Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Poly Ranger wrote:
BA were poor (and arguably one of the worst) from the start of 6th until now and still will be until we get a new dex in 8th or 9th. That's a long time under the bus. So bottom tier to bottom tier.

Compare that to:
SM - top tier to top tier
Eldar - top tier to top tier
Necrons - top tier to top tier

Or even just:
SW - mid tier to mid tier
GKs - mid tier to mid tier
Inquisition - mid tier to mid tier
Tau - top tier to mid tier
Daemons - top tier to mid tier
Sisters - Mid tier to mid tier
The last three are only downgraded due to not having recieved a new dex yet and unable to fully keep up with the 7.5 dexes.

When people say that armies take their turns being bottom of the pile, what they really mean is that BA, CSM, Orks, DE, IG and Nids (to an extent) take turns at being bottom of the bottom. No other army, aside from DA, can claim to be anywhere near that group for many years. BA were good in 5th... 4 years ago! 4 years is a massive amount of time to wait. It is 5% of your life if you live till 80 (that's 1 in 20 of your living days). So when people say 'well you were good in 5th', so flippin what? How about those who never played 5th? How about those who only have BA and have had to put up with FOUR YEARS of being bottom of the pile (it will probably be more like 6 or 7 by the time we get a new dex - getting close to a decade by that point). Is that an enjoyable hobby for them compared to their friends? I'm fortunate in the fact that I own multiple armies, many others are not so fortunate. However, the fact that I have to shelve thousands of pounds of models if I want even a semblance of a chance of winning, riles me up still.

On a side note, after writing it so much, the word 'tier' doesn't feel like a real word anymore.

How about BA sucking out loud in 2nd? Then sucking in 4th when we got that terrible White Dwarf codex? Oh but the Wardex makes everything better? It's been a lot more than 4 years on the bottom. BA were trotting out lists in 2nd that could be tabled by CSM in ONE TURN.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
BA just got it back to back because their 5th ed codex sucked in 6th.

To be fair, pretty much all the 5E books took a huge hit with 6E, at least the Imperial armies, Necrons got better, but IG, BA, SW, GK, SM all got much less capable with the release of 6E.

Not as bad as the BA got nut punched.

Well remembered. Allthough in 3rd we were probably the best army in the game. Insane T1 charge distances with DC out of an overcharged rhino was beautiful.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Well remembered. Allthough in 3rd we were probably the best army in the game. Insane T1 charge distances with DC out of an overcharged rhino was beautiful.

BA ruled 3rd until guess who? The Eldar got their codex. Starcannons ended the party for sure. I'll tell you what. 2nd was so bad, that I STILL think I'm gonna get wiped when I line up against CSM, even though it's not been like that for a long time.

Always the damn pointy ears!

Martel732 wrote:
]

 Vaktathi wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
BA just got it back to back because their 5th ed codex sucked in 6th.

To be fair, pretty much all the 5E books took a huge hit with 6E, at least the Imperial armies, Necrons got better, but IG, BA, SW, GK, SM all got much less capable with the release of 6E.

Not as bad as the BA got nut punched.

Hrm, I dunno about that. GK's went from top of the world to practically nonexistent. IG likewise dropped like a rock save for some gimmicky builds centered around allies and artillery-type units and the tank hordes practically disappeared from tables overnight.

GKs were still rocking their psybolt ammo cheese, they were fine until Tau and Eldar came along and could melt their faces off.

I for one think the relics list is kinda underwhelming, sure, but a few of the options are actually kinda cool for what they do and the buffs they give.

My personal favorites are the Crown Angelic and Valor's Edge.

I always ran my Commander with a Death Mask. It was fluffy and I really enjoyed it back in the 3rd edition mini-codex. They took that option away in the 5th edition codex which saddened me. Now the Crown is in, and it costs the same as the old Death Mask from the 3rd ed. Codex, coupled with a nice debuff for charging something that isn't fearless or has ATSKNF. Hitting something with a -2 leadership fear test and watching them fail it and go to WS:1 for the rest of the combat is pretty awesome. I hit you on 3's, you hit me back on 5's.

Regarding Valor's Edge, I love having an at-initiative power weapon option that cleaves even artificer/terminator armor and allows for an extra attack for being armed for hand-to-hand (Pistol & Sword), plus when coupled with digital weapons, ensures you'll likely get at least a wound or two on target after re-rolling one failed to-wound roll. Yea, you're only at base strength or +1 if you're charging, but I like it personally.

Just my opinion on that. BA need an update/revision for sure, and hopefully we'll get one sooner rather than later. Other codexes need more help in the mean time still, but the release schedule has been much faster than days of yore.

