Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 195 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

2017 - Ork Review

 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 9:31 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 8:54 pm
Posts: 2196
Location: Cornwall
Battlewaggons are chimeras only better : Bigger transport capacity, mob up and basically in an formation which can only utilise its main attacks with transport. If they are not a worthwhile option at 25pnts then i would argue what they are competing with (scorchas?) are under costed.


Sent using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 10:26 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:24 pm
Posts: 83
Location: Galicia
From my point of view and what i read the problem is that a mechanized Warband is too expensive (similar to Aspect Warriors that rarely take Wave Serpents) and brittle, more than the Battlewagons by themselves bad. Then the solution is to make the mechanized formation cheaper or the battlewagons/fortress cheaper.
Also, since there has been talks of 10-15 points Battlewagons, take their weapons out and keep only the transport part a better option in my opinion would be to add in the Trukk to the list which is very similar to what it is proposed and easy to add. There is no need to make complete changes to a long standing unit if there is already another with the desired stats and costs.


- For the first, making the formation cheaper, i think that the best option is to use the formula Tau Fire Cadre formations use for making on foot and mechanized with the same line while keeping the cost, which seems to have made mechanized formations popular:
With Trukks:
Warband - 200 350 500 - 2 Nobz 6 Boyz and 2 Grotz OR 2 Nobz 4 Boyz 2 Grotz and 8 Trukk
Or just use what we have so ...
Warband - 200 350 500 - 2 Nobz 6 Boyz and 2 Grotz OR 2 of Nobz, Boyz, Grotz and Battlewagon they fit into the points and into the transports. The numbers are a bit lower (2 less) but the formation while still brittle is cheap enough to spam and not regret about its lost and could be used to swarm the player with infantry like in fluff, and more important, no stat has been changed and no new unit has been added, so the changes are kept to a minimum on the list, but not on its gameplay.


- For the second option, making the transports cheaper: While it is true that Battlewagons are a bit expensive, they are not more than Gunwagons. Looking at just their numbers don't seem to give the feeling that they are so bad neither when comparing them with other wagons or with their closest cousins the Chimeras (10 points less for one less passenger and one less AT6+) for example. Their main problem, as with the Battlefortress, seems to come more from the same issue as with Warbuggies, that the versatility isn't valued, making the unit not expensive by itself but expensive as just a transport. Battlewagons have a bit of everything and what most people ask here is to take out what isn't needed to transport and make a specialized transport same as how Skorchas are liked for being specialists at 15cm.
So if they were to get a decrease in points, i think that Battlefortress are OK with another small point decrease (110?) but with Battlewagons if they are deemed worse than Guns an Flaks i would prefer to make them better than worse to lower the points, But if their points were to be lowered to 25, i would go to switch the CC and FF values, lower their FF value to 6+ or even lower the armour. That would suffice and any other change would make the unit completely different, making adding Trukks to the list a better option.
Kyrt wrote:
Why do gunwagons and flakwagons have better CC than battlewagons by the way?


Probably because they focused on the balance of their stats more than the balnce in usefulness: compared with Gunwagons and Flakwagons, Battlewagons have better ground shooting and more transport capacity with the same armour, so they had to nerf them somewhere. Looking at the miniatures it is quite random, 1st and 4th edition Battlewagons are smaller in size and weapons, like Warhammer 40k 2nd Ed. Battlewagon, but many in 2nd and all in 3rd are humongous with big CC and FF weapons.

But given the popularity of each wagon, it should be Flaks the ones that should have worse assault stats, not Battlewagons.

_________________
Orkses is never beaten in battle. If we win we win, if we die we die so it don't count as beat. If we runs for it we don't die neither, so we can always come back for anuvver go, see!


