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.

Try it. Why worry about losing testing something different eh?

As for Eldar... the main problem is Serpent Spam in your opinion right? Because I have another unconventional suggestion for cracking that nut.

But remember the Eldar are not our only opponents. It's the fact that none of our TAC lists can stand up to the Eldar. I'd say tailored lists might have a chance, but not TAC.

It's not just serpent spam. Eldar can field multiple looks that slaughter BA TAC lists.

Hmm... I think it could be done. I'm not much of one to accept defeat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wave Serpents and other transports are highly vulnerable to Vanguard Vets. Run them light as possible with Jump Packs, a melta bomb, a meltapistol, and a PF on the sergent runs around 195 points.

Drop in behind the tank. Nuke its armor with the melta. There is no serpent shield on the back. The tank should go down easy enough. Then charge the squishy 5 man DA squad within and wipe them out all in a single turn.

Points = Made back + 1 scoring unit removed

BA "solutions", such as they are, as simply too expensive to construct a list that can take on a big enough slice of the tournament scene. It's not a matter of leadership or list building, the tools simply don't exist in the codex. Or rather, you run out of tools too quickly.

That's true, and it would work against wave serpents, but I would never put VV in a TAC list. What are they going to contribute against chaos demons? Or any other list that kept their forces in a fairly cohesive arrangement for 2-3 turns? Like I do with the BA sometimes?

They'll find something tough and shoot/assault it to tie it up for a turn or two. Just enough to cause a little disruption. Why can't you find a use for a unit that has multiple S8 AP1 ranged attacks & multiple S8 AP2 close combat attack that can charge off the deepstrike?

Assault marines should be rocking as many flamers & hand-flamers as possible for just such a situation! It lets them tip the balance since they are too weak to win assaults through CC power alone. It also provides stronger overwatch.

I can find uses, but they cost too much for what they do.

 warpspider89 wrote:
As long as a single model survives it can score!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Don't forget the ever-awesome benefit of 5+ cover from Shield of Sanguinius.
These are BA. They should be maxing aura benefits at every turn if possible.

So now we are adding a priest AND a librarian to the mix to get this group of 5 to survive?
That are almost another 250 points!

Smart ass you know what I mean

I am really hoping that VV get repriced in the new C:SM as to be actually useful.

Yes, I do I'm just saying that a div-libby and a priest with 10-asm would be cheaper and probably more durable.

For those points I'd prefer to just add five more SG, but 5 is their max :(

Martel: they are rumoured to get cheaper, but not for BA.
there is a big chance I will start a raven guard successor-chapter :p

It's just an issue that T4 doesn't mean thing anymore in this game. The amount of wounds that can be generated against T4 just melts away even 2+ saves. GW needs to make units with 2+ armor and T4 cheaper, because that combination just doesn't mean that much anymore. Xeno lists will spam wounds and spam wounds until your unit is crippled.

Just compare what our tac marines can do against something like a Riptide to what their fire warriors can do to our elites. The disparity is just too great. Marines are charged for stats and equipment and abilites (ATSKNF) that just don't matter that much anymore. I've had this argument at my FLGS with Xeno players. ATSKNF doesn't mean a damn thing is they are just tabling me by generating wounds.

I already PMed this to Martel, but I figured I'd share it on the forum. MSU Raven is a competitive list. It's a Rock list, and probably not GT worthy, but it can beat some serious competition. It is now tournament proven.

My friend's list for ATC, 1999+1, "MSU Raven"

http://whatc.org/rosters/40k/OGAW.pdf

Quick caveat, we had two last second replacements (damn IRL), so we basically walked into every match with an auto loss and a toss up (at best, usually he got tabled, but he won a couple). This meant we couldn't use the Raven list as a counter punch unit like we planned, because we only had three "tournament players" on the team, and he was one of them. That said, he went 4-2 against some serious competition (discounting the first team because we ROFLstomped them)

He beat this list initially (the Tau list, scroll down a bit)

http://whatc.org/rosters/40k/SS40K.pdf

Then he beat this IG list (this is Quality Control, who placed third overall) (we actually beat Quality Control 3 games to 2, and stopped them from winning) (you have to click through few a bit) (well when I say we beat them, we did win 3 games to 2, but our replacement players both got tabled horribly, so we lost on battle points. haha)

http://whatc.org/40kteaminfo.php?name=Quality%20Control

Then he CRUSHED this Eldar list

http://whatc.org/rosters/40k/BNBAG.pdf

Then he lost pretty badly to this Eldar list (the Bell of Lost Souls Team who placed third overall, and knocked us entirely out of the running)

http://whatc.org/rosters/40k/WBNR.pdf

Then he beat this Daemons list (on a mission that had fast attack scoring even)

http://whatc.org/rosters/40k/BGHD.pdf

Then finally he lost to this stupid nine Scythes list. Which we actually let him play because he knows the guy from real life, and we were out of the running so we let him have it.

http://whatc.org/rosters/40k/GS2CB.pdf

So, not counting that Necron game (which he could have won had he had second turn), I think he proved BA can still win. It just takes a gimmick. 4-2 (or 4-1) at ATC is impressive. Especially since we played two of the top three teams.