Time will tell. In the mean time, take it easy for now folks.

-Red__Thirst-

Poly Ranger wrote:


No need for that last sentence. Rather insulting for no reason at all tbh.

You, specifically, weren't the brick wall (more the entire negative BA culture on this forum), but seeing as how I had you quoted, I can see where you'd get that. Sorry for that...

As for the rest...I know I'm not everyone, and I know what I care about won't reflect what everyone else cares about. I was just pushing against the endless tide of super negative BA posts that do not reflect my thoughts on our current state of affairs.

I get it...there's no room for ONE neutral (at best) post about BA on this forum.

Neutral is fine. It's just rough because they are so similar to Vanilla dex but so much different at the same time.

 Voidwraith wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:


No need for that last sentence. Rather insulting for no reason at all tbh.

You, specifically, weren't the brick wall (more the entire negative BA culture on this forum), but seeing as how I had you quoted, I can see where you'd get that. Sorry for that...

As for the rest...I know I'm not everyone, and I know what I care about won't reflect what everyone else cares about. I was just pushing against the endless tide of super negative BA posts that do not reflect my thoughts on our current state of affairs.

I get it...there's no room for ONE neutral (at best) post about BA on this forum.

Fair enough, I misunderstood.
I do understand where you are coming from, I'm reasonably successful with CSM.
Thing is people tell me that CSM are in the worst boat. But to me that's just simply not true. I have large armies of both and find it far easier to build a better CSM army. Personally I really struggle with BA in the current meta. I know it's not because I'm a poor player because I did well with BA in 6th despite them being weak and currently find Renegades and Necrons (my last 2 armies) a stoll in the park. But now, in 7th (7.5th in particular), BA are a hard unforgiving army, trying to play with them is like running a race against a mate where only you have to wade through treacle and in some cases yoyr mate gets a head start. They are frustrating to play recently in my experiances anyway.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I don't think CSM are great btw. I just think they are noticably better than BA.

Yeah the BA got hit by the nerf bat after the new Marine codex
however you can still field an entire walker list with the FTSF FoC
(2x Librarian Dreads,Cassor the Damned, 3xFragosios, 3x Dreadero Dreads, Warhound titan)

 Voidwraith wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:


No need for that last sentence. Rather insulting for no reason at all tbh.

You, specifically, weren't the brick wall (more the entire negative BA culture on this forum), but seeing as how I had you quoted, I can see where you'd get that. Sorry for that...

As for the rest...I know I'm not everyone, and I know what I care about won't reflect what everyone else cares about. I was just pushing against the endless tide of super negative BA posts that do not reflect my thoughts on our current state of affairs.

I get it...there's no room for ONE neutral (at best) post about BA on this forum.

Passive-Aggressive is always the best counter to negativity.

While all of the BA problems aren't super easy to fix, the least GW could do would be to go ahead and release a FAQ to bring their scouts/terminators/dreadnaughts in-line with the new C:SM. It would take 30 minutes for an intern to do but it looks like they can't be bothered.

 Voidwraith wrote:

ASMs no longer troops---I don't care. No one thought they were great before, but we had to take them. It only sucked that we suddenly had to purchase / paint new troop units.

Yes, it makes more sense to buy 2 scout squads, put them in reserve and hope they don't come in at an awkward time. Give me back my ASM troops. Didn't we go through this when BA codex came out, that buying certain units/models no longer allows units to change their role? I'm glad this lasted until the SM codex arrived.

ASMs unable to take dedicated razors or land raiders---Still don't care. I like em as drop melta.

Drop melta is done better by Salamanders. Also, that you do not care, does not mean the change made sense. Were ASM's so overpowered that suddenly they just could no longer buy dedicated transports?

Priests no longer 3 to a slot or in elites---This actually sucks, though many of my lists aren't feeling bare without multiple Priests in them.

As a long time BA player I learned after 7th edition codex had arrived that I had the option of fielding priests in threes, silly me I'm happy they moved the priest away from elite slot, allows for more Fragnoughts (at the cost of fielding any DC...)

Baals losing scout---Don't care at all about this. I play my Baal at a distance, not with the Flamer. It's fast and can do what I need it to do without Scout.

Would have been nice to be able to field them in squadrons and outflank. I played them aggressively, to support the fragnoughts and allow ASM's to approach/mop up.

Baals moved from fast to heavy---This is a perceived nerf, but now that assault marines are in Fast, Baals had to end up somewhere else to get play. It hasn't really affected my list-building, though it does seem stupid.

