Orks are Not OP but Ghaz is. Absurdly so.

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.

**Nitro Zeus**

Jidmah wrote:
Nitro Zeus wrote:
I also think there's a lot of close-minded Ork baddies who haven't had a chance to play him, but it's a pretty casual playerbase for that army so this reaction doesn't surprise me. It's the same people who insist playtesting and experience aren't relevant every time, and have been wrong so many times in the past about stuff they were sure about.

Nitro Zeus wrote:
I’m not saying it’s some massive overlooked thing that’s gonna win you a ton of games. It is however, another cool thing about the unit.

One of the best Ork players I know of in the world says Ghaz has potential and is differently a wrecking ball in some matches, and a late game crusher in others. The best Ork player I’ve met irl currently wont call it as good or bad, and says playtesting is required for such a unit. This is what good players are saying, and it’s where I’m inclined to sit as well. However This site has a notoriously casual yet disproportionately vocal Ork player base who don’t exactly have a good track record with this sort thing. It’s the same people in these threads everytime. I respect the level heads and experience of people like Jidmah, but there’s others who are WAY to sure of something that hasn’t actually hit playtesting yet - not that I think their low level playtesting would really be the measure, but considering how famously wrong some of the louder voices in here have been in the past, you’d think there’d at least be some level of restraint before making these “indisputable” declarations and calling everyone stupid who disagrees.

Between those two posts nine separate posters have referred to his point costs in 11 separate posts, not counting quotes. Berating people on how casual they are without even reading half the posts or bothering to check the topic at hand? Grand sport.

Berating? You guys are way too extra. Yeah I didn't read through all 11 pages of this genius-tier thread, and when I see dakka posters post some gak like that I assume exaggeration, because, well, dakka. If anyone is berating at this point it's you, I was big enough to admit my mistaken understanding of the points, I agreed you guys were in the right, and said I'll hold the L on this one - what exactly are you berating me about now?

**ImperialArmy**

40k community site did a pit match and Gaz beat....
Girly man, a knight, dreadnought and others lost to The red one eyed cyclops.

**JNAProductions**

ImperialArmy wrote:
40k community site did a pit match and Gaz beat....
Girly man, a knight, dreadnought and others lost to The red one eyed cyclops.

Being good at a one-v-one duel does not translate to being good on the tabletop.

**flandarz**

Yeah, that article assumes the following:
1) Ghaz has a 100% charge success rate.
2) your opponent is either gonna charge him with the stuff he *wants* to fight, or will not screen those things.
3) he doesn't take any damage at all until he meets those targets.

**An Actual Englishman**

Good to talk to someone with the decency to consider other viewpoints and admit that perhaps they were mistaken. Pleasure speaking with you Nitro.

Edit - looks like I missed some posts. Let's not go back to warring between ourselves ladies and gents.

**Dudeface**

flandarz wrote:
Yeah, that article assumes the following:
1) Ghaz has a 100% charge success rate.
2) your opponent is either gonna charge him with the stuff he *wants* to fight, or will not screen those things.
3) he doesn't take any damage at all until he meets those targets.

They let all opponents charge ghaz and they had 1 shooting/psychic phase beforehand.

So points 1 and 3 are wrong here.

**flandarz**

Point 3 is still valid as, again, it assumes both opponents are within charge range of each other from the start. So none of them were able to shoot Ghaz as he crossed a minimum of 12" of board. Point 1 being invalid is fair.

**SemperMortis**

Dudeface wrote:
flandarz wrote:
Yeah, that article assumes the following:
1) Ghaz has a 100% charge success rate.
2) your opponent is either gonna charge him with the stuff he *wants* to fight, or will not screen those things.
3) he doesn't take any damage at all until he meets those targets.

They let all opponents charge ghaz and they had 1 shooting/psychic phase beforehand.

So points 1 and 3 are wrong here.

Ghaz is a melee beatstick and not much else, he is great at killing enemy LoW and what not simply because he is limited to 4 dmg per fight phase. So while theoretically Ghaz can inflict 28 dmg a phase his opponent can only do 4. Yeah no kidding he wins one on ones. But on the tabletop he is going to be garbage because unless you spend 2 CP to tellyport him he is going to lose at hte minimum 4 wounds in turn 1 shooting phase, and depending on who goes first either 4 more in the 2nd shooting phase or 1-2 more in the overwatch phase (depending on armies of course, Tau might pull off 4 without much trouble). realistically he is going to be a for fun only choice.

**Pyroalchi**

Please read the following only as an inquiry of a non-ork player out of curiosity:
Would it help Ghaz if he had some rule similar to the Knights Titanic feet that would allow him to do 3x the number of attacks, but weaker ones? Regardless of his survivability it would at least allow him to remove hordes of 1W models swarming him.

**An Actual Englishman**

Pyroalchi wrote:
Please read the following only as an inquiry of a non-ork player out of curiosity:
Would it help Ghaz if he had some rule similar to the Knights Titanic feet that would allow him to do 3x the number of attacks, but weaker ones? Regardless of his survivability it would at least allow him to remove hordes of 1W models swarming him.

