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.

 Jidmah wrote:

 AduroT wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 AduroT wrote:

 Bonde wrote:
Tracking wounds on mobs of 20+ Boyz would be a nightmare!

Not really, you only ever have a single wounded model at a time.

"Uh, which one was the wounded guy?"

The one with the wound token next to him?

You clearly have never moved a unit of boyz.

I have played so many horde armies in so many games, you would be very wrong.

 Bosskelot wrote:
The stat increases for bikes and vehicles are what I'm interested to see, yeah. T6 bikes? The same T as a buggy?

This is what I’m interested in normal bikes have a +1 T increase in most armies so will this continue in the new Ork book?

 Bosskelot wrote:
The stat increases for bikes and vehicles are what I'm interested to see, yeah. T6 bikes? The same T as a buggy?

Yes, it makes sense actually. Buggies were paper things with AV10-10-10 once, same as trukks, which is basically the equivalent of T6 now. Tougher dudes on bikes and light vehicles sound like they could easily have the same T and armour values. Wounds of course would be very different.

Ive played orks competitively for so much time, this is my opinion.

Orks needed the AP- 1 with the same cost or +1p. No way 5 marines can tank 30 orks and even win the fight. And dont even try to charge the 5 bladeguards bubble with a justicar, because you wont kill even 1

The point is, T5 changes the meta. No way a standard tournament list not adapted to hordes can face 120 T5 guys with a warboss, painboy and invulnerables. Not even a vehicle oriented list can stop them. Orks invade the whole board 4 turns, and when you kill them you have no longer available troops to do missions.

No way they will make boyz cost 9 or 10p, it will be free win for us, orks will cost like 13 or 14p so lists with 120 orks with painboy, weirdboy and warboss will cost like 1800p, so you will be limited to play like 60 orks and it means much less attacks (maybe thats why they gave us a - 1). So less ofensive power.

13 or 14 pts....roflmao. So 75% point increase for less increase in durability. You hate orks or why you want to make them SOFTER per points? You realize right 14 pts T5 would make them easier to kill than 8 pts for T4?

Thats why theyll do it, because people stack too much boyz. No way anyone can deal with 120 T5 6++ 6+++ obscured turn1 advancing and charging for 2000 attacks ap-1 and resurrecting after the combat.

They must nerf it in any way, maybe no more invul, maybe high costs, maybe anything, but saying theyll cost 10 points is objectivity 0. Free win for any ork in any tournament (people cannot adapt)

I think at T5 and AP-1 they finally worth their 8ppm price tag. 9 at most, definitely not 10+, unless they also get other rules/interactions that justify that. I'd remove buffs and shenanigans to enhance them though, starting with the Green Tide and Skarboyz stratagems.

Anyone can deal with 120 1W T5 t-shirt saves models, they just need to adjust their lists. Which is one on the reasons why Drukhari do so good in tournaments: typical tournament list is overly tailored against elites.

Number of attacks in combat is also off, typically 30 boyz will get 10-15 dudes within range which means 40-60 attacks. Same as 10 blood claws, except those SW dudes strike on 2+ pretty much everytime and from turn 3 they also gain AP-2 and 6 to hit grant double hits. Goffs exploding 6s on 40-60 attacks aren't extremely significant, Skarboyz costs 1CP per mob and Ghaz is 300 points.

My casual SW lists have 48 assault cannons shots, plus tons of bolters, chainswords and claws. Killing 45+ orks per turn was pretty much guaranteed, with the new codex it may be 30ish which is still a lot. Anti horde tailored lists can definitely delete 60 boyz in one turn.

Kebabcito wrote:
No way anyone can deal with 120 T5 6++ 6+++ obscured turn1 advancing and charging for 2000 attacks ap-1 and resurrecting after the combat.

They must nerf it in any way, maybe no more invul, maybe high costs, maybe anything, but saying theyll cost 10 points is objectivity 0. Free win for any ork in any tournament (people cannot adapt)

Troll detected.

1) I assure you, lots of armies can deal with 120 T5 6++/6+++ bodies. Assuming all your weapons are affected by the toughness change in the worst possible way, instead of losing 60-90 boyz per turn, orks will now lose 40-60 boyz per turn. Or in other words - "I kiLL 10 LeSS boyZ PeR tURn, thE SKy iS faLLIng!"
2) No board ever can obscure 120 boyz. And if it can, maybe you should not put an entire tournament's worth of ruins on one table?
3) If ork boyz advance and charge you turn 1, you helped them do it.
4) Usually no more than 10-12 boyz per mob get to strike.
5) Only one unit gets to resurrect per game, and the stratagem will likely see a nerf/disappear.

I’m interested to see how this changes up Orky lists.

Whilst Green Tide does seem a laugh, with the T boost, you now need fewer Boyz than before to accomplish the same goals (as in, put crudely, start here, get over there, with enough ladz to do the job).

If we perhaps see people reducing down the size of their Mobs, that’s a fair amount of points freed up. I’m looking forward to seeing what people spend them on (assuming Boyz don’t jump in price)

Kebabcito wrote:
Thats why theyll do it, because people stack too much boyz. No way anyone can deal with 120 T5 6++ 6+++ obscured turn1 advancing and charging for 2000 attacks ap-1 and resurrecting after the combat.

