Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/06 17:56:08
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Okay, follow sufferers. Where do you think we stand after the FAQ? Right now, I'm going with slightly better because the grenade nerf doesn't hurt us quite as badly. Everything else was kinda "meh".
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/06 17:59:41
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Due to the whole Drop Pod fiasco, you can expect even less Blood Angels to show up in tournaments.
For now I would replace that detachment with just using Lias to infiltrate them Skitarii.
|
CaptainStabby wrote:If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote:BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote:Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote:ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/06 18:45:05
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
I don't care about drop pod taxi. I thought it was incredibly stupid to begin with.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/06 19:52:44
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Trigger-Happy Baal Predator Pilot
|
I think "kind of meh" sums it up.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/06 19:59:50
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot
On moon miranda.
|
Yeah, not sure if it really makes a huge difference. Sime SuperFriends combos got shot down, so you wont have to face them anymore, but more fundamentally the lower bloat on aome of the newer books is unreal, and an FAQ isnt going to change that
|
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/06 22:08:15
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
I'd say neither. The only rule that really effected how BAs play was the template buff (for those BA players who actually use tac squads ). Still every but as terrible.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 00:30:37
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Pious Palatine
|
the biggest issue with the transport thing is actually the culexus, not being able to put him in a pod, AND him now being useless in a rhino due to a seperate part of the FAQ, to my mind, means that playing an army without heavy psychic is just going to be a huge waste of time now.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 01:27:16
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Blood Angels needed more than an FAQ to fix them.
|
YMDC = nightmare |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 04:02:39
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Chaplain with Hate to Spare
|
This is just the BRB FAQ. There could still be stuff coming in a BA FAQ. Not counting on anything good, but people inundated GW with requests for fixes to BA.
|
5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 04:45:52
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Commander of the Mysterious 2nd Legion
|
casvalremdeikun wrote:This is just the BRB FAQ. There could still be stuff coming in a BA FAQ. Not counting on anything good, but people inundated GW with requests for fixes to BA.
FAQing blood angels and grey knights units to their space marine standard would be a nice change
|
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 05:05:01
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
This guy gets it. Automatically Appended Next Post: BrianDavion wrote: casvalremdeikun wrote:This is just the BRB FAQ. There could still be stuff coming in a BA FAQ. Not counting on anything good, but people inundated GW with requests for fixes to BA.
FAQing blood angels and grey knights units to their space marine standard would be a nice change
Damn slippy I'd love to see it happen. They are and probably always will be my favorite army in the 40k universe. That said, I'll go ahead and bet my army that it won't happen before we get another book ( which will probably be even shittier than our current book is...).
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/07 05:07:37
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 05:32:31
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard
|
I think we should wait for the individiual codex FAQs and Erratas before we decide if the wait was worth it.
|
warboss wrote:Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 14:43:33
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
I don't think BA can be fixed with a codex-specific FAQ, either. The army concept completely fails in 7th.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 14:49:49
Subject: Re:Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Evasive Pleasureseeker
Lost in a blizzard, somewhere near Toronto
|
A codex FAQ that boosts the stats of Dreads & Scouts isn't out of the question. GW did that for both DA's & Templars for example, giving them codex-specific errata for their Storm shields among a few other tweeks.
The addition of the Grav cannon to the armoury would also be a simple errata to make, and would instantly shoot BA's into solid middle tier ground.
Otherwise, BA's only need their Decurion equivalent, and some re-working + a few new formations along the lines of what the other Loyalist Chapters have.
You're in no way shape or form near the level of complete overhaul that Chaos or DE needs at this point.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 15:46:21
Subject: Re:Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Experiment 626 wrote:A codex FAQ that boosts the stats of Dreads & Scouts isn't out of the question. GW did that for both DA's & Templars for example, giving them codex-specific errata for their Storm shields among a few other tweeks.
The addition of the Grav cannon to the armoury would also be a simple errata to make, and would instantly shoot BA's into solid middle tier ground.
