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.

 auticus wrote:

Auticus played the game for over 20 years and had to play in an environment that was only matched / tournament scenarios day in day out.

I highly doubt that the game and matched play conditions in those regards changed drastically in the 3 years that I stepped out or if the missions somehow since 2019 that these missions become these dynamic ever changing things, especially since I can go read them with my own eyes and see what the state of the game is myself.

The mission changes from 8th to 9th were pretty significant.

I guess I'm not sure what others are defining as "whacky" missions. Do they mean where stuff randomly blows up like that daemon-forsaken table in 7th?

Karol wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

And if the overall game requires someone else's army to be deleted or nerfed into unusability, so be it!

More like : If the overall game requires someone's army to need to be reworked so it functions better, so be it!

I play thousand sons, the removal of monofaction souping affected me but i realised it was a better change for the overall game.
If a faction becomes truly unplayable with changes, then GW needs to go back to it and fix the specific problems with that faction instead of sacrificing the whole game.

But GW doesn't do that. They maybe do it for marines, but even then 2.0 marines are often very different from what prior marine armies were.

i'm saying they should, if they were good designers

Toofast 804923 11359456 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blndmage wrote:


Don't forget us Combat Patrol players!
Maybe this is their attempt to bring folks to lower sized games.

The game doesn't work very well at low points and isn't really designed to. They have Kill Team, Warcry, Underworlds, Necromunda, Blood Bowl, Titanicus and Aeronautica Imperialis for that. 40k is a mass battle game about HQs, troops, elites, heavy support, and fast attack units working together to accomplish multiple objectives. That doesn't play well at 500 pts because you basically get an HQ, a troop or two, and one big model or powerful unit.

But I don't want to play titanicus, or kill team. I want to play 40k, using the supported Combat Patrol content. I *really* wish we got Matched Play Combat Patrol love, but since the tournament scene barely recognizes Incursion, I see why we get forgotten. But, because Combat Patrol outside of Crusade (a whole different thing I don't wanna get into) gets basically laughed and and kicked out of the game by the players, we never get any support from GW. My local scene is actually considering moving to 501 as the smallest (outside of fun one offs), as then it counts as Incursion, and we get support.

But the game, as written lists 0-500 points as 1/4 of the different game sizes (not counting Open/Narrative/Matched), and should be valid, not ignored and mocked.

Also re the "but I only get an HQ, and 2 Troops" thing:
I've played Necrons at the 500-750ish points level since 3rd. Trust me I get it, but it teaches you to learn your units.

You're only required 1 HQ and 1 troop now.
It's supposed to be a patrol, if you want to run a Monolith vs kroot (a commonly done thing for us), that's what Open play is for. There's actually a mission pack and rules!

"But the game is totally different and my normal (2k GT) tricks don't work!"
No freaking kidding! It's a totally different level of game. It's a different meta, a different mindset, you can still run really thematic armies.

I'm with you- I love small forces, and combining them in multidetachment armies. This is a little easier in Crusade than matched- faction restrictions aren't as tight.

Really excited that both Cultists and Traitor Guard have HQs and Troops so they can be taken as independent patrols.

And, a 500 or under point force can be super fun to collect and model!

Honestly, if I wasn't stuck to solo games, due to being too disabled to play at the local stores, I'd work out what that minimum points each faction has as a playable Combat Patrol, then take the highest, add a % decided by the community, and set that as the lowest points playable locally, and would work to build a Combat Patrol community.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Auticus played the game for over 20 years and had to play in an environment that was only matched / tournament scenarios day in day out.

I highly doubt that the game and matched play conditions in those regards changed drastically in the 3 years that I stepped out or if the missions somehow since 2019 that these missions become these dynamic ever changing things, especially since I can go read them with my own eyes and see what the state of the game is myself.

The mission changes from 8th to 9th were pretty significant.

I guess I'm not sure what others are defining as "whacky" missions. Do they mean where stuff randomly blows up like that daemon-forsaken table in 7th?

If you don't sometimes win because your opponent suffered a freak virus bombing attack are you even wargaming /sarcasm?

Dudeface wrote:
Have we had the wailing about the doom of the Ork faction yet?

I'm not aware of anything that would make the current situation any worse.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Auticus played the game for over 20 years and had to play in an environment that was only matched / tournament scenarios day in day out.

I highly doubt that the game and matched play conditions in those regards changed drastically in the 3 years that I stepped out or if the missions somehow since 2019 that these missions become these dynamic ever changing things, especially since I can go read them with my own eyes and see what the state of the game is myself.

The mission changes from 8th to 9th were pretty significant.

I guess I'm not sure what others are defining as "whacky" missions. Do they mean where stuff randomly blows up like that daemon-forsaken table in 7th?

If you don't sometimes win because your opponent suffered a freak virus bombing attack are you even wargaming /sarcasm?

Age of Sigmar had that with the realm of battle rules.

They dropped them.

 Jidmah wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Have we had the wailing about the doom of the Ork faction yet?

