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.

AlexRae wrote:
People dont have tactical marines because they are terrible.

And they continue to be terrible.

So you throw the models away or what? Assault marine are horrible too.

AlexRae wrote:
People dont have tactical marines because they are terrible.

And they continue to be terrible.

I'm not saying Tactical Marines are the be-all-end-all troops choice in 40k, but I will say this:

Go play Imperial Guard for 7 years, then come back and tell me Tactical Marines are terrible. For what you pay for, they're actually a pretty excellent troop choice in my opinion, especially when you factor in Combat Squads, and ATSKNF.

My opinion only there, so feel free to disagree it if you wish, but you're not going to change it just as I don't expect to change yours.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

 Crimson Devil wrote:

AlexRae wrote:
People dont have tactical marines because they are terrible.

And they continue to be terrible.

So you throw the models away or what? Assault marine are horrible too.

This is not a valid excuse IMO, but perhaps they sold off all their tacticals since they didn't have need for them. I sincerely doubt people bought their entire army piece by piece. My first instinct when I decided I was going to get into Blood Angels was to get the Blood Angels Battleforce that they had on their website. EVERY army starter box does. I am probably going to kick myself when, after the codex has been out for a bit and I have bought a box or two of BA Tacticals and Sanguinary Guard, that GW releases a boxed set that has everything I just bought and more for less than I just spent. Happened with my Crimson Fists, will happen with BA, mark my words.

 Red__Thirst wrote:
H.B.M.C.: I never said it wasn't a big deal, I've said, repeatedly, that I feel for the people who's armies were invalidated as they currently have them in this very thread. That said, people need to take a breath and realize their army, with ONE small tweak, will still be able to be run in a very similar fashion to how it currently runs, if not identically. Plug in two 5 man squads of Scouts or Tactical Marines and then build your army. It's that easy. Even if you used 6 squads of Assault Marines, you can put 3 in Fast Attack, and 3 in Elites as Vanguard Veterans. Plug in whatever HQ choice you want, slap some jump pack Death Company in the 4th Elite slot and bingo, you're battleforged.

You're still missing it. There are people. Who have made armies. Full armies. Of Jump Packers. They like. These armies. They put hours. Into. These armies. GW invalidated. Their armies. With. A single. Rule change.

Simply resorting to counts as never has and NEVER WILL be a solution.

 Red__Thirst wrote:
Lastly, it DID happen to my personal guard army, though not in the exact same way. I had two fully painted vehicles, that GW has even produced a model for in previous editions (Griffons) and are admittedly OOP now, removed from the codex. I had another unit completely changed and rendered useless/obsolete that I previously used in every game. (Why would I ever run Wyrdvane Psykers when I can put a Primaris Psyker on the board at the same mastery level for 10 points less? He's an IC, so he can hide in a squad and have ablative wounds, has an Invulnerable save, has a better stat line, and is still cheaper than a full 10 man squad of Wyrdvane Psykers when upgraded to Mastery Level 2.)

You lost Griffons. That's nothing. My Inquisitorial and Lost & The Damned armies don't exist any more. Losing Griffons isn't in any way the same as losing the entire structure of an army played by a whole host of people for the better part of a decade.

 Red__Thirst wrote:
I'm trying to look at this objectively and provide counter-points to people screaming that this codex is trash when, in reality and compared to other codex releases so far, it really isn't. At least not in my opinion.

Well most recent Codices have been boring 'return to bland' trash that add nothing and remove heaps, but that aside I'm not actually saying the new Codex is trash. I'm saying that changing the basic structure of BA's to remove the type of army most BA players played for the purposes of selling a new Tactical Squad kit is a dick move, and if the powers that be had any credibility at this point, they should be ashamed of it.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

AlexRae wrote:
People dont have tactical marines because they are terrible.

And they continue to be terrible.

So you throw the models away or what? .

Given GW plastic is currently more expensive than beluga caviar per ounce, i would imagine most people sell models they don't want, to fund the criminally priced stuff they do want.

