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.

@ Efarrer-lol.

But for you to criticize, would it not put strength to your viewpoint to suggest alternatives?

I gave up.

I can't see a good army that will satisfy sportsmanship/comp restrictions.

I don't like the army and have my BA in the closet floor at the moment.

No 's. Just it's alot easier to say "no good' as opposed to 'I play it this way, or have seen it played this way effectively'

Pheonix wrote

I'm just over joyed to see that the blood angels are finaly paying for furious charge and for their death company. And it would appear that they are paying a fair price for both. All in all I'm rather happy with the list.

I agree.

I have been playing BA since midway through 3rd edition. Yes they were an EZ army back then even with the demise of Rhino Rush. Today they are still quite good in my opinion but the army now requires some tactics and finesse to do well. What I like most about the new BA is that they are no longer considered a cheesy army.

- G

akira5665 wrote:@ Efarrer-lol.

But for you to criticize, would it not put strength to your viewpoint to suggest alternatives?

I agree.

The criticsims I gave at heart were.

The army list he's using will get killed by composition points.

and I'd use Chaplain Lemartes. Who is cheaper all things considered.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:...and the rest of the army follows the Codex Astartes (as their 2E Fluff stated very clearly).

They sure do, what with all those Assault Squads as troops... wait...

Unless the current Blood Angel list represents the 8th Company, they're not following the fluff.

BYE

It's GW lame attempt to justify having a seperate codex for them. The new BA and DA codices strengthen my opinion that all marines should be in one book. Give each chapter a couple of pages to explain their special units and your done. Now the Space Wolves and Black Templars aren't codex, but that doesn't mean Jervis won't beat them over the head with it. Grey Hunters with the Combat Squads rule in coming.

I like alot of the codex, but I stopped using my BAs mainly because I'm annoyed with the way Death Co. were handled in the list. I have no problem with paying for them. I prefer it to the last system. I just don't like having the cost built into units. Believe or not, I would like to not have a DC in every game. The Assault squad was another mistake, by putting them in the troops section they undermined the tactical squad. The Assault squad is now a no brainer option. And they did it only to make the list different from the other marines.

I think the rules for BA and DA will probably come into their own when 5th edition is released later this year.

- G

Green Blow Fly wrote:I think the rules for BA and DA will probably come into their own when 5th edition is released later this year.

- G

So do I, especially that 15pt extra armour upgrade.

The BA rules are what I'd use if I still had my raven guard army.

I love the combat squad rule. Having more units in a game is really handy when players can only shoot at one unit at a time. Sure the five-man squads are fragile, but one five man squad getting pasted by Lootas and leaving another five man squad alive to demolish those fragile Orks is better than losing a ten-man squad.

If the rumor is true that only Troop choices can be scoring units, the Combat Squads will really become a viable choice.

The only fault I can really find with the current BA rules (playability wise) is Lemartes is much better than a Chaplain, yet his cost is very close to that of a Chaplain. Locals who play BA's won't even consider a Chaplain and simply take Lemartes.

All choices in the codicies are viable, you just have to pay attention to the rules and the armies they can participate in and figure out how.

With regard to the Chaplain, Lemartes is always Jump Infantry. He cannot removed it to accompany a unit in a transport, such as a Drop Pod, a Rhino, a Razorback, or a Land Raider. He cannot take a Bike or Melta-Bombs, or a Power Fist (he cannot harm Armour 13+, he cannot instant kill anything with T3 or greater), he cannot take Terminator Armour and all that entails.

To misquote my favourite story from the Deathwing anthology: "A Blood Angels Chaplain with a Deathmask can mean only one thing. A Blood Angels Chaplain without a Deathmask can mean anything."

Also, he is also ugly.

Nurglitch wrote:All choices in the codicies are viable, you just have to pay attention to the rules and the armies they can participate in and figure out how.

I had some mean things to say about that sentence, but here is what I'll say instead:

Many have shown any number of non viable units in each codex, and I mean really not viable for reason ranging from overpriced to redundent. A quick list of units taken soley for the purpose of losing games-

-orbital bombardments (far too limited and expensive)
-Repentia (a combination of two bads makes this one of the worst in the game overpriced in both dollars and points, that generally die before they can strike)
-gargoyles
-Chaos Codex daemons, possessed and dreads

The most tacit admission of how non viable some untis were though goes to the dark elf army book, the dark angels book and the dark eldar. All so bad revised editions were released.

Nurglitch wrote:
With regard to the Chaplain, Lemartes is always Jump Infantry. He cannot removed it to accompany a unit in a transport, such as a Drop Pod, a Rhino, a Razorback, or a Land Raider. He cannot take a Bike or Melta-Bombs, or a Power Fist (he cannot harm Armour 13+, he cannot instant kill anything with T3 or greater), he cannot take Terminator Armour and all that entails.

