Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 246 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 17  Next

2017 - Ork Review

 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 9:36 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:14 pm
Posts: 91
I like them, but they are kinda pricey - especially compared to other transports. Chimeras are nearly identical and come in at 25 points, or cheaper when upgrading a Steel Legion Infantry Company to Mechanized.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:42 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:25 pm
Posts: 9475
Location: Worcester, MA
Battlewagons benefit from a higher strategy rating and get Boyz to where they're most effective. There's more synergy there, especially with the 1+ initiative when doubling.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17


Last edited by Dave on Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:40 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1501
Plus you'd basically be lowering the points for zzap guns if your reduced the cost of wagons

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:07 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:00 pm
Posts: 984
Location: Toronto
StevekCole wrote:
Plus you'd basically be lowering the points for zzap guns if your reduced the cost of wagons


Lol I made ghe same mistake. Battlewagons are not Gunwagons

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1501
Oh yeah - good shout. I read good! :-)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:08 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20886
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Here's a fun one: Allow Big Guns to go into Landas.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:41 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:00 pm
Posts: 984
Location: Toronto
Evil and Chaos wrote:
Here's a fun one: Allow Big Guns to go into Landas.


Lol

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 5:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:14 pm
Posts: 91
Dave wrote:
Battlewagons benefit from a higher strategy rating and get Boyz to where they're most effective. There's more synergy there, especially with the 1+ initiative when doubling.


I don't play Imperial Guard so I can't really make any informed comments, but on the face of it I'm not sure I buy that argument. Yes, there's more synergy. Ork Boyz have paltry shooting and are compensated by being CC4+, which is notoriously hard to utilize without some form of delivery system. Many people don't bother taking warbands except for in Landas. I don't think better synergy is an argument that they should have to pay such a premium for transportation, when they can be so hampered without it.
I'm not saying they are worthless on foot, but it'd be nice to have a more worthwhile alternative that doesn't involve aerial delivery.

In addition, while Battlewagons have an easier time doubling or engaging, Chimeras are more tactically flexible - which also makes their shooting more effective than Battlewagons'. And you can get 7 Chimeras for 150 points, vs. only 4 Battlewagons for 140, which is a significant factor in engagements. I really don't think Battlewagons are worth 60% more than Chimeras.

And while Orks do have a higher strategy rating than the Imperial Guard, they are still equaled or beaten by more than half of the approved tournament lists. Leaving your boyz in the Battlewagons as preparation for an engage is still a highly risky move against most opponents.

Anyway, I did suggest taking one of the Twin Big Shootas off the Battlewagon as compensation. I think most Ork players would prefer cheaper transportation to a bit of extra shooting.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 10:20 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:31 pm
Posts: 72
Thanks for the detailed reasoning!

_________________
The gamer formerly known as beelzemetz.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:02 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 6:42 am
Posts: 558
Location: Birchip, Australia
Also going to jump on the orkeosaurus points increase wagon.

Or at least make their criticals the same as the Uk one.

Also the wyrdboy should only be attached to an infantry stand. Attaching him to a orkeosaurus is a bit rude.

_________________
I have 4 laptops in this room and cannot play a pixel pushing tabletop simulator on any of them.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:48 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:16 am
Posts: 1064
Location: London
atension wrote:
Evil and Chaos wrote:
Here's a fun one: Allow Big Guns to go into Landas.


Lol


You're laughing now, but just wait till the two oddboys in a unit of 10 big guns hammers the bejesus out of a unit that you thought was safe hiding out of LOS... Both super zzaps and soopa gunz would both be amazing if you could have them in a landa. And i suspect that's why they're not currently allowed in there ;)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:52 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20886
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
RichardL wrote:
atension wrote:
Evil and Chaos wrote:
Here's a fun one: Allow Big Guns to go into Landas.


Lol


You're laughing now, but just wait till the two oddboys in a unit of 10 big guns hammers the bejesus out of a unit that you thought was safe hiding out of LOS... Both super zzaps and soopa gunz would both be amazing if you could have them in a landa. And i suspect that's why they're not currently allowed in there ;)

Sounds fun to me!

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1501
With a 1+ activation code that as well. That would be awesome. You could run 2 units for tau style crossfire blast marker bonuses as well!

Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 12:26 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:24 pm
Posts: 398
Location: Galicia
The more i think about it, the more i think in a similar way to this I read from Nealhunt, about the shooty Ork units that are usually discussed about (Stompas, Gunwagons, Big Gunz, and to a certain degree Deth Koptas too):

nealhunt wrote:
Well, I'm on record as being a big fan of Big Gunz, so I can't exactly back down now...  

===

Big Gunz are not as good as IG Fire Support.  They're not supposed to be, and I think if there were any Ork units that could go toe-to-toe with IG for firepower that would be a mistake.

Orks are an attrition force specializing in assaults while IG (typically) is a "hunker down and shoot" style force.  Because of the difference in styles, Ork Big Gunz fill a much different role in the Ork force than Fire Support in the IG.  This is part of the problem with cross-army comparisons.  It's not that Big Gunz are as good as IG Fire Support on a point-per-point comparison in a vacuum.  It's that to the Ork army they are as valuable as the Fire Support Platoon is to the IG.

Another way to put it is that IG have tons of firepower options to replace the Fire Support if they want.  Orks don't.  By design the Orks have to pay a premium for that scarce resource.   "It's not a bug; it's a feature."

nealhunt wrote:
(Nicodemus @ Oct. 26 2007,07:30)

Is all that great?  No.  Big Gunz are limited.  In many ways they are a niche unit as rpr mentioned.

