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.

You don't need a landing pad to give them a 4++, Azrael and other HQ choices can bring a 4++ bubble with them wherever they go.

And deathwing REALLY doesn't care about helldrakes.

 Brother SRM wrote:

 labmouse42 wrote:

- Cheap whirlwinds (I'm surprised people have not figured out how these are great vs kroot)

A little situational, don't you think? It's hardly a pro to weigh against the army's particular weakness to Heldrakes.

I think the aggressively mediocre to terrible flyers are one of the other reasons why DA aren't seen as so good. They don't have good anti-air without allying in something.

At 65 points a pop its hard to go wrong. While large blasts are going to kill tons of Kroot, they will keep your opponent spreading them out. This limits their ability to concentrate firepower and limits their ability to fully take advantage of cover. Whirlwinds are not the end-all be-all, but they are dirt cheap for what they do.

I agree that the lack of anti-air is a big weakness for the DA. They really need allies to fill that gap.

or a fortification so that we don't waste points on a whole new set of troops.
or flakk missiles... whoops, already got 'em! thanks!

Hazard30 wrote:
I have been reading alot lately that people think that the Dark Angels Codex is pretty bad...but I really don't see it it. I think it is very well balanced and a fun codex to play, it also has some decently competitive list off the get-go...

so why does everything think its bad?

Because in the limited WAAC mentality they don't have riptides, heldrakes, vendettas or night scythes. Therefore they are a useless army.

I quite enjoy my newly reincarnated Dark Angels.

Skriker

 Skriker wrote:

Hazard30 wrote:
I have been reading alot lately that people think that the Dark Angels Codex is pretty bad...but I really don't see it it. I think it is very well balanced and a fun codex to play, it also has some decently competitive list off the get-go...

so why does everything think its bad?

Because in the limited WAAC mentality they don't have riptides, heldrakes, vendettas or night scythes. Therefore they are a useless army.

I quite enjoy my newly reincarnated Dark Angels.

Skriker

Exactly my point. Since Dark Angels and Chaos Marines were not Necrons, everyone thinks they are awful.

Well, the DA codex is quite solid. What is missing to be a higher tier army is some outstanding unit like a Helldrake for CSM, Serpent for Eldar, flying circus for Daemons, or new Tau.

Exactly my point. Since Dark Angels and Chaos Marines were not Necrons, everyone thinks they are awful.

You are exaggerating this a little aren't you?
They might not be top tier, but not everyone hates them because of it.
People have a few justifiable points about what they think the short-comings of their codex are. Are they not entitled to have opinions?
A new codex can be balanced without being as game changing as the 5th edition necron dex.
When it first came out Codex DA was quite well received, it has been due to the large codex creep with have see in Tau and Eldar that has made many players consider its value to have decreased.

Personally I felt a little disappointed with the new DA codex due to some very lacklustre units, little effective anti-air (mortis dreads really should have made it in), and quite sloppy writing (Missile lock or the nephilim, almost instant FAQ).

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

 Skriker wrote:

Hazard30 wrote:
I have been reading alot lately that people think that the Dark Angels Codex is pretty bad...but I really don't see it it. I think it is very well balanced and a fun codex to play, it also has some decently competitive list off the get-go...

so why does everything think its bad?

Because in the limited WAAC mentality they don't have riptides, heldrakes, vendettas or night scythes. Therefore they are a useless army.

I quite enjoy my newly reincarnated Dark Angels.

Skriker

Exactly my point. Since Dark Angels and Chaos Marines were not Necrons, everyone thinks they are awful.

Or because one can objectively see that they are awful from fluff, lore, and objectively gameplay standpoints.

Locrian wrote:

 Ironwill13791 wrote:
labmouse42- The power field generator was nerfed a bit. It no longer gives the 4+ invuln to the transport and radiate from it. It only works on the guys inside if they embarked. It is in the DA FAQ.

Not exactly. That's only if the model is INSIDE the transport. As Labmouse42 said in his post, all you have to do is put the character with the PFG behind the Landraider, and you achieve the exact same effect. Very common to give this guy a bike also, to keep up with the LR.

" Power Field. Giving a 4+ invuln to your vehicles is huge. Putting this on a model on a bike base increases the range of the field greatly"

Your reply doesn't change his statement at all. Putting the PFG on a lib/chap/techmarine on a bike, and putting it behind your 2/3 Land Raiders, gives them all 4+ invuls, just like before.

Except that wasn't the popular tactic before. Before it was hide inside the land raider and radiate the field from the hull. Now you have to be outside to buff those 2/3 land raiders; which makes you more vulnerable. My reply wasn't meant to change his statement. It was meant to open a discussion on the PFG, and how it has been cut down slightly in utility and made more vulnerable. It isn't 100% pro anymore (even though it wasn't entirely before).

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, the DA codex is quite solid. What is missing to be a higher tier army is some outstanding unit like a Helldrake for CSM, Serpent for Eldar, flying circus for Daemons, or new Tau.

I think there are some fun builds in the list. One that I think would be a meta-buster for a lot of armies would be 60 TACs and 40 assault marines. 100 MEQ bodies on the board. 40 of them rapid moving.

It would be hard to shift, and a big threat to serpents, which explode surprisingly fast when krak grenades are stuffed down the tailpipes.

Hazard30 wrote:

so why does everything think its bad?

You're on the internet. Bad is the only thing everything is.

 gossipmeng wrote:


Deathwing - Running an all terminator force is just not the best idea and never has been. The model count is just too low, dedicated CC units will hurt you and so will dedicated shooting armies. You just end up with a jack of all trades army that doesn't have enough punch to perform the trades.

It's really a shame too, because Deathwing in 5th edition was actually a fantastic hard counter to the mechanized army that ruled the field at the time.

