Hey everyone, relatively new to this forum (if you can see by my post count). I mostly just like to read other people post, and not say anything. Haha. That said, if this is in the wrong area, tell me! And sorry... haha.

But if it IS in the right.. then here we go...

I recently started playing 40k again, and I am slowly but surly learning as much as I can. About the game.

I pulled all of my old bitz of SM's out of the storage, threw em together, and play down at the store now and again.

Right now my army is SUPER bare bones.... I'm talking 2 10 man Tactical Squads, a 5 man Assault Squad, and a "Chapter Master" who is really just a captain....

I'm looking to expand my army, but I have been reading all three codices (BA, SW, and SM) and they'd all fit some what in to my DIY Chapter's fluff.

Blood Angels look cool.. but my girl friend says I'm just mesmerized by the shinny jump packs...

Space wolves seem to be a whole different kind of beast altogether (pun intended), and I'm just not sure I know what I'd be getting into.... but I mean.... WOLF MOUNTS?!? Thats AWESOME!!
(deep breath)

That all said.... relic blades are wicked cool... so... what are your opinions? I'm look for you thoughts and discussions on these armies, oh wise and thoughtful internets... please don't let me down.



(p.s. I threw in the poll for fun... I most want to talk about it..)

relative to who? You're just new
IMO blood angels are the strongest of the 3. then space wolves then codex. you can make strong armies out of all three books.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:relative to who? You're just new
IMO blood angels are the strongest of the 3. then space wolves then codex. you can make strong armies out of all three books.

What would you say makes the Blood Angels the strongest? Obviously this is a VERY narrow point of view.... but the Sang Guard, who look awesome, kinda suck. As is seems like they have a two handed power weapon, so they can't gain another attack from another weapon... boo.... relic and frost blades sound way better.

Just an example... I'm really just trying to understand these armies.

Play Space Wolves, have 15 ML, make lots of friends

Haha.... 15 missile launchers?

legomojo wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:relative to who? You're just new
IMO blood angels are the strongest of the 3. then space wolves then codex. you can make strong armies out of all three books.

What would you say makes the Blood Angels the strongest? Obviously this is a VERY narrow point of view.... but the Sang Guard, who look awesome, kinda suck. As is seems like they have a two handed power weapon, so they can't gain another attack from another weapon... boo.... relic and frost blades sound way better.

Just an example... I'm really just trying to understand these armies.

Its not the sanguinary guard. It's the feel no pain furious charge preferred enemy ass-load-of-attacks jump pack scoring power armor marines at only a marginally greater cost than every other space marine pays for just normal power armor marines. That and descent of angels for free. pound for pound blood angels are the hardest hitting marine army in the game.

As for the VERY narrow point of view comment... what can I say... This game is based on math not opinions. In math there is one and only one correct set of answers to a problem. being broad or narrow doesn't have anything to do with anything.
AF

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

legomojo wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:relative to who? You're just new
IMO blood angels are the strongest of the 3. then space wolves then codex. you can make strong armies out of all three books.

What would you say makes the Blood Angels the strongest? Obviously this is a VERY narrow point of view.... but the Sang Guard, who look awesome, kinda suck. As is seems like they have a two handed power weapon, so they can't gain another attack from another weapon... boo.... relic and frost blades sound way better.

Just an example... I'm really just trying to understand these armies.

Its not the sanguinary guard. It's the feel no pain furious charge preferred enemy ass-load-of-attacks jump pack scoring power armor marines at only a marginally greater cost than every other space marine pays for just normal power armor marines. That and descent of angels for free. pound for pound blood angels are the hardest hitting marine army in the game.

As for the VERY narrow point of view comment... what can I say... This game is based on math not opinions. In math there is one and only one correct set of answers to a problem. being broad or narrow doesn't have anything to do with anything.
AF

Thank you. That's very good point. Math was never my strong point, thats why I went in to film and not science.... haha.

So far, it seem thats BA are winning the day in popularity.

welcome to dakka

AbaddonFidelis wrote:welcome to dakka

It seems to be a good community... thats why I choose it over the other forums!

Well, I'd say personally that SW were best, due to their unique units and cool little items, but if you want to strike it down the middle, C:SM is probably the way to go. It'll also stop people whining that you're playing the "flavour of the month" army, which can get a little irritating after a while.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:Well, I'd say personally that SW were best, due to their unique units and cool little items, but if you want to strike it down the middle, C:SM is probably the way to go. It'll also stop people whining that you're playing the "flavour of the month" army, which can get a little irritating after a while.

I dont think I have ever heard anyone say that... maybe its just the circles I run in...? Haha.

But , are you saying C:SM are more middle of the road balanced?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I am quite surprised that no one has jumped in to defend the honor of the SW. At the GW store, there seemed to be a lot of that fervency. (shrug)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm quite surprised that no one has jumped in to defend the honor of the SW.

At the local GW the youngsters seemed to be more fervent about the SW than on here. Maybe its just here in NYC. Haha.

blood angels=insane, rampaging, troop choice, dreadnaughts!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!

Well, I play BA and Wolves... If you play hyper aggressive, the BA are probably your choice. Deep strike army works quite well for me... Or of course loads of fast Rhino hulls... I do think the Wolves are a bit stronger overall. Especially in objective games, the Wolves can take them and more importantly hold them better than the BA... 'course, just my opinion and experience as always...

Personal opinion, you should pick what fits your style best. I play both BA and SM. I refuse to ever touch SW, they are stupid. I suggest BA if you like fast and hard hitting, or SM if you like balance. They are all durable, so you got that goin for you no matter what you pick. I just absolutely refuse to play SW because I won't ever play anything when I can look at the codex, think for about 10 seconds and feel like I would be cheating. Maybe when I was ten, but I no longer enjoy the 00agent cheat modes anymore.

If you have any questions about anything let me know.

ofcBOOMstick wrote: Maybe when I was ten, but I no longer enjoy the 00agent cheat modes anymore.

You know, when you play BA and say that about another codex, I'm forced to question you.

ofcBOOMstick wrote: I refuse to ever touch SW, they are stupid.

seconded. thousand sons FTW!

thousand sons for the lose more like

AbaddonFidelis wrote:thousand sons for the lose more like

feh!

hope springs eternal eh?

My thought process is this:

Codex Marines are alright, no real specialties until you take a specific H.Q. and his Chapter Traits...they're all pretty flavorful but nothing amazing stands out.

Space Wolves: Can not only bring the pain with 15 Missile Launchers at 420 points but still have points for ridiculous goodies like Thunderwolves and the like. Not to mention one of the best troop choices that a Marine player could ask for. Well balanced and able to not only perform on the charge but also in the defense.

Blood Angels: They're like raging bulls...once they see red and are close enough they wreck face. One of the biggest problems I have found though is they have low staying power until you start tossing priests everywhere. When you do that, you drive up cost of the units and force yourself into a narrow niche that is hard to escape. Pound for pound, one of the BEST assault armies in 40K. After that though, not much else to offer over Codex Marines.

I personally prefer Space Wolves because of their all around ability as well as the individuality of the units...give me tons of choices before I get bored and new and inventive ways to punch people in the face or pelt them with missiles and lightning the next day.

Blood angels definitely need to win on the charge. If the opponent survives the initial charge the blood angels are just normal marines and not much of a threat in close combat.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:Blood angels definitely need to win on the charge. If the opponent survives the initial charge the blood angels are just normal marines and not much of a threat in close combat.

Probably why they have so many units/abilities to help them do it. Man, BA are crazy.

Indeed

Unholy_Martyr wrote:...give me tons of choices before I get bored and new and inventive ways to punch people in the face...

That made my girlfriend lol. Me too.

So, it seems like SW are 00agent cheats... and Blood Angels are fast and simple...

...I'm still on the fence. But I think I'm leaning towards BA. Though the "not hold ground" sound unappetizing. That sounds important.

From the Space Wolfers in the audience... is there some where in the codex I should be exploring to help me decide?

the strengths of the space wolf codex are your ability to spam krak missiles and your thunderwolves. thunderwolves are just super strong. fast killy tough. total package. grey hunters are ok but imo not the meat and potatoes of the army. as a csm player I'm used to having an army full of grey hunter equivalents and I just dont find them that impressive.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:the strengths of the space wolf codex are your ability to spam krak missiles and your thunderwolves. thunderwolves are just super strong. fast killy tough. total package. grey hunters are ok but imo not the meat and potatoes of the army. as a csm player I'm used to having an army full of grey hunter equivalents and I just dont find them that impressive.

I'll have to look in to that missile things.... must have missed that. But I do LOVE those thunderwolves...

yeah. its actually pretty absurd how many krak missiles you can pump out. I didnt see it either; someone else pointed it out to me. come to think of it I didnt think much of thunderwolves either when I first saw them. I was like "ok, crappy blood crushers." look how wrong you can be.

Unholy_Martyr wrote:My thought process is this:

Codex Marines are alright, no real specialties until you take a specific H.Q. and his Chapter Traits...they're all pretty flavorful but nothing amazing stands out.

Space Wolves: Can not only bring the pain with 15 Missile Launchers at 420 points but still have points for ridiculous goodies like Thunderwolves and the like. Not to mention one of the best troop choices that a Marine player could ask for. Well balanced and able to not only perform on the charge but also in the defense.

Blood Angels: They're like raging bulls...once they see red and are close enough they wreck face. One of the biggest problems I have found though is they have low staying power until you start tossing priests everywhere. When you do that, you drive up cost of the units and force yourself into a narrow niche that is hard to escape. Pound for pound, one of the BEST assault armies in 40K. After that though, not much else to offer over Codex Marines.

I personally prefer Space Wolves because of their all around ability as well as the individuality of the units...give me tons of choices before I get bored and new and inventive ways to punch people in the face or pelt them with missiles and lightning the next day.

That is why you shouldn't question me for playing BA, and proves my point from the mouth of the demon... aka Phil Kelly lovers.

I assume 15 missile launchers is referring too the long fang packs? Which is interesting... cheaper than Codex and larger in number than BA... is that really THAT special?

Now a whole SQUADE of 15 MS would be great! Haha... thats what I thought people were saying...

AbaddonFidelis wrote:the strengths of the space wolf codex are your ability to spam krak missiles and your thunderwolves. thunderwolves are just super strong. fast killy tough. total package. grey hunters are ok but imo not the meat and potatoes of the army. as a csm player I'm used to having an army full of grey hunter equivalents and I just dont find them that impressive.

LOLwut?

legomojo wrote:I assume 15 missile launchers is referring too the long fang packs? Which is interesting... cheaper than Codex and larger in number than BA... is that really THAT special?

Now a whole SQUADE of 15 MS would be great! Haha... thats what I thought people were saying...

well I dont know about 15. I'm not a wolf player but that sounds about right. you can get it from the long fangs, wolf guard and typhoon land speeders. there might be others I dont have the book in front of me....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seaward wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:the strengths of the space wolf codex are your ability to spam krak missiles and your thunderwolves. thunderwolves are just super strong. fast killy tough. total package. grey hunters are ok but imo not the meat and potatoes of the army. as a csm player I'm used to having an army full of grey hunter equivalents and I just dont find them that impressive.

