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.

Hi!

I'm coming back to the game from earlier editions, and I have some left over Black Templar from then (Champion, Grimaldus, Helbrecht, a ton of Chaplains, couple Vindicators, classic dreadnoughts and a LRC). Seems like Marines are in a pretty mopey place, and Black Templar have been phased out a bit? Are any of the BT characters any good? I haven't seen the new book yet, so I have no idea. Seems like most SM lists are shooty lists?

Hey! I play BT and I think we are in a good spot. Ever since we got rolled in to the regular marine codex, we got the full range of marine stuff available (when we had a codex, units like scout bikers was not an option). We have rules in the current marine codex giving most bt units reroll on charge to help melee, an a sweet strategem that can deny a psychic power.
Our characters all have rules (emperors champion, grimaldus, hell brecht). So in no way are we phased out.

A healthy mix of shooting and melee goes a long way for me. Drop pods are in a troublesome state if you played such a BT army.

Yeah are pretty bad. Possibly the worst now that DW are out no longer terrible.

BT want to do close combat, but Marines are terrible at that. Their troop squads are better than normal Marines, but not by much, and there aren't any good delivery systems for them since all of the transports are overpriced. Their anti psyker power is good, but that's not really enough reason to play them.

I think if rhinos or drop pods were cheaper, Marines had more attacks in close contact combat, and if bolters were better, then BT might have a place with massed troops in transports with support characters, but right now it's hard to see them having any good builds with the way things are.

This is just something I've seen on the SM Tactics thread, but their Crusader squads are some of the better shooting for vanilla marines. Which is kind of hilarious from a fluff standpoint.

As a long-term Black Templar player, I have seen us wax and wane over time. I won’t sugar coat it - 8th Edition has not been kind to us. Fluffy Black Templars are terrible in a competitive setting.

Now to be fair, most armies played to their fluff fail competitively; it’s the nature of tournaments that you have to murder your darlings and forego fluff for maximum cheese. The only exception this edition is Guard - a fluff bunny Guard list this edition is still genuinely competitive in a tournament setting, which in my opinion is why they’re currently the target of so much angst. However, I would contend that a fluffy Black Templars army is the least competitive Codex faction (Index-only factions are another matter, but of the few that remain, many - if not most - beat out Templars).

To elaborate, let’s look at Templars’ strengths and favoured tactics:

- large (15-20 man) Crusader Squads marching up the field
- drop pod assault
- mechanised infantry
- focus on close combat infantry with a Space Marine statline and Power or Terminator armour
- favoured Troops choice is essentially Assault Marines sans Jump Pack
- mixed close combat/ranged weapon loadouts within a squad
- Characters (Helbrecht, Grimaldus, Emperor’s Champion)
- preference for Vindicators over Predators/Whirlwinds
- preference for vehicle-mounted firepower rather than infantry-mounted firepower like Devastators
- Land Raider Crusaders
- no Psykers
- Chapter Tactic (reroll charges), Relic (extra 3” on aura effects), Warlord Trait (extra 3” on Heroic Intervention) and Stratagem (4+ Deny the Witch)

Starting from the top. The way Morale now works punishes large units - a 5-man unit of Marines is almost immune to Morale, while a 10-man is more likely to lose more models to it. This is the opposite of how it worked in the past, where large units were less vulnerable. A 15- or 20-man unit is extremely vulnerable to Morale - it’s essentially making it take less firepower to kill them, which is an issue for an elite army.

Another part of that is the change in the AP and cover systems. Whereas before Power Armoured Marines could laugh off AP4 or worse, now anything with an AP value reduces their survivability by at least 25%. The tradeoff is that they now get a 5+ save against what used to be AP3, but that’s not a fair deal since AP4 was far more common. Worse, Marines on foot marching forward used to have a much easier time getting cover, which would afford them a 5+ or even 4+ save against AP3 or better. Now that you have to be within terrain to get a bonus rather than just obscured, and that line of sight is now easier to get for shooting, assault units on foot have taken a hit.

