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.

SemperMortis wrote:

Spoiler:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
The quality of a 40k codex seems entirely dependant on if the writer likes the army and sadly for Orks there seems to be no one on the team that looks out for them.

At one point, gw didn't even have a studio army of Orks. Don't know if they do now or not.

Oh man, is that true? Oof.

It isn't true.

One time GW said that their studio Ork army wasn't large enough to take to some tournament or other, which was clearly untrue (they have multiple Stompas), and was clearly said because they wanted to take one of the newer codex releases instead.

You can see the studio Ork armies in literally every edition of Codex: Orks.

Except...it is true




Automatically Appended Next Post:
We even got a campaign together of ork players to send GW models so they could actually have an ork army because christ that is pathetic.

This took place in 2018 btw

I don't know how you think that GW literally saying that they have a studio army somehow counters my claim that they have a studio army

I just went to Battlescribe. And I made a list that consisted of most every Ork unit before big Ghaz came out-minimum units too!

It's over 4,500 points.

You want to tell me that a sub-4k Studio Army is meaningful when that's not even ONE of each unit?

Was GW's post about not having 4k in points before or after the current codex dropped?

And it could be someone was wrong and they have more than 4k.

I think it's fair to call out that Semper changed the goalposts.

I also think it's fair to look askance at GW for not having at least one full unit of every model they've put out (including Forge World units) for their own internal testing purposes, and preferably they'd have at least 2 of each and more of troops.

I think it's very, very odd to call out Lord Damocles as suggesting that "a sub-4k Studio Army is meaningful" while quoting him explicitly stating that GW's statement that they didn't have a big enough army was a lie.

Edit: I mean, folks... That's the WH40k Facebook team's word on the subject. There's not enough salt in the ocean to just take that at face value.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Why should GW have 4k points of Orks? Or any faction?

Believe me, I'm the last person to defend GW, but the studio army is for photographing and showing off, it's not actually meant to be a playable army.

I agree, designers should not be playtesting their own work, it's too time-consuming for 40k and they are too busy with their update schedule and they're too biased to get any good information out of things anyway. I'd rather the designers play competitive games with what is currently out so they have an understanding of where the game is at instead of living in WIP land full time. The things the designers actually need to test can be done with empty bases, like how many Ork Boyz can I fit into a 5-man Intercessor unit now that they are getting larger bases and do Ork Boyz need to be cheaper to account for that fact. The designers wouldn't have time for more than a dozen Ork games while designing the codex, that's a drop in the bucket.

GW has two teams of out of house playtesters, get the casuals to verify whether the rules are thematic and fun, then finalize rules and send them off to see what's broken when it gets spammed by the competitive playtesters.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Why are you spreading this misinformation? The army in the codices has been confirmed to be an employee's personal property.

During 8th when this topic came up the studio collection consist of the red and yellow painted models from 7th edition's box arts which was insufficient to form a playable army. There was a call to send GW boyz among the the ork player to ensure that they could at least play orks.

Confirmed where, Jid?

On the facebook thread (or a related one) that was posted earlier. Someone counted up the unique ork units seen in 7th and 8th edition books and called them out for lying because those added up to a lot more than 4k. The social media account responded that the majority of those orks came from a private collection, and we know that they aren't the same orks Phil Kelly used in his WD battle reports.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Was GW's post about not having 4k in points before or after the current codex dropped?

And it could be someone was wrong and they have more than 4k.

It was before the speed freeks wave.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
I think it's fair to call out that Semper changed the goalposts.

I also think it's fair to look askance at GW for not having at least one full unit of every model they've put out (including Forge World units) for their own internal testing purposes, and preferably they'd have at least 2 of each and more of troops.

I think it's very, very odd to call out Lord Damocles as suggesting that "a sub-4k Studio Army is meaningful" while quoting him explicitly stating that GW's statement that they didn't have a big enough army was a lie.

Edit: I mean, folks... That's the WH40k Facebook team's word on the subject. There's not enough salt in the ocean to just take that at face value.

My apologies, was not my intention to move the goalposts. I just assumed it would be kind of common sense for the game creators who are fielding massive armies of almost every other faction to have at least 4k points of one of their founding factions which has been around for almost 40 years.

Well this thread is clearly dead. The original person who brought up GWs Orks distastes sorta of had a point. Since then it’s been pages of a back and forth on how many points of orks GW owns or doesn’t own, which is not at all relevant to a balance discussion.

