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.

Now I have not played them much in 6th, mostly from them competing with my Space Wolves and Dark Angels armies, but I have only lost one game with them. That one was because I failed a 3” Assault and then the Ork successfully pulled off an 11” Assault on the very next turn . I lost my one VP and this is with a mostly Jump Pack Army with some Sternguard.

This might be my local Meta, but most of our Assault Armies are still doing well.

These include:
Nids
Blood Angels
Orks
Space Wolves with a focus on melee

The ones that are struggling with us are:
Deathwing [Shooty]
Greenwing [Gunline]
Space Marines

Currently the only Armies giving me a hard time are:
Gunline Guard with lost of templates.
Nids with the Doom of Malan’tai

I am just wondering because once more someone asked “I want a Assault Army” and within 3 post someone posted that Blood Angels are “The Worst Army Out There.” Now I happen to think they are not, but once more I have been doing well.

I know they have their issues, mostly I have seen is the “Hyper Focus” on making sure you have AP3/AP2 and Rending Weapons, ignore Cover Weapons, but I think that is hurting all of the Marine Armies not just Blood Angels.
Overwatch has yet to have a serious effect unless my opponent rolls a bucket load of 6s, which my usual response is to fail half my saves.
As stated before the “Random Assault Range” has some impact, but usually I can mitigate that by making sure that I usually have a 2”-6” with my movement.
My response to 6th is just to use as much cover as possible, if I end up having to spend one extra turn getting into position, so be it. the only time this seems to fail is when dealing with armies with buckets of Pie and Templates.

So maybe it is the way that I am playing them that makes it seem like they are not as bad as everyone else seems to think they are or maybe my Local Meta.

I psersnaly think that it is more of a need of a change of Tactics than a “Bad” army.

I don't think I've heard much Blood Angels "hate" (a word so overused it's become meaningless) since 5th edition. However, that was coming from a different place, since people thought they were overpowered, but this is the first I've heard of them being "the worst army out there" or underpowered.

Basically, the army's biggest tricks are lots of vehicles (since they're fast, it's encouraged) and assaulting, and those are two things that people think are worthless in 6th. Honestly, mech and assault are still doing alright, they're just not the be-all-end-all like they were in 5th. In other words, you're right - a slight change in tactics is required to adapt to the new edition, and any player worth their salt should be able to adapt anyway.

And why do people even say Greenwing? They're Dark Angels. There's no "wing" in a battle company. It's unnecessary.

Blood Angels have a tough time making all-corners lists because most of their units are very expensive (even more so when you compare their prices with DA units... when C:SM releases, this problem will become even more evident) and so they're almost always out-manned and outgunned. They also suffered a smattering of nerfs when 6th dropped which massively reduced their effectiveness from 5th edition (Furious Charge being the most crippling, FNP, nerfs to assault armies, etc). Finally, Marines have taken a serious hit in terms of effectiveness with all the AP2 and 3 out there so combined with the BA's expense problems, they suffer quite a bit from every dead Marine.

That said, BA can still compete if you know what type of opponent you're facing, but they really struggle to pull out a TAC list these days.

Two points I'd like to make.

First, yeah don't thi I there is really much BA 'hate' they just aren't as competitive as they were in 5th. It happens, they aren't a new codex anymore.

Secondly, the problem with forums asking for advice on tactics and lists, and general opinion on armies is you're going to get people's own experience. You might play at a club where Nids rule, but in general they aren't a particularly strong tournament army. At my club Mech still seems to still be very very strong.

Tactics for the win. Lazy generals who just want to roll dice and win are kind of at the root of some of the dislike. others are just butt hurt because their incredibly ridiculous ability to steamroll people in 5E has now been brought down to earth and they dont know how to do "fair fights".

Who knows. Gamers Bitch and moan about every Gawd forsaken thing there is to moan about.

 Jancoran wrote:
Tactics for the win. Lazy generals who just want to roll dice and win are kind of at the root of some of the dislike. others are just butt hurt because their incredibly ridiculous ability to steamroll people in 5E has now been brought down to earth and they dont know how to do "fair fights".

