Talk:Warhammer 40,000/7th Edition Tactics/Orks

Ghazghkull formation

"Always take Ghazghkull in a formation that lets you call a Waaagh! every turn so everyone is always fearless, lets your meganobz run, and makes Ghazghkull always have a 2++."

Which formation?

Relics can take only one discussion

Page 53 of the ork codex. compare Orky kbw whots: A model can take up to one of each of the following with Gifts of mork ... A model can tke one of the following... This seems pretty clear to me you can oly pich one Relic per HQ. If you don't think so plz comment here instead of removing the part in the Tactics.--Otter (talk) 15:30, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Appocalypse

I have created an appocalypse section, firstly to seperate the appocalypse formations from the regular ones but also to flesh out this great part of the game. But didn't have the time to fill in, feel free to add something to it. --Otter (talk) 21:34, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

• Are we gonna count the Apocalypse Datasheets? They seem to clutter stuff up and they're very old school. Moonsaves (talk) 08:15, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Cleanup

• I have made the executive decision (entirely without any authority whatsoever) to clean up this talk page. So much of this is leftovers from previous editions of the article relating to previous editions of the game. This is why we shouldn't just clone the previous edition tactica articles when a new edition comes out. I've moved all comments older than 7th ed (I think, it would help if people used timestamps/signatures) to the 6th ed tactics talk page. If anybody really has a problem with this edit, just revert. And as always: remember to sign your comments. --Hiddenkrypt (talk) 15:03, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Kustom stompa no longer a valid lord of war

• It looks like FW stealth errata'd out the kustom stompa. They redid ork lord of war choices in the dread mob update, which came out after they did the original ALL THESE THINGS ARE LORDS OF WAR. Which sadly means kustom stompas are out.

not sure its still in the official low fw list http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/L/lordsofwar.pdf [1]

--Otter (talk) 18:46, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

on an other note. What should we do with the dread mon update, since it isn't that usefull since it updates everuthing to somthing between the old and the new codex. Resulting in lots of strange things. Like spanna boyz having the waaagh rule that links to the waag rule in the rule book thus being able to waaaagh if one of them is your warlord ;) --Otter (talk) 07:54, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I have updated up the lords of war section today to match the forge world list, and added all the super heavies that can only be fielded in unbound / appoc to the superheavies that are not Low section. --Otter (talk) 21:34, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

New Codex

• Can someone clear up this page to match the new rules, there seems to be a lot of stuff from the previous edition remaining.

--83.86.73.212 21:06, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

• A purge will be coming soon. There are a few things that are wrong about the 7th edition codex on here as well, for instance someone saying Snikkrot should get the outflank warlord trait when he already has Infiltrate. >:(

• has anyone else reaslised that under the gifts of gork and mork it says "a model may take one of the following" so no relic stacking

• Sign your comments. Just put 4 tilde(~) characters in a row (or press the signature button above the editor). This gives you an automatic timestamp and keeps the discussion readable. For better readability start your comments with a bullet point. You (second unsigned comment above me) say a purge is coming? Did you say that shortly after the last timestamp (June 2014)? When is 'Soon'? I'd start cleaning this up myself but I'm only good on the core codex stuff. --Hiddenkrypt (talk) 16:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)I'm helping as much as possible with the non core stuff --Otter (talk) 04:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

(Merging) Alternative Sources

Does anyone else think that the "alternative sources" header under the army-wide special rules should be somewhere else? Say, in the supplements or expansions part? --Talon of Anathrax (talk) 07:23, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes you are probably right, but I found no better way to place it.

Ideally it should be splitted into multiple parts, while still keeping it orderly they are important parts of building the army.

1. We really need an orderly part where all the most recent rules of all the units and detachments/formations can be found. So that new players know where to find the rules they are looking for. This is really important since it would be a waste when someone builds an army around out dated rules.

I'm not sure if behind the unit is the best place since or at a different easy to find part page. behind the unit would make sense but is harder to make coherent and check regular I think.

2. We need to an orderly part about all the different formations and detachments including the great detachments in the core codex and probably the ones in the rule book, and unbound . Just to show new players what the current options are to build your army with.