Time to take this thread out behind the stables.

Nobody who has played orkz for a long time thinks this current codex is at all thought out or smart. We have a couple of competitive builds almost exclusively by accident rather than intent

Well that would be the point, since i do not play the current edition and i despise everything about 9th the orks i play against use the 4th ed codex that was used half way through 5th and was a very thematic codex.

Jidmah wrote:

 aphyon wrote:
No it makes perfect sense they are Orks. they are more impressed by the load noise and the bright flashes the guns make. the entire point of the football hooligans...er i mean orks was to brawl.

If you want good shooting bring something manned by a grot. besides it isn't like they needed to be good at it, they did just fine in previous editions. i always look forward to our ork players creating all sorts of silliness in our 5th ed games.

In 5th orks also relied heavily on shooting units. Dakka jets, lootas, big guns, kanz, buggies, koptas or shoota boyz were core assets of pretty much every army, none of the particularly great melee units. Choppa boyz were primarily used as trukk boyz or when you simply had too many AOBR boyz, and besides them only other relevant melee units was nobz which had to rely on wound allocation rules that are cursed to this day to be a threat at all.

Orks have not been a melee focused army since 4th edition, count the number of melee units if you don't want to take my word for it.

Posts like yours annoy me to no end, because they clearly show the same complete lack of knowledge and interest as GW' devs display over and over again. The only difference is that you aren't getting paid to pay attention, while they are.

Or...wait for it, you do not have a clue-the context of how i play 40k is more focused on the lore. as i noted in the above reply. the 4th ed codex IS the one our group uses because it is still on of the best representations of how orks should be in the 40K universe back when most of the important original designers still had a hand in designing things, Even the 4th ed codex had loads of shooting units and yes 5th added even more, but aside from grots (you know the guys inside the killa kanz you mentioned) orks were never "good" at shooting. they made up for the fact with sheer weight of fire which incidentally also fits into the original lore about how they fights mo dakka became a meme for a reason.

As a side note, yes that would allocation nonsense was dumb and that is why we do not use it in our 5th ed games.

^Plus Orks are WS 4, but BS 2. Their core statline is weighted towards assault.

 aphyon wrote:
Or...wait for it, you do not have a clue-the context of how i play 40k is more focused on the lore. as i noted in the above reply. the 4th ed codex IS the one our group uses because it is still on of the best representations of how orks should be in the 40K universe back when most of the important original designers still had a hand in designing things,

Ork lore hasn't notably changed since 4th outside of Thrakka teleporting all over the galaxy (which is kind of dumb, and not the good kind) and Octarius and its overfiend getting eaten by nids.
There was not 5th edition book, by the way.

I suggest giving page 28 of that 4th edition's codex you think so highly of a read which outlines how orks outshot the Farsight Conclave and almost killed Commander Farsight himself in the war of dakka. Read the whole thing while you are at it.

An ork player not having a significant portion of their army dedicated to dakka is not lore focused, quite the opposite.

Even the 4th ed codex had loads of shooting units and yes 5th added even more, but aside from grots (you know the guys inside the killa kanz you mentioned) orks were never "good" at shooting. they made up for the fact with sheer weight of fire which incidentally also fits into the original lore about how they fights mo dakka became a meme for a reason.

You also seem to fail to understand that being good shooting is not the same as having a good ballistic skill. All the units I listed were good shooting units, despite most of them hitting on 5+.
In fact, six shots hitting on 5s are better than three shots hitting on 3s because three shots can't ever kill more than three models.
It's also worth mentioning that ballistic skill is an arbitrarily chosen number to represent part of an abstract concept and is not part of the lore. Im surprised that after all these discussions people still don't get that a unit's abilities on the tabletop has to match its lore, not the numbers in the rulebook.

As a side note, yes that would allocation nonsense was dumb and that is why we do not use it in our 5th ed games.

While I can understand that reasoning, it also means that you neutered two more melee units out of the few orks actually did have. Nobz had little chance of survival without that exploit, as everyone experienced when 6th came around.

Bottom line, you are wrong. Orks are and have always been as much of a shooting army as marines are, both in rules and in the lore.

4th edition softback literally has under the description of the shota the statement, atleast in german, that it is the favourite weapon of boys all over.
count 1 and 1 together with regrowing teef economy and by extent you should see more shoota boys than choppa boys.