Who knows. Gamers Bitch and moan about every Gawd forsaken thing there is to moan about.

maybe theyre bitching because all the money they spent on razorbacks and assault marines was a waste?

6th was a stupid number of nerfs for BA. who wouldnt be pissed off?

I would hazard to say that the change to furious assault just kicked them to the curb metaphorically. Its an army built around getting it, and that 1 point of initiative typically puts them high enough that they can either strike before MEQs, or hit the same time as eldar. For all BA players this is a pretty big deal, since its an assault army, with assault marines, lots of jet packs, and lots of different ways to assault. Did i mention they like to assault things?

I think this has really hurt alot of BA players mentally because its like "hey, we are the finest assault specialists in the imperium" but now they have been severely downgraded because of a very simple rule change (which imho, was not that huge to begin with). I think its like your army got a letter from the Administratum saying "we believe that you are moving too fast, and hence forth you shall move slightly slower, and do a worse in the one thing you were designed to do, that is all P.S. your vehicles blow up more too"

The one long time BA player I know who has been playing them for a decade or more is on the verge of quitting all together because he refuses to try a shooty build. Now this is pure stubborn, but in his defense, he bought BA because he wanted to assault things, not because he wanted to shoot things.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

kb305 wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Tactics for the win. Lazy generals who just want to roll dice and win are kind of at the root of some of the dislike. others are just butt hurt because their incredibly ridiculous ability to steamroll people in 5E has now been brought down to earth and they dont know how to do "fair fights".

Who knows. Gamers Bitch and moan about every Gawd forsaken thing there is to moan about.

maybe theyre bitching because all the money they spent on razorbacks and assault marines was a waste?

6th was a stupid number of nerfs for BA. who wouldnt be pissed off?

Interestingly enough other space marines can pull this off just as good, maybe better. I ran a game last night against a guy with Raven guard, he was using that IA special character that lets you take assault squads and troops and he was on my IG gunline by turn 2 (it was the slanted deployment, w/e its called) and had started ripping me a new one. He had stormtalons and land speeder storms also dropping scouts, so he was pretty fast and well balanced. It was only the timely intervention of deepstriking Stormtroopers (alairos, your stromtrooper theories are becoming reality for me!) and 1 extremely lucky lascannon team that overwatched 2! independent characters to death that allowed me to narrowly eke out a victory.

 generalchaos34 wrote:
I would hazard to say that the change to furious assault just kicked them to the curb metaphorically. Its an army built around getting it, and that 1 point of initiative typically puts them high enough that they can either strike before MEQs, or hit the same time as eldar. For all BA players this is a pretty big deal, since its an assault army, with assault marines, lots of jet packs, and lots of different ways to assault. Did i mention they like to assault things?

I think this has really hurt alot of BA players mentally because its like "hey, we are the finest assault specialists in the imperium" but now they have been severely downgraded because of a very simple rule change (which imho, was not that huge to begin with). I think its like your army got a letter from the Administratum saying "we believe that you are moving too fast, and hence forth you shall move slightly slower, and do a worse in the one thing you were designed to do, that is all P.S. your vehicles blow up more too"

The one long time BA player I know who has been playing them for a decade or more is on the verge of quitting all together because he refuses to try a shooty build. Now this is pure stubborn, but in his defense, he bought BA because he wanted to assault things, not because he wanted to shoot things.

-nerfed furious charge
-hull points turned their tanks and dreadnoughts into paper
-nerfed blendernaught since power weapons now suck.
-overwatch
-random assault distance
-on top of that the new codexs are designed to crap all over power armour

anything i missed?

kb305 wrote:

 generalchaos34 wrote:
I would hazard to say that the change to furious assault just kicked them to the curb metaphorically. Its an army built around getting it, and that 1 point of initiative typically puts them high enough that they can either strike before MEQs, or hit the same time as eldar. For all BA players this is a pretty big deal, since its an assault army, with assault marines, lots of jet packs, and lots of different ways to assault. Did i mention they like to assault things?