LOLwut?

marines with a few extra attacks. woopy doo.

imo i'd rate them sw, sm, ba. wolves are nasty t-wolves and fangs are sweet. marines have cheaper support than ba but miss out on the assaulty punch mostly. ba fast mech is enticing ... fnp,fc, also great ... just find it lackluster.

i am biased though, played all 3 but only kept my salamanderS

fnp + fc + jump packs is what makes it work.
not having to use a transport at all is better than having a fast transport. jump pack guys cant get their ride shot out from under them bc they dont have one. and descent of angels, a truly awesome power, is free. so much goodness.

Well, my Long Fangs tend to get fielded with 2-3 heavy bolters and the rest missile launchers... I usually detail out a WG in Termi armor w/ cyclone and/or a Rune Priest with "Living Lightening" just to throw out more shots... The missiles are nice, but I see some horde type things here, and the HB's work out well for the 20 point guys...

With the Wolves, you have the best basic Infantry in the game. Some of the things like the "Wolf Cav" are stupidly overpowered (for now, I suspect the DE will be the scissors to their paper in the rock/paper/scissors game), but by and large, like regular Marines, but better... If you play a bit more aggressively I think, or at least that's how it works out for me and my ancient RT era Wolves...

pchappel wrote:Well, my Long Fangs tend to get fielded with 2-3 heavy bolters and the rest missile launchers... I usually detail out a WG in Termi armor w/ cyclone and/or a Rune Priest with "Living Lightening" just to throw out more shots... The missiles are nice, but I see some horde type things here, and the HB's work out well for the 20 point guys...

With the Wolves, you have the best basic Infantry in the game. Some of the things like the "Wolf Cav" are stupidly overpowered (for now, I suspect the DE will be the scissors to their paper in the rock/paper/scissors game), but by and large, like regular Marines, but better... If you play a bit more aggressively I think, or at least that's how it works out for me and my ancient RT era Wolves...

I'm not so sure... it seems the the BA have Assault Troops in their... troops... which seems extremely enticing. Where the Blood Claws seem... nice... but just like... missing the Jump packs.

And I'm a bit sad none of the SW troops can carry missile launchers... thats where I like em!

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

legomojo wrote:I assume 15 missile launchers is referring too the long fang packs? Which is interesting... cheaper than Codex and larger in number than BA... is that really THAT special?

Now a whole SQUADE of 15 MS would be great! Haha... thats what I thought people were saying...

well I dont know about 15. I'm not a wolf player but that sounds about right. you can get it from the long fangs, wolf guard and typhoon land speeders. there might be others I dont have the book in front of me....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seaward wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:the strengths of the space wolf codex are your ability to spam krak missiles and your thunderwolves. thunderwolves are just super strong. fast killy tough. total package. grey hunters are ok but imo not the meat and potatoes of the army. as a csm player I'm used to having an army full of grey hunter equivalents and I just dont find them that impressive.

LOLwut?

marines with a few extra attacks. woopy doo.

You mean the marines with counterattack, cheaper plasma weapons, access to a second weapon for free for a 10-man squad TSKNF and more up-to-date miniatures?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Unholy_Martyr wrote:
So, it seems like SW are 00agent cheats... and Blood Angels are fast and simple...

If anything, it's the opposite. Whereas SW can be nasty if used right, BA are just ridiculous. They are almost tailored towards being brutally hard to stop.

You mean the marines with counterattack, cheaper plasma weapons, access to a second weapon for free for a 10-man squad TSKNF and more up-to-date miniatures?

you have 1 more non-power weapon non-rending non-high strength non-anything-good normal attack per guy. you'll roll 10 more dice and maybe kill 1 more meq. so what.
you have the option to waste 15 points on a plasma pistol if you want to do it. who cares.
any squad can get another power or special weapon by attaching an IC.
space wolf players get too hyped up about their hunters. at the end of the day they're nothing but slightly-less-crappy tacticals.
AF

I play C:SM, along with the ability to play C:BA due to my huge amount of Assault troops I own.

I honestly like Codex SM a lot more. The lack of total cheese really means that people can't call you out for "Hopping on the Bandwagon". Furthermore,the Blood Angels have very limited limited ranged ability, aside from Devastators, it is hard to keep objectives unless you put it right out in the middle of the board. That leads it to sometimes be contested since your assaulting over there.

Codex Space Marine allows you to play a bit of everything, with their vast amount of special characters. You can make an Honor Guard focused one with Macaragge, a Bike army with Khan, a super fast scout/assault strike force with Shrike, to even a devastating tough army with Lysander! All of this makes for a very balanced army that can be deadly in any circumstance if you play it right.

Space Wolves just seem dumb to me, savage space marines that run around with huge canines and claws. It just doesn't appeal to me, but thats my opinion. I played a person with a space wolves army in a tournament, and it just isn't fun facing them. Again, this was all in my opinion.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:
space wolf players get too hyped up about their hunters. at the end of the day they're nothing but slightly-less-crappy tacticals.
AF

That, and also arguably the best Troops in the game. Certainly the best PA ones.

Incidentally, I'll always take killing one more guy than I would have otherwise over...well, not killing one more guy. That's just me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

legomojo wrote:
I'm not so sure... it seems the the BA have Assault Troops in their... troops... which seems extremely enticing. Where the Blood Claws seem... nice... but just like... missing the Jump packs.

And I'm a bit sad none of the SW troops can carry missile launchers... thats where I like em!

Assault Marines as troops is great - as long as you've got Sanguinary Priests to go with them. That's what gives Blood Angels their assault edge. Without those SPs, they're just normal Assault Marines, and normal Assault Marines are really only good for beating up on non-MEQs.

If you're looking for a pure assault army, Blood Angels are unequivocally the way to go. Blood Claws aren't what you should be looking at in the Space Wolf book. Throw fifteen of them in a Land Raider Crusader with a priest, and they'll do some damage, sure, but TWC are overall a better assault unit. Grey Hunters aren't slouches in CC, however; Counter Charge and their wargear give them the ability to at least hang with a lot of assault troops, and if you throw in a Standard and MotW, you're looking at some deceptively good close combat punch - which can also shoot just as well as standard Tacticals. That's what Space Wolves are, a close-range army that can hang in assault.

Either way you go on the issue, the guys who want to accuse you of hopping on the band wagon will have enough ammo to do so, so I wouldn't worry about that.

best troops in a game full of gakky troops. whatever. plague marines and berserkers are both better troop choices anyway.

Go BA, but please pick a successor chapter instead of regular BA.

:-) Should have mentioned I haven't actually used Blood Claws, the Hunters are just better for how I play it at least... I tend to use a 5 man pack fully loaded out with free flamer, plasma pistol, Mark of the Wolfen, Power fist/weapon in a Razorback (Usually TLAC or TLLC) and attach a Wolf Guard...

For my BA, the Assault Troops are nice, with the Priest, but they really don't supply the bulk of the hitting power in my FT army. The Vanguard Vets assaulting out of the deep strike, the DC Dreads with the Talons, etc...

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

legomojo wrote:I assume 15 missile launchers is referring too the long fang packs? Which is interesting... cheaper than Codex and larger in number than BA... is that really THAT special?

Now a whole SQUADE of 15 MS would be great! Haha... thats what I thought people were saying...

well I dont know about 15. I'm not a wolf player but that sounds about right. you can get it from the long fangs, wolf guard and typhoon land speeders. there might be others I dont have the book in front of me....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seaward wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:the strengths of the space wolf codex are your ability to spam krak missiles and your thunderwolves. thunderwolves are just super strong. fast killy tough. total package. grey hunters are ok but imo not the meat and potatoes of the army. as a csm player I'm used to having an army full of grey hunter equivalents and I just dont find them that impressive.

LOLwut?

marines with a few extra attacks. woopy doo.

Counterattack. ATSKNF. Grey hunters are not for assaulting. They are for shooting. I rapid fire you, you assault me, I countercharge. I can kit them out with a wolfguard to be better at assaults, flexibility.

What makes them one of the best is their cost effectivenss. But like you said, best troops when all other troops are gak. Then again I'm thankful we have one of the best troops.

Nifty tricks for Space Wolves:

1) Counter-Attack...already mentioned

2) Long Fangs can split fire...that's right, 1 unit of 5 Missile Launchers can target 2 units with their missiles.

3) Independent Characters that make most special characters cry at night...even Mephiston.

4) Stupid amounts of flexibility with wargear, vehicles, spam, non-spam...you name it we can pretty much play it.

5) Characterful units...we have units that when they die earn us kill points that have Feel No Pain and Eternal Warrior...and they start at 20 points.

I could go on...but that's just why I like them...not because they're super awesome and auto win...but because I have a creative mind which is stifled by the monotony by Codex Marines and I have an absolute disgust for extra pretty space vampires...

To stay on topic tho, BA are more OP than SW. They have the killiest, most maneuverable troops in the game (one of the best). Sanguinary priests and Unleash Rage/ Shield Libbies are force multipliers for ASMs.... Then theres the Sanguinor.

The problem with BA is that all their cool toys are costed higher to offset. Expect lower model counts. But their potency is EXTREMELY INCREDIBLE. BA is played as a deadly scalpel, make mistakes, you lose.

SW is all about brute force. Everything is so fething cheap, you can literally fill the board with units. This makes them easier to play, more forgiving. Perhaps why SW armies tend to dominate tournament scenes is bec of its forgiving nature.

The fact of the matter is you have to play an army that appeals to you, if you're a surgeon, play Blood Angles. If you're extra creative but don't like being trashed because you make a mistake, play Space Wolves. If you like a challenge and have a combination of the afoementioned skills than you should probably go with Codex marines as they are more of a challenge and can give you more of what you want.

Unholy_Martyr wrote:The fact of the matter is you have to play an army that appeals to you, if you're a surgeon, play Blood Angles. If you're extra creative but don't like being trashed because you make a mistake, play Space Wolves. If you like a challenge and have a combination of the afoementioned skills than you should probably go with Codex marines as they are more of a challenge and can give you more of what you want.

If you like being trashed because you make a mistake play Deathwing.

Like I said before, Codex Marines all the way. It gives you more possibilities than both SW and BA.

Shouldn't you go with the army you like the most?

I suggest Codex Space Marines because they have a bit of everything you would like... if you want more assault just use your models as BA, and use their Codex.

SW are quite OP in my opinion, but they are very cool nonetheless.

Dude just make up your mind already. Or do as space goats do. :=)

I find BA to be a lackluster codex that attempts to do too much with out actually excelling at doing anything really well. The alpha striking Dante list is pretty easily countered and I have yet to see it win a tournament. In fact I have yet to see BA place higher than 3rd in tournaments where I play. The top spot in the last 5 tournaments at my FLGS were

Space Wolves 3 times
Vanilla Marines once
Imperial Guard once

I think the strongest of the 3 codices in terms of putting boots on the ground and being versatile yet straight forward are the Space Wolves.

Of the three codices the most user friendly for a newer player, or new to MEQ, would be the Space Wolves followed by Codex Marines. The Blood Angels codex has a few too many intricacies in it to be truly "new user" friendly.

