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.

I'm just curious since their point costs are the same for just about everything in the vanilla SM book and can make use of broken tactics that normal SM can't like loading up on BP CCW neophytes and initiates in drop pods and stay inside them for a turn then assault out of them since they are open topped

They are not awful, just overpriced.

C:SM has the same issue. Break out the DA book and compare costs from that codex.

Those are the same people who think bugs are awful, pay them no mind.

The Drop Pod / Dreadnaught Trick is hilarious. I came up against it recently.

"What do you mean he's still inside?"

BT is probably the worst list in the game with perhaps the exception of the BA. It's the one of the worst because of what the models cost for what they are capable of on the battlefield. Having a codex full of overcosted units is one of the definitions of a bad codex. Another interpretation of bad codices are ones with poor internal balance, like Tyranids.

Martel732 wrote:
BT is probably the worst list in the game with perhaps the exception of the BA. It's the one of the worst because of what the models cost for what they are capable of on the battlefield. Having a codex full of overcosted units is one of the definitions of a bad codex. Another interpretation of bad codices are ones with poor internal balance, like Tyranids.

Except Tyranids are a top tier codex. 6th Edition made life harder for some codecies (BA being the one people point at the most...rightfully so) while greatly enhancing other codecies. Tyrands, with the addition of Biomancy and Flying MCs, may have gotten the best facelift from 6th edition, but if people haven't seen them since 6th dropped, they wouldn't know how brutal they can now be. Psst...they're pretty amazing now.

As for Templars, I don't have much experience with them, but people tend to use the word "suck" and "crap" to define units that can totally function and win games. The older the codex, the easier it is to dismiss it. BT are super old and have wonky rules that may not jive the best with 6th edition, but that doesn't mean you can't have fun playing, painting, and potentially winning with them. Just know that you're going to be running an uphill battle when facing off against the newest, super amazing shooty codecies (Tau and Eldar) that have started to define the new meta.

Tyranids might have top tier builds, but the lack of internal balance still fits one of the definitions of a bad codex. It's a bad codex, but not in the same way that BA or BT are bad. Although I'd argue that the BA codex has horrible internal balance as well. That makes it doubly terrible.

Very few books have good internal balance though tbh, Necrons are top tier and half their book is trash, a big chunk of the Nid book is bad and they a couple of competitive builds etc etc. Its actually pretty difficult to name armies which have more than one competitive choice in every slot even in the most recent books - Tau fit (just, Marker Drones being the second Fast option is pretty thin), Eldar almost fit (Elites are marginal, depends on how you define Wraithguard) and Dark Angels definitely don't fit

Just out of curiosity, what's the "assault out of the pod" trick OP is talking about?
I wasn't aware of that.

Yes, by the "internal balance" standard, most GW codices are poorly written. And I'd say that most are very poorly written. GW cynically puts in trap units that are mathematically garbage and hopes some poor sucker likes the models. It's not that hard to make each choice within a slot about the same power level. It just requires a little thinking and math.

 phoenix darkus wrote:
Just out of curiosity, what's the "assault out of the pod" trick OP is talking about?
I wasn't aware of that.

The trick I'm talking about is with the newest faq for BT their Drop Pods no longer require you to disembark after landing so you can bunker down a nice assault unit in their for a turn after landing and the disembark and assault the next turn since they are open topped.

While I agree that BT have some overpriced units (sword bretheren) they still have some very good choices that are priced the same as normal SM units.

They by far have the best generic captains since they have access to EW and grant awsome double cyclone terminator squads that can buy special rules like tank hunters. They can get tank hunter dreads which makes the hellfire loadout very useful.

The DFtS book also gave them access to stormravens and stormtalons.

I have found that DP lists to be the best kind for BT since they can pull sone nasty cheese moves with it and they save a few points on their pods.

EDIT: Oh and also being able to grant army wide 5+ DtW is also very useful

Is that all drop pods or just black templar? My blood angel friend would love that as he is still running an assault based army. Also i understand players being unhappy with codecs but at the same time i think it really depends on how competitive you are. I went from dark eldar to nids and absolutely love my the change. People say this and that about the codex and i would welcome some more cheese, but that hasn't stopped me from having a great time using them.

 Rotary wrote:
Is that all drop pods or just black templar? My blood angel friend would love that as he is still running an assault based army. Also i understand players being unhappy with codecs but at the same time i think it really depends on how competitive you are. I went from dark eldar to nids and absolutely love my the change. People say this and that about the codex and i would welcome some more cheese, but that hasn't stopped me from having a great time using them.

Just BT otherwise you would see much more assaukt based DP armies

Black Templars have always been harder to play, but riddled with "Easter eggs". This is still true.

Tyranids are terrifying, currently, with a proper build.