I think this has really hurt alot of BA players mentally because its like "hey, we are the finest assault specialists in the imperium" but now they have been severely downgraded because of a very simple rule change (which imho, was not that huge to begin with). I think its like your army got a letter from the Administratum saying "we believe that you are moving too fast, and hence forth you shall move slightly slower, and do a worse in the one thing you were designed to do, that is all P.S. your vehicles blow up more too"

The one long time BA player I know who has been playing them for a decade or more is on the verge of quitting all together because he refuses to try a shooty build. Now this is pure stubborn, but in his defense, he bought BA because he wanted to assault things, not because he wanted to shoot things.

-nerfed furious charge
-hull points turned their tanks and dreadnoughts into paper
-nerfed blendernaught since power weapons now suck.
-overwatch
-random assault distance
-on top of that the new codexs are designed to crap all over power armour

anything i missed?

I agree with you, i think i phrased it funny, i meant that the original rule did not need changing because it was perfectly fine, that the nerf to Furious charge was completely unwarrented

kb305 wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Tactics for the win. Lazy generals who just want to roll dice and win are kind of at the root of some of the dislike. others are just butt hurt because their incredibly ridiculous ability to steamroll people in 5E has now been brought down to earth and they dont know how to do "fair fights".

Who knows. Gamers Bitch and moan about every Gawd forsaken thing there is to moan about.

maybe theyre bitching because all the money they spent on razorbacks and assault marines was a waste?

6th was a stupid number of nerfs for BA. who wouldnt be pissed off?

When I see them losing a disproportional amount of the time, I'll care. As it is, I don't see that happening at the moment. Plenty of good BA players around here proving it can be done. Nerfs just mean its a fair fight now. Doesn't mean they are disadvantaged. I think the whole hulabaloo over Hull points on Rhinos is so ridiculous though. How many of those "third hits" wouldn't have already been enough? Think about it. While it isn't as good, its still perfectly fine and people are still winning.

 generalchaos34 wrote:

kb305 wrote:

 generalchaos34 wrote:
I would hazard to say that the change to furious assault just kicked them to the curb metaphorically. Its an army built around getting it, and that 1 point of initiative typically puts them high enough that they can either strike before MEQs, or hit the same time as eldar. For all BA players this is a pretty big deal, since its an assault army, with assault marines, lots of jet packs, and lots of different ways to assault. Did i mention they like to assault things?

I think this has really hurt alot of BA players mentally because its like "hey, we are the finest assault specialists in the imperium" but now they have been severely downgraded because of a very simple rule change (which imho, was not that huge to begin with). I think its like your army got a letter from the Administratum saying "we believe that you are moving too fast, and hence forth you shall move slightly slower, and do a worse in the one thing you were designed to do, that is all P.S. your vehicles blow up more too"

The one long time BA player I know who has been playing them for a decade or more is on the verge of quitting all together because he refuses to try a shooty build. Now this is pure stubborn, but in his defense, he bought BA because he wanted to assault things, not because he wanted to shoot things.

-nerfed furious charge
-hull points turned their tanks and dreadnoughts into paper
-nerfed blendernaught since power weapons now suck.
-overwatch
-random assault distance
-on top of that the new codexs are designed to crap all over power armour

anything i missed?

I agree with you, i think i phrased it funny, i meant that the original rule did not need changing because it was perfectly fine, that the nerf to Furious charge was completely unwarrented

I also agree with theses comments above as the meta in the tournament scene supports these comments.

 Jancoran wrote:

kb305 wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Tactics for the win. Lazy generals who just want to roll dice and win are kind of at the root of some of the dislike. others are just butt hurt because their incredibly ridiculous ability to steamroll people in 5E has now been brought down to earth and they dont know how to do "fair fights".

Who knows. Gamers Bitch and moan about every Gawd forsaken thing there is to moan about.

maybe theyre bitching because all the money they spent on razorbacks and assault marines was a waste?

6th was a stupid number of nerfs for BA. who wouldnt be pissed off?