I wrote a short article on the subject of choosing an army to play that you can find here it touches on the three Marine codices.

Wait a second! I am pretty sure that Orks won your last RTT.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:
As for the VERY narrow point of view comment... what can I say... This game is based on math not opinions. In math there is one and only one correct set of answers to a problem. being broad or narrow doesn't have anything to do with anything.
AF

Correction. The game is based on probability. Whilst probability is a form of maths, it allows for multiple answers/results.
Being Broad or narrow has a lot to do with things when it comes to deciding from a wide choice of options.

Seaward wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:the strengths of the space wolf codex are your ability to spam krak missiles and your thunderwolves. thunderwolves are just super strong. fast killy tough. total package. grey hunters are ok but imo not the meat and potatoes of the army. as a csm player I'm used to having an army full of grey hunter equivalents and I just dont find them that impressive.

LOLwut?

I can't believe I'm saying, but I've gotta agree with Seaward.

Destrado wrote:Shouldn't you go with the army you like the most?

Thread/win.

As Destrado said, don't worry about which one is most competitive, go for the one you like the most. When it comes to competitiveness, an army is what you make it. Whilst some armies have a head-start due to rules, ultimately it's the general that matters.
You're going to be spending a lot of money and time and effort on this army so you should go for the one you like the most, each of them can be competitive and winnable, only one of them can be your favourite.
They are all MeQ, they are all 5th edition, so they can all manage in a competitive environment and are all along fairly similar lines. Ultimately I strongly believe you should go for the one you prefer.


Judging from your responses etc. I get the impression BA's is the army for you. They have the appearance, the in-your-face assault-style and plenty OTT enough for you to enjoy them (judging by your attraction to TWC) and on top of all this, there is a wide variety of builds you can go with and are a very, very competitive rulebook.

Just Dave wrote:
Correction. The game is based on probability. Whilst probability is a form of maths, it allows for multiple answers/results.
Being Broad or narrow has a lot to do with things when it comes to deciding from a wide choice of options.

Actually, not really. Probability dictates you take the option of getting the optimal choice that maximizes the probability of a certain event from happening. There is no multiple answer. If you have a choice between 40% chance and 45% chance of something happening, you take the one with a higher chance. Simple as that. Results, of course, will prove that in the long run the 45% chance option will yield... 45% chance.

He said answers, I said answers/results.

Basically, due to eliminating the mathematical element and it being probability, I still wrote answers (/results) to show the equivalent whilst maintaining there was no right/wrong answer, only probability. which can make no guarantees unless its 100%/1.0/1 over 1.

Darrian13 wrote:Wait a second! I am pretty sure that Orks won your last RTT.

AH! You're right (since it was you that one after all!) So for the last 6.

Orks once
IG once
Codex Marines once
Space Wolves 3 times

In that order from October back through May. Good catch Darrian.

Just Dave there's only one best way to optimize the results bc weapons have different attributes and costs.

How about you don't become a WAAC gamer and play Codex Marines. That way, you will learn how to win without cheese. Either that or play Space Wolves, because Space Wolves are the least 'pretty' of the three.

Just Dave wrote:
I can't believe I'm saying, but I've gotta agree with Seaward.

Wait, why is that a bad thing? 'Cause I was having fun in the thread about whether or not Space Wolves are intelligent?

Just Dave wrote:He said answers, I said answers/results.

Basically, due to eliminating the mathematical element and it being probability, I still wrote answers (/results) to show the equivalent whilst maintaining there was no right/wrong answer, only probability. which can make no guarantees unless its 100%/1.0/1 over 1.

Er, you can't eliminate the mathematical element because probability is using math. Say there's an SM scout squad with an ML and a tac squad with an ML. Both shoot at the enemy rhino. The tac squad missed, and the scout squad hit. Does that mean that the scout squad is more likely to hit the rhino, therefore you should pick it over the tac squad? Of course not. There's nothing subjective about it, and it won't change the fact that the tac squad has a higher percentage rate of hitting the target than the scout squad.

Probability uses math. If the game is based on probability, then the game is based on math. "Removing" the math element is like removing caffeine from coffee--sure you can drink it, but it removes the purpose of drinking coffee in the first place, thus not making any rational sense.

Yes, I hate decaf.

starsdawn wrote:

Just Dave wrote:He said answers, I said answers/results.

Basically, due to eliminating the mathematical element and it being probability, I still wrote answers (/results) to show the equivalent whilst maintaining there was no right/wrong answer, only probability. which can make no guarantees unless its 100%/1.0/1 over 1.

Er, you can't eliminate the mathematical element because probability is using math. Say there's an SM scout squad with an ML and a tac squad with an ML. Both shoot at the enemy rhino. The tac squad missed, and the scout squad hit. Does that mean that the scout squad is more likely to hit the rhino, therefore you should pick it over the tac squad? Of course not. There's nothing subjective about it, and it won't change the fact that the tac squad has a higher percentage rate of hitting the target than the scout squad.

Probability uses math. If the game is based on probability, then the game is based on math. "Removing" the math element is like removing caffeine from coffee--sure you can drink it, but it removes the purpose of drinking coffee in the first place, thus not making any rational sense.

Yes, I hate decaf.

I never really removed the math. I accepted in my post (stated below) that probability is a form of math. Although I admit, I over-generalised in the last post, the point remains that it is not so much a game of math, but more specifically a game of probability. and due to being probability, there is more than one "correct set of answers [or results] to a problem".
Hence, my original point remains, which you appear to have conveniently ignored...

Note: Some people do drink coffee for its taste rather than drug content.

Just Dave wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:
As for the VERY narrow point of view comment... what can I say... This game is based on math not opinions. In math there is one and only one correct set of answers to a problem. being broad or narrow doesn't have anything to do with anything.
AF

Correction. The game is based on probability. Whilst probability is a form of maths, it allows for multiple answers/results.
Being Broad or narrow has a lot to do with things when it comes to deciding from a wide choice of options.

Seaward wrote:

Just Dave wrote:
I can't believe I'm saying, but I've gotta agree with Seaward.

Wait, why is that a bad thing? 'Cause I was having fun in the thread about whether or not Space Wolves are intelligent?

Sarcasm mate. Although your unrelenting Space Wolf hate doesn't sit well with me to be honest. Even so, there was a thread about whether they're intelligent?


None-the-less, I'm stating this (below) again as I hate to drag the thread off topic and ultimately it is my advice to the OP rather than response to others comments.


As Destrado said, don't worry about which one is most competitive, go for the one you like the most. When it comes to competitiveness, an army is what you make it. Whilst some armies have a head-start due to rules, ultimately it's the general that matters.
You're going to be spending a lot of money and time and effort on this army so you should go for the one you like the most, each of them can be competitive and winnable, only one of them can be your favourite.
They are all MeQ, they are all 5th edition, so they can all manage in a competitive environment and are all along fairly similar lines. Ultimately I strongly believe you should go for the one you prefer.


Judging from your responses etc. I get the impression BA's is the army for you. They have the appearance, the in-your-face assault-style and plenty OTT enough for you to enjoy them (judging by your attraction to TWC) and on top of all this, there is a wide variety of builds you can go with and are a very, very competitive rulebook.

Destrado wrote:Shouldn't you go with the army you like the most?

Niiai wrote:Dude just make up your mind already. Or do as space goats do. :=)

JSK-Fox wrote:How about you don't become a WAAC gamer and play Codex Marines. That way, you will learn how to win without cheese. Either that or play Space Wolves, because Space Wolves are the least 'pretty' of the three.

True, I've come to fall in love with all three.... maybe I'll do all three! Haha. Probably not...

But this is eye opening about the game.

Also, extremely confusing.

I'm going to play a few more games with my skeleton crew of Marines...

...riding wolves or crazy assaults...

Both so tempting...

Just Dave wrote:
Sarcasm mate. Although your unrelenting Space Wolf hate doesn't sit well with me to be honest. Even so, there was a thread about whether they're intelligent?

Ha! It's strictly envy, believe me. If I could just find a way to like their fluff, I'd drop BA for SW in a heartbeat. Which I suppose is my answer to the OP's question.

And yes, there was an awfully epic thread about Space Wolf intelligence over in the Background forum.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

legomojo wrote:
True, I've come to fall in love with all three.... maybe I'll do all three! Haha. Probably not...

But this is eye opening about the game.

Also, extremely confusing.

I'm going to play a few more games with my skeleton crew of Marines...

...riding wolves or crazy assaults...

Both so tempting...

I feel your pain, believe me. It took me a very long time to settle on Blood Angels, and I still second-guess myself...oh, pretty much whenever I'm thinking about 40K. Like I just said, if I could bring myself to like SW fluff, I'd play Space Wolves, no question.

Seaward wrote:I feel your pain, believe me. It took me a very long time to settle on Blood Angels, and I still second-guess myself...oh, pretty much whenever I'm thinking about 40K. Like I just said, if I could bring myself to like SW fluff, I'd play Space Wolves, no question.

Though, I had a long trip from DC back to NYC (The Rally for Sanity), and I was seriously debating running both while using the same models that over lap in the two armies. Like... A Thunder Wolf Pack when I'm playing SW, and a ton of assault Troops for BA.... just as a random example...

I just figure it kinda works in to their fluff which I think I will write right now...

... does this upset anyone conceptually? I'm not a WAAC gamer... but I have just fallen so hard for both...

Just Dave wrote:
I never really removed the math. I accepted in my post (stated below) that probability is a form of math. Although I admit, I over-generalised in the last post, the point remains that it is not so much a game of math, but more specifically a game of probability. and due to being probability, there is more than one "correct set of answers [or results] to a problem".

Hence, my original point remains, which you appear to have conveniently ignored...

Your original point is, no offense, pointless. There is no "more than one" correct answer in math. None. And you did admit that probability is math. Math is objective. Therefore, probability is objective. I don't see why and how does that mean you can have multiple optimal choices. You can have multiple suboptimal choices, though.

You can't say "yeah, probability is a form of math" and say in another post "yeah, let's totally remove the math out of probability". Well, you can say it, but it makes you wrong. You also can't say "yeah, math is objective but probability isn't even if probability is a form of math." You see what I'm saying here? It's logically inconsistent.

Note: Some people do drink coffee for its taste rather than drug content.

Which ignores its original purpose, thus my coffee analogy is an apt description. Let's say you pick the scouts for their ML because they're "flavorful" or "fluffier" or whatever. You took a suboptimal choice for a ML platform because of taste, much like drinking coffee ignoring its original purpose (original purpose of the scouts here being to hit things with the ML). That is a simplified analogy but you get the idea.

I play my Space Wolves as Death Guard so it wouldn't bother me...I do it to kill boredom and because sometimes playing the good guys just gets old after a while...

I wouldn't mind.

Seaward wrote:

Just Dave wrote:
Sarcasm mate. Although your unrelenting Space Wolf hate doesn't sit well with me to be honest. Even so, there was a thread about whether they're intelligent?

