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.

If the game is a power fantasy for marines, then making other factions powerful is bad game design.
If it is not a power fantasy for marines, then it's fine to make other factions more powerful.

 Da Boss wrote:
If the game is a power fantasy for marines, then making other factions powerful is bad game design.
If it is not a power fantasy for marines, then it's fine to make other factions more powerful.

Yep, but again, you have a plethora of players like Xeno who think the world is ending anytime a faction that isn't his gets buffed. The guy was screaming about how OP Killakanz were and how brokenly amazing the Stompa is for god sake, could you imagine if Orkz got a unit like Eradicators or Attack Bikes? He would probably go into apoplexy

SemperMortis wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
If the game is a power fantasy for marines, then making other factions powerful is bad game design.
If it is not a power fantasy for marines, then it's fine to make other factions more powerful.

Yep, but again, you have a plethora of players like Xeno who think the world is ending anytime a faction that isn't his gets buffed. The guy was screaming about how OP Killakanz were and how brokenly amazing the Stompa is for god sake, could you imagine if Orkz got a unit like Eradicators or Attack Bikes? He would probably go into apoplexy

I just have a real understanding of the community. A good portion is literally just marine haters like you are. They even sneak into marine fan pages to talk about marines being nerfed. Funny you don't go onto say a DE or CWE fan page and see them talking about nerfing their own units - it is a scam. Marines are currently bottom tier of the newly updated armies. Orks currently win more than marines. Yet...were going to buff orks now against an army that is supposed to be their hardest counter? LOL. It is all a sham.

The change is unnecessary and obviously just a cash grab to get marine players to buy heavy intercessors and ork players being forced to by new ork beast snaggy boys. Just so we can all wound each other on 4's again. An absolute joke. Orks are as tough as custodians. Makes a lot of sense actually not.

 Xenomancers wrote:


The change is unnecessary and obviously just a cash grab to get marine players to buy heavy intercessors and ork players being forced to by new ork beast snaggy boys. Just so we can all wound each other on 4's again. An absolute joke. Orks are as tough as custodians. Makes a lot of sense actually not.

I'm not seeing how T5 Ork boys makes me want to buy Any Beast Snagga boys. Until we see the data sheet I see no value in them over regular Boys or Nobs.

 warhead01 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:


The change is unnecessary and obviously just a cash grab to get marine players to buy heavy intercessors and ork players being forced to by new ork beast snaggy boys. Just so we can all wound each other on 4's again. An absolute joke. Orks are as tough as custodians. Makes a lot of sense actually not.

I'm not seeing how T5 Ork boys makes me want to buy Any Beast Snagga boys. Until we see the data sheet I see no value in them over regular Boys or Nobs.

Thought I had seen them at str 5. Also have a 6++ save.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:


The change is unnecessary and obviously just a cash grab to get marine players to buy heavy intercessors and ork players being forced to by new ork beast snaggy boys. Just so we can all wound each other on 4's again. An absolute joke. Orks are as tough as custodians. Makes a lot of sense actually not.

I'm not seeing how T5 Ork boys makes me want to buy Any Beast Snagga boys. Until we see the data sheet I see no value in them over regular Boys or Nobs.

Thought I had seen them at str 5. Also have a 6++ save.

Yes you saw that. We still don't have a known unit cap for the snaggas. We also don't know how the points and other special rules will shake out. I'm not at all excited about beast snagga boys.
They don't fit my preferred playstyle, as far as I can tell. I will wait for the codex and see, maybe I'm wrong. I don't find much exciting about a 6++ I will just fail to pass. ST5 is ok but not really that necessary but it is funny that ST4 is the new ST3.

The issue at question isn't about competativeness, but about whether the rule fits the setting and feels right.

To me it does, because orks are much tougher than humans, even marines.

 warhead01 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:


The change is unnecessary and obviously just a cash grab to get marine players to buy heavy intercessors and ork players being forced to by new ork beast snaggy boys. Just so we can all wound each other on 4's again. An absolute joke. Orks are as tough as custodians. Makes a lot of sense actually not.

I'm not seeing how T5 Ork boys makes me want to buy Any Beast Snagga boys. Until we see the data sheet I see no value in them over regular Boys or Nobs.