I've bene playing BA since second edition, so I have plenty of stuff to make a legal army, what i don't understand is how people cannot see there are legitimate issues here for people. The BA codex since 4th edition has been built around jump pack assault armies. GW themseelves have pushed players in that direction, deliberately.

There is no excuse for then taking that away, None at all.

Changing armies happens with every new codex, but that doesnt mean take things away from the players, it isnt like we are talking about some uber effective army here, BA have been at the bottom of the pile for a long time, why not give them something extra instead of taking things away.

My problem is that its now so bland. Furious charge army wide sounds great, until you push people into more tactical squads, its as useful as a chocolate fire guard for them.

Its a poor design choice, from a company hemorrhaging players and revenue. In fact its stuff like this that explains precisely why they are.

@Noggin: You can always play the army as Unbound? That or you could wait a bit and see if they bring out a supplement?

Quick note here, to all the posts saying the codex is too "bland" you have a little over 7 UNIQUE units, plus a psychic discipline, relics, warlord traits, formations and detachments.
Stop using that as an excuse. It's a blatant lie.
Its fine to be mad about the invalidation of your army, but again, just because you *can* build an army focused around one specific thing (assualt marines, nobs, etc) doesn't mean you should....
I feel for ya, but there is always a price for buying into ward's madness.

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
If you build your army to that edition's codex then you will always be screwed over by GW. Happens every time. Build your army with the long view over multiple editions.

I find myself a bit amused and perplexed by my fellow BA players. How do so many of you not have any Tactical marines? They come in every starter box. Even players without a marine army have a squad or two lying around.

Anyway, I'm immune from the change since I built a Company. I have six squads of Tacticals and Two squads of Assault. I rarely if ever don't have a least one Tactical squad on the table. My biggest problem is 7th has killed any desire to play the game. I'll only pick up the codex and wait for 8th I guess.

Thank you.

Have an exalt, sir.

It's boggling to me that people can't see this simple fact. Two 5 man squads of Tactical Marines with bolters, or two five man squads of Scouts armed for hand-to-hand that you use for counter-infiltrate and then use to grab an objective or put pressure on a flank. Scouts with Furious Charge and BP/CCW are a fun option to run in my mind.

Just my thoughts. Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Edits: Sleepy spelling errors FTW...

We all understand the concept of minimum troop requirements, so stop acting like we don't. It's doing nothing but making you look like a colossal idiot.

But I can do that with vanilla marines too. And there's a reason why I picked BA as my army and haven't bought a single Tactical Squad so far. I also understand that Scouts are usable. I'm not dense, but it's clearly too hard for you to see that that's not the point. And I'm sure there will be viable ways to run Blood Angels with this new codex, but that's also the case for Necrons and Tyranids, neither of which I'm interested in playing.

And as for needing characters for unlocking DW and RW? Gee, thanks for letting me know, I was totally unaware of that. And that's, like, totally the same because a character on a bike in an army of bikes doesn't, like, fit in at all.

I have about 8,000 points of Blood Angels. I used to have about 2,000 points of Troops. Now I have zero points of Troops. Of my 8,000 points I literally cannot make a legal battle forged army.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
You're still missing it. There are people. Who have made armies. Full armies. Of Jump Packers. They like. These armies. They put hours. Into. These armies. GW invalidated. Their armies. With. A single. Rule change.

Simply resorting to counts as never has and NEVER WILL be a solution.

.....

With all due respect, No, dude. You're missing it. The army as it was built in the old codex is invalidated, however that does not mean it can't be run at all as it's built. Their army will be able to be run in a nearly identical fashion to how it was run before. There are enough slots to put Three or more squads of jump pack power armored (Assault) marines in the army and a squad or two of Sanguiniary Guard (if they're there) as well as a squad of Death Company to boot if someone wants to run them and still leave one Elite slot open. There are enough slots in any Battleforged Blood Angels army to put SEVEN,.. Count them, SEVEN jump pack squads in the army in some form or fashion. It may not be exactly as it was before, but it'll be close. Is it going to cover every single combination that a player could have built: No. But it'll cover damn near all of the ones I can come up with within reason.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
You lost Griffons. That's nothing. My Inquisitorial and Lost & The Damned armies don't exist any more. Losing Griffons isn't in any way the same as losing the entire structure of an army played by a whole host of people for the better part of a decade.