They must nerf it in any way, maybe no more invul, maybe high costs, maybe anything, but saying theyll cost 10 points is objectivity 0. Free win for any ork in any tournament (people cannot adapt)

This is a situation that might happen in some optimal, everything going the ork player's way, dream scenario. Realistically, it's a giant pain the butt to move that many ork boyz across the table without somebody getting in somebody else's way, even more so once you factor in even a bare minimum of terrain. And as others have said, you have a very low chance of ever getting all 30 boyz close enough in a melee to use all of their attacks. Nevermind the casualties that all the units will face due to shooting and morale losses as they footslog across the table.

I think T5 ork boyz is the bare minimum that they could have done to make ork infantry a tiny bit more effective. I'm curious to see if bikers, warbosses, etc will all go up in Toughness as well, and if so, if that means that various ork vehicles will also gain a small increase. If the Warboss and the bikers are T6... that's the same as a trukk right now if I remember correctly. And trukks die to a stiff breeze.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m interested to see how this changes up Orky lists.

Whilst Green Tide does seem a laugh, with the T boost, you now need fewer Boyz than before to accomplish the same goals (as in, put crudely, start here, get over there, with enough ladz to do the job).

If we perhaps see people reducing down the size of their Mobs, that’s a fair amount of points freed up. I’m looking forward to seeing what people spend them on (assuming Boyz don’t jump in price)

Hell yeah. That's my mood too. New codex means new nonsense to slap down on the board and go wild with.

If I can play a green tide with 30 less models and have it just as if not more effective than before then i'll call that an absolute win. If a swarm of trukkboyz becomes viable again because they'll actually survive a round or two and kill something in return then i'll be a happy ork. Or even trukknobz! There could be some damn fun times ahead.

Because wounds don't carry over FnP is always going to be a pain on multi-model units, which is why it bogs down gameplay in 40k so much as opposed to AoS. They could mitigate that by making damage carry over from model to model but making it so a weapon can never deal more damage than a model's wounds characteristic. It would simplify and speed things up but also be a (small but notable) boost to random damage weapons that I am unsure they or players particularly want.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Because wounds don't carry over FnP is always going to be a pain on multi-model units, which is why it bogs down gameplay in 40k so much as opposed to AoS. They could mitigate that by making damage carry over from model to model but making it so a weapon can never deal more damage than a model's wounds characteristic. It would simplify and speed things up but also be a (small but notable) boost to random damage weapons that I am unsure they or players particularly want.

How would that boost a random damage weapon?

It'd only make it weaker against FNP models.

Because right now if I hit a 2-wound unit with a d3 damage weapon and roll a 1 then a 3 I do 2 damage total, whereas if it were as I said above it would be 3. Personally I would be quite happy to deal with that in exchange for the added convenience and practicality. After all, even without FnP multi-damage needs to be rolled one at a time in cases like the above and it slows things down. But I can also understand if someone preferred what we have now.

If one wanted to just address FnP the most direct solution would be doing it like Nurglings; it only works against a damage characteristic of 1. By GWs own description this how disgustingly resilient SHOULD work rather than the bizzaro-opposite DG has now.

Ah. That feels... really counter-intuitive.

*shrug* I can see different people thinking that about either version.

Yeah, right now Disgustingly Resilient is ass-backwards, working against higher damage weapons but giving no extra resilience against low damage weapons.

It's a bit like how shooting at someone in cover is hard, but because they're in cover I can move and shoot my heavy weapon with no further penalties.

GW doesn't really understand how to scale rules correctly.

Well at least orks never cared

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


It's a bit like how shooting at someone in cover is hard, but because they're in cover I can move and shoot my heavy weapon with no further penalties.

GW doesn't really understand how to scale rules correctly.

Right? it should have been something like
1) Attacking units positive hit modifiers
2) defending units negative to be hit modifiers, cannot reduce total below -1
3) attacking units negative to hit modifiers, no cap
4) if final number is a positive number reduce to +1

IF gw ever brings back things like bonus's to be hit on defending target (large size back in warhammer fantasy) could make that step 5 with no positive cap, but thats another topic on adding negatice accuracy modifiers to anti tank weapons and +to be hit modifiers to large sized targets.

that way enemy negaitive effects could reduce the modifier to as low as -1, but then any self inflected negatives to hit could drop it lower, none of that gak of free advancing/shooting assault weapons or move/firing heavy weapons when enemy already has -1 to be hit.

 warmaster21 wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


It's a bit like how shooting at someone in cover is hard, but because they're in cover I can move and shoot my heavy weapon with no further penalties.

GW doesn't really understand how to scale rules correctly.

