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.

 Paradigm wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:

 Thud wrote:
.

So, I'll flip the question around. What's good about it? What makes you excited about this book? I've got about 8k points, so I'd love to have my mind changed.

BA Specific units (DC, SangGuard) got much better/cheaper
Tacticals are now very good at close quarters battle, with HF and FC all round
Points drops on pretty much everything
Dante is a legitimate badass now
Can't see a bad unit in the book
New traits, relics and detachment are all pretty awesome

Admittedly, I'm no fan of the priest slot change (others don't bother me) and some SCs being majorly weakened (Tycho) or blanderised (Corbulo, Astorath) but o other than that, I am really liking this book at the moment.

I'm not saying its bad at all. I'm saying there's not enough good. There are no units or schemes to hang our hat on in this book. DC are just victims like they are now. Cheaper victims, but still victims.

]

Genuine question: do you think that is the fault of this codex, or of lingering imbalance from the anomalous Eldar book? You say your last games have all been against Eldar, so I'm wondering if that's tinting your opinion. Anyone with the ability to think can recognise that Eldar are easily a cut above the rest of the books in terms of sheer power, but I think the new BA book would shape up well against any other codex.

To be frank, I'd rather have a book that can fight on a level field with all bar one book than another one on level of Eldar.

I think a good Tau list, vanilla marine list, Necron list, or SW list can easily handle what this book can field. Every game, the DC will be mercilessly slaughtered with superior firepower unless they are put in an expensive box called a Land Raider. Nothing has changed here really except the price of DC jump packs. Once the DC are removed, the rest of the units in the book are meh.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gunzhard wrote:

Makumba wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I feel that Dante just continues the tradition of codex: trap unit. Dante is extremely expensive, and despite all the buffs, I'm not sure he is cost effective.

Shooting tanks with melta was never a problem for the old codex. Surviving fire from Necron/GK/IG/Eldar/Tau was. I don't see how that has changed at all, really.

It sounds a whole lot more like a necron GK IG Eldar TAU problem then a C:BA issue considering its the same issue vanilla has in any case.

There is nothing short of a my unit is unkillalbe USR that will fix those codexes...... and gotta remember that this is a game of war. you are expected to have to lose some models in on coming fire.

I kind of understand BA players not liking the new codex. All BA lists were made around assault marines in razorbacks and priests handing out fnP .
Now those no longer exist outside of unbound. It kind of sucks when someone with a 1500army sees that he now has to buy a whole new army. Because if the new one isn't better then the best army right now, one may as well buy the best one. Same money spend and better return.

Woa dude ...maybe all of "Goatboy's BOLS spammer lists" were made of assault marines in razorbacks, or at the kiddie table of some uber-stomp tournaments, but that is certainly not "the build" that defines Blood Angels. If you ran a Mephiston cheese spammer list, I'm kinda glad you'll be disappointed with this book, but overall I think "BA players" ARE liking the book - but the fact remains, none of us are actually using it yet.

There were basically zero viable lists from the 5th ed codex in the 7th ed environment. Does this codex change the math enough to put out viable lists? I'm not sure yet. The amount of casualties I regularly take outside 24" is not encouraging.

I feel like all the comparisons to tau/eldar/necron firepower are not really long for this world.

one of those armies is probably up next, and will most likely wane greatly in power to what it is currently, the other two will follow in short order with the same treatment.

This might have been asked already but what weapon options do DC have? Can they take storm shields for example?

Thanks in advance.

 Mumblez wrote:
This might have been asked already but what weapon options do DC have? Can they take storm shields for example?

Thanks in advance.

any model can swap their pistol for a boltgun for free, or upgrade to a hand flamer, inferno or plasma pistol

can also swap out pistol and/or chainsword for power weapon, power fist or thunder hammer

Mattel732 wrote: There were basically zero viable lists from the 5th ed codex in the 7th ed environment. Does this codex change the math enough to put out viable lists? I'm not sure yet. The amount of casualties I regularly take outside 24" is not encouraging.

Weird I play regularly and found the current/old codex works better now than in the last half of 5th edition. Eldar still usually beats me but it's typically close, and hey Eldar pretty much beats everyone.

Eldar is problematic, even for my crimson fists drop pod list, but tau have NEVER been a problem for my old BA. I honestly dont see whats so scary about them.

Good Tau builds can blast 5th ed BA off the table pretty quickly. Admittedly, if things go wrong, it can get ugly for them. 5th ed BA didn't have enough bodies to absorb all the ignore cover AP 2 S9 blasts.

 Arschbombe wrote:
There might be something in the fluff text about them (maybe killing them off), but I didn't have time to read the whole thing. I just noticed that whereas the other chapters each got a nice page and a blurb, there wasn't one for the Lamenters.