Ok. So have you really read the Blood Angels rules?
- Chaplain required for Death Company otherwise they fall to the frenzy of the Black Rage (like Khorne Chaos Chosen in fantasy chasing puppies)
- Regular chaplian for blood angels +Jump pack (so the death co does what you want) is 120 points- for 2 wounds and no mask. 5 points is a bargain for a wound.
- Harming vehicles is what you have the death company and any friends you feel like bringing ( 2-3 vindicators for example, or 5 man squads with meltas in Rhinos)
- Terminator armoured chaplians are still worthless in BA, for the reason mentioned above. The Death company are good If they are undercontrol. Otherwise they are trying to hit falcons.

Sarigar wrote:If the rumor is true that only Troop choices can be scoring units, the Combat Squads will really become a viable choice.

The only fault I can really find with the current BA rules (playability wise) is Lemartes is much better than a Chaplain, yet his cost is very close to that of a Chaplain. Locals who play BA's won't even consider a Chaplain and simply take Lemartes.

Well that will increase the abilty of marine players to win games a great deal. So I expect it will be so.

Nor should they. Blood angels still require a chaplain. It may as well be Lemartes.

Oh boy. Marines win more games because of combat squads? Not without more tuning of the game engine, they won't. Killing 3 marines is in my book easier than killing 6, out of one unit. Especially in CC where that fist can't hide.

Marines are about more than Power Fists. Combat squads are handy because they increase the number of units available. Thanks to Warhammer 40k's emphasis on units rather than models having more units is an advantage. If side A has 8 units and side B has 7 units, then during side B's shooting phase at least 1 unit on side A will get off scot free.

That's true for...1 turn.

Then my units keep firing, and your smaller units disappear faster and faster.

Oops I forgot, I need to play with terrain more. =p

Why, do you not play with at least 25% terrain? Also, who says that all units in an army have to be combat squads, or that the exchange of fire is even?

It was a joke. A jest. Humor. lol

I don't think much of combat squads tactically.

I think combat squads will come into their own when 5th edition is released.

- G

So why should we take your opinion seriously?

Stelek wrote:It was a joke. A jest. Humor. lol

I don't think much of combat squads tactically.

Nor should you.

Ultimately combat squads don’t give you anything that isn’t available in the standard space marines codex. If you wanted to you could take a 5 man squad with a powerfist and a second squad with heavy and special weapon. No-one does this because they’re simply not as good as six man units with a heavy and special weapon each.

The only thing the combat squads rule lets you do is take up to 12 scoring units where previously 6 was the limit. This is not something many marine players have been wanting under the current rules and mission structures.

The rule is there to stop people using troops choices as mini-devestator units. To compensate for losing six man las/plas DA are offered free grenades and bolt pistols, and some other codex elements have reduced prices.

I like combat squads, as I like troops being focused to act as troops. Similarly, I love the treatment of CSM in their new codex, restricting heavy weapon access while giving them extra attacks, turning them into an adaptable units capable of filling multiple roles. But I don’t for one second think either option is preferable to the old six man las/plas.

Maybe it will turn into an advantage if there is a 5th ed, if and if some of the rumours prove true, and if they end up working as some people have predicted, then maybe having 8 or 10 or 12 scoring units could prove a benefit. But they’re all big ifs.

Okay, well, firstly what Marine players want may not actually be preferable. Under the current rules and mission structures being able to have more units than your opponents is preferable. That's one reason why the six man Plasma gun Lascannon Tactical Squad is preferred over the ten many squad, it's easier to fill out six Troop slots with smaller "more efficient" squads. Having that many more lascannons and plasma cannons is worth the added fragility of losing four Space Marines whose points could best be used up elsewhere. Fewer Tactical Marines does not translate too sharply into fewer units. But what is the advantage of having more lascannons and more plasma cannons, but that they are in different units?

Putting all of your lascannons into a Devastator squad means that you reduce the number of enemy units that can be engaged with lascannons by 4x. A Devastator Squad is liked a super-duper-quadruple-linked lacannon squad, much like a Chosen squad or Fire Dragons, or Imperial Guard Special Weapon Squads is a super-duper-x-linked weapon with the recompense that instead of engaging multiple units you're capable of engaging multiple models. So what happens when you get a Combat Squad composed of ten men with a sergeant, specialist, and heavy trooper. The sergeant and the specialist and three others move to attack, while the heavy trooper and the remaining four provide support. Six squads of six with a Plasma Gun, a Lascannon, and no doubt something surprising like a Power Fist can either use the Lascannon or they can move. They have to decide between employing the Power Fist or the Lascannon, both damned useful things to each, and which work best when you double them up by units rather than models in the unit. Imagine having the option to shoot with the Lascannon and then pile into the fray with the Powerfist. This is way combat squads give you, although it does so at a cost. The cost of doubling the effect of the same number of six-man squads will be exactly 24 Tactical Marines, usually somewhere in the ballpark of 360 points. Also, the advantage will be begin to be lost when the Marine player has 11 or less Combat Squad units and be completely lost once the Marine player has 6 or less Combat Squad units. If the Marine player has 6 or fewer units then they would be better off paring of the Marines in the units rather than reducing the number of total units further by insisting of full ten Marine squads.

