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

Man can't you see me? how many points is a flamer on one assault squad?

Maybe it's like 50 I and Don t know...NO bolters...you got pistols+flamer+assault

CaptKaruthors wrote:

The funny thing is I think I may switch to the BA for my space sharks.

LOL. You basically set the example I gave about a page or two ago. Congrats. Your codex chapter somehow sprouts BP/CCWs, cheap access to FNP/ FC. Because somehow your chapter doesn't cut the mustard in this grimdark millenium. Awesome. Is your army at least painted?

Yes, I'm the cheese of the day because I refused to use the overpowered assault terminators that hedge out every other marine army that exists and now might switch to a TACTICAL SQUAD HEAVY BLOOD ANGELS LIST WITH NO FLYING DREADNAUTS OR BAAL PREDS because the veteran assault squad in the C:SM has been replaced by virtually worthless vanguard and the command squads can't take good close combat options.

You're touched in the head. If anything my army will get worse with the change, I'm just doing it because you can't make a functional assault marine army out of C:CSM.



Oh and they're painted grey with some nice highlights. Are your black templars painted black? Because by the sound of it they're painted awfully ultramarine.

@Shuma: Don't feel bad: I'm going to make my "SM" and "CSM" DIY armies into multi-Codex armies once C: BA comes out.

- "grey" SM / CSM / BA with Bolter, BP&CCW, and AM
- "white" BT / CSM / BA based on Mech BP&CCW

As a DIY player, I see no reason to be limited in what I play as - it's my money and my army, and my prerogative to use whatever Codex I desire.

ShumaGorath wrote:You're touched in the head. If anything my army will get worse with the change, I'm just doing it because you can't make a functional assault marine army out of C:CSM.

I dont mean to point you out but this makes my point, about multiple marine codex users being gw's best customers. Every codex creates a mirage that you will be able to do something that the other codexes cant do, which means you will buy the codex and 2-3 units. Only with the new stuff will you be able to make an effective list, something that insults people like cap who is using the old stuff.

@CKO: If you have a core of SM stuff, then you just add a few "signature" units (e.g. SCs, Daemons/Defilers, Death Co/SangGuard) and you're all set to play as another army. Really nice.

The fire! IT BURNZ! Come on guys. Everyone can play whatever no matter how annoying it is because well, as JohnHwang said, it's his money, models, and whatnot.
ANYWHOO
So about them blood angels, do honor guard still get the sanguinary priest upgrade or did I dream that?

CKO wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:You're touched in the head. If anything my army will get worse with the change, I'm just doing it because you can't make a functional assault marine army out of C:CSM.

I don't mean to point you out but this makes my point, about multiple marine codex users being gw's best customers. Every codex creates a mirage that you will be able to do something that the other codexes can't do, which means you will buy the codex and 2-3 units. Only with the new stuff will you be able to make an effective list, something that insults people like cap who is using the old stuff.

Er, what? There's no "mirage effect" here. Compare the ability to take ridiculous amounts of Terminators(with better options to boot!) with Space Wolves...to the Deathwing(who are supposed to be y'know...the signature Terminator army), or the upcoming Blood Angels codex, which is looking like you'll be able to field more Assault Squads than a Raven Guard army could shake a stick at.

It's a side effect of Codex Creep and the removal of the Chapter Traits from the standard Codex: Space Marines. Obnoxious? Yeah. But it doesn't automatically mean someone's bandwagoning onto the new army just for the new rules. The 'flavor' of all those standard vanilla Chapters is gone, to where it now is based upon what characters you can successfully use as stand-ins. The same thing goes for Codex: Chaos Space Marines and Codex: Imperial Guard. In the effort to streamline and get rid of the more abused builds/traits...they basically gutted the ability of a player to make something truly their own.

JohnHwangDD wrote:@CKO: If you have a core of SM stuff, then you just add a few "signature" units (e.g. SCs, Daemons/Defilers, Death Co/SangGuard) and you're all set to play as another army. Really nice.

Amen. I'm of the camp that more flexibility is a GOOD thing.

CrazyThang wrote:The fire! IT BURNZ! Come on guys. Everyone can play whatever no matter how annoying it is because well, as JohnHwang said, it's his money, models, and whatnot.
ANYWHOO
So about them blood angels, do honor guard still get the sanguinary priest upgrade or did I dream that?

I'm pretty sure Honour Guard still get them, but they're called something else (something like Sanguinary Initiates- it's been a few days since I got to see the Codex). Unfortunately, I didn't see any option for Tech-Adepts, so I'm going to have to change one of my Honour Guard squads D:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

CaptKaruthors wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:It's almost like he plays with completely different Bolters than the rest of us.

And clearly, he has magical one-way cover on his board, allowing for him shoot Bolters at troops in the open, while guaranteeing cover saves against enemy Plasma & Ordnance.

I want to see a picture of Karutor's army, along with a list.

And clearly you're delusional.

How hard is it do gain a save when you need it, but also move your own models into position to take it away from your opponent when required? It's not that hard JHDD.

Excuse me? Did I start calling you names? No? Then don't you start.

Now im going to nitpick, but you started JHDD. Saying someone is using different bolters is implying hes in a different world aka delusional.

You had a nicer tone abotu it, but the same message.

Back to lurking ^^.

I agree 100 percent with Captain K that bolters are awesome. One of SM inherent strengths is the boltgun. When I first started to play hte PDF BA rules I switched from a jump infantry/drop pod list to a mech list. The mech list had two full squads of tactical Marines mounted in rhinos, two Baal predators, an LRC and a LST. The new list was basically a mobile gun line and it could throw out a lot of dakka. The bolters/rapid fire were excellent for flushing units from cover and finishing off small remnant squads (as noted by sourclams). The tactical Marines fulfilled a vital role and were a great core, they really won games in many ways (power fist&plasma pistol/lascannon/plasmagun). I should note I also had one full squad of assault Marines mounted in another rhino. This was back towards the of 4th edition. With the release of 5th edition I made some changes to the list (plasma traded for melta, HQs, etc.).

I have found that assault Marines in general are actually not that great of a close combat unit (even with preferred enemy & furious charge & -1 to enemy WS). They were best used as a shock troop to spring out early causing as much havoc as possible. They will certainly be better now since they can finally take other special weapons beside plasma pistols) but still I wouldn't consider them anywhere near as effective in close combat when compared with a unit like assault terminators. When the Ard Boys rolled around I dropped my squad of assault Marines and started to field an allied troop of Grey Knights in power armor. The Grey Knights were so much better and a lot more effective at both assault and especially shooting. I also added a squad of assault terminators (lightning claws)... I ran them in an LRC with in hte bonus range of Dante & Corbulo (preferred enemy, furious charge & -1 WS to enemy units)... Now that was one hell of a unit!

I am thinking scouts with bolt pistols & combat blades are going to be a better choice over assault Marines if you run them in storm ravens with an IC and can get them into an assault. The scouts are cheaper and will just as hard on the charge, and Blood Angels have ALWAYS been about getting the charge. If your BA assault units are being charged then you are doing something wrong. It's just that simple too.