When I see them losing a disproportional amount of the time, I'll care. As it is, I don't see that happening at the moment. Plenty of good BA players around here proving it can be done. Nerfs just mean its a fair fight now. Doesn't mean they are disadvantaged. I think the whole hulabaloo over Hull points on Rhinos is so ridiculous though. How many of those "third hits" wouldn't have already been enough? Think about it. While it isn't as good, its still perfectly fine and people are still winning.

yes, when the new books have stuff like this... sounds like a really fair fight.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/524401.page

and do you play tau? lol

It's largely a matter of power armor not being quite good enough to make sure those troops get up to assault range I think. If someone makes a truly assault based army, I think BA are viable as long as they have the ability to get those units into assault distance without dying out first.

However there are a lot of mixed lists if you look at it, and when local metas force a shooty build they simply can't contend well with something like Tau, or other armies with better shooty choices. A Helldrake alone will force you to be in a building to have a chance of surviving a turn of vector striking and flamer. Mech can still be viable, but it depends on the other army and their ability to deal with mech.

@Null: I am using your list because it is a really good list of points.

-Nerfed furious charge: So you aren’t wounding Marines on a 3+ you now need a 4+, I don’t see that as much of a Nerf.

-Hull points turned their tanks and dreadnoughts into paper: As it should be, though I still see most Vehicles in my local Meta being taken out by Explosions than Glancing.
-Nerfed blendernaught since power weapons now suck: BlenderNaught???
-Overwatch: In my experience it has only been bad when assaulting 20 model units with rapid fire.
-random assault distance: There are ways to minimizing the risk of fall short, it does happen, but how many 6” or less assaults have actually Failed! Right now for me I can count them on one hand.
-on top of that the new codex’s are designed to crap all over power armor: Now this one I agree will 120%

And

 Jancoran wrote:

kb305 wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Tactics for the win. Lazy generals who just want to roll dice and win are kind of at the root of some of the dislike. others are just butt hurt because their incredibly ridiculous ability to steamroll people in 5E has now been brought down to earth and they dont know how to do "fair fights".

Who knows. Gamers Bitch and moan about every Gawd forsaken thing there is to moan about.

maybe theyre bitching because all the money they spent on razorbacks and assault marines was a waste?

6th was a stupid number of nerfs for BA. who wouldnt be pissed off?

When I see them losing a disproportional amount of the time, I'll care. As it is, I don't see that happening at the moment. Plenty of good BA players around here proving it can be done. Nerfs just mean its a fair fight now. Doesn't mean they are disadvantaged. I think the whole hulabaloo over Hull points on Rhinos is so ridiculous though. How many of those "third hits" wouldn't have already been enough? Think about it. While it isn't as good, its still perfectly fine and people are still winning.

As a long time Blood Angel player myself, I wish I had your levels of misguided stubbornness. I don't want to reiterate what everyone else above has been (correctly) stating regarding the nerfs to Furious Assault and Feel No Pain, but also the overall point cost of the codex compared to the new DA codex and the soon to be released C:SM codex. I think there was an obvious conscious decision to either nerf assault in the 6th edition. I think you should also realize that no one cares how Blood Angels do in your local gaming group. Can you show me any major national tournament where they've been in the top spots? Top 5 spots?

 Anpu42 wrote:
@Null: I am using your list because it is a really good list of points.

-Nerfed furious charge: So you aren’t wounding Marines on a 3+ you now need a 4+, I don’t see that as much of a Nerf.

-Hull points turned their tanks and dreadnoughts into paper: As it should be, though I still see most Vehicles in my local Meta being taken out by Explosions than Glancing.
-Nerfed blendernaught since power weapons now suck: BlenderNaught???
-Overwatch: In my experience it has only been bad when assaulting 20 model units with rapid fire.
-random assault distance: There are ways to minimizing the risk of fall short, it does happen, but how many 6” or less assaults have actually Failed! Right now for me I can count them on one hand.
-on top of that the new codex’s are designed to crap all over power armor: Now this one I agree will 120%

And

tau overwatch could likely wipe squads of BA off the board. farsight/shadowsun bomb can kill draigo and paladins with one round of shooting with average rolls. they could also easily slaughter your BA in assault, how do you feel about that?

tau overwatch could likely wipe squads of BA off the board: Yes if they havbe Marker Lights on them or you have One Squad Assualt three Fire Warrior Squads. Though if you pull off 2+ Squads assualting in the same phase it will for alot of Overwatch choices.

farsight/shadowsun bomb can kill draigo and paladins with one round of shooting with average rolls. they could also easily slaughter your BA in assault, how do you feel about that?
And What would that not take out?