I'm not aware of anything that would make the current situation any worse.

A lot of lists seem to like running multiple detachments, none of which are patrols/battalions, so 6cp won't get you far.

Dudeface wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Have we had the wailing about the doom of the Ork faction yet?

I'm not aware of anything that would make the current situation any worse.

A lot of lists seem to like running multiple detachments, none of which are patrols/battalions, so 6cp won't get you far.

Typically there's already a patrol to mitigate the loss of CPs. Multiple detachments for orks are something like patrol + outrider/spearhead or patrol + patrol (+ patrol).

Orks don't really need tons of CPs though, a large chunk of them are burned pre-game. With -6CPs from the starting pool I think they'll manage. I know I'll manage.

Dudeface wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Have we had the wailing about the doom of the Ork faction yet?

I'm not aware of anything that would make the current situation any worse.

A lot of lists seem to like running multiple detachments, none of which are patrols/battalions, so 6cp won't get you far.

Kult of speed is relying on an unfaq'ed stratagem to get gak done and has bee fairly dead in the water due to AoC, the complete obliteration of squig buggies and nids.

Goff list can run beast snagga boyz to pay for the tax, and with no valuable stratagems to speak of they just drop 4CP into a patrol to have another warboss with relic and trait.

The prospect of finally getting a secondary that isn't squig gak and others not being able to leverage their stacking stratagems on us is totally worth losing the trade.

Worst case, orks just remain the weakest army.

I've been playing since 3rd and Orks have consistently been towards the bottom of the tier list. While I think all factions should be viable competitively, it's hard to feel sympathy for people who buy Orks and then complain they can't win tournaments. It's like buying a compact pickup and complaining it won't tow your 59' Sea Ray. You knew before you bought Orks that you probably weren't going to win LVO with them. If that's what you want, play Eldar/Tau/Marines who seem to hit S tier at least some point during every edition. Again, I don't want this to be the case but that's reality.

Most people don't buy an army according to tournament stats. They start an army considering the models aesthetics, their lore and their style of playing. So to me it's perfectly fine to complain if that army is constantly left behind or take unnecessary massive nerfs the very moment they aren't gak tier, and we're talking about years if not decades. Not just the moment. SM player typically start complaining as soon as their army is not in top 3.

On the other hand orks are an army with a massive roster and that relies on the numbers (aka multiples of the same boxes), so from my perpsective it's hard to feel sympathy for those ork players who get 2000-2500 points of miniatures and expect to be good with that lot for a long time. Orks are for players who aim at very large collections and/or people who love kitbashing or converting lots of stuff, not just those who aim at getting the bare minimum to play the game, let alone the competitive meta. Get eldar/tau/SM if that's what you want.

Another popular way to build an army is using box sets as cores in order to take advantage of discounts. This is how I tend to buy mine.

Toofast wrote:
I've been playing since 3rd and Orks have consistently been towards the bottom of the tier list. While I think all factions should be viable competitively, it's hard to feel sympathy for people who buy Orks and then complain they can't win tournaments. It's like buying a compact pickup and complaining it won't tow your 59' Sea Ray. You knew before you bought Orks that you probably weren't going to win LVO with them. If that's what you want, play Eldar/Tau/Marines who seem to hit S tier at least some point during every edition. Again, I don't want this to be the case but that's reality.

Orks had no troubles competing in tournaments till the car company came over, stabbed all four tires and the spare wheel (for consistency) of your pickup, shot your engine twice and then set fire to your other car just to make sure that you won't tow anything ever again.

Meanwhile, the drukhari BMW X7 got a sticker slapped on it's rear which says "drive carefully".

 Jidmah wrote:

Toofast wrote:
I've been playing since 3rd and Orks have consistently been towards the bottom of the tier list. While I think all factions should be viable competitively, it's hard to feel sympathy for people who buy Orks and then complain they can't win tournaments. It's like buying a compact pickup and complaining it won't tow your 59' Sea Ray. You knew before you bought Orks that you probably weren't going to win LVO with them. If that's what you want, play Eldar/Tau/Marines who seem to hit S tier at least some point during every edition. Again, I don't want this to be the case but that's reality.

Orks had no troubles competing in tournaments till the car company came over, stabbed all four tires and the spare wheel (for consistency) of your pickup, shot your engine twice and then set fire to your other car just to make sure that you won't tow anything ever again.

Meanwhile, the drukhari BMW X7 got a sticker slapped on it's rear which says "drive carefully".

So for a whole 2 months out of the last 25 years, Orks were top tier. Wow!

So, I understand that you do support GW's stance of actively preventing ork armies from ever being decent and were just lying about they part where you believe that all factions should be viable?

I can't wait for Guard to receive another patch after patch after patch patch patch.

 BlackoCatto wrote:
I can't wait for Guard to receive another patch after patch after patch patch patch.

They need a 2+ Sv so like Custodes.

