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.

Dudeface wrote:


You said here you want meganobz to be resilient to anti infantry, anti armour and the whole thread is saying that they're more points efficient than nobz so nobz are pointless. You've confused yourself replying to (your) posts about meganobz and thinking it relates to regular nobz somehow.

The point is if meganobz have similar damage output per point at greater survivability nobz just become useless again. If nobz have greater damage output because they're notably cheaper, you'd stop bringing meganobz.

Their roles need splitting out or the gap between survivable and damage output needs widening notably.

No, I said they need to be tankier, nowhere did i say they need to be better vs small arms fire. My main problem with them is that they walk right into a meta that is currently filled to the brim with Primaris Marines, Old Marines and Gravis marines all who have 2+ wounds and 3+ armor and some have T5 along with everything else. So in a meta where armies are bringing a plethora of multi-dmg high AP weapons, simply giving a meganob 1 more wound isn't going to accomplish as much as people think.

And again, I want NOBZ to get a dmg increase, maybe better choppas or something, but not meganobz. this creates 2 units with different jobs. Meganobz to be tanky and hold objectives and Nobz to rush in and take them from others.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
We covered this in the Ork tactics thread, but basically, the reason Orkz are doing well with goff spam is because its counter meta. Most armies correctly assume they will be facing off against Primaris/Gravis type models and therefore bring weapons designed to kill that sort of target, so when you get swamped by 90-120 ork bodies that don't mind being incinerated by a S8 melta blast as much as they do getting hit with a plethora of Hurricane bolters, yeah we win. The beauty about the goff spam is that not only is it counter meta, but its currently great based on 9th edition scoring rules. In other words we bring more troops than the enemy can handle and therefore hold objectives better.

We didn't cover this, buggy spam also has part in those win rates and some of that is objectively wrong. And frankly I just didn't discuss this because with you I don't want to have another discussion where you math out how much more powerful intercessors are than nobz when it's completely irrelevant in the first place.

There are no facts that back up that marines as an army are more powerful than orks as an army.

We covered it in that I broke down the event you listed literally by army that the ork faced and showed what that specific army had geared itself towards. If the multitudes in the tournament scene are flooding the table with multi dmg, good AP weapons, than buggy spam is dead while Ork hordes will do great simply because the enemy doesn't have enough dakka to take care of the hordes. In the event you listed the closest the ork player came to losing was against Nuns with Gunz, and that was because the player in question utilized heavy bolters to deal with Primaris Marines as their go to weapons system, after that there was literally nothign else capable of clearing ork boyz with the rest of their list being heavy weapons like Exorcists. 2 of the lists the ork player faced only had 5 Troop models total.

as to SM being a more powerful army than Orkz...yes, yes they are significantly more powerful. Point for point they can outperform orkz at range or in CC, the only ork lists that are currently winning rely on skewing heavily into infantry and even than, if orkz became a bigger threat to the tournament scene and people geared their armies towards beating ork horde as much as they do beating SM Primaris than ork horde would be dead relatively quickly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyel wrote:
The problem you've got is that Orks are placing *reasonably* regularly in tournaments. They don't do so all the time, but they are clearly not down with the bad factions.

So saying Nobz are bad, fix Nobz - okay. How you do this without stepping on toes is a bit unclear, but its fair enough.
But the view that boyz and Manz need to be buffed prompts a bit of a "???" response from me.

This increases even further if you take the view Harlequins and Custodes are doing so well because they didn't really get a 9th edition points hike, and are so just undercosted compared to everyone else by about 10%. As are certain Marine units.

Its more to do with the fact that the Ork faction is doing well in tournaments because a common playstyle is currently counter meta and incredibly effective based on 9th edition missions. Ork Horde, backed by Ghaz means orkz have a huge amount of relatively cheap models that few tournament lists are capable of eliminating in a timely fashion which means the ork player will win frequently by playing to the mission. Take a look at the recent tournament Jidmah and I discussed, Orkz won 1st place. The Ork players list consisted of Ghaz, warboss, weirdboy, kff big mek, 90 boyz, 2 units of Kommandos, 2 units of Meganobz, 3 Mek gunz and 10 grotz.

2nd place was a DA player who had 2 min units of infiltrators, 1 min unit of intercessors, 5 Knights with shields and maces, an invictor with auto cannons, 2 talons, 3 melta ATVs and 3 outriders

3rd place was a Space Wolf/Smurf player who brought girlyman, melta, grav and a bunch of SW Terminators with claws and shields. No anti-horde weaponry.

So read those 2 SM lists, compare it to the ork list, why did the ork player win?

Answering the OT, my preferred solution would be to differentiate the nobs and MANz in two points:

- killiness: MANZ would be heavy hitters. High strength and low volume, but with no penalty on the WS. They would be hitting on 3+ thanks to the support of the mega armour (or give them WS2+). Nobs would be hitting with medium volume and medium strength (aka big choppas). Increase #A when charing to 4 (or give them WS2+). Those changes would leave space for the boys for high volume low strength.