Otherwise, BA's only need their Decurion equivalent, and some re-working + a few new formations along the lines of what the other Loyalist Chapters have.
You're in no way shape or form near the level of complete overhaul that Chaos or DE needs at this point.
I don't think grav cannons are that useful w/o skyhammer or gladius. That's why I don't think the BA concept is going to work. SM are only good because of fancy bells and whistles. The actual units they can take put them not much higher than BA.
Take away Gladius, skyhammer, and librarian conclave and what do you have? A loser. Grav cannons themselves just get first struck by Xeno heavy weapons before they can fire.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/07 15:47:40
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 15:51:14
Subject: Re:Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord
|
Experiment 626 wrote:A codex FAQ that boosts the stats of Dreads & Scouts isn't out of the question. GW did that for both DA's & Templars for example, giving them codex-specific errata for their Storm shields among a few other tweeks.
The addition of the Grav cannon to the armoury would also be a simple errata to make, and would instantly shoot BA's into solid middle tier ground.
Otherwise, BA's only need their Decurion equivalent, and some re-working + a few new formations along the lines of what the other Loyalist Chapters have.
You're in no way shape or form near the level of complete overhaul that Chaos or DE needs at this point.
He's not gonna be happy until BAs get their equivalent of a Wraithknight  And then they would only be "Tier 2"
|
Gwar! wrote:Huh, I had no idea Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines posted on Dakka. Hi Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can I have an Autograph!
Kanluwen wrote:
Hell, I'm not that bothered by the Stormraven. Why? Because, as it stands right now, it's "limited use".When it's shoehorned in to the Codex: Space Marines, then yeah. I'll be irked.
When I'm editing alot, you know I have a gakload of homework to (not) do. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 16:05:56
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Trying using grav cannons without the tricks. They don't work.
When meqs and meqs w/FNP became fragile, which they are now, the BA were broken as a concept.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 16:07:11
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Stitch Counter
|
Blood Angels are way too OP, it's about time they were nerfed significantly...
*munches popcorn*
|
Thousand Sons: 3850pts / Space Marines Deathwatch 5000pts / Dark Eldar Webway Corsairs 2000pts / Scrapheap Challenged Orks 1500pts / Black Death 1500pts
Saga: (Vikings, Normans, Anglo Danes, Irish, Scots, Late Romans, Huns and Anglo Saxons), Lion Rampant, Ronin: (Bushi x2, Sohei), Frostgrave: (Enchanter, Thaumaturge, Illusionist)
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 16:08:22
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Wulfmar wrote:Blood Angels are way too OP, it's about time they were nerfed significantly...
*munches popcorn*
LOL
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 16:11:56
Subject: Re:Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Chaplain with Hate to Spare
|
Experiment 626 wrote:A codex FAQ that boosts the stats of Dreads & Scouts isn't out of the question. GW did that for both DA's & Templars for example, giving them codex-specific errata for their Storm shields among a few other tweeks.
The addition of the Grav cannon to the armoury would also be a simple errata to make, and would instantly shoot BA's into solid middle tier ground.
Otherwise, BA's only need their Decurion equivalent, and some re-working + a few new formations along the lines of what the other Loyalist Chapters have.
You're in no way shape or form near the level of complete overhaul that Chaos or DE needs at this point.
Pretty much this. Some points and stats reworking to bring everything in line with the C: SM would go a long way. Adding vehicle squadrons is another one. Then if they gave them a Decurion equivalent that really played to their strengths, and BA would be back into mid-tier. I don't need them to be too tier. I just want them to be decent.
|
5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 16:27:51
Subject: Re:Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Experiment 626 wrote:A codex FAQ that boosts the stats of Dreads & Scouts isn't out of the question. GW did that for both DA's & Templars for example.
