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.
JNAProductions wrote: You'll also note that I didn't say "Da Killa Klaw is 2 CP," I said "Da Killa Klaw is either your Relic pick, your second Relic (1 CP), or your third Relic (2 extra CP)." I did forget about specialist detachments, allowing you to get... Actually no, it's the same price or more expensive. Da Killa Klaw plus Souped-Up Shokka is actually 2 CP (1 for the Detachment, 1 for a second Relic).
But okay, let's check Berserkers with Chainaxes! Or is that too much of a buff for you?
6 wounds
5+ save makes that 9
3+ to-wound makes that 13.5
3+ to-hit makes that 20.25
So, you'd need 21 swings on average to kill a Warboss with Chainaxes. Anydice says that's a 62% chance with 21 swings.
Which, I should remind you, is less than what a minimum squad of Zerkers puts out. They've got 3 attacks each on the charge (4 on the champ) and Fight Twice by default.
Dreadwaaagh is mandatory in competitive Ork lists, acting like that makes the KK 2 CP is not fair. KK is never 2CP, it is only ever 1 CP. If you just take the SSAG it's 1 CP, if you take the SSAG and another relic it's 1 CP. It's only if you take SSAG and two other relics that the KK is 2 CP which is why no one takes 4 relics in Ork lists.
A Berzerker does an average of 2,11 damage to a Warboss, 1,63 to a Captain.
*2,84 Zerkers kill a Warboss.
*3,41 Zerkers kill a 6+++ Warboss.
*4,27 Zerkers kill a 5+++ Warboss.
*3,07 to kill a Captain.
*3,68 to kill a Chapter Master Kayvaan Shrike.
Can we at least agree that the 5+++ Warboss numbers are too high? Keep in mind that no new models are coming out for the Warboss, we're not talking about the Orruks from AoS and these changes would also have to be applied to Ghasgkull and Megabosses.
Grimskul wrote: At this point, I feel like vict0988 has a personal vendetta against Orks, everytime they're brought up in this sub-forum he flies in and says any buffs we give them is unwarranted and often he wants nerfs that make no sense, especially within the context of the thread. I can't see how Warbosses, given how hardy they are in the fluff, are seen as survivable at all on the tabletop given how easily they die to any form of multi-wound weapon.
Cybork body as an option for a 5+ invuln is absolutely mandatory IMO, given its previous existence in our 4th ed codex. I wouldn't mind a baseline FNP save, but then you'd have to consider the overlap with the Snakebites Kultur and making it either have to stack or make it useless altogether. I would opt for something similar to what Abominants and Aberrants have from GSC and give him "Dead 'Ard" which is reducing incoming damage by 1 to a minimum of 1. Add that with the 5++ save and he can reasonably survive D3 damage weapons and have a chance that 2 wounds that go through from a TH won't just splat him instantly.
Confirmation bias, I agree Stompas, Trukks and Battlewagons need buffs, nobody really talks about Nobs but I feel like they need a buff more urgently than Warbosses although I understand why you would want your main melee character to be on-par with enemy fighters and if I had played against more Warbosses that were used to actually duel instead of just instantly obliterating tanks, then maybe I'd change my mind. I'm no more stringent on Orks than on any other faction, I just don't think endless buffs leads to a good place, it leads to endless bloat with a bazillion rules, players forgetting their FNP half the game and inevitably to OP things like IH being released. I'd rather nerf Zerkers than buff Warbosses because they get killed too easily, what's supposed to come of Hormagaunts? Do we double their attacks at some point as well? I just push back when people claim things like "Warbosses are trash", when they clearly good enough to top tournaments. I push back against people that claim Necrons are trash far more often though, I don't have a special hatred for Orks, Necron players don't ask for buffs to Tesla Immortals though. Actually I think someone did, I just felt it was so amazingly unintelligent that it wasn't worth discussing, while giving a Warboss some kind of durability buff definitely has upsides that I can see I just wanted to level some input at what the downsides might be and exactly what the value of any changes you wish to implement are.
I think cybork body makes more sense as a 6+++, IH and AdMech set opposite precedents so 5++ is a valid option but IMO Cybork Body needs to be optional and should come with a model or a conversion guide. I still think a Lieutenant/Captain equivalent is needed for the Orks, it shouldn't just go from Company Veterans directly to Primaris Chapter Master.
False equivalence, you believing trukks, battlewagons and stompas (which again, are so plainly obvious in how under utilized they are that even you would have to admit they need fixing, isn't saying much) needing buffs doesn't excuse you from making bad faith arguments against the proposed changes in the thread. You keep creating bad comparisons and deliberately stacking it in favour of the Warboss to try and "prove your point", when things like Berserkers and Knights are not even the same type of unit nor the FOC slot that the Warboss inhabits. It'd be like if I compare a Monolith to a unit of grots and say "Oh wow, well compare the equivalent unit of grots in a 1-1 fight against a Monolith and the grots don't stand a chance! Monoliths don't need any changes, they're fine!". I'm obviously being hyperbolic here but that's effectively what you're doing and not giving the full context of how grots aren't useful via damage output but CP generation and objective holding. Similarly, just because a Warboss CAN (not will) do significant damage to a knight doesn't mean he will, and more often than not can't due to a foot boss having crap survivability and mobility to even reach a knight to begin with intact outside of Da Jump, which is again not guaranteed, either passing the power or succeeding charge wise.
JNAProductions wrote: Vict, why can’t the Zerker champ have a Powerfist, but the Warboss gets all his buffs?
I specifically said a Berzerker and you pick a Berzerker Champion with a PF, the Champ gets in automatically, but a Warboss needs Da Jump, you factor in the full cost of two Weirdboys when each gets 2-6 powers/game and not just the one they need to make KK Warboss into a CC beast. Suddenly the Warboss is charging not just any Knight but a Castellan and is taking Overwatch as well after using Da Jump, you moved the goalposts and instead of calling you out I moved the goalposts, I am sorry, that was childish. I also forgot how you initially mentioned the PF Zerker Champ.