- resilience. Generally I would be careful suggesting inv saves. I think that the kff will change according to the published (and then errated) PA KFF. Therefore, I would go in the direction of flat -1 damage, FnP OR ignoring the first -1 fp. MANZ would definitely go to T5 and normal nobs would have access to cheap cybork bodies (all the unit).

Orkimedez_Atalaya wrote:
Answering the OT, my preferred solution would be to differentiate the nobs and MANz in two points:

- killiness: MANZ would be heavy hitters. High strength and low volume, but with no penalty on the WS. They would be hitting on 3+ thanks to the support of the mega armour (or give them WS2+). Nobs would be hitting with medium volume and medium strength (aka big choppas). Increase #A when charing to 4 (or give them WS2+). Those changes would leave space for the boys for high volume low strength.

- resilience. Generally I would be careful suggesting inv saves. I think that the kff will change according to the published (and then errated) PA KFF. Therefore, I would go in the direction of flat -1 damage, FnP OR ignoring the first -1 fp. MANZ would definitely go to T5 and normal nobs would have access to cheap cybork bodies (all the unit).

Seems reasonable, I agree pretty universally. Only thing I'd add is maybe leave nobz with the ability to take klawz but give megankbz a different melee weapon that was d3+3 damage maybe so the fewer attacks really hurt big things, where as the nob klawz are then more for light vehicles and marine clearing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SemperMortis wrote:

Dudeface wrote:


You said here you want meganobz to be resilient to anti infantry, anti armour and the whole thread is saying that they're more points efficient than nobz so nobz are pointless. You've confused yourself replying to (your) posts about meganobz and thinking it relates to regular nobz somehow.

The point is if meganobz have similar damage output per point at greater survivability nobz just become useless again. If nobz have greater damage output because they're notably cheaper, you'd stop bringing meganobz.

Their roles need splitting out or the gap between survivable and damage output needs widening notably.

No, I said they need to be tankier, nowhere did i say they need to be better vs small arms fire. My main problem with them is that they walk right into a meta that is currently filled to the brim with Primaris Marines, Old Marines and Gravis marines all who have 2+ wounds and 3+ armor and some have T5 along with everything else. So in a meta where armies are bringing a plethora of multi-dmg high AP weapons, simply giving a meganob 1 more wound isn't going to accomplish as much as people think.

And again, I want NOBZ to get a dmg increase, maybe better choppas or something, but not meganobz. this creates 2 units with different jobs. Meganobz to be tanky and hold objectives and Nobz to rush in and take them from others.

Tankier = more resistant to damage, doesn't matter where it comes from. But agree that the nobz should be more of a shock assault clearing unit.

 alextroy wrote:
Call me a outsider, but what exactly is wrong with?:

Boyz S4 T4 W1 A2 Sv 6+
Nobz S5 T4 W2 A3 Sv 4+
Meganobz S5 T4 W3 A3 Sv 2+

It looks like a similar progression to Space Marines:

Scouts S4 T4 W1 A1 Sv 4+
Marine S4 T4 W2 A1 Sv 3+
Terminator S4 T4 W3 A2 Sv 2+/5++

The big difference is the SMs are weighted towards defense while the Orks are weighted toward offense. If they keep the points adjusted correctly, all should be well.

The difference is that a marine can do multiple things that a terminator can't do, while a nob is just a meganob with worse armor.

There simply is no reason to every use both MANz and nobz - no matter what you do to their points, one will always be less efficient than the other.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SemperMortis wrote:
We covered it in that I broke down the event you listed literally by army that the ork faced and showed what that specific army had geared itself towards. If the multitudes in the tournament scene are flooding the table with multi dmg, good AP weapons, than buggy spam is dead while Ork hordes will do great simply because the enemy doesn't have enough dakka to take care of the hordes. In the event you listed the closest the ork player came to losing was against Nuns with Gunz, and that was because the player in question utilized heavy bolters to deal with Primaris Marines as their go to weapons system, after that there was literally nothign else capable of clearing ork boyz with the rest of their list being heavy weapons like Exorcists. 2 of the lists the ork player faced only had 5 Troop models total.

You have analysed five wins out of 512 on record and your argumentation is heavily flawed by confirmation bias. There are one or two orks placing in the top ranks of some GT *every week*, and those 970 recorded games include people placing low and practice games. In addition, why should the whole meta warp to answer marines when the top dogs are dameons, harlequins, sisters and custodes. Even the highest placing marine chapter mostly does so by spamming tons of wolves, not primaris.

as to SM being a more powerful army than Orkz...yes, yes they are significantly more powerful. Point for point they can outperform orkz at range or in CC

Irrelevant, as outlined above. As the context of an army cannot be translated to points, a point for point comparison says absolutely nothing about the power of an army.
You also seem to be ignoring that the ability to kill stuff is not the same as the ability to win games. Or would you argue that Tau are a powerful army right now?

the only ork lists that are currently winning rely on skewing heavily into infantry and even than

Not really? I mean, 90-120 boyz isn't a lot compared to previous editions, and if infantry skew was the goal they wouldn't be sinking as much points into MANz as they do. The primary strength of the Thrakka horde is being able to get lots of points from primaries, due to powerful melee units with objective secured and cheap deep strikers.

if orkz became a bigger threat to the tournament scene and people geared their armies towards beating ork horde as much as they do beating SM Primaris than ork horde would be dead relatively quickly.