Thought I had seen them at str 5. Also have a 6++ save.

Yes you saw that. We still don't have a known unit cap for the snaggas. We also don't know how the points and other special rules will shake out. I'm not at all excited about beast snagga boys.
They don't fit my preferred playstyle, as far as I can tell. I will wait for the codex and see, maybe I'm wrong. I don't find much exciting about a 6++ I will just fail to pass. ST5 is ok but not really that necessary but it is funny that ST4 is the new ST3.

That is my point. It's just another stupid round of stat inflation. It is bad for all armies because it just makes your unit choices more limited. Str 4 was already in a pretty bad place - With ork boys going to T5. Str 4 guns have no place in the game. Except interestingly en mass against T7 units. It does make the jump to Str 6 a little more interesting now.

Was it stupid stat inflation when Marines went to 2 Wounds?

 PaddyMick wrote:
The issue at question isn't about competativeness, but about whether the rule fits the setting and feels right.

To me it does, because orks are much tougher than humans, even marines.

This is false. An ork is not more tough than a marine. It doesn't make sense thematically or in reality.
A marine stands 8 foot and over 1000 lbs In ceramite armor.
An ork Boy is 6' and around 300+ lbs.

Somehow you think the ork is tougher than the marine? please explain. The marine has 3 times the bulk. How is it less tough?

I think you are confusing ork boys with Nobs - which I am with you Nobs should probably be T5 Str 5 and have 3 wounds.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
Was it stupid stat inflation when Marines went to 2 Wounds?

You might notice...marines went to 2 wounds when all heavy infantry in the game got wound buffs.

You could call it inflation but I think most everyone was happen when their heavy infantry weren't getting dropped by single boltguns on a failed save. This was a big complaint in former edditions - as space marines not really feeling like space marines in game over the past several edditions.

The idea here is that space marines were not treated as heavy infantry before...when that is what they actually are. Same thing for Terminators honestly.

 Da Boss wrote:
Was it stupid stat inflation when Marines went to 2 Wounds?

In my opinion, no. It should be all relative. A grot should have 1 wound because its the lowest number we can get, and is also one of the flimsiest beings in the setting. Theres obviously others. A marine by comparison could take twice as much as a grot, so 2 wounds is a logical step. I mean, Ork Boyz should also have 2 wounds too, but this would be in a different 40k edition.

 RaptorInMotion wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Was it stupid stat inflation when Marines went to 2 Wounds?

In my opinion, no. It should be all relative. A grot should have 1 wound because its the lowest number we can get, and is also one of the flimsiest beings in the setting. Theres obviously others. A marine by comparison could take twice as much as a grot, so 2 wounds is a logical step. I mean, Ork Boyz should also have 2 wounds too, but this would be in a different 40k edition.

It would be like sigmar...Where a Savage ork in sigmar is equal to a chaos warrior or sigmarine. They also pay about the same points...In 40k they cost around 3x less than a marine.

Oh boy, Xeno is on fire today. Citing a page listing orks at below 50% winrate as proof for orks being OP, tinfoil hat conspiracy about semper sneaking into marine fansites to suggest nerfs, his group with the guy crushing xeno with kanz being the only group who played 7th *right*, boyz getting buffed so heavy intercessors get bought so beast snaggas get bought, T5 orks now being troop in *every game* irrespective of what armies are playing, 1W T5 6+ being tougher than 2W T4 3+...

Can't wait what's next! *grabs popcorn*

 Jidmah wrote:
Oh boy, Xeno is on fire today. Citing a page listing orks at below 50% winrate as proof for orks being OP, tinfoil hat conspiracy about semper sneaking into marine fansites to suggest nerfs, his group with the guy crushing xeno with kanz being the only group who played 7th *right*, boyz getting buffed so heavy intercessors get bought so beast snaggas get bought, T5 orks now being troops for all armies in the game...

