Well what do you want from Blood Angels in 6th Edition?

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.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Anpu42 wrote:
Fine you are looking at make Space Marines twice as effective at shrugging off wounds than anything in:
>Codex: Chaos Daemons
>Codex: Eldar [Including Wraith Knights]
>Codex: Necrons
>Codex: Tau
>Codex: Tyranid

Yep. That's the point.

**Anpu42**

BlackArmour wrote:
well I've seen some Ideas in here I like that could actually be used. I think we all assume points drops are a given to actually happen....... hopefully....... unless something goes horribly wrong.

I will also state that I don't think its very likely at all that we will see assault out of deep strike (see tyranids) so with that in mind its better to think on ideas that make deep strike more survivable.

-Using JP's to move and to assault was a pretty good idea and would make BAs the fast moving units they should be.

Heres an Idea for you guys , how when arriving by deep strike DoA if a BA unit lands within x amount of inches of another unit it Stun/Knocks down the enemy unit and they can only fire snap shots on their next turn. This makes their precision Drops useful and allows you to survive a deep strike and also allows the opponent to fire at you and move away.

I will repeat that I think BA should have counter attack or similar special rule, a lot of the ideas on here just consist of making them better on the charge but if you don't make the charge or an opponent decides to charge you first and kill all your special rules (see DC with a chaplain as an example of the difference in power of getting the charge or being charged) then they are useless.

BAs should out n out be better at close combat than their vanilla counterparts, WS5 maybe? Its the same way I feel about SWs because its what these chapters train to do and that's beat you in the face. lets put a gap between those chapters not in C:SM so maybe we can end some of the argument.

Maybe something like prefered enemy when Assualting or as I sugested earlyer, Rampage.
Though Death Company haveing WS5 would be good.

**AlmightyWalrus**

BlackArmour wrote:

BAs should out n out be better at close combat than their vanilla counterparts, WS5 maybe? Its the same way I feel about SWs because its what these chapters train to do and that's beat you in the face. lets put a gap between those chapters not in C:SM so maybe we can end some of the argument.

Templars are only WS4 and just as gakky at melee as everyone else, and that's in a 6th edition Codex. It's not boding too well.

Anpu42 wrote:

Maybe something like prefered enemy when Assualting or as I sugested earlyer, Rampage.
Though Death Company haveing WS5 would be good.

DC are already WS5.

**BlackArmour**

Anpu42 wrote:
BlackArmour wrote:
well I've seen some Ideas in here I like that could actually be used. I think we all assume points drops are a given to actually happen....... hopefully....... unless something goes horribly wrong.

I will also state that I don't think its very likely at all that we will see assault out of deep strike (see tyranids) so with that in mind its better to think on ideas that make deep strike more survivable.

-Using JP's to move and to assault was a pretty good idea and would make BAs the fast moving units they should be.

Heres an Idea for you guys , how when arriving by deep strike DoA if a BA unit lands within x amount of inches of another unit it Stun/Knocks down the enemy unit and they can only fire snap shots on their next turn. This makes their precision Drops useful and allows you to survive a deep strike and also allows the opponent to fire at you and move away.

I will repeat that I think BA should have counter attack or similar special rule, a lot of the ideas on here just consist of making them better on the charge but if you don't make the charge or an opponent decides to charge you first and kill all your special rules (see DC with a chaplain as an example of the difference in power of getting the charge or being charged) then they are useless.

BAs should out n out be better at close combat than their vanilla counterparts, WS5 maybe? Its the same way I feel about SWs because its what these chapters train to do and that's beat you in the face. lets put a gap between those chapters not in C:SM so maybe we can end some of the argument.

Maybe something like prefered enemy when Assualting or as I sugested earlyer, Rampage.
Though Death Company haveing WS5 would be good.

DC already do and it makes a difference trust me

Automatically Appended Next Post:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
BlackArmour wrote:

BAs should out n out be better at close combat than their vanilla counterparts, WS5 maybe? Its the same way I feel about SWs because its what these chapters train to do and that's beat you in the face. lets put a gap between those chapters not in C:SM so maybe we can end some of the argument.

Templars are only WS4 and just as gakky at melee as everyone else, and that's in a 6th edition Codex. It's not boding too well.