Now, the interesting thing is where 10+ squad sizes are concerned having lots of flexibility, because they can suck up the damage that would break or destroy a smaller squad and return fire. Larger squads are can absorb more friction. They're good for a full-on frontal assault, while the small squads are good for wearing down the enemy in efficiently directed strikes.

You could say that the role of the lasplas Squad is eliminated once you invest in the advantage of taking full squads working in concert with combat squads. The fragile Heavy Weapon toting Combat Squads in back, the full squad to the fore, and the Special Weapon toting Combat Squads taking the fight to the enemy. The Combat Squad's small size isn't a problem for the Space Marines because they have And They Shall No Know Fear so the enemy will have to kill all of them. I take full units of ten in each Combat Squad unit so that that I can consolidate them all into an defensive force, or split them depending on what I need to accomplish and how many units may opponent brought.

Splitting Devastators in two gives them effects of the Space Wolf splitting fire rule, with other effects like increased anti-infantry fire, more wounds, and at the cost of additional points for the ten Marine squad. But having two Combat Squads with two lascannons apiece allows a Marine player to double the number of tanks that can be attacked with lascannons, and Assault Squads can attack units from different angles using two units instead of one and thereby deepening the killzone affected by Space Marine attacks. Or you can charge with one unit, and then another unit from the same side and penetrate deeply into a looser unit coherency. Even Scout Squads, or should I say especially Scout Squads, benefit from being able to mix and match weaponry and then break into role-specific units. And by all means vapourize a Combat Squad of Marines, because even if you cause twenty wounds on the unit, then only five Space Marines will die.

And there's also that matter of the rumour whereby in the 5th edition the convention is adopted that having more scoring units is not just a good thing, but a great thing...

sebster wrote:Ultimately combat squads don’t give you anything that isn’t available in the standard space marines codex. If you wanted to you could take a 5 man squad with a powerfist and a second squad with heavy and special weapon. No-one does this because they’re simply not as good as six man units with a heavy and special weapon each.

OTOH, when min-Dev squads of Las/Plas with less than 10 models go away, and 6-man squads go away, then Combat Squads are pretty darn good, particularly when the focus is on Troops as Scoring Units.

But I don’t for one second think either option is preferable to the old six man las/plas.

Of course it isn't as good. Nothing would be as good.

But then 6-man Las/Plas is neither Fluffy, nor how the models are sold.

I've been playing my Dark Angels for years. When all of a sudden we got the Combat Squads rules back, I read them, looked at the points for full squads of men, weighed in the advantages, and came to the conclusion....."Big Fat Deal"

Combat Squad rules in the current incarnation are just above useless in my opinion. In trying to make competetive lists, if I find myself using tac squads, its normally a simple five man squad in a cheapy Rhino. Paying an extra 95 pts for another lascannon shot in my army is ridiculous. It's not that useful.

The squads are too pricy to make a list with 12 scoring troop units at the current GT level, bout the best you can muster is 8, and they arent that effective...going back to the pricy lascannon.

Ravenwing combat squads seem to me just a tad bit more useful, its nice being able to split off an attack bike, but unless you're running full ravenwing armies the advantage is negligible. Sure you can split off an attack bike, but the flip side to that is "why not just keep attack bikes as an option?" If you arent running full ravenwing armies you probably only have one attack squad with an attack bike split off. There is no advantage there over a regular biker squad with a second fast attack selection of an attack bike.

Combat squads are a good Idea, but the cost of full squads of units is flat out too much to make them really as useful as they could be at a point level of 1750-2000pts. When you automatically have a vet sarge and full grenade gear in the squads, the points for each individual marine is too much to make an army of 10 man tactical squads, regardless of whether they can split off or not.

One of the rumors for 5th edition is that only certain units will count as scoring. This could make combat squads valuable.

- G

Combat squads will always be horrible. 5 man squads are just to easy to shoot/assault down. It forces you to keep them in 10 man for dedicated assault then they are to big and unwieldy to hide in terrain. One round of minimal shooting at least forces a break test on a 5 man las squad. Chaos at least gets around this a little by allowing 10 man squads with 2 special weapons and the ability to stay combat effective with CCW and bolt pistols. DA are particularly hard up because of combat squads. Where as chaos and BA can get around this with there list options a little easier.

You can always keep the two squads as one, but the ability to split could be useful. I do think that from what I have seen overall the combat squad rule is a nerf which came about due to non-stop whining over 6 man las/plas squads.

- G

You can choose whether to split or not at the start of the game. With my Dark Angels it depends on the opponent. Against very shooty armies, I'll keep them together usually. Against even or less shooty armies I'll split them up. Sometimes I'll split the Devs but not the Tacs, or vice versa. It's really a skill that comes from reading your opponent, the mission and the terrain on the table.

Lemartes wrote:Combat squads will always be horrible. 5 man squads are just to easy to shoot/assault down.

Sure, individual squads aren't hard to kill, but when you have a dozen of them, the army will do OK.