Joined
·
359 Posts
Having never been to a GT or any other major tournament, I am curious as to why so many in that scene think orks aren't competative. I've seen and played against lists and people that know the scene well, and I have never been particularly impressed by any "win all meta-game" list that's been thrown at my orks (mech tau based on FOF, IW with pie plates galore, big DC, Seer council, ect.). That's not to say that they weren't good or even great lists but I've not found one that could not be beaten.
My personal experience has told me that Orks are very effective if played by an experienced and competent general (competence is a measure of ability and experience, not an insult). Have so few people played against orks that didn't march themselves into bolter fire? What are people's experience playing with and against orks? Do the tournament players shy away from orks because of a weakness in the list?
I will admit that orks have lost something in the transition to 4th ed (see entanglement primarily along with sweeping advance being nerfed) but have not noticed a big lapse in competativeness of my list where I play. What are your thoughts?
My personal experience has told me that Orks are very effective if played by an experienced and competent general (competence is a measure of ability and experience, not an insult). Have so few people played against orks that didn't march themselves into bolter fire? What are people's experience playing with and against orks? Do the tournament players shy away from orks because of a weakness in the list?
I will admit that orks have lost something in the transition to 4th ed (see entanglement primarily along with sweeping advance being nerfed) but have not noticed a big lapse in competativeness of my list where I play. What are your thoughts?