That ties nicely into the next point - Drop Pod assault. This gets around the dangers of footslogging and 20-man units, and synergises with Templars’ reroll to charge tactic. It's nice that we can now charge out of Deep Strike - with a nearly 50% success rate - but Drop Pods have taken a massive (140%) price hike. Put simply, Marines don’t have much worth spending 85 points to Deep Strike, and Crusader Squads certainly aren’t worth a 50% price increase for that ability. Sadly, this goes for the idea of Mechanised Infantry too, but less severely - Rhinos are cheaper, can have surprising firepower and can get closer than the 9” boundary that Drop Pods are locked too. The new Deep Strike Beta Rule stopping most Deep Strike Turn 1 also hurts Drop Pod Assault. Also, exploding vehicles now just flat kill 1/6 of the occupants regardless of their armour (rather than a Str4 hit) and spray Mortal Wounds around, which aren’t friendly to elite armies.

The changes to how Close Combat works weren’t kind either. Crusaders used to derive 1/3 of their combat punch from the base profile, 1/3 from having 2 melee weapons, and 1/3 from the charge bonus. They swung at Initiative 4 and WS4 - which meant that, against the things they actually wanted to be in combat with, they swung first and hit on a 3+. Now they’ve lost their extra attack - 1/3 of their combat potential - as a tradeoff to swing still at 3+ and still first if they charged. Furthermore, taking a Power Weapon - another of their unique abilities - now costs them a swing. They also lost the Chapter Banner being able to give them +1 Attack and the +1 Attack from Righteous Zeal. Back in 7th, a 20-man squad that lost 1 model to Overwatch while in range of the Banner put out just shy of one hundred Attacks. A similar squad now kicks out around 40. An extreme example but a common one for me. On top of that, even if you reach your opponent and bully through unlimited rounds of Overwatch (how one unit is allowed to fire Overwatch ten times in one phase I’ll never understand...), you’re not safe as your opponent can calmly waltz away from combat unmolested and shoot you off the board.

Terminators suffer just as badly, if not worse. Yes, they finally got the second wound they always needed... just in time for multi-damage weapons. The old AP system meant their armour was inviolate against anything short of an anti-tank weapon, but now all AP values hurt their save, and they’re no better off against what used to be AP2. The introduction of Mortal Wounds also really stings a unit that pays a lot for its armour. Coupled with the loss of the bonus attack for charging and they’re not in a good place.

Assault Marines are often used as a yard stick for terrible units. Our special troops being Assault Marines without jump packs doesn’t bode well. Mixed weapons in a squad just make an already inefficient unit less efficient, since they’re not all that good at either ranged or close combat.

A preference for vehicle-mounted firepower over infantry-mounted doesn’t seem so bad when we’ve got the Predator, but it does mean we’d lean away from most of the Primaris stuff, which is unfortunate since that’s where Marines’ most competitive units seem to lie. A bigger problem is a preference for Vindicators - they went from the terrifying kill-all pie plates of doom to... effectively a D3 shot lascannon that will generally be hitting on 4s as it moves its short range gun into reach.

Land Raider Crusaders’ Hurricane Bolters got a huge boost to become one of the edition’s best guns, and make it the best Land Raider pattern. Problem is, Hurricane Bolters are great because they’re cheap - but a fully kitted Crusader is pushing 350 points. It was always expensive, but now it’s becoming a liability. The real issue though is survivability. Back in the day, unless your opponent deliberately kitted out to handle AV14, the Land Raider was an indomitable fortress. Now... any weapon is effective and many weapons are efficient at killing it, so you can’t trust it to survive beyond the first turn. The fact that a transport being wrecked flat out kills 1/6 of the models inside regardless of armour means you’re terrified of loading it up with Terminators in case you lose another 100+pts of elites along with your 350pt tank.

No psykers is deceptively problematic. It leaves you defenceless against Psychic Mortal Wound spam, which is a real pain for an elite army that pays for fancy armour. Moreover, it means no access to rule-bending powers, which are where real competitive strength lies. This is most obvious with close combat - the most competitive close combat units are those that can subvert the problems and limitations the rules place on getting into close combat. So things like Warptime, Quicken and Swarmlord double-move powers that let units cross huge distances and still charge. Not all of these are psychic - some are innate or Stratagem abilities - but Templars have access to none of any kind. Theoretically we get Transports, but you can’t disembark after moving so that doesn’t compensate, and Deep Strike, which as discussed is expensive, unreliable, and unavailable on the first turn.