 Desubot wrote:
It was mentioned in the rumors page once some one got the book.

If you dont want the elite slot just play as a regular cad and get obsec instead.

Really no lamenters? thats a bloody shame

Could there be a possible Lamenters supplement incoming?

The problem with this book is the Troop and HQ tax.

The fact that so many units got worse but stayed the same points. Both Dreads, DC on foot, Baals... dear god, Baals!

The fact that FnP only confers to 1 unit.

The fact that Space Marines on foot are not good enough for 14pts to warrant taking en masse.

The fact that the only reason you will take the Troops choices is because you have to.

The fact that all of the inherent chapter tacticesque bonuses are only useful when you are charging into combat and you can't reliably do that with Marines without spending 200-250pts on a box to put them in.

The fact that their nice access to melta is still less efficient than Vanilla and Wolves.

The fact that an army built around Dante, Sanguinary Guard and/or JP Death Company will have not as many other threats to put down on the board to draw fire due to the Troops tax.

It's an underwhelming book that will end up being played in competitive environments only as a detachment/formation taken from the Supplement that will release next week for another £45... Same as the Nids and Wolves.

I saw yet more people in the thread inferring that all BA players were wanting a book that knocks tau and eldar on their backsides.

Blatantly false.

The thing I despise about the codex is how hard it tries to force unbound on you. With the tax-ticals for your required troops, and then the absolutely overflowing HQ and elite section. The detachment should've given more than just one extra elite, possibly an extra hq too.

I like most of the unit upgrades except for:
-the Tychos: downgraded to "never leave shelf" bad
-Mephiston: higher toughness doesn't do anything when you're in a squad of t4's.
-Astorath: still usable, just kinda bland
Blood talons: 10 points to gain shred on already s10 ap2 attacks? Dumb. Possible tie with Tycho as the worst points spent in the book.

And of course, as mentioned above, the 10 tactical guys that no one likes but your mom made you hang out with them anyway. Or you can try to convince your group that unbound isn't so bad, and then promptly get destroyed by Timmy's 8 riptides.

Lastly, the fact that if I want to play a successor chapter, my chapter master is either "Not-Dante" or "Not-Seth." People have been asking for a blank chapter master ever since the last book, and still no love. I'm sure we'll finally get that option next book when we're folded into the "all the marines" codex, since we're now not much different from them than black Templars were.

Niv, everything keeps coming back to the original sin of tactical marines being terrible.

Ally BA to get your Preist and Drop pod for your centurions.

Except a twin assault cannon baal pred with heavy bolter sponsons is 10 points cheaper than the last book.

Sorry to ask again, how does the Baal Strike Force Detachment look like?

Martel732 wrote:
Niv, everything keeps coming back to the original sin of tactical marines being terrible.

Oh I don't disagree. They're pretty dead weight on the table. My problem with them is that they're not fun or interesting on the table either. Jump pack assault marines on the other hand feel tactically engaging, even if they're also lackluster in the current game state.

 Gunzhard wrote:


Woa dude ...maybe all of "Goatboy's BOLS spammer lists" were made of assault marines in razorbacks, or at the kiddie table of some uber-stomp tournaments, but that is certainly not "the build" that defines Blood Angels. If you ran a Mephiston cheese spammer list, I'm kinda glad you'll be disappointed with this book, but overall I think "BA players" ARE liking the book - but the fact remains, none of us are actually using it yet.

First of don't call me a dude. And second why kiddy table, all BA lists from tournaments I have seen run razorbacks with Amarine. Tacs were realy bad, they weren't run and people don't own them. I said nothing about the book being good or bad, because I haven't seen it played. I play IG, and I said it many times before, but that doesn't mean I don't understand people who suddenly lost 50% of their armies. It is not fun to have spent ton of money on stuff you can no longer use and that is more or less what happened here. No CAD or formation or FW list can help, when Amarines can't take razorbacks.

If GW suddenly decided to make vets elite and the only troop choice suddenly became rought rider, I would have the right to be pissed off too.

My flesh tearers are kinda pissed off as well. They are no longer codex compliant. Aside from a few begrudgingly accepting
Devastator duty, they are an all assault force. If tacs could take a CCW it wouldn't be as bad. But no, they give the assault-focused
space marines an assault focused chapter tactic, then force them to field either 2x5 HF RB tac squads, or 2x5 infiltrating scout squads.
Looks like I get to wait for BA's horus heresy rules for my DOA jump pack army.

Are the vehicles still fast?
Do they still have Reclusiarchs?
Is Dante finally playbable?
Do Veterans differ a lot from vanilla ones?

