Jump to content

Welcome to Da WAAAGH
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

How can ork shooting be fixed?

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
102 replies to this topic

#61
Giganotosaurus

Giganotosaurus

    Magnetic Arm

  • Boyz
  • 524 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Late Cretaceous
  • Army Name:Grumpy's Toys

Fix Ork shooting? Hmm, .....target practice always helps, especially if the targets are the 8th ed. pages regarding shooting.  ;)

 

Shabbadoo's suggestions would solve this issue.  :yes

 

"I don't expect anything to be done about this. We have no idea if they even recognize our problem as problem."  Ditto, though I suspect that as long as GW continues to sell beakies by the bushel, 'our problem' doesn't exist.



#62
killercroc

killercroc

    Loota Boy

  • Boyz
  • 1,212 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Idaho

In reality I don't think Ork shooting can be fixed because of how the balance of firepower in the game works with rate of fire, BS, cover, etc. The best way to "fix" Ork shooting is so that it always hits on a 5+ (not a 6 a 5) because as most of us know sometimes Orks aim but most of the time they just open fire in the direction of the enemy. And not like some idiots online think of Orks as just comic relief, they aren't shooting their guns into the dirt. They know where their enemy is and spray bullets in that direction, to be fair in firefights in modern times a lot of the gunfire is suppressive so I figure Orks to be doing that just all the time, maybe they'll hit maybe they wont. In that regard -1 to hit cause spore clouds or camo cloaks makes no sense. If an enemy is shooting in your general direction without aiming for a specific target then camo isn't going to help, you cannot use camo against random rounds that are being shot in your direction if the enemy can't see you. Basically, Orks should always hit on a 5+ because they're probably not aiming anyway so why apply a negative to hit for something being hard to see when the Orks themselves are just blasting away for the fun of it?

My modest proposal. 


  • Blakkreaper, Orkimedez, Nefairius and 3 others like this

#63
greggles

greggles

    Paranoid

  • Boyz
  • 2,084 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA
  • Army Name:Trust in Rust

+1, even sounds fluffy.  Accuracy through volume.  Doesn't matter if you are a weedy ravenguard hiding in a field, a fishhead behind a barrier, or some elfy guy trying to shadow clone through the sky.

 

When there is no space between the bullets, everyone gets hit eventually.

 

Still remember that quote from helsreach "God Breaker"

 

The hail of bullets sounded like rain during a thunderstorm. (paraphrased).



#64
Wortsnagga

Wortsnagga

    Juicy Squig

  • Grotz
  • 60 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Army Name:Faster Then Sunz Light
I agree as stated earlier, I thinks orks should get some bonus with the more shots you direct at a target 🎯 like +1 to hit or reroll 1's even extra shots for each shot that does hit. GW just needs to do something to want players to take ork shooting units, because right now why would you ever consider taking shoota boyz over slugga boyz with the current rules.
  • Wortsnagga likes this

Wortsnagga

(where are my super grots)


#65
FlamingDeth

FlamingDeth

    Shoota Boy

  • Boyz
  • 273 posts
  • Gender:Male
Because all you have is shoota boyz because your entire army was constructed in 5th edition! Just kidding, all those players already sold their orks on eBay.

#66
Boss Ardnutz

Boss Ardnutz

    Steel Hornz

  • Boyz
  • 635 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canberra, Australia
  • Army Name:da Maniakz
How about if Ork shooting caused penalties to the target whether it hit or not?

Say, -2" to movement, and a -1 to hit with shooting, in the target unit's next turn?
  • Garslag likes this

#67
Boss Ardnutz

Boss Ardnutz

    Steel Hornz

  • Boyz
  • 635 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canberra, Australia
  • Army Name:da Maniakz

Because all you have is shoota boyz because your entire army was constructed in 5th edition! Just kidding, all those players already sold their orks on eBay.

All I've got is Slugga Boyz, because my army was constructed during 4th edition :-D

#68
Wortsnagga

Wortsnagga

    Juicy Squig

  • Grotz
  • 60 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Army Name:Faster Then Sunz Light

Because all you have is shoota boyz because your entire army was constructed in 5th edition! Just kidding, all those players already sold their orks on eBay.

Missed the boat 🚢 there as 2/3 of my boyz are shoota boyz.