We do get our 4+ Deny the Witch Stratagem, which is good for stopping one clutch power like Death Hex or Warptime... but not both. It’s also a 4+, which is dicey at best. You can reroll it with another CP, but that’s getting expensive in a low-CP army for a 75% chance. Our relic isn’t so bad, but largely unnecessary if you learn to daisy-chain units into auras, and the Unique Characters you really want it on can’t take it. The Warlord Trait is just terrible - any savvy opponent will just outmanoeuvre you to block it - and it’s compulsory on unique characters.

Now, Characters are the area where we really shine. The Champion is a cheap beatstick that will murder most enemy Warlords. Helbrecht is more expensive but is nearly as scary offensively, and his two aura powers are huge force multipliers. Grimaldus would be great too but he’s a good 30pts overcosted. His Servitors are great for helping out with our big squads’ morale, but they’re not Characters and are a high priority target so don’t expect them to last. That 12” aura is massive, though.

So yeah overall we’ve been punished hard by this edition. Everything this edition is bad for - elite armies, good armour, big non-fearless squads, slow close combat units - is everything we favour. It’s not at all helped by our being a close combat army hamstrung by being shackled into a Codex balanced around shooting. Annoyingly, you could take a Black Templars army, call them Raven Guard and they’d be more competitive.

That said, it’s not all doom and gloom! I’ve been playing with them for most of this edition, and the gap between the worst and best factions competitively is the closest it’s ever been. Against armies like Guard or Eldar I can still have a good game. Don’t try and chase the meta - just enjoy playing games with your army. Balance is fickle - in a year or two we may suddenly be a strong competitor. Hang in there!

I get told every game(that has enemy psykers) that my Black Templars deny the witch is OP and beyond broken/ needs to be FAQ'd. Stopping one power on a 50% chance, that costs to use. had one opponent try and tell me that it is a stratagem to be used in my phase only, As in I use it on a unit, in preparation for a possible psyker attack, and not at all defensive in the event of him actually casting.

 conker249 wrote:
I get told every game(that has enemy psykers) that my Black Templars deny the witch is OP and beyond broken/ needs to be FAQ'd. Stopping one power on a 50% chance, that costs to use. had one opponent try and tell me that it is a stratagem to be used in my phase only, As in I use it on a unit, in preparation for a possible psyker attack, and not at all defensive in the event of him actually casting.

Wow! Well I think it's better than a normal psyker for deny, as you have a good chance to stop powers even if enemy rolls high (like super smite). And it's easier to use with positioning as any kind of BT unit (like rhinos for example) has to be within the range from the caster, rather than other marines who has to place their librarians at the right place to deny.
It's sick that they think it's OP but I could see why they are annoyed.

Ha ha

Black Templars are OP what next, terminators are undercosted?
You get to deny 1 power, admittedly thats 1 more than my Tau but seriously, its one good ish strategum in a lot of unreliable to unusable ones.

Lol no you at least have a codex there are still armies worse off.

hobojebus wrote:
Lol no you at least have a codex there are still armies worse off.

I have two armies, BT and mechanised orks. Bt are miles better.

Gitdakka wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
Lol no you at least have a codex there are still armies worse off.

I have two armies, BT and mechanised orks. Bt are miles better.

Well, yes, there are a few Index armies that are worse. But that’s obviously a temporary position - those armies are likely to improve before the Edition is out. Templars are not.

More concerning is that there are some Index armies - like SoB - that are stronger than BT.

Sisters are more competitive than a lot of armies with codices.

 Primark G wrote:
Sisters are more competitive than a lot of armies with codices.

Trying to make up for the 10 years they were terrible I guess.

I don't get the doomsday shout outs here. Bt are space marines, with the full range of units available and some cool characters added. We also enjoy the added bonus of easier charges, but we dont have to build our entire strategy around that bonus rule. Surely you can't mean space marines are like the worst codex army out there? We have so many units to choose between it's ridiculus. My favourites are rhinos and 5 man tactical squads with various special weapons.

I just think of chapter tactics as a bonus, not a corner stone of the army. (the exeption being raven guard, because that stuff is broken)

kombatwombat wrote:

Gitdakka wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
Lol no you at least have a codex there are still armies worse off.

I have two armies, BT and mechanised orks. Bt are miles better.