G

@Voronesh: I was clearly calling out what I believed to be an apples-to-oranges inconsistency, because I didn't believe that he was making a fair apples-to-apples case. I think that's a far cry from name-calling.

When he says that Bolters will easily kill a 5-SM unit, that's just not consistent with my experience in the game. And I don't think it jibes with others' experience either. Nor does it follow from the math averages which underlie those experiences. So if he's saying that Bolters will do it, I think it's fair to suggest that his Bolters are different in some meaningful way that drives a far higher level of effectiveness than what others would expect or experience.

Sternguard do not qualify, they are 35% more costly than the average marine, have twice the attacks in close combat, better leadership average, and have special ammo which changes their bolter profile. They are different in virtually every way.

I already discounted these guys once people stopped making comparisons between BA and C:SM codexes. But in a vanilla marine list they would qualify my point. Quality mid-range shooting via bolters...that can score. Regardless of what you think...ammo or not, the gun is still a bolter. Do 1ksons shooting suddenly not count because their bolters are AP3? It's still a bolter.

Wasn't this entire argument based on the fact that the assault troops could get heavy weapon packing transports and still cost the same?

No. My argument is that spamming 4-5 5man assault squads isn't going to be the Uber OMG build. It simply isn't. At the end of the day, like all marine armies your BA will need some level of midrange shooting, because even though they'll have 5 razorbacks, they still will be out classed by other armies shooting. At some point the extra firepower the tactical squad can provide will prove helpful. I understand that the assault marines are technically cheaper over all, but does it necessarily make it better? I could fill my IG army with small cheap scoring units...does it make it better? There is a drawback to all BP/CCW units. Hopefully, you take something that helps. However, 25 marines is a little light when you think about the rest of that build...all relatively fragile AV11 rides. Rides which can't shoot with minimal effort from the opponent to get them to not shoot. It doesn't take much to shake or stun a razorback.

I figured that since the assault squad can get THE SAME ASSAULT WEAPONS that that was a moot point.

But now you are running into the possibility of shooting yourself out of potential assault range. Why would you risk that? Tacticals don't worry about that because a 12" move + disembark + shoot, they can't charge anyways (next turn they can). Also, taking that assault weapon is going to rob you of the extra attacks for carrying BP/CCWs. Last time I checked Assault marines can't take plasmaguns either. Not that it matters, but again tacticals do have more options of weapon choices.

Well since the BA assault squads get their transport nice and cheap they have the same mobility and better firepower, while maintaining the ability to defend themselves in combat.

5 BP/CCW guys defending themselves in a combat is usually a recipe for disaster. You simply don't throw enough dice to decisively win your combats. Suddenly your scoring units are evaporating quickly. How are 25 assault marines going to stop Battlewagon nob lists? Again, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything anymore. Go ahead and play your 4-5 man cheap assault squads. In several weeks/ months time I guarantee people will start adding a tactical squad or two to their BA list because they'll realize they'll need them. While were at it, why not take scouts? Cheaper, same number of attacks as assault marines, and can take storms? Yeah, yeah, the Baal Predator I hear you say, well the baal predator is nice, but so is fast moving skimmers that can outflank charge in one turn.

Causing 5.2 wounds on something with a 3+ save means you're probably going to cause maybe 2 wounds, and thats if it doesn't use its psychic power to give you a BS of 1. Why are we doing this comparison, it's not something that would really ever come up (unless you're about to lose).

Range of that power is 12" which means I have 1 full turn to cause as much damage as I could with my tacticals. But enough of the swarmlord example. It's a dumb example and we both know we'd use other guns in our armies to kill it.

Yeah. We know. It's the swarmlord, it could walk through 30 assault or tactical marines without much issue.

Could it? That's a possible 3 missile launchers, 3 melta/plasma/flamer/ combi-weapon+ bolters to eat. It can only kill one unit at time. But again Swarmlord debate is over. It's a dumb example that I didn't even come up with. LOL.

And being more cost effective with their transport (which gives them a mobile heavy weapon) while having more special weapons (better for clearing out entrenched squads)

Since when did hand flamers become awesome? They can take one flamer. Again, their "mobile heavy weapon" can be silenced rather easy.

and the ability to assault better (vs having a 200 point unit stand still and fire one heavy weapon a turn).

Sometimes it may prove beneficial to combat squad. Again, options. If it's to my advantage to keep the squad at 10 great. If it benefits me to combat them, great. Assaulting better is a toss up IMHO. I've played small squads like this with my templars. Now while I don't get access to FC (realistically it's a crapshoot for BA to get it unless you pay close to 50pts to get a SHP to give it to you), I do get to reroll my failed to hit rolls. I've run 5 man squads with BP/CCW with a flamer many times. They simply don't have the oomph to win combats. Maybe vs. weaker toughness units...but then again tacticals (especially if they were lucky to get FC) can do the same amount of damage as well in that case...so it's a wash IMHO.

The same bad comparison could be used with vanilla marines and a leman russ (assault marines would be great for popping it in a cost effective manner, and the vanilla tacs would just have their gun bounce off for 6 turns).

Um ok. How are the assault marines getting there in one piece again?

Flexibility is great, but tactical marines pay too much for it. They are worse in close combat than orks/kroot/space wolves/chaos marines/assault marines/etc (for nearly 3 times the cost of orks or twice for kroot), worse at shooting than orks/ig/tau (for 3/4/1.6 times the cost respectively). The tactical marines are rugged, but expensive weak and poor at shooting. Theres a reason people are quick to leave them in transports or switch them for other things.

Again, I don't know if I agree. All those unit you compared them to have their own weaknesses (weak toughness, poor leadership, etc.) I'm not saying tacticals are the end all be all, but there is definitely a need for them in the BA army in some capacity.

Vs what? 25 tacticals with 2 heavy weapons and 2 transports? Congradulations, you just cut down your own firepower. 10 tacticals with 1 heavy and 15 assaults? On par with firepower but less mobile with worse firepower.

No, more like 2 tactical squads, 3 assault squads. But my comparison is AV11 vehicles and 25 marines vs. Mech guard (actually any decent IG build), Bugs, Vanilla marines, Battlewagon nobs, etc. 25 dudes simply can't stop that kind of possible attrition rate, but I challenge you to try.

I suspect the blood angels will spend the bare minimum required on troops just like vanilla marines. At those low low prices the assault troops just happen to be better at it by being more mobile in their comped transports with a better ability to support the force due to more mobile heavy weapon supports and a better ability to take enemy objectives.

I don't agree, but we'll see. Like I said, in a few weeks time lets see how it plays out on the tables. It reminds me of when people were all over 9 Hive Guard lists....LOL. Now you maybe see one unit of 3 in most lists. Things look good on paper at first, but actual practicality on a table top yields different results.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yes, I'm the cheese of the day because I refused to use the overpowered assault terminators that hedge out every other marine army that exists

LOL. Man you really sure place a lot of stock in assault terminators. Newsflash: they are good, but not OMG awesome...and vs. other armies they are also a little slow. BT assault terminators kick their a$$. Some vanilla builds don't even use them. Shocking, I know. There is more in the vanilla codex than assault terminators.

and now might switch to a TACTICAL SQUAD HEAVY BLOOD ANGELS LIST WITH NO FLYING DREADNAUTS OR BAAL PREDS

Who says you can't take tacticals with dreads or preds in a BA army?

because the veteran assault squad in the C:SM has been replaced by virtually worthless vanguard and the command squads can't take good close combat options.