Not Online!!! wrote:
4th edition softback literally has under the description of the shota the statement, atleast in german, that it is the favourite weapon of boys all over.
count 1 and 1 together with regrowing teef economy and by extent you should see more shoota boys than choppa boys.

Yeah, flipping through that book just now made me realize how little love went into all the books afterwards. The only book that even came close was the the PA one.

From a pure gameplay perspective the current one does compare to 4th, so I'm really not in a place to complain. But imagine how awesome the codex could have been if someone actually put their heart into it...

 Jidmah wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
4th edition softback literally has under the description of the shota the statement, atleast in german, that it is the favourite weapon of boys all over.
count 1 and 1 together with regrowing teef economy and by extent you should see more shoota boys than choppa boys.

Yeah, flipping through that book just now made me realize how little love went into all the books afterwards. The only book that even came close was the the PA one.

From a pure gameplay perspective the current one does compare to 4th, so I'm really not in a place to complain. But imagine how awesome the codex could have been if someone actually put their heart into it...

You see that quite well, everytime in every edition, cue guard compared to R&H in 6th-7th or more current, compare the GSC dex if you got access to it to the Ork dex. Both 9th, except one actually is written in a holistically functional approach (and in a fun + surprisingly customizable format even though HQ's don't really get options sadly) and the other feels like a disjointed mess of limits, specific as in box with lawtext formulation and going against its own faction ethos with that

Heck nobs didn't even get normal access to souped up shootas anymore, because there are none in the box, but somehow the lore hasn't changed, so why are they only using combishootas, or melee equipment?

Stuff like that is annoying, doubly so when synergies have become more and more dictating of how an army plays and yet the ork dex has little actual synergistic behaviour of charachters and boys and stratagems, nvm an atual custom trait builder...

It's not just that. Kustom jobs which were a very popular mechanic from PA were not just nerfed by putting insane point costs on them, but they also axed almost all of the ones which were regularly taken, none of which were considered powerful. Now this awesome mechanic is largely unused because you now have to pay 20 points for upgrades that weren't even worth a CP, not to mention that buggies are now forced to chose between bringing a second one and paying points for mostly mediocre updates.

Specialist mobs are not just boring but also break auras, transports and other synergies. Trukk boyz didn't even function at launch, a clear indication how well playtested this was IMO.

There are more than 10 characters which provide +1 to hit in melee as an aura, on top of many rules that do the same.

Many stratagems and relics that were generalist stratagems are now locked into beastsnaggas. At the same time the stratagems are all so expensive and have so little impact that most CP are spent on core stratagems.

Seriously bad crusade rules.
- If you chose a wartrike to lead your cursade force, half the rules don't work, he basically auto-loses challenges and you can't take crusade relics. If a warboss on warbike leads your force, it loses character protection if it levels up too often.
- Playing speed waaagh! is in general a really bad idea, as crusade rules HATE vehicles. Not only are you locked out of most cool rules and can't do actions, you also shower your opponent's in experience each time you play.
- No trait table for speed freeks or walkers or vehicles. It's cavalry or bust.
- Scrap points are a broken mechanic because most people don't play with a lot of vehicles in crusade, so you need to spend RP to gain scrap. Kustom jobs require you to spend scrap AND PL/points, and the PL costs for them are way too high. On a losing streak, your are seriously starved for RP as an ork because not only does the scrap mechanic eat away at them, you also lose more units in games and thus take more battle scars, at least until you have an experienced mek or doc.
- Specalist mobs cannot be taken unless your unit has gathered 16 exp AND you have to spend RP to get them right when they level up. If you miss that opportunity or don't have enough RP to hand out two specialist mobs at once, you need to wait for the next level.
- Agendas require you to kill titanic models in 50 PL games, kill vehicles or monsters with your warboss(which you see 1-2 per army at best), kill vehicles or monsters with bestsnaggas only, and an agenda that rewards you for killing stuff during your Waaagh!, which is strictly inferior to just having any kill agenda from the BRB. The only decent one is the makin' stunts, but RAW you are never allowed to perform that action because you have to advance to perform it and advancing units are not allowed to perform actions
- In general, if you ever play an ork crusade, make sure to make it a beast snagga heavy bloodaxe army, otherwise the crusade rules will probably disappoint you.