Wortsnagga

(where are my super grots)


#69
Bloatsnot

Bloatsnot

    squig attack arm

  • Boyz
  • 469 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:'Ouston

Shoota boyz are still quite good.   Da Jump to the front, shoota the guys in the back ranks and charge the ones in the front.  That way when the scumgrods in the front line withdraw, you don't get your butt handed to you as badly from shooting.

 

Thats how you kill humies and one of the work arounds for screens.


WAAAAGH!! Da Cybermen.

Bloat

#70
killercroc

killercroc

    Loota Boy

  • Boyz
  • 1,212 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Idaho

I had loads of slugga boyz but with 6th being so hard on combat armies and blast weapons being everywhere I found they just weren't cutting it, at that point I built nothing but shoota boyz and found them to be amazing. Units of 10 w/ big shoota in cover on an objective, 20 in battlewagons being mobile dakka platforms, 'ard shoota boyz in trukks to be a durable yet mobile fire base. It changed when I started using gunwagons but really when I used my Orks I didn't take any less than 60 shootas in any list, they were too good for their cost. Now however I don't think I would because basically my main opponents would be Death Guard or Raven guard and neither of those I fancy my odds against with shoota boyz, KMK though would be quite reliable.



#71
Nefairius

Nefairius

    Steel Hornz

  • Blood Axez
  • 652 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Secret Volcano Lair (Florida)
  • Army Name:Grand Meklord Morgrim's Waaagh!

In reality I don't think Ork shooting can be fixed because of how the balance of firepower in the game works with rate of fire, BS, cover, etc. The best way to "fix" Ork shooting is so that it always hits on a 5+ (not a 6 a 5) because as most of us know sometimes Orks aim but most of the time they just open fire in the direction of the enemy. And not like some idiots online think of Orks as just comic relief, they aren't shooting their guns into the dirt. They know where their enemy is and spray bullets in that direction, to be fair in firefights in modern times a lot of the gunfire is suppressive so I figure Orks to be doing that just all the time, maybe they'll hit maybe they wont. In that regard -1 to hit cause spore clouds or camo cloaks makes no sense. If an enemy is shooting in your general direction without aiming for a specific target then camo isn't going to help, you cannot use camo against random rounds that are being shot in your direction if the enemy can't see you. Basically, Orks should always hit on a 5+ because they're probably not aiming anyway so why apply a negative to hit for something being hard to see when the Orks themselves are just blasting away for the fun of it?

My modest proposal. 

 

This is exactly what I had been thinking.

 

We could call the rule DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA!

 

Because all you have is shoota boyz because your entire army was constructed in 5th edition! Just kidding, all those players already sold their orks on eBay.

 

Jokes on you, I still have mine. ~150 shootas, if I wanted to just take 30x6. Never bulked up to the max of shootas though, I always liked to take a unit of sluggas with the boys.


  • warhead01 and Giganotosaurus like this
Ceterum hoc non est novum Bellum Currus!
Furthermore, we must have new War Buggies!

 


#72
Giganotosaurus

Giganotosaurus

    Magnetic Arm

  • Boyz
  • 524 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Late Cretaceous
  • Army Name:Grumpy's Toys

Years ago, decades actually, there was a tactical SciFi game called Star Guard. A simple, but fun game. With regards to shooting, there were two parts requiring two dice rolls; to hit, and to penetrate. Non penetrating hits resulted in the hit figure being pinned; hit the dirt, no return fire, no movement, and no close combat. It was a very effective rule. Did you kill that figure? No, but the pinned result took that figure out of action for an entire turn. killercroc, I think you are onto something, a 'we're bound to hit something'/suppression result from volume fire.

 

 

P.S. Nefarius, would you consider calling the rule DAKKADAKKA...DAKKA ?   ;)


  • Nefairius likes this

#73
Nefairius

Nefairius

    Steel Hornz

  • Blood Axez
  • 652 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Secret Volcano Lair (Florida)
  • Army Name:Grand Meklord Morgrim's Waaagh!

Years ago, decades actually, there was a tactical SciFi game called Star Guard. A simple, but fun game. With regards to shooting, there were two parts requiring two dice rolls; to hit, and to penetrate. Non penetrating hits resulted in the hit figure being pinned; hit the dirt, no return fire, no movement, and no close combat. It was a very effective rule. Did you kill that figure? No, but the pinned result took that figure out of action for an entire turn. killercroc, I think you are onto something, a 'we're bound to hit something'/suppression result from volume fire.

