The New Ork Codex - my thoughts one month in

Back at the end of June, beginning of July Games Workshop released the new Codex Orks.  This was the first of the seventh edition codexes, and follows a new format that I assume will be used ongoing for all the other 7th ed Codexs.  The new format sees a move away from the old method of 'unit overviews and rules summary' section, followed by an army list section at the back of the book - and moves instead to a datasheet format in which all the rules and points are included on one page.

Most of the reviewers and podcasts online are not fans of the format, mainly because it makes the building of an army list more cumbersome.  Personally I like the new layout.  I've spent many a game flipping through codexs trying to find where a rule or stat was presented, having to check 'common special rules, unit rules, and rules that somehow ended up in the army list.  This is always annoying and was never quite consistent enough to be certain.  The new format is more suited as an in game reference (like the seventh ed rulebook).  This has been achieved by sacrificing some 'out of game' convenience, and I think that was the right call.  Time during a game is more precious than time outside the game, so anything that speeds gameplay is good in my book.

Otherwise, I think the rest of the codex is wonderful.  I ended up getting both the print edition (I was lucky enough to get the collectors edition codex, which is the best collectors ed set to date, in my opinion), and the digital iPad edition.  I'm a huge fan of the digital products (see comment above about saving time in game - having a digital reference has saved massive amounts of time in game) and have stopped buying print books for the armies I don't collect - they are cheaper, take less space to store, stay current with FAQs, and are quicker to reference.  It's all good.  The Ork book has some reused art, but also a lot of new art.  The style and layout is great.  I wish they hadn't chosen Bad Moons as the 'in book army' to paint, but thats just because I'm not a fan of yellow Orks.   A supplement called Waaaagh! Ghazkull was also released, which is a nice compliment to the main book, going into the detailed background of the most feared Ork warlord in the galaxy.  The supplement has also been packed with some of the most powerful Ork formations and wargear I have seen to date.  Given both books came in the same box, and given Games Workshop now refers to 'Factions' rather than Codexes when selecting an army, I've just treated both books as one big Ork resource.  I don't play at tournaments, so don't really care if others agree or not (my club is happy with it).

So how have Orks changed?  Much lament has been heard across the web on some of the perceived 'nurfs' that Orks have taken, but I think there is hidden strength in the book.  My experience on the table is quite different to what a lot of theoryhammer bloggers and podcasters have deduced.  I'll go over my impressions overall, then cover off the units in some detail in a subsequent post.

Common Elements

All Orks, excluding Grots, have two common special rules - Mob Rule, and 'Ere we go.  Orks have lost the Waaaagh! special rule - this is now specific to Warbosses.  (as an aside, for years my friends used to think the Warboss was needed to call a Waaaagh, and after endless corrections, finally learned it was not so - but continued to joke about it every time my warboss died before calling the Waaagh.  Now their mistake has become the actual rule.  Seems like a cruel prank by Mork to me).

Mob Rule

No single change in the codex has attracted so much scorn and lamentation as this rule.  In the previous edition mob rule meant that all Orks on mobs of more than 10 were fearless, and substituted their leadership value for the number of Orks in the unit, to a max of 10.  In the new rule, Orks always use their standard leadership (usually 7) and if they fail a moral or pinning test, need to roll on a chart, which will cause them to pass the test depending on the situation, but usually taking D6 S4 hits on the unit as a consequence.  Now, before we go into the impacts of the new rule, it's worth considering the old rule for a moment.  When the old codex was released, it was on the eve of 5th edition, so was obviously written for 5th.  There was a rule in 5th called 'no retreat' which stated that fearless units that lose close combat rounds stay in combat, but take additional wounds numbering equal to the difference in combat result.  So if the Orks lost a combat by 5, they would take 5 more wounds.  I'm certain this rule was put in place specifically with Orks in mind - the Orks get so caught up in the fight, they stick around and take more losses because they can't see their force crumbling around them.  I once had a canny opponent multi-assault a mob of Orks that was almost shielded by a unit of 30 grots.  He charged the grots with two 10-man Grey Hunter Space Wolf squads, and managed to get one marnine into base contact with one Ork boy in the mob of 20.  The marines wiped out the grots entirely, and only my sole Ork could strike back, meaning I lost the combat by 30.  Needless to say the no-retreat rule caused the whole Ork Boyz mobe to be wiped out.    Now I know that was an absolute worst case example (and I was playing against New Zealands top tournament player) but I can comfortably say that at the time Orks were essentially playing as designed.  They don't run from fights, but do lose more Orks as a result of their reckless courage.