Dunno, I've seen some pretty beefy CC command squads from C:SM...especially on bikes. Vanguard are okay, but require someone to literally build an army around them. Something players may not want to do if there is an easier alternative. It doesn't mean they suck.

You're touched in the head.

Not really. I choose not to focus on one type of unit in a book and obsess over it. I look at what an army can do on the whole.

If anything my army will get worse with the change, I'm just doing it because you can't make a functional assault marine army out of C:CSM.

Last time I checked, space sharks were a codex chapter. Since when did they become a premier assault based army? LOL.

Oh and they're painted grey with some nice highlights. Are your black templars painted black? Because by the sound of it they're painted awfully ultramarine.

Oh, your rage...it sustains me. Actually, if you've been paying attention you will notice I mentioned that my army is almost completely BP/ CCW equipped. A far cry from Ultramarines. I have 6000pts painted how about you?

CaptKaruthors wrote:

Sternguard do not qualify, they are 35% more costly than the average marine, have twice the attacks in close combat, better leadership average, and have special ammo which changes their bolter profile. They are different in virtually every way.

I already discounted these guys once people stopped making comparisons between BA and C:SM codexes. But in a vanilla marine list they would qualify my point. Quality mid-range shooting via bolters...that can score. Regardless of what you think...ammo or not, the gun is still a bolter. Do 1ksons shooting suddenly not count because their bolters are AP3? It's still a bolter.

Hang on, I have absolutely no stake in this argument. I don't care if people take Tac Marines or Assault Marines in what will be some sort of fast mech mash list regardless, but trying to "prove" this point is just silly.

Sternguard special ammo is quite clearly beyond the scope of the argument. Not only does it completely change the weapon profile, but Tac squads don't have it. Is it "still a bolter?" as you assert? For the sake of the special rule yes, but it's like comparing the Land Raider to the Rhino. It's "still a transport" but ridiculously more powerful with far more special abilities.

Er, what? There's no "mirage effect" here. Compare the ability to take ridiculous amounts of Terminators(with better options to boot!) with Space Wolves...to the Deathwing(who are supposed to be y'know...the signature Terminator army), or the upcoming Blood Angels codex, which is looking like you'll be able to field more Assault Squads than a Raven Guard army could shake a stick at.

Boohoo. As Justin Timberlake says: cry me a river. Playing your Dark Angels as SW or whatever else flavor comes along because you feel it can't quite "hang" with other codexes is funny. It's basically admitting you could give a crap about an army's background and only like to play with the shiniest new rules. There's more to the game than an exercise of "how uber can I make my marines today?" Should I run out and play my Templars with the BA codex since I have the ability to? No. I chose Templars because of their background, etc. that's why I play them. The rules come second. If they are inferior, I'll play them regardless.

So why hate on people that simply like the "look" of an army and want to try out all the new codices as they're released? For many it's not about POWAR BILDs, it's about changing up the play style. My Chaos Marines have played as Chaos, Vanilla, and Space Wolves; likely new models will make it into the army so it can try Blood Angels as well. It keeps me engaged and into the hobby, as opposed to waving my cane at all the 'flavor of the monthers' while vowing that when my new codex comes out, THEN I"LL SHOW YOU ALL!!!

Capt what is wrong with wanting to use the new units and rules? If they think playing another codex will give them a better chance at winning then they should use it.

Black Blow Fly wrote:I agree 100 percent with Captain K that bolters are awesome. One of SM inherent strengths is the boltgun. When I first started to play hte PDF BA rules I switched from a jump infantry/drop pod list to a mech list. The mech list had two full squads of tactical Marines mounted in rhinos, two Baal predators, an LRC and a LST. The new list was basically a mobile gun line and it could throw out a lot of dakka. The bolters/rapid fire were excellent for flushing units from cover and finishing off small remnant squads (as noted by sourclams). The tactical Marines fulfilled a vital role and were a great core, they really won games in many ways (power fist&plasma pistol/lascannon/plasmagun). I should note I also had one full squad of assault Marines mounted in another rhino. This was back towards the of 4th edition. With the release of 5th edition I made some changes to the list (plasma traded for melta, HQs, etc.).

I have found that assault Marines in general are actually not that great of a close combat unit (even with preferred enemy & furious charge & -1 to enemy WS). They were best used as a shock troop to spring out early causing as much havoc as possible. They will certainly be better now since they can finally take other special weapons beside plasma pistols) but still I wouldn't consider them anywhere near as effective in close combat when compared with a unit like assault terminators. When the Ard Boys rolled around I dropped my squad of assault Marines and started to field an allied troop of Grey Knights in power armor. The Grey Knights were so much better and a lot more effective at both assault and especially shooting. I also added a squad of assault terminators (lightning claws)... I ran them in an LRC with in hte bonus range of Dante & Corbulo (preferred enemy, furious charge & -1 WS to enemy units)... Now that was one hell of a unit!

I am thinking scouts with bolt pistols & combat blades are going to be a better choice over assault Marines if you run them in storm ravens with an IC and can get them into an assault. The scouts are cheaper and will just as hard on the charge, and Blood Angels have ALWAYS been about getting the charge. If your BA assault units are being charged then you are doing something wrong. It's just that simple too.

G

Well said sir. I couldn't have said it better. I too agree with your assessment of scouts. Cheaper than assault marines and can still hit like a ton of bricks with the right IC's in tow + good delivery systems. I said it from day one of seeing the BA codex in person. The better builds will see tacticals, scouts, + other stuff as the better builds. None of this "lets take X unit and spam it a million times." But I await actual playtesting on the table tops to show me.

Lets follow up Captain Ks argument regarding the virtues of bolters by considering the new DC armed with bolters and the Relentess USR. First why not arm the DC Marines sporting power fists with a bolter instead of the bolt pistol? Obviously the bolter is the better gun for this specific Marine and I don't think it's necessary to spell out why this is so. Now let's take it one step further and consider arming them all with bolters... 2x S4 attack that hits on a 3+ versus the loss of one attack in close combat. It's hard to say which is better... It's possible the DC might benefit from preferred enemy but often that won't be the case. The tradeoff is one hit at S5 in close combat. The main reason why I am reluctant to say the bolter is better than the bolt pistol is that DC will always suffer from Rage. However rapid firing those bolters just prior to the charge is something very few other units can do.

G

Hang on, I have absolutely no stake in this argument. I don't care if people take Tac Marines or Assault Marines in what will be some sort of fast mech mash list regardless, but trying to "prove" this point is just silly.

Again. I'm not out to prove anything. Believe what you want. I'm done trying to convince people. Find out for yourselves.