Can't wait what's next! *grabs popcorn*

Well you are misquoting me. I only said Orks win more than marines. Which is true - you can't argue with that fact.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Oh boy, Xeno is on fire today. Citing a page listing orks at below 50% winrate as proof for orks being OP, tinfoil hat conspiracy about semper sneaking into marine fansites to suggest nerfs, his group with the guy crushing xeno with kanz being the only group who played 7th *right*, boyz getting buffed so heavy intercessors get bought so beast snaggas get bought, T5 orks now being troops for all armies in the game...

Can't wait what's next! *grabs popcorn*

Well you are misquoting me. I only said Orks win more than marines. Which is true - you can't argue with that fact.

I wouldn't ever dare to argue facts.

just going to put this here

"Ork Physiology is fascinating and terrifying in equal measure, demonstrating inhuman degrees of resilience to the point where they can withstand seemingly fatal wounds with little apparent long-term consequence. Indeed, Orks witnessed suffering fatal wounds in the midst of heavy fighting have often been observed again several days later, larger and stronger than they were before their injuries and with no sign of those wounds save for some largely superficial scarring."
— Genetor Aurelius Thoze, Adeptus Mechanicus Xenobiologist

probably worth reading this whole fandom wiki with sources.

https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Orks

also of note again you can't say "an ork is ___ size" there are soem standards but in a larger waagh liek Ghaz's boys would likely be able to dwarf a nob for smaller warbands

 Xenomancers wrote:
This is false. An ork is not more tough than a marine. It doesn't make sense thematically or in reality.
A marine stands 8 foot and over 1000 lbs In ceramite armor.
An ork Boy is 6' and around 300+ lbs.

Jes Goodwin's diagram of a Marine is 7ft (in armor). A Boy is about the same size, just stooped. Armor is irrelevant here, that's why you get a 3+ and the Ork doesn't.

Painting a Marine as substantially larger than a Boy requires some real pick-and-choose of what sources you go with. Especially if you've seen the new Boy models. Marines, for all their redundant organs, aren't an undifferentiated mass of fungal flesh, either.

And yet, you're still tougher.

 Xenomancers wrote:
You might notice...marines went to 2 wounds when all heavy infantry in the game got wound buffs.

Hah, what? Immortals are W1. Gravis didn't get further buffed. Chaos Marines got nothing. A bunch of armies with heavy infantry still haven't been updated.

So really just Firstborn, Terminators, and at a stretch Plague Marines (months later). Marines went to 2 wounds when some Marines went to 2 wounds. Wow, that's... something?

Oh boy, Xeno is on fire today.

Is that so ? He's been like this since the beginning of 8th edition. This is just good old regular Xenomancers.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Oh boy, Xeno is on fire today. Citing a page listing orks at below 50% winrate as proof for orks being OP, tinfoil hat conspiracy about semper sneaking into marine fansites to suggest nerfs, his group with the guy crushing xeno with kanz being the only group who played 7th *right*, boyz getting buffed so heavy intercessors get bought so beast snaggas get bought, T5 orks now being troops for all armies in the game...

Can't wait what's next! *grabs popcorn*

Well you are misquoting me. I only said Orks win more than marines. Which is true - you can't argue with that fact.

I wouldn't ever dare to argue facts.

Spoiler:

Not sure what filters you are running because white scars are below orks on the main win loss area for me. It's also pretty dubious There are several space marine factions in the 45% wr area and a T5 ork buff will only hurt them more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
just going to put this here

"Ork Physiology is fascinating and terrifying in equal measure, demonstrating inhuman degrees of resilience to the point where they can withstand seemingly fatal wounds with little apparent long-term consequence. Indeed, Orks witnessed suffering fatal wounds in the midst of heavy fighting have often been observed again several days later, larger and stronger than they were before their injuries and with no sign of those wounds save for some largely superficial scarring."
— Genetor Aurelius Thoze, Adeptus Mechanicus Xenobiologist

probably worth reading this whole fandom wiki with sources.

https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Orks

also of note again you can't say "an ork is ___ size" there are soem standards but in a larger waagh liek Ghaz's boys would likely be able to dwarf a nob for smaller warbands

So - that should be an army of Nobs then. Have no issue with that. Doesn't mean your average ork boy should be T 5.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 catbarf wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
This is false. An ork is not more tough than a marine. It doesn't make sense thematically or in reality.
A marine stands 8 foot and over 1000 lbs In ceramite armor.
An ork Boy is 6' and around 300+ lbs.