..........well.........

crap......... you're right and I didn't think about that.

**AlmightyWalrus**

BlackArmour wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
BlackArmour wrote:

BAs should out n out be better at close combat than their vanilla counterparts, WS5 maybe? Its the same way I feel about SWs because its what these chapters train to do and that's beat you in the face. lets put a gap between those chapters not in C:SM so maybe we can end some of the argument.

Templars are only WS4 and just as gakky at melee as everyone else, and that's in a 6th edition Codex. It's not boding too well.

..........well......... crap......... you're right and I didn't think about that.

That said, just because we got stuck with the worst rules in 6th edition for portraying our army it doesn't follow that Blood Angels should be similarly gimped, but it's not looking too good. I WANT the Codex to work, because if nothing else I can jump ship from the horrible "melee" units of the Vanilla Codex, but I'm not holding my breath.

**Orblivion**

@BlackArmour: Raven Guard already have the move and assault rule for jump packs. I would hope Blood Angels would get it as well since it makes more sense for them, but GW might not want to give the same rule to two marine armies. We'll see I guess.

If DC keep their existing stats/rules and get the lowered jump pack cost I'll be happy enough to keep running my BA army. That and making DC Tycho able to join squads, at least DC themselves.

As far as the assault from deep strike is concerned, I thought of a way to work it in there without being crazy. There have been some other gripes about how Red Thirst is a pretty nonexistent rule without Astorath. What about falling to Red Thirst on a roll of 1 or 2, and making it so that if they deep strike they HAVE to assault the closest unit if possible? Considering how random Red Thirst is, it would make it pretty impossible to build a list around the idea of assaulting from deep strike, and it fits their fluff. They're suffering from a bloodlust, disoriented or not they're coming after you.

**Anpu42**

Orblivion wrote:
@BlackArmour: Raven Guard already have the move and assault rule for jump packs. I would hope Blood Angels would get it as well since it makes more sense for them, but GW might not want to give the same rule to two marine armies. We'll see I guess.

If DC keep their existing stats/rules and get the lowered jump pack cost I'll be happy enough to keep running my BA army. That and making DC Tycho able to join squads, at least DC themselves.

As far as the assault from deep strike is concerned, I thought of a way to work it in there without being crazy. There have been some other gripes about how Red Thirst is a pretty nonexistent rule without Astorath. What about falling to Red Thirst on a roll of 1 or 2, and making it so that if they deep strike they HAVE to assault the closest unit if possible? Considering how random Red Thirst is, it would make it pretty impossible to build a list around the idea of assaulting from deep strike, and it fits their fluff. They're suffering from a bloodlust, disoriented or not they're coming after you.

That is an intresting idea

**Murdius Maximus**

Mephiston needs an invulnerable save or needs Feel No Pain on a 4+. I agree with a points wide reduction, except Mephiston because I think 250 for him plus FNP is fair. More anti air support. Changes to Red Thirst and possibly the ability for Assault Marines to carry Boltguns. Gabriel Seth to have a 2+ save and Psycho Tycho to be an independent character. Dante to hit with his axe at initiative. Sanguinary Guard to have 2 wounds.

**Orblivion**

Murdius Maximus wrote:
Mephiston needs an invulnerable save or needs Feel No Pain on a 4+. I agree with a points wide reduction, except Mephiston because I think 250 for him plus FNP is fair. More anti air support. Changes to Red Thirst and possibly the ability for Assault Marines to carry Boltguns. Gabriel Seth to have a 2+ save and Psycho Tycho to be an independent character. Dante to hit with his axe at initiative. Sanguinary Guard to have 2 wounds.

-Mephiston needs a point reduction even if he gets FNP, compare him to Skarbrand and you'll see why.
-I expect the anti-air for Blood Angels will be a specialized Stormtalon with an emphasis on air superiority.
-I've said before that I think Dante should get the Spear of Telesto. Make it a straight up power lance that can be used as a flamer in the shooting phase. If you want to make it a little more special make it AP2 on the charge, AP3 normal.
-Sanguinary Guard I'd like to see have an upgrade option to add a Priest to them, this would make them a little bit less squishy. 2 wounds would be nice too though.
-I'd also like to see something done with Glaives, as it stands now its just a different name for power weapons. They don't really need to be more powerful, I just feel like they need something to stand out rather than just have a different name.