Sternguard special ammo is quite clearly beyond the scope of the argument. Not only does it completely change the weapon profile, but Tac squads don't have it.

Again. I've already removed them from the debate table as we are strictly now dealing with comparisons between BA Tacticals and BA assault squads.

Is it "still a bolter?" as you assert? For the sake of the special rule yes, but it's like comparing the Land Raider to the Rhino. It's "still a transport" but ridiculously more powerful with far more special abilities.

Point conceded, but I was thinking more along the lines of the kind of midrange shooting you can get in the various marine armies and how it can be beneficial vs. being locked into a particular troop type that has little flexibility and has one real purpose.

I already discounted these guys once people stopped making comparisons between BA and C:SM codexes. But in a vanilla marine list they would qualify my point. Quality mid-range shooting via bolters...that can score. Regardless of what you think...ammo or not, the gun is still a bolter. Do 1ksons shooting suddenly not count because their bolters are AP3? It's still a bolter.

Yes, and vulcan megabolters are bolters too. Shall we count those?

No. My argument is that spamming 4-5 5man assault squads isn't going to be the Uber OMG build. It simply isn't. At the end of the day, like all marine armies your BA will need some level of midrange shooting, because even though they'll have 5 razorbacks, they still will be out classed by other armies shooting.

I'm pretty sure the BA player is fielding more than just the assault squads alone. Otherwise thats a pretty small game.

But now you are running into the possibility of shooting yourself out of potential assault range. Why would you risk that? Tacticals don't worry about that because a 12" move + disembark + shoot, they can't charge anyways (next turn they can). Also, taking that assault weapon is going to rob you of the extra attacks for carrying BP/CCWs. Last time I checked Assault marines can't take plasmaguns either. Not that it matters, but again tacticals do have more options of weapon choices.

How is the possibility of shooting yourself out of assault range with twice the special weapons any worse than dumping out and shooting yourself into the range you need to be at to get assaulted while having a heavy weapon you payed for sit idle? For more points no less. A second flamer is going to do a hell of a lot more than 6 or 7 extra bolter shots while leaving the same squad more capable of defending itself on the inevitable ensuing charge (it's what makes space wolves the best marines available).

5 BP/CCW guys defending themselves in a combat is usually a recipe for disaster. You simply don't throw enough dice to decisively win your combats. Suddenly your scoring units are evaporating quickly. How are 25 assault marines going to stop Battlewagon nob lists?

Where is the rest of the blood angel army in all these comparisons? Did they just forget to deploy or something?

Again, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything anymore. Go ahead and play your 4-5 man cheap assault squads. In several weeks/ months time I guarantee people will start adding a tactical squad or two to their BA list because they'll realize they'll need them.

Your arguments don't really imply that. Primarily you're just complaining about a lack of bodies on the field. Something switching to tacs doesn't solve. No army worth its salt is worried about the combined bolter fire of a squad and a half of tac marines.

While were at it, why not take scouts? Cheaper, same number of attacks as assault marines, and can take storms?

WS 3 and a 4+ save do not make a good assault unit. I've tried out the storm scout assault unit before. It blows. A five man assault squad with a pred comes in at less points than scouts and the speeder.

Yeah, yeah, the Baal Predator I hear you say, well the baal predator is nice, but so is fast moving skimmers that can outflank charge in one turn.

The storm is great, the scouts its forced to carry are not. They can't beat a single unit in the entire marine codex (short of one already badly damaged or the thunderfire). They do even worse against orks tyranids and chaos.

It's sad too, I really like the concept of the storm. I wish it could hold regular marines.

Since when did hand flamers become awesome? They can take one flamer. Again, their "mobile heavy weapon" can be silenced rather easy.

And the tacs heavy weapon gets silenced every time it has to move (which as your scoring unit it will likely do).

Sometimes it may prove beneficial to combat squad. Again, options. If it's to my advantage to keep the squad at 10 great.

The point of the minimum squading was to maximize the number of free transports (and thus the number of (very) fast moving heavy weapons providing guns while the assault marines hold objectives.

Um ok. How are the assault marines getting there in one piece again?

The fast transport with smoke launchers they have.

Again, I don't know if I agree. All those unit you compared them to have their own weaknesses (weak toughness, poor leadership, etc.) I'm not saying tacticals are the end all be all, but there is definitely a need for them in the BA army in some capacity.

Thats really dependent on the intention of the player. Tacs are a defensive line unit, and an expensive one with poor firepower per point spent at that. Assault marines are just as durable while better capable of receiving assaults and countercharging near the line, all the while being significantly better in a foreward attack use due to the multiple special weapons (more important than the extra attacks in my opinion). Once again though, they're still just a poor mans grey hunters.

No, more like 2 tactical squads, 3 assault squads. But my comparison is AV11 vehicles and 25 marines vs. Mech guard (actually any decent IG build), Bugs, Vanilla marines, Battlewagon nobs, etc. 25 dudes simply can't stop that kind of possible attrition rate, but I challenge you to try.

I'm mystified as to why you think thats all that would be in the blood angel force when its facing such opponents.

I don't agree, but we'll see. Like I said, in a few weeks time lets see how it plays out on the tables. It reminds me of when people were all over 9 Hive Guard lists....LOL. Now you maybe see one unit of 3 in most lists. Things look good on paper at first, but actual practicality on a table top yields different results.

Few people were saying things of that nature.

LOL. Man you really sure place a lot of stock in assault terminators. Newsflash: they are good, but not OMG awesome...and vs. other armies they are also a little slow.

magical. Funny how vulcan/assault terms is the single most popular high end marine list that exists right now. They aren't the end all be all, but they are significantly under priced (to the point where they same unit costs 45 points per model in the BA codex and ~50 in the space wolves).

BT assault terminators kick their a$$.

Cool story.

Some vanilla builds don't even use them. Shocking, I know.

Like the one that I play. In the post that you're quoting. A post that I posted. About the army that I own.

There is more in the vanilla codex than assault terminators.

Not for close combat centric choices. Vanguard are an unplayable joke, assault marines are over expensive and don't have the ability to capture (which significantly hampers their usefulness), command squads have very poor item choices and for some bizzare reason can no longer take terminator armor (which is sad because the terminator assault squad was a classic unit), and honor guard are less effective and more expensive than assault terminators. The space sharks fluff states that they are a linebreaking hard assault army that utilizes a lot of drop pods and assault troops. The vanilla space marine codex just doesn't pull that off very well.

Who says you can't take tacticals with dreads or preds in a BA army?

My wallet, though I do own a heavy bolter ac pred and five dreads.

Dunno, I've seen some pretty beefy CC command squads from C:SM...especially on bikes. Vanguard are okay, but require someone to literally build an army around them. Something players may not want to do if there is an easier alternative. It doesn't mean they suck.

The command squads aren't cost effective with the weapon options. Their price skyrockets quickly, and they are quite vulnerable to firepower/powerfists. They're a great shooting unit, but they just aren't good at assaults.