 

 

P.S. Nefarius, would you consider calling the rule DAKKADAKKA...DAKKA ?   ;)

 

Pinning is also an important feature in FoW and works similar. In there, after securing 5 hits or 1 artillery hit on an enemy platoon, they will be pinned until they pass a rally check. In FoW pinning is less constricting though; you can move, but only away from enemies. You can also still shoot, but at your moving RoF.

 

What I like best about pinning in that game, is that it sets you up for a (successful) assault. Assaults are hard to pull off as the defender get defensive fire at their halted RoF. And not just the poor sobs about to get bayoneted, but anyone within 8 inches of the attacker! too many hits from defensive fire and your assault platoon will be driven back, with nothing to show for it but bullet-ridden corpses. I love assaults in FoW though. They're decided in one go, they don't drag on over turns and they're generally bloody & brutal. Even if the defender legs it with whats left of their platoon, they're pinned down in the open, all to easy to mow-down next turn.

 

I'll consider any naming convention that includes some variation of dakka, including DAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKAGAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKA!


Ceterum hoc non est novum Bellum Currus!
Furthermore, we must have new War Buggies!

 


#74
Giganotosaurus

Giganotosaurus

    Magnetic Arm

  • Boyz
  • 524 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Late Cretaceous
  • Army Name:Grumpy's Toys

"I'll consider any naming convention that includes some variation of dakka, including DAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKAGAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKA!"

 

Sounds good to me, though I must admit to watching 'Battle of Britain' several times in the past month on a local TV station. One does enjoy Robert Shaw as Squadron Leader Skipper.



#75
Gitkilla

Gitkilla

    Gyro Stabilised Monowheel

  • Boyz
  • 534 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:germany
  • Army Name:Death Skulls

In reality I don't think Ork shooting can be fixed because of how the balance of firepower in the game works with rate of fire, BS, cover, etc. The best way to "fix" Ork shooting is so that it always hits on a 5+ (not a 6 a 5) because as most of us know sometimes Orks aim but most of the time they just open fire in the direction of the enemy. And not like some idiots online think of Orks as just comic relief, they aren't shooting their guns into the dirt. They know where their enemy is and spray bullets in that direction, to be fair in firefights in modern times a lot of the gunfire is suppressive so I figure Orks to be doing that just all the time, maybe they'll hit maybe they wont. In that regard -1 to hit cause spore clouds or camo cloaks makes no sense. If an enemy is shooting in your general direction without aiming for a specific target then camo isn't going to help, you cannot use camo against random rounds that are being shot in your direction if the enemy can't see you. Basically, Orks should always hit on a 5+ because they're probably not aiming anyway so why apply a negative to hit for something being hard to see when the Orks themselves are just blasting away for the fun of it?

My modest proposal. 

 

While this makes sense from out perspective other armies pay for things that give -1 to hit, which would just be negated by orks.

It bad gamedesign to release a faction that ignores core rules to that extent.
I feel like we all agree that BS 5+ and the core rules don't work well together, I think making all orks BS 4+ and grots BS 3+ would fix that, sure you need some rebalance but in the end it would work with the modifier system. If you go for a concept with the edition - suport it. Don't just make things that have to ignore the rules because they are broken for edge cases like low chance to hit by default...


Metal elitist & into game/level design.


#76
Orkimedez

Orkimedez

    Burna Boy

  • Boyz
  • 384 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Munich, Germany
  • Army Name:Waagh
Not sure why so many people is against the fact that hitting always on a 5+ would negate the others armies special doctrine/tactic/whatever. It isn't like there were no other mechanism that negated something. Think of the poisoned weapons, mortal wounds, heck! Even the very same -1 to hit negates ork shooting!
  • Blakkreaper, Nefairius and Giganotosaurus like this

#77
Nachgal

Nachgal

    Loota Boy

  • Boyz
  • 1,225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stockholm, Sweden

This forum seems to like eating my posts. I've tried to write replies 3 times to this thread. Let's see of a cleared cache fixes it. A lot of what I wanted to say has been said by others already, so I'll just address one point that's come up a few times:

 



Not sure why so many people is against the fact that hitting always on a 5+ would negate the others armies special doctrine/tactic/whatever. It isn't like there were no other mechanism that negated something. Think of the poisoned weapons, mortal wounds, heck! Even the very same -1 to hit negates ork shooting!