They also didn't do it for SW so BA might get nothing too.
|
tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 16:46:54
Subject: Re:Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Member of a Lodge? I Can't Say
|
Well the FAQ didnt prevent my 'Dreadnought Party' list (100% Walker if you dont count Drop Pods) so im fine with it
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 16:48:22
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Fate-Controlling Farseer
|
Frag Cannons got clarified in 2d3 overwatch, that was something helpful.
|
Full Frontal Nerdity |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 16:53:42
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine
Little Rock, Arkansas
|
The grenade "clarification" makes our tacticals and scouts worse. They no longer stand a chance against dreadnought equivalents and most MC's, (odds were against them before, but now it's a blowout.) Also since they CAN make one single mediocre attack against them, the whole squad is prevented from fleeing via our weapons are useless. /facepalm
Being unable to pod the allied culexus (or have him aura-out in a vehicle) is a significant blow to his usefulness. Our recourse is to politely ask seer councils, thunderdomes, cent stars, and other psychic stars to please move into the culexus' range so he can hurt them.
Small upside, a jump pack IC in a non jump squad can use his pack during assault and give the whole squad reroll to charge. Might come up every once in a while if you're trying to overwhelm, and they leave a jump IC alive in a depleted squad, he could walk over to unhurt-foot-squad and fling them forward.
Overall I'd say we moved down like a quarter step. We weren't hit near as badly as raider-gun-boat dark eldar builds, but the FAQ didn't really do us any favors either.
|
20000+ points
Tournament reports:
1234567 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 16:58:42
Subject: Re:Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Evasive Pleasureseeker
Lost in a blizzard, somewhere near Toronto
|
MechaEmperor7000 wrote:Experiment 626 wrote:A codex FAQ that boosts the stats of Dreads & Scouts isn't out of the question. GW did that for both DA's & Templars for example, giving them codex-specific errata for their Storm shields among a few other tweeks.
The addition of the Grav cannon to the armoury would also be a simple errata to make, and would instantly shoot BA's into solid middle tier ground.
Otherwise, BA's only need their Decurion equivalent, and some re-working + a few new formations along the lines of what the other Loyalist Chapters have.
You're in no way shape or form near the level of complete overhaul that Chaos or DE needs at this point.
He's not gonna be happy until BAs get their equivalent of a Wraithknight  And then they would only be "Tier 2"
Tier 2? You're being generous I think! BA's getting a Wraithknight equivalent will only bring them up to the level of those naughty, OP as gak CSM's!
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 18:06:57
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Auspicious Aspiring Champion of Chaos
|
niv-mizzet wrote:The grenade "clarification" makes our tacticals and scouts worse. They no longer stand a chance against dreadnought equivalents and most MC's, (odds were against them before, but now it's a blowout.) Also since they CAN make one single mediocre attack against them, the whole squad is prevented from fleeing via our weapons are useless. /facepalm
Being unable to pod the allied culexus (or have him aura-out in a vehicle) is a significant blow to his usefulness. Our recourse is to politely ask seer councils, thunderdomes, cent stars, and other psychic stars to please move into the culexus' range so he can hurt them.
Small upside, a jump pack IC in a non jump squad can use his pack during assault and give the whole squad reroll to charge. Might come up every once in a while if you're trying to overwhelm, and they leave a jump IC alive in a depleted squad, he could walk over to unhurt-foot-squad and fling them forward.
Overall I'd say we moved down like a quarter step. We weren't hit near as badly as raider-gun-boat dark eldar builds, but the FAQ didn't really do us any favors either.
Tac and scouts were never meant to take out MCs or walkers. That's what Devastators and Predators are for.
|
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress
2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 18:11:48
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine
Little Rock, Arkansas
|
EnTyme wrote: niv-mizzet wrote:The grenade "clarification" makes our tacticals and scouts worse. They no longer stand a chance against dreadnought equivalents and most MC's, (odds were against them before, but now it's a blowout.) Also since they CAN make one single mediocre attack against them, the whole squad is prevented from fleeing via our weapons are useless. /facepalm
Being unable to pod the allied culexus (or have him aura-out in a vehicle) is a significant blow to his usefulness. Our recourse is to politely ask seer councils, thunderdomes, cent stars, and other psychic stars to please move into the culexus' range so he can hurt them.