As for the vanguard, I'm sorry but no. They suck. They cost 12 points more per model than regular assault marines and all they have is one more attack and a nearly useless special ability that requires in the very least a surviving homing beacon to use without seriously endangering the very expensive squad that has it.

Not really. I choose not to focus on one type of unit in a book and obsess over it. I look at what an army can do on the whole.

Actually I was talking more about your poor arguments and insistence on implying im a codex hopping power gamer.

Last time I checked, space sharks were a codex chapter. Since when did they become a premier assault based army?

Last I checked the blood angels were also a codex chapter. Funny how that works.

Oh, your rage...it sustains me. Actually, if you've been paying attention you will notice I mentioned that my army is almost completely BP/ CCW equipped. A far cry from Ultramarines. I have 6000pts painted how about you?

3250.

Anyway, this is a stupid argument and this post was maddeningly long. I'm done... Almost.

Boohoo. As Justin Timberlake says: cry me a river. Playing your Dark Angels as SW or whatever else flavor comes along because you feel it can't quite "hang" with other codexes is funny. It's basically admitting you could give a crap about an army's background and only like to play with the shiniest new rules.

Coming from someone that didn't know blood angels was a codex chapter thats rich. Does your ivory tower have stairs? Or are you stuck up there?

This was a post in the wrong window. :x

I long stopped paying attention to the minutia of this argument, since it seems to be an ad nauseum repetition of the same thing over and over again, but I will say this.

That list posted a few pages ago with all the AV11 razorbacks and 5-man assault squads? Any one of my IG lists would absolutely RAPE that army. Half of it would be gone after one shooting phase, cover or not. The same lists hate tactical squads. Their size makes them tough to wipe out even if I tag them with a couple of demo charges, and those bolters can make a real mess of my infantry lines (yeah yeah, I haven't gone all mech, even though most lists still have 10 vehicles... but if you paid for 120 krieg models, you'd want to use them too.

sourclams wrote:So why hate on people that simply like the "look" of an army and want to try out all the new codices as they're released? For many it's not about POWAR BILDs, it's about changing up the play style. My Chaos Marines have played as Chaos, Vanilla, and Space Wolves; likely new models will make it into the army so it can try Blood Angels as well. It keeps me engaged and into the hobby, as opposed to waving my cane at all the 'flavor of the monthers' while vowing that when my new codex comes out, THEN I"LL SHOW YOU ALL!!!

There's no hate, only mockery. LOL. Believe me, I plan on playing a BA list since I feel this is the best list they've written for them since 2nd edition. However, I'm not going to play it because I want to power build my way to the top tables. I want to play it because it gives me an opportunity to paint a brand new army. I've always liked the armies look. However, I'm not going to use my Templar marines and simply call them BA.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Black Blow Fly wrote:Lets follow up Captain Ks argument regarding the virtues of bolters by considering the new DC armed with bolters and the Relentess USR. First why not arm the DC Marines sporting power fists with a bolter instead of the bolt pistol? Obviously the bolter is the better gun for this specific Marine and I don't think it's necessary to spell out why this is so. Now let's take it one step further and consider arming them all with bolters... 2x S4 attack that hits on a 3+ versus the loss of one attack in close combat. It's hard to say which is better... It's possible the DC might benefit from preferred enemy but often that won't be the case. The tradeoff is one hit at S5 in close combat. The main reason why I am reluctant to say the bolter is better than the bolt pistol is that DC will always suffer from Rage. However rapid firing those bolters just prior to the charge is something very few other units can do.

G

Yup. I think while DC aren't scoring units, they definitely can add to that midrange punch. There is a tradeoff for having bolters on them, but like you said I think that they can live with it.

CaptKaruthors wrote:

sourclams wrote:So why hate on people that simply like the "look" of an army and want to try out all the new codices as they're released? For many it's not about POWAR BILDs, it's about changing up the play style. My Chaos Marines have played as Chaos, Vanilla, and Space Wolves; likely new models will make it into the army so it can try Blood Angels as well. It keeps me engaged and into the hobby, as opposed to waving my cane at all the 'flavor of the monthers' while vowing that when my new codex comes out, THEN I"LL SHOW YOU ALL!!!

There's no hate, only mockery. LOL. Believe me, I plan on playing a BA list since I feel this is the best list they've written for them since 2nd edition. However, I'm not going to play it because I want to power build my way to the top tables. I want to play it because it gives me an opportunity to paint a brand new army. I've always liked the armies look. However, I'm not going to use my Templar marines and simply call them BA.

Yes, and vulcan megabolters are bolters too. Shall we count those?

LOL. Yes...lets keep adding ridiculous comments to an already tired circular argument... that always works for me.

I'm pretty sure the BA player is fielding more than just the assault squads alone. Otherwise thats a pretty small game.

Well duh! Have you even seen the list posted a few pages back? It's a glass hammer. I'm not the only one in this thread that shares that assessment but since I was the first to mention that it was, I guess I'm the goat, huh? I've seen many incarnations of lists like that and I'm here to tell you that they are a glass hammer. But again, go on believing what you want. That's perfectly fine with me.

How is the possibility of shooting yourself out of assault range with twice the special weapons any worse than dumping out and shooting yourself into the range you need to be at to get assaulted while having a heavy weapon you payed for sit idle? For more points no less. A second flamer is going to do a hell of a lot more than 6 or 7 extra bolter shots while leaving the same squad more capable of defending itself on the inevitable ensuing charge (it's what makes space wolves the best marines available).

Really? Really....I have to explain this? What good does an assault unit do when you are wasting their primary potential? That would be like me just driving around my BT crusader squads all game. Most likely this unit is getting FC. You mean to tell me you are going to waste it? With BA tacticals it's just a nice bonus. Assault marines will live and die by it. Again, I don't quite see how you think a hand flamer is the roxxor. I'd rather have that idle heavy weapon instead. It might actually be useful in the earlier parts of the game when I'm stationary, or farther away. A hand flamer? Completely useless.

Where is the rest of the blood angel army in all these comparisons? Did they just forget to deploy or something?

Go back and reread the rest of the list. It's predators or vindicators depending on which list you look at. Sorry, I'm not jumping up and down for those units. With a side armor 11 it isn't that difficult to get side shots on them that can harm them.

Your arguments don't really imply that.

My argument is simple. BA armies will need some degree of tactical squads in their armies to solve some of their firepower and midrange issues. Period.

Primarily you're just complaining about a lack of bodies on the field. Something switching to tacs doesn't solve. No army worth its salt is worried about the combined bolter fire of a squad and a half of tac marines.

LOL. Are you even looking at the lists? 5 razorbacks and 6 predators + 25 marines? Where's the scary parts? LOL. Switching to a balance of tactical and assault allows your small amount of guys to actually contribute shooting if needed...can get access to FC, so their charges (when they make them) can hurt just as much. Also putting more than 25 guys on the table is a start as well. Most marine armies I play against have at least 35 or more in some cases.

The point of the minimum squading was to maximize the number of free transports (and thus the number of (very) fast moving heavy weapons providing guns while the assault marines hold objectives.