I liked a quote that I read in DashofPepper's 6th ed thread - it's not about making a TAC list now, it's about playing to your strengths and then minimizing your bad matchups because there's too much variety out there to have one-list-to-rule-them-all. My thinking is that BA sort of have to go for this if you want to not have a massive headache playing them.

I dont think I will be running 4 stormravens anytime soon.
I do like to see the BT allies though, that's pretty cool

I can't argue with the results, that's for sure. This is certainly one way to minimize bad match ups.

Quick correction on myself, because they recalculated scores. BOLS placed 2nd, QC 3rd (they're one point apart). We definitely kept QC from winning, kind of hilarious.

Also, Mephiston is a hidden superstar in that list. He killed, and I'm not kidding, FORTY fleshounds against the Dogpile list. He also carves through non Iron Armed DPs, Riptides (if he can get there), basically anything that's not a Terminator squad. (A Riptide is basically a Termy, true, but Mephy is doing one wound for ID before a Riptide does 6)

Martel732 wrote:
I am really hoping that VV get repriced in the new C:SM as to be actually useful.

Why do you think that VV would work in C:SM, even with a re-pricing, when they are only good if they can charge and getting the charge is undependable when you scatter 2D6?

VV only work for BA and that is because of Descent of the Angels

 Icculus wrote:

ASM arent scoring units for BT though. So maybe just getting another 10-man squad in a drop pod would work just as well, haha.

Just to clarify, I was suggesting you take these units as a BA allied detachment in place of Dante and SG, making them scoring and able to benefit from DOA, rather than straight from the BT codex.

 warpspider89 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I am really hoping that VV get repriced in the new C:SM as to be actually useful.

Why do you think that VV would work in C:SM, even with a re-pricing, when they are only good if they can charge and getting the charge is undependable when you scatter 2D6?

VV only work for BA and that is because of Descent of the Angels

Because if they get repriced for C:SM, they'll be repriced for BA. Or maybe they'll let all VV have a descent of angles equivalent rule.

Why that?
Tactical Marines got repriced in CA, but we were still stuck with expensive marines.

Could be different now though, since they will update so many Marine-armies at once.

@anonymou5

Thanks for that. Nice to see some good results from the BA codex against great competition.

@ those talking about priest and librarian tax for FnP and SoS: I know you all know this, but those powers work in a bubble. It IS totally possible, and probable, that you'll be granting FnP or SoS to more than 1 unit during your games. If not, maybe that's your issue?

But we are Deep Striking them That's what you do with 2+ models and JP's!

And of course, there are weapons like the demolisher cannon, basilisk, and Tau riptide thingie that really mitigate the effects of FnP bubble and make us spread out.

anon's list is probably the best thing I've seen for BA in 6th, but I just can't see dropping $300 minimum to do better than average at tourneys. The worst part is, I don't even like the Stormraven. In fact, I kind of hate it.

Kangodo wrote:
Why that?
Tactical Marines got repriced in CA, but we were still stuck with expensive marines.

Could be different now though, since they will update so many Marine-armies at once.

It just means when the BA book gets updated it'll have the same prices in general as the C:SM book.

Kangodo wrote:
But we are Deep Striking them That's what you do with 2+ models and JP's!

Of course you are, but with D6 scatter, you deep strike whatever units you want first, THEN use Dante's non-scattering deep strike to help home the priest (of Honor guard priest if Dante deep strikes in with them) to the best possible location. See....Dante's utility is useful if you want it to be.

 Voidwraith wrote:

Kangodo wrote:
But we are Deep Striking them That's what you do with 2+ models and JP's!

Of course you are, but with D6 scatter, you deep strike whatever units you want first, THEN use Dante's non-scattering deep strike to help home the priest (of Honor guard priest if Dante deep strikes in with them) to the best possible location. See....Dante's utility is useful if you want it to be.