Because I forgot the problem was "PF Zerker Champs kill Warbosses too quickly" my mind went to my experience against Zerkers, a Zerker with re-roll failed hits, re-roll failed wound rolls and +1 to wound rolls, because if your opponent has a Zerker Champion with a PF and the full re-roll and +1 to wound thing will kill a Captain or an Overlord in a single turn anyways, the Warboss isn't unique in that situation. I don't think Warbosses should be as durable than those characters, he's relatively durable when factoring in he doesn't have anything but some iron trousers and a sleeveless t-shirt on though. He is less durable though, that means that an unbuffed Zerker Champion can kill him where he might fall just short on killing a Captain or Overlord, but getting the buffs that push him over the hump into threatening those characters is easy, especially since you'll most likely be able to put a few Zerker attacks in from the side as well. An unarmoured Ork Warboss (of which there are what, half a dozen or more on each planet with Orks?) should not be anywhere near as tough to slay with a PF as an Overlord with a phase shifter that lets him phase out of reality when he sees the PF coming down. The Warboss can swing as hard as most melee fighters, but without upgrades he should not be as durable. Upgrades for the existing datasheet and/or alternate datasheets that can make a Warboss into true Warlord is fine, getting rid of the Lieutenant/Captain rank of your species is not. Claiming that the Warboss is bad when he is good is not fine.
The Necron Lord (exact same price as the Warboss) has 4 W T5 3+/7++ and the Living Metal ability (heal 1 wound at the start of my turn). Warboss hits on 2+ and has 4 attacks instead of 3 on 3+. I have suggested that Warbosses should be 55 instead of 65 in another thread and that PK should be 25 instead of 13 for models with A characteristic of 4+, I have suggested that Necron Lords should be 60 from 65 with the warscythe (which is not -1 to hit but is S7 instead of 10) should remain at 9 pts.
Why the hate for PK? Because it's the premium melee weapon for a melee HQ and that means it needs a relatively high price to avoid punishing people that build their Warboss differently, just like the SM thunder hammer needed a premium price on Captains. Necron HQs are not melee HQs, they are support HQs, any melee ability they have is secondary which is why people don't universally build Lords and Overlords with warscythes but instead often go for the cheapest weapon available, where people universally take PK for their 4+ A Orks. But mostly the nerf to PK Warbosses is actually because of KK, when I suggested nerfing it in another thread people gave me gak for not knowing the Ork struggle. How good is KK compared to the Necron Voidreaper? Same damage buff from 2->3 and D3->3. Voidreaper wounds non-VEHICLE models on 2+, KK re-rolls failed wound rolls at all times. I'd say the KK comes out on top, but KK also adds +1 to hit rolls, making it quite a bit better. So Warboss gets a nerf and you can have your buffs to your other relics and be forced to go relic or go home with your Warboss. Thinking about it I actually think Destroyer Lords need to pay more for warscythes because they are dedicated fighter characters.
Broodlords have a 5++ 6W T5 which gives them 50% more durability vs PF and they cost 50% more pts, they have the same Sv characteristic though so they die more quickly to AP -0 and -1. They have the exact same speed as an Evil Sunz Warboss (re-roll failed charges instead of 'Ere We Go but that's negligible), 50% more attacks, hit on 2+ without a relic but worse relics. I suggested raising the cost of Broodlords by 10.
Grimskul wrote: Just because a Warboss CAN (not will) do significant damage to a knight doesn't mean he will, and more often than not can't due to a foot boss having crap survivability and mobility to even reach a knight to begin with intact outside of Da Jump, which is again not guaranteed, either passing the power or succeeding charge wise.
All I really need to prove that the Warboss is good is two GT top 4s with 2+ foot Warbosses and I have that. Nothing is guarenteed in a dice game, that's half the fun!
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2019/11/01 05:17:37
I was the one who brought up Berserkers, Vict. And I specifically mentioned a Berserker Champ with a Fist.
And a Captain or Overlord takes literally half the damage a Warboss takes. They're hit the same, wounded the same, but save on a 4++ instead of nothing. A Berserker Champ with a Fist that can kill a Warboss 50% of the time manages, at best, a 25% kill rate against the Captain or Overlord.
Not to mention, a Powerklaw ain't that killy on a Warboss base. It's literally a Powerfist that's S12 instead of S8. That's a nice buff, but on a 4 Attack model, they struggle to bracket a Rhino. Yes, you CAN layer buff after buff on them, but pretty much all those buffs are unique-you can have ONE Warboss with Fists of Gork, Da Killa Klaw, Warpath, and Might Is Right. One.
If you were suggesting "Nerf Warbosses" as part of a game-wide overhaul, who's goal was "Nerf everything to get rid of the ridiculous alpha strike problem," I could get behind that. But as it stands now, you're talking about nerfing a mediocre unit.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
Why the hate for PK? Because it's the premium melee weapon for a melee HQ and that means it needs a relatively high price to avoid punishing people that build their Warboss differently, just like the SM thunder hammer needed a premium price on Captains. Necron HQs are not melee HQs, they are support HQs, any melee ability they have is secondary which is why people don't universally build Lords and Overlords with warscythes but instead often go for the cheapest weapon available, where people universally take PK for their 4+ A Orks. But mostly the nerf to PK Warbosses is actually because of KK, when I suggested nerfing it in another thread people gave me gak for not knowing the Ork struggle. How good is KK compared to the Necron Voidreaper? Same damage buff from 2->3 and D3->3. Voidreaper wounds non-VEHICLE models on 2+, KK re-rolls failed wound rolls at all times. I'd say the KK comes out on top, but KK also adds +1 to hit rolls, making it quite a bit better. So Warboss gets a nerf and you can have your buffs to your other relics and be forced to go relic or go home with your Warboss. Thinking about it I actually think Destroyer Lords need to pay more for warscythes because they are dedicated fighter characters.
Building their warboss differently? There is only one other melee option for a warboss and it's the big choppa. The only reason I would ever take the BC is to keep the warboss as cheap as possible or to use Headwoppa's killchoppa to try and use MW's to get around a unit's invlun saves. In any case it is already priced at a premium, the PK costs 4 more points than a PF and it has the exact same stat line.
And the voidreaper/voidscythe argument is pretty weak. A voidscythe is a better thunderhammer at a 20 point discount. it has SX2 AP-4 and 3 damage stock and are -1 to hit like a thunderhammer. With voidreaper you get the same thing but are now hitting on 2+ and wounding on 2+ as long as you don't attack a vehicle so you should be using it to hunt characters/MC's instead of vehicles. I think most Ork players would love to pay 20 points to be able to take a thunderhammer on their warboss.
The reason why people were giving you grief in the other thread is because a Warboss with KK is how the warboss used to be in combat in earlier editions. They were fairly tough and would wreck almost anything they got into combat with. Compare that to a stock warboss now and it's almost laughable, they just bounce off most hard targets without doing any real damage.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/01 13:31:34
JNAProductions wrote: I was the one who brought up Berserkers, Vict. And I specifically mentioned a Berserker Champ with a Fist.