As a Blood Angel player, the nerfs did hurt a LOT. I like jump packs so a shootier list isn't really an option...in my opinion, we should do better as a fast assault army than a firepower army anyway, and right now it's the reverse.

I'll cite the FNP and Furious Charge nerfs as being the worst of all...the cost of our best units also puts us on the back foot, though in theory taking lots of basic Assault Marines should mitigate this. But the point made about 6th codexes being built to crap all over us is absolutely true. In my games of 6th, I've found that I've come close against older books even winning occasionally, but facing a new Codex results in a wipe. This isn't tactical or build failure on my part since I've kicked some butt with other books against the same opponents. I can also say I've played against both old and new Eldar and Dark Angels under 6th and the difference is markedly noticeable (though well deserved with the latter).

Anpu42 wrote:@Null: I am using your list because it is a really good list of points.

-Nerfed furious charge: So you aren’t wounding Marines on a 3+ you now need a 4+, I don’t see that as much of a Nerf.

-Hull points turned their tanks and dreadnoughts into paper: As it should be, though I still see most Vehicles in my local Meta being taken out by Explosions than Glancing.
-Nerfed blendernaught since power weapons now suck: BlenderNaught???
-Overwatch: In my experience it has only been bad when assaulting 20 model units with rapid fire.
-random assault distance: There are ways to minimizing the risk of fall short, it does happen, but how many 6” or less assaults have actually Failed! Right now for me I can count them on one hand.
-on top of that the new codex’s are designed to crap all over power armor: Now this one I agree will 120%

And

Double check your rulebook bud. Furious charge went from +1S and +1I to just +1S....they are still wounding on 3s, but they are swinging at the same time now. In fifth, a big assault squad could cut down a handful of opponents before they could even swing, now a days the opponent marines gets to swing back. Furious charge in 5th had DEFENSIVE benefits thanks to fewer attacks coming your way.

Hull points have made vehicles at least twice, if not three times easier to kill. A decrease in survivability....noticing a trend yet?

Overwatch isn't super bad for Blood Angels assaulting thanks to FnP and power armor, but it's another decrease to suvivability.....1's a fluke, 2's a coincidence and three is definitely a trend.

Random assault distances COMBINED with removing causalities from the front makes melee inconsistent and it frequently gives your opponent another shooting phase....decreasing our survivability yet again.

Blendernaughts are double blood talon furioso or death company dreadnought. They are no longer of any use against 2+ save opponents, and the loss of the +1I from furious charge means they have a rough time against the I4 monstrous creatures out there too.

As for the new codexes.....it really doesn't make much to poison the meta against power armor, hell, I think helldrakes ALONE almost did it. Bladestorm, Riptides, double plasma crisis suits, suncannons, plasma talons, plasma everywhere and the drop in average cover from 4+ to 5+ really didn't help much either.

Basically, BA took a token decrease to their damage output and several massive hits to their suvivability, and with 6th's shift to shooting being the way to go and the new books packing some hugely effective guns to dump MeQ troops by the bucketful....it's a bad time to be an assault based MeQ codex.

kb305 wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

kb305 wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Tactics for the win. Lazy generals who just want to roll dice and win are kind of at the root of some of the dislike. others are just butt hurt because their incredibly ridiculous ability to steamroll people in 5E has now been brought down to earth and they dont know how to do "fair fights".

Who knows. Gamers Bitch and moan about every Gawd forsaken thing there is to moan about.

maybe theyre bitching because all the money they spent on razorbacks and assault marines was a waste?

6th was a stupid number of nerfs for BA. who wouldnt be pissed off?