Not to sound petulant, but this is all I hear when I read that: Oh, woe is me, I lost more than you did so I should be entitled to feel worse.
I respect you H.B.M.C., you make some great points and I generally really enjoy reading what you write on this forum, and also deeply respect your lore knowledge to boot. That said, we both lost something man, the quantity of the loss on your part is greater and by extension I feel for you because of that, I really really do man.

Now, here's the difference: The structure may have changed for Blood Angels, but the models are still able to be used identically in function as they were before, just in a different force organization slot. Sure, you have to put models on the table you didn't before to keep your army battleforged, but ten models that you can purchase for ~$30.00 U.S. new off the shelf (or way less if you trade for them or go to e-bay) is a small price to pay, don't you think? The structure wasn't lost. Had they removed Assault Squads from the codex, then it would have been lost. No, it just shifted back to where it was before in Fast Attack. Where it belongs, in my personal opinion.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Well most recent Codices have been boring 'return to bland' trash that add nothing and remove heaps, but that aside I'm not actually saying the new Codex is trash. I'm saying that changing the basic structure of BA's to remove the type of army most BA players played for the purposes of selling a new Tactical Squad kit is a dick move, and if the powers that be had any credibility at this point, they should be ashamed of it.

I respect that opinion, and respectfully disagree with it. Assault Marines should have never been in the Troops slot. They can still be fielded exactly as they were before as Fast Attack and/or Elite (Vanguard Veterans). As for releasing a BA tactical squad with this release to mandate sales and that being a 'dick move', I think you need to perhaps put the Kool-Aid down just a moment.

May I offer a counter-point to that view: Blood Angels never have had a specific tactical box that you could use to build a Blood Angels tactical squad. You had to purchase not only a 'vanilla' tactical squad, but if you wanted some BA specific wargear/armor/shoulderpads/extras, you had to purchase a Death Company box on top of it, even if you didn't NEED any more death company, and had to basically sit on a bunch of unneeded Death Company bits and parts and essentially waste money on them. Where-as now, you can get a Tactical Squad box by itself and build a Blood Angels Tactical Squad without having to rely/purchase anything else beyond that Tactical Squad box. That saves the consumer money in the long run, does it not? At least, that's how I see it, here.

Thanks, and take it easy for now.

-Red__Thirst-

Wanna take 60 ASM? Take two CAD and total of 20 scouts as troops and fill both CAD fast spots with assaults. Battle forged... there. stop whining.

Another question: What weapon choises do BA bike squads have? Did they also get the gravgun as a possible special weapon upgrade?

Neronoxx wrote:
Quick note here, to all the posts saying the codex is too "bland" you have a little over 7 UNIQUE units, plus a psychic discipline, relics, warlord traits, formations and detachments.
Stop using that as an excuse. It's a blatant lie.
Its fine to be mad about the invalidation of your army, but again, just because you *can* build an army focused around one specific thing (assualt marines, nobs, etc) doesn't mean you should....
I feel for ya, but there is always a price for buying into ward's madness.

Have an exalt sir! Well said!

I think hbmc and red_thirst are both right: Its a dick move, and people should have expected it.

 Thud wrote:

We all understand the concept of minimum troop requirements, so stop acting like we don't. It's doing nothing but making you look like a colossal idiot.

But I can do that with vanilla marines too. And there's a reason why I picked BA as my army and haven't bought a single Tactical Squad so far. I also understand that Scouts are usable. I'm not dense, but it's clearly too hard for you to see that that's not the point. And I'm sure there will be viable ways to run Blood Angels with this new codex, but that's also the case for Necrons and Tyranids, neither of which I'm interested in playing.

And as for needing characters for unlocking DW and RW? Gee, thanks for letting me know, I was totally unaware of that. And that's, like, totally the same because a character on a bike in an army of bikes doesn't, like, fit in at all.