**Voidwraith**

To be honest, apart from the addition of a yet to be determined new unit (that should be good, but may not be game breaking), I don't expect anything ground breaking from the new codex. The points costs will come down, and although that's not sexy, it IS a huge deal having more bodies on the table-top.

If the new Nids have shown us anything, it's that a drop in point values alone is worth quite a bit even if they copy/paste the rest of the codex. People may hate the fact that many of the Nids issues weren't addressed, but being able to field more MCs and gribblies is performing well despite the hatred.

**Martel732**

Well until Taudar shoot your synapse off the table.

**krazynadechukr**

Fair, balanced, working army?

**Martel732**

I think Tyranids have shown that it will take a lot to have a competitive assault-based army. I wouldn't worry at all about BA being too strong. None of the meq codices are even close to OP in the overall meta.

**Voidwraith**

Martel732 wrote:
Well until Taudar shoot your synapse off the table.

If an army I played became powerful enough to easily compete with that OP brokenness, I would more than likely move on to another army. I, personally, do not enjoy easy win buttons, and have much more fun when things at least "appear" to be balanced.

Also, comparing everything to Taudar is a recipe for becoming a bitter, hate-filled gamer who sees no hope in the immediate future for this game. Sound about right, Martel?

**Martel732**

Voidwraith wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Well until Taudar shoot your synapse off the table.

If an army I played became powerful enough to easily compete with that OP brokenness, I would more than likely move on to another army. I, personally, do not enjoy easy win buttons, and have much more fun when things at least "appear" to be balanced.

Also, comparing everything to Taudar is a recipe for becoming a bitter, hate-filled gamer who sees no hope in the immediate future for this game. Sound about right, Martel?

Well, I'll give you the same response as the people who podcast over at 11th Company: they said they'll stop talking about Tau and Eldar when people stop playing them. I'll do the same. I use them as a standard because they ARE the standard, and many people use them. Citing them as OP or broken doesn't change the fact that they exist and have to be dealt with. Trying to say something is okay "except for Tau and Eldar" is like saying it is okay "except for the game in which they are played". To quote 11th company again, Tyranids are a great 5th edition list. I've moved from bitterness to acceptance. Because the Taudar ARE the game at the moment. Pretending otherwise is delusional.

I can't imagine the new Nids enjoy IG gun line much either, but many IG gunline players have moved to the superior Tau/Eldar gun lines.

**Anpu42**

Martel732 wrote:
Voidwraith wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Well until Taudar shoot your synapse off the table.

If an army I played became powerful enough to easily compete with that OP brokenness, I would more than likely move on to another army. I, personally, do not enjoy easy win buttons, and have much more fun when things at least "appear" to be balanced.

Also, comparing everything to Taudar is a recipe for becoming a bitter, hate-filled gamer who sees no hope in the immediate future for this game. Sound about right, Martel?

Well, I'll give you the same response as the people who podcast over at 11th Company: they said they'll stop talking about Tau and Eldar when people stop playing them. I'll do the same. I use them as a standard because they ARE the standard, and many people use them. Citing them as OP or broken doesn't change the fact that they exist and have to be dealt with. Trying to say something is okay "except for Tau and Eldar" is like saying it is okay "except for the game in which they are played". To quote 11th company again, Tyranids are a great 5th edition list. I've moved from bitterness to acceptance. Because the Taudar ARE the game at the moment. Pretending otherwise is delusional.

I can't imagine the new Nids enjoy IG gun line much either, but many IG gunline players have moved to the superior Tau/Eldar gun lines.

Yes you are right, but you are not listening to what we are saying.
1] There is nothing that can be done with the Tau/Eldar Codex’s, that daemon has already been let out of the bottle.
2] That means the fix has to done with new Codex’s like the Blood Angels.
3] We need to stop whining about how good Tau/Eldar are and work on what We can Do About it.

So can we move on?

**OIIIIIIO**

How about a special rule for the Sang. Priests? Something along the lines it matching what your opponents best Invuln save is? Bring a Slanesshi with a 2++ re-rollable ... BA gets FNP on a 2+ re-rollable.