3 Army whide rules should probably mention that there are also formation and detachment wide rules or the different formations and detachments should just be under army whide rules. Since they are practically army wide rules when you play with them

4. I kinda feel like the relics of waaagh ghazz and the core codex should be merged...

--Otter (talk) 18:44, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

1. We should simply put every formation in its place (part 10), even no matter where they are from, along with it's origins. That way, we can check them all regularly easily!

2. I think that that already exists (see part 10). Should we update this? I think we should make it more visible from the introduction, or the "Building your army" section?

3. I don't think that that it is really necessary to mention that (isn't kinda obvious?), as it could be confusing? but we should NEVER mix up army-wide special rules (which must be played with) and rules from formations (which can be ignored by not taking the formation)

4. I don't think we should merge the relics, because everyone doen't want to play with a supplement (and realising that you planned your army around a relic from a supplement and now probably need to buy it is extremely infuriating).

--Talon of Anathrax (talk) 20:37, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

I spent a large part of the day streamlining the article by merging and ordering things in the whole article( sorry anathrax i don't see your message while I was editing, ). Things that have been changed.

-All the suplements have now been fully incorperated into the article instead of being completely scattered across the article. So all wargear is in one place, all the formations are in one place all etc.

-A reference has been added in the beginning, it is still incomplete and could also use the time each book came out.

-All unit entries have now been moved to their force org place. So the truck is now in the fast attack section, as are the fast attack flyers, and all the lords of war are in the lords of war section.

-All things have now a reference added to them ( I still need some help with IA appocalypse and the appocalypse book, they are now just marked as forge world ) so that the most current rules can easily looked up.

-I added the missions in waaagh ghazz, these are really interesting and you can roll to see if you play them.

-I added appocalypse things since playing appoc is great for ork players, but didn't have the time to write divine internentions strategic assets and the finest our parts.

I did all those things not signed in at the Ip. . ‎145.97.232.29 --Otter (talk) 21:16, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

@Anathrax I completely agree with you that it sould be clear when somthing is not from the codex susch as relics form the supplement. This is why I added references to all the tings. I hope you like it, I think its a great improvement and sorry for the indent/syntax errors I might have creted here and there while moving large parts of text. --Otter (talk) 21:30, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Added missing references to everyting,added some missing units and sorted out the heavy support. I'm done here. --Otter (talk) 07:52, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I have cleaned up the cluttered mess that has somehow taken hold. The reason the supplement stuff is split off from the rest of the codex is because those rules are optional to the army and by no means necessary to running the army. Similarly, there is no need to type in which units are from the codex nor which books the Forge World Stuff's from. I've made notes as to which books they're in, and the Dred Mob already has its own Tactica. I've kept the Apoc stuff in since I'm uncertain as to whether or not they're even usable because the old GW formations are two editions old and thus generally not used unless you're running a very friendly game and the stuff from the new Apoc book is technically still usable. If there are any further questions about this, I'll be willing to answer. ThatOneBruvva (talk) 15:36, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

" I have cleaned up the cluttered mess that has somehow taken hold. The reason the supplement stuff is split off from the rest of the codex is because those rules are optional to the army and by no means necessary to running the army. Similarly, there is no need to type in which units are from the codex nor which books the Forge World Stuff's from" - I completely disagree with you. These suplements are just as official as our codex ( notice that is is also called a suplement by gw ). The references where a great tool for players who would like to use some of these other rules, it isnt that tricial to find the newerst rules for some of the more obscure units. You vandalized about a days work, I tried to undo your vandalism. But it wasn't all possible I would really like it if you restored it to the original state. --145.97.232.29 11:40, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

This article is a huge mess. Waaagh! Ghazz. should have its own section, the "Sources" section is useless, and the spelling and grammar is atrocious. This is your warning that I'll start fixing it when I have time so you don't accuse me of "vandalism" too. CrazyThang (talk) 18:50, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, the spelling and grammar are awful on this page again. I've done another brief fix but this stuff can be easily prevented by just reading edits before they are committed. Also, do we need to get into the habit of talking about previous versions of FAQS that are no longer supported, when the FAQ that replaced them isn't supported either? I feel the page is getting cluttered enough, and while there is some useful stuff in the sources section, it's starting to get convoluted and redundant. Moonsaves (talk) 22:29, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Clarifications and Clean Up