Ha! It's strictly envy, believe me. If I could just find a way to like their fluff, I'd drop BA for SW in a heartbeat. Which I suppose is my answer to the OP's question.

And yes, there was an awfully epic thread about Space Wolf intelligence over in the Background forum.

Fair enough man, I won't complain. Ironically, for me it's the fluff that makes me love Space Wolves. Their rebellious, unconventional nature through which they still ultimately do the right thing and protect the people and innocent civilians. Each to their own of course and I can understand they are not for everyone, but for me they are heroes within an otherwise crappy imperium...

What I don't like is the TWC and the reputation Space Wolves have as being so easy to use/ a beat-stick. Hence I'm leaning away from using Space Wolf armies and either using a different army altogether or a very unconventional Space Wolf army...

I may have to look that thread up if I feel my sanity can take it...

starsdawn wrote:

Just Dave wrote:
I never really removed the math. I accepted in my post (stated below) that probability is a form of math. Although I admit, I over-generalised in the last post, the point remains that it is not so much a game of math, but more specifically a game of probability. and due to being probability, there is more than one "correct set of answers [or results] to a problem".

Hence, my original point remains, which you appear to have conveniently ignored...

Your original point is, no offense, pointless. There is no "more than one" correct answer in math. None. And you did admit that probability is math. Math is objective. Therefore, probability is objective. I don't see why and how does that mean you can have multiple optimal choices. You can have multiple suboptimal choices, though.

You can't say "yeah, probability is a form of math" and say in another post "yeah, let's totally remove the math out of probability". Well, you can say it, but it makes you wrong. You also can't say "yeah, math is objective but probability isn't even if probability is a form of math." You see what I'm saying here? It's logically inconsistent.

Note: Some people do drink coffee for its taste rather than drug content.

Which ignores its original purpose, thus my coffee analogy is an apt description. Let's say you pick the scouts for their ML because they're "flavorful" or "fluffier" or whatever. You took a suboptimal choice for a ML platform because of taste, much like drinking coffee ignoring its original purpose (original purpose of the scouts here being to hit things with the ML). That is a simplified analogy but you get the idea.

I can see what you are saying. However, It wasn't so much logically inconsistent but verbally or literally inconsistent. I typed it in an unsuitable way but my logic remained the same throughout. Abbadon Fidellis said that as maths, there is only one correct answer (or therefore result).
I said that the game isn't so much maths, but more specifically probability, which allows for multiple possible results. Compared to AF's idea of there only being one answer or result.

What AF is basically suggesting - and you seemingly agreeing with him - is that a game is basically decided before it's started because there's "only one correct answer".

My original point remains the same, although probability is a form of math, it allows for more than one answer/result, unlike what Fidellis said.

For example, what you both seem to be saying is that there is only one correct answer and therefore choice, that a Tactical Squad is out-right the only choice for a ML platform, compared to scouts. Whilst in most cases they are the superior ML platform, this isn't an automatically correct answer like you both suggest.
For whilst Tactical Marine have a better chance of hitting, they do cost significantly more than the scouts (170pts).
However, Scouts not only cost less (significantly), but are able to infiltrate/scout into a superior position so are able to threaten side/rear armour. Also, they can use Sgt. Telion to compensate for the low BS but potentially still cost less than the more expensive and [now] less likely to hit tactical marines.
So in this circumstance, your 170pts missile launcher platform has gone from being the superior choice and - as has been suggested by AF and yourself - therefore the only choice, to...
... being inferior when compared to the cheaper, superior positioned and more likely to hit Scout Squad with Sergeant Telion.

Hence, there is more than one potential answer/result and there isn't a definitely correct one in many cases.
Similarly, what would you say is a better anti-tank unit? A Predator Annihilator or 5 Combi-melta Sternguard in a drop pod?

The predator is cheaper and possesses higher-ranged and higher-strength anti-tank weaponry. However, it can be taken out in a single shot and will struggle against targets such as Land Raider.
Conversly, Combi-melta Sternguard are very unlikely to be taken out in one shot and with their melta-weaponry can reliably destroy almost any tank in the game. However they are short-ranged and more expensive.

In such a situation, there isn't a definably correct answer. Particularly if you factor in extraneous variables such as the composition of the rest of your army or the enemy force. Hence my original point remains. It isn't a game of maths where there is only one correct answer. It is a game of probability (yes I know probability is a form of maths), which you can be affected by many factors and leaves the door open for many possible consequences.


Note to OP, it is much easier to 'change' from using an army as Codex Marines to Blood Angels than it is to either of these to Space Wolves. Although they are all Space Marines, Space Wolves use much less Jump Packs, have your much-liked TWC and have a very distinctive image to them. Obviously 'count-as' will work, however for practicality sakes, it's easier to use Codex and Blood Angels than either of these and Space Wolves. YMMV of course...

You are talking about variations and context. Not probability.

If there was a special rule in every army which kills all Space marines, it doesn't change the fact that Space marines shoot better than scouts, even if it means getting scouts would be better in this context =P

There are enough professional accounting, engineering and science people in this hobby that if you go with the math doesn't mean anything argument your going to look foolish.

As far as what to go with I don't really think space marines are meant for CC as there only means of winning. Blood angels are sick right now with the amount of CC buffs they get but I think when all the armies get updated blood angles will be scene as overpriced vanilla marines as fast vehicles have the alot of the same problems (weak side armor, long range guns that don't get better close up) regular vanilla vehicles have BUT FASTER! They are by no means weak though just very focused on CC and I think space marines should be a little bit of everything.

I think space wolves embody this spirit the best with there options to get armor, solid troops, anti-everything, long rang/close range fire and some nasty CC all into several lists that work. For newer players I think they are the most friendly and have plenty of options for more advanced players. I personally hate their fluff.

This brings me to codex space marines. If you prefer a no frills approach to gaming or like to field a crap load of tanks codex SM is the way to go. SM lists require more thought than SW lists do since we have more dud codex entries but it is very manageable to make a solid all comers list with them that is completely strait forward/no surprises to anyone just rock hard. When people play me that don't complain about my special rules or my overpowered anything they just say holy crap that's a lot of tanks/bikes depending on what list im playing and try not to get blown off the table.

While I usually don't like giving the play whatever you like advice since some codex's are severely in need of an update you can really pick any of these three and do just fine and remember that power armor is power armor if you have a specific theme in mind just pick the rules you like best and convert/paint your army to be whatever chapter you like including chaos SM.

The post above makes my head hurt. And english isn't my primary language >.<

cromwest wrote:There are enough professional accounting, engineering and science people in this hobby that if you go with the math doesn't mean anything argument your going to look foolish.

As far as what to go with I don't really think space marines are meant for CC as there only means of winning. Blood angels are sick right now with the amount of CC buffs they get but I think when all the armies get updated blood angles will be scene as overpriced vanilla marines as fast vehicles have the alot of the same problems (weak side armor, long range guns that don't get better close up) regular vanilla vehicles have BUT FASTER! They are by no means weak though just very focused on CC and I think space marines should be a little bit of everything.

I think space wolves embody this spirit the best with there options to get armor, solid troops, anti-everything, long rang/close range fire and some nasty CC all into several lists that work. For newer players I think they are the most friendly and have plenty of options for more advanced players. I personally hate their fluff.

This brings me to codex space marines. If you prefer a no frills approach to gaming or like to field a crap load of tanks codex SM is the way to go. SM lists require more thought than SW lists do since we have more dud codex entries but it is very manageable to make a solid all comers list with them that is completely strait forward/no surprises to anyone just rock hard. When people play me that don't complain about my special rules or my overpowered anything they just say holy crap that's a lot of tanks/bikes depending on what list im playing and try not to get blown off the table.

While I usually don't like giving the play whatever you like advice since some codex's are severely in need of an update you can really pick any of these three and do just fine and remember that power armor is power armor if you have a specific theme in mind just pick the rules you like best and convert/paint your army to be whatever chapter you like including chaos SM.

Well, thank you. That is a good way to look at it... the poll results almost read that way too... haha.

Yuber wrote:You are talking about variations and context. Not probability.

If there was a special rule in every army which kills all Space marines, it doesn't change the fact that Space marines shoot better than scouts, even if it means getting scouts would be better in this context =P

Exactly. The quality of Scouts you, Just Dave, pointed out (points, ability to infiltrate and scout or use Telion) are not based on probability at all. I would've agreed if you have said "40k is more than just math" because it's also about generalship, controlling and tricking your opponent, making the right decisions on your army list to beat the current meta, knowing how to use your army inside and out, player experience, and in some tournament player politeness and painting skill, etc.

Probability is objective. In your Combi-Stern and Pred example, it would depend on the purpose you want them to fulfill. Wold you like it to pop medium tanks, or do you want to gank that monolith? Then it becomes more complicated so would you like it to pop medium tanks, do it in a distance, have a high survivability rate and do you have points to spare? Even if the question is complicated, you should choose the answer that will fulfill the role you had in mind (this is the reason why I specified that the objective of the Scouts here is to be an ML platform, to simplify the argument and to show what purpose they should be fulfilling). In the end, there will only be one optimal answer context-wise (context here being the composition of the rest of your army, the current meta and how much points do you have left). The answer will depend on the context, not on probability. There is only one correct answer based on the context.

I am not agreeing with AF. I am disagreeing with you saying that probability gives you a variety of choices. It doesn't.

The state of math in america is sad...but that's a whole 'nother topic.

Anyways, as anybody who has done engineering or taken higher level math, there is NOT only one right answer in math.

Starting from calculus onwards, math answers aren't so much a specific answer, but a set of solutions. Linear algebra goes into the idea of finding a "best fit" answer, because in real life things don't nicely fall into a predictable equation.

The thing about using dice in 40k is that unfortunately, the 6 sided die gives very predictable results. A lot of 40k strategy revolves around manipulating probability.

You typicallly see the same people winning over and over...that is not a result of someone getting "lucky".

That is an unfortunate reality of 40k...

Then again, in the irony of optimal, what was the point of me taking all this engineering math when I never use it in real life?

scuddman wrote:The state of math in america is sad...but that's a whole 'nother topic.

Anyways, as anybody who has done engineering or taken higher level math, there is NOT only one right answer in math.

Starting from calculus onwards, math answers aren't so much a specific answer, but a set of solutions. Linear algebra goes into the idea of finding a "best fit" answer, because in real life things don't nicely fall into a predictable equation.

The thing about using dice in 40k is that unfortunately, the 6 sided die gives very predictable results. A lot of 40k strategy revolves around manipulating probability.

You typicallly see the same people winning over and over...that is not a result of someone getting "lucky".

That is an unfortunate reality of 40k...

Then again, in the irony of optimal, what was the point of me taking all this engineering math when I never use it in real life?

Unfortunate reality of 40k? What? You want people winning due to luck? That's just sad.

scuddman wrote:The state of math in america is sad...but that's a whole 'nother topic.

Anyways, as anybody who has done engineering or taken higher level math, there is NOT only one right answer in math.

Starting from calculus onwards, math answers aren't so much a specific answer, but a set of solutions. Linear algebra goes into the idea of finding a "best fit" answer, because in real life things don't nicely fall into a predictable equation.