Absolutely.

**Not Online!!!**

An Actual Englishman wrote:
Pyroalchi wrote:
Please read the following only as an inquiry of a non-ork player out of curiosity:
Would it help Ghaz if he had some rule similar to the Knights Titanic feet that would allow him to do 3x the number of attacks, but weaker ones? Regardless of his survivability it would at least allow him to remove hordes of 1W models swarming him.
Absolutely.

that way atleast he could deal with screens without beeing on his last legs.

**warhead01**

I kinda just wish Ghaz was an exception to the rule and that after his damage is dealt the excess damage spilled over, the way mortal wounds do. I think that would be a nice way for him to deal with being bogged down and maybe not too over the top.

**WhiteDog**

I just cannot understand the arguments that the anti Ghaz are spouting. Screening are a problem for Ghaz ? Why ? When he use tela-tepula ?
Screening are not a problem for Ghaz, as the Ork army have plenty of tools to get rid of those ... Come on, can we get a little bit serious.
His problem is that : he lacks mobility, as a monster he lacks synergy with the rest of the army, and his cost is a little too much. That's it. He does not need more melee efficiency ... He is already better than most in this specific area.

**flandarz**

If you have to take an entirely separate 210 pt unit to deal with screens, then I'd say screens are an issue for Ghaz. And, if that unit gets nuked (and, really, how many armies can't kill off at least 1 Boy mob a turn?) then your ability to deal with screens for Ghaz is reduced.

**Xenomancers**

In certain conditions Ghaz gonna do really well. (Like if facing a pure Custodian army). Hes pretty much useless against an army that can shoot and CC well. I wish he was just the ork version of Abaddon. For how crappy his BS is too he should ether cost way less or his gun should be upped to flat 2 damage.

**SemperMortis**

WhiteDog wrote:
I just cannot understand the arguments that the anti Ghaz are spouting. Screening are a problem for Ghaz ? Why ? When he use tela-tepula ?
Screening are not a problem for Ghaz, as the Ork army have plenty of tools to get rid of those ... Come on, can we get a little bit serious.
His problem is that : he lacks mobility, as a monster he lacks synergy with the rest of the army, and his cost is a little too much. That's it. He does not need more melee efficiency ... He is already better than most in this specific area.

Screens are a problem for Ghaz because for him to even think about getting into CC he has to tellyporta in which btw is 2CP. And every turn you shoot a backfield screen to death you are doing 2 things. 1: giving your opponent plenty of time to move models around and reposition screens and expensive units and 2: not shooting important things. On top of that even if you Tellyporta Strike him in he is useless for his buff aura's (already kind of was anyway) and leaving him completely and utterly exposed.

And as for his cost. It isn't a little to high, its completely absurd. He doesn't synergize AT ALL with the ork army and his buffs don't benefit anyone for the most part. All for the low low price of 285pts. I wouldn't take him at 200pts let alone 285. I'll be taking the new Warboss strat that gives a warboss basically Ghaz levels of power but at 80pts instead of 285 and he can be character protected and healed by painboyz, use grot shields and can be whatever Kulture I want.

**flandarz**

There are certainly armies and units against whom Ghaz will excel. The main issue is that all of these are things which Orkz can already handle more efficiently with other units. Like SAGs, Smashas, Lootas, Flash Gitz, Dreadz, MANz, etc. His sole advantage is that he can only take 4 Wounds a Phase, and even that is easily mitigated. Even if you built a list that doesn't have the tools to kill him, you can fairly easily hide from him, or kite him around the board.

**Canadian 5th**

WhiteDog wrote:
I just cannot understand the arguments that the anti Ghaz are spouting. Screening are a problem for Ghaz ? Why ? When he use tela-tepula ?

Even dropping 9" away he only has a 55% chance to reach melee with a charge. That isn't reliable enough to make him a good unit, so he's then stuck walking up the table to avoid a coinflip.

**An Actual Englishman**

Canadian 5th wrote:
WhiteDog wrote:
I just cannot understand the arguments that the anti Ghaz are spouting. Screening are a problem for Ghaz ? Why ? When he use tela-tepula ?

Even dropping 9" away he only has a 55% chance to reach melee with a charge. That isn't reliable enough to make him a good unit, so he's then stuck walking up the table to avoid a coinflip.

It's 48% chance is it not? You can't reroll a reroll and chances of making a 9" charge with Ere we go is 48%.

**Canadian 5th**

An Actual Englishman wrote:
Canadian 5th wrote:
WhiteDog wrote:
I just cannot understand the arguments that the anti Ghaz are spouting. Screening are a problem for Ghaz ? Why ? When he use tela-tepula ?

Even dropping 9" away he only has a 55% chance to reach melee with a charge. That isn't reliable enough to make him a good unit, so he's then stuck walking up the table to avoid a coinflip.

