The 'performance to size of event' ratio shows this (we do worse at larger events because more chance of running into hard counters).

 hollow one wrote:
I was only focusing on Nids because you made a vapid comparison to orks in your post, and it was an easy target to explain why your focus on one number (win percentage) is not meaningful.

It wasn't an easy target, Nids perform excellently outside of the US. Particularly in Australia I understand. I don't believe you've proven that Nids are worse than Orks with your very specific subset of data either but this discussion is around Orks, not Nids.

 hollow one wrote:
Our disagreement here is simple, you seem to think that 48% winrate means orks lose more than half of their games and that beacuse that number is dropping we are no longer top tier. I am merely shifting those goalposts. Yes the winrate is dropping, because we were THE best army in the game and now we are merely in the top 5-ish. Does that mean we need buffs? Probably not.

What does a 48% winrate show if not that Orks lose more than half their games exactly? You're going to have to evidence that we were and have ever been in 8th THE best army in the game. I think you'll struggle to back that up. I have not spoken about any buffs for our army by the way. I'm merely presenting the data for people to make use of as they will and adding my opinion on what that data shows. If you want to use a dropping, sub 50% winrate to show that Orks are actually in a great spot and probably don't need any buffs you do you man. I don't agree but I like the positivity.

 hollow one wrote:
I understand that it sucks not getting free wins through list building, and that it is difficult to play strategically, and not blame dice, luck, or opposing armies countering us. But if people merely focused on how to win with the tools they are given, rather than focus on a win percentage as an excuse for why they are losing, the those people might get better! There is literally no reason why steve pampreen, rich kilton, or liam hacket are all consistently winning tournaments with orks and we are not. There is NO REASON other than they are better players.

OK so win % isn't an excuse, I think that's your confusion, it's a symptom. Also you'll realise that Steve Pampreen recently was disqualified from an event for taking a free Weirdboy in his list? I'm not disputing there are way, waaaay better Ork players than me and that they perform very well. That does not mean that our faction is in a perfectly balanced state or even good state however. It does not mean that we're at the top of the faction tier list. Those players used to do well last edition and I don't think anyone is arguing that we were in good shape then?

We've probably taken this thread a little off topic Hollow. I'm more than happy to discuss this further via PM if you want (or on here if Jidmah/mods believe it's on topic)?

Seems like you wanna take Lootas or Flash Gitz if you think you're going to deal with power armour.

Just annoying it seems like both are *massive* investments, unless you are already going Bad Moons or Freebootas (you need to take grots to protect both units, which requires them to be the same culture...).

Kaptin Badrukk + Flash Gitz + grots is a 450-500 point investment.

tulun wrote:
Seems like you wanna take Lootas or Flash Gitz if you think you're going to deal with power armour.

Just annoying it seems like both are *massive* investments, unless you are already going Bad Moons or Freebootas (you need to take grots to protect both units, which requires them to be the same culture...).

Kaptin Badrukk + Flash Gitz + grots is a 450-500 point investment.

That is correct. Also it requires, basically , to run a pure horde, I have to find yet anybody that does combine FG with Mechs and wins.
I am toiyng with the idea to run them with Tankabusta, and Nauts but... we ll see..

Flashgitz suffer significantly more then lootas did with the problem of getting shot to hell. While Flashgitz are technically harder to kill they are a lot more expensive AND throw in the fact that most factions don't have any trouble with icing 30-60 grotz a turn, yeah you are going to lose those gitz pretty quick. Why? Because range. Flashgitz, unlike Lootas, have to be within 24' to shoot their target which means for most factions you will be in range of their small arms weapons. With the recent buffs to SM's bolt weapons you are going to have a hard time getting close without getting wiped out.

SemperMortis wrote:
Flashgitz suffer significantly more then lootas did with the problem of getting shot to hell. While Flashgitz are technically harder to kill they are a lot more expensive AND throw in the fact that most factions don't have any trouble with icing 30-60 grotz a turn, yeah you are going to lose those gitz pretty quick. Why? Because range. Flashgitz, unlike Lootas, have to be within 24' to shoot their target which means for most factions you will be in range of their small arms weapons. With the recent buffs to SM's bolt weapons you are going to have a hard time getting close without getting wiped out.