 

These things are usually unit specific, not army wide. If you've got a unit like say Flash Gitz, and give their Gitfindas the special rule "ignore negative to hit modifiers", then I would be all for it. This seems fluffy, and it does not break the opposing sides special rule, it just means that one unit is strong against it. 

If you make it an army wide special rule though, you're basically negating something that the opponent paid for completely, with your entire army. It would feel bad for your opponent, who would then feel like they've just wasted points. Sure, there will be units that are better or worse against some armies, but making it so that something just flat out does not work against an entire army is never a good thing. 

 

 

 

I found a video here where the host talked about what playtesters had told him, and it basically sounds like GW has massive issues fixing orks. Any attempts to make orks viable makes them overpowered against some armies. It really does feel like GW has painted themselves into a corner with this edition, and can't figure out what to do with melee armies, and orks in particular due to how they've written some of the previous codexes. 


  • Nefairius likes this

#78
Badfang Brassaxe

Badfang Brassaxe

    Deliriak

  • Boyz
  • 2,531 posts
  • Army Name:Da Perfeshunelz

These things are usually unit specific, not army wide. If you've got a unit like say Flash Gitz, and give their Gitfindas the special rule "ignore negative to hit modifiers", then I would be all for it. This seems fluffy, and it does not break the opposing sides special rule, it just means that one unit is strong against it. 

Yes, that would work for gitfindas - especially since they've rated their snazzgunz as artillery.

 

 

I found a video here where the host talked about what playtesters had told him, and it basically sounds like GW has massive issues fixing orks. Any attempts to make orks viable makes them overpowered against some armies. It really does feel like GW has painted themselves into a corner with this edition, and can't figure out what to do with melee armies, and orks in particular due to how they've written some of the previous codexes. 

So just put them back to BS3 (or 4+ in modern money), BS2 didn't come in 'til 3rd Ed and it's easy enough to argue that orky shooting is as effective as anyone else's coz there's more of it :sowhat



#79
Orkimedez

Orkimedez

    Burna Boy

  • Boyz
  • 384 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Munich, Germany
  • Army Name:Waagh

This forum seems to like eating my posts. I've tried to write replies 3 times to this thread. Let's see of a cleared cache fixes it. A lot of what I wanted to say has been said by others already, so I'll just address one point that's come up a few times:
 

 
These things are usually unit specific, not army wide. If you've got a unit like say Flash Gitz, and give their Gitfindas the special rule "ignore negative to hit modifiers", then I would be all for it. This seems fluffy, and it does not break the opposing sides special rule, it just means that one unit is strong against it. 
If you make it an army wide special rule though, you're basically negating something that the opponent paid for completely, with your entire army. It would feel bad for your opponent, who would then feel like they've just wasted points. Sure, there will be units that are better or worse against some armies, but making it so that something just flat out does not work against an entire army is never a good thing. 
 
 
 
I found a video here where the host talked about what playtesters had told him, and it basically sounds like GW has massive issues fixing orks. Any attempts to make orks viable makes them overpowered against some armies. It really does feel like GW has painted themselves into a corner with this edition, and can't figure out what to do with melee armies, and orks in particular due to how they've written some of the previous codexes. 


Sorry but I disagree. How is it rendering useless your -1 to hit a bad thing and your -1 to hit making my shooting useless not? We also pay for our guns and 5+, despite how horrible they may be.
  • Blakkreaper likes this

#80
Nachgal

Nachgal

    Loota Boy

  • Boyz
  • 1,225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stockholm, Sweden

Yes, that would work for gitfindas - especially since they've rated their snazzgunz as artillery.

 

So just put them back to BS3 (or 4+ in modern money), BS2 didn't come in 'til 3rd Ed and it's easy enough to argue that orky shooting is as effective as anyone else's coz there's more of it :sowhat

 

 

3rd edition did change orks quite significantly, and with that, the nature of how orks work on the tabletop. Orks were basically guardsmen with +1 T & -1 I back then. 3rd edition upped their WS, lowered the BS, and increased their number of attacks. In general orks became a lot more focused on "volume of attacks" with this change. Increasing their BS would fix a gameplay issue, but it would at the same time remove some of their current personality