**Martel732**

Anpu42 wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Voidwraith wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Well until Taudar shoot your synapse off the table.

If an army I played became powerful enough to easily compete with that OP brokenness, I would more than likely move on to another army. I, personally, do not enjoy easy win buttons, and have much more fun when things at least "appear" to be balanced.

Also, comparing everything to Taudar is a recipe for becoming a bitter, hate-filled gamer who sees no hope in the immediate future for this game. Sound about right, Martel?

Well, I'll give you the same response as the people who podcast over at 11th Company: they said they'll stop talking about Tau and Eldar when people stop playing them. I'll do the same. I use them as a standard because they ARE the standard, and many people use them. Citing them as OP or broken doesn't change the fact that they exist and have to be dealt with. Trying to say something is okay "except for Tau and Eldar" is like saying it is okay "except for the game in which they are played". To quote 11th company again, Tyranids are a great 5th edition list. I've moved from bitterness to acceptance. Because the Taudar ARE the game at the moment. Pretending otherwise is delusional.

I can't imagine the new Nids enjoy IG gun line much either, but many IG gunline players have moved to the superior Tau/Eldar gun lines.

Yes you are right, but you are not listening to what we are saying.
1] There is nothing that can be done with the Tau/Eldar Codex’s, that daemon has already been let out of the bottle.
2] That means the fix has to done with new Codex’s like the Blood Angels.
3] We need to stop whining about how good Tau/Eldar are and work on what We can Do About it.

So can we move on?

There is no "move on". However, the postulated rule for all meqs above would at least address the problem to some extent. I don't think that will ever happen, though. But any list that gets the Tyranid treatment might as well pack it in for a big picture point of view.

**Anpu42**

Martel732 wrote:
Anpu42 wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Voidwraith wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Well until Taudar shoot your synapse off the table.

If an army I played became powerful enough to easily compete with that OP brokenness, I would more than likely move on to another army. I, personally, do not enjoy easy win buttons, and have much more fun when things at least "appear" to be balanced.

Also, comparing everything to Taudar is a recipe for becoming a bitter, hate-filled gamer who sees no hope in the immediate future for this game. Sound about right, Martel?

Well, I'll give you the same response as the people who podcast over at 11th Company: they said they'll stop talking about Tau and Eldar when people stop playing them. I'll do the same. I use them as a standard because they ARE the standard, and many people use them. Citing them as OP or broken doesn't change the fact that they exist and have to be dealt with. Trying to say something is okay "except for Tau and Eldar" is like saying it is okay "except for the game in which they are played". To quote 11th company again, Tyranids are a great 5th edition list. I've moved from bitterness to acceptance. Because the Taudar ARE the game at the moment. Pretending otherwise is delusional.

I can't imagine the new Nids enjoy IG gun line much either, but many IG gunline players have moved to the superior Tau/Eldar gun lines.

Yes you are right, but you are not listening to what we are saying.
1] There is nothing that can be done with the Tau/Eldar Codex’s, that daemon has already been let out of the bottle.
2] That means the fix has to done with new Codex’s like the Blood Angels.
3] We need to stop whining about how good Tau/Eldar are and work on what We can Do About it.

So can we move on?

There is no "move on". However, the postulated rule for all meqs above would at least address the problem to some extent. I don't think that will ever happen, though. But any list that gets the Tyranid treatment might as well pack it in for a big picture point of view.

What I mean by move on is not make EVERY REPLY about how it will be useless it will be against Tau/Eldar.
You have made a couple of good suggestions. However the next post it on how the Tau/Eldar are so OP.
Acknowledging a problem and coming up with an suggestion in not the same filling up half a thread with B*TCHING about the Tau/Eldar

**Martel732**

Look. I play against a lot of Tau and Eldar. I'm happy for you that you don't, but I have to be realistic here. My standard HAS to be those lists, because that's what 50% of my games are against. The other 50% is the total field of other codices.

GW has created the quandry of how to take on Taudar without being TFG against every other list. Not that I think the BA are going to get even close to that kind of codex.

**Voidwraith**

Martel732 wrote:
Voidwraith wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
Well until Taudar shoot your synapse off the table.