I have about 8,000 points of Blood Angels. I used to have about 2,000 points of Troops. Now I have zero points of Troops. Of my 8,000 points I literally cannot make a legal battle forged army.

A.) Thanks for the name calling, makes you look like a stellar human being there, bud . A guy can't try and offer suggestions and draw parallels logically without being called a "colossal idiot" I guess, huh?

B.) Bad choices have consequences. Tactical Squads have been in every Blood Angels army book since Blood Angels were their own codex back in the Angels of Death book of 2nd edition (Great book by the way, lots of neat stuff in there). You chose to not buy any Scouts or Tactical Marines, sorry for that, but it's not too late!! You can rectify this situation. You have the power!

C.) You mean to tell me you have about 8000 points of an army and don't have ONE squad of Tactical Marines or Scouts?

D.) In response to point A.: Don't call a pot black, lest someone gently point out that you yourself are a kettle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 masquerade81 wrote:
Wanna take 60 ASM? Take two CAD and total of 20 scouts as troops and fill both CAD fast spots with assaults. Battle forged... there. stop whining.

Another question: What weapon choises do BA bike squads have? Did they also get the gravgun as a possible special weapon upgrade?

I don't know this for sure, so please don't quote me, but Grav Guns were added to the Blood Angel's Tactical Squad. So, logically I would expect they were also added to the Blood Angel's Bike squad as well.

Just my thoughts on that, hopefully someone will confirm it later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Neronoxx wrote:
Quick note here, to all the posts saying the codex is too "bland" you have a little over 7 UNIQUE units, plus a psychic discipline, relics, warlord traits, formations and detachments.
Stop using that as an excuse. It's a blatant lie.
Its fine to be mad about the invalidation of your army, but again, just because you *can* build an army focused around one specific thing (assualt marines, nobs, etc) doesn't mean you should....
I feel for ya, but there is always a price for buying into ward's madness.

+1, and exalted sir. Well said!

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Would be nice if DA could have these shiny Grav weapons too lol. Pweez?

AlexRae wrote:
People dont have tactical marines because they are terrible.
And they continue to be terrible.

Not really.
Most people do have Tactical Marines, they are just painted as Bolter DC's
Which, just like ASM, apparently aren't troops either.

When you go from 6 Troops to 2, you KNOW there is something terrible going on.

 Red__Thirst wrote:
Assault Marines should have never been in the Troops slot.

Here's the thing right: I don't disagree with that. At all. The fluff purist in me always hated the idea that BA's could field armies of Assault Marines. They're a Codex Chapter - no more special than Crimson Fists or Raven Guard - and the idea that they had more regular Assault Marines around was just silly (is the 8th Company the BA's main front-line unit or something?). The Blood Angels exist as a separate Codex now because of legacy issues - they're too ingrained now, so they can't just dump them - but by the same token, the "all Assault all the time" thing is also a legacy issue. It's quite improper of GW to simply flip a switch and say "Nope. You play like this now!", and I can't think of a single army off hand that has gone through such an intentional change of play-style (Nidzilla in 4th is perhaps the only example, and it doesn't really fit, because it was a list borne out of bad rules design and a desire to sell as many shiny new Carnifex kits as possible, rather than simply an option that was created and then went away after many, many years of play).

And in respect to the old Angels of Death Codex, go and look at it. It's the same list as Codex Ultramarines + Death Company - Ultra Spec Chars + BA Spec Chars. I think it's a bad example to go "back in my day!", 'cause then we get into "Back in my day me 'Nids 'ad lots of Brood Brothers an' Squigs". Some old things need to stay old things, and some changes, once made, shouldn't be changed back.

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 Thud wrote:

We all understand the concept of minimum troop requirements, so stop acting like we don't. It's doing nothing but making you look like a colossal idiot.

But I can do that with vanilla marines too. And there's a reason why I picked BA as my army and haven't bought a single Tactical Squad so far. I also understand that Scouts are usable. I'm not dense, but it's clearly too hard for you to see that that's not the point. And I'm sure there will be viable ways to run Blood Angels with this new codex, but that's also the case for Necrons and Tyranids, neither of which I'm interested in playing.