Last edited by Abetillo on Mon Oct 30, 2017 8:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 10:18 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:35 am
Posts: 2720
Managed a game tonight against Partisan_nick and his NetEA Emperors Children list. I took orks. I used 4 normal warbands with battlewagons for 10p each. We quit after 3 turns but the orks where probably going to win on points at the end of turn 4.
The battlewagons gave a very much needed 5+ save when the warbands got drawn into FF-assaults. After playing this game I think that maybe 10p is a bit to cheap, but 15p would be the sweet spot. A warband would then cost 260p. Any more than that they become unviable to use.
Also, to really use the extra engage move from the battle wagons the boyz would have to stay mounted in their vehicles. So that makes it kinda risky.
But it does let the warbands double up 60cm which is way better than foot sloghing along for two turns to even make it into the opponents half.

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 9:06 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:14 am
Posts: 182
As I mentioned earlier has anyone ever thought of including the march action into power of the waagh and work with garrisioned warbands? Will do wonders to mobility, pressing and will not hassle with points, special rules, unit abilities and arising bias with with other cc lists


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:25 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8039
Location: Manalapan, FL
Yes and it provides unnecessary boosts to all the other lists, especially speed freaks. It's been brought up and discussed all the way to Neil's time and been roundly tromped, in fact once long ago myself even.

_________________
The Artist Formerly Known As Marine Army Champion

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 4:38 pm
Posts: 97
Location: Toronto, Canada
Have you considered upgrading the Boyz FF to 5+?
Effectively making them FF on par with IG infantry.
This would go a long way to making the Warbands more effective in numerous ways and refocusing the Orks on assaulting hoards of infantry. I believe this keeps with the theme of Orks (assault focused) and puts the boys in the middle ground between a Tactical SM and IG infantry. Don't think it breaks anything and in my mind is an elegant fix to numerous issues that are being brought forward regarding the ork boyz use in the list.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8039
Location: Manalapan, FL
but isn't the core complaint that foot slogging them just doesn't work to get them into an engagement and less about the results of the engagement?

_________________
The Artist Formerly Known As Marine Army Champion

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 5:20 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:03 pm
Posts: 5811
Location: Leicester UK
yes, it's a problem with the epic rules, strong CC is inherently much less effective than FF.....

the other main CC focused army (nids) seems to get round this by having a quicker base move of 20cm, and infiltrate on key CC troops such as hormagaunts, raveners and genestealers

it seems one school of thought is that massed mobs of boys should footslog everywhere because of the background, which doesn't really jive with the whole EA 'army scale' gaming where sometimes you've got troops hunkered in vehicles and driving around for 30 minutes, rather than marching, waving swords around and going 'wargh!!' at nobody in particular

I don't think anyone disagrees that formations of slow CC-focused infantry without transports are a poor choice, it's solving that problem that is causing the debate....

take a BL chaos retinue for example, you get 8 stands of elite infantry, SR4, int1+ great save, solid CC and FF and a decently ranged shooting attack, they also come with a built-in character for 275 pts, for a mere 40 extra points you can give them rhinos to speed around in, engaging folks and supporting engagements, that's 315 pts

a basic ork mob with 4 battlewagons to ferry it around in is 340 points.... with lower SR, lower base initiative, much lower save on average, and considerably weaker FF...

I know which I'd choose if I could, and people wonder why everyone maxes out on the skorchas?

_________________
Adeptus Astartes Army Champion, also AC for Imperial Fists and Red Corsairs

various hobby/painting threads: full of 6mm goodness

Army Forge List Co-ordinator (netEA+EpicUK)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 5:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 3:58 am
Posts: 98
jimmyzimms wrote:
but isn't the core complaint that foot slogging them just doesn't work to get them into an engagement and less about the results of the engagement?

Depends what you mean by "getting into an engagement". Footslogging will usually get you into an engagement eventually, but if you can only ever reach FF range and not CC, Ork Warbands will basically always lose. So from the Ork perspective, "getting into an engagement" generally means reaching base contact, which is a considerably bigger ask. It's a problem that's exacerbated by the inability to reach base contact in response to being engaged by an enemy, as well as certain armies having large numbers of skimmers.