I liked Baal's role as being able to scout if needed, to try to apply some control/pressure. Now I just don't seem to be able to utilize them. I need some anti-air and that's taken by stormraven, which is too expensive for that role. No room for Baals anymore.

Corbulo losing his 2+ fnp---a nerf to be sure, but this one we had to see coming. It was WAY too boss.

Agreed, but why go over the top with the nerf?

Additionally, moving Dante/Seth to LoW slot makes absolutely no sense. They are nowhere near the level of a lord of war. Fielding one just forces me to spend points for HQ, so I don't bother trying to fit either one in.

None of that is to say people should love the BA codex or say it's top tier. I just get tired of hearing all of these "who gives a crap" complaints that aren't affecting my games one bit.

Humour me, build your typical BA army using BA codex and then do the same with SM codex. You would be surprised.

Also, the buffs to Dante were what BA players had been asking for for years, and everyone still casts him aside as "meh" because of what? The Wraithknight? Sure, I wish he wasn't in our LoW slot, but I'm not going to look down on him because he doesn't compare well to the most brokenly undercosted and well-rounded unit in the game.

You could argue that by having Dante as LoW allows to buy a librarian + priest. We could do that previously also. However now with him being a LoW and other hard choices I just don't find room for him anymore (and I did play him previously with Sanguinary guard).

Yeah, GW rejiggered our codex around and we had to buy / use some scouts or tactical marines.

I only have ultrasmurf tacs and scouts, will not bother with BA enough to go and buy some. I've shelved them for now. As has been said, it's not realy a problem with the BA codex itself, but the immediate power creep after it (and other better balanced 7th edition codices).

Why do I feel like I just said all of that to a brick wall?

I don't know, it could be your attitude? FYI, "I don't play unit X, so I don't care if they nerf it or not" is not really constructive.

BA are fine as long as you pretend the current SM codex doesn't exist.

I think alot of BA players got spoiled by their 5th ed dex that was pretty much the entire SM codex plus a handful of other unique units. No BA player cried foul about the missing Conversion beamers and thunderfire cannons, especially since they got all those other goodies. BS3 scouts were good enough back then, nothing changed there.

But now they are missing all the best SM toys and suddenly feel left out. Nevermind that they should always have been missing some SM stuff, you know, being a divergent chapter and all.

I really find the BA whining a case of having your cake and eating it too.

 Jayden63 wrote:
BA are fine as long as you pretend the current SM codex doesn't exist.

More like they are fine if you pretend Necrons, Ad Mech, Craftworlds, and SM don't exist. Basically, everything that started coming out as soon as a month after Blood Angels did can't exist for them to be fine.

All codex that came out before Necrons have that problem, yet it seems like BA players feel especially butt hurt by it and i really cant see why. Why do they feel so entitled to everything the SM get?

 Jayden63 wrote:
Nevermind that they should always have been missing some SM stuff, you know, being a divergent chapter and all.

I really find the BA whining a case of having your cake and eating it too.

Um, no. That's not it. Can you tell me what makes Blood Angels special in any way, because I can't?

All codex that came out before Necrons have that problem, yet it seems like BA players feel especially butt hurt by it and i really cant see why. Why do they feel so entitled to everything the SM get?

You are again incorrect. If you have never seen any Ork, CSM, GK etc players complain about their codex you haven't really been reading the forum.

Honestly i think people are overstating the problems, the dreads and scouts need to be brought in line and it makes no sense they pay more for vanguard veterans melee weapons but most of the units are pretty good

The ASM are better with access to meltaguns and the tacticals are better with access to a heavy flamer

Dante is pretty capable for his cost and DC and SG are also decent

They have a few lame duck units like the current ball pred but it isn't that far off, hell don't most people houserule the scouts and dread changes anyway?

the issue is that everything they can do other marines do bettr in some form or another. and they are too finnickey

Thanks for the replies, everyone.

Blood Angels are blessed with the BA Tactical, Death Company and Sanguinary Guard kits, which are some of the best 28mm infantry space marine bits GW has made.

They are cursed (or blessed) with not having any of the cheesy options available to standard space marines, and a effective, but not super-duper chapter tactic. They are also cursed (or blessed) by not having any super-duper formations other than Flesh Tearer's, and at larger scales than most people play, Angel's Fury.

But whatever, just play them as vanilla marines and call them Blood Templars if you're envious of centurions and skyhammer and free razorbacks.

 Jayden63 wrote:
BA are fine as long as you pretend the current SM codex doesn't exist.

I think alot of BA players got spoiled by their 5th ed dex that was pretty much the entire SM codex plus a handful of other unique units. No BA player cried foul about the missing Conversion beamers and thunderfire cannons, especially since they got all those other goodies. BS3 scouts were good enough back then, nothing changed there.

