Codex Orks - Informed discussion.

[Blackcloud6]

White Dwarf #21, IIRC. My copy's not on me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure that's it. The bad thing is that you'll either need to find a local retailer with a copy still, or ask someone with it to photocopy the page for you, because the GW stores are told to ditch their unsold copies, including issues with limited time rules (which is absolutely ridiculous for those people who can't get into a shop for week, for whatever reason, i.e. medical emergency or job).

Thanks, if I can't get a physical copy, I'll get a digital one.

[Path Walker]

Seriously, don't players in your area have autocannons, or anything else that shoots? Everything about these mediocre 2 hullpoint paperbag gets worse but you're liking them better than ever. They're slow, they're fragile, they cost too much, they're under armed, and they're the only vehicle in the game that isn't straight up fearless. There is optimistic and then there is just plain trolling. If kanz and dreds are the best performers in an ork list then someone in your gaming group is doing things wrong.

Yeah, we must be doing things wrong, because my friends and I have played a lot of games and enjoyed ourselves.



I love Kan models, i have 6 of them, with 3 more coming in stormclaw, I have 3 Deff dreads, I love them too, they're Orky as hell, guess what, Kans aren't supposed to tank wounds all day, they're supposed to be fragile and pop off, its the fluff and I enjoy it.



Also i love the idea that because an autocannon can reliably strip off a Hull point from the unit, my opponent must have an unlimited supply that he's bringing to bear on the Kans, because thats what you do with them, isn't it, you play on an empty table, devoid of cover and just march your Kans at the enemy autocannons like it was the charge of the light brigade!

And the opponent has nothing else to fire his autocannons at either! He has the perfect weapons to counter each of my units and has range and line of sight to them every turn. This Top Trumps bollocks doesn't work out on the table sorry, he had obliterators, but only 3 of them, on the same flank as the Kans took, his lascannons only manager to take off one hull point from them before there were boyz assaulting them. Its a war, not a sterile assessment of numbers, maneuvering and luck have a really big part to play.

[lets_get_em_boyz]

This is a sad sad read.

[Uberbeast]

Yadda yadda.

Okay, here's the thing... You're an outlier statistic. Anyone who consistantly uses a poor unit will eventualy get a "good" performance from them, especially if they aren't used to getting more from the other units in their army. You use a sub-par unit, and get a good game with it due to whatever meta you play or just dumb luck. Then you come on a forum and start telling people how awesome it is.

The immediate implication in your doing this is that the people complaining are either too stupid to know how to use the unit, or that you are either some genious tactician who can turn lead into gold. Neither are likely, but both results of your argument are purely on your hearsay alone, and put the person you are arguing with in an impossible position of either being an idiot or arguing against a genious.

Here's the reality: kanz were hit pretty hard with the nerf-bat and they weren't all that great before. That's evidence anyone can see with their eyes. Now your argument to counter this fact is purely anecdotal and impossible to confirm, and is as I pointed out above, bound to cause an argument because of it's very nature.

I'm sure it was meant well, but in the end the, "I use it and kicked my friend's butt with it" argument is not really a valid one to go trolling around the internet with.

[Caitsidhe]

[Wolfshade]

A couple of things.

Firstly, people should play 40k however they like and include what units they want regardless of a unit being "sub optimal", "sub prime" or whatever.

Second, the argument that you used something in a game and it did what you wanted it to is a great argument. Afterall, we only have anecdotes. I am supremely confident that no one has played enough 7th edition games with the Ork codex to have a statistically significant results to "prove" otherwise.

Yes Kans are slow, but no more slow than any other walker. I very much like kans, though I have yet to use them in 7th. I probably will still use them in 7th if my rulebook ever turns up (thanks Totalwargamer...).

[Uberbeast]

Firstly, people should play 40k however they like and include what units they want regardless of a unit being "sub optimal", "sub prime" or whatever.

Second, the argument that you used something in a game and it did what you wanted it to is a great argument. Afterall, we only have anecdotes. I am supremely confident that no one has played enough 7th edition games with the Ork codex to have a statistically significant results to "prove" otherwise.

Yes Kans are slow, but no more slow than any other walker. I very much like kans, though I have yet to use them in 7th. I probably will still use them in 7th if my rulebook ever turns up (thanks Totalwargamer...).

No, anecdotal, personal evidence is not acceptable because here on the internet everyone just makes it up and can easily trump everything the last guy says to the point of it being incredible. The only thing it serves is to add color to someone's opinion.

And yes, feel free to take whatever sub-par units you like, I'm not saying don't take it because it sucks (I reguarly run mandrakes in my Dark Eldar). I am saying that taking it doesn't change the fact that it sucks a lot worse than it did before. And arguing that all walkers are the same speed is a little of a false argument here as well when you consider that of all the walkers out there, the ork ones rely most on getting into close combat to do any damage while other walkers can get their points back with superior balistic skills and weapons. With the whole ork army gaining speed, a gimped kan with it's many nerfs is just going to be lagging behind the real combat.

There is another issue I'd like to bring up about the Kanz, and that is internal balance. If you want to allow players to run all the units from the book you should make them all viable. Right now Kanz are possibly the worst heavy support option down there with the gorkanaught in a slot where most of the many other options are far and away better. Unless you just like losing a lot, you're going to want to try something else other than kanz out, and there are plenty of toys to take.

So ask yourself this- Where were all the cries for a nerf to Killa Kanz? Where was the community uproar, the banning of it from tournaments, the countless thread spam, the constant joking at every game night about OP Cheese? In a complete absense of complaint about KK's needing a nerf, they took a triple whammy of one of the hardest nerf combos I've seen in my many years of gaming combined with nerfs to how kff worked and two editions of indirect nerfing to walkers and CC in particular.

[Wolfshade]

No, anecdotal, personal evidence is not acceptable because here on the internet everyone just makes it up and can easily trump everything the last guy says to the point of it being incredible. The only thing it serves is to add color to someone's opinion.

So what evidence do you have?

[Mr Mystery]

I don't make things up. Real life is much more fun!

[lets_get_em_boyz]

Although on second readthrough i do like the idea of filling my elites with trukking burna boys and tankbustas. Convoy style.