The thing about using dice in 40k is that unfortunately, the 6 sided die gives very predictable results. A lot of 40k strategy revolves around manipulating probability.

You typicallly see the same people winning over and over...that is not a result of someone getting "lucky".

That is an unfortunate reality of 40k...

Then again, in the irony of optimal, what was the point of me taking all this engineering math when I never use it in real life?

I specified one and only one set of solutions in my original post... as opposed to one and only one solution.
40k decisions are optimization problems. you dont pay 20 points for a gun that does the same job as a 10 point gun.
my point to whoever it was earlier on was just that its not about opinion. all the variables are knowable. the game is based on math. for every codex and every situation there is one and only one correct choice for the codex. the sum total of all the situations you are likely to encounter gives the parimeters of the optimization problem. I cant stand it when people say its all about what works for you. thats why I bring it up. its not about what works for you. its about the numbers. AF

It's not that I want people winning due to luck...my issue with it is that 40k uses 6 sided dice, which is relatively easy to hammer out. It is, in my opinion, sometimes too easy to figure out that one particular thing is better than all others...
That's the unfortunate reality..game is becoming more simplistic <- leads to quicker breakdown.

Because of the way 40k works (no turning restrictions, side attacks mean nothing, no facing etc.), the game breaks down quickly when people take WAAC army lists.

You play pure deathwing and you face mech guard...I don't care how good of a player the deathwing player is, if the IG player follows the checklist, he'll win.

And not just win..he'll win every time. Skill has nothing to do with it.

more or less yeah. the game is very heavily tilted in favor of the guard player. imo its a balance problem thats on gw's game development staff to fix. It has alot to do with the codex system too. I dont have to gimp my game because they cant be bothered to do thorough r&d though. that being said I think its good to bring underpowered lists against underpowered opponents.

*nods*

This isn't helping at all now... its even MORE confusing.

Er, what's wrong with a simple game? The game does not degenerate or break down because it is simple--it breaks down if it is poorly designed. Take the uber-classic example of chess: it's so simple you can teach it to a kid, yet it takes a lot of skill to master it. Last time I looked, chess never broke down. In fact, games with simple rules are easier to balance.

It also takes skill (or common sense, really) to choose your army list. In this case, it's lack of skill on the Deathwing player's part to, you know, choose a list that can win. You shouldn't bring a sword in a gunfight. I mean, you can, but more or less you'll die before you can kill anyone (there's an off-chance that you'll kill someone in close combat, but would you risk your life in that wee bit of chance?). In the same vein, you can take an underpowered list if you just want to have fun, but don't expect to win against optimized lists.

You limit "skill" with the decisions the player will have to make during battle, but the decisions made pre-battle are also important. In fact, it might be more important. It's not a coincidence Sun Tzu mentioned you should win a battle before fighting.


"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.

...Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory." -Sun Tzu

Would you call someone who brought an inferior weapon in a fight "skillful"?

Now, it's GW's responsibility if they want to make all kinds of lists balanced, but it's the player's responsibility (given he/she wants to win in a competitive environment) to bring a list that can win. A dead Chinese strategist demands it.

just pick the 1 you like best for fluff. all 3 are good. if you go with codex be sure to play a vulkan list. the others just arent that strong.

Well, in a normal video game like street fighter, I would agree with you. Your character can't hang? Next time you put a quarter in, you pick a different one.

However, a 40k army is a big time and money investment. You can't just suddenly pick another one after you've invested in an army.

Edit: Well, to be on topic, let me just say what I always say to people who ask me this question. Pick the army that suits your style and that you really like. That will mean more than anything else. Styles make players, and styles make matchups, much like in boxing or any combat sport. Know your army, know your style, and know your matchups (which means consequently you'll also know your tier rankings). Pick the army that suits your style.

scuddman wrote:Well, in a normal video game like street fighter, I would agree with you. Your character can't hang? Next time you put a quarter in, you pick a different one.

However, a 40k army is a big time and money investment. You can't just suddenly pick another one after you've invested in an army.

just use counts as. as long as the wargear is right people shouldnt complain.

scuddman wrote:Well, in a normal video game like street fighter, I would agree with you. Your character can't hang? Next time you put a quarter in, you pick a different one.

However, a 40k army is a big time and money investment. You can't just suddenly pick another one after you've invested in an army.

That is why you should do extensive research and planning before buying your minis if you want to win. As I have said, planning before the battle is much more important.

And I think that's lame..because if we all pick top tier, 40k will become like the video game MvC 2 where only 4 characters out of 50+ are picked.

On top of that, editions and armybooks change..and what was viable before might not be viable now. And I'm talking about viable...I'm not necessarily talking about competitive worthy.

But yes, you are right. There are certain...tendecies/phenomenon that reoccur that allow you to carefully pick a more powerful army.

ok.
I have a berserker army I'm playing as blood angels. blood angels are better than berserkers right now and I dont like getting my face smashed by space wolves etc, which I will if I play a codex with such a piss poor set of tools as chaos marines. on the other hand if Im playing someone who might not be as strong I just run berserkers + demons of khorne. I think its fair because its not abusive. I have a characterful army and it's well painted and I dont think my dedication to khorne should condemn me to constantly losing to guys who just happen to play better armies. Its on gw to fix this problem. I agree its not really the way the game is supposed to be played. but they force me to do it you know?

scuddman wrote:And I think that's lame..because if we all pick top tier, 40k will become like the video game MvC 2 where only 4 characters out of 50+ are picked.

On top of that, editions and armybooks change..and what was viable before might not be viable now. And I'm talking about viable...I'm not necessarily talking about competitive worthy.

But yes, you are right. There are certain...tendecies/phenomenon that reoccur that allow you to carefully pick a more powerful army.

It's still the same: top tier lists will dominate the top lists. Same way that in Magic: the Gathering, top deck lists will have a higher chance of making it to the top 8. In any competitive game, the same thing will happen: tactics that can be done before of after the battle that would increase your chances of winning would be reused and reused. And even if everybody knows what the top tier is, there will still be people who won't pick it for various reasons. There's nothing wrong with picking what you want if it's not your main objective to play to win, but if you are playing to win thinking that "it's lame that not everything is top tier so I'll just pick what I want" won't really help your position.

There is still out-of-the-box thinking, and sometimes it helps: sometimes people are unprepared for the unusual tactics you're using and it will throw them off-guard, but it will require a lot of playtesting and planning more than using your usual top tier tactics. For thinking out of the box works, you should know why is there a box in the first place.

Back to the OP:

All 3 armies have their different play styles and strong builds. I started with vanilla/codex SM then moved to a more assaualt oriented fast BA army. BA are good if you like having (for the most part) a small number, hard hitting, mobile, and resilient force. You have to be the aggressor with BA as it works well with their units (fast tanks, JP, FC and FNP) , as with generic marines, you can have different builds and different play styles by just selecting different special characters (i love pedro cantor mostly for the fluff + i love stern guard) but generic marines are more balanced to any stlye of play, although they usually favor shooty, tactical play.

... Can't tell you anything about SW though... Jaws of the great wolf thing.. kiss ma arse. ;p

scuddman wrote:And I think that's lame..because if we all pick top tier, 40k will become like the video game MvC 2 where only 4 characters out of 50+ are picked.

On top of that, editions and armybooks change..and what was viable before might not be viable now. And I'm talking about viable...I'm not necessarily talking about competitive worthy.

But yes, you are right. There are certain...tendecies/phenomenon that reoccur that allow you to carefully pick a more powerful army.

Every 5th ed codex that has come out so far has several builds that can be fielded and they haven't released a dud codex yet this edition so enough books have been released to where there is already alot of variety between good armies. I think GW has the codex building down pretty good as of late and expect that all the new codex's this edition will be more or less on par with each other. Also I just took 3rd in an 18 man 1750 Halloween tournament yesterday GO VANILLA! GO VANILLA! GO VANILLA! But yeah SW placed higher than me.

legomojo wrote:*nods*

This isn't helping at all now... its even MORE confusing.

Yeah, people are busy fellating themselves over how great their opinions on 40K are. I think your question's lost in the shuffle.

Seriously. If fluff's not a consideration, choose your playstyle. If you want assault, go Blood Angels. If you want balance and the most flexibility, go Vanilla. If you want to win because Space Wolf players apparently had compromising pictures of the guy writing their codex, go Space Wolves.

if only I could fellate myself.....

I love every time i check in to the forum, the poll is almost exactly the same percentage, just with more votes.

It's very telling.

I guess you just have to decide who you believe....

So, I tended to over look specials in my decisions... how important would you say that is?

Because right now, its jut Jump Packs v. Thunderwolves. But people keep mentioning specials...

... maybe I should have, but I just never gave them much thought.

special characters?

Yes, in my brain wrote the word characters, lol.

ummmmm..... well thats kind of a tough question to answer. If you look at hq choices over all space wolves are definitely stronger because so much of their codex is geared towards the hq section. the special characters of both armies are pretty killy but overpriced. Space wolves are stronger here too though because the best blood angels special character - mephiston - has no invulnerable save and cant join a squad, so he's pretty vulnerable to power weapons and shooting. space wolf special characters have invulnerable saves to protect them and can join squads so theyt're much more survivable. for the same point costs more or less its hard to beat. the sanguinor is strong but just stupid expensive. the crazy vampire chaplain guy is good too but again too expensive. ragnar logan and njal have point costs issues too so really its just about basic hq choices. for blood angels librarians are the only strong hq choice because they are cheap, decent fighters, and can get really good psychic powers. space wolf characters have access to better wargear and the sagas help too. in general though you dont want to play special characters from either army.

Space Wolf HQ units are pretty insane, and all-around great. Of course, the most expensive BA HQ will rip a Thunderlord's arm off and beat him to death with it, but he has his own issues.

You can actually make "vanilla" Wolf Lords with the SW codex that are good. The same cannot be said about BA Captains. With BA, you're either using 1-2 Librarians or a Special Character (and possibly a Librarian).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:in general though you dont want to play special characters from either army.

And that's just blatantly wrong.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:ummmmm..... well thats kind of a tough question to answer. If you look at hq choices over all space wolves are definitely stronger because so much of their codex is geared towards the hq section. the special characters of both armies are pretty killy but overpriced. Space wolves are stronger here too though because the best blood angels special character - mephiston - has no invulnerable save and cant join a squad, so he's pretty vulnerable to power weapons and shooting. space wolf special characters have invulnerable saves to protect them and can join squads so theyt're much more survivable. for the same point costs more or less its hard to beat. the sanguinor is strong but just stupid expensive. the crazy vampire chaplain guy is good too but again too expensive. ragnar logan and njal have point costs issues too so really its just about basic hq choices. for blood angels librarians are the only strong hq choice because they are cheap, decent fighters, and can get really good psychic powers. space wolf characters have access to better wargear and the sagas help too. in general though you dont want to play special characters from either army.

Well, I was also curious about the Vanilla Marines. I had over looked them due to my DIY status, but I have since realized that If I use an appropriate modle.... I can say they are who ever I want them to be... correct?

dont agree with that. you can make a wolf lord that will kick the crap out of mephiston and he'll end up costing less too.