Again, why maximize on something that can be easily silenced? Why maximize on something that gives away KPs easy? Are you seriously thinking this list can actually table an opponent? That seems like the only way they'll be able to win IMHO. Multi objectives will be a pain since spreading out actually hurts this type of army. Again, I sound like a broken record here, but I PLAY an army like this...and more often than not some missions are not going to favor your force selection if you go too heavy in one area. What does this army do in DoW missions? Stay off the entire table? That's risky.

The fast transport with smoke launchers they have.

So you are basically crossing your fingers and praying then? What happens when you cross paths with an IG army that can force you to reroll the smoke save...or as lame as it sounds, the Tau army that can remove it all together? Lastly if you are smokin' you ain't shooting. I'll take that trade off. Smoke doesn't always work and gambling your scoring units like that is fine with me.

Thats really dependent on the intention of the player. Tacs are a defensive line unit, and an expensive one with poor firepower per point spent at that. Assault marines are just as durable while better capable of receiving assaults and countercharging near the line, all the while being significantly better in a foreward attack use due to the multiple special weapons (more important than the extra attacks in my opinion). Once again though, they're still just a poor mans grey hunters.

Tacticals are fine for what they do. While you may think they are over priced, others do not. From a fire power stand point they are okay as well. Assault marines do one thing well and one thing only...and that's giving a charge (and some even think they don't even do that well at that either). Receiving a charge they are no better, or worse than tacticals. Adding more special weapons to the unit actually weakens them since they are now getting less attacks to throw on a charge and truly wasting the FC that they might have.

I'm mystified as to why you think thats all that would be in the blood angel force when its facing such opponents.

Again, I'm only offering commentary on the lists posted by Deadshane. He feels those are killer lists, I and a few others disagree. It's as simple as that.

WS 3 and a 4+ save do not make a good assault unit. I've tried out the storm scout assault unit before. It blows. A five man assault squad with a pred comes in at less points than scouts and the speeder.

For BA? Why not? With the ability to attach a SHP, suddenly they seem pretty damn good to me? Who gives a fig what their WS is when most marine on marine engagements everyone is hitting on 4's anyways? It's the str5 init5 that should concern you. They are swinging first in most cases. Assault marines, scouts...at that point they are both hitting on 4's. What happens afterwards is irrelevant. Either they maul a unit, or get mauled...for an even cheaper investment. Sounds pretty good to me. Speeder Storms are a toss up. However, BBF makes a good point about putting them in a Stormraven.

magical. Funny how vulcan/assault terms is the single most popular high end marine list that exists right now. They aren't the end all be all, but they are significantly under priced (to the point where they same unit costs 45 points per model in the BA codex and ~50 in the space wolves).

Really? That's funny, because I don't see too many of them anymore. They are as predictable as an all drop pod army was in 4th. People have seen it enough times to know how to beat it. I haven't lost to a Vulkan list in months. I've also seen other builds do well in tournaments also. Vulkan isn't the savior for C:SM. Only the true salamander players have stuck with this list. The other bandwagoners have move on from it. Most of those people are playing their marines as SW now...LOL...soon to be Red marines.

Cool story.

All true. I'll take BT assault terminators over vanilla assault terminators all day. Rerolling to hit and wound with my LC attacks and FC? That's a hell of a lot better IMHO. But many don't share my opinion. Oh well.

Like the one that I play. In the post that you're quoting. A post that I posted. About the army that I own.

It shows that you aren't alone in playing a list like that. The difference is those other people can make their lists work without having to switch codexes. Why is that?

Not for close combat centric choices.

Newsflash: It's not suppose to! Codex marines were never assault oriented at all. While they do have some beefy CC units, that isn't the books primary focus.

Vanguard are an unplayable joke, assault marines are over expensive and don't have the ability to capture (which significantly hampers their usefulness),

I'm a firm believer that Vanguard can work. The problem is that it requires over specialization in an army that suffers from doing so. If you over specialize with vanilla marines, you usually are deficient somewhere else. That being said, Vanguard can work with the right kind of supporting cast. While not as points efficient as assault terminators, they are more of a mop up unit rather than a bulldozer unit. Will it magically beat every army out there? No, but then again no army can do that right now anyways.

command squads have very poor item choices and for some bizzare reason can no longer take terminator armor (which is sad because the terminator assault squad was a classic unit),

Dunno about that, the ability to be able to take bikes more than makes up for the loss of not being able to take terminator armor. Most guys in the command squad can take storm shields...which makes them fairly durable. The only real downside is they are vulnerable to things like IG Executioners, etc. but that can be somewhat mitigated.

and honor guard are less effective and more expensive than assault terminators.

Honor guard seem like a choice to take in bigger games. but are still a decent unit.

The space sharks fluff states that they are a linebreaking hard assault army that utilizes a lot of drop pods and assault troops.

Okay, so from a fluff standpoint that tells me that their tacticals would ride in pods, and your fast attack choices would most likely carry 2-3 assault squads. With other stuff to fill in the holes, OR Ironclad dreads in pods followed by a mechanized force to break through the IronClads "line breaking" abilities. There is lots of ways of representing a force like that in the C:SM book. I'm sorry you don't feel that way.

The vanilla space marine codex just doesn't pull that off very well.

Again, I disagree. But I'm sorry you feel that way. To me "line breaking, hard assault force" can mean many things...not just ball busting assault troops.

Actually I was talking more about your poor arguments and insistence on implying im a codex hopping power gamer.

Poor arguments is a matter of opinion. Why make the jump if you claim you are not a person of that ilk? Don't smoke and mirrors your way to claiming otherwise. You are changing books not because you like your chapter and how it runs. You are jumping codexes because you want the biggest, shiniest, marine army you can have. It's no big deal, but at least admit it. Trying to cover it up with "well my army can't fit within the constraints of the C:SM book so I'm switching" is a cop out. I respect you though greatly, because at least your army is fully painted (and probably looks awesome, space sharks color scheme is cool as hell) when you are doing it. Others care even less.

Last I checked the blood angels were also a codex chapter. Funny how that works.

The key word here is were. GW has retcon'd their background completely. I don't remember BA raging in 2nd edition or suddenly having a sh!t ton of assault troops in their codex, do you? As years go by, their chapter looks more and more like a complete divergent chapter to the likes of SW. The Dark Angels codex is inferior to most, but at least they didn't add dumb units that never existed before in the older canon. Some of the new units, characters, deepstriking landraiders from the BA codex is laughable.

3250.

Excellent. That is a lot of points painted. That's quite the accomplishment and commitment of time to finish that. In all seriousness, I salute you sir.

Anyway, this is a stupid argument and this post was maddeningly long. I'm done... Almost.

Agreed. Like I've said about 6 times now, lets see what happens. My gut and experience tells me that lists with assault marine spam in it aren't going to be as good as a list that has diversity in it's troops.

Coming from someone that didn't know blood angels was a codex chapter thats rich. Does your ivory tower have stairs? Or are you stuck up there?