And finally: Is the codex actually good?

Finally, I can run my RG with no lament that they aren't BA!

Is this yet another step along the path to players maturing enough to use unbound for style rather than 8 riptides?

 Tigramans wrote:
Are the vehicles still fast?
Do they still have Reclusiarchs?
Is Dante finally playbable?
Do Veterans differ a lot from vanilla ones?

And finally: Is the codex actually good?

Rhinos, Baals and Razorbacks are. Predators and Vindies can be upgraded.
No.
Playable, yes.
No.

To the last question: read the last two pages.

 soomemafia wrote:

 Tigramans wrote:
Are the vehicles still fast?
Do they still have Reclusiarchs?
Is Dante finally playbable?
Do Veterans differ a lot from vanilla ones?

And finally: Is the codex actually good?

Rhinos, Baals and Razorbacks are. Predators and Vindies can be upgraded.
No.
Playable, yes.
No.

To the last question: read the last two pages.

It seems to be the worst BA codex so far.

O_o really?

You'd take the WD book or the 3E pamphlet over the new one?

 soomemafia wrote:

Rhinos, Baals and Razorbacks are. Predators and Vindies can be upgraded.
No.
Playable, yes.
No.

To the last question: read the last two pages.

Read, and sighed.

Its ok guys the full Jump Pack army is not dead!

The answer? Counts as space wolves :-)

Using the champions of fenris supplement you don't need troops and can instead take elite wolveguard units with jump packs. They have lots of attacks at WS:5 with counter attack and the option of special weapons.
You can take wolf priests who give FNP and Prefered enemy as counts as Sanguinary priests.
Murderfang makes a great standin for a death company dread with his infantry mulching claws.

Plus you can take flyers in every slot to gain that fast, soaring blood angels feel at the low low cost of ....your soul.

Jesus Christ, BA have been nerfed like you wouldn't believe!
Oh well, what are the stats for the new BA tac squads.


Please don't attach non wargaming images to Dakka.
reds8n

niv-mizzet wrote:
And of course, as mentioned above, the 10 tactical guys that no one likes but your mom made you hang out with them anyway. Or you can try to convince your group that unbound isn't so bad, and then promptly get destroyed by Timmy's 8 riptides.

Some thoughts on Unbound and the new codex:

- When you're only using Unbound to use the same list as you've been using for the last 5 years, are people really going to have a problem with that? If so, I strongly suggest finding another group of players.

- You playing Unbound does not somehow force you to play a stupid 8-tide list (which I'd guess only a handful of people worldwide own anyway); you can still refuse the game on the basis you won't enjoy it, doing so does not reflect on you as a person

- A page back, someone complained that you need to use unbound to build a 'simple, fluffy' list. Well, that's exactly what it's fething for! The whole point of unbound is to be able to build the army you want, exactly how you want it. Building things like classic BA lists is exactly what the designers would have had in mind when they wrote the rules!

I really think the community at large would benefit from accepting Unbound. There's nothing inherently wrong with it as a system, and while you have to rely on the integrity of your fellow gamers not to abuse it, the same could be said of any set of units and restrictions. If you can't trust players not to exploit the system, then frankly I would endeavour to find players that you can.

If you can't trust players not to exploit the system, then frankly I would endeavour to find players that you can.

Simply not an option for a lot of people who live in areas with relatively small circles of 40K players. The fluff-building capabilities of Unbound are precisely the capabilities that permit the 8 Riptide Army... which is just as justifiably "fluffy", only Riptides are simply given superior rules to most every other unit in the game.

 Paradigm wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:
And of course, as mentioned above, the 10 tactical guys that no one likes but your mom made you hang out with them anyway. Or you can try to convince your group that unbound isn't so bad, and then promptly get destroyed by Timmy's 8 riptides.

Some thoughts on Unbound and the new codex:

- When you're only using Unbound to use the same list as you've been using for the last 5 years, are people really going to have a problem with that? If so, I strongly suggest finding another group of players.

- You playing Unbound does not somehow force you to play a stupid 8-tide list (which I'd guess only a handful of people worldwide own anyway); you can still refuse the game on the basis you won't enjoy it, doing so does not reflect on you as a person

- A page back, someone complained that you need to use unbound to build a 'simple, fluffy' list. Well, that's exactly what it's fething for! The whole point of unbound is to be able to build the army you want, exactly how you want it. Building things like classic BA lists is exactly what the designers would have had in mind when they wrote the rules!

I really think the community at large would benefit from accepting Unbound. There's nothing inherently wrong with it as a system, and while you have to rely on the integrity of your fellow gamers not to abuse it, the same could be said of any set of units and restrictions. If you can't trust players not to exploit the system, then frankly I would endeavour to find players that you can.