But then you are using Dante's ability to get a priest in place to protect the SG, when the FNP would be better used to protect ASM, simply because the effect will benefit a larger number of models, and support the core of your army. The issue is not so much how to get FNP on SG as whether or not you SHOULD be doing it, leaving other parts of the army less protected. In my opinion, Priests are better used to protect ASM, preferably 2 squads, as to use them in the way you suggest above requires a 225 point character, and a 75 points preist, all to give one 200 point unit FNP. The fact you have to spend more than the unit itself to give it a 5+ save which ultimately will not help it survive to any great extent is something the BA, who suffer from horiffically low body count anyway, cannot afford to do. Yes, there is the option than the FNP bubble can hit other units, but in that case, protecting the ASM is more valuable.

 Voidwraith wrote:

Kangodo wrote:
But we are Deep Striking them That's what you do with 2+ models and JP's!

Of course you are, but with D6 scatter, you deep strike whatever units you want first, THEN use Dante's non-scattering deep strike to help home the priest (of Honor guard priest if Dante deep strikes in with them) to the best possible location. See....Dante's utility is useful if you want it to be.

It's useful, but you pay way too many points to field it. *Every* unit is useful, but it has to undergo a cost/benefit analysis to determine if its *good*. Dante is not good for his points. Most deep striking schemes are not good anyway, because in a tactical game, I find reserves to a negative, not a positive.

"Most deep striking schemes are not good anyway, because in a tactical game, I find reserves to be a negative, not a positive." That is an opinion Martel and it is one presented without explanation.

I find the notion of ignoring a tactical option, without valid explanation, in a tactical game rather unusual, especially for an army that is currently at a disadvantage when playing the usual "bodies on the field firing" game that dominates the current meta. After all, BA lack serious firepower at range and they lack the bodies to sustain casualties in shooting exchanges.

The main argument against reserves/deep striking is that it reduces the amount of outgoing firepower over the limited number of turns available because models that are not on the field cannot shoot. However...

"Deep striking schemes" are probably the best thing that BA having going on for them because it mitigates one of their main problems: lack of bodies & lack firepower at range.

If a body is not on the ground, then it cannot be shot. Bodies in reserve are not on the ground, therefore they cannot be shot. It reduces casualties early game.

If Blood Angels lack competitive long-range firepower and the ability to sustain long-ranged fire fights, then Blood Angels should avoid fighting against the enemy at range. This is true. Their ranged options are lacking. Therefore, Blood Angels should seek options to close the gap.

Blood Angels can take much larger number of weapons that are most effective at close range - primarily flamer-type weapons and melta-type weapons. The short range character of these weapons supports the notion that Blood Angels need to close the gap between them and their enemies if they want to be effective.

Further, armies should be played in such a way that takes full advantage of their strengths. If an army has a strength that isn't being utilized, then the player of that army should adapt to take advantage of that strength. Blood Angels are better at Deep Striking than most armies due to Descent of the Angels. Deep Striking is a strength and, from the sounds of it, it isn't being utilized. Therefore, players should adapt to take advantage of that strength.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
TL;DR BA players should go for all of the deep strike combo shenanigans available to them since it takes the greatest advantage of their various strengths.

 warpspider89 wrote:
...presented without explanation.

Every opinion presented in this thread "without explanation" has maybe a half dozen explanations over the past few months on this forum. This thread gets restarted so frequently that I don't think Martel or Peregrine or anybody feels compelled any more to restate every nuance of their opinions. Do a search if you care and you'll find it all.

If a body is not on the ground, it can't shoot or assault either.

Deep striking piecemeals your list so your opponent can take you on a chunk at a time. I've had many games against lists using reserves determined before their reserves even got to roll. (I went first) You aren't saving any models, really because of 6th edition deployment rules. If you deep strike some of your army, my dakka list will just dakka what you are forced to start with on the map.

Closing the gap with deep strike comes at a horrible cost. The first cost is piecemealing as I outlined above. Secondly, in order to shoot, you can't spread out. This makes things like the sun cannon, battle cannons, or even the generic plasma cannon completely lethal.

I tore apart BA players trying to drop their whole list in 5th and I still tear apart BA players trying to use deep strike. The turn of not being able to assault, yet being in optimal dakka range is absolute murder. You can't count on fancy terrain. You CAN count on Tau opponents having interceptor, however.

Clearly, it appears the best thing the BA have going is Stormraven spam. This appears to best take advantage of our strengths. However, this also makes us the imperial version of chaos space marines, ie Codex: Storm Raven. I would use this any day over deep strike shenanigans if I had the models or inclination.