Jes Goodwin's diagram of a Marine is 7ft (in armor). A Boy is about the same size, just stooped. Armor is irrelevant here, that's why you get a 3+ and the Ork doesn't.

Painting a Marine as substantially larger than a Boy requires some real pick-and-choose of what sources you go with. Especially if you've seen the new Boy models. Marines, for all their redundant organs, aren't an undifferentiated mass of fungal flesh, either.

And yet, you're still tougher.

 Xenomancers wrote:
You might notice...marines went to 2 wounds when all heavy infantry in the game got wound buffs.

Hah, what? Immortals are W1. Gravis didn't get further buffed. Chaos Marines got nothing. A bunch of armies with heavy infantry still haven't been updated.

So really just Firstborn, Terminators, and at a stretch Plague Marines (months later). Marines went to 2 wounds when some Marines went to 2 wounds. Wow, that's... something?

T5 3+ save is actually better than t4 2 W 3+. It would take that in a heart beat. Warriors went to 3 wounds before that they were always 2 I think. I think you get the idea at the time - lots of units wound totals went up. You know that is what I am saying.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 warhead01 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:


The change is unnecessary and obviously just a cash grab to get marine players to buy heavy intercessors and ork players being forced to by new ork beast snaggy boys. Just so we can all wound each other on 4's again. An absolute joke. Orks are as tough as custodians. Makes a lot of sense actually not.

I'm not seeing how T5 Ork boys makes me want to buy Any Beast Snagga boys. Until we see the data sheet I see no value in them over regular Boys or Nobs.

Thought I had seen them at str 5. Also have a 6++ save.

Yes you saw that. We still don't have a known unit cap for the snaggas. We also don't know how the points and other special rules will shake out. I'm not at all excited about beast snagga boys.
They don't fit my preferred playstyle, as far as I can tell. I will wait for the codex and see, maybe I'm wrong. I don't find much exciting about a 6++ I will just fail to pass. ST5 is ok but not really that necessary but it is funny that ST4 is the new ST3.

That is my point. It's just another stupid round of stat inflation. It is bad for all armies because it just makes your unit choices more limited. Str 4 was already in a pretty bad place - With ork boys going to T5. Str 4 guns have no place in the game. Except interestingly en mass against T7 units. It does make the jump to Str 6 a little more interesting now.

The thing is, I believe it is intentional on GW's part. I believe they want players to spend 5 turns fishing for 5'sand 6's. I think that is their intent because of the to wound roll and mechanics this edition.
This works with a +1/-1 to wound roll/hit roll mechanic lowering or raising those rolls 1 bracket. It doesn't look like they want something like BA Death company wounding Ork boys on 3's on the charge.
For every thing a T5 Ork boy may hinder I am also looking for what else across the game it might balance or bring forward.
Or I am completely wrong.
And lastly I think, maybe T5 will balance out due to both my views just above and a change in the points costs of Ork boys.
I guess I just think there is a bigger picture than are Ork boys T4 or T5. Will T5 stops 30 boys from being deleted in one round of fire, if so good. Ork players should get a turn too.
My experiences with 9th playing space Marines so far have been something like I'm on the ropes until turn 3 then everything turns around in my favor, except any score I may have missed an opportunity to get the turns before. The other army just runs out of meaningful options and can't finish the job, seal the deal.

Ork boys T5? Who turned on hard mode! I'm sure it will be a little challenging until the replacement codex for 9th drops in a year or two when GW's reached the right level of power creep.

Who has T5 3+ besides Marines?

And Warriors have been W3 for a while. Since at least 7th.

So who went up in wounds, for infantry? Not tanks or monsters, but infantry?

 Xenomancers wrote:
T5 3+ save is actually better than t4 2 W 3+. It would take that in a heart beat.

Have you thought much about the fact that you are in an extreme minority on this one?

 Xenomancers wrote:
Warriors went to 3 wounds before that they were always 2 I think. I think you get the idea at the time - lots of units wound totals went up. You know that is what I am saying.

...As in Tyranid Warriors?

Which went to W3 in 5th edition?