Right? it should have been something like
1) Attacking units positive hit modifiers
2) defending units negative to be hit modifiers, cannot reduce total below -1
3) attacking units negative to hit modifiers, no cap
4) if final number is a positive number reduce to +1

IF gw ever brings back things like bonus's to be hit on defending target (large size back in warhammer fantasy) could make that step 5 with no positive cap, but thats another topic on adding negatice accuracy modifiers to anti tank weapons and +to be hit modifiers to large sized targets.

that way enemy negaitive effects could reduce the modifier to as low as -1, but then any self inflected negatives to hit could drop it lower, none of that gak of free advancing/shooting assault weapons or move/firing heavy weapons when enemy already has -1 to be hit.

Couldn’t this be even more simplified to something akin to the DND advantage system? Attacking unit has advantage (+1), unless there’s something that would give disadvantage (terrain, defensive grenades, etc.)

Optional: Call the rule “I have the high ground” for the lolz

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah, right now Disgustingly Resilient is ass-backwards, working against higher damage weapons but giving no extra resilience against low damage weapons.

It's a bit like how shooting at someone in cover is hard, but because they're in cover I can move and shoot my heavy weapon with no further penalties.

GW doesn't really understand how to scale rules correctly.

To be fair, DG as a whole package feel perfectly right. T5 + 2/3 wound + good armor already makes them very resilient against small arms, the -1 damage makes sure that a plague marine or terminator remains a night unstoppable juggernaut and doesn't suddenly pop like a balloon because someone hit the overcharge switch on their plasma gun.

People need to start looking at the whole picture and drop the mindset that each number or bespoke rule represents a specific trait. This clearly hasn't worked well in the last two decades, so it's good the start breaking those arbitral restraints now.

Kebabcito wrote:
Thats why theyll do it, because people stack too much boyz. No way anyone can deal with 120 T5 6++ 6+++ obscured turn1 advancing and charging for 2000 attacks ap-1 and resurrecting after the combat.

They must nerf it in any way, maybe no more invul, maybe high costs, maybe anything, but saying theyll cost 10 points is objectivity 0. Free win for any ork in any tournament (people cannot adapt)

So how they deal with equilavent point t4 boyz? That would be harder to kill. T5 14 pts would be lot easier to kill.

Do you think orks are op now because you are　saying gw are nerfing them...

Also you assumn 6++ 6+++ arb still available. Green tide　is also likely going.

 Jidmah wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah, right now Disgustingly Resilient is ass-backwards, working against higher damage weapons but giving no extra resilience against low damage weapons.

It's a bit like how shooting at someone in cover is hard, but because they're in cover I can move and shoot my heavy weapon with no further penalties.

GW doesn't really understand how to scale rules correctly.

To be fair, DG as a whole package feel perfectly right. T5 + 2/3 wound + good armor already makes them very resilient against small arms, the -1 damage makes sure that a plague marine or terminator remains a night unstoppable juggernaut and doesn't suddenly pop like a balloon because someone hit the overcharge switch on their plasma gun.

People need to start looking at the whole picture and drop the mindset that each number or bespoke rule represents a specific trait. This clearly hasn't worked well in the last two decades, so it's good the start breaking those arbitral restraints now.

I'd still rather they have just given DG stuff 50% more wounds. It works out the same as the old FNP against most things, doesn't require the slow rolling that one did, and doesn't generate unintuitive break points like the new one does. D2 still works, it just takes a little more, and D1 things aren't weirdly efficient.

I'm down for the T5 orks, though, as it's just another combination of the (probably too) many "durability" stats that 40k has. If we're going to have them, why not use them? And certainly an ork's physiology can represent that as much as anything. Even a marine needs his various organs to live, after all, but orks aren't really bothered by a short stint without lungs.

Thanks to this discussion I'm thinking of T5 orks not so much as being super tough outright but rather 'T4+fnp rolled in=T5' which is making me no longer dislike it. Still wish it had been an extra wound, but I'm cool with it now. Thanks Dakka!

When are we thinking for the release? O heard spikey bits saying it could be end of June but I'm doubtful tbh.

Rogerio134134 wrote:
When are we thinking for the release? O heard spikey bits saying it could be end of June but I'm doubtful tbh.

After today's preview the rest of June is now taken up with AOS. Preview next Sunday, then two-week preorder on the 19th.

I'm expecting the Beast Snagga box to come out sometime in July, with the GK/TS books in August, and Ork main release in Sept/Orktober. Just like how they left a couple of months gap between the Sisters box and full army release.

AOS3 is a two week preorder. There's nothing stopping another preorder in there. We've had it happen before.

 xttz wrote:

Rogerio134134 wrote:
When are we thinking for the release? O heard spikey bits saying it could be end of June but I'm doubtful tbh.

After today's preview the rest of June is now taken up with AOS. Preview next Sunday, then two-week preorder on the 19th.

I'm expecting the Beast Snagga box to come out sometime in July, with the GK/TS books in August, and Ork main release in Sept/Orktober. Just like how they left a couple of months gap between the Sisters box and full army release.

Don't forget we also have the Stormstrike Chariot, Beast-Skewer Killbow, etc. releasing "...hard on the heels..." of Dominion so that will take up another week of releases at the minimum.

No 'ere we go today :(

 Dreamchild wrote:
No 'ere we go today :(

Its been every 2 weeks lately. May 3rd, 17th, 31st. Also April 5th, but that was a real early look.
So probably next week.