And as for needing characters for unlocking DW and RW? Gee, thanks for letting me know, I was totally unaware of that. And that's, like, totally the same because a character on a bike in an army of bikes doesn't, like, fit in at all.

I have about 8,000 points of Blood Angels. I used to have about 2,000 points of Troops. Now I have zero points of Troops. Of my 8,000 points I literally cannot make a legal battle forged army.

A.) Thanks for the name calling, makes you look like a stellar human being there, bud . A guy can't try and offer suggestions and draw parallels logically without being called a "colossal idiot" I guess, huh?

B.) Bad choices have consequences. Tactical Squads have been in every Blood Angels army book since Blood Angels were their own codex back in the Angels of Death book of 2nd edition (Great book by the way, lots of neat stuff in there). You chose to not buy any Scouts or Tactical Marines, sorry for that, but it's not too late!! You can rectify this situation. You have the power!

C.) You mean to tell me you have about 8000 points of an army and don't have ONE squad of Tactical Marines or Scouts?

D.) In response to point A.: Don't call a pot black, lest someone gently point out that you yourself are a kettle.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Anyone has the right to be frustrated about the Assault Marines, if you build your army spending hard earned money on an army concept they like to play. Nothing is being accomplished by everyone needing the last word here. We build armies that are small strike forces of large chapters, its not stupid to build all assault marines, the option was there, alot of us took it, and now that its gone, some people feel duped. Reecius on frontlines famous scout army is a great example, and if it were suddenly pulled out from him, he would be upset too.

There will be no statements that will make these people say, oh ok, i guess your right, i have no right to be upset. Remember we all play this gamr for different reasons, but the unifying reason is to have fun. So lets go back to discussions that keep the thread alive, and informative. Thanks for reading this post.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Red__Thirst wrote:
Assault Marines should have never been in the Troops slot.

Here's the thing right: I don't disagree with that. At all. The fluff purist in me always hated the idea that BA's could field armies of Assault Marines. They're a Codex Chapter - no more special than Crimson Fists or Raven Guard - and the idea that they had more regular Assault Marines around was just silly (is the 8th Company the BA's main front-line unit or something?). The Blood Angels exist as a separate Codex now because of legacy issues - they're too ingrained now, so they can't just dump them - but by the same token, the "all Assault all the time" thing is also a legacy issue. It's quite improper of GW to simply flip a switch and say "Nope. You play like this now!", and I can't think of a single army off hand that has gone through such an intentional change of play-style (Nidzilla in 4th is perhaps the only example, and it doesn't really fit, because it was a list borne out of bad rules design and a desire to sell as many shiny new Carnifex kits as possible, rather than simply an option that was created and then went away after many, many years of play).

I totally see where you're coming from, but I think it's a matter of dueling legacies, and GW made the right call when they picked which legacy to keep and which one to axe: Do away with the newer (and nonsensical Matt Ward abomination) legacy. Had Blood Angels been the first codex swapped into 6th edition instead of Dark Angels I wonder if people would have been as upset. Food for thought. As for GW making the choice, they were damned if they do, damned if they don't, and I feel like the choice they made was the right one, even if it did have negative consequences.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

While Red__Thirst's opinion certainly isn't popular, it's kind of a good point. Blood Angels never should have been pushed towards all jump packs all the time. It grossly distorted the fluff - not because Blood Angels couldn't or wouldn't run an all-assault force, but because it completely skewed people's perception of the army. Vanilla marines have every bit as much a right to run assault squads as troops (exact same codex-adherent company structure, and other codex chapters rely heavily on jump packs, like Raven Guard). Yet they lack that option. Meanwhile the Blood Angels have been twisted into a weird place by years of people assuming that anything but 100% assault squads isn't a Blood Angels army, when in reality ~60% of Blood Angels are tactical marines, same as everyone else. Making their codex a one-trick pony like that did the Blood Angels no favors.