Hopefully CA will help with something here.

It seems the most effective fallback Orks might have right now is Mek Gunz (a bit boring and expensive in dollars), and the SSAG, but SSAG is random and won't necessarily carry. Lootas and Flash Gitz seem like they will struggle if you can't really protect them (Maybe Lootas are just the option here, because you can at least keep them out of range for a turn, except now you can deep strike turn 1 w/ Drop Pods, which might screw up that plan). Maybe you just have to tellyporta all your big threats and hope to smash turn 2?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Some of you must have missed the fact that the win rate for Orks has been steadily deceasing for some time and now sits at sub 50%.

We are no longer a top level faction. Tyranids perform better.

Ever since the castellan got the axe, almost every week had one to three ork players placing in the top 4 of major tournaments with at least 50 competitors, with multiple first placings among them.

There are preciously few armies that can match that, nids most certainly cannot.

We also know that most ork players doing well are players who have been playing orks for a long time, while players constantly changing their primary army tend to do worse with them (Nick Nanavati being the prime example).

So an army that doesn't forgive many errors and is hard to master naturally has an low average win rate. But those numbers say absolutely nothing about the potential.

 Jidmah wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Some of you must have missed the fact that the win rate for Orks has been steadily deceasing for some time and now sits at sub 50%.

We are no longer a top level faction. Tyranids perform better.

Ever since the castellan got the axe, almost every week had one to three ork players placing in the top 4 of major tournaments with at least 50 competitors, with multiple first placings among them.

There are preciously few armies that can match that, nids most certainly cannot.

We also know that most ork players doing well are players who have been playing orks for a long time, while players constantly changing their primary army tend to do worse with them (Nick Nanavati being the prime example).

So an army that doesn't forgive many errors and is hard to master naturally has an low average win rate. But those numbers say absolutely nothing about the potential.

Again we're looking at the 'top 4' for some bizarre reason. I assume because it falls better into your rhetoric? How many Tyranid players are there at these events compared to Orks? Have you included GSC results in your podium placements?

The final part of your post is entirely anecdotal/hypothesizing. The 'potential' of any army is massive. The actual stats however do not paint this picture of a top tier army as so many of you believe. As I have stated, my belief is that the stats show us to be a gatekeeper faction at best, exactly as anticipated.

SemperMortis wrote:
Flashgitz suffer significantly more then lootas did with the problem of getting shot to hell. While Flashgitz are technically harder to kill they are a lot more expensive AND throw in the fact that most factions don't have any trouble with icing 30-60 grotz a turn, yeah you are going to lose those gitz pretty quick. Why? Because range. Flashgitz, unlike Lootas, have to be within 24' to shoot their target which means for most factions you will be in range of their small arms weapons. With the recent buffs to SM's bolt weapons you are going to have a hard time getting close without getting wiped out.

Altought you are right, DS Flashgitz and a board with decent LOS block should help us. I feel that those mortars are gonna wither with the introduction of more monocodex oriented lists.

Again we're looking at the 'top 4' for some bizarre reason. I assume because it falls better into your rhetoric? How many Tyranid players are there at these events compared to Orks? Have you included GSC results in your podium placements?

In regards to Orks being a bottom tier faction. Nids have been on the top 4 6 times since LVO, there Orks have been 37, GSC14. Not even Deamons with Vesal and his spawns got that many results. You usually watch who´s on the podium to understand who´s winning. Like when there is track and field and the lonely white guy comes 8th and Jamaica has constantly somebody on the podium; we don´t think :" Wow Poland made it to the final, they are very good.", We see Jamaica wins and we think, "well they did it again."

If you are having problem with your list or winning, might be a more proper discussion than making comparison with other armies or how bad orks are. It is a tedious conversation that leads nowhere.

Englishman was preaching how orks were bad when they got bumped up to 7ppm. I defended orks as being top tier at the time, and look where they are. They have either won or come in the top of almost every event. I think we're still in a good spot even if space marines just got a lot scarier. I think our best troops are grots supported by kff though, acting as the brimstone horrors from the editions birth.