I pointed that out and explained that I had forgotten all about the Fist when making my next comment.
And a Captain or Overlord takes literally half the damage a Warboss takes. They're hit the same, wounded the same, but save on a 4++ instead of nothing. A Berserker Champ with a Fist that can kill a Warboss 50% of the time manages, at best, a 25% kill rate against the Captain or Overlord.
A Lord is easier to kill with a PF, Broodlord gets a 5++, but it's 50% more expensive. Captain charges 14", Overlord 13", Warboss 18".
Spoiler:
Not to mention, a Powerklaw ain't that killy on a Warboss base. It's literally a Powerfist that's S12 instead of S8. That's a nice buff, but on a 4 Attack model, they struggle to bracket a Rhino. Yes, you CAN layer buff after buff on them, but pretty much all those buffs are unique-you can have ONE Warboss with Fists of Gork, Da Killa Klaw, Warpath, and Might Is Right. One.
If you were suggesting "Nerf Warbosses" as part of a game-wide overhaul, who's goal was "Nerf everything to get rid of the ridiculous alpha strike problem," I could get behind that. But as it stands now, you're talking about nerfing a mediocre unit.
Everything is relative in terms of killyness, one-shotting a Knight with a 78 pt character is crazy. I know tanks have gotten super hard to kill in melee and that's also a problem I'd like to adress, but that's not something that'd be only for open-play and not part of the matched play overhaul I'm doing, but while they are hard to kill they can also act as hostages if you wrap them and they are still possible to destroy in melee.
I'd reckon most people would still take Warbosses if they were 2 pts more expensive (giant nerf I know) and I don't think many people would take the much cheaper big choppa even if PK had a special price just for WARBOSS models. I am in the middle of a game-wide overhaul restricting the alpha strike problem by compiling a list of OP Stratagems, Traits, Tactics and Relics, but I couldn't even bring it up in the Ork kultur rebalance thread without getting shouted down for being a filthy robot. All we want is more power, more rules, more bloat. I am not even nerfing the Warboss, I'm buffing most versions of him and making the PK Warboss 2 pts more expensive, that's not a nerf except relative to other Warbosses that are currently not a real option. I still believe that KK needs a nerf (2 pts is probably not enough).
But none of that is what this thread is about, it's about buffing a unit that is seeing constant tournament play in every major tournament in the world and often tops tournaments including the big ones. A 6+++ or a 5++ as an option for 10 pts? Great idea. An additional WL trait for your Warlord for 1CP? Great idea. Mandatory upgrade from Lieutenant/Captain tier to Chapter Master tier? Less great idea IMO. Make a unique character instead, give him a unique relic and a special rule that gives him a 5+++, that can be your own special Warlord, making every Warboss owned by everybody 50% tougher is silly.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/01 13:44:53
JNAProductions wrote: Vict, why can’t the Zerker champ have a Powerfist, but the Warboss gets all his buffs?
I specifically said a Berzerker and you pick a Berzerker Champion with a PF, the Champ gets in automatically, but a Warboss needs Da Jump, you factor in the full cost of two Weirdboys when each gets 2-6 powers/game and not just the one they need to make KK Warboss into a CC beast. Suddenly the Warboss is charging not just any Knight but a Castellan and is taking Overwatch as well after using Da Jump, you moved the goalposts and instead of calling you out I moved the goalposts, I am sorry, that was childish. I also forgot how you initially mentioned the PF Zerker Champ.
Because I forgot the problem was "PF Zerker Champs kill Warbosses too quickly" my mind went to my experience against Zerkers, a Zerker with re-roll failed hits, re-roll failed wound rolls and +1 to wound rolls, because if your opponent has a Zerker Champion with a PF and the full re-roll and +1 to wound thing will kill a Captain or an Overlord in a single turn anyways, the Warboss isn't unique in that situation. I don't think Warbosses should be as durable than those characters, he's relatively durable when factoring in he doesn't have anything but some iron trousers and a sleeveless t-shirt on though. He is less durable though, that means that an unbuffed Zerker Champion can kill him where he might fall just short on killing a Captain or Overlord, but getting the buffs that push him over the hump into threatening those characters is easy, especially since you'll most likely be able to put a few Zerker attacks in from the side as well. An unarmoured Ork Warboss (of which there are what, half a dozen or more on each planet with Orks?) should not be anywhere near as tough to slay with a PF as an Overlord with a phase shifter that lets him phase out of reality when he sees the PF coming down. The Warboss can swing as hard as most melee fighters, but without upgrades he should not be as durable. Upgrades for the existing datasheet and/or alternate datasheets that can make a Warboss into true Warlord is fine, getting rid of the Lieutenant/Captain rank of your species is not. Claiming that the Warboss is bad when he is good is not fine.
The Necron Lord (exact same price as the Warboss) has 4 W T5 3+/7++ and the Living Metal ability (heal 1 wound at the start of my turn). Warboss hits on 2+ and has 4 attacks instead of 3 on 3+. I have suggested that Warbosses should be 55 instead of 65 in another thread and that PK should be 25 instead of 13 for models with A characteristic of 4+, I have suggested that Necron Lords should be 60 from 65 with the warscythe (which is not -1 to hit but is S7 instead of 10) should remain at 9 pts.
Why the hate for PK? Because it's the premium melee weapon for a melee HQ and that means it needs a relatively high price to avoid punishing people that build their Warboss differently, just like the SM thunder hammer needed a premium price on Captains. Necron HQs are not melee HQs, they are support HQs, any melee ability they have is secondary which is why people don't universally build Lords and Overlords with warscythes but instead often go for the cheapest weapon available, where people universally take PK for their 4+ A Orks. But mostly the nerf to PK Warbosses is actually because of KK, when I suggested nerfing it in another thread people gave me gak for not knowing the Ork struggle. How good is KK compared to the Necron Voidreaper? Same damage buff from 2->3 and D3->3. Voidreaper wounds non-VEHICLE models on 2+, KK re-rolls failed wound rolls at all times. I'd say the KK comes out on top, but KK also adds +1 to hit rolls, making it quite a bit better. So Warboss gets a nerf and you can have your buffs to your other relics and be forced to go relic or go home with your Warboss. Thinking about it I actually think Destroyer Lords need to pay more for warscythes because they are dedicated fighter characters.
Broodlords have a 5++ 6W T5 which gives them 50% more durability vs PF and they cost 50% more pts, they have the same Sv characteristic though so they die more quickly to AP -0 and -1. They have the exact same speed as an Evil Sunz Warboss (re-roll failed charges instead of 'Ere We Go but that's negligible), 50% more attacks, hit on 2+ without a relic but worse relics. I suggested raising the cost of Broodlords by 10.