It's 48% chance is it not? You can't reroll a reroll and chances of making a 9" charge with Ere we go is 48%.

I'd heard quotes of 55% going around, but if it's 48% that's even less useful.

**An Actual Englishman**

Canadian 5th wrote:
An Actual Englishman wrote:
Canadian 5th wrote:
WhiteDog wrote:
I just cannot understand the arguments that the anti Ghaz are spouting. Screening are a problem for Ghaz ? Why ? When he use tela-tepula ?

Even dropping 9" away he only has a 55% chance to reach melee with a charge. That isn't reliable enough to make him a good unit, so he's then stuck walking up the table to avoid a coinflip.

It's 48% chance is it not? You can't reroll a reroll and chances of making a 9" charge with Ere we go is 48%.

I'd heard quotes of 55% going around, but if it's 48% that's even less useful.

Indeed and apologies - my comment didn’t really add much of value to your assessment that I utterly agree with.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Xenomancers wrote:
In certain conditions Ghaz gonna do really well. (Like if facing a pure Custodian army). Hes pretty much useless against an army that can shoot and CC well. I wish he was just the ork version of Abaddon. For how crappy his BS is too he should ether cost way less or his gun should be upped to flat 2 damage.

Nah Custodes can kill him in two turns.

**Canadian 5th**

An Actual Englishman wrote:
Indeed and apologies - my comment didn’t really add much of value to your assessment that I utterly agree with.

I've got greener skin than to be hurt by that.

**Nitro Zeus**

flandarz wrote:
If you have to take an entirely separate 210 pt unit to deal with screens, then I'd say screens are an issue for Ghaz. And, if that unit gets nuked (and, really, how many armies can't kill off at least 1 Boy mob a turn?) then your ability to deal with screens for Ghaz is reduced.

I’m not saying Ghaz is good, but you already need to be trying to clear screens with Orks as is and that’s like your main game. I don’t think this is what’s holding him back I think it’s the cost.

**Lammia**

Nitro Zeus wrote:
flandarz wrote:
If you have to take an entirely separate 210 pt unit to deal with screens, then I'd say screens are an issue for Ghaz. And, if that unit gets nuked (and, really, how many armies can't kill off at least 1 Boy mob a turn?) then your ability to deal with screens for Ghaz is reduced.

I’m not saying Ghaz is good, but you already need to be trying to clear screens with Orks as is and that’s like your main game. I don’t think this is what’s holding him back I think it’s the cost.

It's both? He's a giant beatstick that doesn't make its points back against most armies

**Billagio**

I would be very interested to see a list with new Ghaz be competitive. I dont think it would happen but if it did, I dont see how 285 points of something else (boyz, mek gunz) in the same list wouldnt be better. Would LOVE to be proved wrong

**flandarz**

It's definitely both. Even if they dropped him to 210 pts, he'd still cost as much as a full mob of Boyz, whereas we could field a Warboss with Brutal but Kunnin', Da Killa Klaw, and Da Biggest Boss and still have enough left over for 20 more Boyz. To become competitive on points alone, he'd need to be, at most, 50 pts more expensive than the standard Warboss. And even then you'd have to consider whether a Klaw Dread couldn't just handle the job better.

**BrianDavion**

An Actual Englishman wrote:
vipoid wrote:
An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.

Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?

thats exactly what some people want.

despite all the complaints to the contrary some people WANT to be able to kill everything with a single turn alpha strike. it's why people judge many things on "IT'S CRAP IF IT CAN'T KILL A KNIGHT!"

**Billagio**

BrianDavion wrote:
An Actual Englishman wrote:
vipoid wrote:
An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.

Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?

thats exactly what some people want.

despite all the complaints to the contrary some people WANT to be able to kill everything with a single turn alpha strike. it's why people judge many things on "IT'S CRAP IF IT CAN'T KILL A KNIGHT!"

The problem is its become the expectation, and anything that costs nearly as much as a knight but isnt as durable isnt usually worth its points

**BrianDavion**

Billagio wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
An Actual Englishman wrote:
vipoid wrote:
An Actual Englishman wrote:
Let's be honest, most if not all of the hate towards the "Max 4 wounds per phase" rule is due to jealousy and not any real dislike for the rule itself.

Yep. No one can dislike a rule because it's a sloppy game mechanic. Always has to be envy.

I have yet to see a coherent reason as to why it is a 'sloppy game mechanic'. Ghaz would be paper without the rule. Is that what you want? A big, centrepiece model that dies immediately?

thats exactly what some people want.

despite all the complaints to the contrary some people WANT to be able to kill everything with a single turn alpha strike. it's why people judge many things on "IT'S CRAP IF IT CAN'T KILL A KNIGHT!"

The problem is its become the expectation, and anything that costs nearly as much as a knight but isnt as durable isnt usually worth its points

yeah, I'd like to see more things have some special rules to ensure they get a turn on the table. nothing is worse then having a 200+ dollar model that you spent the last 3 months lovingly crafting and painting, die within 15 seconds of the games start