Are Blood angles competative?

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.

**Crimson Devil**

BAN wrote:
Boohoo your army is no longer top tier, welcome to the bottom of the pack where orks have been forever and you need skill and an absurd amount of luck to win (neither of which I have).

Blood Angels haven't been top tier since 3rd edition. We had some gimmicks in 5th people weren't prepared for, but that advantage disappeared pretty quickly as opponents adjusted. You seem to be enjoying your Schadenfreude so much you missed that pretty important fact.

I find Ork players to be some of the best opponents, since they have a greater skill level at running their armies. If you rely on luck over skill than Orks are a bad choice for you.

**Andilus Greatsword**

hobojebus wrote:
Andilus Greatsword wrote:
Poly Ranger wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
The fact that this thread has a 23% "yes" response shows how GW gets away with its stuff.

I reckon half of that is people either having a laugh or being Ironic... or people who rarely play.

Amen, BA have a hard enough time in casual play.

Deuce11 wrote:
The point of comparing BA, a 3+ dex from a prior edition, to DA, a 3+ dex from the current edition, is to bring to light the fact that although imperfect it is still playable.

When 6th dropped, Greenwing was actually half-decent because it was still cheaper than C:SM. Now DA are an awful way to run a Marine army, unless you absolutely have to have scoring Terminators (a bad idea) or are running Ravenwing (good, although I think White Scars are better). C:SM was a much better Codex and just blew DA out of the water. BA are currently beyond even that lowly standard, and the worst part is that you can't proxy them in C:SM very well (no scoring jumpers).

Goddard wrote:
It doesn't feel like it was long ago at all the Blood Angels just got their new codex and didn't have much trouble at all cleaning up enemy armies.

So strange to see it turned on its head.

Makes me feel old. Or at least older.

Blame Ward. He tailored his Codices towards gimmick units, but when the edition changeover happened it screwed over 99% of those gimmicks.

It's funny that Necrons came out so much stronger after 6th but BA and GK both came out so much weaker yet all are written by ward chaos rot his soul.

Obviously, because Ward wrote Necrons for 6th edition, their gimmick being Flyer Spam. Now that AA is pretty common, they've dropped back to 2nd tier, much like BA did when people figured out how to deal with mass FNP and Razorspam.