Most armies aren't specifically geared towards killing marines, and even if they are, the big hits for marines currently seem to be fenris wolves, deathwing terminators and ATVs - none of which care about the primaris statline.

TL;DR: Data doesn't support your analysis. Thrakka horde is clearly a build powerful enough to win tournaments and beat marines. Using that as a target to make all ork units and archetypes just as good is way better than complaining about wanting the same toys as an army which is doing worse.

I wouldn't say that lots of ork boyz countering multi dmg weapons has nothing to do with ork builds winning tournaments (after all, SM are and will remain the most common faction). But it is not the only or even the main reason they do.

Ork boyz are pretty good on their own, they're T4 which is not terrible, they dish out quite a lot of dmg especially with their hidden PC . They are good at screening and board control and when paired with a KFF and painboy they're very resilient.
And that is all the more painful for nobz, who are clearly outclassed by them. They don't really do more dmg, and for their points they are much worse in resilience on top of being elite.

2 ork boyz cost less than 1 naked Nob, do more attacks and have the same number of wounds. Also while they loose half their power if they take 1 wound and have a worse save (which clearly makes them worse against small firearms) they laugh at multi wound weapons, which are becoming more and more common. I would say that is a small win for ork boyz, but when you add the fact that they can be taken by 30 vs 10 and are troops (and thus have more board control, more screen, benefit much more from Ghaz buffs, ect...) then why would you take Nobz ?

==> the special weapons

Are they good ?
No.

With what Jidmah said about nobz and meganobz I arguee the only way to make nobz worth it and feel different agaisnt meganobz is to make them troops.

You can have both a place for boyz and nobz in the same troop slot: Boyz will always be beeter agaisnt horde and about covering ground, and nobz should be the anti-medium/elite troops.

I don't understand people that dont want nobz to be troops. I mean, if you want to play heavy boyz lists you can still do it? But it would open a ton of space design for more ork elite lists. Just because Tyranids have tyranid warriors as an option doesnt mean they dont have a ton of builds centered around gants.

And they have two troop options that are two versions of the same thing; hormagaunts and genestealers, but one is a more expensive version, more offensive, and the other is more based in movility.

 Galas wrote:
With what Jidmah said about nobz and meganobz I arguee the only way to make nobz worth it and feel different agaisnt meganobz is to make them troops.

You can have both a place for boyz and nobz in the same troop slot: Boyz will always be beeter agaisnt horde and about covering ground, and nobz should be the anti-medium/elite troops.

I don't understand people that dont want nobz to be troops. I mean, if you want to play heavy boyz lists you can still do it? But it would open a ton of space design for more ork elite lists. Just because Tyranids have tyranid warriors as an option doesnt mean they dont have a ton of builds centered around gants.

And they have two troop options that are two versions of the same thing; hormagaunts and genestealers, but one is a more expensive version, more offensive, and the other is more based in movility.

It's fluff reasons mostly, nobz are meant to be the equivalent to upper-middle class society and far less common than boyz, so an army running them as troops would be like fielding an army of sargeants.

While true, I don't see why that would make them unavailable as troops (although I prefered it when you could take 1 pack as troop per Warboss, I think that was great game design).

In a world with gravis armors in troop choice I feel that is a bit hypocritical. Also, it would kinda fix the problem of orks having only 2 troop choices, one of which is pretty terrible. Ork boyz being pretty good on their own and synergizing well with the rest of the codex is the only reason why they don't feel too much of a tax.

Fluffy army comp is a pretty loose concept. Why couldn't a battle be initiated by a very elite ork army with a warboss that prefers to bring all the Nobz into the heart of battle instead of boyz swarming ?
I'm not specifically advocating for troop Nobz, but I don't feel there are that many reasons they would be such a bad idea.

When I see the core implementation in SM and Necrons, I feel like GW easily just wipes their butts with the lore anyway when designing armies (seriously ? dread core but not scarabs ?)

 Mr Raptor wrote:
While true, I don't see why that would make them unavailable as troops (although I prefered it when you could take 1 pack as troop per Warboss, I think that was great game design).

In a world with gravis armors in troop choice I feel that is a bit hypocritical. Also, it would kinda fix the problem of orks having only 2 troop choices, one of which is pretty terrible. Ork boyz being pretty good on their own and synergizing well with the rest of the codex is the only reason why they don't feel too much of a tax.