Seconded

AbaddonFidelis wrote:dont agree with that. you can make a wolf lord that will kick the crap out of mephiston and he'll end up costing less too.

I wasn't talking about Mephiston. He's not the most expensive BA HQ.

yeah. as long as the wargear is modelled right and you explain everything clearly beforehand. vanilla marines unquestionably have the best special characters. BA and SW characters are just close combat fighters. Codex characters give the whole army benefits. vulkan in particular is stronger than anyspecial character out of either book. lysander is also an uber-strong close combat fighter. I'd take him over mephiston or logan any day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
sanguinor is good but for what he costs he ought to be.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:
sanguinor is good but for what he costs he ought to be.

+1A bubble, turns a Sergeant into a mini Captain, and will beat the snot out of any IC you throw him at, not to mention being a very good heavy infantry mulcher.

All for the price of the average tooled-out Thunderlord.

yeah but the thunderlord can join a squad. you can just shoot the sanguinor.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:yeah but the thunderlord can join a squad. you can just shoot the sanguinor.

Oh... I never realized her can't join a squad... he's just.... near them? I guess...

the problem with the 2 strongest blood angel special characters is that they arent characters at all. theyre infantry squads of 1. they cant hide in squads you can always shoot them. since they're really deadly in close combat of course people will do their best to blow them away before it comes to that, so it takes a good deal of skill to use these guys correctly. its a real handicap and imo is not made up for by their abilities, which are available in one form or another to space wolf and codex players without resorting to a 250+ point special character who can get blown away by any jack ass with a plasmagun.

legomojo wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:yeah but the thunderlord can join a squad. you can just shoot the sanguinor.

Oh... I never realized her can't join a squad... he's just.... near them? I guess...

Nope, they're not ICs.

It's not as bad as it sounds, though; the Sanguinor rolls around with a 2+ armor save and a 3+ invulnerable, and if you're keeping him near units to give them +1A, you're probably getting Feel No Pain from a Sanguinary Priest - in which case, it would statistically take six full Tactical Squads shooting at him to kill him. And, contrary to what was said above, plasma's not the easy answer to him that it is to Meph. Also factor in that the Sanguinor actually does have a Jump Pack, so he can be part of a DoA force, and you should only look at one round of shooting before he's safe in combat.

All depends on what you want out of your HQs. Throw a Thunderlord at most things and he'll eventually kill them; throw Sanguinor at a Thunderlord and he'll eventually kill it, while considerably buffing other elements of your list.

Mephiston is a pure beatstick. He'll kill things, without question, and at T6 and an ungodly amount of wounds, it takes dedicated armor-ignoring fire to bring him down. There's a reason he gets used, after all.

Ultimately, I think Space Wolves is the stronger codex, arguably the best currently in the game. It's remarkably easy to play, and even their "bad" choices aren't crippling. Blood Angels are more of a high wire act.

Seaward wrote: Ultimately, I think Space Wolves is the stronger codex, arguably the best currently in the game. It's remarkably easy to play, and even their "bad" choices aren't crippling. Blood Angels are more of a high wire act.

OOoo... you peaked my interest... what are their "bad choices"

legomojo wrote:

Seaward wrote: Ultimately, I think Space Wolves is the stronger codex, arguably the best currently in the game. It's remarkably easy to play, and even their "bad" choices aren't crippling. Blood Angels are more of a high wire act.

OOoo... you peaked my interest... what are their "bad choices"

Skyclaws and bikers spring to mind. That's really all I can think of without the codex right in front of me, other than some of their SCs.

Yes space wolves are stronger for hq purposes. I prefer blood angels all around. Don't have enough experience with wolves to def say one is better than the other but they're Both strong. Blood angels will probably be easier to model though since there's no thunder wolf model.

Again though OP, what are you interested in? Does fluff play a role at all?

I love the Space Wolf army list. The models are awesome. I don't use either simply because I don't like the fluff. If that's not a consideration for you, then Space Wolves are a very good choice. They're not pure assault, but "pure assault" isn't always necessarily a good thing anyway.

Seriously you can pick any 5th edition dex and be fine tactics wise. There is also nothing stopping you from painting your space marines some off color and playing with what ever dex you feel like at a given moment as long as its WYSIWYG. Buying multiple codex's at a minimum lets you see how other armies work which never hurts and you'll always have the option to use it later. Space marines are really flexible like that.

Wow polls split. Nice!

I played Ultra Smurfs and sadly I could not win to save my life, lol. Space Marines, in my opinion, are the only army (vanilla marines) that anyone can have a backup list to take you out. With so many armies loaded with lascannons/lance weapons now I can't justify bringing half the SM Armor to the table.

I haven't experienced SW yet so I voted for BA since my friend is playing them. We teamed up for a few 2v2 games (BA and CD) and were pretty successful.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:Yes space wolves are stronger for hq purposes. I prefer blood angels all around. Don't have enough experience with wolves to def say one is better than the other but they're Both strong. Blood angels will probably be easier to model though since there's no thunder wolf model.

Modeling the wolves is like... the only I WANT to model them Haha.

http://www.mrdandy.com/wargamma-battle-wolves/
http://mythicast.com/?page_id=4#ecwid:category=0&mode=product&product=1220553

Seaward wrote:Again though OP, what are you interested in? Does fluff play a role at all?

No, not really, its all about rules, fun/easy to play, looking cool in white. I have my own fluff in mind.

At my old house in PA (I live in Manhattan now) I have a lot of models that I just got because I thought they were cool (I was like 12)... so my army is kind of a hodge podge... http://gallery.me.com/mallica714#100051

...My dad sent me all the un assembled ones from days of yore (2 tacticals, 1 assault, some termies
, a lib in term, 2 land speeders, and and handful of characters)

Now I'm 23 and I have time and money to begin a new (less barney colored) Chapter.

I LOVE my assault marines... so BA seemed like a great choice. But... I mean... SW looks awesome and WOLVES... riding them... thats so cool! BUT.... now I have read the rules for Vulcan... and I love Thunder Hammers and the firey weapons....

...so I'm just stuck on the fence... and soooo is this poll!

BUT... all this arguing is VERY very insightful. And I appreciate it unendingly.

Then you can do one of two things.

You can, for one, simply pick a codex to go with and run with it...

Or you can pick a codex for now, and simply make sure that (at least most) of what you model would meet WYSIWYG requirements for the other codices. That way, if you went for, say, Blood Angels, and when in five or six more releases Blood Angels have lost a lot of their relative power - as I'm absolutely convinced they will - you can switch over to the Space Wolves. Or vice versa, though I don't see the SW codex becoming underpowered until the next edition.

Wow. Arguing civilly to have new insights and dissect the topic = fellating yourself.

Just... wow.

starsdawn wrote:Wow. Arguing civilly to have new insights and dissect the topic = fellating yourself.

Just... wow.

Whatever even though it seem partially directed at me it was still pretty funny. Personally I think its awesome the polls are so close now that the three books have been out for awhile space marine lovers can't seem to choose between them. This is a good sign of things to come for future codex releases.

cromwest wrote:Whatever even though it seem partially directed at me it was still pretty funny. Personally I think its awesome the polls are so close now that the three books have been out for awhile space marine lovers can't seem to choose between them. This is a good sign of things to come for future codex releases.

Yes, it speaks highly of my potential choices as well. The joy it brings is only equaled by it's frustration. Haha.

legomojo wrote:
Yes, it speaks highly of my potential choices as well. The joy it brings is only equaled by it's frustration. Haha.

I hate you, by the way. You have me, ONCE AGAIN, questioning my choice to go BA over SW.

the easy answer here is that you don't have to choose really. If you play a DIY chapter, you can field them using any of the three rules sets in question.

I have a friend who has a huge Black Templar army - is just so happens to include "thundercav" and "Dorn Pattern Predators" which happen to be armed with flamestorm cannons etc etc.

Remember, at the end of the day, all these guys are marines - whether he's a devastator that suffers from Red Thrist or a Long Fang or a Devastator that has Combat Tactics it doesn't really matter.

I would say pick Codex Marines first, build up a decent force of stuff that can be used in all the codeci, then start branching off into unique units.

Actually a Devastator Marine with the Red Thirst has to be treated very differently from a Devastator Marine with Combat Tactics: They cost less because they're worth less.

Seaward wrote:

legomojo wrote:
Yes, it speaks highly of my potential choices as well. The joy it brings is only equaled by it's frustration. Haha.

I hate you, by the way. You have me, ONCE AGAIN, questioning my choice to go BA over SW.

I'm sorry buddy! Maybe you can do like me, and probably just play both... haha. Get some very wolves and paint em you color scheme.

legomojo wrote:

Seaward wrote:

legomojo wrote:
Yes, it speaks highly of my potential choices as well. The joy it brings is only equaled by it's frustration. Haha.

I hate you, by the way. You have me, ONCE AGAIN, questioning my choice to go BA over SW.

I'm sorry buddy! Maybe you can do like me, and probably just play both... haha. Get some very wolves and paint em you color scheme.

You can always go the Goatboy route...

OverwatchCNC wrote:

legomojo wrote:

Seaward wrote:

legomojo wrote:
Yes, it speaks highly of my potential choices as well. The joy it brings is only equaled by it's frustration. Haha.

I hate you, by the way. You have me, ONCE AGAIN, questioning my choice to go BA over SW.

I'm sorry buddy! Maybe you can do like me, and probably just play both... haha. Get some very wolves and paint em you color scheme.

You can always go the Goatboy route...

What that?

Nurglitch wrote:Actually a Devastator Marine with the Red Thirst has to be treated very differently from a Devastator Marine with Combat Tactics: They cost less because they're worth less.

I know man, but I'm saying that physically - it's still a marine model with a missile launcher. Buy all three codeci, pick up some standard models present in all three lists (bolter marines, special marines, devastator marines, razorbacks/rhinos, land speeders etc.) and then once the OP has a good core, pick up some of the more specialized stuff (TWC, Baals, Sang Guard, etc...)

Regular marines all the way.. I've played Codex Marines for 2 years now and they have always served me best, i've played against 3 Blood Angels players and have always came out ontop because of the amount of firepower i give out. thats right 3 Sternguard squads filled with all combi weapons just obliterate BA assault squads even with feel no pain.. As for wolves their just too overpriced.. I mean really i'll take 4 Lascannons with a signum over 5 Missile launchers anyday.. My view is Codex Marine, Space Wolf, then if you just really want to.. Blood Angels

I have to admit, that's the first time I've seen someone label Space Wolves as overpriced.

Sgt_Scruffy:

It doesn't work terribly well. Codex: Space Marine and Codex: Chaos Space Marine are more compatible in terms of using a different army list for the same models, than Codex: Space Wolves, and Codex: Blood Angels.

I used to have an army that synch'd up nearly perfectly between lists, the old White Dwarf Blood Angels, and Codex: Chaos Space Marines, and that was when I made compromises like using Possessed for Death Company, Furioso for Chaos Dreadought with Extra Close Combat Weapon (The Melta Gun as a Twin-Linked Bolter), and so on.