When I see them losing a disproportional amount of the time, I'll care. As it is, I don't see that happening at the moment. Plenty of good BA players around here proving it can be done. Nerfs just mean its a fair fight now. Doesn't mean they are disadvantaged. I think the whole hulabaloo over Hull points on Rhinos is so ridiculous though. How many of those "third hits" wouldn't have already been enough? Think about it. While it isn't as good, its still perfectly fine and people are still winning.

yes, when the new books have stuff like this... sounds like a really fair fight.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/524401.page

and do you play tau? lol

He does play Tau, and his previous posting history shows that he doesn't believe anything he hasn't experienced personally and doesn't believe in theoryhammering/statistics. Maybe the best player in his local meta is BA, and he thinks they are over powered...who knows?

 Jancoran wrote:
When I see them losing a disproportional amount of the time, I'll care. As it is, I don't see that happening at the moment. Plenty of good BA players around here proving it can be done. Nerfs just mean its a fair fight now. Doesn't mean they are disadvantaged. I think the whole hulabaloo over Hull points on Rhinos is so ridiculous though. How many of those "third hits" wouldn't have already been enough? Think about it. While it isn't as good, its still perfectly fine and people are still winning.

You honestly believe an outdated (and nerfed, on top of that) assault-based book with overpriced units is a fair matchup for new books like Eldar? And against things like Heldrakes? I disagree.

And I also realize that everyone's local scene is different, but just because they may be doing well in some areas and poorly in others doesn't mean a book is "fine" or not clearly underpowered.

There's a reason few players choose to run books like Blood Angels or Black Templars in high-stakes, big name tournaments. Maybe because they don't want to put as much effort into tactics and skill, sure, but I also think a large part of it is simply because the books aren't as competitive or conducive to scoring high in a tournament setting.

kb305 wrote:

yes, when the new books have stuff like this... sounds like a really fair fight.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/524401.page

and do you play tau? lol

Yes I play Tau. I play 8 armies actually. I trade off frequently.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:

As a long time Blood Angel player myself, I wish I had your levels of misguided stubbornness. I don't want to reiterate what everyone else above has been (correctly) stating regarding the nerfs to Furious Assault and Feel No Pain, but also the overall point cost of the codex compared to the new DA codex and the soon to be released C:SM codex. I think there was an obvious conscious decision to either nerf assault in the 6th edition. I think you should also realize that no one cares how Blood Angels do in your local gaming group. Can you show me any major national tournament where they've been in the top spots? Top 5 spots?

Doesn't matter if they are placing as high aas they used to. Less people playing it = less opportunities. thats like saying to me Sisters of Battle are terrible because they aren't placing well. Lol. Fact is, theres a LOT of GOOd Generals out there playing a LOT of armeis and its not even close to easy to place in those big tournies. So when you only have like FIVE Sisters players wading through that, the odds are against it. The Blood Angels are now a normal codex. No stronger or weaker.

Tourney standings are indicators at least, but here's a different question for YOU as a long time Blood Angel player: why is my local gaming group better at Blood Angels than you? I am going to go ahead and say they probably aren't. They just figured something out that you are too stubborn to change on. Its not the army. Its the round hole you're still trying to fit the Square peg in. Combined arms is now a need for all armies in 6E. So what. Do it and you'll win just fine. Or play it your way if you're happier that way. Just dont cry to ME if you can't figure out how to win with it. If you ARE winning with it, what are you complaining for? Can't have it both ways. You're winning and should quit whining or you're losing when others aren't. You decide I guess which one it is.

Actually, I think that Blood Angels got a slight bit of hope in the form of allies. I've been looking at an assault marines allies for a thunderwolf list, and they fit the bill fairly well. For 730 points, I can have 2 ten man squad combat squad while having sanguinary priests in 3 of the squads with a libby in the other make a great addition to a thunderwolf list. Gives them a fairly solid scoring choice that moves like the rest of the army, much better than grey hunters in rhinos. Being able to run with Tau or Eldar gives those armies a good assault based squad or two. Allies, I think, is one of the best ways to run BA these days.
Although, I would love to see a RP with a jump pack and stormcaller running up the field with Baal Predators and Vindicators giving them cover saves while still being able to fire! All I can say is, BA have be run properly in order to work these days, as there is no point-click-win build. That's the way the game should be anyways, not with triptide lists, or 3 heldrakes, or serpent spam. This is supposed to be a tactical game, not a game of I have the newest codex using only the cheese, and I think that older codices allow the game to be played like that.