Fluffy army comp is a pretty loose concept. Why couldn't a battle be initiated by a very elite ork army with a warboss that prefers to bring all the Nobz into the heart of battle instead of boyz swarming ?
I'm not specifically advocating for troop Nobz, but I don't feel there are that many reasons they would be such a bad idea.

When I see the core implementation in SM and Necrons, I feel like GW easily just wipes their butts with the lore anyway when designing armies (seriously ? dread core but not scarabs ?)

You can put any primaris in a suit of gravis, from a rookie to a captain, its not a sign of seniority.

You can take an elite army built around nobz using a vanguard detachment now, moving them to troops only enables obsec and arguably saves some cp.

Thats exactly one of the problems of nobz, the lack of Obsec to fight for objetives.

Nobz are the black orcs of 40k, and you had full black orcs armies in fantasy in special lists. Now in AoS we have a full black orc and black orc ++ armies.

Adding more troop variety and lists variety for xenos armies is never a bad thing. With the exception of Tyranids, all xenos armies are severly lacking from a troop perspective.

 Galas wrote:
Thats exactly one of the problems of nobz, the lack of Obsec to fight for objetives.

Nobz are the black orcs of 40k, and you had full black orcs armies in fantasy in special lists. Now in AoS we have a full black orc and black orc ++ armies.

Adding more troop variety and lists variety for xenos armies is never a bad thing. With the exception of Tyranids, all xenos armies are severly lacking from a troop perspective.

Armies with 2 or fewer base troops off top of my head:
Chaos marines
Custodes
Sisters
Orks
Crons
Stealer cults
Grey knights

It's not just a xenos problem.

Custodes have two troop options, that offer different stuff, a meele one that can be both offensive , defensive, or a mix of both, and a shooting one.

Chaos Marine have an "elite" troop option and a chaff option.

Sisters have a single one, but thats because they are extremely new, even if they have existed for 20 years. The same for Harlequins.

Grey Knights are a small army with two troop options, and those two are clearly different, an elite one and a more "basic" infantry one.

Crons suffer similarly like Orks but even of both their troop options are basically middle range shooting ones, they play quite differently in the kind of lists they are used with, unlike orks.

Orks on the other hand have two options: An unusable one thats ultra cheap (or was) chaff, and a cheap chaff one.

 Galas wrote:
Custodes have two troop options, that offer different stuff, a meele one that can be both offensive , defensive, or a mix of both, and a shooting one.

Chaos Marine have an "elite" troop option and a chaff option.

Sisters have a single one, but thats because they are extremely new, even if they have existed for 20 years. The same for Harlequins.

Grey Knights are a small army with two troop options, and those two are clearly different, an elite one and a more "basic" infantry one.

Crons suffer similarly like Orks but even of both their troop options are basically middle range shooting ones, they play quite differently in the kind of lists they are used with, unlike orks.

Orks on the other hand have two options: An unusable one thats ultra cheap (or was) chaff, and a cheap chaff one.

Well I'm pretty sure owners of the other factions on the list have complaints of their own, owning a chaos army my cultists are barely more use than your grots for the points and chaos marines themselves are so lacklustre you wonder why you bother.

Making nobz troops seems an ok idea, don't paint as a "poor pity me and my 2 options" moment.

I don't even play Orks, I play dark angels, tau and custodes. Nobody painted this as a "poor me" but you.

Dudeface wrote:
It's fluff reasons mostly, nobz are meant to be the equivalent to upper-middle class society and far less common than boyz, so an army running them as troops would be like fielding an army of sargeants.

We had this on one of the first pages and that is simply not true. There are quite some examples in the lore of warbands consisting of nothing but Nobz, for example Thrakka's Bully Boyz.

It also would be like fielding an army of veterans, which marines actually can do.

 Jidmah wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
It's fluff reasons mostly, nobz are meant to be the equivalent to upper-middle class society and far less common than boyz, so an army running them as troops would be like fielding an army of sargeants.

We had this on one of the first pages and that is simply not true. There are quite some examples in the lore of warbands consisting of nothing but Nobz, for example Thrakka's Bully Boyz.

It also would be like fielding an army of veterans, which marines actually can do.

Orks can do that now if they don't care about obsec. There are no veteran options in the marine troops slot, they need a vanguard detachment the same as orks do.

Dudeface wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
It's fluff reasons mostly, nobz are meant to be the equivalent to upper-middle class society and far less common than boyz, so an army running them as troops would be like fielding an army of sargeants.

We had this on one of the first pages and that is simply not true. There are quite some examples in the lore of warbands consisting of nothing but Nobz, for example Thrakka's Bully Boyz.

It also would be like fielding an army of veterans, which marines actually can do.

Orks can do that now if they don't care about obsec. There are no veteran options in the marine troops slot, they need a vanguard detachment the same as orks do.

Note that both Orks and Marines can gain ObSec on non-Troops.

ObSec is such a dumb rule.