Eventually this army underwait mitosis into Loyalist Beakies and Renegade Bunny Ears, and frankly I'm enjoying having them tailored to the resources and advantages of their respective Codexes.

I cant believe codex is winning the poll. you codex guys are just plain wrong. space wolves and blood angels are both a lot stronger. codex has a few awesome things. the rest is just blah. compare that to books like space wolves are blood angels where there's an awesome thing on every page and.... I dont know. I dont get it.

I love codex space marines and do very well with them but I will be the first to admit that codex SM is filled with a lot of crap units and is more limited than codex: SW. I do feel when all the codex's come out though blood angles will be worse off than vanilla SM. They are pretty scary now but even with FNP and decent of angles i think when more serious CC armies get updated blood angles power level will slide while codex marines will still be able to rely on some pretty nasty mech builds while BA has to pay a lot more than I think is reasonable for "fast" mech. Unfortunately my beloved biker marines will probably suffer along with jump pack BA when other CC armies get their 5th ed codex's.

true. good points.




unrelated
I dont understand all the hate for counts as armies. I mean its natural when gw releases 3 power armor codices in a year right? and when all the best codices were written within the last 18 months. If I loyally stick to codex: chaos marines and get my face beaten in by newer and snazzier space marine books, can anyone really blame me for switching out my rule set? I dont play to lose after all, and its disruptive to play balance when gw writes crap codices like chaos or dark angels early on and then decides to write awesome codices like blood angels and space wolves later. I'll stop using counts as rules when gw stops putting me in a situation where I have to do it to stay competitive.

ok rant over.

I think there's a lot more going for Vanilla chapters than just going with Wolves or BA. I think it has more with what people play with than exactly what seems better on paper.

Riddick40k wrote:Regular marines all the way.. I've played Codex Marines for 2 years now and they have always served me best, i've played against 3 Blood Angels players and have always came out ontop because of the amount of firepower i give out. thats right 3 Sternguard squads filled with all combi weapons just obliterate BA assault squads even with feel no pain.. As for wolves their just too overpriced.. I mean really i'll take 4 Lascannons with a signum over 5 Missile launchers anyday.. My view is Codex Marine, Space Wolf, then if you just really want to.. Blood Angels

What in the world is overpriced about wolves? Almost everything in the codex seems either fairly or aggressively costed to me. The only exception I can think of is Wolf Guard with shiny toys, but that's a specific load out of a specific unit. Even the "Claw" units which I love to hate on suffer more from having an awkward place in the army than not being worth the points.

Taking your example. 5 Lascannons in a Long Fangs squad is 15 points less than 4 in Dev Squad, plus you can split fire which is a better bonus than 1 shot at BS5.

Riddick40k wrote:Regular marines all the way.. I've played Codex Marines for 2 years now and they have always served me best, i've played against 3 Blood Angels players and have always came out ontop because of the amount of firepower i give out. thats right 3 Sternguard squads filled with all combi weapons just obliterate BA assault squads even with feel no pain.. As for wolves their just too overpriced.. I mean really i'll take 4 Lascannons with a signum over 5 Missile launchers anyday.. My view is Codex Marine, Space Wolf, then if you just really want to.. Blood Angels

Can you pass me that stuff you are smoking? seems funky =)

codex tacticals arent furious, dont get feel no pain, have crappy weapon options, and cost the same as blood angel assault marines. if you take a 350 point stern guard squad, melt a 250 point blood angels squad, and then get wiped by the squad right behind it, how is it that you're coming out on top? sorry, blood angels are stronger.

Wow, looks like BA, who were winning in the beginning, are loosing out to SW and Codex.

yeah. bizarre.

Well, I'd figure it's because regular Codex Marines always have their strengths over the others. Right now it, yes, Blood Angels are probably stronger. Will the power creep be the same in a year or two, when 6th edition comes around?
Wasn't Carnifex spam one of the most effective builds of the previous tyranid codex? Look where it is now... in the gaming graveyard.

Besides, the latest Blood Angel codex is simply slowed. Even more than the Thunderwolves and the Wolf Claws... but at least they didn't go the Vampire route all the way, and added some wings and angelic themes instead.

yes. they seem to be suffering from an identity crisis. artificer-vampire-angel-genetic supermen. come on guys. pick one.

Destrado wrote:Well, I'd figure it's because regular Codex Marines always have their strengths over the others. Right now it, yes, Blood Angels are probably stronger. Will the power creep be the same in a year or two, when 6th edition comes around?
Wasn't Carnifex spam one of the most effective builds of the previous tyranid codex? Look where it is now... in the gaming graveyard.

Besides, the latest Blood Angel codex is simply slowed. Even more than the Thunderwolves and the Wolf Claws... but at least they didn't go the Vampire route all the way, and added some wings and angelic themes instead.

My one concern with BA is that I suspect they're likely to not maintain their relative power even before 6th edition hits - except for Razorspam lists, which are...not particularly Blood Angelic. Or fun.

I think they'll hold their power for a while. some things... like scoring assault troopers with jump packs or descent of angels... will always be good.

It all depends on what sort of army youre looking to build and what tactic youre building it around. If you wanna lay down devastating firepower, Id take SW. SW assault units are great, but the BA still take the cake when it comes to killing in CC. SM is pretty much Ultramarines with the ability to make Salamanders, Crimson Fists, etc. But they are essentially one trick armies allowing you to exchange Combat Tactics for Twin Linked Flamers, Meltas or Fleet for your whole army. I play BA and SW and id go with BA. I actually regret buying SW because that money could have gone to fuel my BA warmachine.

SanguinaryGuard wrote:It all depends on what sort of army youre looking to build and what tactic youre building it around. If you wanna lay down devastating firepower, Id take SW. SW assault units are great, but the BA still take the cake when it comes to killing in CC. SM is pretty much Ultramarines with the ability to make Salamanders, Crimson Fists, etc. But they are essentially one trick armies allowing you to exchange Combat Tactics for Twin Linked Flamers, Meltas or Fleet for your whole army. I play BA and SW and id go with BA. I actually regret buying SW because that money could have gone to fuel my BA warmachine.

What would you specifically regret about SW?

I find thunderwolfs cavalry sweet.

Pick Codex marines, because Blood Angels versus Space Wolves is 40k's version of Team Edward versus Team Jacob. It's vampires versus werewolves all over again, and you don't want to be a part of all that claptrap.



But seriously, I play codex marines for flavor, customization and well, I don't like vampires or werewolves. In short: I choose them knowing full well that they're underpowered than BA or SW. At least not by a lot, so you can still pull some wins. Count on the Alapin move.

starsdawn wrote:Pick Codex marines, because Blood Angels versus Space Wolves is 40k's version of Team Edward versus Team Jacob. It's vampires versus werewolves all over again, and you don't want to be a part of all that claptrap.



But seriously, I play codex marines for flavor, customization and well, I don't like vampires or werewolves. In short: I choose them knowing full well that they're underpowered than BA or SW. At least not by a lot, so you can still pull some wins. Count on the Alapin move.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I agree 100000000000000000000000000%!!!!

I hate BA and I hate wolves play the good old normal space marines

every time you hear people talk about the other two the first thing they point to is like 1-3 models they are real good as if they don't use the army all together they just HAVE to point out that special unit thats good in CC and why its the most powerful thing they worship all day.

I wouldnt get too hung up on the fluff if I were you all. Its not the fluff - its the rules content - that matters. If you want to handicap your game so no one will laugh at you.... hey.... go for it.

starsdawn wrote:
In short: I choose them knowing full well that they're underpowered than BA or SW. At least not by a lot, so you can still pull some wins. Count on the Alapin move.

Pull some wins!?! Underpowered!?! Speak for your self buddy because no one who plays me thinks codex marines are underpowered. At best BA and SW took the solid SM core and built on it and in some cases tweaked the points values of certain units while adding/subtracting abilities. When you strip all that extra stuff away your still left with a really solid core ready to lay some smack down.

GamzaTheChaos wrote:

starsdawn wrote:Pick Codex marines, because Blood Angels versus Space Wolves is 40k's version of Team Edward versus Team Jacob. It's vampires versus werewolves all over again, and you don't want to be a part of all that claptrap.

But seriously, I play codex marines for flavor, customization and well, I don't like vampires or werewolves. In short: I choose them knowing full well that they're underpowered than BA or SW. At least not by a lot, so you can still pull some wins. Count on the Alapin move.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I agree 100000000000000000000000000%!!!!

I hate BA and I hate wolves play the good old normal space marines

every time you hear people talk about the other two the first thing they point to is like 1-3 models they are real good as if they don't use the army all together they just HAVE to point out that special unit thats good in CC and why its the most powerful thing they worship all day.

Well, I'm sure you've seriously read twilight with a critical eye and thus have a legitimate reason to think so little of it. Well, that or at least have taken in some if the serious literally criticisms on the issues the stories have, after all time is precious and you don't always have time to do it yourself. I'm also positive you have perfectly reasonable and rational reasons why physical affection between men is something of little enough value, that it is amusing to mock through lazily modified images. I'm also sure you've got a very convincing line of reasoning on how both those things not only draw relevant parallels to two factions in a miniatures, but how those parallels form a legitimate criticism of said factions.

I'm sure of all that because otherwise trying to make those comparison in that fashion would be very immature and more then a little bit crude, and I'm positive nobody would around here would do that. Certainly, nobody around here would be silly enough to be crude and immature just to jump on an internet bandwagon on an issue they've never actually considered. We're better than that around here!

Surely.

More man-lovin' please...

indeed

cromwest wrote:

starsdawn wrote:
In short: I choose them knowing full well that they're underpowered than BA or SW. At least not by a lot, so you can still pull some wins. Count on the Alapin move.

Pull some wins!?! Underpowered!?! Speak for your self buddy because no one who plays me thinks codex marines are underpowered. At best BA and SW took the solid SM core and built on it and in some cases tweaked the points values of certain units while adding/subtracting abilities. When you strip all that extra stuff away your still left with a really solid core ready to lay some smack down.

Wrong. SW and BA plays extremely differently. Codex are underpowered compared to SW and BA. Not the entire game.

Then again, I dont expect you to know since you probably didnt play SW or BA. So speak for YOURSELF.

Chongara wrote:Well, I'm sure you've seriously read twilight with a critical eye and thus have a legitimate reason to think so little of it. Well, that or at least have taken in some if the serious literally criticisms on the issues the stories have, after all time is precious and you don't always have time to do it yourself. I'm also positive you have perfectly reasonable and rational reasons why physical affection between men is something of little enough value, that it is amusing to mock through lazily modified images. I'm also sure you've got a very convincing line of reasoning on how both those things not only draw relevant parallels to two factions in a miniatures, but how those parallels form a legitimate criticism of said factions.

I'm sure of all that because otherwise trying to make those comparison in that fashion would be very immature and more then a little bit crude, and I'm positive nobody would around here would do that. Certainly, nobody around here would be silly enough to be crude and immature just to jump on an internet bandwagon on an issue they've never actually considered. We're better than that around here!

Surely.