However, I think neutering entire builds is never a good idea. The correct course would be somewhere in the middle - both codexes should have the option to run assault squads to fill the minimum troop requirement, but it should require a captain or chapter master with a jump pack. Likewise, vanilla marines should have the option of running a jump pack honor guard or command squad (because again, the 8th company is a thing). Blood Angels are a codex chapter - with a few unique characters, chapter-wide rules, wargear options, and a unique unit, they could be rolled into the vanilla codex. I don't think it's a bad thing that GW has moved them in that direction, but I do think they should have met in the middle on assault squads (where all codex chapters should be) instead of removing it outright.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
If you build your army to that edition's codex then you will always be screwed over by GW. Happens every time. Build your army with the long view over multiple editions.

Pretty much this. I play three armies myself (and might add a small BA force as a fourth, now that I have the Deathstorm models), but I never get more than 2 of any one unit. Not only does it make for more balanced lists that generally are more fun to play and play against, you're not that sensitive to codex and edition changes. A nerf to one unit and a buff to another balance each other out.

Every army that relies on spamming a one or two units gets invalidated somewhere along the line, every single time. It should hardly come as a surprise by now.

21stPrimarch wrote:


Anyone has the right to be frustrated about the Assault Marines, if you build your army spending hard earned money on an army concept they like to play. Nothing is being accomplished by everyone needing the last word here. We build armies that are small strike forces of large chapters, its not stupid to build all assault marines, the option was there, alot of us took it, and now that its gone, some people feel duped. Reecius on frontlines famous scout army is a great example, and if it were suddenly pulled out from him, he would be upset too.

There will be no statements that will make these people say, oh ok, i guess your right, i have no right to be upset. Remember we all play this gamr for different reasons, but the unifying reason is to have fun. So lets go back to discussions that keep the thread alive, and informative. Thanks for reading this post.

I never said people don't have a right to feel upset, I'm saying that there's hope and people should focus on that hope and try to move forward once the initial shock and anger fades. The army didn't go away, it changed, and I think in time people will see it changed for the better. That's my opinion anyway.

Thanks for the reply also, 21st Primarch.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Let's clear this assault marine thing up:

BA companies have the standard 6:2:2 Tactical:Assaultevastator split.

All marines are trained in the use of jump packs.

The big difference with BA was not that they had more assault marines than other chapters but that their tactical marines suit up with a jump pack more often than anyone else. A subtle difference, true, but a significant one.


"Pay troop tax and use all your FA slots for assault marines" is a hand wave response at best and sneering condescension at worst. What if you have other FA options you'd like to use? What if you've got more than 3 assault squads you've spent so long lovingly converting and painingt?

Just because GW frequently pulls dick moves when it comes to invalidating armies and playstyles doesn't mean you should be any less angry when it happens. Moreover, unless your list is particularly gimmicky (and let's be clear, using assault marines as troops was not that as it allowed at least two - really many more- ways of fielding them: jump pack or in a discounted transport, not to mention it was in place for years and years) you have no way of knowing that the way you've done your army is what's going to get hit next.

- venting protocol complete -

It's all very well harking back to 3rd and saying this is how BA always played, but not everyone can do that. Not everyone has a date of birth or an interest in the hobby that allowed them to experience that. For many the PDF or the 5th 'dex were their first encounter with the Songs of Sanguinius and all they've ever known is jump packs are troops. It's like with bands who change their sound up a bit, the 'right' sound is usually the album of theirs that hooked your interest and anything that diverges from that too much just isn't that band anymore. Nothing stopped you playing BA 'like they ought to be' with Tactical squads in PDF and 5th - now, tacticals weren't suddenly robbed of their FOC slot. So stope castigating more recent players for their fully justified frustration and disappointment, their point of entry and understanding of the army was just as valid as yours and it's been trashed. Of course there are older players who came to love the changes 5th made and are also fully justified in being mightily annoyed at such a fundamentsal alteration (I played in 3rd and I freaking loved the more recent ability to have assault marines as troops).

Honestly I would trade the assaults for the changes made to Dante and Mephiston. I mean do we really want to talk about how bad it can get? Dark Eldar lost their leader just flat out gone. How many years have BA players begged for Mephiston to get IC? Guess what it just happen.

 Redemption wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
If you build your army to that edition's codex then you will always be screwed over by GW. Happens every time. Build your army with the long view over multiple editions.