The problem is the rule had very negative consequences for other armies with fearless troops - Tyranids and Dark Angels come to mind.  So roll on to 6th edition, and the no retreat rule is removed.  Now fearless is all good, and doesn't lead to model loss.  Suddenly Orks become stronger!  So through 6th edition Orks end up with a 'no consequence' fearless ability that they were not intended to have.  It also led to some strange situations - a mob of 10 Orks with no characters had a higher leadership than a space marine tactical squad lead by a sergeant.  So the Marines fall back when the Orks hold fast?  Doesn't make much sense.  It makes less sense for a unit of boys that costs half what the marines cost points wise.

So now we enter 7th edition and see the new mob rule.  How does it really compare to the old mob rule?  Lets compare based on the mob rule table:

D6 roll of:

Rolling a 1 - if the boys are in combat they are considered to have passed the test.  If they are not they run.  You really want this result when you are taking a combat resolution test, and when it happens it's great, but unfortunately it doesn't happen very often.  Getting this result when not in combat is also not a big deal - the boys run away for a turn then get to try and rally.  You lose some ground, but that's it. Yes, the boys might not rally and may run away - so don't camp them near your table edge - you want to be on your way across the table as soon as possible.  If you are at the mid point or further, you should have at least two tests before you run off the table.  In the old days, if you had less than eleven Orks in the unit, you just ran - this is better.

Rolling a 2-3:  if you have a character in the unit you take d6 strength 4 hits.  If you don't have a character you run.  Ork mobs should always have a character.  You should protect the character as long as possible.  If you stick to these two rules, you will be fine (we'll talk about the d6 hits in a moment.  In my opinion this is the most risky of the three outcomes, but more often than not you will take some wounds and stay in the fight.   All Ork units can take characters, many come with them by default (excludes grots, dey ain't Orks is dey).  So most of the time you are taking hits, but not running.  If you do run, see 1 above.  In the old days, character or not, if you had less than eleven Orks in the unit you just ran.  This is better.

4-6:  if the mob numbers more than 10 Orks they take D6 S4 hits, otherwise they run.  Old rule - If under 10 Orks they just run, over 10 they stick it out.  This is the one situation in which things have gotten worse - but actually comes close to the old no-retreat rule when in combat.

So what we are really seeing is the return of 'no-retreat' type wounds for big mobs, and improved courage for smaller mobs.  If you had a unit of 10 Lootas, and three were shot, in the old days they would take a leadership 7 test or run away.  In the new rules, you have a 1 in 3 chance that they will stick it out if they have a character, albeit with a few wounds, otherwise they will run.  This is actually better than it was.  Big mobs of boys will almost never run (1 in 12 chance) if they have a nob with bosspole.  Yes, they will take wounds from Mob rule, so they should bring more boys.

Now, about those D6 hits.  Remember, you need to roll to wound, so odds are usually half will be negated, and from that you'll usually save 1/6th thanks to the Ork 6+ T-shirt save.  That means 3 wounds usually.  Add 'Eavy Armour and the average wounds drops to 1 - not looking so expensive at 4pts each now is it?  Two dead boys pay for the armour for three Orks.  So for small mobs, like Trukk Boyz, consider taking 'Eavy Armour.  For big mobs consider pain boys, Kustom Force Fields (won't stop the mob rule hits, but will cut back on shooting attacks that may cause the tests) or consider leaders who can either make the units fearless (like Grotsnik), or able to re-roll leadership (like Zagstrukk).

Note that Nob mobs and Meganobs have benefitted significantly from this rule, as they seldom had enough models to benefit from Mob rule before, but now will often take hits, shrug them off (especially Meganobs) and keep going.  Meganobs used to be easy to break and run if you killed a couple - now they are virtually fearless!

So in essence, Orks have lost a rule that was not designed to be as effective as it ended up being in 6th edition.  The irony is that Orks have not been considered a competitive army in 6th ed, even with old mob rule, but back in the early days of 5th were considered top tier, in spite of the no-retreat rule.  Go figure.