Small upside, a jump pack IC in a non jump squad can use his pack during assault and give the whole squad reroll to charge. Might come up every once in a while if you're trying to overwhelm, and they leave a jump IC alive in a depleted squad, he could walk over to unhurt-foot-squad and fling them forward.
Overall I'd say we moved down like a quarter step. We weren't hit near as badly as raider-gun-boat dark eldar builds, but the FAQ didn't really do us any favors either.
Tac and scouts were never meant to take out MCs or walkers. That's what Devastators and Predators are for.
Never said they were. It's just that previously they could still maybe take out a wound/hull point or two as they went down. Sometimes they'd get super lucky and actually walk away with some survivors. Now not so much. If they aren't white scars, the squad is effectively dead as soon as a big thing touches them.
There's a difference between "meant to" and "can maybe do in a pinch." Which a ton of anti-marine players are super quick to point out that tacticals "can do a lot of stuff in a pinch," ...well, now not so much.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/07 18:13:48
20000+ points
Tournament reports:
1234567 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 18:23:42
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
EnTyme wrote: niv-mizzet wrote:The grenade "clarification" makes our tacticals and scouts worse. They no longer stand a chance against dreadnought equivalents and most MC's, (odds were against them before, but now it's a blowout.) Also since they CAN make one single mediocre attack against them, the whole squad is prevented from fleeing via our weapons are useless. /facepalm
Being unable to pod the allied culexus (or have him aura-out in a vehicle) is a significant blow to his usefulness. Our recourse is to politely ask seer councils, thunderdomes, cent stars, and other psychic stars to please move into the culexus' range so he can hurt them.
Small upside, a jump pack IC in a non jump squad can use his pack during assault and give the whole squad reroll to charge. Might come up every once in a while if you're trying to overwhelm, and they leave a jump IC alive in a depleted squad, he could walk over to unhurt-foot-squad and fling them forward.
Overall I'd say we moved down like a quarter step. We weren't hit near as badly as raider-gun-boat dark eldar builds, but the FAQ didn't really do us any favors either.
Tac and scouts were never meant to take out MCs or walkers. That's what Devastators and Predators are for.
Too bad devs and preds can't do it either.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 18:46:25
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Auspicious Aspiring Champion of Chaos
|
Martel732 wrote: EnTyme wrote: niv-mizzet wrote:The grenade "clarification" makes our tacticals and scouts worse. They no longer stand a chance against dreadnought equivalents and most MC's, (odds were against them before, but now it's a blowout.) Also since they CAN make one single mediocre attack against them, the whole squad is prevented from fleeing via our weapons are useless. /facepalm
Being unable to pod the allied culexus (or have him aura-out in a vehicle) is a significant blow to his usefulness. Our recourse is to politely ask seer councils, thunderdomes, cent stars, and other psychic stars to please move into the culexus' range so he can hurt them.
Small upside, a jump pack IC in a non jump squad can use his pack during assault and give the whole squad reroll to charge. Might come up every once in a while if you're trying to overwhelm, and they leave a jump IC alive in a depleted squad, he could walk over to unhurt-foot-squad and fling them forward.
Overall I'd say we moved down like a quarter step. We weren't hit near as badly as raider-gun-boat dark eldar builds, but the FAQ didn't really do us any favors either.
Tac and scouts were never meant to take out MCs or walkers. That's what Devastators and Predators are for.
Too bad devs and preds can't do it either.
How are you equipping them? Three Lascannon shots (one of them twin-linked) usually makes short work of most walkers. MCs are another story for another thread.
|
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress
2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/05/07 21:54:19
Subject: Are BA better or worse after the FAQ?
|
 |
Locked in the Tower of Amareo
|
Tri-las preds are okay, but you are still looking at one miss and one failure to pen every volley. Single shot AT is basically dead in this game.
|
|
 |
 |
|