Blood Angels may have suffered in 6th, but its karma ( flying librarian dreads and land raiders falling from the sky, what?). You can still do incredible things with them.

IMO - as long as you are having fun, game on.

No, there's not much "incredible" coming out the BA codex. I'm sick of people claiming this. BA have more than "suffered". I think every competitive build got broken from 5th and nothing replaced them.

BA do have one really nasty Rock build left. People laugh when they hear it, but I know a guy running it to great effect. He beat me at the final table of Fight Club Atlanta, he lost to 11th Company Neil at the final table of a RTT in Charlotte. It's probably not GT worthy because it has a few terrible hard counters, but it shines in Regionals, where it can win 4 games.

3 Storm Ravens with Mephiston
Allied Vanilla or BT (he usually uses BT, just to further brag when he wins) with another Raven.

It's an anti meta build for sure. He hides Mephy out of LOS and runs him across the board to slam into something weak, or uses him to screen for his Troops (as Mephy is really good at killing most MCs)

Yes, I've seen such builds on the internets. Given that the units inside the Stormravens DO count against your deployment options, those few units you have at the start of the game are very lonely indeed.

Given that this list will almost certainly be automatically tabled if it goes second against a SW drop pod list, I'm hesistant to call it a rock build. It also doesn't help that the Stormraven sucks for its price.

The Stormraven is the Daemon killer though. There is one reliable way in the entire codex to kill a Raven...Lash Prince with Iron Arm. There are a lot more Daemon Armies at tournaments than SW Drop Pod Armies.

He also doesn't run anything in the Ravens (so with proper dispersion it's pretty safe from tabling via Drop Pod). They're gun ships. I mean I'm not pretending the list doesn't have "auto losses," but it's still a nasty little piece of work, and I've seen it (and lost to it) at the final table of a pretty decent Regional. Again, not GT worthy, but worth mentioning (especially since he's running two "dead" codexes and doing really well).

Oh, it's a horde of empty Stormravens. I must confess that I have considered proxying this to see how it goes. The idea of not having any heavy support until turn 2/3 still does not really appeal to me. This list does punish helldrakes pretty amusingly, though. Although lately, I've been having bigger problems with Eldar "Endless STR 6 shots" lists LOL WTF owning my BA.

The results may speak for themselves, but I find this excessively gimmicky compared to Necron/Tau/Eldar lists.

Templars are not awful. People consider them as such because they are not viable or competitve or whatever idiotic trite term is used for a one-click army. They require a lot of finesse in the list building, otherwise, it can become very easy to over build the army and make expensive units too expensive. As it is an old codex, there are a lot of nickel-and-dime charges things like spotlights and grenades.

There are also some really cool features, too. 20 man squads, Land Raider Crusaders as troop transports, Litanies of Hate, and two heavy weapons for terminators to name a few. It requires more than a little imagination to make Templars work.

To get a bit back on track, the new C:SM book will tell the tale on meqs for this whole edition. If GW puts out a book that just gets erased by Eldar and Tau like they do now, I might just sit out till 7th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
Templars are not awful. People consider them as such because they are not viable or competitve or whatever idiotic trite term is used for a one-click army. They require a lot of finesse in the list building, otherwise, it can become very easy to over build the army and make expensive units too expensive. As it is an old codex, there are a lot of nickel-and-dime charges things like spotlights and grenades.

There are also some really cool features, too. 20 man squads, Land Raider Crusaders as troop transports, Litanies of Hate, and two heavy weapons for terminators to name a few. It requires more than a little imagination to make Templars work.

Imagination only gets you so far before reality comes back into the mix. Competitive lists are not one-click, or my BA would have *zero* wins. People make mistakes. But a person with a competitive list versus a person with say BT or BA can afford to make far more mistakes than the guy with BT or BA. If both players make the same amount of mistakes, the superior codex will win most (nearly all, barring dice) of the time. BA also have "cool features", but none of these features actually help the BA win in 6th.

 Voidwraith wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
BT is probably the worst list in the game with perhaps the exception of the BA. It's the one of the worst because of what the models cost for what they are capable of on the battlefield. Having a codex full of overcosted units is one of the definitions of a bad codex. Another interpretation of bad codices are ones with poor internal balance, like Tyranids.

Except Tyranids are a top tier codex. 6th Edition made life harder for some codecies (BA being the one people point at the most...rightfully so) while greatly enhancing other codecies. Tyrands, with the addition of Biomancy and Flying MCs, may have gotten the best facelift from 6th edition, but if people haven't seen them since 6th dropped, they wouldn't know how brutal they can now be. Psst...they're pretty amazing now.