'Ere We Go

This rule lets Orks re-roll one dice when charging - sort of a poor mans fleet.  In my experience this rule has been a game changer.  Charges are suddenly much more reliable and Orks have gained asault reach as a result.  In the games I have played this has allowed for some devastating charges.  This rule is fantastic, and almost every single Ork gets it, even War bikers and Deffkoptas.  Nuff said.

Thats all for today - next time I'll go into the individual units to cover how they have changed.

The Armchair CEO analyses Games Workshops business

This is a response to Zion's article on the Top 10 Things he wishes Games Workshop would change, published at TalkWargaming.com. 

It's always good to see an amateur look at a company that makes products they enjoy and take an interest in how things are run, but unfortunately this sort of 'armchair ceo' analysis is seldom insightful. 

Looking at his top ten list, I noticed two things:

1, He attributes the majority of Games Workshops operating costs to its stores, and suggests closing them.  This is a frequent mistake made by people who have a poor understanding of corporate cost structure, and how capital investment and operational cost management determine business strategy. It's a typical opinion based on 'the costs than can be seen' by the consumer.  A nicely fitted out store in a higher end mall or storefront looks like the money has been put on the street.  Primarily, this view overlooks the raw materials and supply chain costs a manufacturing company like GW has to manage - this is likely to account for at least as much, if not more, costs as the channels (stores, websites, re-sellers). 

It would be interesting to see the spit between store sales and web sales for GW, and even more interesting to see the acquisition rates for new customers.  Stores have always been focused on new player recruitment - this is not something that tournaments, Games Days and third party retails have ever been good at, and as a result, it has meant that most new customers start at a store.  Game store re-sellers can help this, but Games Workshop has no way of stopping re-seller stores from recruiting the customers into other games instead, like Warmachine, X-Wing, etc.  This is not something any company would want if they can avoid it, which Games Workshop has the size and reach to do by establishing it's own stores.  Of course, once recruited into the hobby, many customers then move to the web to buy products ongoing - this can mean the bulk of the revenue ends up in another channel, which makes the stores look unprofitable - but the reality is, few new customers come into a hobby as complex as Warhammer 40k without a fair bit of assistance, usually provided by the stores at a high time, and thus cost, requirement.  

  

2.  Zion points out a disregard from Games Workshop in maintaining game balance, and thinks this should be more valued by GW.  Games Workshop, and I would bet, most other games manufactures, value something in their game systems much higher than competitive balance - Fun.  Now this is not simply "we have a good time playing the game" fun, but more complex fun, in which the customers investment in new products leads to more "Fun" each time the customer adds to their collection, and paints and games with their new products.  While a well balanced game can be more fun, it's the new and different units, with strange and interesting rules and game effects, that make customers want to buy and play with more models.  This may seem 'profit motivated', but the simple fact is that GW is a for profit business, and as such, needs to ensure that customer spend money regularly on the hobby.  If that makes you upset, I'd suggest looking at a game made by a non-profit miniatures company.  Oh wait, there aren't any.  

Now I'm not saying that all games companies work this way, and I do believe that a trend towards games balance should be a goal for Games Workshop, but the fact is that true game balance is also incredibly difficult to achieve, requiring considerable time in product testing and evaluation before launch - which is a lot more cost.  It's also impossible to put enough people and time into testing every possible combination of allies, data slates and supplements to find every possible situation that hurts balance.  You can work out how much effort, and thus cost, it would take to do this with a basic observation of new rules changes leading to 'broken' balance.  How long does it take between the release of a new codex and the emergence of a new death star? It's typically several months, across a global player base of thousands of players.  GW can't hope to replicate that level of codex analysis.

That is not to say Games Workshop can't make some improvements, however I think they are making moves in the right direction however.  Any system or product base as complex as the Warhammer 40k rule set requires a 'test and learn' change approach.  New rule sets and models can be released, observed, and then adjusted as needed.  Data slates, digital codexes and supplements can provide a way to adjust the meta as needed - as we are seeing.  For example, Knights and lords of war are a good counter to the currently popular death stars, thus the meta balance changes (note I didn't say improves).  It's very unlikely with a system as complex as 40k that true balance is possible - and if it was, it's likely the units would be far more generic across armies.  This is something some systems suffer from - Infinity is a good example.  Most of the Infinity armies are essentially clones of each other, with minor stat variations and the occasional unique unit.  It works for that system, but in reality it leads to fairly low diversity.  40K on the hand has wonderful variety, and all the armies have distinct play styles and units - this makes it very interesting, and very fun.