 DarthOvious wrote:


Is that we should tell the SM bike squads?

They burn an HQ to do that. An HQ that you can spend on your psychic-character-dreadnaught.

But yeah it's a terrible codex and you'll email GW about how you've quit the hobby I'm sure. I'm sure they care.

 Paradigm wrote:

 Thud wrote:
.

So, I'll flip the question around. What's good about it? What makes you excited about this book? I've got about 8k points, so I'd love to have my mind changed.

BA Specific units (DC, SangGuard) got much better/cheaper
Tacticals are now very good at close quarters battle, with HF and FC all round
Points drops on pretty much everything
Dante is a legitimate badass now
Can't see a bad unit in the book
New traits, relics and detachment are all pretty awesome

Admittedly, I'm no fan of the priest slot change (others don't bother me) and some SCs being majorly weakened (Tycho) or blanderised (Corbulo, Astorath) but o other than that, I am really liking this book at the moment.

Sanguinary Guard go cheaper, yes, but they're still fairly pricey and crap on their own. And if you start adding characters to support them, it gets expensive quickly. And then they still get shot up. Just like before. DC got cheaper jump packs and scoring. They lost re-rolls to wound from regular Chaplains who used to be Elites. Now, you'll not only need to spend more points on a more expensive character to get that re-roll, but you have to waste one of your HQ slots. And WS4. Sure, you could get it back up to 5, but then your new, cheaper squad is suddenly more expensive than it used to be.

Both units are still usable, they're not Pyrovores or anything, but I would not call them "much better." A lateral move, at best.

Point drops? Aside from special characters, everything's been brought in line with C:SM. Ok. This makes Bikes, Tac Marines, Scout Bikes, Predators etc viable options. But it doesn't make them fantastic or exciting. They're just the same fillers from the vanilla book, and the units that really needed some point drops (Terminators, Land Raiders, Dreadnoughts) didn't get them and are still pants. Of course, there are also points increases. Sternguard combis are now more expensive, Attack Bikes are more expensive, Frag Cannons for the Furioso are more expensive...

Dante? Dante is a trap. He's very good at punching certain things. He's also very good at dying to other things. He's also expensive on his own while still needing support. Stick him in pretty much any half-decent unit and you're breaking 400 points at least. He's also worse at everything that doesn't involve punching people. His hat is now more or less useless, he used to get no scatter at all plus a warlord trait, he screwed over opponent ICs, etc. Sure, that last one is an example of one of those abilities that are idiotic, and should be removed from the game, but the fact remains; Dante is worse.

No bad units in the book? I'm gonna let Tycho slide for the sake of the argument, but on the same note, there aren't really any very good units either. Maybe Mephiston. Probably Mephiston. He's got some interesting applications that are not only good, but also cool. We may have different opinions on what constitutes bad units, but I'd definitely argue that Terminators and Dreadnoughts (DC and stock) suck and the Whirlwind isn't exactly awesome. In addition, Baal Predators, Death Company, Sanguinary Guard and Assault Marines weren't very good in the old book, and are now either about the same (DC), slightly better but still poor (Sanguinary Guard), or straight up nerfed (Baals and Assault Marines). And then there are Vanguard Veterans which are crappier versions of Death Company.

Traits, detachment and relics. The traits suck. Let's be honest here. Dante's is fine, but only because you know he's coming with it. If you go non-unique Warlord, and you're picking traits based on what's good, you're taking the Red Finkin' Cap and double strategic every time. The relics are ok. There are some cool ones, but nothing amazing, and some of them are quite limiting in their use. An example is the aforementioned Red Finkin' Cap (I can't for the life of me remember its actual name); you'll need BA to be your primary, you'll need a non-SC to be your warlord, and you'd rather not take the detachment so you get two rolls with re-rolls to get max advantage of the strategic table. That gets pretty tricky if you also want a Warlord that isn't fairly weak and close to the action. As for the detachment, I'm unimpressed. The lack of I5 wasn't what made BAs crap in 6th and 7th, and without having fixed all the other problems with an assaulty Marine army, it's not suddenly going to make BAs super awesome. They still get shot to bits and as an aggressive army without obsec they will struggle with actually winning games.


So, what does it leave you? A Space Marine army missing a lot of the actual good units, instead having a couple of special punchy units, and, well, not a lot else.




For those of you happy with the codex, can you make a list matching the following criteria?

- 1500 points, battle forged.
- You can use allies, but the BA part should at least be close to 2/3 of the list.
- Not just a worse version of a SM list.
- Not garbage that will just get blown off the table by any reasonably good list (you don't need to dominate WS spam, just have an honest chance against good armies).