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.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

gungo wrote:
Someone at GW really hated orks last edition.

Both the SSAG and shoot twice strat is gone
I don’t think any army relied on vigilus detachments to be competitive as much as orks... the SAG in any form is dead this edition...

Orks got hit the least and still have tons of tools. The SSAG was a crutch of layered CP shenanigans. It's probably better than its gone to let people use something else for a change.

So the only reason people would use something else if they weren't using it before was if the previous option was superior. There's no magic barrier of the Shock attack gun that stopped you from bringing other things, it was just the best option available.

If your best option available goes away, that means everything that remains is weaker.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Orks got hit the least...

5 point grots.

Yeah...

Oi vey. Always with the grots. They were just killin' it prior. From dying as a grot shield to...dying as a grot shield. Huge nerf that.

Yeah it definitely doesn't matter that dying as a grot shield got 67% more expensive. I mean it's not like you have a fixed amount of points to build an army wi....oh wait.

While I understand the displeasure with Grots and Infantry Squads both being 5 ppm, the bellyaching is getting to be a bit much.

Just how many points did people spend on Grots, mostly for CP purposes along with Grot Shields? If you brought 6 units of 10 grots for two battalions, that was 180 points. Now you don't need to fill out multiple battalions for CP, so how many Grots do you need for Grots Shields? You can still get 36 Grots for the same points, so that give you 3 units with a few spares, or 3x10 for 150 points, a savings.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Orks got hit the least...

5 point grots.

Yeah...

Oi vey. Always with the grots. They were just killin' it prior. From dying as a grot shield to...dying as a grot shield. Huge nerf that.

Okay, what about coherency? That hurts Orks who like Boys blobs.
Melee engagement range? Hurts Orks.
Blast? Hurts Orks.
The loss of SSAG and other Vigilus goodies? Hurts Orks.

Hottest of hot takes, you can take 30 less grots than before and "save" 30 points.

ERJAK wrote:

So the only reason people would use something else if they weren't using it before was if the previous option was superior. There's no magic barrier of the Shock attack gun that stopped you from bringing other things, it was just the best option available.

If your best option available goes away, that means everything that remains is weaker.

If you assume the SAG is a necessary tool, sure. The game doesn't play the same. ITC at least let him stand on top of something and see through the second floor. Now obscuring blocks sight more than a very static model can handle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 alextroy wrote:
While I understand the displeasure with Grots and Infantry Squads both being 5 ppm, the bellyaching is getting to be a bit much.

Just how many points did people spend on Grots, mostly for CP purposes along with Grot Shields? If you brought 6 units of 10 grots for two battalions, that was 180 points. Now you don't need to fill out multiple battalions for CP, so how many Grots do you need for Grots Shields? You can still get 36 Grots for the same points, so that give you 3 units with a few spares, or 3x10 for 150 points, a savings.

No. We're not allowed to disagree. In the 41st millennium there is only bitching.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

So the only reason people would use something else if they weren't using it before was if the previous option was superior. There's no magic barrier of the Shock attack gun that stopped you from bringing other things, it was just the best option available.

If your best option available goes away, that means everything that remains is weaker.

If you assume the SAG is a necessary tool, sure. The game doesn't play the same. ITC at least let him stand on top of something and see through the second floor. Now obscuring blocks sight more than a very static model can handle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 alextroy wrote:
While I understand the displeasure with Grots and Infantry Squads both being 5 ppm, the bellyaching is getting to be a bit much.

Just how many points did people spend on Grots, mostly for CP purposes along with Grot Shields? If you brought 6 units of 10 grots for two battalions, that was 180 points. Now you don't need to fill out multiple battalions for CP, so how many Grots do you need for Grots Shields? You can still get 36 Grots for the same points, so that give you 3 units with a few spares, or 3x10 for 150 points, a savings.

No. We're not allowed to think. In the 41st millennium there is only bitching.

So, what you're saying is that one of the Ork's strongest options got nerfed, even if it was still allowed in tournaments?

How does that make ANYTHING better?

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, what you're saying is that one of the Ork's strongest options got nerfed, even if it was still allowed in tournaments?

How does that make ANYTHING better?

The game doesn't have the same dynamic. SSAG worked great when kill / kill more was important.

If you want to ignore everything else that works for them and just make the gripes list then I don't know what else to tell you.

If SSAG is less good in 9th than in 8th, why did it take such a points nerf?

Trying to rationalize these points is a fool's errand. It can't be done. They're just bad. Even the playtesters agree.

Doesn't mean it's the end of the world, but it does mean they're bad.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, what you're saying is that one of the Ork's strongest options got nerfed, even if it was still allowed in tournaments?