Well, yes, there are a few Index armies that are worse. But that’s obviously a temporary position - those armies are likely to improve before the Edition is out. Templars are not.

More concerning is that there are some Index armies - like SoB - that are stronger than BT.

Well marine codex mk2 is going to come sooner or later. GW being marine pusher could even be before 9th ed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gitdakka wrote:
I don't get the doomsday shout outs here. Bt are space marines, with the full range of units available and some cool characters added. We also enjoy the added bonus of easier charges, but we dont have to build our entire strategy around that bonus rule. Surely you can't mean space marines are like the worst codex army out there? We have so many units to choose between it's ridiculus. My favourites are rhinos and 5 man tactical squads with various special weapons.

I just think of chapter tactics as a bonus, not a corner stone of the army. (the exeption being raven guard, because that stuff is broken)

Well if your local meta isn't that competive sure but as it is without Guillimann marines breaks down in competive setting.

@tneva There are some super competitive players in my group, for example one has about 15+ shining spears and used to run 20+ dark reapers with ynnari characters. I face such sheenanigans sometimes and I play the match to my best ability. More often than not I lose against those lists. I strive to make a good army but i'm okay with it not being better than the best. I mean I have not won a tournament yet, but I usually win 2-3 out of 5 games during tournaments, so I'm ok with where I'm at.

'Fluffy' templars are not good. They give up units (psykers, devastators, whirlwinds, etc) but at the end of the day are still just black painted ultramarines in terms of their capabilities.

But on the flip side they are part of the ultramarines book, therefore updated regularly with new rules and releases. The old templars may have been distinct but they were also two editions behind the time when rolled with an errata longer than the codex :p

 Primark G wrote:
Sisters are more competitive than a lot of armies with codices.

Well Grey Knights and... Custodes. Tsons???

A.T. wrote:
'Fluffy' templars are not good. They give up units (psykers, devastators, whirlwinds, etc) but at the end of the day are still just black painted ultramarines in terms of their capabilities.

But on the flip side they are part of the ultramarines book, therefore updated regularly with new rules and releases. The old templars may have been distinct but they were also two editions behind the time when rolled with an errata longer than the codex :p

 Primark G wrote:
Sisters are more competitive than a lot of armies with codices.

Well Grey Knights and... Custodes. Tsons???

Is it really "fluffy" not to use devastators? I mean why would they not employ heavy weapons in infantry squads? Surely there are times when vehicles are unsuited for the terrain etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Same could be said about scout squads. Even black temolars should perform covert missions, right?

A.T. wrote:
'Fluffy' templars are not good. They give up units (psykers, devastators, whirlwinds, etc) but at the end of the day are still just black painted ultramarines in terms of their capabilities.

But on the flip side they are part of the ultramarines book, therefore updated regularly with new rules and releases. The old templars may have been distinct but they were also two editions behind the time when rolled with an errata longer than the codex :p

 Primark G wrote:
Sisters are more competitive than a lot of armies with codices.

Well Grey Knights and... Custodes. Tsons???

I'd give you grey knights are the worst offenders of codex suck, but custodes and Tsons are both still part of tournament winning lists. Vanilla marines arn't part of those lists and won't be any time soon.
Gman parking lot was OP when released but he's just been nerfed again and the few remaining units keeping that build viable also got points increases. Vanilla marines don't have a list thats tournament class.

Gitdakka wrote:

Is it really "fluffy" not to use devastators? I mean why would they not employ heavy weapons in infantry squads? Surely there are times when vehicles are unsuited for the terrain etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Same could be said about scout squads. Even black temolars should perform covert missions, right?

Check out the Crusade listing in the Black Templars fluff section of the Codex. It makes no mention of any kind of Scout or Devastator Squads. I believe every other unit (aside from Librarians obviously) is represented. Even Whirlwinds are included despite not being in the 4th Ed Codex - though there is an old piece of art of a Black Templars Whirlwind so there’s some justification for that.

They do use heavy weapons, but in a support role rather than dedicated fire teams. They don’t do sneaky - they’re based thematically on a knightly order and sneaking is dishonourable.

Gitdakka wrote:
Is it really "fluffy" not to use devastators? I mean why would they not employ heavy weapons in infantry squads? Surely there are times when vehicles are unsuited for the terrain etc.