So yeah, it basically reads like a codex that was halfway done, then they slapped the entire beast snagga thing in there (confirmed to not be playtested), randomly wrote the BEAST SNAGGA keyword everywhere it made sense and sent it off to the printers without playing it once. Then it somehow turned out to be rather strong anyways, and they made sure that wasn't the case by nerfing every model that was part of a top 10 list into the ground. Now ork tournament players are stuck with exploiting a stratagem they worded badly and forgot to FAQ, despite the same type of stratagem already causing problems for the same reason in the past.

Ever since Phil Kelly lost interest with orks it has been this way, and I don't see it changing unless they hire a new guy who loves orks.

@Jidmah

Wow, sorry to hear about orks and crusade. I don't have the dex because the kommandos are the only orks I have, but I had considered a small force.

This doesn't motivate me to follow through.

PenitentJake wrote:
@Jidmah

Wow, sorry to hear about orks and crusade. I don't have the dex because the kommandos are the only orks I have, but I had considered a small force.

This doesn't motivate me to follow through.

I'm kind of surprised to hear it after being told there was no need to fix stupid Crusade rules because there just aren't any. Except maybe the one about Chaos and their (un)holy numbers.

It's probably not too bad if you build a traditional footslogger army around kommadoz and beast snagga boyz and make them blood axes.
You kind of need the extra stratagems from the supplement because the balancing mechanism for crusade points fails if you have nothing to spend those CP on. The extra relics and warlord traits are also quite cool to customize some characters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breton wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
@Jidmah

Wow, sorry to hear about orks and crusade. I don't have the dex because the kommandos are the only orks I have, but I had considered a small force.

This doesn't motivate me to follow through.

I'm kind of surprised to hear it after being told there was no need to fix stupid Crusade rules because there just aren't any. Except maybe the one about Chaos and their (un)holy numbers.

I'm fairly sure that I said that your fix in specific was nonsense, not that there was no need for fixes.
It was also related to you implementing an inefficient fix trying to prevent people from power-gaming PLs, not to codex specific crusade rules not performing whatsoever.

The reason I dropped that discussion was because you never back down from any argument ever, therefore there is no point in trying to exchange arguments with you.

There also isn't really any way to easily house-rule the issue outlined above, so you are completely off topic. I guess me calling your absolutely perfect silver bullet for every issue in the entire crusade system "nonsense" must have struck a nerf.

The problem isn't just the crusade rules though, atleast with narrative inclined people you can just beforehand discuss what is wrong and isn't about it to avoid issues, houserule or just do a full on standalone campaign without crusade rules.

Otoh, the "normal" list part of the dex is just... a mess and it translates poorly.

Also looted wagons.

Harlequins looking incredibly strong on the weekend results. CWE doing okay too - at least until they hit the finals, where I think they got knocked about a bit by the last two (but I mean its a relatively small number of players and games, so hard to say with clarity).

Probably want a few more weeks (and a few bigger tournaments) - but those initial "not a meta defining codex" takes are perhaps looking... questionable.

Tyel wrote:
Harlequins looking incredibly strong on the weekend results. CWE doing okay too - at least until they hit the finals, where I think they got knocked about a bit by the last two (but I mean its a relatively small number of players and games, so hard to say with clarity).

Probably want a few more weeks (and a few bigger tournaments) - but those initial "not a meta defining codex" takes are perhaps looking... questionable.

Yea, I'll be pulling up the win rates against various armies for knife ears once I can get to my other PC. Should be interesting. They don't seem to be entirely beyond Tau and Custodes yet ( except perhaps Harlies ).

 Jidmah wrote:


I'm fairly sure that I said that your fix in specific was nonsense, not that there was no need for fixes.

Well I said "House Rule some balance stuff that doesn't make any sense" and gave an example for me.

It was also related to you implementing an inefficient fix trying to prevent people from power-gaming PLs, not to codex specific crusade rules not performing whatsoever.

It wasn't to prevent Power Gaming PL, it was to bridge points players into PL - the premise was how to start a Crusade - which led me to Points to PL - but that's neither here nor there.

The reason I dropped that discussion was because you never back down from any argument ever, therefore there is no point in trying to exchange arguments with you.

There also isn't really any way to easily house-rule the issue outlined above, so you are completely off topic. I guess me calling your absolutely perfect silver bullet for every issue in the entire crusade system "nonsense" must have struck a nerf.