That's your idea of a heavy infantry unit that got a wound buff at roughly the same time as Marines in 9th Ed? While tons of other heavy infantry didn't get any sort of buff at all? And you're saying all heavy infantry got a wound buff?

Just stop.

Mathematically T5 W1 3+ (I assume you meant that, Xeno?) Is only better then T4 W2 3+ against S4, 5, 8 with D2. So heavy Bolters and overcharged plasma?
Note that it is only marginally better against S8 Dd3 (battle cannons) as those need 9/4 = 2.25 hits to kill a T5 W1 3+ model and 12/5= 2.4 hits for T4 W2 3+


Meanwhile T4 W2 3+ is better against S1,2,3,6,7, poison weapons, anything with 1 point damage, anything that causes mortal wounds...

 Jidmah wrote:

Tygre wrote:
I wonder if marines should have been Toughness 5 and orks 2 Wounds. If that would have made more sense.

Not really. The fluff is full of instances where a single well-aimed lasgun shot fells an ork.

*cough* Ciaphus Cain jamming and shooting his lasgun into a warboss' eyeball socket *cough*

And isn’t there the same for Marines?

So why are Marines W2?

What broke the setting was marines going to t4...

T5 orks are great and am looking forward to purging them with promethium.

 Pyroalchi wrote:
Mathematically T5 W1 3+ (I assume you meant that, Xeno?) Is only better then T4 W2 3+ against S4, 5, 8 with D2. So heavy Bolters and overcharged plasma?
Note that it is only marginally better against S8 Dd3 (battle cannons) as those need 9/4 = 2.25 hits to kill a T5 W1 3+ model and 12/5= 2.4 hits for T4 W2 3+


Meanwhile T4 W2 3+ is better against S1,2,3,6,7, poison weapons, anything with 1 point damage, anything that causes mortal wounds...

T5 feels better to me most of the time. It also messes with target priority of the opponent. Much more likely to force them to shoot weapons at a non optimal target. Aside from being mathematically better against a large portion of weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Racerguy180 wrote:
What broke the setting was marines going to t4...

T5 orks are great and am looking forward to purging them with promethium.

Marines have been T4 for like...more than 20 years right?

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Pyroalchi wrote:
Mathematically T5 W1 3+ (I assume you meant that, Xeno?) Is only better then T4 W2 3+ against S4, 5, 8 with D2. So heavy Bolters and overcharged plasma?
Note that it is only marginally better against S8 Dd3 (battle cannons) as those need 9/4 = 2.25 hits to kill a T5 W1 3+ model and 12/5= 2.4 hits for T4 W2 3+


Meanwhile T4 W2 3+ is better against S1,2,3,6,7, poison weapons, anything with 1 point damage, anything that causes mortal wounds...

T5 feels better to me most of the time. It also messes with target priority of the opponent. Much more likely to force them to shoot weapons at a non optimal target. Aside from being mathematically better against a large portion of weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Racerguy180 wrote:
What broke the setting was marines going to t4...

T5 orks are great and am looking forward to purging them with promethium.

Marines have been T4 for like...more than 20 years right?

Anything that relies on your opponent being bad isn't really good. Plus, the math isn't that hard.

And name some weapons that T5 Orks are more durable against than Marines. Go ahead.

 catbarf wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
T5 3+ save is actually better than t4 2 W 3+. It would take that in a heart beat.

Have you thought much about the fact that you are in an extreme minority on this one?

 Xenomancers wrote:
Warriors went to 3 wounds before that they were always 2 I think. I think you get the idea at the time - lots of units wound totals went up. You know that is what I am saying.

...As in Tyranid Warriors?

Which went to W3 in 5th edition?

That's your idea of a heavy infantry unit that got a wound buff at roughly the same time as Marines in 9th Ed? While tons of other heavy infantry didn't get any sort of buff at all? And you're saying all heavy infantry got a wound buff?

Just stop.

If being in a minority by being right is considered a bad thing? Most armies have lots of multi damage attacks. 2 wounds is a novelty at that point. Meanwhile - str 10 is still pretty rare.

Care to list weapons that are better against Marines than Orks, Xeno?

I can think of a small number, but not a lot.