 Carnage43 wrote:

He does play Tau, and his previous posting history shows that he doesn't believe anything he hasn't experienced personally and doesn't believe in theoryhammering/statistics. Maybe the best player in his local meta is BA, and he thinks they are over powered...who knows?

Thats patently untrue. I dont need to SEE it to beleive it as evidenced obviously by my willingness to defend others on these forums when they try to advance positive ideas. I just tell you NOT to DISbeleive what you see and what others see. Cavalier disregard for POSITIVE results is an idiotic thing to engage in and it does pisss me off a little.

Theoryhammer is just kill ratios and guys who think themselves smart because they can post simple math. VaccummHammer is my word for what you call theoryhammer; because the internet makes it sound like we're all on an open shooting range all the time.

The best player in my meta isn't BA. Aside from myself, the one whose won the most is generally an Eldar player (long before the new codex he was winning big with them) and his twin brother a Space Wolf player (same story). I would say that the BA players here are good, but like a lot of people, they are still trying to bang away at non-combined arms forces and getting much closer wins (and losses) than they need to be getting. One of them has evolved a bit and has won a fair number of games now, including beating me, so I am excited to see his change of heart. I didn't enjoy the beating but i did enjoy the evolution it represented in his play. People who improve are awesome.

Even when i switched armies with a couple blood angels players and beat them to death with their own plastic, they wanted to still tell me how "bad the codex was". Whats funny is, i dont play Blood Angels, so it wasn't like they were facing a veteran of a thousand SM games using them. This tells me all i need to know about some people: you cant even SHOW them what you're trying to say without them going into denial about it. Musta been the dice right?

Frustrating.

So it isn't about not beleiving what I see. Its the opposite. Its beleving in MORE than VaccuumHammer.

Aleph-Sama, allies are a different mechanic but do not affect the usefulness of any specific army. It does allow you to take units to counteract an army's weaknesses, but it ultimately means you are now playing two different armies. It also does not do anything to balance things out; if you must take a list with allies to be competitive, your army has issues. I am not saying this is the case, but that is where the allies argument goes.

 Jancoran wrote:

Tourney standings are indicators at least, but here's a different question for YOU as a long time Blood Angel player: why is my local gaming group better at Blood Angels than you? I am going to go ahead and say they probably aren't. They just figured something out that you are too stubborn to change on. Its not the army. Its the round hole you're still trying to fit the Square peg in. Combined arms is now a need for all armies in 6E. So what. Do it and you'll win just fine. Or play it your way if you're happier that way. Just dont cry to ME if you can't figure out how to win with it. If you ARE winning with it, what are you complaining for? Can't have it both ways. You're winning and should quit whining or you're losing when others aren't. You decide I guess which one it is.

Or his opponents have figured out how to play against Blood Angels and your haven't. When the overwhelming trend in most local metas is that Blood Angels get wrecked I'd say it's a fair bet to say that the army's been massively weakened, as opposed to a vast majority of the Blood Angels players out there suddenly starting to suck.

AlmightyWalrus, I do not DISbeleive that people are struggling with them. What I ALSO believe at the same time is that their struggle is somewhat self inflicted.

1. One of the most terrifying leaders in the game.

2. Feel no Pain IS a pain. One model can make three or four squads have Fnp on the eve of their triumphant charge

3. Some of the most attractive allied options in the game.

4. POSSIBLY the best flyers in the game (I actually am pretty sure I like the Eldar flyers better for TOTALLY different reasons, BUT one cannot discount the firepower of the mighty StormRaven).

5. Cheap Land Raider transports.

6. AV 13 DreadBlenders or AV 13 FragCannon nightmares

And you cant win with this? I think you can.

 Jancoran wrote:
AlmightyWalrus, I do not DISbeleive that people are struggling with them. What I ALSO believe at the same time is that their struggle is somewhat self inflicted.

