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.

So, I'm new to 6th Edition, but the Templars seem to have a lot of advantages that made them popular a decade ago when I was playing 4th Ed.

They can get PFs in squads that can't be challenged... their ASMs have combat shields (and can upgrade to storm shields)...

Admittedly they're a bit limited in their R-back options (no assault cannon is sad), but it still seems like they are a viable codex (judging from Army Builder 'cause I don't have their newest 'dex)...

So I'm wondering if there's a fatal flaw to the BTs that I'm not seeing that would explain why no one seems to be posting lists in the other forum....

Long story short? BT are the worst of the marine armies in an edition where marine armies aren't good.

If they aren't the worst army in the game then they are definitely bottom 3. With the ability to codex hop with marine armies, then why use a defective book?

And the last BT codex you saw, is still the current BT codex. Single biggest problem is it is just to expensive, like every other 4e codex. Look what happened to Tau, the biggest change to them was just getting a price re-vamp and now they are very competitive.

 Carnage43 wrote:
Long story short? BT are the worst of the marine armies in an edition where marine armies aren't good.

If they aren't the worst army in the game then they are definitely bottom 3. With the ability to codex hop with marine armies, then why use a defective book?

Can you give me reasons why? I understand that choppy marines took a hit in 6th Ed, but I don't see why BT are the worst, they seem to have some advantages over Codex marines and I'm not seeing why the BTs are so bad.

Problem is that everyone's thoughts run along these lines...

Black Templars are a nasty army, but difficult to create and run. Lance? ok, they have Blessed Hulls. Dropping a lot of shots into my Crusader squad? ok, the integrated scouts will take the wounds and now you have incited a free move towards your troops. Use Predators a lot? Slap POTMS on them and make them more mobile.

Yes, BT is difficult and a bit pricey, but they are worth it if you are willing to put time into it.

BT marines are super overpriced, which really hurts their viability. They also don't have great shooting support options. I played BT successfully in 5th, but the lynchpins of my army (Terminators with Cyclones and Landspeeders) are no longer as effective. Anti-infantry fire is at an all-time high and results in TEQs dying way too quickly. Landspeeders are now a liability due to Flyers having the ability to easily alpha strike them (2 HP is also quite poor).

I really don't think BT are a good army in a competitive environment. If you want to play casually, you can make it work, otherwise use your BT as C:SM or SW.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
. Dropping a lot of shots into my Crusader squad? ok, the integrated scouts will take the wounds and now you have incited a free move towards your troops.
Yes, BT is difficult and a bit pricey, but they are worth it if you are willing to put time into it.

From my reading of the BRB wouldn't you have to play the scouts closer to the enemy to take them as casualties first? I had been thinking the opposite way for using a sword bretheren squad in PA with SS -- so I get to take the 3++ saves before anyone dies

BT marines are super overpriced, which really hurts their viability. They also don't have great shooting support options. I played BT successfully in 5th, but the lynchpins of my army (Terminators with Cyclones and Landspeeders) are no longer as effective.

I like termies also (for my HH list especially, 'cause I can give 'em a 4++) but can you give me a bit more info as to why you don't see the BT as viable in this edition?

I do apologize 'cause I am running (in my brain) 4th Ed rules, so I really need help to understand how 6th Ed is different from experienced players.

6th edition saw a nerf to transports. Troops can no longer sit inside vehicles to score objectives. That coupled with the hull point mechanic made vehicles less useful in the later stages of the game (which are IMO the defining moments).

This lead players to load up on infantry units and eschew transports for pure durability. You'll notice a lot more Guard blobs in 6th, as well as large blocks of Xenos infantry. The effect this had was that many players began taking more anti-infantry, rather than anti-tank guns. Plasmas are often favored over Melta, etc.

In my experience in 6th, the focus on anti-infantry weaponry has invalidated terminators. For what a Termie costs, it brings to bear very, very inefficient firepower. The 2+ save is great but is also very punishing if you have a few bad rolls. 1-2 1's can really cripple a Terminator squad.

Terminators also aren't so great vs Horde-style armies. You'll run into way more of these.

The last reason is simple: Heldrakes. Marine codices took a very big hit when the Heldrake was FAQd. BT marines are some of the priciest and lackluster Marines around. I wouldn't trust them to hold objectives or deal damage very well.

Lvalx hit some of the key points.

Transport nerfs means you have to expose yourself for at least 1 turn before seeing combat.
The transports themselves are more fragile, with hull points making vehicles much easier to kill.

Melee is now super....inconsistent. Random charge distances means that even a 3" charge isn't guaranteed to work anymore.
With overwatch and removing causalities from the front it's even more random for charge distances. I've seen it a few times where units 4-5 inches from melee take a few unlucky hits and end up 7-8 inches out, and then failed the charge roll.
Overall the prevailing opinion of melee is that it's a secondary method of dealing damage behind the superior ranged damage.

Marines in general have taken a beating in 6th. The ally rules mean that EVERYONE has access imperial guard blobs or chaos cultists, or ork boyz. Cheap troops are everywhere, and if you have cheap scoring troops, then you spend the rest on good offensive output. The compulsory space marine troop choices are very poor in terms of both damage output and staying power, so you are starting off with a handicap right there. Black templar in particular don't really bring anything special to the table that the other marine books couldn't do better and/or cheaper. Marines in general have seen a big decrease in terms of their general usefulness due to the decrease in cover saves and the increase in weapons that ignore their armor. Helldrakes alone have almost made foot based marines extinct, but suncannons, pseudo rending shuriken catapults, massed power weapons, template spam, the rise in plasma, and the general increased uselessness of good old bolter have made marines look really poor recently

I love my BT, we are a rare select group that still knows that we have a formidable army if used correctly. Alot of good comments have been made in this thread.

Thats my two cents since everything that need to be said has lol. my big thing is dont lose faith in our rightous xenos killing rage machines! we still got it!

Apostasus wrote:
From my reading of the BRB wouldn't you have to play the scouts closer to the enemy to take them as casualties first? I had been thinking the opposite way for using a sword bretheren squad in PA with SS -- so I get to take the 3++ saves before anyone dies

IIRC, the Neophytes are a little worse then what the Initiates can do (1 less WS and BS, less gear they can take) so they won't be as important as the Initiates who can whatever job you want them to do better. By using a Sword Bretheren squad to protect rather then to attack seems, IMO, a little wasteful to protect something that is less powerful then them. Sooner or later, you're gonna roll those 2s and 1s for you invulnerable saves so you might as well use the Neophytes as a meat shield to get the tougher guys to where they need to be. So yeah, put the Neophytes up frot to take all the blows first so that their betters can fight a little longer.