Marines can also promote troops to veterans, gaining 100% legit veteran troops.

 Jidmah wrote:
Marines can also promote troops to veterans, gaining 100% legit veteran troops.

I might be missing something here, Jidmah, but how?

Having skimmed the rest of the thread, it seems like y'all agree that Ork Nobz need a bit of spit and polish, but you don't agree on how best to handle that?

Veteran Intercessors?

 Jidmah wrote:
Veteran Intercessors?

Veteran intercessors are no longer a strategem. They're a separate datasheet from basic intercessors and are elites, kind of like Chosen for csm. Loyalists can still promote lots of their characters though.

 Jidmah wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You have analysed five wins out of 512 on record and your argumentation is heavily flawed by confirmation bias. There are one or two orks placing in the top ranks of some GT *every week*, and those 970 recorded games include people placing low and practice games. In addition, why should the whole meta warp to answer marines when the top dogs are dameons, harlequins, sisters and custodes. Even the highest placing marine chapter mostly does so by spamming tons of wolves, not primaris.

Yes, I analyzed the most recent Ork victory. I can further analyze other recent GT's but the results will be the same. As far as Daemons, Harlies, sisters and Custodes being Top dog they share it with SM but only if they bring a list that counters SM's and only if they don't run into a skew Ork list. Its almost like space Marines are a victim of their own success. Its almost like people are list building against their current playstyle of multi-wound models....like the renegade open winner whose units almost to a man (demon) had 2+dmg weapons. or 2nd place who brought 900pts of Blight Haulers. Multi-dmg high AP weaponry. The meta has shifted to target the likely opponents, in this case its Multi-wound good save models (Tacs, primaris and Gravis) and the best part is that by gearing towards this you can usually handle high-durability units fairly well. The Top list as mentioned had no answer to horde besides his 30 troops. Had he faced an ork player bringing goff horde he would have lost. Ironically, the 2 ork players in that GT finished 23rd and 24th. One brought Buggies the other brought 60 boyz and a host of Meganobz and Smasha gunz. But there were 3 Space Marine lists in the top 8 and 5 in the top 12., none were space wolves. Fully 1/3rd of the entire tournament were Space Marines of one flavor or another, and if you count Custodes and SOBs it is probably closer to half or more.

Irrelevant, as outlined above. As the context of an army cannot be translated to points, a point for point comparison says absolutely nothing about the power of an army.
You also seem to be ignoring that the ability to kill stuff is not the same as the ability to win games. Or would you argue that Tau are a powerful army right now?

Actually...pretty much the opposite. Ability to kill is all but useless unless your opponent happens to bring what you geared towards. If I bring a bunch of intercessors and fight against a IG Tank list...im going to lose, likewise, in the current meta you have Tournament lists bringing Melta guns and 2-3dmg melee weapons against....boyz. Go figure the ork list wins. On the reverse of that, as I mentioned, if orkz became a meta shifting force, their horde style would die relatively quickly since T4 boyz with a T-shirt aren't exactly hard to kill if you actually take horde clearing weapons. Summary: I'm not ignoring it at all, I am pointing out that most lists are geared towards killing multi-wound models which is why Ork boyz are doing so well. But if a SM player list tailored against an Ork horde list the way most tournament players list tailor to fight SMs....well we wouldn't last long.

Not really? I mean, 90-120 boyz isn't a lot compared to previous editions, and if infantry skew was the goal they wouldn't be sinking as much points into MANz as they do. The primary strength of the Thrakka horde is being able to get lots of points from primaries, due to powerful melee units with objective secured and cheap deep strikers.

7th edition 120 boyz was the norm, 90 was acceptable but 120 was preferable. 120 boyz in 7th was....720pts. 90 boyz in 9th is = 720pts. So point for point its a pretty hefty investment, especially when you factor in goffs using 1CP per mob to give them S5. As far as MANz, they fall into hte skew but not as well as Boyz. Honestly, if we ever have a fething tournament out here I plan on bringing as many boyz as I can muster, backed by Painboyz, KFF big mekz and Weirdboyz. Because I 100% agree with your other comment, the primary strength of Ghaz horde is taking primaries.

Most armies aren't specifically geared towards killing marines, and even if they are, the big hits for marines currently seem to be fenris wolves, deathwing terminators and ATVs - none of which care about the primaris statline.

This is patently false. Go look at any GT from the last 2 weeks or so. Most top placing armies are heavily invested in multi-dmg weapons than anything else. The GT I mentioned above as proof and the one I mentioned in the Ork thread as another proof.

TL;DR: Data doesn't support your analysis. Thrakka horde is clearly a build powerful enough to win tournaments and beat marines. Using that as a target to make all ork units and archetypes just as good is way better than complaining about wanting the same toys as an army which is doing worse.