OMG WE SHOULD TAKE THESE THINGS REALLY SERIOUSLY WE CAN'T JOKE ABOUT THEM.

Because we can't joke about stuff because you know, it's funny. Surely. Because making jokes are immature at best, right? That's why my grandpa always makes them, to feel his youth coming back to him!

Look at what I've said after the joke (hint: it's at the bottom of the message). I mainly stay away from BA and SW because I want to make my own chapter and I don't like it written out for me. I like to use my own colors and I don't want stupid people to say "BUT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE RED/BLUE". Also, hint: jokes are not to be taken seriously. Also, hint: you just ruined the joke by taking it seriously, therefore.... well, I was going to make a joke out of it but since I fear you would take it seriously again and leave you offended and broken-hearted, I think not.

And yes, I've read the first book (not seriously, because who can take a sparkling vampire seriously?). It's guilty pleasure at best, and overglorified fanfic-level writing at worst. As a matter of fact, I've read better written fanfics. I also approve of gay marriage, and joking about something =/= thinking little of it. I don't know where you live, but where I live we can joke about anything. And as far as I know the rest of the world treats it all the same. Where do you live? Mars?

C'mon, we are grown adults playing with toys. That's a whole lot of room for joking. Can't we joke about things we love? Can't we joke about things we don't love? Are Nazis only allowed to make Jew jokes? Is the sky purple? Is Napoleon still alive? Whatever happened to Amelia Earhart? Who holds the stars up in the sky? Is true love just once in a lifetime? Did the captain of Titanic cryyyyyyy~

I think it's more immature that you can't take a joke that's in context with what we're discussing. You know, a joke that's not supposed to be taken seriously, right? Do I need to insert an icon for the canned applause?

You need this:


PS:I've marked the jokes in red, just in case you missed them.

PPS: The Care Bear should be Red too.

cromwest wrote:Pull some wins!?! Underpowered!?! Speak for your self buddy because no one who plays me thinks codex marines are underpowered. At best BA and SW took the solid SM core and built on it and in some cases tweaked the points values of certain units while adding/subtracting abilities. When you strip all that extra stuff away your still left with a really solid core ready to lay some smack down.

Hey, it's a bit harder to pull off a win in chess when you're black, since white has the first turn advantage, thus it dictates the game. Does that mean you can't win when you're on the black side? No. Does that mean black is stronger than white? No.

Winning with something doesn't mean it's the best there is. Maybe you're just good, or maybe everyone you played with sucks. Lot of things that affect a win, not just your list.

Actually, while White can attack better, Black has the advantage of seeing the first move, and so has an advantage defending.

i voted space wolves, but then I play space wolves so would have to.

some reasons i like space wolves:

I love the models, they are great fun to paint.

iin game they are great. as well as being able to hold there own in close combat and on the offenisve they are also great defenders. Its very seldom they loose I nearly awlays get at least a draw.

The grey hunters (there standard troops) are great. They take some some beating when holding an objective. last game i played i drop a squad of ten of them into the middile of a 4000 point tau and chaos marine army and they serviced a hole round of being shot at them with no casualties. The game before that i made some bad moves and lost my whole army except for two grey hunters and yet that was enough to keep the game a draw. so yeah love them.

its a very versatile army, you can make loads of different stlyes. for example an all terminator army no other marine force can do one of those.

Wait, surely the Edward to the SW's Jacob is the Dark Angels here? I mean, that's a legitimate rivalry/love affair.

Amount of bulls*it in this thread offends the Emperor! How dare you to speak against any of the astartes? I wonder how deep have you stumbled upon road to damnation you BLASPHEMOUS HERETICS! Chapters are waging wars, wars in the Emperors name! That some of them are curently undermanned does not give you right to dishonour them! Chapters are like the trees, trees which gives fruit to those who serve the Emperor. When branches are taken in their service and their fruit is used, tree needs time to revitalize. When next edition come...I mean when next year comes and the tree was given enough love, next gathering can come as well! Rejoicer those who stand loyal to the Emperor, for your unyielding service shall be rewarded in the end and those who jump from tree to tree like parasits, HERETICAL parasits, will be cleansed by puryfing fire and turned to ash and cinders, ASH and CINDERS!!!

Time for your medication, methinks.

Destrado wrote:Actually, while White can attack better, Black has the advantage of seeing the first move, and so has an advantage defending.

I thought it was black attack/white flight. I've either missed a major shift in socio-economic trends, or your point. one or the other. j/k

Destrado wrote:Time for your medication, methinks.

I dont associate with sheeps. Carry on with your forgiving live.

Jolrael wrote:I dont associate with sheeps. Carry on with your forgiving live.

Sorry, I try not to discriminate based on colour.

If you want to go for a scoring bike army, then SMurfs are the only way to go.

Go for Vanilla, it's better than labelling yourself an Edward Marine or Jacob Marine.

I voted space wolves.
I have all 3 armies painted, Space Wolves, Blood Angels and Crimson Fists.

There are things to like in all 3, but the space wolves probably offer the best base combination of army style lists, and all of them are effective.

Thunderwolf Cavalry
Transport Spam
Drop Pod Style
All Wolf Guard
Terminator Army

Plus IMO their extra custom bits are the best (though I liked the winged Blood Angels packs and melta pistols so much I built that army as well!)

Best of luck whatever you choose all 3 are great!

Space Wolves will probably give you the most options. You can play an assault army, a gunline army, a pod army, a fast cav army, or an elite herohammer army. No matter which one you pick you'll be good in H2H so you can afford to make a few mistakes and the list will forgive you.

And seriously, the shooting can be BRUTAL. In 2000+ games SW players can field more than 30 missile launchers.


If you want to do pure mech, especially if you want Predators or Vindicators, BA will give you the best bang with fast vehicles and more FA options for those vehicles. I played 3 Baal Preds/3 Vindicators and razorback troops and it was awesome the amount of firepower I could throw down range while shrugging basically anything below S8.

Codex Marines are bland, but they do have their strengths; Vulkan is still good with cheap terminators and rhino melta bunkers. Shrike can pull off some shenanigans.

Codex: Space Marines have more subtle application than Blood Angels or Space Wolves, particularly if you don't get caught up in variant Chapter Tactics and stick to Combat Tactics.

Codex: Space Marines lets you field:

A Forge Army (Master of the Forge, Independent Character Techmarines, Thunderfire Cannons)

A Bike Army

A Sternguard Army (either Gate of Infinity in combination with Locator Beacons or Crimson Fists)

A Scout Army

Personally I find that the Blood Angels and Space Wolves epitomise the epiphet that Space Marines are a beginner's army: they're easier to learn, but ultimately have a relatively low ceiling, whereas Space Marines have more options that reward more nuanced play.

Take Space Wolf firepower, for example. Vanguard Veterans, Zagstruck, Barrage shooting, Mawlocs, and so on will shut Long Fangs down. Or just shoot them. Each wound loses either a Heavy Weapon or Fire Control.

Or take Blood Angel assault power, for another example, just charge them first and hit the Sanguinary Priest with a Power Weapon, then they'll be bog standard Assault Marines caught on a back foot. Or just bubble-wrap some Plasma and mow them down.

Personally I blame the community for promoting a resource-based view of 40,000, and ignoring game-play or tactical solutions...

I absolutely love seeing "solutions" like "Just charge them first."

Tactical genius, that.

sourclams wrote:I absolutely love seeing "solutions" like "Just charge them first."

Tactical genius, that.

Why would you need something more complicated? Charging a BA assault army before it can charge you will shut it down. No need to reinvent the wheel.

sourclams has a point, "Just charge them first" is incredibly vacant. The thing is, however, that there are strategies available to people that are facing certain Blood Angel armies that wouldn't be available facing Blood Angels list that didn't emphasize anti-mech.

Take the tactic of 'bubble-wrap' whereby an expandable infantry unit surrounds another unit, for example. I recently surrounded two Devastator Combat Squads and a Command Squad with two full Tactical Squads. The Devastators had two Plasma Cannons in one Combat Squad, and two Missile Launchers in the second Combat Squad. The Command Squad was three Plasma Gunners with an Apothecary and a Standard Bearer. It was a classic castle, as there was no space for the Blood Angels to assault inside of the formation, and if they assaulted the outer Tactical Squads then they would get Rapid Fired by the Command Squad, and point blanked sans cover by the Devastator Squads.

The configuration worked well for shooting, but it would have worked equally well for a counter-assault by stuff like Assault Terminators. Maybe you could take Vanguard Assault Squads, but the same problem would have occurred with Shooting, and perhaps even in Assault.

So yeah, "charge them first" is vacant like any variable that isn't paid out, but the problem facing a player is on any particular board is how to be able to charge them first. If you're going with the mechanized strategy then you're frankly boned because the Blood Angel shuck your Rhinos-Land Raiders and then charge the remains with Vanguard.

An Infantry-based strategy, on the other hand...

There is an element of rock paper scissors to any good strategy game, and that's true of 40k as well - any list you can make will have strengths and weaknesses. Serlin has a great article about RPS in game design here -

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/rock-paper-scissors-in-strategy-games.html

The tl;dr version of the article is that uneven weighting (winning with rock pays $10, while winning with paper pays $1) and unpredictable counters make for a much more nuanced and interesting game than boring, repetitive RPS.

Balance at a macro level is important, so that competitive tournaments aren't filled with a single army or list, but at a micro level IMbalance is what makes a game challenging and interesting. SC2 does this really well, giving almost every unit in the game situations in which they shine and others in which they get creamed. The armies are distinct I'm both play style and cost, as well. 40k does it pretty well, too, but there are tons more units, making the balance much more complicated and therefore less precisely tuned. Some units (DA assault marines for example) just aren't worth their points.

Clearly math can (and at a competitive level, must) be used to analyze the cost vs benefit of units in your army. Calculating kills per turn per point is useful for determining the efficiency of similar units; the less efficient unit is worse. If the game consisted of just CC, with no deployment, movement, objectives, etc. then you could create a list based solely on [(k/t)/pt] - and we'd be back to the single competitive list situation.

Because of the above, I think saying "this is a game of math, there is one right answer" ignores all of the RPS baked right into the rules of the game. The designers want you to make choices about composition and tactics, and they want the evaluation of units to be complex enough that a single metric doesn't work. So yes, math is a useful tool for evaluating army strengths, but no, there isn't one right answer, because the game is intentionally designed to make that kind of right answer impossible to calculate.

If you're looking to maximize your win ratio above all other concerns, you can take a look around at which lists are winning tournaments and choose an army that way (SW aren't a bad choice based on this method). Personally, I've played with lists that smashed the gak out of my opponents and been bored to tears (4th Ed. Korne army, zerkers on bikes), so I choose armies that are fun, look cool, and have fluff that I find appealing. I still play to win, but I do it within the context of an army that appeals to me.

The people who are saying take what appeals to you and play what you enjoy have a point, as do those that say some books are less competitive than others; it's up to you to decide what motivates you to spend piles of money and time on this game, and get the most out of that investment.

Tl;dr: I voted for the wolves. Vikings in space kick ass, and win tournaments, too.