Grimskul wrote: Just because a Warboss CAN (not will) do significant damage to a knight doesn't mean he will, and more often than not can't due to a foot boss having crap survivability and mobility to even reach a knight to begin with intact outside of Da Jump, which is again not guaranteed, either passing the power or succeeding charge wise.
All I really need to prove that the Warboss is good is two GT top 4s with 2+ foot Warbosses and I have that. Nothing is guarenteed in a dice game, that's half the fun!
See this is what I meant by bad faith arguments, you rarely if ever address the points being made, you just looked at my paragraph and went "Nope! Orks did well in GT with Warbosses! I'm right!", without again considering the context they're in regarding the lists. Without a doubt that at least one of the Warbosses is with a KK (which we've established is the anomaly and not the rule regarding Warboss effectiveness) and the other Warboss on foot is slot filler or there for morale purposes. So neither is a case of demonstrating how baseline Warbosses are doing their job in terms of how effective they are as a CC unit.
Similarly, I think any credibility you might have held in your argument is gone the moment you implied PK needed to go up to 25 for Ork characters. How in Gork's green earth is a PK worth that much? Do you see Powerfists rocking the meta? If that was the case, Terminators would be the absolute hotcakes atm, and every marine sergeant would upgrade to a PF. On top of that logic, TH terminators would see competitive play again. Do you see that currently? I don't see that all, so unless your meta is super unconventional it seems like you're grasping at straws.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2019/11/01 14:01:02
Except it's NOT a 78 point character one-shotting a Knight.
First off, the nitpick-it's only 78 points with the Index. Otherwise, it's 80 minimum. but two points is small peanuts.
More importantly, it's also a Relic, and then a minimum of two psychic powers or one psychic power and a Warlord trait. And even then, they can realistically be murdered in overwatch. It's not guaranteed, but it's a distinct possibility. You say "Charge from behind ruins or other LoS-Blocking terrain!" But what if there's not any available? Or it's there, but it's within 9" of the Knight or their screens? Or, hell, what if you fail the charge? If you Da Jump or Tellyport him into range, you still will fail the charge reasonably often. Evil Sunz makes it better, but then you're Kultur-locked for at least one detachment-admittedly, Sunz are good, so that's not a huge deal, but it's still something you need to consider.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
Even at 13 points PK aren't that good. They completely pale in comparison to how useful they were in earlier editions.
In earlier editions PKs great for dealing with vehicles and instagibbing T4.
Nowadays they can't do that. Not only do you have an increasing chance of missing due to the -1 to hit, but the variable damage means that you might not even do that much damage. You might as well just take a big choppa, which doesn't have hit penalties and is guaranteed to deal 2 damage. You are missing out on better wound rolls and armor pen, but its 1/3 of the price.
The only reason to take a PK is to get the Killa Klaw, imo.
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
Edit: Removed a faulty claim about the big Choppa Warboss being unpopular.
A voidscythe is a better thunderhammer at a 20 point discount. it has SX2 AP-4 and 3 damage stock and are -1 to hit like a thunderhammer. I think most Ork players would love to pay 20 points to be able to take a thunderhammer on their warboss.
The thunderhammer was never too good on the basic Captain, and never an option for a Lieutenant, the nerf was only meant for Bike and Jump Captains. As I mentioned the voidscythe isn't taken because Overlords are M5 support characters, CCBs and Destroyer Lords cannot take them. Orks cannot take thunder hammers though, it's a rarely taken option for a support character with M5 and not the most common option for a melee character.
With voidreaper you get the same thing but are now hitting on 2+ and wounding on 2+ as long as you don't attack a vehicle so you should be using it to hunt characters/MC's instead of vehicles.
Voidreaper is S7 D2 regardless of whether you take it as an upgrade for a warscythe or a side-grade for a voidscythe.
The reason why people were giving you grief in the other thread is because a Warboss with KK is how the warboss used to be in combat in earlier editions. They were fairly tough and would wreck almost anything they got into combat with. Compare that to a stock warboss now and it's almost laughable, they just bounce off most hard targets without doing any real damage.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Even at 13 points PK aren't that good. They completely pale in comparison to how useful they were in earlier editions.
In earlier editions PKs great for dealing with vehicles and instagibbing T4.
Nowadays they can't do that. Not only do you have an increasing chance of missing due to the -1 to hit, but the variable damage means that you might not even do that much damage. You might as well just take a big choppa, which doesn't have hit penalties and is guaranteed to deal 2 damage. You are missing out on better wound rolls and armor pen, but its 1/3 of the price.
The only reason to take a PK is to get the Killa Klaw, imo.
Well this ain't 7th and thank god for that, the Warboss is just as good at hitting things as other melee fighters, he doesn't need an OP relic any more than other factions do. But go back and play 7th, I'm sure you'll have great fun against invisible daemon/bark/seer stars and infinite daemons, unkillable robot hordes that fry your vehicles in no time etc. etc. Vehicles getting popped by a mean look was just how things worked back then.
Grimskul wrote: False equivalence, you believing trukks, battlewagons and stompas (which again, are so plainly obvious in how under utilized they are that even you would have to admit they need fixing, isn't saying much) needing buffs doesn't excuse you from making bad faith arguments against the proposed changes in the thread.
How is it false equivalence? I only want to nerf the OP Ork units and I want to buff the UP ones, just because you have a victim complex and you don't know how to read does not mean I haven't answered the arguments made in the thread. I've said three times why I think OP needs to rework his idea. Because his one-size-fits-all Warboss does not fit every Warboss in the 40k universe.
See this is what I meant by bad faith arguments, you rarely if ever address the points being made, you just looked at my paragraph and went "Nope! Orks won GT with Warbosses! I'm right!", without again considering the context they're in regarding the lists. Without a doubt that at least one of the Warbosses is with a KK (which we've established is the anomaly and not the rule regarding Warboss effectiveness) and the other Warboss on foot is slot filler or there for morale purposes. So neither is a case of demonstrating how baseline Warbosses are doing their job in terms of how effective they are as a CC unit.
Similarly, I think any credibility you might have held in your argument is gone the moment you implied PK needed to go up to 25 for Ork characters. How in Gork's green earth is a PK worth that much? Do you see Powerfists rocking the meta? If that was the case, Terminators would be the absolute hotcakes atm, and every marine sergeant would upgrade to a PF. On top of that logic, TH terminators would see competitive play again. Do you see that currently? I don't see that all, so unless your meta is super unconventional it seems like you're grasping at straws.