1. One of the most terrifying leaders in the game.

2. Feel no Pain IS a pain. One model can make three or four squads have Fnp on the eve of their triumphant charge

3. Some of the most attractive allied options in the game.

4. POSSIBLY the best flyers in the game (I actually am pretty sure I like the Eldar flyers better for TOTALLY different reasons, BUT one cannot discount the firepower of the mighty StormRaven).

5. Cheap Land Raider transports.

6. AV 13 DreadBlenders or AV 13 FragCannon nightmares

And you cant win with this? I think you can.

1: Nothing scary

2: CSM do it better

3: Meh

4: Doesn't even come close to the top three

5: Not really scary, inside stuff might be though

6: Also not really scary.

Inb4 Martel's uber pessimism.

Jancoran, you should probably stop talking down to the BA players when it's obvious you're not as familiar with the book as you could be.

Especially when you're talking from the position of a 6E Tau player.

Stormravens best flyer? Eldar flyers? Lol.

 Carnage43 wrote:

Anpu42 wrote:
-Nerfed furious charge: So you aren’t wounding Marines on a 3+ you now need a 4+, I don’t see that as much of a Nerf.

Double check your rulebook bud. Furious charge went from +1S and +1I to just +1S....they are still wounding on 3s, but they are swinging at the same time now. In fifth, a big assault squad could cut down a handful of opponents before they could even swing, now a days the opponent marines gets to swing back. Furious charge in 5th had DEFENSIVE benefits thanks to fewer attacks coming your way.

I keep that mixing that up.

Hull points have made vehicles at least twice, if not three times easier to kill. A decrease in survivability....noticing a trend yet?

No, This has not been my Experience, unless there is only one or two vehicles on the board. My experience has been the more Vehicles that harder they become to kill as you have to spread out your fire rather than focus it.

Overwatch isn't super bad for Blood Angels assaulting thanks to FnP and power armor, but it's another decrease to suvivability.....1's a fluke, 2's a coincidence and three is definitely a trend.

I roll or don’t fail saves so I have never noticed. (Roll 20 Dice for 3+ Saves make 5 is common for me]

Random assault distances COMBINED with removing causalities from the front makes melee inconsistent and it frequently gives your opponent another shooting phase....decreasing our survivability yet again.

Not been my experience, but then I generally maneuver to so I have less that 6” for an Assault, just like in 5th.

Blendernaughts are double blood talon furioso or death company dreadnought. They are no longer of any use against 2+ save opponents, and the loss of the +1I from furious charge means they have a rough time against the I4 monstrous creatures out there too.

Then do what I would do, don’t Assault Terminators and MC with them, they are now (in 6th) somebody elses job).

As for the new codexes.....it really doesn't make much to poison the meta against power armor, hell, I think helldrakes ALONE almost did it. Bladestorm, Riptides, double plasma crisis suits, suncannons, plasma talons, plasma everywhere and the drop in average cover from 4+ to 5+ really didn't help much either.

No Argument Here!

Basically, BA took a token decrease to their damage output and several massive hits to their suvivability, and with 6th's shift to shooting being the way to go and the new books packing some hugely effective guns to dump MeQ troops by the bucketful....it's a bad time to be an assault based MeQ codex.

I don’t think it is as bad as everyone is making it. We are constantly taking out Assault Armies and they do well vs. everything, but Dedicated Gunline Builds. Even the outflanking Genestealers are doing ok with us.

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:

You honestly believe an outdated (and nerfed, on top of that) assault-based book with overpriced units is a fair matchup for new books like Eldar? And against things like Heldrakes? I disagree.

And I also realize that everyone's local scene is different, but just because they may be doing well in some areas and poorly in others doesn't mean a book is "fine" or not clearly underpowered.

There's a reason few players choose to run books like Blood Angels or Black Templars in high-stakes, big name tournaments. Maybe because they don't want to put as much effort into tactics and skill, sure, but I also think a large part of it is simply because the books aren't as competitive or conducive to scoring high in a tournament setting.

This

This is a Typical 2k List for me




And I usually win with this, mostly by taking our my opponents Scoring units 1st.