Been building a list for my second game of 8th and had a little idea, wondered if anyone had considered/taken it.

The plan is to combine a gunwagon with 6 stormboys as a powerklaw delivery system. I figured that the slow speed of the gunwagon would be countered by the high speed of the stormboys as they get out. Thus countering 2 issues:

1: Gunwagons are too slow to be good transports, and
2: Stormboys are too fragile per point to rush across the board.

This is going in as part of a 5-trukk rush with a deffkilla wartrike and some smasha guns for supporting fire. The idea is that the enemy can focus on the trukks, or on the gunwagon, but not both. Hopefully the trukks will provide the distraction and the gunwagon gets 2 turns of rolling forward with a 12"+charge powerklaw threat range and an 18" jump-on-an-objective range for when it's needed.

Overview of my list is:


Not expecting it to be competitive, I'm still learning how my old army fits into 8th edition. Plan is to have cunnin' but brutal to allow me to redeploy units, and try to target the squishiest. Deffkilla lets trukks move, advance and then assault, so hoping for a turn 1 charge from at least one of them. fully expecting to lose 2 on turn 1 but that's 8th for you!

Has anyone combined stormboys with a gunwagon before? Seems they compliment each other well, to me, but maybe a fast sneaky klaw just ain't what it used to be?

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
[Again we're looking at the 'top 4' for some bizarre reason. I assume because it falls better into your rhetoric?

Oh, ad hominem attacks right out of the gate?

How many Tyranid players are there at these events compared to Orks? Have you included GSC results in your podium placements?

Oh, the moved goal posts. But yes, actually I have because I know your dishonest way of discussing things by now.
21 top 4 placements for Nids, Nids/GSC, and GSC/AM combined since CA, with 6 tournament wins
28 top 4 placements for orks with 12 tournament wins for orks.

Which means you were wrong about GSC, even if you factor pure nid armies in there for some reason.

The final part of your post is entirely anecdotal/hypothesizing. The 'potential' of any army is massive. The actual stats however do not paint this picture of a top tier army as so many of you believe. As I have stated, my belief is that the stats show us to be a gatekeeper faction at best, exactly as anticipated.

Gate keepers don't win tournaments on a regular basis. But hey, you never did let facts get in the way of your opinions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 some bloke wrote:
Been building a list for my second game of 8th and had a little idea, wondered if anyone had considered/taken it.

The plan is to combine a gunwagon with 6 stormboys as a powerklaw delivery system. I figured that the slow speed of the gunwagon would be countered by the high speed of the stormboys as they get out. Thus countering 2 issues:

1: Gunwagons are too slow to be good transports, and
2: Stormboys are too fragile per point to rush across the board.

I think this thing already falls apart at "powerklaw delivery system". What you are delivering are 3 attacks hitting on fours, wounding most stuff on 3+ and dealing d3 damage. Why bother?
Delivering PKs is something that is no longer part of our toolbox due to how 8th edition changed the game. The only klaws that are worth delivering are the relics ones with flat 3 damage and no minus to hit.

This is going in as part of a 5-trukk rush with a deffkilla wartrike and some smasha guns for supporting fire. The idea is that the enemy can focus on the trukks, or on the gunwagon, but not both. Hopefully the trukks will provide the distraction and the gunwagon gets 2 turns of rolling forward with a 12"+charge powerklaw threat range and an 18" jump-on-an-objective range for when it's needed.

In my experience, I'd rather run a battlewagon with killkannon and some rokkit launchas (index). You get about the same firepower out of it, but can have a deff rolla and move at full speed.