No nerve particularly. I just have a pretty good memory. The glee you apparently have for hoping you "struck a nerve" is sobering to see. Most of those seriously bad crusade rules can be house ruled - like anything else. The hardest one is probably the missing trait tables, but even then you could just borrow someone else's and ork-ify them. The generic SM list looks pretty easy to do that. Walkers - Marksman's Honors turns into Dedeye's Eye, Aquila Imperialis to Boss Pole or Orkoid Fungus, Purity Seals to Gork's Gift, Bladesman's Honor to Top Choppa, Terminator Honors to Mek's Favor, the Centurios Service Studs - you probably have to punt so borrow the Armour Plating from GSC. All it takes is an organization night, have everyone show up with their list of stuff they don't like, and find a way everyone will agree to fix it - which is usually most easily/likely solved by borrowing another rule.

Looks like Harlequins are the problem and not necessarily CW or Asuryani.

Green - 56%+
Yellow - 45% to 55%
Orange - < 45%

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Without posting pictures its hard to say - but I think an effective range of about 30" will allow you to cover the vast majority of the relevant parts of a table. Especially if there's some nice LOS blocking terrain in the center of the board - which is fairly standard.

There also aren't that many units that can just zip 24" across the table.

I think having been possibly prematurely written off, its starting to become clearer there are some gems in the CWE roster. Be interesting to see if that starts to come through tomorrow.

i'm not saying theyre bad or that they won't be problematic, just that having them on a platform that moves only 6"m doesnt fly, isnt infantry and doesnt have Core makes them probably less problematic than Airbursts for example.

I think the d-cannon hype won't live and that people will got to the mini nightspinners instead (i know thats what i'll be using first)

I played 4 games this weekend with the new codex and i must say that spinners and cannons losing access to rerolls is huge. I used 2 spinners and 2 shadowweavers. We are using the UK terrain pack, that i personally thing is lacking cover and lacking containers that could slow fast moving CC durable elite armies. Spinners without the rerolls and random shots were unreliable(as i expected) and failed in many occasions to kill what they should and they are practically useless vs anything that have -1D and more than 1 wound. I took the support weapons to pick up the slack when the spinners bounced, but i`m totally unsatisfied with their performance, random shots, without the guardian strat and if the opponent used terrain -1 to hit, they failed me alotof times(2 of them failed to kill one ruststalker). Person should not expect alot from 90 pts, but still....
I have the feeling that most of my opponents whined more from my LOS that it actually did. I tried using D-cannons before and i`m sure that they simple don`t have the range to be effective on most terrain types, especially now since most of the armies are much faster and having them tied in close combat is not something i want to experience.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Looks like Harlequins are the problem and not necessarily CW or Asuryani.

Green - 56%+
Yellow - 45% to 55%
Orange - < 45%

I for one welcome our new meta overlords.

Tyel wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Looks like Harlequins are the problem and not necessarily CW or Asuryani.

Green - 56%+
Yellow - 45% to 55%
Orange - < 45%

I for one welcome our new meta overlords.

Thank god, means i'm not gonna have to endure people whining that my elves are too strong Hopefully we stay at that level (or even drop a little bit)

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Tyel wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Looks like Harlequins are the problem and not necessarily CW or Asuryani.

Green - 56%+
Yellow - 45% to 55%
Orange - < 45%

I for one welcome our new meta overlords.

Thank god, means i'm not gonna have to endure people whining that my elves are too strong Hopefully we stay at that level (or even drop a little bit)

I doubt it, the WR will increase, because the list will become better and people will play better. Tao and custodes will probably eat some nerfs also, but they will probably also adapt more to the new treat.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Looks like Harlequins are the problem and not necessarily CW or Asuryani.

Green - 56%+
Yellow - 45% to 55%
Orange - < 45%

What qualifies as each? Pure Harlequins are Harlequin, Pure Craftworld is Craftworld, mixed Craftworld and Harlequin is Asuryani?

Breton wrote:
What qualifies as each? Pure Harlequins are Harlequin, Pure Craftworld is Craftworld, mixed Craftworld and Harlequin is Asuryani?

Yea Asuryani is going to Ynnari / DE / CW / Harlies. It's a category that is probably under performing at the moment until someone finds just the right combination of soup.