To-Do List Update

Just a quick update to the to-do list.  I have had a nasty case of the flu and a chest infection over the past two weeks, so not much progress at the moment.

1. Paint Ghazkull- DONE
2. Paint Mad Doc Grotsnik - DONE
3. Paint Weirdboy - DONE
4. Paint Big Mek wiht Shokk Attack Gunn - DONE
5. Repaint Nob Bikerz red -  in progress
6. Paint 20 Biker Boyz - undercoated and based.
7. Paint my Tankbustas
8. Paint my Dakkajet
9. Paint my Ork Bomba 
10. Base my Tyranids
11. Base and undercoat my Dark Elves
12. Start painting my Dark Elves
13. Finish the two Ork Attak Fightas and paint them
14. Get More DAKKA JETS!  (Ideally four more)
15. Build and paint a Mekboy Junka - Half built, waiting on turrets from Dakka-Jet Kits
16. Kit bash together two more war buggies from Trukk kit (may defer, as rumours are there are new Ork buggy kits in the pipeline.

New To-Do List

As I mentioned in my last post, I have cleared a large number of things from my current to-do list, and I need a new one.  This is what I'm currently thinking:

1. Paint Ghazkull
2. Build and paint two Nobz with Big Shootas and Power Klaws - Not Started
3. Paint my Tankbustas
4. Assemble and paint my Dakkajet
5. Paint my Ork Bomba 
6. Base and undercoat my Dark Elves
7. Start painting my Dark Elves
8. Finish the two Ork Attak Fightas and paint them
9. Get More DAKKA JETS!  (Ideally four more)
10. Build and paint a Mekboy Junka - Half built, waiting on turrets from Dakka-Jet Kits
11. Kit bash together two more war buggies from Trukk kit

Odds are I'll chop and change a few things, but the main goal I have is to put more anti-armor and air power into my Ork lists.  

Updated to-do list

As I mentioned when I last updated my to-do list, I had a deadline of 7 July for everything.  Well, it's now the 9th of July, lets see how I did:

So here's my new list of things to do:

1. Paint my two Nobz mobs - DONE
2. Paint 9 Killa Kanz - DONE
3. Paint 15 Shoota boyz - DONE
4. Paint the bases on DONE
5. Paint the bases on DONE
6. Build and paint two Nobz with Big Shootas and Power Klaws - Not Started
7. Build and paint a Mekboy Junka - Half built
8. Paint a Battle Wagon - DONE

So as you can see, some good progress, and not so much a failure on some items as a change in priorities - as I didn't end up using the Junka or the Nobs with Big Shootas I pulled them from the list.  Instead I managed to paint another 10 Lootas fully, and also managed to paint a display board for my army.  Overall I am very pleased with the progress.  Now I need a new to-do list!

Fields of Blood Day Two

Well - day two is in the bag and man am I tired.  It's a long day leaving the house at 7am and getting home at 7pm, even when doing something as fun as a tournament.

So heres how day twos matches went.

Game four I drew another Dark Eldar list - virtually identical to the list I played in game three.  Five Venoms, three Ravagers, Baron with Beasts.  This list opted for a couple of Raiders with Witches.  That being the case - I had practice now!  I followed the plan I laid out in my last post - keeping my force together and ensuring all units were supported, and also ensuring the Kans all had KFF protection.  It mean I took one heck of a lot of incoming fire, and shruged off most of it.  When I got into Grotzooka and shoota range I began hammering back, and by turn three my opponent realised that he would need to table me to win - I had a massive lead.  In the end I think I had 17 kill points to his 4.  My secret mission was to kill the baron, which I also achieved.  15 tournament points earned.

Gamer five was another Blood Angels list - this one with Rhinos rather than jump packs, a normal libarian instead of Mephiston, and a Death Company with Furioso Dred in a Stormraven.  My lootas popped the storm raven in turn one, the Kans then locked up the whole army in the middle of the table for most of the game.  We ended with a Draw, and in hindsight I wish I had not played my boys mob into the Death Companies hands - they were better dealt to by the Kans.  The game ended in a Draw and I took away 7 points.