Pretty much this. I play three armies myself (and might add a small BA force as a fourth, now that I have the Deathstorm models), but I never get more than 2 of any one unit. Not only does it make for more balanced lists that generally are more fun to play and play against, you're not that sensitive to codex and edition changes. A nerf to one unit and a buff to another balance each other out.

Every army that relies on spamming a one or two units gets invalidated somewhere along the line, every single time. It should hardly come as a surprise by now.

+1 and Exalted.

Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

Blood Angels players are seriously excited rollback to basically C:SM rehashed with army rules that are basically chapter tactics? Why do they have their own book again? OG players sure are weird. And lol at saying new fluff and names are any dumber in a book about fancy painting vampire marines.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
If you build your army to that edition's codex then you will always be screwed over by GW. Happens every time. Build your army with the long view over multiple editions.

Well, better not buy Ork Boyz for Orks because they could move them to elite.
Let's also not buy Terminators for my DA, who knows what will happen to those.
I also own Necrons, should I get rid of my Immortals because they might want to push Warriors as the only Troop-slot?

In short: People are pissed.
People have the right to be pissed, because they aren't able to use the majority of their models.
I was happy because I knew ASM would get a point-cost reduction.
But that is out of the window because I now have to pay a Tactical-tax before I can play those guys.
That is NOT why I play Blood Angels and I am waiting for some FW-model or dataslate to fix this gak.

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 Thud wrote:

We all understand the concept of minimum troop requirements, so stop acting like we don't. It's doing nothing but making you look like a colossal idiot.

But I can do that with vanilla marines too. And there's a reason why I picked BA as my army and haven't bought a single Tactical Squad so far. I also understand that Scouts are usable. I'm not dense, but it's clearly too hard for you to see that that's not the point. And I'm sure there will be viable ways to run Blood Angels with this new codex, but that's also the case for Necrons and Tyranids, neither of which I'm interested in playing.

And as for needing characters for unlocking DW and RW? Gee, thanks for letting me know, I was totally unaware of that. And that's, like, totally the same because a character on a bike in an army of bikes doesn't, like, fit in at all.

I have about 8,000 points of Blood Angels. I used to have about 2,000 points of Troops. Now I have zero points of Troops. Of my 8,000 points I literally cannot make a legal battle forged army.

A.) Thanks for the name calling, makes you look like a stellar human being there, bud . A guy can't try and offer suggestions and draw parallels logically without being called a "colossal idiot" I guess, huh?

B.) Bad choices have consequences. Tactical Squads have been in every Blood Angels army book since Blood Angels were their own codex back in the Angels of Death book of 2nd edition (Great book by the way, lots of neat stuff in there). You chose to not buy any Scouts or Tactical Marines, sorry for that, but it's not too late!! You can rectify this situation. You have the power!

C.) You mean to tell me you have about 8000 points of an army and don't have ONE squad of Tactical Marines or Scouts?

D.) In response to point A.: Don't call a pot black, lest someone gently point out that you yourself are a kettle.

English is your native language, isn't it? I didn't call you an idiot, I said you're acting like one. Your entire involvement in this thread is based on purposefully misinterpreting people's points and making yourself feel superiour with your paltry straw man arguments. I'm pissed that I no longer have a legal army, and you act like I don't understand that I can have a legal army by just adding some new units.

I think we should all take a breath here and move on before the thread is locked...
It's still very early days BA release wise so let's just see what else comes out if anything.

Personally I only started a BA force in 5th because I wanted an alternative to my vanilla mech force. I guess if you played mech BA since the shiny red orange days this is less a shocker.

 angelofvengeance wrote:
I think we should all take a breath here and move on before the thread is locked...
It's still very early days BA release wise so let's just see what else comes out if anything.

What? And not post our caustic opinions and argue about the smallest most trivial bits of information, clearly you haven't seen DakkaDakka at it's finest.

OT, I guess I'll ask the same question again: Can anyone confirm the status of Land Raiders and deep striking? Or cheap transports for jp-less ASMs or tacticals?