Actually, I've known that for a long time since I played BA at one point back in 2nd edition. But nice try. Nice attempt at an insult as well. I'd retort with something clever, but I'd rather sleep at this point, so I'll refrain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Terminus wrote:I long stopped paying attention to the minutia of this argument, since it seems to be an ad nauseum repetition of the same thing over and over again, but I will say this.

That list posted a few pages ago with all the AV11 razorbacks and 5-man assault squads? Any one of my IG lists would absolutely RAPE that army. Half of it would be gone after one shooting phase, cover or not. The same lists hate tactical squads. Their size makes them tough to wipe out even if I tag them with a couple of demo charges, and those bolters can make a real mess of my infantry lines (yeah yeah, I haven't gone all mech, even though most lists still have 10 vehicles... but if you paid for 120 krieg models, you'd want to use them too.

I agree with you. My IG would decimate it as well. Case in point, I faced a similar SOB list like this past weekend. Lots of Immolators, rhinos, etc. about 8 or 9 vehicles I think. After the first shooting phase my opponent lost all but 2 of his AV11 boxes.

C'mon you two, just drop it. You both have in the thousands of posts on here, so it would be pretty silly to see one of you get the boot because a flamewar started over the new BA codex.

If you guys had started the hobby playing BA like I did (because I was poor and the PDF was free) you wouldn't be having this argument. Get over your egos and move on.



Now that is out of the way, we can talk about something more on topic.

This codex looks like it is going to suffer from the same problem that the IG codex did: too many cool combos and not enough points to take them all. I think my list will run a nice balance of LRC with asstermies, couple rhinos with tacs, maybe some assault squads with jetpacks and meltas. Oh yeah, and a sprinkling of sanguinary priests.

LOL. Yes...lets keep adding ridiculous comments to an already tired circular argument... that always works for me.

For someone that doesn't want to convince anyone of anything you seem to love circular logic. I figured I would humor you.

Well duh! Have you even seen the list posted a few pages back? It's a glass hammer. I'm not the only one in this thread that shares that assessment but since I was the first to mention that it was, I guess I'm the goat, huh? I've seen many incarnations of lists like that and I'm here to tell you that they are a glass hammer. But again, go on believing what you want. That's perfectly fine with me.

I think the issue is that all you've said is "It's weak throw in tacticals".

Really? Really....I have to explain this? What good does an assault unit do when you are wasting their primary potential? That would be like me just driving around my BT crusader squads all game. Most likely this unit is getting FC. You mean to tell me you are going to waste it? With BA tacticals it's just a nice bonus. Assault marines will live and die by it.

In the situation assault marines put out more firepower and handle the countercharge better. You're not making any sense. What the hell are you trying to say?

Again, I don't quite see how you think a hand flamer is the roxxor. I'd rather have that idle heavy weapon instead. It might actually be useful in the earlier parts of the game when I'm stationary, or farther away. A hand flamer? Completely useless.

You gave a situation claiming the tacticals superiority. I disputed that. Welcome to the magic of a fluid conversation. Try and keep up chap.

Go back and reread the rest of the list. It's predators or vindicators depending on which list you look at. Sorry, I'm not jumping up and down for those units. With a side armor 11 it isn't that difficult to get side shots on them that can harm them.

It is with the vaunted tacticals heavy weapons though you're right, it's not hard to manage side shots on the. The big ticket for vindicators is their ability to move in blocks, thus negating the side armor issue entirely (chimeras do this too).

My argument is simple.

Actually your arguments been all over the place and wishy washy.

BA armies will need some degree of tactical squads in their armies to solve some of their firepower and midrange issues. Period.

Which makes no sense. The average 7 extra shots you get by double tapping and the 7 shots you get at 24" on occasion are basically just filler. Mathematically they accrue virtually no real interest over the course of most games. It takes 8 bolter shots on average to kill a single marine, thats dreadfully inefective "midrange" firepower. The heavy weapon brings that up but thats long range, not mid, and it's hardly mobile or flexible when it's the primary focus of the unit.

LOL. Are you even looking at the lists? 5 razorbacks and 6 predators + 25 marines? Where's the scary parts? LOL.

The 11 fast tanks with hard hitting heavy weapons? It's a hell of a lot scarier than a horde of tac marines.

Switching to a balance of tactical and assault allows your small amount of guys to actually contribute shooting if needed...can get access to FC, so their charges (when they make them) can hurt just as much. Also putting more than 25 guys on the table is a start as well. Most marine armies I play against have at least 35 or more in some cases.

Adding 10 tacticals reduces the number of razorbacks (thus the number of heavy weapons) for a marginal and statistically meaningless increase in >24 inch firepower. I'm not seeing the big deal with the switch. Every tank fielded has midrange firepower, and the list looks like it could use an assault element. The tacticals would hardly be plugging some kind of giant hole in the list.

Again, why maximize on something that can be easily silenced?

For an early game alpha strike at range? It works for dark eldar.

Why maximize on something that gives away KPs easy? Are you seriously thinking this list can actually table an opponent?

It wouldn't surprise me, it puts out equivalent firepower to an ig gunline and those manage to do so.

That seems like the only way they'll be able to win IMHO.

Actually 25 scoring bodies isn't a bad total for a marine player in the tournament scene. Other than pedro kantor stern lists and the odd tac spam army most seem to field 20-30 on average.

Again, I sound like a broken record here, but I PLAY an army like this...and more often than not some missions are not going to favor your force selection if you go too heavy in one area. What does this army do in DoW missions? Stay off the entire table? That's risky.

I play mixed force and I don't see the big deal with lacking tacticals. I'm consistently underwhelmed by their lackluster abilities in al fields. As for dawn of war, it's not as risky as it seems. If they go second an entire army of fast moving vehicles with heavy weapons is at a tremendous advantage.

So you are basically crossing your fingers and praying then? What happens when you cross paths with an IG army that can force you to reroll the smoke save...or as lame as it sounds, the Tau army that can remove it all together? Lastly if you are smokin' you ain't shooting. I'll take that trade off. Smoke doesn't always work and gambling your scoring units like that is fine with me.

Well we were comparing ridiculous analogies. I went for something similar to the swarmlord idea where one unit can't do anything at all and the other can at least hope to cause damage.

Tacticals are fine for what they do. While you may think they are over priced, others do not.

And I'm sure people still think the world is flat somewhere too. Presence of opinion does not equate to correctness of thought.

From a fire power stand point they are okay as well.

Not for their points cost. Most units in the game put out more firepower for less cost. Not most troops choices, most units. Most anything. They are reaaaaaallllly not cost effective for firepower output. ~200 points for 7 bolters, a special weapon (that wont get used well if theyre using the heavy) and a heavy weapon (that wont get used well if theyre using the special) + whatever the sarge has is a bad price to pay.

Assault marines do one thing well and one thing only...and that's giving a charge (and some even think they don't even do that well at that either). Receiving a charge they are no better, or worse than tacticals.

I'm pretty sure having more attacks makes them receive charges better.

Adding more special weapons to the unit actually weakens them since they are now getting less attacks to throw on a charge and truly wasting the FC that they might have.