No devastators, no scouts, no artillery, no psykers, and no squad sergeants (though you don't get to pick).
All junior marines are rolled into a single all purpose 'crusader' squad save for those picked out to use bikes and jump packs, and all seniors in the sword brethren units and bodyguards.

Ice_can wrote:
I'd give you grey knights are the worst offenders of codex suck, but custodes and Tsons are both still part of tournament winning lists.

Just trying to figure out which were the many books the index sisters were apparently beating.
Custodes are certainly good in a tournament setting but only have two units... or so I hear. (SoS really should have been rolled into that book)

A.T. wrote:

Gitdakka wrote:
Is it really "fluffy" not to use devastators? I mean why would they not employ heavy weapons in infantry squads? Surely there are times when vehicles are unsuited for the terrain etc.

No devastators, no scouts, no artillery, no psykers, and no squad sergeants (though you don't get to pick).
All junior marines are rolled into a single all purpose 'crusader' squad save for those picked out to use bikes and jump packs, and all seniors in the sword brethren units and bodyguards.

Ice_can wrote:
I'd give you grey knights are the worst offenders of codex suck, but custodes and Tsons are both still part of tournament winning lists.

Just trying to figure out which were the many books the index sisters were apparently beating.
Custodes are certainly good in a tournament setting but only have two units... or so I hear. (SoS really should have been rolled into that book)

About the "no scouts for templars is fluff" point you made, I knew I had read it somewhere that was not the case. Today I found it. on pg 109 in the current marine codex, crusader squads are described. After the neophytes has served next to their initiate they form independent squads similar to codex scouts.The fluff has been updated (thank god). So using scouts squads seems legit even from a thematic standpoint.

"these squads are tasked with infiltrating enemy positions or performing other critical missions" The BT find nothing dishonest about using stealth. One blade in the dark can be worth 1000 swords in the day.

This is also speculation, but BT putting some heavy weapon dudes together as fire support does not seem to unreasonable to me. Sure they might not have those squads as a part of their training regime like the codex chapters, but when the mission demands it I'm sure they would not find moral issues with putting some heavy weapons together for increased effectiveness.

Gitdakka wrote:
About the "no scouts for templars is fluff" point you made, I knew I had read it somewhere that was not the case. Today I found it. on pg 109 in the current marine codex, crusader squads are described....

Current Marine Codex.

The faction has been retconned to fit them into the chapter structure with scouts, tactical marines, squad sergeants, etc. It's only 'fluffy' in the sense that the old fluff has been thrown out to make them better fit as a chapter tactic-based faction.

A.T. wrote:

Gitdakka wrote:
About the "no scouts for templars is fluff" point you made, I knew I had read it somewhere that was not the case. Today I found it. on pg 109 in the current marine codex, crusader squads are described....

Current Marine Codex.

The faction has been retconned to fit them into the chapter structure with scouts, tactical marines, squad sergeants, etc. It's only 'fluffy' in the sense that the old fluff has been thrown out to make them better fit as a chapter tactic-based faction.

Well, in this regard the old fluff remains, it's just a slight evolvement/addition to the fluff. How is it bad really? It makes a lot more sense that BT would be able to do stealth missions. If they would only do line battles then you might as well have replaced them with some imperial guard regiments. Isn't tactical flexibility the whole point of any space marines?

Gitdakka wrote:

Well, in this regard the old fluff remains, it's just a slight evolvement/addition to the fluff. How is it bad really? It makes a lot more sense that BT would be able to do stealth missions. If they would only do line battles then you might as well have replaced them with some imperial guard regiments. Isn't tactical flexibility the whole point of any space marines?

The problem is that it’s a dilution of their faction identity.

This is a really sensitive issue for Black Templars players who’ve had to suffer having their Codex taken away with them and being forced into a Codex in which they don’t fit*. It might make sense in a modern army for recon squads to exist, but belligerence and not using Scouts was part of what made Templars unique. A big part of their culture is a hangover from the days following the Horus Heresy, where the Templars were formed from the fightiest, most zealous members of the Imperial Fists. It’s similar to the change in lore around Astrophaths - they went from hating them but tolerating them because the Edict of Nikaea sanctioned their use, to venerating them. Such changes detract from the identity of Templars being the most intolerant, straight up and down fighters with a taste for hacking their target apart with a chainsword and bit by bit dilute them into just Ultramarines painted black.