Overview of my list is:

Spoiler:

1749pts

deffkilla
weirdboy

12x boys, PK nob
11x boys, PK nob
11x boys, PK nob

4 MANs, 1 skorcha
1 waaagh banner nob

Megatrakk Scrapjet
6 stormboys, PK Nob

7 flashgitz, runt
Gunwagon, killkannon, 3 big shootas (it's on the model)

Trukk x 3
Trukk w/ Wrecking ball
Trukk w/ stikkbomm chukka (just seeing how it do)

5x mek guns - 4 smasha, 1 KMK

Not expecting it to be competitive, I'm still learning how my old army fits into 8th edition. Plan is to have cunnin' but brutal to allow me to redeploy units, and try to target the squishiest. Deffkilla lets trukks move, advance and then assault, so hoping for a turn 1 charge from at least one of them. fully expecting to lose 2 on turn 1 but that's 8th for you!

Has anyone combined stormboys with a gunwagon before? Seems they compliment each other well, to me, but maybe a fast sneaky klaw just ain't what it used to be?

I wouldn't expect too much from it, since trukks and units of 11-12 boyz will most likely not do anything. To make your life easier make sure to use the deff skulls culture, just so the PKs you rely heavily on become a bit more reliable.

In general, you should probably drop all your trukk boyz and replace them with mobs of 30 you can da jump where needed.

Thanks for the feedback Jidmah,

I hadn't thought about the effectiveness of the powerklaw that much, actually. it probably is a bit of a wasted approach.

I see what you're saying about the gunwagon < battlewagon, and will probably change to a wagon with rolla. It'll also let me up my stormboys to a unit of 10, which feels a bit more solid to me.

Not sold on swapping my trukkers out for a horde, I feel that's a completely different list to play. I will see how they do, then probably try a horde next time!

Definitely running deffskulls with the MSU approach, it'll be the best one to take advantage of. I did consider speed freeks, with the whole trukk-rush thing I was going for, but the MSU deffskulls approach will fit better.

 Emicrania wrote:

 hollow one wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Some of you must have missed the fact that the win rate for Orks has been steadily deceasing for some time and now sits at sub 50%.

We are no longer a top level faction. Tyranids perform better.

We're at 48% win rate, including all the jokers who bring trash lists, of which orks bring in abundance. We are 7% of the field and at 9% TWIP, meaning there are a higher percentage of players going undefeated than would be expected based on our field representation. What this means is that good players are outperforming expectations, probably because we have the tools to win but are a complex army to play. We are not a point and shoot list like knights (who perform exactly as expected), and thanks to every amateur that thinks you're supposed to run forward all game as orks, we get a lot of unfavorable data injected into our totals.

And if you look at the last two months of results, there has not been a single weekend where orks have not come top 4 in a GT/Major, with something around 5 events Orks coming first in that time frame. There are roughly 16 podium placements made by orks since 1st June, by contrast there have been 3 tyranids. Out of the recent ETC singles event Orks came 10th and 14th, nids best result was 50th.

Don't just throw out a percentage as if it means something. Data is more complicated than that. If you want to do well at an event, you would clearly play Orks over Nids. Orks are in a good spot right now, we may not be the best army in the game, but we are up there.

Amen to this. I played Nids when the codex just went out and I got my A.s.s. whopped anyway.
I started with Orks before codex and spent 6 months training and finding a good list that I like and guess what? In 3 tournaments i got top 500 in ITC. There are SO MANY orks players out there and even more vanilla players that just copy and paste somebody else list and hopes to win with it without even understanding the mechanics. I´m winning like never, good orks players are winning everywhere and honestly, those poor SM needed a bump.
I Own a BA army that i LOVE but that is impossible to field because vs any decent opponent, marines dies like flies.
Play your army, focus on making less mistakes, don´t change list and try to be a better player. You might have 1 bad game in 20 where dices are just insane, but focus on the mission and try to reflect at home what could YOU had done differently. If you cannot understand why you lost, you WILL lose again.

100% agree. I thought hollow ones analysis of the data was spot on. Invariably people don’t like admitting that the reason they lost was that they played poorly so it must be because the army the run is under powered despite all the stats that indicate otherwise.

Also I’m really looking forward to taking on some proper marine lists.

 some bloke wrote:
Thanks for the feedback Jidmah,

I hadn't thought about the effectiveness of the powerklaw that much, actually. it probably is a bit of a wasted approach.