Toofast wrote:
I've been playing since 3rd and Orks have consistently been towards the bottom of the tier list. While I think all factions should be viable competitively, it's hard to feel sympathy for people who buy Orks and then complain they can't win tournaments. It's like buying a compact pickup and complaining it won't tow your 59' Sea Ray. You knew before you bought Orks that you probably weren't going to win LVO with them. If that's what you want, play Eldar/Tau/Marines who seem to hit S tier at least some point during every edition. Again, I don't want this to be the case but that's reality.

You should blame GW, not the people who like Orks.

Toofast wrote:
I've been playing since 3rd and Orks have consistently been towards the bottom of the tier list. While I think all factions should be viable competitively, it's hard to feel sympathy for people who buy Orks and then complain they can't win tournaments. It's like buying a compact pickup and complaining it won't tow your 59' Sea Ray. You knew before you bought Orks that you probably weren't going to win LVO with them. If that's what you want, play Eldar/Tau/Marines who seem to hit S tier at least some point during every edition. Again, I don't want this to be the case but that's reality.

This is one of the worst arguments I've ever seen to defend GW. Did you even apply an ounce of criticism your own post before you hit "Submit"?

At this stage in regards to orks, in older editions atleast i could strap my warboss ontop of a warbike.... A far superior state of affairs rather then what we got instead for it, aka a bunch of snakebites with bionics.

YMMV may massively vary (Jidmah/Semper: no.) but I think Orks are probably in a better spot competitively than they are as a casual player. We are seeing Orks popping up at GTs.

The issue is that lists tend to be quite... precise.

By contrast ye casual player could very easily have say, a few characters, a bunch of boyz and grots, some meganobz, some storm boyz, some bikes and a buggy or two, a deffdread, some killa kans, flash gitz, lootas and a trukk or three. I.E. what you'd have picked up walking into a store over the last decade or so. But the way the army's rules go, the list doesn't synergize. Its just a random collection of things, about half of which is mathematically bad.

And while you can argue there are winners and losers across any codex, its rarely this extreme.

That's essentially what blackie is saying though - you need to build somewhat of a competitive army to fight a casual list from one of the better codices on equal footing.

You can trade down optimal choices for less optimal ones, but that's about it.

It's also worth noting that playing to win a game from the Nachtmund season is a very different game from playing to win a BRB matched play, tempest of war mission or crusade mission. Hiding most of your army behind obscuring terrain and minimizing casualties to maximize VP is not how most casual players would go about playing orks.

Orks should legally not be allowed to win. Sorry, that's just how it is. James Workshop said so.

Aaaaaand there goes Orks to top 4 at the Seattle open

 Gert wrote:
Orks should legally not be allowed to win. Sorry, that's just how it is. James Workshop said so.

No, you're talking about SM. SM sell regardless and considering how popular and common they are whenever they get in the top 3 the game turns into 30k . Play 30k if you want powerful marines .

 Jidmah wrote:
That's essentially what blackie is saying though - you need to build somewhat of a competitive army to fight a casual list from one of the better codices on equal footing.

I was more criticizing Toofast's idea that "players should just recognise Orks as the Bloodbowl halflings of 40k, and its not surprising they can't win tournaments."

To my mind (and this may be somewhat exaggerated as I'm not checking actual stats) - Orks have had counter-meta play for a decent proportion of 8th and 9th - and got tournament placings to show for it.
If winning tournaments is all you want, I kind of feel they've been in a healthier spot than say Necrons these last 5 years.

But if two casual players threw down a random grab bag of units, I think I'd favour the Necron player's chances because there's fewer traps to list building. (Although all the characters and 30 Praetorians would kind of suck.)

That largely depends on what is in the patrol box for a given faction. 2xDE patrol box gives a much better army, then someone picking up any other of the patrol boxs twice.

Toofast wrote:
I've been playing since 3rd and Orks have consistently been towards the bottom of the tier list. While I think all factions should be viable competitively, it's hard to feel sympathy for people who buy Orks and then complain they can't win tournaments. It's like buying a compact pickup and complaining it won't tow your 59' Sea Ray. You knew before you bought Orks that you probably weren't going to win LVO with them. If that's what you want, play Eldar/Tau/Marines who seem to hit S tier at least some point during every edition. Again, I don't want this to be the case but that's reality.

so to be clear... orks should be bad because they have always been bad and should continue to be bad? This is the "you play an NPC faction" argument, sadly GW seems to agree as orks are the only army to in my recollection have a model nerfed before release because non-ork players were complaining about how powerful it was going to be. orks had one powerful freebootaz list that was too strong and took a baseball bat to the codex nerf after dark eldar and mechanicus were broken for 6 months and got another light touch nerf.

To be fair my answer has basically been work with it but realize as I have since 4th edition, GW has nobody on the rules team that play, advocates for, or even likes to orks, they just like that the models sell well as people are loyal to the faction. realizing this by the middle of 5th that is unlikely to change. That said I do not think its a case of "well orks deserve to always be bad" as you imply instead its a GW problem and people should stop buying ork models until they get a proper fix.