It was the greatest fear we had when we learned we were being rolled into the vanilla Codex, and it appears to be coming true.

*Seriously, I would contend that Black Templars as a faction have suffered some of the worst treatment of any 40k army after Squats. You might argue Sisters and you may have a point, but they appear to (finally) be getting the treatment they deserve in the near future. The other contender might be Corsairs now, but did they ever have a proper Codex?

Stop referring to BT sucking - the entire marine codex sucks. Their chapter tactic is just about as useless and the ultramarine one. Where you can fall back and shoot and reduce your total damage output hitting on 4's - instead of stay in CC and shoot a pistol and a CC attack that hit's on 3's - with infantry and dreads only (the two unit types you probably want to stay in CC anyways).

There are 3 units in the space marine codex that don't suck. Storm Ravens (been nerfed twice) / Scout Bikes (somehow have not been nerfed yet - I have 9 scout bikes and I have never seen another player with any - that is probably why) / Guilliman (been nerfed twice - his best units to buff also been nerfed). You'll notice none of the good units have any synergy with each other - at least storm ravens have synergy with themselves.

A pretty brutal pattern of nerfs for an army which was already noticeably weaker than several index armies.

Space marine players unite. Stop the injustice!

They ironically make one of the best gunline armies if you make a Captain into a Chapter Master and then give him the +3" Aura Relic. If that doesn't speak volumes of the melee power of the codex, nothing does.

the helmet aura relic is awesome! Also, if you want to go melee, get some ironclad dreads, those things are amazing! They smash anything and everything. The best delivery method for them is a Stormraven.

After your choices are up to you. But I do like the stormraven loaded out with a Chaptermaster (command point upgrade) and the helmet relic with the storm of fire warlord trait. The turn they disembark from the stormraven everyone around gets rerolls and extra ap on 6s when shooting. Then reroll the charge distance!

Assault is not dead! ...as long as you don't actually rely on it and 3/4 of your army is Imperial Guard. I think BT are in a really tough spot right now.

kombatwombat wrote:

Gitdakka wrote:

Well, in this regard the old fluff remains, it's just a slight evolvement/addition to the fluff. How is it bad really? It makes a lot more sense that BT would be able to do stealth missions. If they would only do line battles then you might as well have replaced them with some imperial guard regiments. Isn't tactical flexibility the whole point of any space marines?

The problem is that it’s a dilution of their faction identity.

This is a really sensitive issue for Black Templars players who’ve had to suffer having their Codex taken away with them and being forced into a Codex in which they don’t fit*. It might make sense in a modern army for recon squads to exist, but belligerence and not using Scouts was part of what made Templars unique. A big part of their culture is a hangover from the days following the Horus Heresy, where the Templars were formed from the fightiest, most zealous members of the Imperial Fists. It’s similar to the change in lore around Astrophaths - they went from hating them but tolerating them because the Edict of Nikaea sanctioned their use, to venerating them. Such changes detract from the identity of Templars being the most intolerant, straight up and down fighters with a taste for hacking their target apart with a chainsword and bit by bit dilute them into just Ultramarines painted black.

It was the greatest fear we had when we learned we were being rolled into the vanilla Codex, and it appears to be coming true.

*Seriously, I would contend that Black Templars as a faction have suffered some of the worst treatment of any 40k army after Squats. You might argue Sisters and you may have a point, but they appear to (finally) be getting the treatment they deserve in the near future. The other contender might be Corsairs now, but did they ever have a proper Codex?

I also used the BT codex back in 5th ed. I've also read the the armageddon supplement but never used it. We are all drawn to our factions for different reasons and if you loved that particular part of the fluff then by all means, collect your army that way. Nothing is preventing you organizing your army that way. This is why I say we have lost nothing really. I think it's silly though to be upset when someone build their BT in another fashion. How does it devalue your 4th ed bt codex theme army if someone else builds an all scouts BT army or if they have some devastators?

I did not care for that particular 4th ed book. I was drawn to BT by the 3rd ed starter box artwork. So my force is all about massed power armour. The lore is not really my main drive although i like parts of it. So for me when we got access to more units and got to keep our classic ones it was like the best treatment ever, not the worst.