I see what you're saying about the gunwagon < battlewagon, and will probably change to a wagon with rolla. It'll also let me up my stormboys to a unit of 10, which feels a bit more solid to me.

Not sold on swapping my trukkers out for a horde, I feel that's a completely different list to play. I will see how they do, then probably try a horde next time!

Definitely running deffskulls with the MSU approach, it'll be the best one to take advantage of. I did consider speed freeks, with the whole trukk-rush thing I was going for, but the MSU deffskulls approach will fit better.

Here you can see a trukk boyz list played by Nick Nanavati, top 10 player in the world.

https://youtu.be/cbolpNdC8Y4

I don't think he ever won a major with it, but I belive it is a competitive list nontheless

tulun wrote:
Seems like you wanna take Lootas or Flash Gitz if you think you're going to deal with power armour.

Just annoying it seems like both are *massive* investments, unless you are already going Bad Moons or Freebootas (you need to take grots to protect both units, which requires them to be the same culture...).

Kaptin Badrukk + Flash Gitz + grots is a 450-500 point investment.

Ya the gitz, badrukk, grot bomb is pricey alrite. The gunz, though shorter range, are better against marines thanks to their ap-2 (the steady number of shots is good too)

SemperMortis wrote:
Flashgitz suffer significantly more then lootas did with the problem of getting shot to hell. While Flashgitz are technically harder to kill they are a lot more expensive AND throw in the fact that most factions don't have any trouble with icing 30-60 grotz a turn, yeah you are going to lose those gitz pretty quick. Why? Because range. Flashgitz, unlike Lootas, have to be within 24' to shoot their target which means for most factions you will be in range of their small arms weapons. With the recent buffs to SM's bolt weapons you are going to have a hard time getting close without getting wiped out.

The range issue will not only come when facing marines though. nids or guard or gsc or just about any other army aside from knights and Chaos demon will also down your 60 grots very fast. The issue is also that 30 gitz just doesn't hurt that much (except perhaps if you roll a "1" and shoot again). Riptide with gatling does the same stuff (36 range, and way more mobility, and way more durability -if i sum things up, play Tau if you want a xenos army to spread strengh6 dmg2 ap2 shots-).

Let's be real, Gitz are utter trash at their current PPM. They are not good at anti tank, nor good at claring chaff either. If they move (wich they often do as 24 range is not much) and the target has -1 to hit they will do NOTHING to it. I think anyone who makes them work must have a "special" dice (die ?) for rolling a "1" after shooting, AND having the luck of facing opponents who will stupidly walk within range of the gits so thy can shoot without moving.

I have 20 gitz (the new models), I have spent LOTS of time assembling and painting them, they are maybe the best minis in the game model/aesthetics wise. I now we are many here in the same boat, and we will love it when they go down at least 5 PPM, as i am sure they will. But for now, shelf time for them, sorry ladz.

The fact that someone once or twice at a tournament made them work simply does not make them a viable choice for us. It is time we accept that and stop debating their use. They currently have none aside from making an ork army look even better on the table.

i dont think ive used gitz once in 8th. Every list i make with them i feel like im lacking something very important.

 hollow one wrote:
I understand that it sucks not getting free wins through list building, and that it is difficult to play strategically, and not blame dice, luck, or opposing armies countering us. But if people merely focused on how to win with the tools they are given, rather than focus on a win percentage as an excuse for why they are losing, the those people might get better! There is literally no reason why steve pampreen, rich kilton, or liam hacket are all consistently winning tournaments with orks and we are not. There is NO REASON other than they are better players.

OK so win % isn't an excuse, I think that's your confusion, it's a symptom. Also you'll realise that Steve Pampreen recently was disqualified from an event for taking a free Weirdboy in his list? I'm not disputing there are way, waaaay better Ork players than me and that they perform very well. That does not mean that our faction is in a perfectly balanced state or even good state however. It does not mean that we're at the top of the faction tier list. Those players used to do well last edition and I don't think anyone is arguing that we were in good shape then?

We've probably taken this thread a little off topic Hollow. I'm more than happy to discuss this further via PM if you want (or on here if Jidmah/mods believe it's on topic)?