You keep creating bad comparisons and deliberately stacking it in favour of the Warboss to try and "prove your point", when things like Berserkers and Knights are not even the same type of unit nor the FOC slot that the Warboss inhabits. It'd be like if I compare a Monolith to a unit of grots and say "Oh wow, well compare the equivalent unit of grots in a 1-1 fight against a Monolith and the grots don't stand a chance! Monoliths don't need any changes, they're fine!". I'm obviously being hyperbolic here but that's effectively what you're doing and not giving the full context of how grots aren't useful via damage output but CP generation and objective holding. Similarly, just because a Warboss CAN (not will) do significant damage to a knight doesn't mean he will, and more often than not can't due to a foot boss having crap survivability and mobility to even reach a knight to begin with intact outside of Da Jump, which is again not guaranteed, either passing the power or succeeding charge wise.
I made a comparison between Lords and Warbosses (two characters with the exact same cost) and a comparison between Broodlords and Warbosses (two characters with the same T, W and Sv characteristics). Why don't you address that comparison? The one you asked for? Is it because you didn't read the quote you posted? I did address your point about a lack of 1-1 comparisons I just did it as part of my comment to JNA and then addressed the point I quoted you made separately.
I only mean to increase the pts cost of the PK for Warboss on foot and on bike, where other options are not worth taking. If you are taking anything but a PK for your Warboss currently you are not writing your lists optimally AFAIK, but feel free to prove me wrong with math or tournament results. I forgot about Warboss in Mega-armour because #1 he's not in the codex #2 nobody takes him. But for all the people that want a more durable Warboss, why aren't you running a Warboss in Mega-armour?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/11/01 15:51:00
The reason why people were giving you grief in the other thread is because a Warboss with KK is how the warboss used to be in combat in earlier editions. They were fairly tough and would wreck almost anything they got into combat with. Compare that to a stock warboss now and it's almost laughable, they just bounce off most hard targets without doing any real damage.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Even at 13 points PK aren't that good. They completely pale in comparison to how useful they were in earlier editions.
In earlier editions PKs great for dealing with vehicles and instagibbing T4.
Nowadays they can't do that. Not only do you have an increasing chance of missing due to the -1 to hit, but the variable damage means that you might not even do that much damage. You might as well just take a big choppa, which doesn't have hit penalties and is guaranteed to deal 2 damage. You are missing out on better wound rolls and armor pen, but its 1/3 of the price.
The only reason to take a PK is to get the Killa Klaw, imo.
Well this ain't 7th and thank god for that, the Warboss is just as good at hitting things as other melee fighters, he doesn't need an OP relic any more than other factions do. But go back and play 7th, I'm sure you'll have great fun against invisible daemon/bark/seer stars and infinite daemons, unkillable robot hordes that fry your vehicles in no time etc. etc. Vehicles getting popped by a mean look was just how things worked back then.
Yes, because as we all know, there was only 7th ed before 8th, and 4th ed and 5th ed never existed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/01 14:38:57
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
Good Ork players more or less unanimously disagree AFAIK, what GT did you win with your big choppa Warboss again? Have you at least won a couple of RTTs with them? Can you refer me to three lists (piloted by any player) in 2019 that topped a GT with a big choppa Warboss?
? I feel like we are having a language barrier issue here.
The thunderhammer was never too good on the basic Captain, and never an option for a Lieutenant, the nerf was only meant for Bike and Jump Captains. As I mentioned the voidscythe isn't taken because Overlords are M5 support characters, CCBs and Destroyer Lords cannot take them. Orks cannot take thunder hammers though, it's a rarely taken option for a support character with M5 and not the most common option for a melee character.
The only reason I brought up the thunderhammer is because you were saying the voidscythe/voidreaper are PK equivalents. I was saying that they are comparable to the KK because what they really are is a cheap thunderhammer equivalent. I wasn't making the arguement that overlords are a good CC unit.
Voidreaper is S7 D2 regardless of whether you take it as an upgrade for a warscythe or a side-grade for a voidscythe.
I'm literally staring at the codex voidreaper and it is only S7 when attacking a unit with the VEHICLE keyword. It is also always 3 damage. You have either been playing it wrong for all of 8th or are deliberately lying to try and bolster your argument.
Well this ain't 7th and thank god for that, the Warboss is just as good at hitting things as other melee fighters, he doesn't need an OP relic any more than other factions do. But go back and play 7th, I'm sure you'll have great fun against invisible daemon/bark/seer stars and infinite daemons, unkillable robot hordes that fry your vehicles in no time etc. etc. Vehicles getting popped by a mean look was just how things worked back then.
I've never played 7th and you are just deflecting from the argument.
How is it false equivalence? I only want to nerf the OP Ork units and I want to buff the UP ones, just because you have a victim complex and you don't know how to read does not mean I haven't answered the arguments made in the thread. I've said three times why I think OP needs to rework his idea. Because his one-size-fits-all Warboss does not fit every Warboss in the 40k universe.
The original premise of the thread was that Warbosses are currently glasscannons that don't match their fluff since they only have a 4+ save and no invuln to keep them from getting instagibbed like most HQ's. You were the one who derailed the thread by saying that since it was theoretically possible to a knight to get one-shot by a relic PK warboss with a lot of support in very specific scenario that they were fine as they are compared to the knights durability.
why aren't you running a Warboss in Mega-armour?
Because it is an index option that doesn't have a kit, they are extremely slow so you still need to da jump/tellyport them in, and they are significantly more expensive than a standard warboss. Gaining 2 armor, 1W, and losing an inch of movement just isn't worth it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/01 14:57:08
Andykp wrote: I always liked the old Kustom force field
That's great. That should really be a relic option.
It wouldn't work as a generic option because of the scale of the game, but as a one off it should be fine.
Andykp wrote: I always liked the old Kustom force field
That's great. That should really be a relic option.
It wouldn't work as a generic option because of the scale of the game, but as a one off it should be fine.
I feel like that would be an anomaly in the game design for most weapons/abilities +1 being pretty simple straight buffs. I would prefer a Mega Kustom Force Field relic that just gives a 4++ save instead tbh, less bookkeeping that way.
1. As a Necron player, I can tell you nobody brings the Voidscythe on an Overlord. You can't even deliver it. I don't remember if it was even an option for the CCB though. Been a while since I looked at the codex or even the army.