The general problem with niche unit is that all units have to have abilities and points that are balanced in their optimum use.  If you improve a unit so it becomes generally useful, then when you go back to the niche in which it excels, the unit is overly powerful.

In this case, it might not be a true case of the unit being  unbalanced if allowed outside its niche.  To my persepctive, it's as much about the flavor of the Ork army.  Orks aren't supposed to have "park and fire" units as a core function of the army so their flexibility is limited.  If you improve Big Gunz to the point they are useful in broad application the army might still be balanced overall, but the Gunz definitely will be broadly used.  The army's just not supposed to be about that kind of play.


So i think it would be better to keep the changes small or not change at all and leave the changes for more shooty or Stompy Ork lists, like OGBM or a Bad Moonz one if we ever see it.

The point is that Orks aren't supposed to be good at shooting, so their shooty units shouldn't be as good at shooting that shooty units from shooty armies, but i want to expand to focus it to only Orks by that shooty Ork units are Ok with being worse than not shooty Ork units in non shooty Ork armies, because they add the shoot part to Ork lists that shouldn't be shooty. Their value is in that they add a part the army doesn't have, and as such their value is that they add something new or unique instead on how good they are at it.

The second, and less important, is that all of them have a niche they are good at, not only as a unit but for the army itself, like for example, DethKoptas numbers are bad, but their value are in the 4+ armour and most importantly in being the only skimmer unit, Gunwagons while worse in their numbers compared to other wagons, are valuable as a big in number source of longer shoots even if those shots have worse numbers, Big Guns for the same reason as Gunwagons, and Stompas for the same reason as Gunwagons plus sturdy if used in big enough numbers and as garrison as someone pointed out before.

atension wrote:
@Abetillo,
Yeah that is a good point also. BUT what's the niche for stompas. They are slow and their firepower isn't anything special they'd be good in an assult but they are slow and AVs so not easily delivered and quite avoidable. Is their role a garrisoning formation that are hard to crack? They would do alright at that but be quite expensive. Very easy to break in numbers less than 5 and too costly for a "big" formation. In the Ghaz list they are just a necessity for access to supa-stompas. I don't really see their niche. If they were allower an oddboy then your opponent would have to deal with them they wouldn't be a unit you could break and forget or ignore. They'd actually be useful to take. Oddboy on wagons are nice for their speed but are very easily killed. I'm sure that's part of the design to a degree too. But I can't say they could go toe to toe shooting with IG. Oddboy are very pricy and generally only used as zaps. Zaps are great but also a little situational. Soopa guns are only good taken in pairs and that would make for a crazy expensive formation. A big formation of 6 costing 400 points plus the oddboys =500 points that's almost 2 supa stompas . I don't think the list will out shoot guard at that price. There is also the argument that not everything needs to have a good usefullness:point ratio but these poor little guys are so very cool looking and so rarely used in EA.I'd love them to take a more central role in a list. I agree mucking with the stats gets troublesome for units overlapping several lists especially approved lists. Allow in them an upgrade though in the gargant list should be acceptable. Gargant list should be full of mekboys throwing crazy fun and explody weapons on things.


No, no, that's not the point i wanted to get across. It is not that they shouldn't be better than IG shooty units, leaving aside that cross army comparisons are always bad, but that the shooty units in Ork list shouldn't be as good as other shooty units in other armies, and i expand it and pass it to the point that shooty Ork units are Ok with being worse than not shooty Ork units in non shooty Ork armies, because they add the shoot part to Ork lists that shouldn't be shooty. The niche part is secondary to this.

About Stompas specifically:
- About the niche part, as you and other people commented, is that they are good as garrison in big enough numbers and also in 4k+ more games where they become a lesser priority target and can roam with more freedom.
- As several have mentioned, an Oddboy will give them a role closer to the Supa-Stompas adding redundancy to the list, but i'll add to that the Stompas themselves with that change will stay the same as it is an extra, and that an option that must be taken is the worst option, if that can be even named an option, and, lastl we will add the same problems as the Gunwagons have which no answer have been found for years to fix them.
- I agree on the usefulness/point ratio.
- On the point on that they should have a more central role i think that while i agree with i also think that it its better to leave that to Gargants an other more specific lists.

Overall, and to summarize about Stompas, I don't think that there is much of problem as long as the 200 points for Stompas, 300 point for Supa-Stompa change gets approved. While i don't think that Stompa Mobs will be seen more than before with it, it's fine going with what i said in this post about them shouldn' been as good as non shooty Ork options, it will put them on par with Supa-Stompas which i think it is the bigger issue here, except for their use as BTS that will not ever change as long as Supa-Stompas are Fearless.

_________________
Sculpting Orks thread
Statistics of games for OGBM v.3 list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Wed Aug 23, 2017 5:18 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 4:03 am
Posts: 18
How about a "Mob Up" rule for warbands? A broken warband can move into cohesion with another warband and merge with it (permanently).

Or perhaps a rule that lets them use them use the combined size of all warbands within 15cm of the formation for the purposes of "Mob Rule"?

Edited to add further suggestion for warbands:
- allow the option to take "inflitrate" (a silly rule name for doubling charge distances :P) by setting all FF values to "-". Maybe as a nob ability?
- Alternatively, to emphasise the "green wave" of orks, give nobz/warbands the ability to force a second round of an engagement before the "work our results" step.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 246 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 17  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net