But now they are missing all the best SM toys and suddenly feel left out. Nevermind that they should always have been missing some SM stuff, you know, being a divergent chapter and all.

I really find the BA whining a case of having your cake and eating it too.

This guy gets it.

Yes, BA players unduly suffered throughout 4th ed with the lame duck, dead horse WD list. But honestly, that list wasn't really much worse than what DA's were saddled with.
Then came their 5th edition codex, and suddenly, they became the most adaptable army in the entire game, only being equaled/surpassed by Longwang spam (which they were kinds of breaking btw...), and of course, "I-Win" Knights super cheese.

While yes, it sucks royal monkey balls that GW pulls a massive shift in direction with the very next codex after yours gets done, it's not like BA's are without teeth of their own, as they can still;
- MSU Drop Pod spam.
- Dread spam in Drop Pods.
- MSU Jump Pack heavy, with much better Assault Squads to boot. (BA's effectively get Raptors +1 for feth's sake!)
- Template/Melta spam that's rivaled only by Sisters!

On top of being able to out assault anything Vanilla Marines can pull off, and also being a part of the IoM BFF super club... Plus, while not as good as the super formations, BA's at least have the benefit of their own unique FOC detachment, plus the extra stuff they got in the Shield of Baal campaign.

Honestly, the way certain people carry on, it really comes across as being nothing more than a spoiled child wanting their toys to be the outright 'bestist' just because they think so.


As a Chaos player, it's highly annoying to see the sheer amount of *****ing and whining BA players do, especially since their model line also blows our completely out of existence.

I'm sorry, but I'll admit that I get pretty peeved seeing how BA players try and paint themselves as the most neglected and worst off army of all time! Chaos Marines & Sisters especially have a heck of a lot less going for them, especially on the options & model front.

Experiment 626 wrote:
As a Chaos player, it's highly annoying to see the sheer amount of *****ing and whining BA players do

This is how the rest of the world feels about CSM players who hijack any thread about the flaws of a faction that isn't theirs.

I have recently seen some pretty convincing arguments that csm are better than BA. Someone asked what is wrong with BA and we told them.

Also no one asked for all the toys sm get. It would just be nice if our toys where as equally effective.

Martel732 wrote:
I have recently seen some pretty convincing arguments that csm are better than BA. Someone asked what is wrong with BA and we told them.

Also no one asked for all the toys sm get. It would just be nice if our toys where as equally effective.

Simple solution then. Just let your not divergent chapter get wrapped into the SM codex and you will be just as effective.

Thats one of the problems of not being in the parent codex. You dont get upgraded when everyone else does. SW have the same issue.

 Jayden63 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I have recently seen some pretty convincing arguments that csm are better than BA. Someone asked what is wrong with BA and we told them.

Also no one asked for all the toys sm get. It would just be nice if our toys where as equally effective.

Simple solution then. Just let your not divergent chapter get wrapped into the SM codex and you will be just as effective.

Thats one of the problems of not being in the parent codex. You dont get upgraded when everyone else does. SW have the same issue.

That's fine with me, but evidently not GW. There's no reason that sanguinary guard suck out loud and grav cents are broken, though.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
As a Chaos player, it's highly annoying to see the sheer amount of *****ing and whining BA players do

This is how the rest of the world feels about CSM players who hijack any thread about the flaws of a faction that isn't theirs.

Exalted

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
As a Chaos player, it's highly annoying to see the sheer amount of *****ing and whining BA players do

This is how the rest of the world feels about CSM players who hijack any thread about the flaws of a faction that isn't theirs.

Yes, it's almost as annoying as everyone assuming that every Necron player fields Decurion with Canoptek Harvest, every Eldar player fields Scatterbikes with multiple Wraithknights, and every SM player fields a Battle Company with 10 Razorbacks - and then uses that level of cheese as a point of comparison to a fluffy list from their own Codex.

 j31c3n wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:
As a Chaos player, it's highly annoying to see the sheer amount of *****ing and whining BA players do

This is how the rest of the world feels about CSM players who hijack any thread about the flaws of a faction that isn't theirs.

Yes, it's almost as annoying as everyone assuming that every Necron player fields Decurion with Canoptek Harvest, every Eldar player fields Scatterbikes with multiple Wraithknights, and every SM player fields a Battle Company with 10 Razorbacks - and then uses that level of cheese as a point of comparison to a fluffy list from their own Codex.

For me, it's very relevant. For example, I have never played against a non-Decurion.