And tacs waste the FC any better? Or waste the heavy when using the special any less? Or the other way around?

Again, I'm only offering commentary on the lists posted by Deadshane. He feels those are killer lists, I and a few others disagree. It's as simple as that.

Yeah, but all of your arguments have been treating the assault marines as if they were taking on the enemy alone.

For BA? Why not? With the ability to attach a SHP, suddenly they seem pretty damn good to me? Who gives a fig what their WS is when most marine on marine engagements everyone is hitting on 4's anyways?

Well they just lose against marines. Thats a given. statistically they will not do enough to break a unit likely the marines will hold, and then the scouts will break or die in the following round. The WS is more important against armies like the tau or orks though when the enemy is hitting back on a 3+ it hurts too.

With the khp thats a surprisingly pricy unit with 3 kill points to throw into the enemy as a suicide assault.

Really? That's funny, because I don't see too many of them anymore. They are as predictable as an all drop pod army was in 4th. People have seen it enough times to know how to beat it. I haven't lost to a Vulkan list in months. I've also seen other builds do well in tournaments also. Vulkan isn't the savior for C:SM. Only the true salamander players have stuck with this list. The other bandwagoners have move on from it. Most of those people are playing their marines as SW now...LOL...soon to be Red marines.

Huh. Tournaments around here still feature a few. I guess I don't live in your ivory tower though, so the metagame up there is probably different.

It shows that you aren't alone in playing a list like that. The difference is those other people can make their lists work without having to switch codexes. Why is that?

I think this is where we run into an impasse. I was considering switching armies for fluff purposes because the blood angels (A codex chapter) function more closely to the army I play the Space Sharks (Another codex chapter). I didn't jump on the space wolf bandwagon because they weren't any closer than the halfway I managed to get using shrike and assault marines. I was going to switch to the BA primarily because they actually have veteran assault squads and vanguard units that aren't a joke, they make the army that mine is in the fluff feasible.

However I guess I'm just trying to powergame in your mind.

Newsflash: It's not suppose to! Codex marines were never assault oriented at all. While they do have some beefy CC units, that isn't the books primary focus.

Blood angels are codex marines. You seem to have no idea what you're talking about.

I'm a firm believer that Vanguard can work. The problem is that it requires over specialization in an army that suffers from doing so. If you over specialize with vanilla marines, you usually are deficient somewhere else. That being said, Vanguard can work with the right kind of supporting cast. While not as points efficient as assault terminators, they are more of a mop up unit rather than a bulldozer unit. Will it magically beat every army out there? No, but then again no army can do that right now anyways.

Yes, they over specialize and become a third of your points very quickly for little durability and useless special abilities. They can be made to work, but that doesn't mean that they don't still suck pretty badly. I'm sure that paraiahs can be made to work too, so can chaos spawn. They still blow. The codexes aren't well balanced and vanguard are pretty terrible by almost universal consensus.

Dunno about that, the ability to be able to take bikes more than makes up for the loss of not being able to take terminator armor. Most guys in the command squad can take storm shields...which makes them fairly durable. The only real downside is they are vulnerable to things like IG Executioners, etc. but that can be somewhat mitigated.

Well that and the units astronomic cost once you give them close combat weapon options. Thats the problem. Its not their effectiveness. It's their effectiveness for how much they cost (Which with stormshields and powerweapons/fists is a hell of a lot).

Honor guard seem like a choice to take in bigger games. but are still a decent unit.

They have a virtually identical statline to assault terminators, but without an inv save. If you give them similar equipment (thunderhammers, lightning claws, storm shields) they actually end up costing more while being the same (except without the inv). They are a decent unit in a vacume (questionably) but they cost too much to only have a single wound with no INV save.

Okay, so from a fluff standpoint that tells me that their tacticals would ride in pods, and your fast attack choices would most likely carry 2-3 assault squads. With other stuff to fill in the holes, OR Ironclad dreads in pods followed by a mechanized force to break through the IronClads "line breaking" abilities. There is lots of ways of representing a force like that in the C:SM book. I'm sorry you don't feel that way.

I have that army. I don't feel it represents them very well due to the inadequacies of the C:SM assault elements. How about you step the feth off and not tell me how exactly a variant chapter with a one paragraph description thats 20 years old is supposed to be played?

Again, I disagree. But I'm sorry you feel that way. To me "line breaking, hard assault force" can mean many things...not just ball busting assault troops.

I'm sure it does. And in the magical fairy lala land where you live I'm sure that opinin holds some weight. Down here in shumatopia It doesn't. Your just being kind of a catty tool about it. But then I suppose you would know better than me. I mean after all, I'm the one thats been playing this army for years. You have a much fresher perspective.

Why make the jump if you claim you are not a person of that ilk?

Because I'm not? Are you intentionally trollish or do you just have very few friends in life?

Don't smoke and mirrors your way to claiming otherwise. You are changing books not because you like your chapter and how it runs. You are jumping codexes because you want the biggest, shiniest, marine army you can have.

Except I'm not. I just want veteran assault squads. I don't care about the librarian dreads. I dont care about furiosos. I don't care about free transports. I don't care about the storm raven. I don't care about feel no pain.

I just want veteran assault squads back. Is that so wrong?

It's no big deal, but at least admit it.

You're a very hard person to like.

Trying to cover it up with "well my army can't fit within the constraints of the C:SM book so I'm switching" is a cop out.

No. It really isn't. I don't play an army that is well represented within the book. They made bizzare choices like removing T command squds and veteran assault troops in the most recent dex. They also removed the trait system that would have better allowed for the army to function as I believe its meant too. The blood angels have at least a little bit of that. Using shrike was the cop out, I'm trying to make the army more legitimate.

The key word here is were. GW has retcon'd their background completely. I don't remember BA raging in 2nd edition or suddenly having a sh!t ton of assault troops in their codex, do you? As years go by, their chapter looks more and more like a complete divergent chapter to the likes of SW. The Dark Angels codex is inferior to most, but at least they didn't add dumb units that never existed before in the older canon. Some of the new units, characters, deepstriking landraiders from the BA codex is laughable.

And I don't remember sternguard or vanguard or thunderfire canons or land raider varients before either. The game changes, they are still considered a codex chapter.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

C'mon you two, just drop it. You both have in the thousands of posts on here, so it would be pretty silly to see one of you get the boot because a flamewar started over the new BA codex.

I've never been banned over semi polite conversation before. Though this thread probably should have been locked a while ago, and I must admit, being called a powergamer for thinking about switching to the BA irked me some. I've been hoping people wouldn't start thinking that since it wasn't my intention and and cap'ns been hitting that hammer hard.

come on guys this is a game, let's stop this rant please, it is pointless!

Let's talk about Blood Angels and stay on topic

JohnHwangDD wrote:@Voronesh: I was clearly calling out what I believed to be an apples-to-oranges inconsistency, because I didn't believe that he was making a fair apples-to-apples case. I think that's a far cry from name-calling.

To be honest, John, the first thing that your previous post struck me as was an implied insult to CaptKaruthors.