In that sense, FF5+ would at least give the Warband some kind of fighting chance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 5:48 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20698
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
kyussinchains wrote:
take a BL chaos retinue for example, you get 8 stands of elite infantry, SR4, int1+ great save, solid CC and FF and a decently ranged shooting attack, they also come with a built-in character for 275 pts, for a mere 40 extra points you can give them rhinos to speed around in, engaging folks and supporting engagements, that's 315 pts

a basic ork mob with 4 battlewagons to ferry it around in is 340 points.... with lower SR, lower base initiative, much lower save on average, and considerably weaker FF...

I know which I'd choose if I could, and people wonder why everyone maxes out on the skorchas?


This does make it look like it's the vehicles' cost is the problem.

_________________
6mm scale Scifi Plastic Sprues available here!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:00 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:24 pm
Posts: 83
Location: Galicia
Evil and Chaos wrote:
take a BL chaos retinue for example, you get 8 stands of elite infantry, SR4, int1+ great save, solid CC and FF and a decently ranged shooting attack, they also come with a built-in character for 275 pts, for a mere 40 extra points you can give them rhinos to speed around in, engaging folks and supporting engagements, that's 315 pts

a basic ork mob with 4 battlewagons to ferry it around in is 340 points.... with lower SR, lower base initiative, much lower save on average, and considerably weaker FF...

I know which I'd choose if I could, and people wonder why everyone maxes out on the skorchas?


And also Warbands are more frail because for each transport down is three guys that will go down most probably, which counters their numbers. But they have bigger numbers, surprising better shooting, disposable shields, and remove BMs faster. But i would choose the CSM like you too, not for the points but just for the infantry's armour, which counters the weak Rhinos's armour when shooted, and FF, as it is a matter of whats more useful for assaults than what they have or not.

_________________
Orkses is never beaten in battle. If we win we win, if we die we die so it don't count as beat. If we runs for it we don't die neither, so we can always come back for anuvver go, see!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 8:31 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:35 am
Posts: 2720
Some really good points being made by Kyussinchains and Abetillo here!

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 9:56 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:24 pm
Posts: 83
Location: Galicia
So my point, is there no way to make this versatile formation (apart from in FF) usable? Is the world only for specialists?

And about its fragility, i can only think of lowering them to 25 points and lower their transport capacity, so there is less infantry dead per transport down. Mechanized Warbands are more frail than on foot ones while transporting and even work against on foot Warbands' good points (soak up damage and BMs like no other), even out of cover, but i think we don't need to concern with it much as it is something minor, as usual in most cases the units are kept out of transports at the end of each action.

_________________
Orkses is never beaten in battle. If we win we win, if we die we die so it don't count as beat. If we runs for it we don't die neither, so we can always come back for anuvver go, see!


Last edited by Abetillo on Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:25 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:30 am
Posts: 1390
Location: Örebro, Sweden
GlynG wrote:
25 points but reduce the 2 x twin linked big shootas to 2 x big shootas is a possible approach too.

I don't think this is necessary. Orks are doubling almost all the time (or engageing) it's not like mech. warbands big strength is shooting.

Kyrt wrote:
What about flak and gunwagons? Those are transports too, not so much better units, and needing twice as many the current upgrade price is even more prohibitive than it is for battlewagons. Leave them as they are and you could take 3x as many battlewagons and still come in chealer. Yet bear in mind if they were dropped to the same price as the battlewagons you'd be paying 30 points for the warband compared to the blitz brigade, which is obviously not right.

Well the gunwagons could also really do with a price drop, they are a worse alternative compared to the flakwagon and just a means to get an supa/zaap gun mount. Alternatives would perhaps be to give them two big guns each or a 4+ save, but I prefer keeping stats and just lowering the price.

I think a starting point might be 25 pts for both the gun- and battlewagon (increasing the basic blitz brigade to 6 vehicles for the same price or perhaps 175 pts).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 - Ork Review
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 8:53 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:14 am
Posts: 182
jimmyzimms wrote:
Yes and it provides unnecessary boosts to all the other lists, especially speed freaks. It's been brought up and discussed all the way to Neil's time and been roundly tromped, in fact once long ago myself even.


Allright. So noted. Thanks.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 195 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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