As for Templars, I don't have much experience with them, but people tend to use the word "suck" and "crap" to define units that can totally function and win games. The older the codex, the easier it is to dismiss it. BT are super old and have wonky rules that may not jive the best with 6th edition, but that doesn't mean you can't have fun playing, painting, and potentially winning with them. Just know that you're going to be running an uphill battle when facing off against the newest, super amazing shooty codecies (Tau and Eldar) that have started to define the new meta.

Yea tyranids are good only if you run 2 flyrants and triple tervigon spam and build aroound that. Otherwise the army is terrible. Your relying on the fact thatt you get lucky with biomancy to get the right powers. With armies coming out now getting decent AA the flyrant can be easiy put down, as its save is only 3+ it gets grounded and its pretty much done for. As my friend plays nids he literly relies on those biomancy powers and if he doesnt get them then there goes the game. Granted my friend only has one tervigon at the moment and doesnt have great of luck with nids.

Martel732 wrote:
It also doesn't help that the Stormraven sucks for its price.

Couldn't disagree with you more. Those things are an abomination. Two are bad enough. Four? I think I'd just smile kindly at my opponent, tell him "OK, you win. Now please get that off my table so I can play a game with someone."

How exactly is a 200 pt vehicle with only AV 12 HP 3 and no ability to ignore cover an abomination? I'd much rather see Stormravens than Helldrakes (harder to kill, ignore cover) or Vendetta (Far more HP and fire power per army point spent)

Personally I just converted all my space marines over to BT (I knew the rumors about the new codex). They fit my preferred play style. Do they have things that make them over priced and bad. Yes most codices do but, they have cheaper lascannons, plasma guns, and drop pods. There LRC spam that they can do and the assault squad able to take all melta bombs. The special skills also make them a lot better. Now on the flip side the rest of there heavy weapons are over price and I have noticed with my lists that most of my points are sitting in the HQ slot (if I take a command squad). In the lower point games it is hard to compensate the over pricing but when you get into higher games its a lower deviation. Usually I run a horde of marines and neophytes backed up by a couple 5 man squads with lascannon/plasma. And vindicators can be really annoying for the other guy. Take 3 give them power of the machine spirit and your dropping templates on there front lines immediately. I saw the mention of the dual cyclone launcher and tank hunters. I haven't tried this yet but I think it could work better is 2 assault cannons with tank hunters. lower strength but more shots and rending could push you over the top. Also the "space marine death star (assault terminators in land raider)" can be improved with the ability to give assault terminators furious charge. Rhinos and razorbacks are worthless thought.

And also where is the mentioning of the ability to stay in drop pods in the FAQ's I don't see a thing about that.

The drop pods don't say that you must disembark unlike normal drop pod rules where you have to

Would anybody do one of the old 3rd edition style 5 man lascannon/plasma gun squads as troops? Not necessarily the only troops, just one possibility.

 A GumyBear wrote:
The drop pods don't say that you must disembark unlike normal drop pod rules where you have to

Yep, try insisting this in a game...

The_Slight_Brigade wrote:
Would anybody do one of the old 3rd edition style 5 man lascannon/plasma gun squads as troops? Not necessarily the only troops, just one possibility.

I used this in my last two games with black templar. those were also my first two games with BT. these 5man squads got annihilated. That being said I went up against a Daemon flying circus and an av13 necron spam list. sooo, i went up against some super cheesy lists while testing black templar for the first time.

But, I still see the value in these backfield fire support squads and still plan to field at least two, probably 3 of these units in my next game. I'm changing my tactic from footslogging to drop pods though.

 Voidwraith wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
BT is probably the worst list in the game with perhaps the exception of the BA. It's the one of the worst because of what the models cost for what they are capable of on the battlefield. Having a codex full of overcosted units is one of the definitions of a bad codex. Another interpretation of bad codices are ones with poor internal balance, like Tyranids.

Except Tyranids are a top tier codex. 6th Edition made life harder for some codecies (BA being the one people point at the most...rightfully so) while greatly enhancing other codecies. Tyrands, with the addition of Biomancy and Flying MCs, may have gotten the best facelift from 6th edition, but if people haven't seen them since 6th dropped, they wouldn't know how brutal they can now be. Psst...they're pretty amazing now.

As for Templars, I don't have much experience with them, but people tend to use the word "suck" and "crap" to define units that can totally function and win games. The older the codex, the easier it is to dismiss it. BT are super old and have wonky rules that may not jive the best with 6th edition, but that doesn't mean you can't have fun playing, painting, and potentially winning with them. Just know that you're going to be running an uphill battle when facing off against the newest, super amazing shooty codecies (Tau and Eldar) that have started to define the new meta.

Mid tier, Tyranids aren't as TAC as Daemons, Crons, Tau, Imperial Guard, and Eldar are now.

Tyranids are also only saved by spamming Gons, Flyrants, Zoans and Biovores.