Again, Thrakka Horde is NOT a powerful build. Its a Counter Meta build that wins by bringing a plethora of cheap throwaway infantry units that the enemy can't deal with fast enough to earn enough primaries to win.
Also, I am not wanting "the same toys as an army which is doing worse" I am talking about whats going to happen with nobz to make them useful.

 Mr Raptor wrote:

Ork boyz are pretty good on their own, they're T4 which is not terrible, they dish out quite a lot of dmg especially with their hidden PC . They are good at screening and board control and when paired with a KFF and painboy they're very resilient.
And that is all the more painful for nobz, who are clearly outclassed by them. They don't really do more dmg, and for their points they are much worse in resilience on top of being elite.

2 ork boyz cost less than 1 naked Nob, do more attacks and have the same number of wounds. Also while they loose half their power if they take 1 wound and have a worse save (which clearly makes them worse against small firearms) they laugh at multi wound weapons, which are becoming more and more common. I would say that is a small win for ork boyz, but when you add the fact that they can be taken by 30 vs 10 and are troops (and thus have more board control, more screen, benefit much more from Ghaz buffs, ect...) then why would you take Nobz ?
==> the special weapons
Are they good ?
No.

T4 isn't bad I'll give you that, but they no longer really dish out much in the way of damage in regards to their most likely target, SMs. In 8th an ork boy was 7ppm and has basically the same statline as he does now, Against 13pt marines he was doing 3 attacks, 2 hits, 1 wound and .33 dmg. So 3 boyz killed 1 Marine, 21pts killed 13 in CC, that is a very good trade off. Now? not so much, those same 3 boyz do 9 attacks, 6 hits, 3 wounds and 1dmg which is ZERO dead Marines. It now takes 6 Boyz to do what 3 used to accomplish. As far as the "Hidden" PK goes, nowhere near what it used to be. On the hidden nob it gets 3 attacks, 1.5 hits 1.25 wounds for D3 dmg each. likely 1 dead Marine. Prior editions that same PK nob was slaying Leman Russ's and Terminators, now it struggles to kill 1 Tac Marine.

And when you compare them to nobz...yeah that is the point, nobz are kind of useless right now.

Remember it's 4 attacks per boyz if the unit has at least 20 of them. Which isn't unlikely with good use of KFF and painboy.

And my point is definitely not that they're the end all be all. Far from that. They are a cheap troop choice that require support, it would be ridiculous if they were one of the top damage dealer of the faction.
But honestly for their price, they deal decent damage and have good survivability.

And sure they are not as good to kill marines as they used to be per point, but I don't think that's an issue. First, because it's not really their job in the first place. Second, because even if Marines are the most played faction, they are about 30% (including subfactions), which, while disproportionate for a single faction, means that you have less than 1/3 chance to fight against a marines army per battle if you go to a tournament. And ork boyz are pretty good at killing gants, SoB, eldars, Taus, cultists, demons, ect...

 Mr Raptor wrote:
Remember it's 4 attacks per boyz if the unit has at least 20 of them. Which isn't unlikely with good use of KFF and painboy.

And my point is definitely not that they're the end all be all. Far from that. They are a cheap troop choice that require support, it would be ridiculous if they were one of the top damage dealer of the faction.
But honestly for their price, they deal decent damage and have good survivability.

And sure they are not as good to kill marines as they used to be per point, but I don't think that's an issue. First, because it's not really their job in the first place. Second, because even if Marines are the most played faction, they are about 30% (including subfactions), which, while disproportionate for a single faction, means that you have less than 1/3 chance to fight against a marines army per battle if you go to a tournament. And ork boyz are pretty good at killing gants, SoB, eldars, Taus, cultists, demons, ect...

In the aforementioned Grand Tournament, Space Marines made up 33% of the tournament, now add in Chaos Space Marines, Grey Knights, Custodes and suddenly far above 50%. So the likelihood of running into T4 3+ is relatively high.

As far as killing Marines not being their job, well that is the problem, it is in fact their job, and prior to this edition, a job that they accomplished just fine once they finally got into CC.

Now to get into the nitty gritty of math. You are correct boyz have 4 attacks if they are choppa boyz and have 20+ models. As far as durability, lets assume 30 Boyz(Nob/PK) backed by a KFF and a Painboy. To kill the 30 boyz would require 37 failed KFF saves which means you would need 55-56 wounds. TO get 55-56 wounds with bolters would require 110-112 hits, and for a SM player to get 110-112 hits would require about 165-168 shots. That does seem fairly tough honestly. The problem is though that it isn't a 250pt boyz unit. Its a 250pt boyz unit with 140pts of babysitting characters, one of whom is an HQ and is in high demand. So you are talking about 390pts for 1 unit of boyz to have the durability to require 165-168 bolter shots. Out of curiosity, How many bolter shots does it take to kill 10 Tac Marines? 180.

390pts worth of buffed boyz take 165 shots to kill. 10 Tac Marines coming in at 180pts require 180 shots. Or to put it nicely, point for point they are more than TWICE as durable as those boyz. And more importantly, once the Boyz lose 11 models they reach critical loss and lose 1/4th to 1/3rd of their attacks.