If an army I played became powerful enough to easily compete with that OP brokenness, I would more than likely move on to another army. I, personally, do not enjoy easy win buttons, and have much more fun when things at least "appear" to be balanced.

Also, comparing everything to Taudar is a recipe for becoming a bitter, hate-filled gamer who sees no hope in the immediate future for this game. Sound about right, Martel?

Well, I'll give you the same response as the people who podcast over at 11th Company: they said they'll stop talking about Tau and Eldar when people stop playing them. I'll do the same. I use them as a standard because they ARE the standard, and many people use them. Citing them as OP or broken doesn't change the fact that they exist and have to be dealt with. Trying to say something is okay "except for Tau and Eldar" is like saying it is okay "except for the game in which they are played". To quote 11th company again, Tyranids are a great 5th edition list. I've moved from bitterness to acceptance. Because the Taudar ARE the game at the moment. Pretending otherwise is delusional.

I can't imagine the new Nids enjoy IG gun line much either, but many IG gunline players have moved to the superior Tau/Eldar gun lines.

Bah, the 11th company has gone downhill as of late. They're so damn negative towards 40k they may as well be spearheading the movement for people to stop playing altogether. The only reason I listen to the 11th company is because it helps kill time at work and, hard as it may be to believe, there aren't enough 40k podcasts to fill the time.

Thankfully Forge the Narrative came around. They actually attack each army with the intent to figure out what works rather than casually dismiss everything because it isn't the most efficient hotness. If you want to hear uber-competitive peeps talk about the 40k hobby in a way that doesn't make you hate yourself for not playing Tau or Eldar, give them a listen...

**Martel732**

I'm curious to hear what they say, but I can't argue with the math of the 11th company guys. I hope FtN aren't just GW apologists. My BA record against the new C:SM vs Tau or Eldar, to me, shows the huge gulf between the latest meq list and the top lists.

**Anpu42**

Martel732 wrote:
Look. I play against a lot of Tau and Eldar. I'm happy for you that you don't, but I have to be realistic here. My standard HAS to be those lists, because that's what 50% of my games are against. The other 50% is the total field of other codices.

GW has created the quandry of how to take on Taudar without being TFG against every other list. Not that I think the BA are going to get even close to that kind of codex.

Yes YOU have made that clear for YOU and your META, that does not mean every META is the same.
If they made the Codex: Blood Angels up to YOUR META it would be OP for everyone else not in YOUR type of META.

We are trying to make a balanced What If Codex for Every META. This will probably cause it to be weak in some META’s and Strong in other META’s.

**niv-mizzet**

To be fair, he's not alone. Several of my local meta players are disgruntled at the tau/eldar situation. Some of them are tau and/or eldar players, who now borrow armies of other races to play instead. They claim it's because they don't enjoy starting with a massive advantage and playing an opponent who isn't having fun.

Needless to say, my Blood Angels have been passed around amongst them like a drunken party girl.

**Anpu42**

niv-mizzet wrote:
To be fair, he's not alone. Several of my local meta players are disgruntled at the tau/eldar situation. Some of them are tau and/or eldar players, who now borrow armies of other races to play instead. They claim it's because they don't enjoy starting with a massive advantage and playing an opponent who isn't having fun.

Needless to say, my Blood Angels have been passed around amongst them like a drunken party girl.

We do that all of time with my Armies.

**Ninjacommando**

How are Taudar the standard when Pure Eldar armies or Eldar/Deldar are now filling the top 10s at tournaments.

heck with the LVO the highest Tau list was 11th with a nid list at 12

The Final 8 was
1. Eldar
2. SM/SM
3. Eldar/Deldar
4. Eldar
5. Eldar/Deldar
6. Necrons/CSM
7. Csm/CD
8. IG/INQ

**Martel732**

Okay. It looks like Eldar are significantly more aggregious than Tau.

**ZebioLizard2**

Because amusingly enough, Eldar is one of the best counters to Tau.

**Martel732**

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Because amusingly enough, Eldar is one of the best counters to Tau.

Right....... of course. Even Tau can't kill the WS fast enough I guess.

**tomjoad**

I'm glad to see that this Blood Angels thread is about how good Tau/Eldar/Taudar are...again.

Bloody boring, guys.