2. Warbosses are only A4? They really should be A5 at minimum.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Good Ork players more or less unanimously disagree AFAIK, what GT did you win with your big choppa Warboss again? Have you at least won a couple of RTTs with them? Can you refer me to three lists (piloted by any player) in 2019 that topped a GT with a big choppa Warboss?
? I feel like we are having a language barrier issue here.
That and I was just wrong, apologies, deleted from the post in question.
Voidreaper is S7 D2 regardless of whether you take it as an upgrade for a warscythe or a side-grade for a voidscythe.
I'm literally staring at the codex voidreaper and it is only S7 when attacking a unit with the VEHICLE keyword. It is also always 3 damage. You have either been playing it wrong for all of 8th or are deliberately lying to try and bolster your argument.
I don't know why I wrote it is D2 I even posted it had D3 earlier I feel like, but it is never Sx2. Wounding a vehicle on 3/9 times or 8/9 times is a pretty big point I feel like, wounding a Monster 32/36 instead of 30/36 times is also marginally better.
Well this ain't 7th and thank god for that, the Warboss is just as good at hitting things as other melee fighters, he doesn't need an OP relic any more than other factions do. But go back and play 7th, I'm sure you'll have great fun against invisible daemon/bark/seer stars and infinite daemons, unkillable robot hordes that fry your vehicles in no time etc. etc. Vehicles getting popped by a mean look was just how things worked back then.
I've never played 7th and you are just deflecting from the argument.
The arguement is "Warboss was able to kill a vehicle in earlier editions, therefore he should still be able to do it and any option that allows him to do it should not be nerfed to an extent that he can no longer perform this feat", the problem is that other factions also struggle with killing a vehicle in one turn and don't get as amazing a Relic as the KK. Voidscythe would need to be better than the KK to make Necrons take it since #1 Necrons don't get as much CP #2 Necrons don't have a character that is well-suited for carrying it since Overlords have 3 A WS 2+ and Destroyer Lords have 4 A WS 3+.
How is it false equivalence? I only want to nerf the OP Ork units and I want to buff the UP ones, just because you have a victim complex and you don't know how to read does not mean I haven't answered the arguments made in the thread. I've said three times why I think OP needs to rework his idea. Because his one-size-fits-all Warboss does not fit every Warboss in the 40k universe.
The original premise of the thread was that Warbosses are currently glasscannons that don't match their fluff since they only have a 4+ save and no invuln to keep them from getting instagibbed like most HQ's. You were the one who derailed the thread by saying that since it was theoretically possible to a knight to get one-shot by a relic PK warboss with a lot of support in very specific scenario that they were fine as they are compared to the knights durability.
Their durability is fine is what I've said since my first post, any durability they get past this basic level of 6W T5 4+/7++ should be optional and not mandatory. Warbosses die and new ones rise, who is going to claim the title of Warboss after one falls? What is the step between 2 W and 9 W?
why aren't you running a Warboss in Mega-armour?
Because it is an index option that doesn't have a kit, they are extremely slow so you still need to da jump/tellyport them in, and they are significantly more expensive than a standard warboss. Gaining 2 armor, 1W, and losing an inch of movement just isn't worth it.
I know all the reasons why people don't take them, the point is that the option for a tougher Warboss already exists and it's not all that popular. The Mega Warboss is fluffy, going from 2 wounds to 9 wounds, without a Lieutenant and a Captain between your Chapter Master-esque Warboss and a Boss Nob is not fluffy. Giving that tiny model 9 W T5 does not make sense either.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/11/01 16:12:54
You've made several mistakes already in the thread and you made another again. I would seriously consider looking over the facts and books before you make any more statements that "support" your stance. You keep repeating that a Warboss is survivable when people have already shown that is not the case. You of all people don't get to use fluff as an excuse for Orks "dying" and being replaced, especially when Ork fluff actually contradicts that given that Warbosses get to their position from being the toughest and strongest, not by politicking or nepotism. That would be like if I suggested necron overlords get dementia as a bespoke rule because a lot of them get a little crazy after being awoken from stasis, meaning they have to take a Ld test each time they move, shoot, attack or use MWBD, otherwise they can't do anything for the whole turn. Does this sound realistic or fair? More importantly I don't know what you're smoking, but a Mega Armour Warboss only has 7 wounds, not 9, so you're using the wrong comparison....again. Can you not see why people disagree with you at this point?
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2019/11/01 17:05:48
vict0988 wrote: All I really need to prove that the Warboss is good is two GT top 4s with 2+ foot Warbosses and I have that. Nothing is guarenteed in a dice game, that's half the fun!
Source for these lists please? The vast majority of competitive Ork lists that I've seen of late have the Megaboss on foot or use the Bike Boss. I have seen the footboss used very rarely and, as stated earlier, primarily to alleviate Grots' morale issues.
E - Vict, to be honest, unless you play against or with Ork units often, you'll not have much idea what you're talking about and probably shouldn't get so invested in a discussion around which you are largely ignorant. Unsurprisingly, the majority, if not all, Ork players want to believe that their particular warboss is the baddest boss dat ever WAAAGGGHH'd and the simple fact is that their stats don't reflect that. They're not even close. I also take umbridge with the idea that a unit is fine if it functions only with a relic. Relics should be optional niceties, not requirements of a successful unit.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/01 16:41:10
The walking warboss as is is hot garbage.
The Biker boss I think is good because it alleviates some of its issues enough to become a good unit for its cost. Of course, we’re losing it. Woof. FW even took the bike off its shop.
It has one thing going for it: it’s relatively cheap as far as HQs go.
It has several issues that have been noted but:
1) it can’t deliver itself to combat effectively. It requires Da Jump ( which means you have to pass it, not get dispelled, and then be able to mane the charge ), slogging ( good luck ), a transport ( woof), or spending precious CP to deep strike. Basically these options pigeon hole it into evil suns because it’s slow as gak. Da Jump also means you aren’t using it on other units.
It also has a reasonable chance of getting munched by overwatch.
2) It requires a relic, and possibly being the warlord, and several psychic powers to be really combat effective. With only 4 attacks ( and a couple squig bites ), it’s not effective without pouring insane amounts of stuff into the unit, plus probably using several CP heavy stratagems. A lot of comparable stuff like SM captains can be fine without relics or strangers.
The biker boss gets over 1 a lot; it can deliver itself to combat, it has extra T and W, and also gets some ok Dakka for chaff. It’s also not locked into evil suns to get there effectively.
Two is an issue, but I get im paying ~30 points less.
I’d happily pay more points for a krumpy warboss. If that also means we get a cheaper option closer to what it is now, fine. But unless we get a bike or jump pack, walking boss is basically trash anyway. If it’s walking it needs to be able to take a punch; if it can fly again, I’d still happily pay more points for a killy version.