How does that make ANYTHING better?

The game doesn't have the same dynamic. SSAG worked great when kill / kill more was important.

If you want to ignore everything else that works for them and just make the gripes list then I don't know what else to tell you.

We will see, but when even the playtesters are saying Orks got hosed, you have to at least pause for thought. Surely.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, what you're saying is that one of the Ork's strongest options got nerfed, even if it was still allowed in tournaments?

How does that make ANYTHING better?

The game doesn't have the same dynamic. SSAG worked great when kill / kill more was important.

If you want to ignore everything else that works for them and just make the gripes list then I don't know what else to tell you.

Exactly. I agree that it is unreasonable for IS to be only 5 points when compared to the other 5 point units, but that doesn't make 5 points the wrong value. Stop trying to play your 8th Edition lists and work on new ones.

yukishiro1 wrote:
If SSAG is less good in 9th than in 8th, why did it take such a points nerf?

Trying to rationalize these points is a fool's errand. It can't be done. They're just bad. Even the playtesters agree.

Doesn't mean it's the end of the world, but it does mean they're bad.

The TTT guys agree in the sense that "we don't have everything yet". I can't conceive of what that even for every army in the near future, because I can't see books coming fast enough so we'll probably have a stupid arms race again.

I can envision them setting some points, looking at the SSAG, and kicking it up. And then someone writes the tournament rules. The SSAG is still somewhat valuable outside tournament, but the resulting points otherwise makes him no go. It's a weird divide and I don't know how they'll address it.

Some items of note:

I'm pretty sure (could be wrong) that Gitz can ride a wagon and shoot without penalty now given the trukk can move and shoot heavy and imparts no restriction:

‘When they do so, any restrictions or modifiers that apply to this model also apply to its passengers.’

- Deffrolla is WS2 instead of +3 to hit
- Shokkjump went to BS3 instead of +2
- Keepin' Order works on Attrition

The guys at Tabletop Tactics know what the "everything we don't have yet" is (they've been playtesting the new codexes) and they still think the new points are ridiculous.

And we're not going to "have another arms race". We're just continuing the same arms race we've always had.

It doesn't matter what's coming out in the future, the points are assessed based on how the units perform now. If they change that performance in a codex, they should raise unit costs then. I don't think even GW is dumb enough to raise points now in anticipation of buffs later, but it's certainly a curious line of defense, and shows how hard it is to defend the points they released if people are desperately trying to say "maybe they'll make sense after codexes come out!"

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
The guys at Tabletop Tactics know what the "everything we don't have yet" is (they've been playtesting the new codexes) and they still think the new points are ridiculous.

And we're not going to "have another arms race". We're just continuing the same arms race we've always had.

Arms Race Season 9, The Revengeance! Coming soon to tables near you!

yukishiro1 wrote:
It doesn't matter what's coming out in the future, the points are assessed based on how the units perform now. If they change that performance in a codex, they should raise unit costs then. I don't think even GW is dumb enough to raise points now in anticipation of buffs later, but it's certainly a curious line of defense, and shows how hard it is to defend the points they released if people are desperately trying to say "maybe they'll make sense after codexes come out!"

TTT has the overview of "where it is going", which implies a plan.

CSM is rumored to be an early book so we may find out why Cultists are 6 points.

Stuff like the SAG could just be the "slap this with a nerf so we don't have to really deal with it right now".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
The guys at Tabletop Tactics know what the "everything we don't have yet" is (they've been playtesting the new codexes) and they still think the new points are ridiculous.

And we're not going to "have another arms race". We're just continuing the same arms race we've always had.

They think some of the new points are ridiculous.

The arms race has been a thing forever. I'm just a bit thankful that it happens in a far faster timeline than it has ever before. And given the reform to a lot of the important rules I'm happy to wait and let it pan out.

 Trickstick wrote:
So you think specialist detachments are just dead? You know how tournament comp rules tend to spread to more casual play...

They spread even faster when articles make false statements like:

"The biggest change to note out of all of this is that Specialist Detachments is not allowed in Matched Play."

They are 100% allowed in matched play. They're not allowed in tournaments.

But they could have just waited for codex to mess with the balance like they did...

yukishiro1 wrote:
If SSAG is less good in 9th than in 8th, why did it take such a points nerf?

Because that's one of GW's fav methods of "balancing" things.

Unit X is performing to well! They can either reduce its effectiveness, or they can increase it points. GW often does both.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I can envision them setting some points, looking at the SSAG, and kicking it up. And then someone writes the tournament rules. The SSAG is still somewhat valuable outside tournament, but the resulting points otherwise makes him no go. It's a weird divide and I don't know how they'll address it.