They could have made it work by allowing DWA to bypass the Reserves restriction. They could have made it work by not raising the cost of TH/SS loadouts and the Belial Tax. They could have made it work by allowing double Heavy Weapons in each squad. Instead, they basically destroyed it.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
You're on the internet. Bad is the only thing everything is.

I'd rather be bad and win a lot of games, or bad and have a lot of fun, than just straight up bad.

As a pure DE player all I can say is that I've never had a problem tabling DA players.

Simply put, a typical DA army has too few models on the board. I've played maybe 10 games against various opponents fielding the boys in green in games ranging from 750 to 1500 points and I've yet to have a game not be completely obvious that it was over by end of turn 2. Bear in mind I go second (when I have a choice), and I certainly don't run alpha strike or tailored lists. Those games boiled down to my opponents simply not having anywhere near enough bodies on the table and my poison walking all over them. I did have one game that went to turn 5... only because his HQ (last model alive - for 3 turns...) was in a tree stand while the rest of my army simply sat back on objectives plinking away with dark lances. It was important to him that we "finish" the game, so I obliged.

I'm not sure if my opponents don't know how to build an army or if there is something fundamentally wrong in the codex. I'm guessing the former as the codex offers enough neat "tricks" that some people try to squeeze it all in. That said, I already have a decent collection of marines and will likely try running a DA army myself as a challenge.

For the DA players flipping thru this thread, is a pure DW army fun to play in a non competitive aspect (meaning non tournament)? I was building a pure DW army with FW contemptors. I play in a group with no eldar or tau and its basically all for bragging rights. Nobody takes the games too seriously...except for a couple of guys that pout when they get tabled. My full DW army looks sweet on the table and seems like a ton of fun. I'm asking this because I have yet to play em in a battle because I don't like playing with unpainted models. Should I keep em or sell em?

Also I agree with a previous statement of a termie libby or chaplain should also unlock troops. If they're granted DA assault just by upgrading to TDA then they should be allowed to take DW termies into battle as troops. That's just a thought, not a complaint.

 RavenGuard55 wrote:
For the DA players flipping thru this thread, is a pure DW army fun to play in a non competitive aspect (meaning non tournament)? I was building a pure DW army with FW contemptors. I play in a group with no eldar or tau and its basically all for bragging rights. Nobody takes the games too seriously...except for a couple of guys that pout when they get tabled. My full DW army looks sweet on the table and seems like a ton of fun. I'm asking this because I have yet to play em in a battle because I don't like playing with unpainted models. Should I keep em or sell em?

Also I agree with a previous statement of a termie libby or chaplain should also unlock troops. If they're granted DA assault just by upgrading to TDA then they should be allowed to take DW termies into battle as troops. That's just a thought, not a complaint.

I had fun using my pure DW list, but YMMV. When I used that list the game was pretty bloody. I had 2 termies left in the end, but I was able to hold the relic and was already ahead on VP. It takes a lot of finesse and strategy to use well and there are quite possibly a few lists that it cannot beat, but it can be fun to play in a casual setting. But yet again YMMV.

 labmouse42 wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, the DA codex is quite solid. What is missing to be a higher tier army is some outstanding unit like a Helldrake for CSM, Serpent for Eldar, flying circus for Daemons, or new Tau.

I think there are some fun builds in the list. One that I think would be a meta-buster for a lot of armies would be 60 TACs and 40 assault marines. 100 MEQ bodies on the board. 40 of them rapid moving.

It would be hard to shift, and a big threat to serpents, which explode surprisingly fast when krak grenades are stuffed down the tailpipes.

Nice idea. A full company would be hard to remove within a few turns.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

 Skriker wrote:

Hazard30 wrote:
I have been reading alot lately that people think that the Dark Angels Codex is pretty bad...but I really don't see it it. I think it is very well balanced and a fun codex to play, it also has some decently competitive list off the get-go...

so why does everything think its bad?

Because in the limited WAAC mentality they don't have riptides, heldrakes, vendettas or night scythes. Therefore they are a useless army.

I quite enjoy my newly reincarnated Dark Angels.

Skriker

Exactly my point. Since Dark Angels and Chaos Marines were not Necrons, everyone thinks they are awful.

Or because one can objectively see that they are awful from fluff, lore, and objectively gameplay standpoints.

Objectively awful from a fluff (as in, subjective) standpoint? Wow.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

 Skriker wrote:

Hazard30 wrote:
I have been reading alot lately that people think that the Dark Angels Codex is pretty bad...but I really don't see it it. I think it is very well balanced and a fun codex to play, it also has some decently competitive list off the get-go...

so why does everything think its bad?

Because in the limited WAAC mentality they don't have riptides, heldrakes, vendettas or night scythes. Therefore they are a useless army.

I quite enjoy my newly reincarnated Dark Angels.

Skriker

Exactly my point. Since Dark Angels and Chaos Marines were not Necrons, everyone thinks they are awful.

Or because one can objectively see that they are awful from fluff, lore, and objectively gameplay standpoints.

Objectively awful from a fluff (as in, subjective) standpoint? Wow.

Should've mentioned that one for Chaos specifically. I'm still not sure why Chaos Possessed/Spawn/Oblits/Mutilators are Marked of X but not Daemons of X. They are Daemons! Even the Possessed/Spawn within the Warriors of Chaos are Daemons of X rather then that.

You've got some weird choices that make it look off when compared to the rest. Daemon Prince is a Daemon of X, but these daemons over here aren't? Believe me, I would've loved to run some Possessed Daemons of Slaanesh, giving them that extra 3" run with rending would've done a number on me thinking of adding them to my EC army.

Though I probably should've chosen my wording better, I guess it wasn't fluff I thought was wrong. I actually enjoyed some of the new fluff for things, though not when they applied it to the units themselves I suppose.