Cybork 5++ or 5+++ FNP seem like good ideas.
As an aside, This was actually brought up in the tactics thread. Orks in general have kind of limited or gak HQ options. 3 very popular options are getting retired for basically the reason that GW can’t be assed to make the models anymore it’s at the time. Woof.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/11/02 00:28:54
You've made several mistakes already in the thread and you made another again. I would seriously consider looking over the facts and books before you make any more statements that "support" your stance.
Just because you never admit you you are wrong does not mean you never are.
You keep repeating that a Warboss is survivable when people have already shown that is not the case. You of all people don't get to use fluff as an excuse for Orks "dying" and being replaced, especially when Ork fluff actually contradicts that given that Warbosses get to their position from being the toughest and strongest, not by politicking or nepotism. That would be like if I suggested necron overlords get dementia as a bespoke rule because a lot of them get a little crazy after being awoken from stasis, meaning they have to take a Ld test each time they move, shoot, attack or use MWBD, otherwise they can't do anything for the whole turn. Does this sound realistic or fair? More importantly I don't know what you're smoking, but a Mega Armour Warboss only has 7 wounds, not 9, so you're using the wrong comparison....again. Can you not see why people disagree with you at this point?
You can't even read, what are you doing on a forum?
vict0988 wrote: All I really need to prove that the Warboss is good is two GT top 4s with 2+ foot Warbosses and I have that. Nothing is guarenteed in a dice game, that's half the fun!
Source for these lists please? The vast majority of competitive Ork lists that I've seen of late have the Megaboss on foot or use the Bike Boss. I have seen the footboss used very rarely and, as stated earlier, primarily to alleviate Grots' morale issues.
BCP app. The footboss is w. powerclaw is the most popular option from all the lists I've been looking through (all the top 4s in 2019 and several dozen others), it's in around 50% of lists, around 15% have choppa footboss and around 35% have Bikeboss w. powerclaw. I don't care what he's used for, you don't buff powerful units.
E - Vict, to be honest, unless you play against or with Ork units often, you'll not have much idea what you're talking about and probably shouldn't get so invested in a discussion around which you are largely ignorant.
I'm no more ignorant than the people that say Warbosses are bad or PK are bad. So please tell those people to shut up as well.
Unsurprisingly, the majority, if not all, Ork players want to believe that their particular warboss is the baddest boss dat ever WAAAGGGHH'd and the simple fact is that their stats don't reflect that. They're not even close. I also take umbridge with the idea that a unit is fine if it functions only with a relic. Relics should be optional niceties, not requirements of a successful unit.
The stats don't reflect that every Warboss is the biggest Warboss in the galaxy! The horror! The absolute horror. No, you can get a Stratagem or a seperate datasheet/option for the badass Warboss. You can still run a Warboss without a Relic, as the top4s with multiple Warbosses proves. Now get out of the thread or at least stop posting until you inform yourself.
I think the Warboss datasheet is fine but it’s very uninteresting and in certain lights a little lacklustre. Da Killa Klaw is the only thing that I would say makes the Warboss particularly strong, and it’s certainly a great relic. Without it I’ve found Warbosses don’t feel particularly offensively powerful. 4 attacks feels a bit low to me for such a unit and they really need relics/WL traits/psychic powers/all of the above to get around that. Without a sweeping reduction in the overall killing power of the game I’d hate to see Orks lose Da Killa Klaw, after all there is plenty of non-unwieldy and upgraded power fists (and similar weapons/relics) available to other factions. I would however agree that it’s a bit of a crutch for the Warboss. I really like the Breakin’ Heads ability, very useful in game and very fluffy - one of the reasons I’d always include a Warboss in most lists.
Like most of our codex the datasheets of our units when compared to their points cost aren’t particularly special but as we’ve got some really powerful stratagems it’s quite easy to make things punch above their weight, the price paid to do so is just wrapped up in CP or relics/WL traits etc. A basic PK Warboss isn’t great but a KK Warboss with Might Makes Right, Fists of Gork, Warpath fighting twice or even thrice is amazing.
I’d like for their to be many more options for our HQs - mounts, melee weapons, ranged weapons, armour and invulnerable saves etc. Of course I don’t mind paying for these upgrades. A 4+ save with no innate invulnerable save or FNP feels pretty unrepresentative of the picture I’ve built in my mind of these behemoths. A 5++ as standard with an option for a non-relic 4++ would be ideal for me. Something like an Iron Gob would be cool. I don’t mind fluffing the invulnerable save away as being due to incredibly resilient biology, but FNP definitely represent that better (however it overlaps with the design space for Painboys).
I’d really love to see a datasheet for a Warlord type unit, so we can leave the Warboss as a Lieutenant-style unit and have something else to represent a bigger, more capable Waaagh! leader.
Basically I’d like to see Orky versions of SM Lieutenants and Captain/Chapter Master (not exact translations but something similar) so we can make our warbands and Waaaghs! more customisable. As I said I’m happy I pay points for any of this where justified!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/11/02 07:59:30
vict0988 wrote: All I really need to prove that the Warboss is good is two GT top 4s with 2+ foot Warbosses and I have that. Nothing is guarenteed in a dice game, that's half the fun!
Source for these lists please? The vast majority of competitive Ork lists that I've seen of late have the Megaboss on foot or use the Bike Boss. I have seen the footboss used very rarely and, as stated earlier, primarily to alleviate Grots' morale issues.
BCP app. The footboss is w. powerclaw is the most popular option from all the lists I've been looking through (all the top 4s in 2019 and several dozen others), it's in around 50% of lists, around 15% have choppa footboss and around 35% have Bikeboss w. powerclaw. I don't care what he's used for, you don't buff powerful units.
No Vict. Go to 40k stats, run through the recent Ork lists and provide links to those that have a standard warboss on foot, as this discussion is around that specific unit. I’m not seeing the same numbers that you are. I could provide links to lists here that have no warboss. As I have repeatedly stated, when a warboss is taken he’s most often on a bike and next often in mega armour - two options that will soon be removed from competitive Ork lists because they will be illegal. Your numbers seem way, way off to me (I’ve never seen a big Choppa boss in the top 4 for example). We look at the top 4 lists only by the way, no one is interested in little Timmy taking a footboss in his first ever tournament going 0-5.
Many of us have already proven that the footboss is in no way a ‘powerful’ unit.
I’m no more ignorant than the people that say Warbosses are bad or PK are bad. So please tell those people to shut up as well.