The last game of the tournament I drew a third Dark Eldar list.  No Baron in this list, but still Venomspam, with Ravagers and two Raiders with Witches.  It was table quarters, and smoking or burning terrain, so I reserved my Choppa boys with my Warboss, and my Nobz.  The mission was five objectives and five kill points, with five units nominated at the start of the game.  I chose the Venoms, as I knew I'd need to deal with them anyway.  It was a brutal fight - I'm not sure I regret any tactics ( I may need to sleep on it though) but we ended in a draw - I did get five smoking ruined Venoms though, so Harrah! 

In the end I finished with two wins, two draws and two losses - not to shabby overall.  I placed 24th out of 50, which was Waaayyy better than last time - I was 76th out of 80 last time.  Talk about improvement!  Oh, and to top off the day, I won 2nd place for best terrain - Allistair took first.  

I took lots of photos, I'll try to get some up soon.

Fields of Blood day 1 recap

It's currently 6:45am on Sunday morning and I'll be piling into the battlewagon in 15 minutes to pick up the guys for day two of the tournament.  I thought I'd do a quick recap of day one so that it's not all lost in the blur of excitement that day two brings.

The battlewagon

My first match up was against Mathew Collett's Eldar Shuriken Cannon spam list - three wave serpents, two farseers using guide and doom with witchblades, two guardian squads with Shuriken cannons, two squadrons of three war walkers and two dire avenger squads.   I pulled of a resounding victory - 15 to tournament points with and absurdly high number of kill points - I think I scored 18 pts by the end of the game.

Mathews somewhat painted Eldar - turns out Peter asked him to play at the last minute to make the numbers even, so I suppose some forgiveness is in order.

The battlefield for game 1 - I deployed on the side closest to the camera.

Game two was a bit more rough.  I played against Daniel Hayden's 'colorful' blood angels army, let by Mephiston, with three ten man assault squads with two meltas each and a power fist, two apothecaries, and three devastator quads with four missile launchers a piece.  It was horribly one sided - my dice roles we not great, I put my big mek in the wrong place - back with the lootas (who didn't need him) instead of up with my Kans (who did need him, a lot).  I held my boyz in reserve along with my warboss, nobs and battlewagon.  All of which was also a mistake.  The blood angels were able to pick me apart - first my Kanz, then the lootas, then the boyz, and then the Nobs/Warboss/Wagon, and at no time was I able to bring any force of any size to bear.  I was tabled, and deserved it.  I really need to ensure I don't piecemeal myself like that again.  Orks need to play as one all threatening mass.

The battlefield for game two - I deployed in the rear left corner - not a lot of cover to be had

Game three was against Hayden Korach's Dark Eldar.  It packed a vicious six Venoms, four with blaster equipped 5 man warrior squads aboard and extra splinter cannons, and two with three blaster equiped 3 man Trueborn squads, extra splinter cannons and grisly trophies.  He ran Baron leading a big beast pack with 5 beast masters, 6 razorwing flocks, 8 Khymarae, and three ravagers with nightsheilds.  The mission was night fighting turn one, then  again for turns 5-6.  The mission activated objectives through the game - not a great one for a slow force like mine.  It was a fun game - the beasts destroyed my boys mobs, but lost the baron in the process, then the beasts mob was laid low by my Kans, which blew most of them away with Grotzooka fire (insta-kill 5 wound bird bases for the win!) and then mopped up the rest in assault.  The Venoms harassed my Kans at long range, and the battle wagon and one loota mob spent most of the game stuck at the wrong end of the table.  I lost the match, due to an empty Venom contesting my objective in the very last turn of the game!

Battlefield 3 - I deployed on the opposite side.

 SO here are my lessons from day one:

• Dragoon the battle wagon for the big mek and shootas.
• Keep the Kanz near the wagon/Mek for the cover saves.  
• Keep the Nobs safe in the back to grab/hold objectives. Use their small force size to keep them out of sight.
• keep the choppa boyz behind the wagon and the kanz.  
• Move the whole force as one and make the enemy deal with the whole thing - don't offer 'safe' charges - make sure all units are supported.