Please remind me what other weapons are priced according to the potential when being replaced with a relic and shot multiple times with a stratagem?
Oh right, none.
The regular SAG was killed by the points raise, with the SSAG just barely remaining viable between obscuring terrain, look out sir and vastly more expensive grot shields. And no the SSAG is banned, leaving all possible uses for SAG meks worthless. You can't white knight that.

I'm pretty sure (could be wrong) that Gitz can ride a wagon and shoot without penalty now given the trukk can move and shoot heavy and imparts no restriction:

‘When they do so, any restrictions or modifiers that apply to this model also apply to its passengers.’

Are you acting as if you know gak about orks again? Have a look at the "embark" section of the new rules, passengers count as moved if the transport moved, open topped doesn't matter at all.

- Deffrolla is WS2 instead of +3 to hit
- Shokkjump went to BS3 instead of +2

Well, good thing they didn't miss the other 15 weapons with grot gunners and other static bonuses to their hit rolls so that freebootas aren't screwed out of their army trait.

- Keepin' Order works on Attrition

... and no one would have cared at all if it didn't. The only reason to bother rolling for this rule was when your unit was going to be wiped out by moral and a single six meant that you could hold an objective or green tide the unit.
You know it's looking grim for orks if you have to list this as a benefit.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
If SSAG is less good in 9th than in 8th, why did it take such a points nerf?

Because that's one of GW's fav methods of "balancing" things.

Unit X is performing to well! They can either reduce its effectiveness, or they can increase it points. GW often does both.

They just wiped out almost all competitive units for orks, just like they do every time a codex or new edition drops.
Except mek guns, of course, because you can't nerf a unit where points are the same as $€£.
Gotta give those dirty orks an incentive to buy new units despite needing 3-4 boxes per unit you field instead of using what they already have.

I'm pretty sure (could be wrong) that Gitz can ride a wagon and shoot without penalty now given the trukk can move and shoot heavy and imparts no restriction:

They still count as having Moved, and in Addition cannot use any "abilities",which include dakkadakka, ammo runt rerolls and their shoot twice on a 6 ging... Tankbustas in trukks lose reroll against vehicles... definitely nerfed...

 Trickstick wrote:
I'm still laughing over 5 point Guardsmen. The entire of 8th there were people wishing for them to go to 5 points. Then when it happens...

Which one of you made the monkey's paw wish?

Well it was 5 pts in 8th. When everything goes us 5 pts guardsmen isn't same in 9 as it would have been in 8th

Other highlights from the GT Rulebook:

- Deployment: both players declare their Reserves, then alternate deployment one unit at a time, then roll off to know who gets 1st turn
- Reserves: same as 8th, no Reserves on 1st round, and not after 3rd round
- Rule of Two at 1000 pts and Rule of Three at 2000 pts

Not fan of deployment. Takes longer time and makes first turn roll more important

gungo wrote:
Someone at GW really hated orks last edition.

Both the SSAG and shoot twice strat is gone
I don’t think any army relied on vigilus detachments to be competitive as much as orks... the SAG in any form is dead this edition...

Gen cult relied more, I play both armies, so I know

I agree orks got hit extremely hard, but I think the star of the nerfbat this start of 9th is gen cult. I was expecting it. GW had shown they hate that army with last CA

 JNAProductions wrote:
Orks got hit the least...

5 point grots.

Yeah...

Still not even a blib compared to the Ynnari and GSC nerfs.

Orks are fine.

Fine sure lf you mean one narrow playstyle that might get to upper mid levels

 Aaranis wrote:
Other highlights from the GT Rulebook:

- Deployment: both players declare their Reserves, then alternate deployment one unit at a time, then roll off to know who gets 1st turn
- Reserves: same as 8th, no Reserves on 1st round, and not after 3rd round
- Rule of Two at 1000 pts and Rule of Three at 2000 pts

For what it's worth, those are all the same as with the Eternal War missions in the main rulebook, except for the "Rule of Two at 1000pts" part. Eternal War is Rule of 3 at every level.

tneva82 wrote:
Not fan of deployment. Takes longer time and makes first turn roll more important

Alternating deployment may take longer, but it's way more tactical than just dumping your entire army at once, because it allows you to react to whatever your opponent is doing, and lessens the chance of you getting your favorite unit(s) alpha:ed of the table in turn one.

Add in the new terrain rules and first turn is less important (which is a good thing) than in 8th in my opinion.