This just further reinforces my point though, the reason Ork boyz are winning events is because nobody is bringing those Bolters to the games. Because it takes 180 to kill 10 Tac Marines. On the reverse of that, if you took a plethora of Meltas/plasma etc, your return on investment is much better vs Space Marines and SIGNIFICANTLY worse vs those Orkz. In other words, one of the main points I made when the edition was brand new. I'll gladly take a Melta shot on my ork boyz, because they fear that about as much as they fear a bolter.

SemperMortis wrote:
In the aforementioned Grand Tournament, Space Marines made up 33% of the tournament, now add in Chaos Space Marines, Grey Knights, Custodes and suddenly far above 50%. So the likelihood of running into T4 3+ is relatively high.

As far as killing Marines not being their job, well that is the problem, it is in fact their job, and prior to this edition, a job that they accomplished just fine once they finally got into CC.

Now to get into the nitty gritty of math. You are correct boyz have 4 attacks if they are choppa boyz and have 20+ models. As far as durability, lets assume 30 Boyz(Nob/PK) backed by a KFF and a Painboy. To kill the 30 boyz would require 37 failed KFF saves which means you would need 55-56 wounds. TO get 55-56 wounds with bolters would require 110-112 hits, and for a SM player to get 110-112 hits would require about 165-168 shots. That does seem fairly tough honestly. The problem is though that it isn't a 250pt boyz unit. Its a 250pt boyz unit with 140pts of babysitting characters, one of whom is an HQ and is in high demand. So you are talking about 390pts for 1 unit of boyz to have the durability to require 165-168 bolter shots. Out of curiosity, How many bolter shots does it take to kill 10 Tac Marines? 180.

390pts worth of buffed boyz take 165 shots to kill. 10 Tac Marines coming in at 180pts require 180 shots. Or to put it nicely, point for point they are more than TWICE as durable as those boyz. And more importantly, once the Boyz lose 11 models they reach critical loss and lose 1/4th to 1/3rd of their attacks.

This just further reinforces my point though, the reason Ork boyz are winning events is because nobody is bringing those Bolters to the games. Because it takes 180 to kill 10 Tac Marines. On the reverse of that, if you took a plethora of Meltas/plasma etc, your return on investment is much better vs Space Marines and SIGNIFICANTLY worse vs those Orkz. In other words, one of the main points I made when the edition was brand new. I'll gladly take a Melta shot on my ork boyz, because they fear that about as much as they fear a bolter.

Why is the measure of toughness how many S4 AP0 shots it takes to kill a unit? The measure of toughness is surviving for long enough to accomplish your battlefield role which is something that Ork Boyz are certainly doing right now.

As for them only being good in this specific meta, that's every good list. How good a unit/army/strategy is will always be 100% dependant on the meta they find themselves used in. If Ork hordes get countered orks will switch to buggy focused lists and keep on rolling.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Mr Raptor wrote:
Remember it's 4 attacks per boyz if the unit has at least 20 of them. Which isn't unlikely with good use of KFF and painboy.

And my point is definitely not that they're the end all be all. Far from that. They are a cheap troop choice that require support, it would be ridiculous if they were one of the top damage dealer of the faction.
But honestly for their price, they deal decent damage and have good survivability.

And sure they are not as good to kill marines as they used to be per point, but I don't think that's an issue. First, because it's not really their job in the first place. Second, because even if Marines are the most played faction, they are about 30% (including subfactions), which, while disproportionate for a single faction, means that you have less than 1/3 chance to fight against a marines army per battle if you go to a tournament. And ork boyz are pretty good at killing gants, SoB, eldars, Taus, cultists, demons, ect...

In the aforementioned Grand Tournament, Space Marines made up 33% of the tournament, now add in Chaos Space Marines, Grey Knights, Custodes and suddenly far above 50%. So the likelihood of running into T4 3+ is relatively high.

As far as killing Marines not being their job, well that is the problem, it is in fact their job, and prior to this edition, a job that they accomplished just fine once they finally got into CC.

Now to get into the nitty gritty of math. You are correct boyz have 4 attacks if they are choppa boyz and have 20+ models. As far as durability, lets assume 30 Boyz(Nob/PK) backed by a KFF and a Painboy. To kill the 30 boyz would require 37 failed KFF saves which means you would need 55-56 wounds. TO get 55-56 wounds with bolters would require 110-112 hits, and for a SM player to get 110-112 hits would require about 165-168 shots. That does seem fairly tough honestly. The problem is though that it isn't a 250pt boyz unit. Its a 250pt boyz unit with 140pts of babysitting characters, one of whom is an HQ and is in high demand. So you are talking about 390pts for 1 unit of boyz to have the durability to require 165-168 bolter shots. Out of curiosity, How many bolter shots does it take to kill 10 Tac Marines? 180.