Alright so two things I want to specifically look at. -It's pretty straightforwardly stated that an ork can only have one artifact and there can only be one of each artifact. New Ghaz supplement allows you to pick from vanilla orks and Ghaz books for your artifacts. That's where it gets a little tricky, but I am inclined to say 1 artifact per ork. -Secondly, there seems to be some disagreement about the endless Waaagh with fearless combination. I hope to clear this up so we can come to a final verdict and eliminate the passive-aggressive contradictions that are scattered throughout the tactics page. The Great Waaagh-Band detachment requires 1+ core, 1-10 auxilary, and 0-1 command (per core.) What you get is:

- If this detachment is your primary, you get to re-roll on the Warlord Traits table.

- If this Detachment contains your warlord and he has the Waaagh special rule, he can call a waaagh each and every turn INCLUDING the first.

- then something about HoW which is for now inconsequential.

Ghazzy Boy can be acquired in the Council of Waaagh! command detachment part of the Great Waaagh-band detachment. He also has the Prophet of the Waaagh command trait which gives all units with 'ere we go the fearless USR until the start of the next friendly turn. So combining the Waaagh every turn, including the first, and the Prophet of the Waaagh warlord trait: this makes all units with 'ere we go fearless as long as you call Waaaghs and Ghaz lives. Furthermore, you do not *need* Ghaz, he's just a reliable way to make this combo work. The new Ghaz supplement says "you may choose to roll" on the Ghaz traits table instead of the vanilla orks table. So you can have the warboss from the Waaaghband or Goff Killmob roll on the vanilla table with fingers crossed and dice painted blue (alongside the re-roll from the detachment) and hope for the Prophet of the Waaagh command trait. Am I missing anything? Naeondaemon (talk) 05:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

---

Article for power klaws: https://1d4chan.org/wiki/PK_spam_your_way_to_victory!

I think this belongs in there. If it is possible to merge the 2 articles, then please do so. if not, I will copy and paste into this article.

404 article? HK (talk) 04:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Fandex

Regarding the recent edits by User:Evilexecutive, is this really the place to be advertising a fandex? This is tactics for the current codex. Anybody really in favor of keeping this in? HK (talk) 04:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

There's no money to be gained, I'm only trying to help give good advice for Ork Players. I've yet to see an Ork player that didn't have their 40k experience vastly improved by running the Space 0Din 'dex. I don't even play orks either, but I would much rather have a game against someone running the fandex than the geedubs dex, because it's just a much more fair game. Evil Executive, CEO of Evil Incorporated (talk) 06:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

And besides that, what's with the hostility towards it? Have you ever known the joy of playing a game against orks, where the orks actually stand a chance? Even while still including all the randumb shennanigans that make them hilarious? Have you ever had a battle where some space marines shot the driver of a Trukk dead, but the trukk driver slumped forwards with his foot gunning the gas, and have the Trukk fly a whopping 12" directly into the tactical squad before exploding? And then have the surviving orks get out of the exploding wreckage to go krump sum gitz? Evil Executive, CEO of Evil Incorporated (talk) 06:17, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Moved the alternative dex entry to the bottom in a new section where people can place alternative ork codices and rules if they want.--Naeondaemon (talk) 09:30, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Can any fandex be submitted? If so, might I make my own humble contribution? (http://www.the-waaagh.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=53918) --Dr. Zoidbork (talk) 20:25, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

• I guess. Place it in the same section so others will not be confused with homebrew vs official.--Naeondaemon (talk) 23:55, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Reorganization

Seriously, this is a disordered mess. I am willing to reorganize everything and add in some parts that are inexplicably missing. However, what is the consensus of separation vs merging? I am of the opinion that Waaagh! Ghazghkull should have its notable parts included in the same parts as the codex but marked as Waaagh Ghazghkull (IE: Warlord traits, tactical objectives, special rules) but can go the other way as well with a modicum of persuasion.--Naeondaemon (talk) 21:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Not sure if/when I'll get to it, but a specific section for general weapons under Orky Know-wots is important. Then we can clear out the pointless subsections under most units talking about equipment.