You think you are more informed about a faction you don’t play with or against than those that do? Unbelievable. Your statements throughout this thread have proven your ignorance, I’m afraid. You’re welcome to continue posting, my suggestion is that you become less invested because you seem to be winding yourself up. Your last post is incredibly rude - stating another user can’t read. Perhaps it’s time for a break from the thread?
The stats don't reflect that every Warboss is the biggest Warboss in the galaxy! The horror! The absolute horror. No, you can get a Stratagem or a seperate datasheet/option for the badass Warboss. You can still run a Warboss without a Relic, as the top4s with multiple Warbosses proves. Now get out of the thread or at least stop posting until you inform yourself.
Again - please provide the top 4 Ork lists that took multiple warbosses. I’ve seen very few.
As to your suggestion, if it’s that Orks should have access to another data sheet, a warlord or something that is a stronger, better, more expensive warboss I’m all for it. That doesn’t help the current warboss on foot though, which is what this discussion is about. The current warboss on foot is not a good unit. It is an expensive aura buff bot that some lists require to function effectively and is never taken for its durability or innate damage output. Reliance on a relic to be useful is, again, poor design.
These are the last ten Orks listed posted on 40kstats so the stats aren't hidden behind a paywall like with BCP, please PM me if any of this is wrong.
One Footboss w. PK: 3rd Place Tom Higginbottom - Glasshammer Open 1st Place Steven Pampreen - Warzone: Montreal 3rd Place Steven Pampreen - CCBB
One Footboss w. PK and one Footboss w. BC: 2nd Place Chris Hanes - Warzone: Montreal
One Bikeboss w. PK: 2nd Place Rasmus Olesen - Midtcon 1st Place Nick Sutherland - Iron Halo 3rd Place Marc Parker - Nova Open 4th Place Charles Velazquez - Wargamescon XI 2nd Place Jeff Poole - Hammer of Wrath
Two Footbosses w. PK: 4th Place Andreas Drachmann - Midtcon
Footboss w. PK and Bikeboss w. PK: 3rd Place Elliott Levy - Michigan GT
The one Footboss w. PK is more common in general than at the top tables. But lists with no Warbosses are very unpopular both at the top and bottom, more or less half the lists on BCP actually write KK on their Warboss but I assume everyone that has a PK Warboss takes KK, I think must be less than 25% that don't take KK between those that run no Warboss and just big choppas. I don't think I've seen any Ork list without a Warboss. I've only scrolled through all the top 4s on 40kstats and a couple dozen on BCP and maybe there was one or two, can't say for sure.
Balance is a complicated mess of interlocking things and any attempt to balance the game is probably going to be messy and without proper playtesting it probably won't get a tonne better than what GW does. Destroying vehicles in melee was a very rewarding experience previously, I recommend you try and make the most of your pile-in and consolidation moves and capture enemy tanks as captives to survive the enemy Shooting phase, melee can still be a rewarding experience and lead to victories both at the casual and competitive level.
I was wrong about a lot of SM factions which don't perform as well as I expected, on the other hand WS are way overperforming. Stats are obscured by brilliant players that can perform magic with the worst units. I think the Helldrake for example was viewed by many as a trash unit before it suddenly started doing super well. The KK Warboss is certainly tilted heavily in the direction of glass cannon and requires real finesse to get value from, on the other hand if you give him a 4++ and 5+++ he can also get moderately tough.
Good luck with further development and possibly eventual testing of the idea for making Warbosses more survivable.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/02 09:17:07
vict0988 wrote: These are the last ten Orks listed posted on 40kstats so the stats aren't hidden behind a paywall like with BCP, please PM me if any of this is wrong.
One Footboss w. PK:
3rd Place Tom Higginbottom - Glasshammer Open
1st Place Steven Pampreen - Warzone: Montreal
3rd Place Steven Pampreen - CCBB
One Footboss w. PK and one Footboss w. BC:
2nd Place Chris Hanes - Warzone: Montreal
One Bikeboss w. PK:
2nd Place Rasmus Olesen - Midtcon
1st Place Nick Sutherland - Iron Halo
3rd Place Marc Parker - Nova Open
4th Place Charles Velazquez - Wargamescon XI
2nd Place Jeff Poole - Hammer of Wrath
Two Footbosses w. PK:
4th Place Andreas Drachmann - Midtcon
Footboss w. PK and Bikeboss w. PK:
3rd Place Elliott Levy - Michigan GT
The one Footboss w. PK is more common in general than at the top tables. But lists with no Warbosses are very unpopular both at the top and bottom, more or less half the lists on BCP actually write KK on their Warboss but I assume everyone that has a PK Warboss takes KK, I think must be less than 25% that don't take KK between those that run no Warboss and just big choppas. I don't think I've seen any Ork list without a Warboss. I've only scrolled through all the top 4s on 40kstats and a couple dozen on BCP and maybe there was one or two, can't say for sure.
Balance is a complicated mess of interlocking things and any attempt to balance the game is probably going to be messy and without proper playtesting it probably won't get a tonne better than what GW does. Destroying vehicles in melee was a very rewarding experience previously, I recommend you try and make the most of your pile-in and consolidation moves and capture enemy tanks as captives to survive the enemy Shooting phase, melee can still be a rewarding experience and lead to victories both at the casual and competitive level.
I was wrong about a lot of SM factions which don't perform as well as I expected, on the other hand WS are way overperforming. Stats are obscured by brilliant players that can perform magic with the worst units. I think the Helldrake for example was viewed by many as a trash unit before it suddenly started doing super well. The KK Warboss is certainly tilted heavily in the direction of glass cannon and requires real finesse to get value from, on the other hand if you give him a 4++ and 5+++ he can also get moderately tough.
Good luck with further development and possibly eventual testing of the idea for making Warbosses more survivable.
Thanks for sharing that. But either way, this kinda proves our point though, we're not arguing that Warbosses in general are terrible. The ones on bikes are good and Megabosses are somewhat passable depending on the list. The codex specific foot one is the main issue and you can notice that the very lists you post there aren't many footbosses and when there is, there's generall only one with PK, which is heavily implied to be the one with the Killa Klaw, the one established to NOT be representative of what the baseline Warboss is, given that it is relying on a relic to be effective. There is no incentive to take more than one with the relic because of how little they do overall in the army, they're not killy, fast or tough enough to be a beatstick and their auras don't do enough to buff Ork units to warrant using them like Lieutenants or Captains hanging out in the backfield.
3500+
3300+
1000
1850
2000 
~4100