 Emicrania wrote:

Again we're looking at the 'top 4' for some bizarre reason. I assume because it falls better into your rhetoric? How many Tyranid players are there at these events compared to Orks? Have you included GSC results in your podium placements?

In regards to Orks being a bottom tier faction.

I have not said this once during this entire discussion.

 Emicrania wrote:
Nids have been on the top 4 6 times since LVO, there Orks have been 37, GSC14. Not even Deamons with Vesal and his spawns got that many results. You usually watch who´s on the podium to understand who´s winning. Like when there is track and field and the lonely white guy comes 8th and Jamaica has constantly somebody on the podium; we don´t think :" Wow Poland made it to the final, they are very good.", We see Jamaica wins and we think, "well they did it again."

Well that's the interesting thing, isn't it? A "podium" is 1st, 2nd, 3rd. No-one ever looks at the "top 4" because it is entirely arbitrary - unless it suits your skewed argument of course....

 Sluggaloo wrote:
Englishman was preaching how orks were bad when they got bumped up to 7ppm. I defended orks as being top tier at the time, and look where they are. They have either won or come in the top of almost every event.

Citation needed.

 Jidmah wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
[Again we're looking at the 'top 4' for some bizarre reason. I assume because it falls better into your rhetoric?

Oh, ad hominem attacks right out of the gate?

No, this isn't an ad hominem attack Jidmah. It's a question that you've not answered.

 Jidmah wrote:

How many Tyranid players are there at these events compared to Orks? Have you included GSC results in your podium placements?

Oh, the moved goal posts. But yes, actually I have because I know your dishonest way of discussing things by now.
21 top 4 placements for Nids, Nids/GSC, and GSC/AM combined since CA, with 6 tournament wins
28 top 4 placements for orks with 12 tournament wins for orks.

The goalposts were moved when you all started discussing the "top 4" as if it were some sort of relevant statistic and not a number picked entirely because it suited your misguided belief that we're top tier.
And the definition of "ad hominem" is claiming someone has a "dishonest way of discussing things". Oh the irony.

 Jidmah wrote:

The final part of your post is entirely anecdotal/hypothesizing. The 'potential' of any army is massive. The actual stats however do not paint this picture of a top tier army as so many of you believe. As I have stated, my belief is that the stats show us to be a gatekeeper faction at best, exactly as anticipated.

Gate keepers don't win tournaments on a regular basis. But hey, you never did let facts get in the way of your opinions.

Top tier factions tend not to have a plummeting win % and see success at larger events too but keep up those ad hominem attacks

 vercingatorix wrote:

I wrote:

 hollow one wrote:
I understand that it sucks not getting free wins through list building, and that it is difficult to play strategically, and not blame dice, luck, or opposing armies countering us. But if people merely focused on how to win with the tools they are given, rather than focus on a win percentage as an excuse for why they are losing, the those people might get better! There is literally no reason why steve pampreen, rich kilton, or liam hacket are all consistently winning tournaments with orks and we are not. There is NO REASON other than they are better players.

OK so win % isn't an excuse, I think that's your confusion, it's a symptom. Also you'll realise that Steve Pampreen recently was disqualified from an event for taking a free Weirdboy in his list? I'm not disputing there are way, waaaay better Ork players than me and that they perform very well. That does not mean that our faction is in a perfectly balanced state or even good state however. It does not mean that we're at the top of the faction tier list. Those players used to do well last edition and I don't think anyone is arguing that we were in good shape then?

We've probably taken this thread a little off topic Hollow. I'm more than happy to discuss this further via PM if you want (or on here if Jidmah/mods believe it's on topic)?

Look, besmirch my name all you want, but at least call me STEVEN not steve.

And as far as points go. I would like to remind everyone of me forgetting to deploy about 100 points of orks on stream at Renegade. I just suck at counting.

Apologies, am I mistaken in thinking that you took a free Weirdboy and were disqualified from a recent event? Certainly not trying to besmirch you, I'm simply informing that some of your wins may have been with an unintended advantage. You're obviously a top player, not that you need any qualification on that from me I'm sure.