390pts worth of buffed boyz take 165 shots to kill. 10 Tac Marines coming in at 180pts require 180 shots. Or to put it nicely, point for point they are more than TWICE as durable as those boyz. And more importantly, once the Boyz lose 11 models they reach critical loss and lose 1/4th to 1/3rd of their attacks.

This just further reinforces my point though, the reason Ork boyz are winning events is because nobody is bringing those Bolters to the games. Because it takes 180 to kill 10 Tac Marines. On the reverse of that, if you took a plethora of Meltas/plasma etc, your return on investment is much better vs Space Marines and SIGNIFICANTLY worse vs those Orkz. In other words, one of the main points I made when the edition was brand new. I'll gladly take a Melta shot on my ork boyz, because they fear that about as much as they fear a bolter.

This is such a weird vacuum laden example I'm not even sure what the point is. You're claiming needing 1620 points of tac marines to kill a 250 point unit of boys under buffs in a turn is... bad?

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Why is the measure of toughness how many S4 AP0 shots it takes to kill a unit? The measure of toughness is surviving for long enough to accomplish your battlefield role which is something that Ork Boyz are certainly doing right now.

As for them only being good in this specific meta, that's every good list. How good a unit/army/strategy is will always be 100% dependant on the meta they find themselves used in. If Ork hordes get countered orks will switch to buggy focused lists and keep on rolling.

The argument that Orkz are durable isn't really true though is it? I brought up the bolter comparison because Mr. Raptor made the statement that a unit of 30 boyz with a KFF and a painboy were durable. For the same points you could almost take 20 Intercessors, who have better weapons, armor and buffs. Even in the current meta, its a lot harder to shift 20 Intercessors off an objective than it is 30 boyz backed by a KFF and a painboy. So 20 intercessors can accomplish the same job while also inflicting significantly more damage at range.

Dudeface wrote:


This is such a weird vacuum laden example I'm not even sure what the point is. You're claiming needing 1620 points of tac marines to kill a 250 point unit of boys under buffs in a turn is... bad?

Read above.

Also, last time I checked, Marines had access to a plethora of anti-horde units/weapons. The problem is they never take them because they'd rather take more anti-elite weapons.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Why is the measure of toughness how many S4 AP0 shots it takes to kill a unit? The measure of toughness is surviving for long enough to accomplish your battlefield role which is something that Ork Boyz are certainly doing right now.

As for them only being good in this specific meta, that's every good list. How good a unit/army/strategy is will always be 100% dependant on the meta they find themselves used in. If Ork hordes get countered orks will switch to buggy focused lists and keep on rolling.

The argument that Orkz are durable isn't really true though is it? I brought up the bolter comparison because Mr. Raptor made the statement that a unit of 30 boyz with a KFF and a painboy were durable. For the same points you could almost take 20 Intercessors, who have better weapons, armor and buffs. Even in the current meta, its a lot harder to shift 20 Intercessors off an objective than it is 30 boyz backed by a KFF and a painboy. So 20 intercessors can accomplish the same job while also inflicting significantly more damage at range.

Dudeface wrote:


This is such a weird vacuum laden example I'm not even sure what the point is. You're claiming needing 1620 points of tac marines to kill a 250 point unit of boys under buffs in a turn is... bad?

Read above.

Also, last time I checked, Marines had access to a plethora of anti-horde units/weapons. The problem is they never take them because they'd rather take more anti-elite weapons.

You also neglected to consider that a tac unit will nearly always be more than 180 points, that the auras affect more than 1 ork unit, those 20 intercessors still take 5 turns to kill the 1 boyz unit, never mind the two buff characters.

I know it wasn't the intent but you're reinforcing (for me) the durability of boyz.

SemperMortis wrote:
The argument that Orkz are durable isn't really true though is it? I brought up the bolter comparison because Mr. Raptor made the statement that a unit of 30 boyz with a KFF and a painboy were durable. For the same points you could almost take 20 Intercessors, who have better weapons, armor and buffs. Even in the current meta, its a lot harder to shift 20 Intercessors off an objective than it is 30 boyz backed by a KFF and a painboy. So 20 intercessors can accomplish the same job while also inflicting significantly more damage at range.

Only if by accomplish more you mean kill more and lose fewer models to incoming fire. The Boyz do more by denying you the chance to get within scoring range of an objective and by pinning you into your own deployment zone as they leap forward up the field, then they rip you up with S5 attacks while dying too slowly for you to win. That's durable and useful in my books.

Why is the only comparison you're making Bolters? Why not look at the durability against overcharged plasma, melta, or other weapons that are seeing more use on the battlefield? Durability doesn't exist in a vacuum and what is actually durable on the table, as opposed to being durable against a hypothetical scenario that isn't actually happening, will always change based on the meta.

Also, why are you including the points for buffs when talking Orks but not when talking about your 20 intercessors? Shouldn't we be looking at a Chapter Master and like a handful of Intercessors if we're comparing apples to apples?